Counseling Psychology EPPP rates

[The Cinnabon]

As the application cycles is slowly coming to a wrap for me, I've become far more critical of programs before committing anywhere.

One thing that recently drew my attention is that most counseling psychology programs seem to have EPPP pass rates that leave a bit to be desired. I really enjoyed a lot of the counseling programs I did interview and am seriously considering an offer I received at one. Still, its EPPP pass rate (low 70%) is considerably lower than the clinical pass rate (recently lost its 100% ranking due to one person).

Naturally, this does concern me, and I wanted to get the takes of people who "know the game" before making any possible rash choices.

Also, sorry if I've been crowding out some of these forms recently, as the app cycle comes to a close I've certainly had a lot of questions that I've wanted answered from people who have "been there and done that."

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[summerbabe]

I would consider if the low EPPP pass rate is the only red flag or one of possibly many, which can include funding, typical graduation time, mentoring, accredited internship match %, matching to types of internships that you may prefer (if people usually go to counseling centers but you see yourself working in hospital settings in the future), types of practicum opportunities on campus & locally, perceived student happiness, etc etc etc.

Licensure rate might be especially important since this is measuring who passes on their first attempt (I think). So if some people need to re-take it but then pass (which this data doesn't capture), that's very different than people who continue to fail & then can't get licensed. And I would also look at the sample size for the timeframe in comparison to other programs & look up historical EPPP data for this program.

IMO, I view the EPPP more like a general standardized test. Some areas such as research/stats & prof ethics will line up more with standard doc level study but for other categories, just about anything that has every happened in psychology could show up so you'll see all kinds of names & concepts that will be completely foreign, even with lots of test prep.

People who are stronger standardized test takers (e.g., combo of their knowledge base, understanding of test taking strategies including those specific to the EPPP, and logical reasoning abilities) and are more analytically minded will naturally be better EPPP test takers. Some programs may select more for this archetype (think 'hardcore' clinical programs) and will likely have stronger EPPP rates. But some programs may value other attributes that may not be as correlated to standardized test taking (yet still produce quality psychologists).

And broadly speaking, if I met a colleague who didn't pass the EPPP on the first go, I wouldn't think any more or less of them since it's kinda a weird test. Now somebody who continues to struggle on multiple re-takes even with lots of prep, I would be concerned about whether they were suited for doctoral study in the first place.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[The Cinnabon]

I would consider if the low EPPP pass rate is the only red flag or one of possibly many, which can include funding, typical graduation time, mentoring, accredited internship match %, matching to types of internships that you may prefer (if people usually go to counseling centers but you see yourself working in hospital settings in the future), types of practicum opportunities on campus & locally, perceived student happiness, etc etc etc.

Licensure rate might be especially important since this is measuring who passes on their first attempt (I think). So if some people need to re-take it but then pass (which this data doesn't capture), that's very different than people who continue to fail & then can't get licensed. And I would also look at the sample size for the timeframe in comparison to other programs & look up historical EPPP data for this program.

IMO, I view the EPPP more like a general standardized test. Some areas such as research/stats & prof ethics will line up more with standard doc level study but for other categories, just about anything that has every happened in psychology could show up so you'll see all kinds of names & concepts that will be completely foreign, even with lots of test prep.

People who are stronger standardized test takers (e.g., combo of their knowledge base, understanding of test taking strategies including those specific to the EPPP, and logical reasoning abilities) and are more analytically minded will naturally be better EPPP test takers. Some programs may select more for this archetype (think 'hardcore' clinical programs) and will likely have stronger EPPP rates. But some programs may value other attributes that may not be as correlated to standardized test taking (yet still produce quality psychologists).

And broadly speaking, if I met a colleague who didn't pass the EPPP on the first go, I wouldn't think any more or less of them since it's kinda a weird test. Now somebody who continues to struggle on multiple re-takes even with lots of prep, I would be concerned about whether they were suited for doctoral study in the first place.

Just my 2 cents.

