How to watch out for "diploma mills"

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Yes. You make very good points and I will attempt to answer all of your questions. Argosy OC is a for profit prof psych school (which is why I have openly disclosed the debt I have incurred numerous times). When students don't match, they go to second rounds. If still not matched they pay for a year of practicum supervision and dissertation costs (if they have not yet completed). Or they work in the field and apply the next year. 1 student this past year was not concerned about APA so she got a CAPIC university site. She plans on working in a private practice so it worked out for her. The others either got APA, delayed a year to reapply next year and the rest matched with APPIC sites.

Some students do not care about APA internships and obtaining an APA internship is not a requirement for my program (as it probably is for yours, which makes sense because of your probable career goals hence choosing the phd route over the psyd route to begin with). This might shock you but some people want to work in places that do not require an APA internship such as state prisons (only federal require APA), private practice, some hospitals, community centers, etc. The world is big and there is a need for psychologists in other settings besides universities, some hospitals (va specifically) and federal prisons.
Also, California internship sites are saturated with applicants (I have to say, the weather is great here and it is a fun place to live 😎). When ppl are geographically limited (many Californians want to stay close to home or just love it here), it hurts their chances of being matched as well (please refer to the internship threads- internship tips, 2013 internship application and 2014 internship application).

To answer your other question, my current class size is 8 (however to not mislead...the class above me is the biggest we have ever had, 25).

So yes, Argosy OC is making lots of money and is doing the best they can to provide us with better training sites and resources.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.

Don't even get me started on California - so overrated 😳

Your class size estimates don't jive with the data your program posts.

http://www.argosy.edu/documents/psydinfo/OrangeCounty-psyd-outcomes.pdf

They report their first-year student class sizes to have ranged from 19-38 over the past few years (see attrition table). Yes, some drop out, but that is an enormous amount of students to admit to one program (and some institutions are much worse).

I definitely take your point about other employment opportunities. I know that not all jobs require APA accreditation and there are other opportunities out there. But many of us also believe in minimal standards - APA accreditation is a MINIMAL standard of training, not some extra credential that would be nice. I firmly believe that no one should be licensable without an APA internship (match issues aside - there wouldn't be a problem if there weren't huge class sizes), and wish that more states had some kind of a standard that would prevent FSPSs from taking so many students every year.
 
This might shock you but some people want to work in places that do not require an APA internship such as state prisons (only federal require APA), private practice, some hospitals, community centers, etc. The world is big and there is a need for psychologists in other settings besides universities, some hospitals (va specifically) and federal prisons.

This is confusing to me. How is it that a group of people with the highest level of debt would prefer to work in the lowest paid positions for psychologists (e.g., community MH, PP, state jobs). Federal government jobs/VA hospitals can pay close to double the salary and have significantly better benefits, resources and working conditions. I think you are confusing this choice with a lack of options. Some of the jobs you mention max out around 60K so someone with 180-200K in debt is not going to prefer this position. Also, the postdocs at the VA will pay double (50K) the salary of some state postdocs i've seen specifically in CA (many don't even pay anything at all).
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind that this might not be an apples-to-apples comparison. Many of the posters you've mentioned attend programs that require their students attend an APA-accredited internship. Thus, the APA match rate for such a program would be 100%, but the overall match rate might "only" be 85 or 90%. As such, comparing overall rates across programs isn't very useful, so it's important to delineate what we're asking for/talking about. Raw numbers of students affected can be useful as well, given that a 50% match rate for a cohort of 6 is a much different animal than a 50% match rate for a cohort of 20+.

Very true. This will be helpful to the OP when deciding on a school. To clarify, my point was that as great as phd programs are (I truly respect your programs and your training), there are still people who need to go to second rounds or who don't match. I stand corrected in the assumptions I may have made. I welcome any further information or clarification as I presumed that 100% APA match rates in every phd program, every year was unlikely.

Thanks to those of you that actually posted your match rates (as I was unable to look them up bc nobody has disclosed what school they attend, besides me), for informing me that second rounds and not being matched to an APA site is very rare or unheard of in your programs. I must say, that must be very comforting for you to know and that guarantee is great. I however, am taking a gamble, am working my ass off to do do everything I can to get an APA accredited internship and know that I may have to reapply next year (due to all of the factors I previously mentioned).

Was I also assuming incorrectly when I stated that you get top of the line practicum sites without any effort? That you are simply placed in your university site and other exclusive sites (contracted with your university) that only take students from your school? I am asking for clarification on this as I do not know for sure and would like to be accurately informed. Thanks.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.
 
Was I also assuming incorrectly when I stated that you get top of the line practicum sites without any effort? That you are simply placed in your university site and other exclusive sites (contracted with your university) that only take students from your school? I am asking for clarification on this as I do not know for sure and would like to be accurately informed. Thanks.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.

This is likely going to vary from program to program. I attended one of the few doctoral-level psych programs in the state in which I trained, so we did essentially have our pick of practicum sites. The effort came on the back end in that respect in that there weren't any formal application procedures, but the expectations that supervisors had of us were universally high. This was (justifiably so) touted as one of the strengths of the program when I interviewed there way back when.

