Clinical Psychology - Private Practice Questions

[positivepsych]

.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[joetro]

Quite frankly, I think you might be doing yourself a big disservice by planning to attend an incredibly research-oriented graduate program ... not to mention those other applicants and students whose spot you could be taking who actually subscribe to the mission that these schools stipulate - that of training future academics and researchers. That being said, I think you might find at these schools a big push away from providing mentoring or advice about private practice. You will need to work extra hard to get advice, mentoring and networking on the applied side of psychology, and you might find it difficult to get as much clinical training as at other schools that are more balanced between research and practice. This might affect your internship options.

 

[clinpsychgirl]

Ok, so another thing to consider is this:

The top notch researchers at the top notch schools have the connections to get their students into academia. If you ask them, they will usually have stats available to back that up (e.g. 26 of my last 30 students are currently doing research in hospital or academic setting).

If you want to go into private practice, and be lucrative and successful, you will also need the right kind of connections. And the big shot researchers at top institutions not likely to have the best connections to suite your career goals.

Finding a more clinically-oriented Phd program is probably your best bet. This way, you can still benefit from tuition remission/stipend but you can hook up with mentors who will have the right kind of resources and connections to make you a successful practitioner.

Just some food for thought.

 

[PsychMode]

I concur with joetro. Positivepsych, it sounds like you may want to pursue a balanced program. The book Insider's Guide to Graduate Programs in Clinical and Counseling Psychology lists graduate programs and their self-ratings re: clinical versus research focus. You may also want to look into highly ranked counseling psych programs. As you probably know, these programs often look less at pathology and more at issues with highly functioning individuals. From what I've seen, their programs also tend to be more balanced regarding research versus clinical emphasis. (Disclaimer: sometimes there isn't much of a difference between a counseling and clinical psychologist.) I'm getting that you have a good shot of gaining admission into a highly ranked clinical program. But I don't see the benefit of going to a heavily research-oriented program given your professional goals (other than having gone to a widely known, but still research-oriented, school).

Regarding working in a university counseling center, I believe that they get paid more after they have completed their postdoc hours and obtained licensure.

 

[PsychMode]

Finding a more clinically-oriented Phd program is probably your best bet. This way, you can still benefit from tuition remission/stipend but you can hook up with mentors who will have the right kind of resources and connections to make you a successful practitioner.

Just some food for thought.

That's a good idea too. But I'm wondering about funding in a balanced program versus a heavily clinically-oriented program. Career-wise, the primarily clinically-oriented program would probably be better for prospective psychologists who are mainly interested in private practice.

 

[RainbowTVP]

I agree with what has been posted.

Look into a counseling psych phd program at a top school that is fully funded or a clinical program that is clinical rather than research oriented (I also recommend the Insider's Guide).

As far as adjunct teaching- if you are looking at top universities, that is probably true, however smaller schools, liberal arts colleges, etc would be options.

Tara P

 

[RainbowTVP]

I agree with what has been posted.

Look into a counseling psych phd program at a top school that is fully funded or a clinical program that is clinical rather than research oriented (I also recommend the Insider's Guide).

As far as adjunct teaching- if you are looking at top universities, that is probably true, however smaller schools, liberal arts colleges, etc would be options even with a masters.

Tara P

 

[positivepsych]

Thanks for the advice. I did apply to UMich, which was rated as a 4 (equal emphasis on clinical and research) in the Insider's Guide. So if that ends up working out, its a good option.

I applied to research-oriented programs for a couple of reasons: 1) reputation (I do want to teach in the future, and so reputation matters in this regard), 2) specific faculty I wanted to work with coincided with my research interests well, 3) funding.

 

[clinpsychgirl]

That's a good idea too. But I'm wondering about funding in a balanced program versus a heavily clinically-oriented program. Career-wise, the primarily clinically-oriented program would probably be better for prospective psychologists who are mainly interested in private practice.

The best source to suss out the funding situtions for each school is the other graduate school applicant "bible": The APA guide book (exactly title failing me at the moment)- but I know that it does tell you which schools provide tution remission/stipends (how much and how long and to how many of their students). Good to know!

 

[MI2005]

The best source to suss out the funding situtions for each school is the other graduate school applicant "bible": The APA guide book (exactly title failing me at the moment)- but I know that it does tell you which schools provide tution remission/stipends (how much and how long and to how many of their students). Good to know!

Clinpsychgirl, if you remember the exact name, please post it here. Thanks!

 

[clinpsychgirl]

Clinpsychgirl, if you remember the exact name, please post it here. Thanks!

It's called "Graduate Study in Psychology" and its by the APA. Google it- I think its 20something bucks.

It's not a "good read" like the insiders guide is, but it is a GREAT reference book.

Good luck!

 

[LM02]

It's called "Graduate Study in Psychology" and its by the APA. Google it- I think its 20something bucks.

It's not a "good read" like the insiders guide is, but it is a GREAT reference book.

Good luck!