This program in particular, seems to have a bit of a track record with less than desirable EPPP rates. The lowest I found was 60%, which has a sample of 15, while the highest I found was back in 2016 at 80% with a sample of 12. These rates just took me back a bit, mainly because the clinical program, at the same university, does not have this issue.

I'm actually going to meet with the DCT as this is the largest current red flag and I want to see if they have any other data that can give a clear picture. The funding seems to be solid and a non-issue.

I am rather risk-averse when it comes to this sort of thing.

In retrospect an error in judgement I may have made was just not looking at the EPPP data when building my school list, stupid I know. I rather hyper focused on funding, faculty match, apa match rate, and casting a wide net.

 

[Sanman]

The only thing I can add is that having looked at national stats before, I have also noticed counseling programs generally seem to have lower EPPP pass rates than comparable clinical psych programs overall. Not sure if this is due to a curriculum difference or something else. That said, if you would be happy there and it is your best offer otherwise, will it matter?

 

[The Cinnabon]

The only thing I can add is that having looked at national stats before, I have also noticed counseling programs generally seem to have lower EPPP pass rates than comparable clinical psych programs overall. Not sure if this is due to a curriculum difference or something else. That said, if you would be happy there and it is your best offer otherwise, will it matter?

Thank god I'll have until April 15th to really think this over LOL!

If the program itself can provide far more detailed data and insights into this, I certainly am more willing to accept this as a downside. If they can immediately offer up an explanation such as "oh yeah, we realized this was an issue. Here's our second time pass rate, which we are tracking closely, it's 100%. Here's the steps we're taking to ensure this ceases to happen in future cohorts."

Having said all of that, being a VA research assistant isn't a bad gig and I actually get paid pretty dang well in a low COL area. I'm certainly not opposed to reapplying, especially because I currently have like 2 papers in review.

 

[summerbabe]

I am rather risk-averse when it comes to this sort of thing.

IMO if you're risk averse, a lot of other factors would outweigh EPPP rate (in no particular order): a) funding b) licensure % c) time to graduation d) mentorship fit e) happiness in that area/program f) perceived preparation for your future career goals g) likelihood of future offers

Ultimately, the EPPP is an individual responsibility. If you've been a good test taker, you should be fine with normal prep. Worst case scenario would likely be not passing the first time and then figuring out how to prep better and passing the second time.

If you've historically been a bad test taker, you're more likely to struggle and may not pass the first time even if you go to a 100% pass rate program.

This is conjecture on my part but for funded programs, differences in rates might have more to do with the type of student being accepted rather than fundamental programmatic flaws.

I went to a counseling program that consistently has a 100% pass rate. But we literally never talked about the EPPP, didn't do any prep & our coursework seemed pretty on par for the field.

But just about all us were pretty to very analytically minded (lots of stats like structural equation modelling for theses & dissertations vs simple regression) whereas some counseling programs place more emphasize on things like qualitative research, which probably draws on other types of cognitive and professional strengths that standardized testing may not capture or even penalize.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I would agree that a lot of the variance in terms of passing the EPPP can be influenced by the individual. Some programs will be better or worse than others when it comes to preparing their students, such as by virtue of directly teaching to/preparing for the test, providing more of the foundational knowledge in their required coursework, or something else. But even if a program doesn't do the best job of preparing a trainee, a lot of the prep work ultimately falls to you, and the prep materials generally allow you to make up for knowledge gaps.

I attended a scientist-practitioner clinical psych program at a large state university with pretty decent EPPP and licensure rates (mid-90's, give or take), and I don't recall ever talking about the EPPP in grad school. I'm sure it came up at some point, but we never had any type of formal prep for it. I knew pretty much none of the I/O info on the test, so I drilled down on that in my prep, and even chunks of the other material were things I had to re-learn because they'd come up so early in my training or we'd glossed over them pretty quickly.

 

[Mama Bear]

You have several variables that may impact scores, such as: rigor of the program, the student population selected into the program, individual test-taking preparation, etc.

