Child Clinical Psychology Program

[clinicalpsych13]

So I am interested in child clinical psychology program for graduate school, but I am not sure how to find the programs. I've already searched the top schools, such as UCLA, UC berkeley, and etc. But I need to find some back-up schools too.

How do you guys usually find the programs? just google search?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=714255

 

[modestmousktr]

So I am interested in child clinical psychology program for graduate school, but I am not sure how to find the programs. I've already searched the top schools, such as UCLA, UC berkeley, and etc. But I need to find some back-up schools too.

How do you guys usually find the programs? just google search?

Are you applying right now? UCLA and UC Berkeley aren't really known for their CHILD clinical programs, just their clinical programs. They happen to have some faculty who research children, but it's not the experience you'd get at University of Kansas, University of Washington, University of Denver, UNC-Chapel Hill, St. John's, University of Rhode Island, USC, and other campuses that have a specific child emphasis or track. The amount of child psych researchers at the two universities you listed are in the minority, actually.

 

[LisaLisa86]

Are you applying right now? UCLA and UC Berkeley aren't really known for their CHILD clinical programs, just their clinical programs. They happen to have some faculty who research children, but it's not the experience you'd get at University of Kansas, University of Washington, University of Denver, UNC-Chapel Hill, St. John's, University of Rhode Island, USC, and other campuses that have a specific child emphasis or track. The amount of child psych researchers at the two universities you listed are in the minority, actually.

I actually think it's a nice balance to apply to regular Clinical programs where the professor purely does child research. This way, you get lots of training with both adults and children, and can feel competent with both. For example, you may be in a child program, doing only child research, but what about when you're asked to do family therapy? Or a child-parent dyad? If your research lab only does children, and there are children-oriented practicums in the area, I wouldn't worry much beyond that unless you are absolutely opposed to working with adults in any capacity- basically only your classes would be adult-focused. (And they still likely have classes such as Dev Psych, Child Psychopathology, etc.)

Just some food for thought!

 

[clinicalpsych13]

I actually think it's a nice balance to apply to regular Clinical programs where the professor purely does child research. This way, you get lots of training with both adults and children, and can feel competent with both. For example, you may be in a child program, doing only child research, but what about when you're asked to do family therapy? Or a child-parent dyad? If your research lab only does children, and there are children-oriented practicums in the area, I wouldn't worry much beyond that unless you are absolutely opposed to working with adults in any capacity- basically only your classes would be adult-focused. (And they still likely have classes such as Dev Psych, Child Psychopathology, etc.)

Just some food for thought!

Thanks for your thought. I agree with you. My main interest is child clinical psych but I also like to research and working with adults too. Do you know any other grad schools you would consider?

 

[PhDToBe]

University of AL has a child track.

 

[LisaLisa86]

Thanks for your thought. I agree with you. My main interest is child clinical psych but I also like to research and working with adults too. Do you know any other grad schools you would consider?

It's more important to find researchers in your field of interest who work with children. It shouldn't be a large number, to be honest- in my research area there are only a handful of well-known ones. Start with research papers and people who are doing the types of things you want to be doing.

 

[Psychorpsych]

While it is important to find researchers in your field with interest in childhood, it make no sense for people interested in child, pediatric or child neuo to pursue training in a clinical program that does not have explicit training focused on children. 20 years ago it would have made sense. There were fewer programs and things were less specialized. At a certain point, there is too much to know to be a generalist. That is the case with the child vs adult issue. There is now a tremendous data base focused on children. Kids aren't just small adults. You should seek a program that has an explicit child track, child focused classes and child focused placement experiences-with an integration of the three. If your interests are in pediatric psychology or ped neuro, look for programs associated with research oriented medical settings. I don't care how great one researcher in an adult oriented program is, it is not worth being trained in such a program if your interest is child. Likewise for programs that are not associated with research oriented medical settings for those wanting pediatric neuropsych or pediatric psychology. Yeah, I know we'll hear from those with 20 years service to adult oriented programs who disagree. There are tons of outstanding child programs. Why wouldn't you want to be trained in one of them. Why would you opt for one where child training is an add on, or happens if they happen to have a child placement that year? why would you opt for a program where the psychopath class will focus on adult disorders and where you'll spend most of the time learning diagnosis and treatment pertaining to adults?

