Argosy University

[apumic]

---

Members do not see this ad.

hey buddies, I just wanna ask anyone who was rejected in PsyD program by Argosy University before

Would it be too cruel to say good luck finding someone Argosy rejected?

 

[terpskins10]

Would it be too cruel to say good luck finding someone Argosy rejected?

I would say no, until you find that one person who was.

 

[fankychan]

Would it be too cruel to say good luck finding someone Argosy rejected?

not really, i applied this school last week, then i got a message from their advisers that no one would be rejected but are recommanded studying other programs instead.

 

[PsyDGradStudent]

Hey everyone, I have read every "PsyD vs. PhD" post and every professional school debate on this website. I have mostly found very helpful information (as well as some not-so-helpful information that seems to be rooted in the need for some people to be defensive about their own educational backgrounds and paths and deem them superior to other paths or as the "best" path for their given field, and often this translates as criticizing others' paths). Overall, I have learned a lot, yet still have a desperate dilemma and cannot seem to find the information I need anywhere on this forum. Any and all opinions are WELCOME. MORE than welcome.

Here is my situation: I was accepted to and am trying to decide between two PsyD programs here in Chicago: The Chicago School of Professional Psychology and Roosevelt University. Both are APA accredited. I was also accepted to Adler's PsyD program but eliminated it based on several reasons. So it's between The Chicago School and Roosevelt University. First of all, I understand people's concerns over professional schools, but based on the information I've learned, as I understand it The Chicago School seems to have a reputation and background that is superior in quality to many other professional schools across the country (i.e. many Argosy schools) and is sometimes unfairly lumped with "all" professional schools. I also understand people's various opinions about the PsyD versus PhD, but I am confident that I would like to pursue my PsyD. It took me several years to decide this, and I am certain that I want a practitioner-focused education and not one based in research. I understand there are many clinically-oriented PhD programs out there, but I am limited to the Chicago area. When I was still considering the PhD, I didn't apply to any PhD programs in Chicago because they are too research-oriented and I do not want a research-heavy program (regardless of the opinion that several years of research in graduate school is worth the overall long-term career benefits of having a PhD in clinical psychology). I did however find one clinically-oriented PhD program in clinical psychology in the area, but it happens to be one of the most competitive in the country (Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine) and unfortunately I am not qualified for this school, at least at this point in my education (they require a year of experience in a clinical setting whereas I only have two months. They also require the Psychology Subject test as most PhD programs do, but I had only taken the General GRE for the schools I applied to and didn't feel prepared to take the Subject test before the application deadline. Not to mention how extremely competitive it would be to get into this program, even if I more than met the qualifications). I see the value in taking time to work on your applications for a few years, gaining clinical/research experience, etc until being qualified for such a competitive clinically-oriented PhD program as opposed to attending a professional school for a PsyD. However, I have been preparing in one way or another for PsyD applications for several years now, and can't imagine waiting one more year. I have worked hard on preparing for my applications over a long period of time and am ready to start my education now.

It would be so, so very helpful if I could gather some advice on which school to attend. There is little to no info or opinions on Roosevelt University's PsyD program on studentdoctor, at least in my searches. I've found plenty of information/opinions on The Chicago School's PsyD program, but no information which compares this school to Roosevelt University's PsyD program. I welcome any and all opinions comparing these two schools. Both positive and negative information would help. Please no requests to ditch both schools and attend a PhD program instead. If I really find myself to be unhappy at whichever school I attend this fall, I will re-apply to Northwestern's clinically oriented PhD program next year after I feel I meet the qualifications. But for now, I'm picking TCS or Roosevelt, so I need your help! Quick stats- Roosevelt is significantly cheaper (~$40,000) but I do not want to make the decision between schools solely based on this because if TCS is still a better choice, then I would go there. Other info: APA match rates are pretty good and comparable at both schools. Some differences: Roosevelt accepts a maximum of 20 new students (TCS ~100 students). Some professional school students feel that having a larger cohort and larger faculty gives them more resources, more connections, more opportunities for networking, more diversified training, etc. Also, I would get the opportunity to teach my own undergraduate classes at Roosevelt whereas I wouldn't have this opportunity at TCS (only TA positions).

