Yes, thank you too, JSnow. Though I cant help but feel cheated that the petition is released it seems there was little true intention to promote dialogue to help shape it. More important to polish the talking points and fire away armed with the astounding certainty that all relevant factors have been acknowledged. My whole point was to argue that not all FSPS are the same, that perhaps even the offenders can be remedied in a less disruptive, meaningful, valuable way than simply tearing them down.
I didn't generalize about FSPS.
You have, and still do.
I said the line between FSPS and university programs is blurry. The problem is within the professional schools (
http://www.ncspp.info/), but it's not all of them.
That you did, but your posts make it painfully obvious youre no advocate, either.
I do think FSPS are a blight on clinical psychology, but that's not what this letter is about. I am not specifically targeting free standing schools.
Yes you avoided naming FSPS as a class in the letter, but your prejudices shine through. And on this forum you all-too-often simply yank the chain of those who may be more militant. Thats just one SDNers perspective. Those who back this petition are more or less gunning at FSPS in the belief that they have not made and can not make meaningful contributions to psychology worse, that the public health is on the line. When asked for proof of inferior product, this group has but its own fear of a wounded authoritative status and a deep hit to the pocketbook.
Many jobs requires APA certification. The VA is one large example, but there are many others.
Oy the VA. Greed is not good, but neither is being in service to the military industrial complex. At a basic level, the two are not different.
Realize also that private practices, internship sites, postdocs, etc.. . . are run by people with opinions. Many in the field see these issues similarly.
First, a word from Led Zep -- Many is a word/that only leaves you guessing/guessing bout a thing/you really ought to know
Anyway, yes. You make my point as well PPs, internship sites, postdocs, etc., are run by people not simply with opinions about but needs for the services being supplied by folks from FSPS. In drafting this petition there was not a single word other than mine about what these programs are to do when the blighted doctoral level services they have been contracting for simply go away. Ironically you want to talk about decreasing stress and helping the community stirring a civil war within (really more like a suicide by) psychology does little to help the community.
If I were hiring someone, I would not select someone from a non-apa program, an FSPS, nor most psyd programs. But that's me. Your mileage may vary.
I wonder what kind of work youd offer all due respect its debatable whether Id sniff twice.
The way I see CAPIC is as part of that system of professional schools that mostly ignore/circumvent APA. I see this as a somewhat hostile attempt at a takeover.
Guess I have a bit of history to brush up on this summer. Why would I believe youre offering anything but spin? What does CAPIC say of its roots and mission vis-à-vis APPIC?
More than 50% of our new grads come from professional schools, many of those students are from FSPSs and for-profit, devry/university of phoenix like businesses. These programs have very high acceptance rates compared to other programs, lower entry scores (GRE, GPA) and average lower match rates to APA internships and EPPP scores. Populating our field with these folks gives these programs political power in our field. I would like for that to go away.
I guess youd ask me to ignore the fact that there is a longstanding debate about training models
Fine, lets just say one size fits all for psychology and the public it serves. No wonder you make sweeping generalizations about FSPS and lump them in with For Profit professional schools.
There are data to support a difference. What's your metric?
Its becoming clear that my metric is not your metric, no? I and others have asked you to prove that the FSPS as a class have contributed to worsening public health, to answer for the idea that your proposals will have not simply pros but cons, and to have a more honest look at the all-too-real seeming possibility that the cons may actually be the very worsening of the public health you blame others for.
But, we should be doing credit risks in academics. Personally, I'd like to start by chopping off the programs that exist totally based on student loans and have high default rates. To me, that's the alliant/argosy contingent. On general principle, I'd like to see them gone regardless of the quality of the professionals they produce (though, I think there's evidence, that's not so good in any case).
