Hi,
I am new here and just looking for input. I am applying for graduate programs in clinical psychology. I have seen a lot of negative comments about Argosy in particular. Here is my observation- for whatever it's worth. The Professional Schools of Psychology are re-branding to get away from the Argosy perception. I am seriously considering going for a Psy D at the Schaumburg campus for the following reasons:
1. Psy D program is APA accredited. Not on probation, but accredited. One of my professors at DePaul got her PhD from Fielding Institute and they are now on probation, but she is one of the best clinicians and teachers I have ever seen. Also, worked recently with a really good neuropsychologist who was trained some years back at Argosy. His only observation was that some of the faculty at that time did not have enough teaching experience, even though they were licensed professionals. I believe in any program people bring what they personally have to offer in terms of IQ, EQ, life experience, and talent to where they train and visa-versa.
2. Finding a practicum is a huge problem within the field for everyone. ISPP Schaumburg is in process of creating a consortium so their students will have opportunities.
3. HAS ANYONE LOOKED AT THEIR FACULTY? The faculty is pretty impressive. The Dean comes from The Family Institute at Northwestern University and another faculty member still practices there. I worked at The Family Institute and I am 100% positive that professionals of this caliber would not be involved in a fly-by-night diploma mill program. Also, there are faculty doing research, and presenting- just like a university.
4. Unless one desires a tenured position at a university- a Psy D appears to have produced some respected professionals in the field. Rather like comparing physicians who have M.D or D.O after their name? Same license to practice.
I am considering PhD and other Psy D programs as well. I am well past the traditional age of pursuing a doctorate and I really don't think a PhD program would believe I fit their profile- despite clinical experience, research experiences, high GPA, etc. Here is my perspective and I could be mistaken, but it seems like common sense to me.
Forgive me while I compare the dynamic to my older son's path. He just started a PhD program in physics at Northwestern University. Northwestern is a fine university, but their physics program is not in the "top ten". He was also accepted into the PhD program at University of Illinois UC, which is a top ten program in physics. Here is the interesting part- think about it- the program at UIC is HUGE. I suspect that it is somewhat of a meat grinder in terms of grad students as slave labor. A professor who is prolific at Northwestern courted my son with all the bells and whistles he could. My son chose Northwestern because he will get incredible mentoring (he is going to Switzerland on the university's dime for a week of research next month).
When I read through all the angst filled threads about getting into a program and all the other worries inherent with pursuing a doctorate degree in any field, it strikes me that quality of one's life matters in terms of satisfaction and outcome. I also believe that especially in mental health you must have many skill sets to be successful. I have met people in the field who might be good at research, but they are not really that great as clinicians- and that is O.K. as long as they recognize that. I also see many people in the field who are clueless about how to market themselves in a business model.
It is my belief that the only advantage to a PhD program for me would be a lower cost of education, but that university is going to find a way to get every cent of value out of you- how exhausting. If one pays for the education, one has the freedom to select which research projects to pursue. It seems to me that everyone is scrambling for practicums and post-docs and if you are getting your training in a program that has respected and well-connected professionals AND they are actively creating a consortium mechanism for their student population, it is an advantage.
I am fortunate in the fact that the dollar amount for the program is not a problem for me to self-fund. Every other doctoral program of interest would require me to go into Chicago or a long commute to the North shore- and the city is expensive and a hassle. Why do I want to use 3 hours of my life energy commuting every day? Or I could go the LCPC or LCSW route to become a clinician, but there are still a significant amount of clinical hours/time additionally to be licensed and independent. So- it seems more like 4 to 4 1/2 years of effort for license with a master's and 5 to 5 1/2 years for a Psy D. license.
Framing the cost/benefit of attending the Illinois School of Professional Psychology at Argosy, Schaumburg, it seems to me that I will be able to get what I want there. Perhaps there are people they accept into the program who would not be admitted to a more stringent elimination for admittance, but it does not automatically follow that one would not receive a quality education in the program.
Would appreciate any thoughts or comments. 🙂 Thanks.