However, my program may have been in the minority in having such an informal process.
 
To clarify, my point was that as great as phd programs are (I truly respect your programs and your training), there are still people who need to go to second rounds or who don't match.

You're hung up on this, but cant figure out why? Its simple Yes, it happens everywhere. Thats the statistics/probability in action given the match imbalance, right? It happen MUCH more frequently and egregiousness at your program and other professionals schools. What do you think that's about?
 
I think they work with someone, but only during the time they are doing the dissertation. I am unsure how they access clincial population though, unless its public, archival databases.

We work with a faculty member (a phd from a reputable school (yes, just like you) and a committee (more phds from reputable schools just like you). We access our subjects from University settings, public forums, etc. Our studies are not restricted to undergrads at a major university. Some ppl use archival data as well but most do not. We run our own statistics, defend proposals and do a final defense as well. We have revisions and use a professional editor for final print.

To clarify and to be transparent, our final academic project is called a clinical research project (CRP). It is very similar to a dissertation, the major difference is, we are clinically focused. I have used the word "dissertation" here because most ppl (including me prior to this program) don't know what that is. Also, I knew that I would be subject to further criticism for it but that is really no reason for me to not disclose that. I apologize if I have misled anyone in that regard.

P.S. I will continue to use the term "Dissertation" in my following/other posts for the sake of not having to explain myself several times (yes, I would rather not repeat/explain myself several times). I'm sure you can sympathize with that.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.
 
You're hung up on this, but cant figure out why? Its simple Yes, it happens everywhere. Thats the statistics/probability in action given the match imbalance, right? It happen MUCH more frequently and egregiousness at your program and other professionals schools. What do you think that's about?

I am not "hung up" on this. I was merely responding to a poster who asked me about it.

Yes, you are right. It happens much more frequently in programs like mine (which I have openly discussed here). There are several reasons for this which I have discussed and have agreed with others who brought up the reasons.

Please read the previous posts and if you still believe that I am "hung up" on this or have not discussed the reasons in detail, please repost and I will be happy to repeat/discuss the reasons.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.
 
This is likely going to vary from program to program. I attended one of the few doctoral-level psych programs in the state in which I trained, so we did essentially have our pick of practicum sites. The effort came on the back end in that respect in that there weren't any formal application procedures, but the expectations that supervisors had of us were universally high. This was (justifiably so) touted as one of the strengths of the program when I interviewed there way back when.

However, my program may have been in the minority in having such an informal process.

Thank you. I wonder if this is typical for other programs as well? ( which you seem curious about as well?)

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.
 
To clarify and to be transparent, our final academic project is called a clinical research project (CRP). It is very similar to a dissertation, the major difference is, we are clinically focused. I have used the word "dissertation" here because most ppl (including me prior to this program) don't know what that is. Also, I knew that I would be subject to further criticism for it but that is really no reason for me to not disclose that. I apologize if I have misled anyone in that regard.

I believe it's called a Clinical Research Project since it's very similar to what is required in a Master's Program as opposed to a doctoral-level project. If the expectations/requirements were similar they would be able to call it a dissertation. A typical dissertation cannot be completed in 1 year on a part-time basis. That's how much effort I put into my undergrad honor's project.
 
I don't mean to derail the thread but I was struck by these numbers for the Orange County PsyD Program at Argosy:


What are my financing options to pay for the program?
A:

In addition to any grant and scholarship aid for which they are eligible, 100% of graduates used loans to finance their education. The median debt for program graduates:

Federal Loans: $211298
Private Educational Loans: $9199
Institutional Financing plan: $0


Success
What percentage of students find employment in their field or a related field?
A:

No students graduated during the reporting period.
(this is internal data they do not release).

I was thinking that a good number of the graduates came from wealthy families and am very surprised to see that 100% take out loans and that the median is 220K. This is higher than the median for an MD (I looked this up and it was 150-160K).
 
This is confusing to me. How is it that a group of people with the highest level of debt would prefer to work in the lowest paid positions for psychologists (e.g., community MH, PP, state jobs). Federal government jobs/VA hospitals can pay close to double the salary and have significantly better benefits, resources and working conditions. I think you are confusing this choice with a lack of options. Some of the jobs you mention max out around 60K so someone with 180-200K in debt is not going to prefer this position. Also, the postdocs at the VA will pay double (50K) the salary of some state postdocs i've seen specifically in CA (many don't even pay anything at all).

You are confused about the financial aspects, right? I hear you. I personally have had to take out tons of loans and would love to work at the places you mentioned. Typically, those sites prefer phds and as stated previously "look down" on psyds. This is slowly changing but to change the perception, we have to prove ourselves. Yes, that is a major down fall in attending a psyd program and is also a flaw with ppl institutions that are not open to any other program that is not a "traditional phd" program, who know very little about psyd programs/prof schools and dissmiss us without further investigation.

In terms of having no other options, that may be true in some cases. For the most part, my colleagues and I have chosen a psyd program bc we felt it was a better fit. Not everyone wants to go to a big research school.