Yes, credit risks would be prudent. As for the idea that there are institutions that exist totally off student loans? Is that realistic? Absolutely no grant money, no endowment, no interest bearing investments, no volunteer power, nothing? As for the high default rates, yeah, its a problem, its multifaceted
Tearing down a house is easier than fixing it, and the petition is all about tearing it down because youre afraid itll fall on you (dare I say, us?). Not saying you shouldnt be concerned, but lets be clear that the political is personal. No doubt, I am fighting mad because the solution you propose seems targets my school as surely as it targets me and my little family who are hugely invested in this project
you would tear down my familys house? Good luck with that.
Lesser entry requirements, circumventing of our national organization, high representation of businesses instead of traditional academic institutions; among the professional schools of psychology, very few are from even average universities. We have all these boards associated with APA that work to come up with both general standards and specialty practice standards. We are a young field and have enough issues establishing and enforcing standards within the APA-fold. This outs another layer of crap that we have to deal with. That is a public safety issue, in my opinion.
The argument that society is served by having different training models includes the notion that these models may need to use different entry requirements. And perhaps some of these different requirements will be untethered from the dream of an empirically perfect assessment tool. Anyway, as for the business vs. university differentiation Traditional academic institutions were perhaps once upon a time best seen as charities. But the differences are less than clear. That larger debate aside, universities are not perfect worlds unto themselves nor even perfect reflections of their larger societies. OG has argued that they are superior training environments because of the rich cross-departmental support, but Ill but theres a fair amount of rigidity and interdepartmental competition for scarce resources in academia today
General and practice standards are fine and necessary. To link this to public safety is a weak argument, IMHO. All it takes is one demonstration that there is no detrimental effect to public safety, and your cheese is on the move
In this regard, I cannot help but wonder at the parallels between the arguments presented by PUTATOSOP vis-à-vis FSPS, and the anti-RxP contingent vis-à-vis the pro-RxP folks
Oh the good old one-syllabler. I have one as well. Its Yes. But itd be unfair of me to take the credit for that one syllable. The majority of states in the union seem to agree that the CAPIC experience will do just fine, no? Am I wrong on that point?
This is the part that most professionals object to when it comes to the increased #'s of trainees being released into the market. The programs mostly target folks that otherwise would not be remotely competitive for university-based programs.
.
Not my concern. There is more than enough work to go around if people would stop to think more creatively about human problems.
I have a big problem with CAPIC (and related state level acred. internships) because the only thing limiting even more people flooding the market was internship, and now they are providing an alternative path that was never part of the clinical psychology training model.
CAPIC provides internship sites. That hasnt been a part of the standard model?
There are no data to support equivalency, the sites often are unfunded and take advantage of students by having them work long hours for free, AND when they finish they are automatically limited by the mere fact they completed a state/local acred. internship.
Need there be data to support equivalency? The argument is in large part that this is a public safety issue. Is there a lack of data there, too? As for limitations again, I am perhaps under the mistaken impression the overwhelming majority of most states are not screening out the CAPIC folks
They can't go back and do an APA/APPIC internship....so they are essentially stuck as a 2nd class professional because they can't work at VAs (one of the largest trainers AND employers of psychologists in the USA), most medical centers won't employ them, and many competitive jobs will automatically cut non-APA acred. internship applicants from their application pool. So many often take those: "Required training: LMHC, MSW, PsyD., Ph.D...." type jobs that marginalize doctoral training and pull down salaries by equating our training to that of a 2 year program.
I would sooner have sex with my mother than work in a VA. All the agonizing over lack of money in the field and not one word about the federal military/homeland security budget
Medical centers meh. Im not one of the medical manifest destiny types. My guess is theres more than enough work for folks who want to provide alternatives to that model, though I understand the spirit of collaboration is paramount. As for the second class jobs that could be filled by an MSW
The PsyDs and PhDs who take those jobs have my respect. Do you really imagine they are just wallowing in the dreck because they have nothing better to do? For some work in the field is a calling and for others its a trophy hunt. As the point is often made re: licensure, at lesser paying jobs the degree is simply the entry level requirement. There will be questions as to why an agency that is strapped for cash should pay for a doctor when it could have a masters level clinician. Once on the job, if the PhD/PsyDs let their training be equated with a lesser degree then thats their fault.