My main issue is over the fact that Roosevelt is a university and not a stand-alone professional school (although some would debate that Roosevelt still counts as a professional school because they are not funded). Considering the fact that Roosevelt and TCS are pretty comparable in terms of match rates, licensure, quality of training, I am strongly considering Roosevelt because it is part of a larger university and a PsyD from a university seems to be more respectable in the field than a stand-alone professional school. Does anyone have opinions on this? I have read many opinions that encourage people to get their PsyD from a university over a professional school, but is Roosevelt considered a university by most? Or because it is unfunded, would people lump it with the professional schools? I know the quality of education and training as well as internship/licensure rates are most important, but since between these two schools the stats are so similar, I am looking to other criteria such as reputation for future employment. Here is another issue: not many people have heard of Roosevelt University, whereas TCS has a pretty strong national reputation. So does this "trump" the fact that Roosevelt is a university and TCS is not? Is it better to attend a stand-alone professional school with a strong national reputation, or a so-called "real" university with not much of a reputation at all?

I am truly desperate for opinions as the APA deadline is fast approaching. PLEASE HELP!!!!!!

 

[IT514]

When it comes to Roosevelt and the Chicago School, regardless of how you classify them, they are similar types of programs. So, dont worry about whether one is "university based" and one is not. I would look for which one is the best fit for you in terms of faculty, practicum opportunities, internship info, etc. I work in a practice with neuropsychologists from Northwestern, U of Chicago, UIC, The Chicago School, the Illinois School (now Argosy), and Adler. They are all excellent at what they do and all 6 would tell you that it is not where you go to school but what you can do with your education. I agree with them. You can not rely on the name of your school to make your career for you. You seem to know the stats for both schools, so with that in mind, just look for the best fit for you.

 

[apumic]

My main issue is over the fact that Roosevelt is a university and not a stand-alone professional school (although some would debate that Roosevelt still counts as a professional school because they are not funded). Considering the fact that Roosevelt and TCS are pretty comparable in terms of match rates, licensure, quality of training, I am strongly considering Roosevelt because it is part of a larger university and a PsyD from a university seems to be more respectable in the field than a stand-alone professional school. Does anyone have opinions on this? I have read many opinions that encourage people to get their PsyD from a university over a professional school, but is Roosevelt considered a university by most? Or because it is unfunded, would people lump it with the professional schools? I know the quality of education and training as well as internship/licensure rates are most important, but since between these two schools the stats are so similar, I am looking to other criteria such as reputation for future employment. Here is another issue: not many people have heard of Roosevelt University, whereas TCS has a pretty strong national reputation. So does this "trump" the fact that Roosevelt is a university and TCS is not? Is it better to attend a stand-alone professional school with a strong national reputation, or a so-called "real" university with not much of a reputation at all?

I am truly desperate for opinions as the APA deadline is fast approaching. PLEASE HELP!!!!!!

I think this is ultimately a decision you need to make based on your preferences and what you want to do professionally. If I were in your position, I would probably choose Roosevelt as it is cheaper by 6 mos' salary (average for a psychologist). I think your question about what's better a professional school that's well-known or a lesser-known university based program can be answered by looking at APA internship match rates. I didn't look them up, but you could find them under the outcomes. My guess would be Roosevelt does better as it has smaller classes (according to your post) and is university-based, which means it probably has less of a stigma against its students.

 

[PsyDGradStudent]

Thank you IT514 and Apumic, that was very helpful. Much appreciated. Roosevelt University matched 100% this past year, with 12 out of the 15 students receiving APA accredited internships (they also encourage students to apply nationally whereas other schools don't, so many students probably went outside of Chicago for their internship). I believe The Chicago School was up there too for last year's matches, around 97% but I'm not sure how many were APA accredited. The match rates are basically very similar so I can't really pick one school over the other based on match rates.