Also, there are some ppl in my program who have not had to take out loans as they have the funds to pay out of pocket or get external scholarships. So the finances in those cases are irrelevant. Unfortunately, I am not independently wealthy and have taken out student loans. So yes, I will do my best to get a job that will pay me well and that I will enjoy.


Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.
 
I believe it's called a Clinical Research Project since it's very similar to what is required in a Master's Program as opposed to a doctoral-level project. If the expectations/requirements were similar they would be able to call it a dissertation. A typical dissertation cannot be completed in 1 year on a part-time basis. That's how much effort I put into my undergrad honor's project.

Not to belabor the point further, but just to avoid confusion in any prospective students--dissertations certainly can be (and very often are) clinically-oriented. Mine, for example, was based entirely on clinical neuropsychological and psychoeducational data. My thesis was also clinically-relevant, although similar to what PHD12 mentioned, the main difference was in the rigor of the methdology and thoroughness of the overall project.

Others in my program frequently conducted treatment-related studies or assessments of psychometric properties of measures in various clinical populations/disorders.
 
Don't even get me started on California - so overrated 😳

Your class size estimates don't jive with the data your program posts.

http://www.argosy.edu/documents/psydinfo/OrangeCounty-psyd-outcomes.pdf

They report their first-year student class sizes to have ranged from 19-38 over the past few years (see attrition table). Yes, some drop out, but that is an enormous amount of students to admit to one program (and some institutions are much worse).

I definitely take your point about other employment opportunities. I know that not all jobs require APA accreditation and there are other opportunities out there. But many of us also believe in minimal standards - APA accreditation is a MINIMAL standard of training, not some extra credential that would be nice. I firmly believe that no one should be licensable without an APA internship (match issues aside - there wouldn't be a problem if there weren't huge class sizes), and wish that more states had some kind of a standard that would prevent FSPSs from taking so many students every year.

It seems that ny agrees with you as they are working on not allowing ppl to become liceensed without an APA internship. I am hoping that this pushes more schools and internship sites to become APA accredited withour compromising training. I hope this adds more value to our training and our field.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile
 
You are confused about the financial aspects, right? I hear you. I personally have had to take out tons of loans and would love to work at the places you mentioned. Typically, those sites prefer phds and as stated previously "look down" on psyds. This is slowly changing but to change the perception, we have to prove ourselves. Yes, that is a major down fall in attending a psyd program and is also a flaw with ppl institutions that are not open to any other program that is not a "traditional phd" program, who know very little about psyd programs/prof schools and dissmiss us without further investigation.

I think you are failing to mention that sites that do this (both internship sites and employers) do so because often research or integration of research activities within the clinical duties is part of the job description. That's not a strength the Psy.D applicant brings to the table.

Also, I posted this before and you didn't respond.

Yes, the amount of money I am spending on school is ridiculous but I feel like I am getting a great education that is preparing me to be a good clinician. So that is worth the money..

Would you want to expound on that for the benefit of future applicants to your school?

What is your projected starting salary and what is your monthly student loan payment going to be? Do you think, seeing this ratio, most reasonable people would agree with your statement?
 
Very possible, although I do think it's important to point out that at least according to APPIC's stats, the average PhD program internship applicant has more clinical face-to-face hours than the average PsyD applicant. I'm sure a big part of this is due to PhD applicants spending somewhere around a year longer, on average, in grad school, although it may also reflect the number of concurrent practicum experiences available (I held an average of two concurrent practica throughout grad school, for example) and the expected typical workload (e.g., funded students are of course not expected to be able to work outside of school, and thus faculty don't feel it's unreasonable to expect 40+ hours per week of clinical and research responsibility).

We are not allowed to work (practicum hours) over 20 hours per week at a practicum. I must say that idk why as I have been told "its policy" and I should really look into it further. I would love to be able to do 2 concurrent practicums. When I find out, I will get back to you.


To be fair and accurate, I don't believe the issue was the poster's difficulty understanding the role they play in therapy (as it would be faulty to say that CBT doesn't pay attention to this important concept). It was more an issue of difficulty adjusting to the style of the supervision.

ok. Thats fair.

No one's going to disagree with you there. Although it becomes a matter of looking at the number, type, and severity of flaws in any particular program.

Severity of flaws are personal matters for the most part ($, time). However I am not denying the general flaws, which of course are to be considered.

Erg already mentioned the relevance of program evaluation experience, given that psychologists are often expected/called upon to take supervisory and/or administrative roles (and I feel it's in the best interests of our profession to do so).
Ok.

I personally also believe that getting a good amount of experience with conducting research is of fundamental importance, even to those who never publish again after graduation. Doing so gives you a much more intimate understanding of the scientific process as a whole, and allows you to better critically evaluate new research. Also, it forces you to at least become somewhat comfortable with various statistical and psychometric concepts. And as much as some may want to believe it, our typical assessment instruments aren't nearly as pre-packaged and out-of-the-box ready-to-use as they might initially appear. Competently choosing, administering, and interpreting them; and using that data to inform your conceptualization of a patient (not to mention then continually monitoring that conceptualization via progress tracking/outcome measures); is a scientific process in its own right.

