Argosy Question

[commymommy]

I've been reading through the forums about PsyD/PhD with a great deal of interest and I have a question about the 'Argosy' comments.

Argosy appears to have 'purchased' several programs that were fairly reputable...ie...Minnesota School of Professional Psychology had a good reputation (at least here in Minnesota). Because I currently live in MN I have been researching the schools. I talked to a woman last week who graduated from MN School of Professional Psychology to ask her about her education/experience. She expressed some disregard for the fact that Argosy had now taken over....yet she said that she was 100% satisfied with the education that she had received there. She doesn't feel that it has adversely affected her in any way.

She says that many of the professors are the same (as far as she knew) and that she worked with students from UMN and St. Thomas and felt she received a solid education. I told her about the 'Argosy' website and the fact that it appears to have a businessy/degree mill type feel to it and she was disturbed by that...and disappointed that her school (that she felt so good about) seems to have taken a different direction....she is going to "look into it" for me.

That all being said. How did Argosy (what a STUPID name) come to purchase some of these professional schools? I called Argosy last week and asked them what the diploma would say, and they told me that they 'recognize' that Argosy is not yet a well-respected name...and that the degree is from MN School of Professional Psychology instead.

I don't mind the idea of a professional school...I think eduation is also partly what you make of it yourself. I have a research degree and am capable of being a consumer of research. I'd like a clinical education....that being said, I don't want to go somewhere that used to be good quality but is now a degree mill....

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[commymommy]

Well...I don't think degree mill in the traditional sense of giving credits for life experience or any of that rot.

At the same time, Argosy appears to have embraced a purely business model. On their website you can not search a schedule of classes, view the requirements for degree completion, etc etc. You can not view faculty bios (beyond a lame picture with a blurb) or look at their publications or clinical experience. I find that disturbing. Though they may not be degree mills at this point, there is a fine line between a business and an educational institution. An organization interested in profit will likely have lower admission standards as well as graduation standards...and may produce many more subpar practitioners along with some good ones.

Now for you, Jon....Define Fringe.

 

[SaraL124]

Although, in the typical definition of the word "fringe", I don't know if PsyD programs run through professional schools fall into that category anymore considering that they are pumping out more practitioners than reputable PsyD programs and PhD programs. This in turn is increasing the competition for internship placements. So, yes, while they may be "not-mainstream", I don't think it qualifies as a "fringe" sect of psychology anymore, unfortunately.

 

[codetype4/9]

MSPP was at one time respected in Minnesota, they had a talented faculty and even managed to turn out students who on average outpreformed the UofM on the EPPP in their early years.

A student I did my undergrad with went there and reported that it was easy if not easier than his undergrad coursework and not all of the faculty were very invested in the program. He also said he was able to work almost 40hrs a week while going to school. Doesn't sound very rigorous. Why go somewhere that costs huge $ and advertises their vet tech and dental hygene programs on television?

 

[Jon4PsyD]

I don't like Argosy. I sent in information form to PsychologyToday about Grad schools and they got my information from that and were e-mailing me relentlessly ("It's not too late to apply!!") and even started calling. I was respectful and set up times where they COULD call me when I was free, they agreed, and then would never call during those times. They still email me every once in awhile.

I just wouldn't trust a school like that. They seem very unorganized and even worse, desperate for applicants.

I'm sorry to sound like I'm trashing them, but after researching PsyD programs and choosing which ones I wanted to apply to, Argosy is one I wouldn't ever consider. It's too bad they bought out the Minnesota School of Prof. Psychology because you're right, it was well respected at one point. One of the 3 Neuropsychologists at the local hospital here graduated from there.

Jon

 

[mmonte4]

I don't like Argosy. I sent in information form to PsychologyToday about Grad schools and they got my information from that and were e-mailing me relentlessly ("It's not too late to apply!!") and even started calling. I was respectful and set up times where they COULD call me when I was free, they agreed, and then would never call during those times. They still email me every once in awhile.

I just wouldn't trust a school like that. They seem very unorganized and even worse, desperate for applicants.

I'm sorry to sound like I'm trashing them, but after researching PsyD programs and choosing which ones I wanted to apply to, Argosy is one I wouldn't ever consider. It's too bad they bought out the Minnesota School of Prof. Psychology because you're right, it was well respected at one point. One of the 3 Neuropsychologists at the local hospital here graduated from there.

Jon

I agree, they do seem desperate for applicants. I was interested in Argosy Honolulu at one point a few yrs back and had a 3.1 gpa and no experience- they still wanted me (emails, calls, etc.). Also no GRE required- something is up!