The lower score may mean something about the quality of the training, but it is not the only explanation. Does the program have many students from underrepresented and historically marginalized groups? Such groups are disproportionately impacted by standardized tests even though they are capable students. Also, it was mentioned above that some programs may draw people interested in other types of inquiry.

 

[R. Matey]

But just about all us were pretty to very analytically minded (lots of stats like structural equation modelling for theses & dissertations vs simple regression) whereas some counseling programs place more emphasize on things like qualitative research, which probably draws on other types of cognitive and professional strengths that standardized testing may not capture or even penalize.

My counseling program had an abysmal EPPP pass rate. I also didn't think about the EPPP when I was putting together my list and the program I did attend gave me the best offer in terms of funding and mentorship by a very wide margin. For me, it didn't really matter. I'm similar in personality to what summerbabe is describing here so I walked out of the EPPP early and did just fine.

 

[JustNoticing]

I went to a counseling psych program with a near perfect EPPP pass rate and have a few thoughts on it:

I think who the program attracts makes as much of an impact as the curriculum - counseling psych programs may be more likely to take/attract students with more diverse backgrounds, including those who did not major in psych in undergrad. I found my strong undergrad background in psych (and the fact I'd already done psych GRE studying) to be a huge benefit in the EPPP. My program attracted folks who were strong students regardless of their background, and though our program didn't necessarily do a great job "teaching to the test," strong students will do a good job being able to study and perform well on a basic test like the EPPP regardless. Agreed with what summerbabe says about EPPP prep being "individual responsibility" - a program's pass rate may tell you more about your peers than the program, necessarily.

I tutored an alumni of another counseling psych program whose program allowed them to skip real research methods/quant training for qualitative. They failed because they didn't have the knowledge needed to answer stats and psychometrics questions. Also possible that many counseling psych programs being outside of psych departments may skimp a little more on some of the basic foundations of psychology - i.e. I don't remember learning theory taught in my program, but it definitely is on the test.

If the other metrics on the program are solid (e.g. funding, apa match rate) I wouldn't get as caught up in the EPPP pass rate.

 

[WisNeuro]

I went to a counseling psych program with a near perfect EPPP pass rate and have a few thoughts on it:

I think who the program attracts makes as much of an impact as the curriculum - counseling psych programs may be more likely to take/attract students with more diverse backgrounds, including those who did not major in psych in undergrad. I found my strong undergrad background in psych (and the fact I'd already done psych GRE studying) to be a huge benefit in the EPPP. My program attracted folks who were strong students regardless of their background, and though our program didn't necessarily do a great job "teaching to the test," strong students will do a good job being able to study and perform well on a basic test like the EPPP regardless. Agreed with what summerbabe says about EPPP prep being "individual responsibility" - a program's pass rate may tell you more about your peers than the program, necessarily.

I tutored an alumni of another counseling psych program whose program allowed them to skip real research methods/quant training for qualitative. They failed because they didn't have the knowledge needed to answer stats and psychometrics questions. Also possible that many counseling psych programs being outside of psych departments may skimp a little more on some of the basic foundations of psychology - i.e. I don't remember learning theory taught in my program, but it definitely is on the test.

If the other metrics on the program are solid (e.g. funding, apa match rate) I wouldn't get as caught up in the EPPP pass rate.

Quick caveat, with APA over-correcting and more programs creating captive internships, accredited match rate is not a great indicator anymore, as the variance there has shrunk dramatically. Funding still very important, but I do think that the EPPP does remain a good, but far from perfect, indicator of quality of a program.

 

[psychedaboutpsych123]

I graduated from a counseling psych (scientist practitioner) program which, last time I checked, was floating in the 100% pass rate range for the EPPP. Myself and my cohort-mates all passed on the first attempt with ease.

I would be hesitant to brush all counseling psych programs with the same stroke here. There are some clinical psych programs that are significantly more predatory/diploma mills and will lead to horrible outcomes. It's more about the program than clinical vs counseling.

