Argosy University-Dallas PsyD program???

[KB2131]

Hey everyone, im wondering if anyone has any valuable knowledge or advice concerning the PsyD program at Argosy University-Dallas campus?

Ive always heard of their successful Atlanta campus, but not until recently did I ever even know there was a location in Dallas....I've visited their website and im thinking of applying and all but I wanted to see if anyone has ever heard anything about it?? or ???

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PsychBiker]

All I have heard is that it is fairly new and not APA accredited. Im not generally a fan of Alliant to begin with, but no APA accreditation is not something I would recommend. I know it is fairly limited in the Texas area for PsyDs, but dont be afriad to leave the best state in the country.

 

[erg923]

There are several threads about the Argosy schools and other similiar professional schools. Just do a search for it on here. Some campuses may indeed be better than others, but they generally have poor reps ("degree mills") and have bad match stats. Cost alot too.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The non-APA acred. is something to really consider. There have been a number of threads about some of the complications associated with gaining placements, licensure, etc coming from a non-APA acred. program.

 

[Cyniclaus]

To bring back an old thread...

Anyone have new news on Argosy's attempts (or lack thereof) to get this program accredited? I can't find them mentioned at all on the APA site, not even as having an application pending.

While I don't think I'd ever enroll in a program that's not APA-approved but, with all of Argosy's other accredited programs, is there any reason not to assume that this one will not cut the mustard?

I'd love to go to school in Dallas

 

[PsyDr]

it seems to me that many people choose this school because they cannot bear to move away from texas and do not attend the other programs in texas.

the idea that someone can commit 5-6 yrs of their life to something but not to moving is strange to me. especially when they will likely have to move at the end of the 6th year.


that's just me though.

 

[terpskins10]

it seems to me that many people choose this school because they cannot bear to move away from texas and do not attend the other programs in texas.

the idea that someone can commit 5-6 yrs of their life to something but not to moving is strange to me. especially when they will likely have to move at the end of the 6th year.


that's just me though.

I understand completely where you're coming from, but some people just like where they are. I supposed Clinical Psychology may not be the best option pursue if you have such a strong attachment to one area (considering who knows where you'll receive a position afterward), but I guess to each, his own.

 

[Spatial]

While I am not familiar with the Dallas campus, I do know that the Seattle campus attempted to get its APA accrediation and was told that they had a choice to withdraw their application or it would be declined. Needless to say they withdrew their application. I would be very hesitant of this school.

 

[Argosy Parent]

If you are researching or investiating Argosy University go to www.magerlawyers.com.:(

 

[Blue Rock]

If you have questions about Argosy University -kindly read this press release which explains the entire structure of this school, -let's say it's pretty scary indeed!
www.vanweyjohnson.com

Texas College Sued by Students for misrepresenting That it Would Become Accredited
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, August 7, 2009
www.vanweyjohnson.com

Texas College Sued by Students for Misrepresenting that it would become Accredited​

Dallas, TX - August 7, 2009 - Several students have sued Argosy University, which is an education system of Education Management Corporation (Nasdaq: EDMC) in Dallas County District Court, alleging that the college lied to them in order to get them to enroll in the college. Argosy University is a for-profit college. Plaintiffs were students enrolled in the school's psychology doctoral program at Argosy's Dallas campus. At the time Plaintiffs were considering enrolling in the program, school officials told them that the program was in the process of obtaining crucial accreditation by the American Psychological Association and that the program would become accredited before the students graduated. As a result of these reassurances plaintiffs enrolled in the program at significant personal expense.
The lawsuit alleges that during the students' enrollment in the program the school indicated on numerous occasions that the school was actively pursuing APA accreditation. In reality, the school had not begun to secure accreditation, and the students ultimately graduated from the program without the program ever obtaining APA accreditation. Julie Johnson, plaintiffs' attorney, explains, what sets this case apart are the blatant and repeated lies told by school officials: "When students expressed skepticism about the school's progress toward APA accreditation, the school dismissed these concerns as baseless 'rumors' and perpetuated the sham that it was in the process of pursuing APA accreditation."
The school's repeated lies, claim the plaintiffs, have significantly hindered their ability to repay the exorbitant student loan debt they assumed in order to attend the college. Johnson explains, "even though the state of Texas does not require a degree from an APA-accredited college for individuals to practice as clinical psychologists, the reality is that in this competitive job market, most employers require APA accreditation. Those that are willing to employ clinical psychologists that have graduated from non-APA accredited institutions pay them significantly less than they would pay a clinical psychologist that did graduate from an APA-accredited institution." This, plaintiffs claim, has left them saddled with unserviceable student loan debt and dashed dreams.
Attorney Julie Johnson often represents students in Texas Deceptive Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Act, fraud, and breach of contract cases against proprietary colleges such as Argosy University. To contact Julie Johnson, please call 1-888-416-9572, or send her an email at [email protected]. For additional information about Julie Johnson and her other areas of practice, go to http://www.vanweyjohnson.com/.
http://www.vanweyjohnson.com/CM/PressRelease/Students-Sue-Texas-College-For-Misrepresenting-Accreditation-080709.asp