I think right now I am leaning toward Roosevelt in terms of which school "fits" me better, it does have a stronger research focus than The Chicago School, and while I'm not interested in research in terms of my career goals, I think the stronger research focus will ultimately make me a better psychologist and therapist and perhaps a stronger candidate for internships at university hospitals. I think the education at Roosevelt might be more challenging for me because of the stronger research focus (as I don't have a strong background in research methods, statistics, etc- just one course in both), but maybe it's best to challenge myself. That is all speculation of course. I also think the smaller faculty at Roosevelt will allow me to not only find a mentor, but several mentors/advisors during my education, and the smaller cohort might be a better environment for me. But...as Roosevelt is a newer program, I'd appreciate any more specific info about this school. I would especially appreciate advice on clinical training/practicum sites with regards to Roosevelt.

Please keep the comments/advice coming, I need as much advice as I can get! THANKS IN ADVANCE!!

 

[apumic]

Thank you IT514 and Apumic, that was very helpful. Much appreciated. Roosevelt University matched 100% this past year, with 12 out of the 15 students receiving APA accredited internships (they also encourage students to apply nationally whereas other schools don't, so many students probably went outside of Chicago for their internship). I believe The Chicago School was up there too for last year's matches, around 97% but I'm not sure how many were APA accredited. The match rates are basically very similar so I can't really pick one school over the other based on match rates.

Just a thought, but really the APA match rate is what matters. The unaccredited internship sites don't count toward that. Anybody can set up an "internship" in their office (or GARAGE!) by paying you $9/hr to answer phones, call caseworkers, physicians, and others related to each case or to gain referrals, and co-lead therapy groups and calling it an "internship" but it's obviously not going to be accredited. The APA accreditation of an internship is what gives you asssurance that the internship is actually going to be of value to you and assures future employers that you have been properly trained. So Roosevelt's match rate was 80%, not 100%, which is still fairly decent.

 

[futureapppsy2]

^
Perhaps that's a bit of hyperbole--doesn't APPIC have an application process?

 

[apumic]

Sure....but my understanding was that there's no site visit involved. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this seems to have some major potential for abuse. I do know I've heard many tales of insufficient training at unaccredited sites. I could do an unaccredited internship at my current job under a Psy.D. (it's registered). We currently have an LPC doing her training under an LCSW, which is fine I suppose, but she's not really doing that much more than I am doing as a case manager. She basically supervises residential staff at night and sits in on internal and external staffings as well as some therapy sessions and clinical meetings during the day. About the only thing she does that I don't is participate in clients' individual therapy, but I don't even think she sees her own clients. The place is great overall, but I don't think it's sufficient training for a clinician, yet it evidentally is according to at least a couple of governing bodies.... (it's not APA accredited, although we may pursue that in the future)

 

[docma]

APPIC has a detailed application process that requires substantiation of meeting a broad range of requirements that make sure a program meets very specific standards. These are congruent with what National Health Services Providers and what many states hold as "equivalent to APA" when evaluating a non-APA predoctoral internship. APPIC member non-APA sites have a biannual re-certification process to remain members and the organization is well run. Many non-APA, APPIC sites simply cannot afford the minimum stipend required by the APA accreditation criteria and/or the annual costs associated with APA standing--but otherwise are delivering good quality training.

 

[Spatial]

There is something flawed with the school. I'm a former student and the staff at my campus was horrid. The administration does not care about the student body. I was lied to by recruiting as were many others and when the school found out they fired the recruiter but did not inform the students so by the time we found out about it we were 2 years into the program. The staff turn-over is disgusting. You'll have a professor for half the class then they will leave and you get a new one who will bad mouth the other professor. I've looked at lots of reviews and I’m hearing that this is rampant across all campuses. People completing their programs and then being told that the quality of their work is so bad they can't graduate even though they were not provided with this information until that time, professors causing students to have anxiety attacks, professors under investigation by ethic committee's....It's not worth it. I would find another school.

 

[apumic]

Many non-APA, APPIC sites simply cannot afford the minimum stipend required by the APA accreditation criteria and/or the annual costs associated with APA standing--but otherwise are delivering good quality training.

This isn't really a valid argument. While one could argue the APA's own thoughts on this issue are biased and therefore basically propaganda, what they say here makes sense: http://www.apa.org/apags/edtrain/accredinternsite.html

If a site truly cannot afford to put aside $2500/yr to ensure the training they provide you is recognized by other agencies, they obviously either do not value their interns or they likely do not have the financial resources to adequately train their interns.