The community being? The big cities where many of these FSPs are? There are many options, are there not? If APA/whatever boards determine through market analysis that we need more psychologists than we come up with a plan and execute it. The expansion/growth in the professional school community has come about because of demand from students to become psychologists and the schools' desires for money/expansion, not from needs in the field.
We form a committee to consult on the procedures for creating a committee to draft a white paper on the need for concerted action to define the need
and how many lives are left in the balance? We have something in place now.
And Whoa theres a quote where you generalize about professional schools! Which ones, again? Are we there yet?
I don't know, but I don't think it would be much of a problem. I could be wrong.
Reminds me of a quip I once heard by a pro bicyclist Breaks only slow me down.
I'm sure the adjuncts already are serving the community clinically and probably the professors as well (as they don't really do much research at those schools).
Yes, and my point was that once released into the community, they will have projects ripe for new doctoral students to participate in
but who will be available? Oh, right, lets wait for the committee to draft the procedures for creating a committee
If they've taken a faculty job at an FSPS, I'm not sure I care about their "visions." That's bottom rung stuff. Plus, their vision includes supporting a training venue/model that I think is bad for the field. I'd prefer they do something else.
.
Anybody else want to claim the E word here? I fear Ive met my APA approved quota for the year. I wonder how many FSPSers work with folks you know and/or love.
Can you clarify this, I don't understand?
I think I was making the point that if you believe the market can auto-correct, its mildly ironic to take an interventionist stance
This letter is about the internship imbalance. Yes, some of these issues play into that, but one thing at a time!
I have given a loose definition of "scammers/diploma mills." Debt, cohort-size/contribution to unmatched and non-apa internships, low EPPP scores, etc. . . What's wrong with that?
I was merely noting that one of the PATUTs was in it to shut down the scammers and diploma mills. Might want to yank their chain rather than miine. As for your parameters: cohort size is a non-issue as I have stated in this and my previous post, contribution to unmatched and non-apa internships are being oversold as a public health issue unless we are looking at the way our national wealth is being squandered on the military, low EPPP scores are a statistical unavoidability because someone will always be lowest but also because you can teach to the test.
This is a complicated issue. It also plays into why I think that the FSPs and some other professional school programs are exploitative. They advertise on buses and radio programs, and through internet ads like a business. This reaches people that might not have previously considered a doctorate. That's not necessarily bad, but then they provide easy access (don't have to worry so much about GREs and appropriate experience, some programs present as night school type alternatives, they are in big cities so people don't have to move), charge lots and lots of money, and use a hard sell (they will call students and recruit them hard and actively, they have staff for this purpose; real universities don't do this).
1. The FSPS I attend does not advertise its program on busses, radio programs or SDN banners. The only reason it would be bad if it did would be if it was if the quality of my programming was being compromised to recruit more students. So yes, I agree, it could be worrisome. But your four parameters were not subtle enough to tease out a difference between my program and a program that operates like this.
2. There is quite a large cohort of people who have moved from out of state to attend my program. There are also international students.
3. The rub on many professional programs is that they value experience over academic indicators in their acceptance decisions. Now you are saying that students dont have to worry about appropriate experience. I guess we are talking about different ideas of breadth, depth, etc.
4. Let me try an alternate reality out on you. You may castigate me all you like, refer me to the age thread, or worse. Just dont necessarily believe I necessarily believe the formulation: Many folks who go to the unies go because they are drawn by the dream of power and prestige, the dream that their unsullied and unimpeachable rationality will be the highest octane fuel for the progressive machine... They are hooked at a time (late adolescence/early adulthood) when they are most floridly authoritarian. They come out sounding like elitists and work in the VA, or for the pharmaceutical-industrial/medical establishment. They argue that while greed may not be good, they are entitled to big dollars because theyve paid their dues and their expertise is critical to the running of the machine
No less inflammatory, generalizing, or accurate than your portrait of an FSPS student...
