Applying to Programs

[commymommy]

I have an ugrad degree in Psychology and German (3.45 overall, 3.95 last two years, 3.9 Psychology)...I went on and did a post-bacc in science and got my MS in mol biology several years ago (3.8). I initially had plans to become a psychologist, but eventually switched over to biology because I thought I would like to go to med school. Marriage, children and many years later, I've decided to return to my initial 'calling'. I have been a sahm and worked part-time teaching biology labs at our state U for the past 4 years. Teaching science wasn't my dream job and I didn't feel fulfilled by it, but I felt that it offered me a flexible way to be around more for my family.

After being diagnosed with lymphoma during the holidays, I have spent a great deal of time contemplating the meaning of life and what I feel passionate about. I realize that I want to go back to school and get my PhD or PsyD. I'd like to work in a healthcare setting to help patients and family members who are dealing with devastating diagnoses of all kinds.....I feel fortunate to have been diagnosed early and feel like this is the opportunity now for me to change the direction of my life.

We live in MN and I basically have two options...U of MN (a more cutthroat research-oriented program with an average time of completion of the degree of 6+years) and....Minnesota Institute of Professional Psychology which unfortunately...has been bought out by Argosy U. Argosy seems to me to be a really weird school that doesn't make a 'genuine' impression. You can't search their website for schedules, info about classes, etc...and it is very expensive. It feels almost 'diploma-mill'-like, but...it is APA accredited.

At this point in my life, I honestly don't know that I have the drive to do a hard-core research oriented program. I love research....I did 2 years of science research while getting my MS and it is something that I'm capable of doing...I guess I am just interested in working in a clinical capacity. I already posess the skills to read/utilize research.

Does anyone know anything about the Argosy PsyD programs? Are they poorly run or of poor quality? What about U of MN? I understand it is a top 10 school and though my grades are pretty competitive from years ago, I do not have current research or clinical experience.

Any advice/thoughts would be appreciated. My only alternative would be to apply nationwide (which may be a necessity anyway...though that does present more challenges for my family).

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[destinydell]

...

 

[Kevin Psych]

I'd have to agree with the above post.

First off, it is very inspiring to hear of your conviction to pursue your academic and professional dream of being a psychologist, particularly with your extenuating circumstances that you're overcoming.

With regard to your question regarding Argosy University, I admit I cannot speak from direct, personal experience with this organization, but I can offer what I have heard about this organization while at a top 5 clinical program doing my undergrad, which in and of itself may be a bit biased. The sentiment that I have heard is that they are in the basis of making money by way of having very high tuition, coupled with having a very high acceptance rate. Consequently, I have heard at the Minnesota School of Professional Psychology and the Illinois School of Professional Psychology, both run by Argosy U., that class sizes are pretty large, compared to what is more generally found in the faculty to student ratio of many PhD programs.

Having not been to either school, I do not feel confident in judging their curriculum or standards. What I can offer, however, is an experience I had as an undergraduate. For a psychotherapy course I took, the course was taugh by a visiting associate lecturer, a PsyD, from the Illinois School of Professional Psychology (Argosy). It is my opinion that he was a great instructor with great knowledge of the field and therapy. His PsyD did not seem to handicap him in any way in his work as an instructor or clinician. He has his own private practice and is on staff at a local hospital as well. He told us that his main goal was to practice and as a result, sought the PsyD training model. After speaking with numerous faculty members during my undergrad, he was highly respected among the PhD faculty of a major, major research-oriented top PhD program. There is no question in my mind he is an excellent clinician and his PsyD from the Illinois School of Professional Psychology seemed to have served him very well, but I'm sure some individuals from the forum may disagree because he received his graduate training from a professional school. In my opinion, education is mostly what you make of it. Indeed, some schools are better than others, but mostly the weight of a good education falls on the shoulders of the student who chooses to be or not be successful (generally speaking).

With that, a PsyD may be a good choice for you. Although my lecturer did not attend the Minnesota School of Professional Psychology, he did get a good taste of the Argosy U. system at the Illinois location. Apparently, it served him well.

There are a lot of biases that individuals have regarding programs and such. I would suggest doing what is best for you and doing what fits your interests and career goals. Hope this helps a bit. Best of luck

 

[jerseygrl]

hello! you should also consider the fielding institute- it is apa accredited and is a flexible format phd program, weekends and distance courses.

might be worth checking out!

 

[psych101]

I completely agree with Jon Snow regarding the Argosy programs and other similar programs. I even wonder about the Fielding program, although I have never interacted with any graduates. Seems odd to do distance-education PhD training -- think of how much you would miss out on. Anyway, Jon's post completely and accurately describes my experience thus far with degree holders from these programs. I have experienced this personally (working with several graduates of those programs who seem to have subpar training and skills) and have heard many professionals in the work setting make comments reflecting lack of respect from graduates of professional PsyD programs. Yes, you can still become licensed and work with a degree from places such as this, but you have to consider whether your reputation will suffer to some degree.