For what it's worth, I got a highly competitive internship and postdoc, and a highly desirable job. I passed EPPP with a WIDE margin on my first shot.

IMO, take it on a program by program basis

 

[LurkerNow]

As others have said, EPPP is an individual pursuit. The study materials (my favorite was psychprep) have everything one needs to pass the exam. I didn't look at my program as the major source of EPPP prep (although it did help), I looked to myself. I saw at least five people at my place of work fail the EPPP because they didn't study in a systematic, disciplined way. Motivated by their failure, I absolutely crushed the preparation, overlearned the material/testing strategies, took lots of practice exams, and breezed through the actual test as a formality/victory lap with minimal anxiety. My advice, your program isn't responsible for your EPPP success, you are.

 

[WisNeuro]

As others have said, EPPP is an individual pursuit. The study materials (my favorite was psychprep) have everything one needs to pass the exam. I didn't look at my program as the major source of EPPP prep (although it did help), I looked to myself. I saw at least five people at my place of work fail the EPPP because they didn't study in a systematic, disciplined way. Motivated by their failure, I absolutely crushed the preparation, overlearned the material/testing strategies, took lots of practice exams, and breezed through the actual test as a formality/victory lap with minimal anxiety. My advice, your program isn't responsible for your EPPP success, you are.

While generally true, one's program does have a relationship to the success. If you look at the diploma mills sites, you can see the areas that they struggle with, and one of those struggle areas is largely the research methods and statistics portion. That's probably the section that a program is most responsible for.

 

[The Cinnabon]

While generally true, one's program does have a relationship to the success. If you look at the diploma mills sites, you can see the areas that they struggle with, and one of those struggle areas is largely the research methods and statistics portion. That's probably the section that a program is most responsible for.

I'm in such an odd predicament right now. The university I got the counseling offer, from some insider's info, is likely to be reassessed as an R1 within the next year. The funding is phenomenal and the faculty POI, while new, is on some impressive grants setting them up for quite a successful career.

Still, I do feel as though the curricula has to be, on some level, rather deficient to have a 60% EPPP pass rate within the past 3 years.

Conversely, the clinical program has had 100% rate and during my recent interview the professor who teaches most of the stats and research methods course said "yeah, we don't f*** around and I pride myself on how well my students do with this. There's no excuse for any of my students to get close to failing." Naturally, this is the answer I was looking for.

Needless to say ... I really hope I get the clinical offer here as I felt it was a solidly ran program.

 

[MCParent]

FWIW I completed my counseling psych PhD at UF, which has 100% pass rate (per https://www.psychology.ca.gov/about_us/meetings/materials/20230601_hc.pdf) and passed by a good margin on my first go. I don’t recall the EPPP being mentioned during grad school. Idk that I’d have wanted it to be; I wouldn’t have wanted yet another class in I/O or whatever. I don’t personally know anyone who didn’t re-study for the EPPP post graduation and just rode on their grad school instruction.

The pass rates are weird. I looked up some programs that I would not say produce good clinicians and some have good pass rates. A couple excellent programs I also saw have sub-70%, which surprised me.

 

[The Cinnabon]

FWIW I completed my counseling psych PhD at UF, which has 100% pass rate (per https://www.psychology.ca.gov/about_us/meetings/materials/20230601_hc.pdf) and passed by a good margin on my first go. I don’t recall the EPPP being mentioned during grad school. Idk that I’d have wanted it to be; I wouldn’t have wanted yet another class in I/O or whatever. I don’t personally know anyone who didn’t re-study for the EPPP post graduation and just rode on their grad school instruction.

The pass rates are weird. I looked up some programs that I would not say produce good clinicians and some have good pass rates. A couple excellent programs I also saw have sub-70%, which surprised me.

Would you mind if I private messaged you about a program, since you're a counseling grad and may know the "lay of the land?"