 

[LisaLisa86]

While it is important to find researchers in your field with interest in childhood, it make no sense for people interested in child, pediatric or child neuo to pursue training in a clinical program that does not have explicit training focused on children. 20 years ago it would have made sense. There were fewer programs and things were less specialized. At a certain point, there is too much to know to be a generalist. That is the case with the child vs adult issue. There is now a tremendous data base focused on children. Kids aren't just small adults. You should seek a program that has an explicit child track, child focused classes and child focused placement experiences-with an integration of the three. If your interests are in pediatric psychology or ped neuro, look for programs associated with research oriented medical settings. I don't care how great one researcher in an adult oriented program is, it is not worth being trained in such a program if your interest is child. Likewise for programs that are not associated with research oriented medical settings for those wanting pediatric neuropsych or pediatric psychology. Yeah, I know we'll hear from those with 20 years service to adult oriented programs who disagree. There are tons of outstanding child programs. Why wouldn't you want to be trained in one of them. Why would you opt for one where child training is an add on, or happens if they happen to have a child placement that year? why would you opt for a program where the psychopath class will focus on adult disorders and where you'll spend most of the time learning diagnosis and treatment pertaining to adults?

I might be a little biased based on my experiences and career path, but I think going so highly specialized so early in training isn't a good thing. In my lab, we work only with children, and most students in our lab have practicums at child-specific sites (those who have practicums at adult sites have specifically chosen to do so in order to round out their experience). Some of the students in my lab also been accepted to prestigious child-specific clinical internships. Our lab is very productive, so we get a large number of assessment and intervention numbers through our research (the great majority with children, although a few studies have children-parent dyads), and a large number of hours at child sites. That means that we spend a very large majority of our week- research and clinical time- with children. I personally welcome the few hours a week of parent-oriented classes, as I am interested in learning how to assess and work with adult populations in addition to child populations. I want to understand psychopathology across the lifespan. I also want to have as many carer and research options as possible throughout my life, and that's only possible by pursuing a wide range of experiences and knowledge. It would be similar to saying that you are only interested in studying depression, and therefore don't want to learn about schizophrenia- but that doesn't mean, at some point in your research or clinical career, you won't come across anything having to do with schizophrenia.

Just my opinion.

 

[Ollie123]

Its important to make sure whatever school you attend provides adequate training and resources for what you want to do. We bring this up often on this board but "tracks" are usually as much about marketing as anything so I wouldn't worry too much about that. There are plenty of FSPS's with "tracks" for any specialty you can think of, but these are usually the worst imaginable places to go if you want to focus in that area since the experiences they can offer are usually limited, the training sub-par and the standards too low.

Its unfortunate, but there really aren't any great shortcuts other than really doing a significant amount of digging into what is available at each and every school that has people doing work you are interested in. Looking into area hospitals, seeing what practica sites are available, what courses are there, etc.. Looking for the CVs of current students and/or recent grads may be helpful.

 

[fresnel]

RE: Lisa86. Pursuing a program that offers an explicit child track is not like choosing a program focused on depression at all.

In most clinical programs (except those offering child tracks), most of the course material is geared towards adults. Students in adult oriented programs take multiple courses in psychopathology, assessment, intervention, learning and perception,neuropsychology, etc often taught by people who know little about children and often the courses mention children as an after thought-maybe devoting a week to how the topic applied to children. Electives are overwhelmingly adult oriented. Courses like child psychopathology, developmental (beyond those taught at a very basic level) are hard to find, usually not required. Specialty seminars on child related topics are rare in adult oriented programs. Going beyond basic information is difficult because most faculty are experts in non-child areas. So, when an advanced child related seminar is offered, it is unlikely to be in a child related area. And, since students are not selected on the basis of having child related interests, even when child seminars are offered, there is often insufficient interest in them to meet enrollment minimums.Child related topics, experiences, seminars are rarely integrated into the curriculum in the way the adult oriented courses are. Invited speakers are usually experts in adult areas since the choice of speakers is usually a function of the interests of those arranging for the talks. Little effort is exerted to ensure that a variety of child placements are available.