 

[Blue Rock]

Considering Argosy University? The following filed Florida lawsuit can easily answer any questions about the integrity (or lack thereof) within this school (Casey Hamel v. Argosy) -YIKES!
http://www.magerlawyers.com/20090714172408593.pdf

 

[ForensicPsychMA]

The Dallas campus is not APA accredited but there are several Argosy campuses that are. You can see a list of them on this page at the APA Web site: APA Accredited Programs in Clinical Psychology .

Argosy has very rigorous programs in psychology, they are definitely not diploma mills, although not-for-profit institutions characterize all for-profit institutions that way. Many highly respected professionals have come out of for-profit universities. To me it's the same kind of prejudices between those who attend private grade schools versus public school systems. The important thing in a for-profit professional psychology program is to make sure the programs are rigorous and do look for APA accreditation, which many of the Argosy campuses have.

 

[ForensicPsychMA]

All I have heard is that it is fairly new and not APA accredited. Im not generally a fan of Alliant to begin with, but no APA accreditation is not something I would recommend. I know it is fairly limited in the Texas area for PsyDs, but dont be afriad to leave the best state in the country.

Some of the Alliant campuses are also APA accredited. They seem to be mostly in California though. See the APA list of Accredited Clinical Psych Programs.

 

[ForensicPsychMA]

The lawsuit alleges that during the students' enrollment in the program the school indicated on numerous occasions that the school was actively pursuing APA accreditation. In reality, the school had not begun to secure accreditation, and the students ultimately graduated from the program without the program ever obtaining APA accreditation. http://www.vanweyjohnson.com/CM/Pre...-For-Misrepresenting-Accreditation-080709.asp

Frankly, I do feel sorry for the fact that the students didn't have anyone to counsel them to wait until the accreditation came through. No one can guarantee that accreditation is going to be granted in a specific period of time, and since many of Argosy's campuses DID (and still do) have APA accreditation, I'm sure that made them a little more apt to count their chickens before they were actually hatched. But it still looks to me like over-zealousness on the part of a few students (encouraged by equally overzealous Argosy admissions counselors). Fraud, though? They were clear that the accreditation wasn't yet secured--it's frankly very silly to gamble on an unpredictable process like accreditation being completed before you graduate. If Argosy was the school of choice, why not aim for one of the campuses that already had accreditation? It looks to me, even going solely on the one-sided information supplied by the students' lawyer, that there was certainly some culpability on the students' part.

How long does it take to go to the APA Web site and see which schools are accredited? Again, I would say any student should check the APA list of accredited schools before enrolling anywhere.

 

[LHDMMD]

Not be snarky, but I do not feel badly for anything that happens to students that attend for-profit schools. I can understand being duped when this type of schools first popped up, but a little internet research will clearly show that these schools are not the best. After reading this forum it seems like you take a huge risk by attending not only a for-profit school, but any school in general that is not APA accred. if you are wanting to go into clinical.

 

[wigflip]

Not be snarky, but I do not feel badly for anything that happens to students that attend for-profit schools. I can understand being duped when this type of schools first popped up, but a little internet research will clearly show that these schools are not the best. After reading this forum it seems like you take a huge risk by attending not only a for-profit school, but any school in general that is not APA accred. if you are wanting to go into clinical.

I understand your perspective, but keep in mind the alternative. The alternative, as I understand it, is that only people who are unencumbered enough to pick up and move god-knows-where for a funded, uni-based program should be clinicians. Not everyone's relationships/family/marriage/children's schooling/disability constraints etc. works that way. Sometimes the pro schools are a compromise for people for whom the other options just aren't real options.