In my program we do clinically focused research but are not necessarily expected to publish (even though some do, which is smart). I am not bashing research at all. I come from a research background. The lab that I was in as an undergrad had the "publish or perish" philosophy so they published non-stop (it felt almost desperate at times). I didnt want that for myself. In my program we also do an ax practicum (our first practicum after taking a year of courses) which is focused on learning, utilizing, scoring, interpreting axs (with real patients). Actually, Argosy OC uses Stephen Finn's model of therapeutic ax. I personally love it.

After our second year, we take comprehensive exams: 3 days of testing all of the clinical (and stats) we have learned up to that point. The next year, we have additional comprehensive exams that are science based. I have heard of other programs having to just presnt a case for their comps exam or not having comps at all (some reputable schools as well). Some schools may not need comps as they have a different way of assessing student learning outcomes. I can speak about my program and not really about others.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.
 
I believe it's called a Clinical Research Project since it's very similar to what is required in a Master's Program as opposed to a doctoral-level project. If the expectations/requirements were similar they would be able to call it a dissertation. A typical dissertation cannot be completed in 1 year on a part-time basis. That's how much effort I put into my undergrad honor's project.

Most ppl do not finish in a year. My undergrad honors project took me a year as well.

Masters students are required to do a thesis (this is typical). The crp is more extensive than that.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile
 
Most ppl do not finish in a year. My undergrad honors project took me a year as well.

Masters students are required to do a thesis (this is typical). The crp is more extensive than that.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile

Also, this is a full time program. Not online and not weekends etc.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile
 
I do know a handful of great psychologists from these programs. But it is the exception, not the rule. Excuse me for hating on the program, because I think it these programs are the scum of the earth and are ruining the profession. No offense to you personally.

No offense taken.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile
 
In my program we also do an ax practicum (our first practicum after taking a year of courses) which is focused on learning, utilizing, scoring, interpreting axs (with real patients). Actually, Argosy OC uses Stephen Finn's model of therapeutic ax. I personally love it.

Sounds good, but you seem to be talking this up like its unusual or something (and not just in this post). Whats up with that? Do you think that having a clinical assessment practicum in a doctoral training program is special or unusual or something?

Again, I think you (liker many others) probably have pretty distorted views of the scientist-practitioner model of training utilized in Ph,.D programs
 
I think you are failing to mention that sites that do this (both internship sites and employers) do so because often research or integration of research activities within the clinical duties is part of the job description. That's not a strength the Psy.D applicant brings to the table.

Also, I posted this before and you didn't respond.



Would you want to expound on that for the benefit of future applicants to your school?

What is your projected starting salary and what is your monthly student loan payment going to be? Do you think, seeing this ratio, most reasonable people would agree with your statement?

I may not have seen your previous post. I wasn't ignoring you or your statements. Yes, to those considering private schools/unfunded programs the cost is a huge factor to consider.

As I have many friends that are mds and jds (professional degrees) did not go to funded programs have debt as well. And yes, the projected income of a graduate is not great, so to the OP, you will have a bunch of debt. After being in the profession for awhile, there is money to be made (not saying you will be rich. Most ppl do not go into this field to become wealthy anyway).

To address your other point....yes, many of those institutions utilize research activities which is why they hire you more than psyds. Correct, it is not a strength. That said, there are still (some/few) that hire psyds since we dont habe some research experience and there is a need for clinically trained professionals. Im not saying phds are not clinically trained, im just saying that our foci are different.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile
 
That said, there are still (some/few) that hire psyds since we dont habe some research experience and there is a need for clinically trained professionals. Im not saying phds are not clinically trained, im just saying that our foci are different.

Ok, but the data doesnt actually bare that out, does it?

Have you seen the APPIC.org listing of average hours at time of internship application by degree (ph.d vs psyd)?


Given those stats, is there ANY data out there that shows that this focus on clinical training that you allude to so often: a.) actually results in more clinical contact and/or exposure, b) produces differential outcomes at the internship/early career stage?
 
Ok, but the data doesnt actually bare that out, does it?

Have you seen the APPIC.org listing of average hours at time of internship application by degree (ph.d vs psyd)?


Given those stats, is there ANY data out there that shows that this focus on clinical training that you allude to so often: a.) actually results in more clinical contact and/or exposure, b) produces differential outcomes at the internship/early career stage?

It is common knowledge that phd programs are research driven, as you and others have emphasized.

I will look for the data later, if there is any.


Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile
 
It is common knowledge that phd programs are research driven, as you and others have emphasized.

I will look for the data later, if there is any.


Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile

Argumentum ad populum, could we please stop with the fallacious arguments? They really have no place in a profession where one is meant to assess thought processes and reasoning.
 
I thought it might help to give you an idea of the training that occurs at other programs, as I'm not sure I get what you mean by "research focused".