Furthermore, there appears to be no minimum stipend imposed by the APA, although some accredited internships have minimum stipends that have been self-imposed. For instance, one accredited site (U of Memphis' APA accredited psychology counseling center) has imposed a minimum stipend of $20,867.04 over 12 months. This equates to about $10.44/hr. It would seem to me that a site that cannot even afford to pay $10/hr for a psychological intern who may even be licensed as an LPC probably does not have the financial resources to be able to provide adequate training to its interns. Additionally, it would be quite difficult to live on such meager (or even nonexistent) pay. This may result in further loans being taken out during the internship year to cover basic living expenses.

As a result of these things, I would still advocate that when looking at outcome statistics in determining whether a given program is worth the investment of time, effort and, in some cases, large amounts of money, non-APA accredited internships, even if APPIC-approved, should not be considered successful internship placements. They are more along the lines of placements that are used to get students out of the program so they can get on with their lives -- necessary? sure. successful placements? not really -- at least, I wouldn't want to apply to a school with the thought that I have an 80% chance of getting into "some sort of internship" when the reality was that only ~15% end up in a well-enough-funded internship to live off your stipend (albeit modestly) and actually get training that other sites and states view as "up-to-par."

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

This isn't really a valid argument. While one could argue the APA's own thoughts on this issue are biased and therefore basically propaganda, what they say here makes sense: http://www.apa.org/apags/edtrain/accredinternsite.html

If a site truly cannot afford to put aside $2500/yr to ensure the training they provide you is recognized by other agencies, they obviously either do not value their interns or they likely do not have the financial resources to adequately train their interns.

The "cost" is often in meeting the requirements for APA-accreditation, which typically includes adding staff, space, resources, etc. According to a number of DCTs I know, the costs can run $50k-$100k to make the changes, and many places like CMHCs can't justify taking that kind of money out of the budget and put it towards APA accreditation. Hiring someone even part-time to supervise, add additional office space, and/or acquire additional resources is not an inexpensive endeavor.

Furthermore, there appears to be no minimum stipend imposed by the APA, although some accredited internships have minimum stipends that have been self-imposed. For instance, one accredited site (U of Memphis' APA accredited psychology counseling center) has imposed a minimum stipend of $20,867.04 over 12 months. This equates to about $10.44/hr.

Trust me when I say the pay is not reflective of what we "should" be paid, but because of our inability to directly bill insurance (unlike medicine), we are stuck with the peanuts we receive. Our "value" to many sites is actually a net loss on the books, but they keep the training program because it offers an opportunity to recruit quality people and also provide services that they may not otherwise be able to provide. Admittedly there are sites that use grad students as cheap labor and provide minimal training, so it is really important to do your homework because you don't want to end up in a psychology sweat shop.

I wouldn't want to apply to a school with the thought that I have an 80% chance of getting into "some sort of internship" when the reality was that only ~15% end up in a well-enough-funded internship to live off your stipend (albeit modestly) and actually get training that other sites and states view as "up-to-par."

Nor would I.

I think it is a problem that the "standard" for many jobs is APA-acreditted internships, yet so many students are being pushed towards APPIC-acreditted sites. The system is definitely broken, with no easy solution.

 

[did]

My personal experience with Argosy-Dallas has been extremely negative and a huge disappointment. I was embarassed at the lack of education one of my professors demonstrated on a regular basis. Nothing about her vocabulary, pronunciation, knowledge, etc. would lead a person to believe she was actually a Ph.D. I was finding the incongruency odd until I realized her doctorate degree was from Argosy and that is why she was so lacking! The majority of the administrators are sub-par. They talk the talk but do not walk the walk. Many of the professors are known for their bullying techniques rather than academic rigor. The work load was not too difficult, but the lack of direction and guidance was astounding. Avoid Argosy-Dallas and their counseling program.

 

[ExpressYourself]

I graduated from Argosy University-Schaumburg with a masters degree. Apparently, that campus is better than other Argosys around the nation. I'm now licensed as an LMHC (the equivalent of an LCPC) in Massachusetts, and have had success with jobs.

I was originally in the PsyD program, but left. I didn't think it was worth it. It's true that the expenses are ridiculous, and I didn't want to worry about match rates, etc.