I doubt that I'll apply to Alliant--if it comes to that I'll probably just settle for masters level training and call it good--but the POI with the best research match for me within a commutable distance is actually at Alliant. The school I'd prefer will require some serious fibbing: "Of course I'm interested in the the impact of spirituality on patient well-being! What? This Flying Spaghetti Monster t-shirt? Why no, of course I'm not a godless atheist..."

 

[AcronymAllergy]

The Dallas campus is not APA accredited but there are several Argosy campuses that are. You can see a list of them on this page at the APA Web site: APA Accredited Programs in Clinical Psychology .

Argosy has very rigorous programs in psychology, they are definitely not diploma mills, although not-for-profit institutions characterize all for-profit institutions that way. Many highly respected professionals have come out of for-profit universities. To me it's the same kind of prejudices between those who attend private grade schools versus public school systems. The important thing in a for-profit professional psychology program is to make sure the programs are rigorous and do look for APA accreditation, which many of the Argosy campuses have.

I don't know that comparing the prejudice held against most for-profit institutions is entirely akin to that between private and public grade schools. I obviously see the point, but I think one might be able to make the argument that there are a higher proportion of underperforming for-profit schools than there are public grade schools. Remember, APA accreditation really shouldn't be seen as a gold standard, but rather as a minimum standard which programs should seek to surpass.

I think the biggest issues people have with professional schools beyond their sometimes-predatory admissions/recruitment processes are: 1) over-recruitment of large class sizes with concomittant under-availability of training resources (e.g., advisors, practica sites, funding); 2) related to the first point, under-preparation of graduate students; 3) related to the second point, poor match rates at accredited internship sites along with potentially-misleading reporting of internship match rates (e.g., reporting overall match while not pointing out the number who match at APA-accredited or APPIC-accredited sites).

The issue isn't whether a for-profit and/or free-standing professional school can produce competent (or even exemplary) individuals. This of course can, and does, happen. The issue is with the large(r) number of potentially under-prepared individuals being churned out.

 

[LHDMMD]

I understand your perspective, but keep in mind the alternative. The alternative, as I understand it, is that only people who are unencumbered enough to pick up and move god-knows-where for a funded, uni-based program should be clinicians. Not everyone's relationships/family/marriage/children's schooling/disability constraints etc. works that way. Sometimes the pro schools are a compromise for people for whom the other options just aren't real options.

I doubt that I'll apply to Alliant--if it comes to that I'll probably just settle for masters level training and call it good--but the POI with the best research match for me within a commutable distance is actually at Alliant. The school I'd prefer will require some serious fibbing: "Of course I'm interested in the the impact of spirituality on patient well-being! What? This Flying Spaghetti Monster t-shirt? Why no, of course I'm not a godless atheist..."

I definitely understand why people can not or are unwilling to move to attend school. However, as others have pointed out here many times before if you can't move to go to school what are you going to do when it comes time to do a post-doc. What if you have to move after the post-doc to get a job? I don't know what the job market is like in Dallas, but are you sure you will be able to work in your field after you graduate? What if you can't and then you have a hugh amount of debt because of an unfunded program? These are serious matters to consider. Getting a ph.d. or psy.d. is not the path for everyone. Maybe a masters is the way to go and if at a later point in time you can move to attend a funded program then you can.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I understand your perspective, but keep in mind the alternative. The alternative, as I understand it, is that only people who are unencumbered enough to pick up and move god-knows-where for a funded, uni-based program should be clinicians. Not everyone's relationships/family/marriage/children's schooling/disability constraints etc. works that way. Sometimes the pro schools are a compromise for people for whom the other options just aren't real options.

This is a false dilemma, as there are more than 2 choices (Attend Uni or Attend Pro). The third choice is to not attend a doctoral program. While people do not like this choice, it is still a choice that needs to be considered.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Remember, APA accreditation really shouldn't be seen as a gold standard, but rather as a minimum standard which programs should seek to surpass.

Thank you for bringing up one of my biggest pet peeves about the acred. status. I've been posting about this for years, and yet so many people still assert that attending an APA-acred program and APA-acred internship is "the ideal" (as in the best possible scenario), instead of acknowledging that APA-acred was put in place to represent the minimum standard for psychology training. Unforunately with all of these "alternative" acred. options popping up, it has tried to make a grey area that until relatively recently did not exist.