I attend an APA-accredited, fully funded clinical psych Ph.D. program with class sizes of 4-5 per year. We complete a Master's thesis and a doctoral dissertation. These are typically clinically-focused projects. For example, some students do psychotherapy process research, conduct small treatment studies, or look at social/emotional/or cognitive variables in clinical populations (e.g., individuals with diagnosed ADHD, depression, or anxiety disorders).

Students in my program typically complete two assessment practica (in two different settings). One of these occurs in an in-house clinic, and the second is an external practicum that we apply for. Like you, we see "real clients" and learn both cognitive and psychodiagnostic assessment. We get very comprehensive supervision for the most part (typically an hour of supervision per hour of client contact, at least early in the program).

We also complete 2-3 therapy practica-- Again, one in our in-house clinic and then 1-2 external. Like you, we apply for the external practica and often compete with students from other programs. We learn a variety of therapy modalities. There is a focus on empirically-supported treatments, but these are diverse. For example, a typical student leaving the program will have experience with traditional BT and CBT, third-wave CBT approaches like ACT and mindfulness, and some exposure to DBT and/or IPT. Some students have also chosen to pursue practicum placements with other modalities, including short-term psychodynamic approaches.

We also get experience teaching, supervising other students in assessment and therapy (through a structured supervision course) and in program evaluation.
 
Last edited:

Again, none of that is particularly data-driven; they're opinion pieces by PsyD-holders and training directors defending the validity of the PsyD degree. My personal opinion is that the idea behind its creation was sound (i.e., that a large enough proportion of PhD students a number of decades ago were receiving subpar clinical training for it to be a problem). However, the field has significantly rebounded such that, as has been mentioned, the average PhD student now obtains more clinical experience than the average PsyD student (at least in terms of internship applicants).

I'm not denigrating individual PsyD degree holders, as I've worked with those who are highly competent. However, I do seriously wonder if the degree is truly worth having anymore at this point, as I personally don't know that the field (and the science behind it) is yet mature enough, at least in a clinical sense,to warrant a truly professional degree ala MD, JD, etc. This is compounded by the fact that the most egregious offenders with respect to perpetuating/worsening the internship crisis and, seemingly, reducing training standards in the field have latched onto the degree, thereby further eroding its credibility.

I honestly don't think it's going anywhere, though.
 
I'm at a funded, university-based, clinically-focused PhD program. All of our students complete a thesis and dissertation, but most don't conduct any research outside of that. I am very research-focused myself, but I am considered something of an anomaly. The whole "PhD = Research; PsyD = Clinical" is a false dichotomy.

I'm one of the people here who disagrees with the PsyD in itself. I understand the historical context in which it was created made it necessary, but that is no longer the case and now it is being ridiculously abused.
 
Thank you for the info.

Norcross, J. C., Ellis, J. L., & Sayette, M. A. (2010). Getting in and getting money: A comparative analysis of admission standards, acceptance rates, and financial assistance across the research–practice continuum in clinical psychology programs. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 4(2), 99-104. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014880
 
Last edited:
It is common knowledge that phd programs are research driven, as you and others have emphasized.

I think you are thinking of Ph.D programs in experimental branches of psychology. Then that statement is of course true. If you had an accurate understanding of the Boulder model, you would know that this dichotomy keep alluding to is silly and inaccurate. Its both...with science being the foundation/core from which everything is built. So, of course, this requires doing both and one informing the other. Kinda like CBT circle of life, if that helps you.

So, lets try again.
1. You claim the focus is different, no? You claim there is more focus on clinical training in Psy,d programs. Is this correct? I do not see any evidence of this.

2. I see evidence of the opposite. See # 10. http://www.appic.org/Match/MatchStatistics/ApplicantSurvey2011Part3.aspx

3.So...I will ask again. IS there ANY data out there that shows that this focus on clinical training that you allude to: a.) actually results in more clinical contact and/or exposure, b) produces differential outcomes at the internship/early career stage?

Further, if you find data supporting your assertion for A, if there is no evidence for B, then what the point?
 
Thank you for the info.

Norcross, J. C., Ellis, J. L., & Sayette, M. A. (2010). Getting in and getting money: A comparative analysis of admission standards, acceptance rates, and financial assistance across the research–practice continuum in clinical psychology programs. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 4(2), 99-104. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014880

Weren't their sole means of differentiating research vs practice self reported values? Were you trained to Dx based solely on self reports?
 
So your match rate is?

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile

I started to mention this in my original post, but I was afraid it was too off topic. But since you asked 🙂 ...

Full disclosure: I am not heading to a PhD program, rather after doing much research (see my join date haha) I decided to go the MSW route. Like I said in a previous post, I am very paranoid. Maybe skeptical is a better word for it. I read. A lot. I came across a lot about the internship crisis. I realized that if I really wanted to do go the PhD route, to be competitive and give myself the best chance for success, I needed to be mobile when it came to applying to internship sites. I calculated how old my son would be and figured out that if I took the typical 5-7 years, he would be right in the middle of high school. I have experience with moving kids around (I'm a military spouse) and I think high school is the wrong time to move your kids. I know sometimes you can't help it, but I wanted to avoid it if possible.