 

[WisNeuro]

I'm in such an odd predicament right now. The university I got the counseling offer, from some insider's info, is likely to be reassessed as an R1 within the next year. The funding is phenomenal and the faculty POI, while new, is on some impressive grants setting them up for quite a successful career.

Still, I do feel as though the curricula has to be, on some level, rather deficient to have a 60% EPPP pass rate within the past 3 years.

Conversely, the clinical program has had 100% rate and during my recent interview the professor who teaches most of the stats and research methods course said "yeah, we don't f*** around and I pride myself on how well my students do with this. There's no excuse for any of my students to get close to failing." Naturally, this is the answer I was looking for.

Needless to say ... I really hope I get the clinical offer here as I felt it was a solidly ran program.

I wouldn't get too hung up on the R1 distinction, if it's an otherwise good program. Especially if they are routinely putting students at goof prac sites for the things that you are interested in. A 60% pass rate is a good deal below the national average, so that could be indicative of some things. Especially if the clinical side of the same university is 100% and they have similar classes.

 

[The Cinnabon]

I wouldn't get too hung up on the R1 distinction, if it's an otherwise good program. Especially if they are routinely putting students at goof prac sites for the things that you are interested in. A 60% pass rate is a good deal below the national average, so that could be indicative of some things. Especially if the clinical side of the same university is 100% and they have similar classes.

Very true. I'd rather be the modal applicant who is successful rather than an exception who did well in spite of their program.

 

[MCParent]

Would you mind if I private messaged you about a program, since you're a counseling grad and may know the "lay of the land?"

Sure

 

[Freud’sMommy]

EPPP pass rates reflect selection effects rather than quality of the program, which is why you see much variance and discrepancy from official data sources and from anecdotes. I didn't even consider EPPP pass rates when applying to grad school!

I bet you could pass it right now with just a few months of studying as the strongest correlates of success are prior verbal and math GRE scores (yes, even above psych GRE performance).

 

[The Cinnabon]

I wouldn't get too hung up on the R1 distinction, if it's an otherwise good program. Especially if they are routinely putting students at goof prac sites for the things that you are interested in. A 60% pass rate is a good deal below the national average, so that could be indicative of some things. Especially if the clinical side of the same university is 100% and they have similar classes.

I think I may have found one of the huge issues on this. The counseling psychology program CAN have similar courses to the clinical students, specifically there are 3 empirical research tracks as it pertains to coursework. The hardest one is also the most statistics heavy, guess which one is the one that the clinical students HAVE to take (they don't have any track choices) whereas the counseling students have a choice?

This means there may be a good number of students who overly specialize in qualitative research and may lack some serious fundamentals of quantitative analysis. This actually manages to further complicate matters for me as I don't know how much this choice could radically influence one's time in the program and what they get out of it. For example, if I am simply elected to take the same research methods course sequence as the clinical students would my issues dissipate?

And yes, the counseling program does accept more students from non-traditional and marginalized backgrounds.

 

[EnPsychlopedia]

For example, if I am simply elected to take the same research methods course sequence as the clinical students would my issues dissipate?

I personally think you are overcomplicating it. It very much sounds like the counseling program offer would offer you a good fit in terms of research interests and funding opportunities, and that it is sufficiently flexible in terms of tracks to allow you to shore up on the content areas with which their students typically struggle. If you know yourself and your test-taking abilities well, and if the program is fully funded and routinely matching students to competitive internships, then I think the EPPP rates speak more about those students failing to do something right rather than the program failing to do something right.

 

[MCParent]

I barely remember the EPPP, but from what I recall stats questions were about central tendency measurements and kinds of validity sorts of things. Not like HLM or something specific in terms of stats. I agree w @PsychSupreme and also reiterate that I don’t know a single person who didn’t restudy some section for the EPPP, nor would I have wanted to have gone to a program that teaches to that test as their main means of determining pedagogical content.

 

[Mama Bear]

Echoing what’s been said. My Counseling Psych program had funding and good training opportunities/match rates, but the EPPP pass rate was not good. I knew that I was a good test-taker, and I showed that test who’s boss. Know yourself.