In contrast, clinical child programs have a broad range of child placements consistently-since a training priority is to provide experience in child related institutions. School settings are quite different from mental health settings, for example. Child clinical programs would usually have both since the goal would be to make sure each student has experience in both. A clinical program may only provide one because the goal is to give students some child experience. . Prelim questions address child issues consistently. There are other students studying child clinical consistently. Faculty with research in child relevant areas are hired consistently. There are numerous faculty conducting research in child related areas. There are usually also a number of people in the department that consider themselves to be developmental psychologists who may collaborate with the child clinical faculty. The program usually has strong ties to child related internships and post docs consistently. Often there are speaker series' that are oriented towards child clinical issues. The clinic is often geared specifically towards children and families-with child related specialty assessment and treatment clinics also offered. In short, the program is as committed to the "child" aspects of clinical as are the adult programs committed to "adult" experiences. Can you imagine the reaction of a student interested in adult clinical upon learning that all the training experiences would be oriented towards child clinical? (to anticipate criticisms, child clinical programs do provide experience, training and classes about adults too).


So, while you may be able to get some good child experience in programs without special child clinical tracks-it's often at a catch-it-it as you can basis. And rarely have I met a graduate of a general clinical track that compares (in terms of expertise, previous experience, mastery of the full range of child related assessments/interventions) as those that graduate from child clinical programs such as that offered at Kansas.

In terms of why "child" is not the same as "depression". Rarely will a professional provide services to those depressed without providing services to others or to the same person when that person no longer fits criteria for depression but most practitioners who specialize in children actually stop seeing patients when they are no longer children. Depression is a mental health diagnosis. Childhood is an important, influential time in life that is important for reasons well beyond the fact that childhood life events impact on adult functioning. Children are not just little adults. In contrast to the past, there is a sufficient research and theory pertaining to children (and different from that pertaining to adults) to warrant separate training tracks for those interested in child clinical.


It is not just marketing. Take a look at a program like Kansas and compare it to an adult oriented program.

 

[LisaLisa86]

RE: Lisa86. Pursuing a program that offers an explicit child track is not like choosing a program focused on depression at all.

In most clinical programs (except those offering child tracks), most of the course material is geared towards adults. Students in adult oriented programs take multiple courses in psychopathology, assessment, intervention, learning and perception,neuropsychology, etc often taught by people who know little about children and often the courses mention children as an after thought-maybe devoting a week to how the topic applied to children. Electives are overwhelmingly adult oriented. Courses like child psychopathology, developmental (beyond those taught at a very basic level) are hard to find, usually not required. Specialty seminars on child related topics are rare in adult oriented programs. Going beyond basic information is difficult because most faculty are experts in non-child areas. So, when an advanced child related seminar is offered, it is unlikely to be in a child related area. And, since students are not selected on the basis of having child related interests, even when child seminars are offered, there is often insufficient interest in them to meet enrollment minimums.Child related topics, experiences, seminars are rarely integrated into the curriculum in the way the adult oriented courses are. Invited speakers are usually experts in adult areas since the choice of speakers is usually a function of the interests of those arranging for the talks. Little effort is exerted to ensure that a variety of child placements are available.

In contrast, clinical child programs have a broad range of child placements consistently-since a training priority is to provide experience in child related institutions. School settings are quite different from mental health settings, for example. Child clinical programs would usually have both since the goal would be to make sure each student has experience in both. A clinical program may only provide one because the goal is to give students some child experience. . Prelim questions address child issues consistently. There are other students studying child clinical consistently. Faculty with research in child relevant areas are hired consistently. There are numerous faculty conducting research in child related areas. There are usually also a number of people in the department that consider themselves to be developmental psychologists who may collaborate with the child clinical faculty. The program usually has strong ties to child related internships and post docs consistently. Often there are speaker series' that are oriented towards child clinical issues. The clinic is often geared specifically towards children and families-with child related specialty assessment and treatment clinics also offered. In short, the program is as committed to the "child" aspects of clinical as are the adult programs committed to "adult" experiences. Can you imagine the reaction of a student interested in adult clinical upon learning that all the training experiences would be oriented towards child clinical? (to anticipate criticisms, child clinical programs do provide experience, training and classes about adults too).