 

[wigflip]

This is a false dilemma, as there are more than 2 choices (Attend Uni or Attend Pro). The third choice is to not attend a doctoral program. While people do not like this choice, it is still a choice that needs to be considered.

That was my point precisely. It's often implied here that if you can't relocate for a funded program, you probably shouldn't go at all. Training/work first, everything else second. I think that's limiting, and implies a perspective which overvalues (dare I say, "privileges"?) youth, mobility, and a lack of interdependence with other people.

Could I get into a funded PhD program somewhere in the US? Probably. Am I willing to endanger my marriage and abandon my aging, disabled parent to do so? No. I value relationships as well as my professional life. Can I go away if necessary for internship year? Probably, if my parent passes away first (which will likely happen if I do end up enrolling in a doctoral program in psych). Might I choose to go APPIC instead of APA for internship if my family needed me to stay close by? Absolutely.

 

[Psychadelic2012]

That was my point precisely. It's often implied here that if you can't relocate for a funded program, you probably shouldn't go at all. Training/work first, everything else second. I think that's limiting, and implies a perspective which overvalues (dare I say, "privileges"?) youth, mobility, and a lack of interdependence with other people.

Could I get into a funded PhD program somewhere in the US? Probably. Am I willing to endanger my marriage and abandon my aging, disabled parent to do so? No. I value relationships as well as my professional life. Can I go away if necessary for internship year? Probably, if my parent passes away first (which will likely happen if I do end up enrolling in a doctoral program in psych). Might I choose to go APPIC instead of APA for internship if my family needed me to stay close by? Absolutely.

Exactly. The 'traditional' view of attending a funded PhD program, followed by an APA internship and postdoc, well, it's really limiting the profession to young people of privileged backgrounds. We're going to end up with a bunch of immature clinicians out there, treating the mentally ill without any life or 'street' experience, if this attitude dominates.

 

[LHDMMD]

Exactly. The 'traditional' view of attending a funded PhD program, followed by an APA internship and postdoc, well, it's really limiting the profession to young people of privileged backgrounds. We're going to end up with a bunch of immature clinicians out there, treating the mentally ill without any life or 'street' experience, if this attitude dominates.

You're joking, right?

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Exactly. The 'traditional' view of attending a funded PhD program, followed by an APA internship and postdoc, well, it's really limiting the profession to young people of privileged backgrounds. We're going to end up with a bunch of immature clinicians out there, treating the mentally ill without any life or 'street' experience, if this attitude dominates.

I can see how one might say that the relatively nomadic existence often required for a funded Ph.D. program places a high premium on "flexibility," sure. And I can see how flexibility might be highest in younger individuals. However, I think it is faulty to say that most individuals going through the APA-accredited doctoral and internship routes are privileged and immature without any life/'street' experience. Simply put, the APA-path has become "traditional" because it seems to produce the largest proportion of competent clinicians who then have the greatest opportunities for employability and occupational success.

If you happen to live in an area where there are available training opportunities at the graduate, internship, post-doctoral, and early-career levels, and these opportunities are of sufficient breadth and depth to lead to the appropriate development of necessary skills, then more power to you. However, that is unfortunately not the case for most people, as programs that offer strong training in the various specialty areas of clinical psychology are often scattered about the country. This is why such high degrees of mobility are often required (that and the raw competitiveness of the field).

 

[Psychadelic2012]

You're joking, right?

Yes, totally joking. Everyone knows that attending a funded PhD program right out of undergrad (with no family obligations because you're too young to get married or have aging parents), moving multiple times across the country for internship & postdoc, all with no need to take out loans, and then earning six figures is what it takes to become a worthy psychologist. I mean, if you have any real limitations on your way to becoming the coveted "Dr.," you don't deserve it.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Yes, totally joking. Everyone knows that attending a funded PhD program right out of undergrad (with no family obligations because you're too young to get married or have aging parents), moving multiple times across the country for internship & postdoc, all with no need to take out loans, and then earning six figures is what it takes to become a worthy psychologist. I mean, if you have any real limitations on your way to becoming the coveted "Dr.," you don't deserve it.