Many people that "hit bottom" be it because of drugs or other things, go into social work and work in communities on the front lines, so to speak. This is very important. And, social work programs actively recruit and want people like this because of their experiences. Often people like this do not have the background to get into a doctorate program or medical school (and this is the hurdle that existed BEFORE the rapid expansion of professional schools of psychology; clinical psychology was as, if not more, competitive than medical school; that is the quality of student that we had as the tapestry for creating the professionals in our field AND we are aggressively lowering that bar).
1. Other things like loss of family, sudden poverty, accident and illness
or simple vow of nonattachment. Its not us to judge, but you went right to the most polarizing zinger drug addiction.
2. Also, statistically speaking, people with masters degrees are more likely to come to a PsyD degree, and probably a FPSP. This is not simply about adequate training, but about trainability, too prejudices against folks who have been around the sun a bit more often not being able to learn or being beyond the age when they can take a protégé role
Often these masters level folks, like myself, have surveyed the field from the trenches and want to be able to take a more leveraged position in advancing the cause. The idea that people should pursue a masters I addressed in my previous post. Id like to suggest again that the problems facing this society are multiple, complex and open ended. Psychology is a young field, as you have said, and it would dare to cede these problems to the LCSW/MFT crowd? Really? Im not interested in that, why are you? Because it would mean accepting a rag when we used to have a splendid tapestry? Im thinking about clinical-community psychology hybrids. Probably not your thing, I dont expect you to sniff twice, but you would dare to say I, as an FSPS student, am contributing to the blight? I want to believe youre just being silly ol JSnow
so, people like this (rock bottom and putting themselves back together types) often come from poor backgrounds and don't have a solid appreciation for money; meaning what is a lot of money to earn, what is a lot of debt. I feel that the FSPs of the world exploit these people. Incidentally, this is the case with University of Phoenix/Devry et al. . . and the default rate for student loans in these programs (devry and phoenix, I don't know about the professional schools of psych) is huge.
Oh, before I forget youre not generalizing about FSPS
.youre not generalizing about FPS
.youre not generalizing about FSPS
Social work and psychology serve different purposes. Psychology is a science. Clinical psychology is an applied science. Social work is a different animal, an important one. But, we do different jobs.
Not interested in this argument/option. See the above. Im thinking about clinical-community psychology hybrids. Maybe you also disparage community psych? I wouldnt be surprised. In any case the work Im thinking of is probably not your thing, I dont expect you to sniff twice, but Im looking at ways to expand the field, not narrow the scope of practice. You would dare to say I, as an FSPS student, am contributing to the blight? Ooofa. You would say I may take away from a more deserving Unie student? I have folks in my corner, too. You would shut my program down? Not on my watch.
I do not intend to belittle the work you are putting in, or other students at FSPs put in. I believe you (that you work hard, find it rigorous and exhilarating). I also agree with you that many good clinicians come from FPSs. Still, I think, it would be better for the field to shut those programs down (after the current crop of students are done).
I want to believe this. And I recognize that on the anti-PsyD sentiment thread you wish to atone for unnecessarily pissing off professional school students. I dont mean any disrespect to you as a professional or a person. I wish merely to take issue with your thoughts on the parameters of the profession and how to advance it.
FYI, currently within APA governance there is a movement to require APA accreditation at ALL levels of training (doctoral, internship, post-doc) for licensure. It would have to go through state boards and might not pass everywhere, but it has pretty strong backing. Such a policy would be consistent with nearly every other profession, from hairdressing to medicine, that requires completion of accredited training; that we don't do it is ridiculous.
I do like this idea, in theory.
It often feels a bit unproductive to come to this forum and be told how wrong I am, but that's part of the business no matter what the setting. 