So, taking the above and several other factors into account, I decided to apply to a reputable state school MSW program. My class size is going to be about 30. And I will most likely graduate with little to no debt. I knew that I could apply to a PsyD program and be out and done by the time that my kiddo was a sophomore, but after evaluating all scenarios, I went with the most financially sound (for my family) decision. I get a nervous tic when I think about getting into $120,000 debt for a career that on average, starting, makes about 65K a year (and some not making that). I realize that people are different, and that some people are okay with debt, or maybe have independent means of paying for their education. Again, due to a good healthy dose of skepticism, I calculated my income with no debt for MSW vs funded PhD vs a non funded PsyD. I took median income amounts for my current and future states. The difference (for a retirement age of 65) was that MSW earnings were greater than non funded PsyD earnings. This was due to the amount of debt and years of lost income. If someone had more years to retirement to make up for it, I'm sure it might be a slightly different story, but for me it made no financial sense at all. Funded PhD came out at $130,000 more than MSW. Unless I got a job at a VA, which is insanely competitive, so I didn't think it was fair to bank on that. Again, this number would probably be way different for someone else due to the fact that I only had until the year 2039 to recoup lost time/wages.

Not only that, I want to work with Vets and military families, so I didn't want to go into getting a PhD to aim for one of the most competitive jobs for that career. I have a lot of faith myself, but I also love me some stats. I don't like heading into those kinds of numbers on purpose. So, I get to get a MSW, still earn roughly the same lifetime amount as I would with a PsyD, and still be almost guaranteed that I get to work with my favored population.

My focus is going to be clinical, but I want to be involved in research. I have completed an undergraduate thesis and hope to continue working on it with my mentor. Our goal is to eventually publish it. Where? Not sure hahaha, but my goal is to at least submit it. I want to do this, not because my focus is research (though I freaking love it) but because I feel like research is the foundation for clinical work. I know it sounds like I've consumed the SDN kool-aid, but really, I chose to go into the honors thesis program before I found these boards.

For me, going via MSW was the best choice. I'm going to get to be a counselor, practice for a while, and then perhaps go on to a PhD when I miss research again. This also lets me see if I actually want to be a therapist. I don't need to be called Dr. to be a fabulous counselor/therapist. (Making sure I only practice appropriately within the scope of my education and license ha ha)

Wow, that was really long winded. I just wanted some others who may come along to see that there are options besides getting in all that debt. For example, if I were to go to the state prison system as a PsyD, I'd net less money than I will with my MSW (to get eventually a LCSW). It makes NO financial sense for me to go for a PsyD.
 
Last edited:
Here's another:

Pashak, T. J., Handal, P. J., & Ubinger, M. (2012). Practicing what we preach: How are admissions decisions made for clinical psychology graduate programs, and what do students need to know? Psychology, 3(1), 1-6. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/940328359?accountid=34899

Again, completely irrelevant to the question of whether or not Ph.D. vs Psy.D. programs receive more training in practice.
 
I think you are thinking of Ph.D programs in experimental branches of psychology. Then that statement is of course true. If you had an accurate understanding of the Boulder model, you would know that this dichotomy keep alluding to is silly and inaccurate. Its both...with science being the foundation/core from which everything is built. So, of course, this requires doing both and one informing the other. Kinda like CBT circle of life, if that helps you.

So, lets try again.
1. You claim the focus is different, no? You claim there is more focus on clinical training in Psy,d programs. Is this correct? I do not see any evidence of this.

2. I see evidence of the opposite. See # 10. http://www.appic.org/Match/MatchStatistics/ApplicantSurvey2011Part3.aspx

3.So...I will ask again. IS there ANY data out there that shows that this focus on clinical training that you allude to: a.) actually results in more clinical contact and/or exposure, b) produces differential outcomes at the internship/early career stage?

Further, if you find data supporting your assertion for A, if there is no evidence for B, then what the point?

Ok. I stand corrected based on internship data. The hours are close and phds have a bit more than psyds.

I am tired and bored with this thread as I have been transparent, respectful, open-minded and have admitted to any wrongdoings or misunderstandings on my part. Hearing your opinions and feedback has given me the opportunity to see the apparent bias and poor opinions of my program (and other psyd and prof programs) and my hard work, by some of my future colleagues.

I thank you all for your honesty and I appreciate the challenge.

As for the OP, I hope you got a clear picture of your options.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.
 
What kind of *******es, to quote that 70s show, are we attracting with that kind of income/debt ratio?

I don't really get whether it's a lack of financial/common sense, a sign of poor judgement, denial/delusion or a combination of all 3. Someone who knowingly takes out 250K to go to a program that has 10-20% APA match rates, poor attrition, low licensure rates, low EPPP pass rates, etc. All this data is available on the website so it's not like it was hidden to them. It's scary that these folks are providing therapy.
 

Racho, what is the typical starting salary of graduates of your program? You said that only 1 person got into the VA for internship in Puerto Rico. Since the VA/federal government/DOD is generally going to be off limits for most graduates, what do you expect to earn in a 100% therapy position?