 

[squigglefixx]

I've been following this forum for awhile as I wait to hear back about applications, but this is my first post. Good luck to everyone who is still waiting.

I don't want to offend any of the hard-working PhD hopefuls, students, and graduates on this site, but I think that most clinical psyc PhD programs are unbalanced. To anyone who considers clinical practice one of the main goals of their education, anyway. I chose to pursue a PhD program because I value research experience and empirically-based treatments, but at a lot of the programs that I investigated, it seemed to me that research was THE main goal. I don't feel comfortable with that, and was only able to find 3 programs that offered some balance in my chosen subspecialty. So, commymommy, since you already have research experience and want to help people, in my humble opinion, a PsyD may be the best thing for you. I wouldn't worry too much about people having a 'bleh' reaction, either. I say this because I have had a therapist who was a PsyD, and it didn't give me a negative feeling. The therapist was actually terrific at his job. I also have a good friend who is a psychiatrist and went to a PsyD therapist with no complaints. Actually, I've never heard anything negative about PsyD-educated therapists...except from PhDs.

That being said, I don't know much about Argosy schools. I have heard about the Fielding Institute, though. My current therapist recommended it to me, but I decided I wanted to pursure research as well as practice. I also want the grad school experience; however, if I were in your position, I wouldn't want to mess with it. And from what I understand, that's a perfect fit with the Fielding Institute.

 

[commymommy]

Thanks for the feedback. I have to admit to having a similar gut reaction when I hear the word 'Argosy'...and their website is more of a 'business' website than a university. There is no way to look at actual courses, detailed biographies of professors, etc.....It is as slick and glossy as a pharmaceutical brochure or something.

I think I could make myself competitive to be looked at by U of MN...I guess my concern is that I have heard that the top-ranked programs in the country (U of M being one of them) tend to be more cut-throat and very, very research oriented. Forgetting the fact that admission there is so competitive that I probably wouldn't get in anyway, I wonder if it would be a good fit for me in the long run considering my goals.

I have to admit...I prefer the idea of a research-oriented clinical degree over the clinical degree because I enjoy research and....because I think that whatever cinical deficits exist for PhD scientists when they get out are probably made up for in the first few years of practice.

 

[positivepsych]

We can debate the finer aspects of what knowledge is or is not necessary to be a good clinician if you want. A long story short. . .in my opinion the traditional Ph.D. route w/internship and postdoc is the best training option for both researchers and clinicians. Financially, it goes like this.. . .

good ph.d program = 0 debt
almost any psy d program = >$68,000 debt.

What about funded PsyD programs at research universities? I believe at certain schools you basically get a tuition waiver, but no stipend (so you have to take out loans for living expenses). So the first three years x $12,000 for rent/food = $36,000 in debt.

However, the programs are only 4 years, so you're graduating (on average) two years earlier than someone in a PhD program. You can surely make more than $36,000 the first two years out of school. I think in this scenario, taking the PsyD route is financially better?

This is all assuming, of course, you go to the rare PsyD programs with good funding. And the acceptance rates of these programs aren't much higher than comperable PhD programs, so they're ridiculously competitive as well.

This is why I feel like the field of Psychology is messed up at the moment. There needs to be graduate programs at top universities that aim to train clinicians (like they do in medical school, where research is an option but certainly not emphasized or required), that don't require students to incur debt (or offer loan forgiveness programs if graduates want to be therapists).

Personally, I feel like to avoid debt I have two options:

1) Suck it up and do a lot of research in a very stressful research-oriented university, or
2) Go to a no-name, middle-of-nowhere university and justify my PsyD for the rest of my life (not to offend any PsyDs out there, I like the training model, I just don't believe professional schools aka degree mills should be allowed to offer them)

Neither option fully satisifies me.

 

[psypsypsy]

Honestly, if you're really interested primarily in practice, I wouldn't necessarily recommend the PhD from UMinn. As a current clinical student, in a more research based program, your primary focus is really going to be on research, with clinical interests really more secondary. From everything I know about UMinn, that would be the same there. In order to get in, you would probably have to lie about how interested in research you were, which people certainly do, but I don't think makes them very happy.

Another option is the MA in counseling, MSW in social work, or a clinical nurse specialist. They don't have the cache of having a PhD, but the debt is less, and would come from UMinn, which is more reputable than Argosy, overall. From a strict salary standpoint, you probably won't make that much more as a PsyD, especially considering the debt you'd accrue. For clinical work, hospitals and clinics are hiring many more masters levels clinicians than PhD/PsyD because it's more affordable. Plus, the research mostly indicates (with a couple exceptions) that master level clinicians are equally as good as PhD level ones.