So, while you may be able to get some good child experience in programs without special child clinical tracks-it's often at a catch-it-it as you can basis. And rarely have I met a graduate of a general clinical track that compares (in terms of expertise, previous experience, mastery of the full range of child related assessments/interventions) as those that graduate from child clinical programs such as that offered at Kansas.

In terms of why "child" is not the same as "depression". Rarely will a professional provide services to those depressed without providing services to others or to the same person when that person no longer fits criteria for depression but most practitioners who specialize in children actually stop seeing patients when they are no longer children. Depression is a mental health diagnosis. Childhood is an important, influential time in life that is important for reasons well beyond the fact that childhood life events impact on adult functioning. Children are not just little adults. In contrast to the past, there is a sufficient research and theory pertaining to children (and different from that pertaining to adults) to warrant separate training tracks for those interested in child clinical.


It is not just marketing. Take a look at a program like Kansas and compare it to an adult oriented program.

Agree to disagree. The OP can look at both sides of the discussion, talk to other people, and make their own decision.

I haven't had any of the experiences mentioned in the above post. I'm sure some people who go child track are very happy with their decision. I'm sure some people who go child track are not happy with their decision- in fact, I know one who went to a top-tier child program and wishes she had had more experience with adults. I'm sure the same can be said for people who do not go child track.

At the end of the day, it is about fit and your experiences over the course of the program- which encompasses much more than just which track you're on.

 

[CheetahGirl]

And rarely have I met a graduate of a general clinical track that compares (in terms of expertise, previous experience, mastery of the full range of child related assessments/interventions) as those that graduate from child clinical programs such as that offered at Kansas.

Fresnel, you're meeting me, soon-to-be graduate of clinical program that offers lifespan developmental training.

I'm leaning more towards LisaLisa86's opinion. As she said, what if you were asked to work with families where the 'identified patient' is a child, parent-child dyads, or late adolescents/emerging adults (developmental stage just beyond adolescence when these folks are not yet mature adults w/ 'adult presenting problems')?

Another option is to go into combined clinical/school psych programs, like Hofstra in NY (not where I attend though, but it's a great program). You get a ton of exposure to child assessment in these programs.

If you're starting off, entering any program that gives you lifespan training is best IMO. In my last years of this type-program, I focused on child work through coursework and externship placements, and I only applied to a few child track internships. (I could have opted for exclusive child externships, but I branched out for exposure.) But I will work with children in the future b/c it's an art (in addition to the skill) and I'm good at it. Sure, there are others with exclusive child-focused training and dissertation topics on children, but in no way would that type training make them better, more effective "child clinicians" than me (when in the actual therapy room w/ a child). My theoretical, intervention and assessment experience has trained me with a solid base from which I can "specialize" by post-docs, job placements, etc.

By the way, the confidence in my statements comes from having been through lifespan training, having clinical experience with traumatized children, and being a mom of four (the latter mainly gives me prespective, but I'm not in any way implying that it is a prerequiste and definitely NOT suggesting others go out and have a bunch of kids to find out prior to graduate school). But, I'll tell you having worked with severly mentally ill, psychotic adults and learning their personal histories gives me a ton of insight into what happens when interventions are not implemented in early childhood (and the significant roles of mother-infant attachment and family dynamics). I could actually be so bold as to suggest looking into some psychodynamic-focused programs because you will get all this training and more.

It is important for you to focus on your interests once in your accepted program, not necessarily submersing yourself in a clinical program that focuses exclusively on children, unless you want to do school psychology (which is often one of the main areas that problems are detected).

Apply everywhere (avoiding those programs that offer minimal coursework in child development, child psychopathology, child psychotherapy, child assessment) and keep your focus. Good luck!