 

[Jon4PsyD]

They are also "Avertising ******" LOL..you see their ads everywhere on every possible Psychology site! What respectable program of any type..would do that?!

I'm sure someone from Argosy reads this board and has their mouth wide open after that comment....haha

Jon

 

[Neuro-Dr]

we have had students apply and get accepted for fellowships in NP over the years from Argosy campuses. This is as honest of an opinion as I can give you - My sense is that the top 10% of students from an AU program would stack up pretty well against students from ANY clinical (applied more than research program) and we've taken them from all over. The problem, is that the bottom 10% would be quite a drop off from the bottom 10% of most other programs. Meaning, there seems to be a bi-modal distribution at these schools.

I think all for-profit schools likely have admissions people with quotas and these are not the faculty members, who would probably be appauled if they knew the practices. However, it also means that if they need 40 PsyD students that year, they are going to take the best of the ones who apply. Traditional programs, who are not tied to grad student revenue wouldn't look at it that way, if they needed 10 and only trusted 8, they'd likely take 8.

I think you have to consider two things, the first is how you feel about the faculty, the training model and the placement data. The second, is how you feel about the reputation. Most of us in the field recognize the legacy names like MSPP, ISPP, FSPP and so on, the AU title probably won't be an issue. BTW Alliant is doing the same thing with most of the California schools. The problem is that in some place, there is a real issue with these programs and it can set you back a step even if you are brilliant. Liek anything, if you love a place, go there and the rest will work itself out.

 

[docjohng]

I think all for-profit schools likely have admissions people with quotas and these are not the faculty members, who would probably be appauled if they knew the practices. However, it also means that if they need 40 PsyD students that year, they are going to take the best of the ones who apply. Traditional programs, who are not tied to grad student revenue wouldn't look at it that way, if they needed 10 and only trusted 8, they'd likely take 8.

It completely varies from program to program and school to school. Again, generalizations of this sort about *all* types of X institutions are meaningless, because there is such a wide diversity in practices.

The fact is, demand is far outstripping supply until you get into actual practice or research. Ph.D. programs get hundreds of applicants for less than a dozen positions (which is absolutely no different than when I was applying in 1999), and Psy.D. programs get double that amount (some get over 1,000) for their more numerous slots.

I'm certain that most traditional Ph.D. programs are more challenging to get into, but I'm not sure it means what you say that a program would only take 8 students they "trusted" if they had 10 slots open. Just because they don't necessarily need the money (which is questionable), doesn't mean they don't have other expectations that still need to be fulfilled by those slots.

-John

 

[Neuro-Dr]

You are wellcome to consult the Dec 2005 issue of the American Psychologist or the Peterson article from 2003. Either will clearly indicate that your statement of application to enrollment is seriously flawed. In addition, having served in an advisory board capacity with AU as a system, I stand behind my statements regarding admissions. I will admit that I have no first hand knowledge if this is true for other free-standing PsyD programs.

As for the 8 or 10 comment, this has indeed happened. Although pragmatically, you are right that the general number of applicants means this will not happen often, several DOTs have stated this very point at training conferences. In addition, how a University could make money when most of those positions are funded seems odd. If you make the case that they are just cheap labor as TAs and GAs, then it could be possible to support.

Remember, I gave my honest opinion to this students question. You are wellcome to give yours.

 

[commymommy]

Thank you for all of the great feedback. This has been very helpful.

kris

 

[Janusdog]

I went to ISPP-Chicago, and it was taken over by Argosy not too long after I graduated. ISPP had a great reputation in Chicago and I had some of the most competent dedicated professors. My cohort rocked on the EPPP. A lot of us have gone on to be fairly distinguished in what we do.

I have heard that many of the local TDs are very dissatisfied now with Argosy's two programs in the Chicagoland area and they currently prefer CSPP. Students complain that Argosy doesn't particularly care about them and they have to fight to get any kind of advising.

 

[Neuro-Dr]

I don't mean this to be an attack on you personally, but in the interest of disclosure, I'm having a hard time believing that any cohort from ISPP-Chicago "rocked" the EPPP. The average score from 1986-1996 was 145. The average score from 1997-2005 was also 145. These are not great numbers and imply that close to 40% of ISPP-Chicago grads fail the test and that really hasn't changed with Argosy's purchase in 1998-1999.

I also agree that there are many successful grads from that program, but in looking at the faculty, it is still much the same people as before the Argosy purchased it and they continue to take in 100 students per year with a minimum GPA of 3.0. This means 1 out of every 30 new psychologists went to ISPP-Chicago so there should be some good ones, but likely some marginal ones as well.