Not only do I agree with the other posters, but I also have the hindsight of having gone to and having graduated from a heavily research-oriented graduate program.

The truth is that grad school is tough - even for those who are fully committed to research (like myself), there will be many moments when you question your decision and wonder if you made the right choice. If you are not fully committed to pursuing a research career, I can only imagine it will be even worse attending a research-oriented program if research is not your career goal.

Depending upon the school, you may or may not get sufficient enough clinical training in grad school to pursue your goal of full-time clinical practice immediately post-internship.

Onto your other question...generally, postdoc requirements are 2000 hours post-degree. You can get these either through a formal fellowship or through clinical supervision. You will get paid more as a licensed psychologist (when you have your credential) than you will while you get your post-doc hours.

Also, if you are interested in teaching as an adjunct for one or two courses at a university local to where you live, the reputation of your graduate department really doesn't matter. Most schools that rely on and hire adjuncts are just looking for someone to teach courses that the tenure-track faculty don't want to teach and buy out of (e.g., intro, research methods, etc.).

 

[DryDoc]

It's also important to realize that during interviews at heavily research oriented PhD programs there will be a lot of discussion about your research interests and committment to a research career. For most individuals who are not that committed to a research career, this fact will become apparent during these interviews and will probably torpedo your admissions chances. If you do manage to conceal your lack of research interest during the admissions process and get in, there may be some negative ramifications when this lack of interest becomes apparent later in your academic career.

 

[positivepsych]

It's also important to realize that during interviews at heavily research oriented PhD programs there will be a lot of discussion about your research interests and committment to a research career. For most individuals who are not that committed to a research career, this fact will become apparent during these interviews and will probably torpedo your admissions chances. If you do manage to conceal your lack of research interest during the admissions process and get in, there may be some negative ramifications when this lack of interest becomes apparent later in your academic career.

It's not a lack of reseach interest in grad school, its whether academia is the right career choice for the rest of one's life.

1) People's interests evolve, change, mature, etc. I'm not sure every 22-year-old is truly 100% certain with what they want to do with their life (or even should).
2) Even so, academia is brutal, not everyone can make it to tenure, and some people might not want to be an assistant professor at a school in the middle of nowhere for the rest of their lives just to get by. Furthermore, professors often have to be willing to move wherever they are offered a position, which is difficult if your wife/husband also has a career of their own.
3) Also, what about people who legitamately change their minds over the course of 6 years? I've seen it happen first-hand with graduates at heavily-research oriented schools. Some of them don't even bother to hide it since their advisor is at the medical school and they're in their 3/4th year by then.

 

[psychanon]

There are a number of fully funded programs out there with excellent reputations that provide top-notch research training while still offering quality clinical training (and that have faculty that don't "get mad at you" if you decide to pursue a clincial career). I attend one of them now. I'm happy here because I feel like I'll be qualified for an academic or a clinical career after I graduate, and hopefully I'll be able to have a hybrid of a career.

At this stage (you're interviewing, right?), you should be really getting a sense of the degree to which the programs you apply to actually value clinical work. I think you're absolutely right that most 22 year olds don't know exactly what they want (note- this is one reason why I strongly believe in taking time off before heading in to grad school, but that's a whole 'nother discussion), and I think it's accurate that many people change their minds about what they want over the course of grad school.

Others can correct me, but my understanding is that most universities have no problem hiring adjuncts/ lecturers from the community, but don't expect anything competitive in terms of pay or benefits.

PS-- here are some depressing articles about the life of an adjunct professor:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A15182-2002Jul16
http://www.salon.com/it/feature/1998/09/17feature.html

 

[positivepsych]

There are a number of fully funded programs out there with excellent reputations that provide top-notch research training while still offering quality clinical training (and that have faculty that don't "get mad at you" if you decide to pursue a clincial career). I attend one of them now. I'm happy here because I feel like I'll be qualified for an academic or a clinical career after I graduate, and hopefully I'll be able to have a hybrid of a career.

At this stage (you're interviewing, right?), you should be really getting a sense of the degree to which the programs you apply to actually value clinical work. I think you're absolutely right that most 22 year olds don't know exactly what they want (note- this is one reason why I strongly believe in taking time off before heading in to grad school, but that's a whole 'nother discussion), and I think it's accurate that many people change their minds about what they want over the course of grad school.

Others can correct me, but my understanding is that most universities have no problem hiring adjuncts/ lecturers from the community, but don't expect anything competitive in terms of pay or benefits.

PS-- here are some depressing articles about the life of an adjunct professor:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A15182-2002Jul16
http://www.salon.com/it/feature/1998/09/17feature.html

Thanks for your input. Unfortunately, the only options left to me at this point are not evenly balanced programs, they are research-heavy and the clinical side is a just considered an add-on. I could wait and apply again next year to more balanced schools, with no gaurantee of getting in. I'd rather take an offer from a top school now, than have to apply again for a year or two with no gaurantees.

Perhaps the more pertinent question now is... is it possible to take the initiative and seek out clinical training at a school that de-emphasizes it?
I'm not sure how one could go about doing this, perhaps externships in the summer?