To the best of my knowledge, no one on this board has ever espoused that what you've proposed above is the best or traditional path to doctoral education in clinical psych. Very few people, in general, attend these programs straight from undergrad. Similarly, no one here is saying that all or most psychologists should, or even will, earn six figures. I also see very few people mention that NO ONE should ever take out ANY loans, even in a funded program (anecdotally, the majority of people in my funded program do, because they quite simply can't or won't live on the limited stipends provided). Every single student I've met has limitations obviously. The issue becomes learning how to prioritize and/or overcome these issues.

What has been said, though, is that in order to best receive adequate training and best position yourself for success at the intern, post-doctoral, and career levels, geographic flexibility is the rule rather than the exception. If, for whatever reason, flexibility isn't an option for (generic) you, then you must realize that there's a high likelihood you're significantly limiting yourself in multiple respects, which may lead to poor outcomes.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Exactly. The 'traditional' view of attending a funded PhD program, followed by an APA internship and postdoc, well, it's really limiting the profession to young people of privileged backgrounds.

If this was investment banking, where there is rampant professional imbreeding (Ivy--> Top IB firm--> Boutique IB Firm/Spinoff) and legacy status trumps most accomplishments...then yes, you have an argument. As AA wrote, the path for training is 'the path' because it works, not because it is the path for the privledged.

We're going to end up with a bunch of immature clinicians out there, treating the mentally ill without any life or 'street' experience, if this attitude dominates.

I think having other life experiences can enhance the training experience, but I don't think students will be 'immature clinicians' if they do not have this additional life experience. I have met a few immature interns and post-docs in my travels, though their lack of maturity was mostly like connected to their personality and approach to life...not to their life experiences.

 

[Ollie123]

I'm all for getting more people of different backgrounds (including non-traditional returning students) into the field.

I worry a LOT that some people seem to basically assume that "maturity" is an appropriate substitute for competence and adequate training. Its not. At all. To the extent that we can accommodate folks who are older and have restrictions...great. However, we have some older students with families and career-changers in my (clinical science PhD) program who have made it work. Its one thing when we can show that selection criteria or life circumstances are unfair to one person or another for admissions, and justify things like affirmative action. I'm fully supportive of that, though I do think the system could probably be better handled. That's not the issue here. These schools simply do not provide comparable training, and maybe some people at them are able to figure out ways to make it work. Which is good for them, and good for the folks here if they are able to make it happen, but it doesn't justify Argosy's existence - people here tend to personalize, but they need to realize that professional training is not all about "them" and whether or not they would make a good psychologist is really irrelevant to the discussion. Life experience does not make you more familiar with the research on a particular topic, and a big part of training is often learning to "set aside" much of one's own life experiences when entering the therapy room (even for someone very young). That's not to say that age/maturity doesn't add anything to the mix, it certainly does and I'm sure can help people form connections with certain patient populations, though I haven't seen any data on that. However, despite the frequency with which it gets thrown around, I've always been very unclear how age makes it okay to cut corners and still be just as competent. Where is the evidence for this? Last I knew, even years of experience practicing isn't very predictive, I imagine age would be even less so.

By examination of the curricula and faculty, subjective experiences interacting with the students, and by nearly every objective measure we can throw at people, folks coming out of professional schools are just not on par with students from other programs. I'd wager that discrepancy will only get worse over time based on current trends in the field. That doesn't mean that everyone going to such a school comes out incompetent, but it does mean the school is not doing an adequate job of keeping incompetent people from becoming psychologists. Is it worth it to let one incompetent person graduate for one non-traditional person who also graduates? What about 2 to 1? Where do we draw the line?

 

[wigflip]

Ollie, as usual, I appreciate the nuance you bring to these discussions. I think you navigate tricky topics with a lot of social grace.

By examination of the curricula and faculty, subjective experiences interacting with the students, and by nearly every objective measure we can throw at people, folks coming out of professional schools are just on par with students from other programs. I'd wager that discrepancy will only get worse over time based on current trends in the field.

I'm guessing you meant "just not on par"?

 

[Ollie123]

I'm guessing you meant "just not on par"?

Haha, indeed.

The Freudians should have fun with that one.

 

[KillerDiller]

Haha, indeed.

The Freudians should have fun with that one.

Nah, only if you had slipped by saying "not on pa."