AS you mentioned, most graduates from your program are going to end up in PP, community MH centers, counseling centers, and state prison facilities. Therefore, we are talking about a starting salary of around 50K and maybe reaching 75K after 10 years (PsyD salary survey from the APA quoted the PsyD salary as 75K after 10 years of experience). If you open a PP, you will have no benefits or sick leave along with your 250K in debt. And these are the "lucky" ones that end up getting licensed. Another very possible outcome is going to be 250K in debt with no degree and no licensure. How do you make sense of this?

By the way, Argosy has very high loan default rates. This is devastating for both the individual and our society.
 
Ok. I stand corrected based on internship data. The hours are close and phds have a bit more than psyds.

I am tired and bored with this thread as I have been transparent, respectful, open-minded and have admitted to any wrongdoings or misunderstandings on my part. Hearing your opinions and feedback has given me the opportunity to see the apparent bias and poor opinions of my program (and other psyd and prof programs) and my hard work, by some of my future colleagues.

I thank you all for your honesty and I appreciate the challenge.

As for the OP, I hope you got a clear picture of your options.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using SDN Mobile. Please excuse any typos.

Yes, your program has a poor reputation, but its due to the issues, outcomes/metrics that we have discussed. Its not due to people being snobby and having "biases." Its based on evidence/data.

But, that is not what we are trying to do here. The point of all my questioning was so you can see that, when looking at evidence, alot of your assertions about your program's training model do not hold up. It's to your advantage, and the advantage of future applicants, to stop with this delusional notion that Ph.D programs solely produce people for academia (you cant possibly think there is that many opening in academia every year can you?!) and that a Psy.D somehow gives better (or more) clinical training. Moreover, there is no evidence to support the notion that having 200 or 300 more hours (once you reach a certain base-level, say 500 hours) produces superior therapists or superior outcomes for their clientele anyway. If you know of this evidence, than clue us in. But until such time, I truly hope you understand why people are indeed ""biased" against your program. It cuts out the base and adds nothing more, not even more clinical contact, on average.

I also agree with the financial aspect and I don't understand how you think the debt to potential income issues is " worth it."

Lastly, I think if you want to dig yourself out of the Argosy hole, you are going to have to step things up and make yourself a shining star. Uphill battle, but can be done. I would argue that if you want to be a private practice therapist, then there was no point in getting your doctorate in the first place, much less paying 200k for it. If, on the other hand you want to utilize your doctoral training to its full potential in the new age of Obama care (its coming), you will value the quality of your training vs just the quantity and you will abhor that people can complete capstones internships that have no formal approval or sanctioning, and you will diversify your clinical experiences to gain the competencies necessary to move this profession forward in the decade to come. What do you think?
 
Last edited:
If I could do everything over again, I would in a heartbeat. I wasted the past three years at Alliant because I was misinformed and too trusting. It is a terrible school, never go there. The only consolation I have is that I didn't come out with any debt. Heh, don't suppose there's any way I could just start over...
 
That was a lot of gyrations and verbal gymnastics to avoid labeling Argosy as a "diploma mill." Argosy, Alliant, probably diploma mills. Easy to avoid.

The real question is whether avoiding obvious "diploma mills" is enough. For example, is the PGSP-Stanford Consortium a "diploma mill? They boast a 100% licensure rate, 100% APA match rate (as of last year)... seems to be a rising star in the professional school firmament. But they still saddle students with unconscionable debt.
 
I would say yes, they are a diploma mill within the context of our field.

I'm surprised how no one has posted this yet:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diploma_mill

"A diploma mill (also known as a degree mill) is an unaccredited higher education institution that offers bogus academic degrees and diplomas for a fee. These degrees may claim to give credit for relevant life experience, but should not be confused with legitimate prior learning assessment programs. Diploma mills are frequently supported by accreditation mills, set up for the purpose of providing an appearance of authenticity.[1] An individual may or may not be aware that the degree they have obtained is not wholly legitimate. In either case, legal issues can arise if the qualification is used in resumés and the like."

.... and it goes on
 
I'd agree based on their class size and lack of funding. Their outcomes have been improving, but they still graduate way too many people and saddle their students with crazy debt.

Do you think this conversation is helpful (e.g., labelling any unfunded program with any poor attributes) as a "diploma mill" given the definition I posted above? The tack being taken by many here is to label just about any unfunded program, apparently, as a "diploma mill," while according to what I just posted above, even Argosy and Alliant might not be considered "mills" given the traditional definition (which doesn't mean Argosy and Alliant are places anyone should go)..... it doesn't seem to clarify things for a prospective student weighing different options that we're just applying the definition by pasting it on any program we don't like. Just sayin'.
 
Do you think this conversation is helpful (e.g., labelling any unfunded program with any poor attributes) as a "diploma mill" given the definition I posted above? The tack being taken by many here is to label just about any unfunded program, apparently, as a "diploma mill," while according to what I just posted above, even Argosy and Alliant might not be considered "mills" given the traditional definition (which doesn't mean Argosy and Alliant are places anyone should go)..... it doesn't seem to clarify things for a prospective student weighing different options that we're just applying the definition by pasting it on any program we don't like. Just sayin'.