I am new here and just looking for input. I am applying for graduate programs in clinical psychology. I have seen a lot of negative comments about Argosy in particular. Here is my observation- for whatever it's worth. The Professional Schools of Psychology are re-branding to get away from the Argosy perception. I am seriously considering going for a Psy D at the Schaumburg campus for the following reasons:
1. Psy D program is APA accredited. Not on probation, but accredited. One of my professors at DePaul got her PhD from Fielding Institute and they are now on probation, but she is one of the best clinicians and teachers I have ever seen. Also, worked recently with a really good neuropsychologist who was trained some years back at Argosy. His only observation was that some of the faculty at that time did not have enough teaching experience, even though they were licensed professionals. I believe in any program people bring what they personally have to offer in terms of IQ, EQ, life experience, and talent to where they train and visa-versa.
2. Finding a practicum is a huge problem within the field for everyone. ISPP Schaumburg is in process of creating a consortium so their students will have opportunities.
3. HAS ANYONE LOOKED AT THEIR FACULTY? The faculty is pretty impressive. The Dean comes from The Family Institute at Northwestern University and another faculty member still practices there. I worked at The Family Institute and I am 100% positive that professionals of this caliber would not be involved in a fly-by-night diploma mill program. Also, there are faculty doing research, and presenting- just like a university.
4. Unless one desires a tenured position at a university- a Psy D appears to have produced some respected professionals in the field. Rather like comparing physicians who have M.D or D.O after their name? Same license to practice.
I am considering PhD and other Psy D programs as well. I am well past the traditional age of pursuing a doctorate and I really don't think a PhD program would believe I fit their profile- despite clinical experience, research experiences, high GPA, etc. Here is my perspective and I could be mistaken, but it seems like common sense to me.
Forgive me while I compare the dynamic to my older son's path. He just started a PhD program in physics at Northwestern University. Northwestern is a fine university, but their physics program is not in the "top ten". He was also accepted into the PhD program at University of Illinois UC, which is a top ten program in physics. Here is the interesting part- think about it- the program at UIC is HUGE. I suspect that it is somewhat of a meat grinder in terms of grad students as slave labor. A professor who is prolific at Northwestern courted my son with all the bells and whistles he could. My son chose Northwestern because he will get incredible mentoring (he is going to Switzerland on the university's dime for a week of research next month).
When I read through all the angst filled threads about getting into a program and all the other worries inherent with pursuing a doctorate degree in any field, it strikes me that quality of one's life matters in terms of satisfaction and outcome. I also believe that especially in mental health you must have many skill sets to be successful. I have met people in the field who might be good at research, but they are not really that great as clinicians- and that is O.K. as long as they recognize that. I also see many people in the field who are clueless about how to market themselves in a business model.
It is my belief that the only advantage to a PhD program for me would be a lower cost of education, but that university is going to find a way to get every cent of value out of you- how exhausting. If one pays for the education, one has the freedom to select which research projects to pursue. It seems to me that everyone is scrambling for practicums and post-docs and if you are getting your training in a program that has respected and well-connected professionals AND they are actively creating a consortium mechanism for their student population, it is an advantage.
I am fortunate in the fact that the dollar amount for the program is not a problem for me to self-fund. Every other doctoral program of interest would require me to go into Chicago or a long commute to the North shore- and the city is expensive and a hassle. Why do I want to use 3 hours of my life energy commuting every day? Or I could go the LCPC or LCSW route to become a clinician, but there are still a significant amount of clinical hours/time additionally to be licensed and independent. So- it seems more like 4 to 4 1/2 years of effort for license with a master's and 5 to 5 1/2 years for a Psy D. license.
Framing the cost/benefit of attending the Illinois School of Professional Psychology at Argosy, Schaumburg, it seems to me that I will be able to get what I want there. Perhaps there are people they accept into the program who would not be admitted to a more stringent elimination for admittance, but it does not automatically follow that one would not receive a quality education in the program.
Would appreciate any thoughts or comments. 🙂 Thanks.
