New article ranking clinical programs

I just camem across an article in the most recent Journal of Clinical Psychology that might be of interest to people planning on applying to clinical programs (and to those who are just interested in debating about program rank).

Roy, K.M., Roberts, M.C., & Stewart, P.K. (2006). Research productivity and academic lineage in clinical psychology: Who is training the faculty to do research? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62, 893-905.

The authors list programs based on how many graduates of the program are faculty members at clinical programs, and how many publications graduates have generated. I'm not sure if these rankings are any more meaningful than any others that have been published, but it's useful information to look at if you're applying, at least if you're interested in an academic career. There is some convergence w/ other rankings--For example, top programs using these criteria include UCLA, UIUC, Stony Brook, Minnesota, etc.

By the way, it's very new--I can't even find it on PsycINFO yet, but it is posted online, so you should be able to get it if you have online access to that journal.

I'm downloading th ePDF now, and I will post the results later when I get a chance.

Interesting rankings. It would have been interesting to see if they had included PsyD programs in the rankings. UCLA number one in faculty members and pubs. I knew they good, I didn't realize they were that good.

I don't think it would have been that interesting. It was ranking based on research, presumably they would have all been at the bottom. Now, if it were based on some other criteria in which they could competet that would be interesting!

Well, I am pretty sure that my program, baylor, and a few others have more faculty members than some of the private PhD programs. I would have liked to see where those programs fell. However, yes it would have been interesting if the rankings were based on more than research.

Perhaps more interesting is Joanne Davila's paper in the same issue, focused on nontraditional career paths. I got distracted by that, and am just now going back and looking at the article mentioned in the original post!

Psyclops said:

I'm downloading th ePDF now, and I will post the results later when I get a chance.

Click to expand...

I hate to do this but i'm going back on this post. 😳 I'm too lazy to sift through them all.

I have to say that I will take the USNWR rankings on my school, it noticably higher almost every category except for Mdn# pubs, which I don't think is that interesting, and faculty, which is actually quite high for my program. Here's to hoping. 👍

Psyclops said:

I hate to do this but i'm going back on this post. 😳 I'm too lazy to sift through them all.

I have to say that I will take the USNWR rankings on my school, it noticably higher almost every category except for Mdn# pubs, which I don't think is that interesting, and faculty, which is actually quite high for my program. Here's to hoping. 👍

Click to expand...

Yeah, part of the reason that I like these rankings is probably that my program is ranked a little bit higher using these criteria than on UNWR. It probably just goes to show that we're not really looking for unbiased rankings, we're looking for rankings that confirm our preconceived biases. But in any event, more information about programs is always better, especially for those researching programs (who presumably haven't developed their own biases yet). 😎

It's a good resource for those who want to pursue an academic position after school. The non-traditional article in the same issue was good as well.

The big variable that presumably affects those rankins though is the size of the departmetns.