Well, going back to my original statement in this thread, I think "diploma retailer" is probably more appropriate.

The ways i judge a program are class size and funding. Too many students or too little funding support seems to indicate a program that wants to generate revenue much more than responsibly train psychologists.

We've talked a lot about funding, but really - class size is probably the most salient thing if we are going to throw out labels. We could also discuss admissions standards, although data about that is probably less transparent.
 
Do you think this conversation is helpful (e.g., labelling any unfunded program with any poor attributes) as a "diploma mill" given the definition I posted above? The tack being taken by many here is to label just about any unfunded program, apparently, as a "diploma mill," while according to what I just posted above, even Argosy and Alliant might not be considered "mills" given the traditional definition (which doesn't mean Argosy and Alliant are places anyone should go)..... it doesn't seem to clarify things for a prospective student weighing different options that we're just applying the definition by pasting it on any program we don't like. Just sayin'.

I totally agree with you. I've seen people with "Diploma Mill" degrees and they, quite literally, either spend NO time in an actual or online classroom (and pay to get the piece of paper) or, more frequently, attend a "school" or "university" that exists because someone hung a shingle or held classes in their living room and issued "PhD" degrees that have no real world application--not licensable, not practical in any sense, not a qualification for any job, role, or service.

So, while the FSPS's do some disgusting things in the name of profit, if they are APA accredited they really should not be called diploma mills. I think "diploma retailer" is the exact same thing, sorry Pragma. If the degree is licensable, it's fair to say that the student put in the time and effort to be evaluated and processed through the program.

I suppose it's possible that if a PhD is not accredited, such as what is offered by Capella or others, could be considered a diploma milled degree--what can a person do with that degree, really? That's the question to ask.
 
I totally agree with you. I've seen people with "Diploma Mill" degrees and they, quite literally, either spend NO time in an actual or online classroom (and pay to get the piece of paper) or, more frequently, attend a "school" or "university" that exists because someone hung a shingle or held classes in their living room and issued "PhD" degrees that have no real world application--not licensable, not practical in any sense, not a qualification for any job, role, or service.

So, while the FSPS's do some disgusting things in the name of profit, if they are APA accredited they really should not be called diploma mills. I think "diploma retailer" is the exact same thing, sorry Pragma. If the degree is licensable, it's fair to say that the student put in the time and effort to be evaluated and processed through the program.

I suppose it's possible that if a PhD is not accredited, such as what is offered by Capella or others, could be considered a diploma milled degree--what can a person do with that degree, really? That's the question to ask.

Well, depends on how you are defining it I guess. If you use JeyRo's wikipedia definition then it really would only apply to illegitimate programs.

I personally still think the term is useful, because perception is reality after you graduate. I view programs that have lower standards for admission and graduate a ton of people (who seem to meet admission standards based solely on their ability to fill out a FAFSA) this way. Maybe I am an elitist jerk or something, but I don't think that a) everyone is cut out to be a psychologist and b) that our programs should be producing so many psychologists when we have demand problems.

I also might get flamed for this, but my limited experience with students in FSPS suggests that they do very little actual work when it comes to dissertation projects. Just look at the product. Also, a lot of these programs allow people to work full time in other areas. On the surface, that seems perfectly fair since they are charging their students an arm and a leg to get this degree. But I believe that assistantships are also a critical part of the education of a psychologist. So from my vantage point, these unfunded FSPS programs are pumping out tons of psychologists (whoever can pay) and these graduates do less work to achieve their degree than I think is needed.
 
I
So, while the FSPS's do some disgusting things in the name of profit, if they are APA accredited they really should not be called diploma mills. I think "diploma retailer" is the exact same thing, sorry Pragma. If the degree is licensable, it's fair to say that the student put in the time and effort to be evaluated and processed through the program.

.

Most of the students from alliant and argosy do not end up getting licensed if you include attrition rates (can be as high as 60%) and licensure rates reported by the program (usually about 60%).
 
While I don't think that diploma mill is quite accurate for FSPS schools (though this covers quite the range), I consider them a lot like third or fourth tier law schools. They may go through the motions of providing a proper education, but they are in it for the tuition money and are letting students take a huge gamble on their future with little support rather than cultivating the best environment for future graduates. While people cry about the APA internship crisis, I am not complaining too much. The reason is that jobs need some way to cut through applications. Law firms do it by the name brand of the school and we do it this way. As more and more graduates are pumped out for not enough jobs, more jobs will require it to be hired and the bulk of graduates from these programs that do not have it will be forced into masters level jobs or private practice.
 
While people cry about the APA internship crisis, I am not complaining too much. The reason is that jobs need some way to cut through applications. Law firms do it by the name brand of the school and we do it this way.

But the internship crisis affects students outside of these programs, as well. Until this year my funded, university-based PhD program was on average having one or two people not match.
 
Top