Therapist4Change: It is hard to produce 'the very best' when the student's focus is spread over a variety of areas, with no real allowance for extending the amount of time to make up for the fewer hours spent on the task at hand...
Research, collaboration, seminars/panel discussions, professional presentations, intensive trainings, etc. I think one of the hardest things for an online program to reproduce is the collaborative piece of graduate learning. I find that the classes are merely the first step in a graduate education. All of the other time spent doing the things I previously mentioned really crystalizes the classroom learning.
I will not waste time arguing that the experiences are the same because they obviously are not.
But, I think you discount the amount of collaboration possible in an online program while simultaneously exaggerating the amount involved in a conventional program.
Yes, collegial sharing is an important -- yet immeasurable -- construct. Yet it remains an
assumed benefit of conventional program. I find it difficult to believe that every doctoral student is as collegial as your description would suggest.
So, you found that aspect of your program enriching? Good for you.
But . . . so did I.
Like your I/O friend, we were required to fly in for regular face-to-face collaborations and clinical proficiency seminars.
Ultimately, whatever the presumed benefit of collegiality experiences, it will be determined by whatever the particular student desires. I adjuncted at a major metropolitan university. Despite their best efforts, I saw very little "mingling" in the student body. Most students commuted in for classes, etc. and dashed off when they were done. But, again, I don't think someone graduating from this program would have the legitmacy of the program challenged because they didn't hang around on campus.
Therapist4Change: I believe it to be similar to an MS level person trying to argue that they are the same as a Doctoral level person because they both spend time in similar classes (ignoring the amount of time, level of work, depth of study, etc). I understand (in clinical at least) that a license is a license.....but I think people should try and get the best level of training as possible.
Actually, I believe you are comparing apples and oranges here as a Master's degree is generally a required prerequisite for admission to the online programs with which I am familiar. These students already come with an advanced level of education and training. It is disrespectful to dismiss it simply because it was not earned in the conventional MA-PhD one-shot program.
Oh, and I do not hold a negative view of younger clinicians. In fact, one of my post-doc supervisors at my internship was ten years younger than I and I learned much from her. But, much of what had been said in this thread has been mired in generalities. It seems disingenuous to disregard the potential benefit of accumulated life and professional experience in a setting which relies on interpersonal skills.
And, aren't you undermining your own argument by pointing out that experience engenders bias and that not all experience is good experience? (Perhaps the standard graduate program is the standard but maybe it shouldn't be!
)
Therapist4Change: I beg to differ. Life experience is definitely valuable, and professional experience is obviously helpful, but therapeutic rapport has little to do with age, and much more to do with interpersonal skills. If you have the ability to connect with people on an interpersonal level, you have a much better chance of facilitating therapeutic change, compared to being of similar age or background as your patient. I know plenty of people with YEARS of experience who would make lousy clinicians.
You may beg, but you haven't actually proven anything here. Yes, ancedotally, there are some very good younger clinicians and poor older ones, and visa versa. But, as with any profession, there is another difficult to quantify construct: prior life experience. While the 10 year consolidated program graduate may have equivalent
technical skills, do you really believe that -- on average -- graduates with several years human service experience have less or better developed interpersonal skills? Given the extraordinarily rarified experience of going BA-MA-PhD straight through, don't you think people who are seeking help dealing with the ups-and-downs of average life might feel more comfortable with a clinician who might have actually experiened some similar travails?
Therapist4Change: I don't mean to dismiss an online program, but I'm sharing my views of the limitations.
I do appreciate you sharing your views. (I
especially appreciate the dignified manner in which you shared them!) I think your concerns are well grounded, but a bit naive. Do remember that the legitimate online programs were founded by conventionally trained clinicians who recognized an untapped pool of talent in mid-career adults and sought to provide a venue they might be able to utilize to upgrade their training and credentials. While it is not possible to replicate all of the positive aspects of a campus-based program, the online ones do recognize those limitations and have made efforts to create as equivalent experiences as possible.
As someone who throughly enjoyed undergraduate life on campus at a mid-sized state college, was immensely disappointed by it while earning a Master's at a larger urban university, and was impressed the collegiality experienced in an online doctoral program, I've yet to be convinced not "being there" does irreparable harm to the educational experience.