Finally, I know adjuncts have a ****ty life if that's all they do for a living. But at my school, we have lecturers (aka adjuncts) who are immensely popular. They lecture on topics of their choice to several hundred students and reach a lot of students. It's something I would want to do on the side if I chose to be a clinician. Either way, as a professor or as a clinician, I want to teach since I know I would enjoy it (as long as I could choose what I taught, which might not always be possible)

 

[sumo]

Thanks for your input. Unfortunately, the only options left to me at this point are not evenly balanced programs, they are research-heavy and the clinical side is a just considered an add-on. I could wait and apply again next year to more balanced schools, with no gaurantee of getting in. I'd rather take an offer from a top school now, than have to apply again for a year or two with no gaurantees.

Perhaps the more pertinent question now is... is it possible to take the initiative and seek out clinical training at a school that de-emphasizes it?
I'm not sure how one could go about doing this, perhaps externships in the summer?

Finally, I know adjuncts have a ****ty life if that's all they do for a living. But at my school, we have lecturers (aka adjuncts) who are immensely popular. They lecture on topics of their choice to several hundred students and reach a lot of students. It's something I would want to do on the side if I chose to be a clinician. Either way, as a professor or as a clinician, I want to teach since I know I would enjoy it (as long as I could choose what I taught, which might not always be possible)

Which schools are you thinking you might end up going to? Maybe some people here can offer some input about clinical training that you may not be able to get from websites and one interview.

 

[positivepsych]

.

 

[LM02]

As long as you're interested in research, I see no problem in going to a strongly research oriented program even if you end up as a clinician. In fact, I'd still say the odds are pretty good that you will be a better clinician than someone from a nameless professional school type program with lots of practicum and low theory.

I don't want to get too far off-topic from the original question, but I wanted to quickly reply to this... I think we're entering the territory of false dichotomies yet again. It doesn't have to be PhD = research only and PsyD = clinical only.

PhD programs exist within a range of how much emphasis is placed on research vs. clinical training. Indeed, consistent with the careers goals outlined in the original post, there are many PhD programs that one might consider that combine solid research training with a variety of clinical experiences (I could name several off the top of my head).

With that said, there are PhD programs that exist on the extreme ends of the research/clinical continuum. Such programs may not be the best fit for what your goals are, as I already explained in my earlier post.

Specifically within a strongly research-based environment (such as UCLA and Penn), you will not be equipped to enter full-time clinical practice immediately post-internship. Moreover, you will find that the faculty expectations are that you are in grad school to gain research mentorship and to produce publications (and sometimes grants). As such, that is where they are going to place most of the emphasis in your training. And they will admit you into their programs under the pretense that those are your goals for graduate school, as well.

Although it is understandable that interests and goals change over the course of training, you stated that your goals are already focused on a clinical career. And that's great. But it's not the same as entering grad school with a plan to pursue a research career, and simply changing your mind down the road.

I'm responding to this because I really think you should consider your options. Having come from a strongly research-based department, I know how difficult it can be for students who are "not with the program," so to speak. It doesn't have to necessarily be a punishing environment for those students, but they can feel neglected and pressured to do things that they derive no satisfaction from.

 

[Sanman]

wow, after reading those articles on academia, I remeber why I chose to shy away from it. Makes me feel bad for complaining about psychologists being underpaid. Though the professor in the Washington Post article may want to lower her expectations and start applyin at some lower tier places.

 

[Psyclops]

I agree with Jon Snow, if you want to be a clinical psychologist in practice, you should go to a PhD program, but one that emphasises practice as well as research. If you really have a good chance of getting in to UPenn and UCLA as you say, you should know that they are very research oriented and particularly un-practice slanted. Please, think about what you are saying here, if you can get into those places as you repeatedly claim over various posts, CRY ME A RIVER. GO there with an open mind and let your path develop itself. Penn in particular is a wonderful unversity, enjoy it and good luck. But, give me a break. "I have a choice between penn and ucla but don't like reasearch?" How does one get in that situation?

 

[joetro]

Those are definitely two of the most research-oriented places in the country. And, just remember that you are taking a spot from someone who actually wants to do research post-graduation.

 

[positivepsych]

LM02, thanks for your post. I wanted to clarify one of your assertions: "Specifically within a strongly research-based environment, you will not be equipped to enter full-time clinical practice immediately post-internship."

Please excuse my ignorance, but can you break down what would equip a student to be a private-practice full time practioner?

I think I'll just go into grad school with a committment to do research in topics I'm truly interested in, while keeping an open mind about what I want and what choices I am afforded.

 

[JatPenn]

If you're research interests aren't 100% crystal clear and the match with a potential advisor is not as well, Penn admissions people sniff you out and you are cut. They don't even send out rejection letters. Just an FYI.

 

[50960]

Nothing in graduate training prepares you for private practice real world....really. Start sparring with insurnace companies and you will know what I mean..