 

[Justanothergrad]

As the application cycles is slowly coming to a wrap for me, I've become far more critical of programs before committing anywhere.

One thing that recently drew my attention is that most counseling psychology programs seem to have EPPP pass rates that leave a bit to be desired. I really enjoyed a lot of the counseling programs I did interview and am seriously considering an offer I received at one. Still, its EPPP pass rate (low 70%) is considerably lower than the clinical pass rate (recently lost its 100% ranking due to one person).

Naturally, this does concern me, and I wanted to get the takes of people who "know the game" before making any possible rash choices.

Also, sorry if I've been crowding out some of these forms recently, as the app cycle comes to a close I've certainly had a lot of questions that I've wanted answered from people who have "been there and done that."

Depends a lot on the program. Dont over-read, and also- the EPPP means nothing to learning material. I'd just check on the program rep - thats gonna be a better proxy. Some people I know even look at EPPP first attempts as a 700 dollar gamble based on the hourly rate they would earn studying (i.e., if you study for 80 hours, you are saying your time is worth 8.75 an hour) (highly successful people, APS rising stars, early tenured faculty, etc.). Lots of ways to look at it. My program had higher rates than the clinical program when I was a student. My program now matches or exceeds as well.

Whats the program

 

[The Cinnabon]

Depends a lot on the program. Dont over-read, and also- the EPPP means nothing to learning material. I'd just check on the program rep - thats gonna be a better proxy. Some people I know even look at EPPP first attempts as a 700 dollar gamble based on the hourly rate they would earn studying (i.e., if you study for 80 hours, you are saying your time is worth 8.75 an hour) (highly successful people, APS rising stars, early tenured faculty, etc.). Lots of ways to look at it. My program had higher rates than the clinical program when I was a student. My program now matches or exceeds as well.

Whats the program

I'm definitely swinging back and forth into this trying not to overread.

I know the POI I applied to got the most applicants by a decent number as they have some pretty solid early career grants, from some pretty impressive funders, and have a pretty productive lab that's hitting the ground running. As a research heavy applicant this was something I screened heavily for and probably lead to me overlooking some of the things like EPPP pass rates.

To make this choice even more obnoxious the funding is solid in a low COL area. They've also had recent internship matches at some VAs that I know offer solid training in areas I'm interested in.

 

[R. Matey]

I barely remember the EPPP, but from what I recall stats questions were about central tendency measurements and kinds of validity sorts of things. Not like HLM or something specific in terms of stats. I agree w @PsychSupreme and also reiterate that I don’t know a single person who didn’t restudy some section for the EPPP, nor would I have wanted to have gone to a program that teaches to that test as their main means of determining pedagogical content.

+1

Most of the EPPP stats content is accessible in the most basic first-level graduate stats and psychometrics courses. If the program in question doesn't have those then maybe it's concerning (not just from EPPP perspective--every psychologist should at least know these fundamentals).

 

[The Cinnabon]

+1

Most of the EPPP stats content is accessible in the most basic first-level graduate stats and psychometrics courses. If the program in question doesn't have those then maybe it's concerning (not just from EPPP perspective--every psychologist should at least know these fundamentals).

You have three choices, you require a basic level, but one of the empirical research training tracks goes much more into the weeds from what I've heard. Which is rather attractive to me because, while I do enjoy qualitative portions to my research, I want strong quant training/opportunities.

 

[WisNeuro]

+1

Most of the EPPP stats content is accessible in the most basic first-level graduate stats and psychometrics courses. If the program in question doesn't have those then maybe it's concerning (not just from EPPP perspective--every psychologist should at least know these fundamentals).

I agree, but you should check in on the percent correct for this section for the known mills and some other programs, it's shocking. Like sub 50% shocking. One of the Chicago Schools was mid-30's. More programmatic and who these schools are admitting is likely the culprit here, but that won't stop people from conducting poor research using these numbers and advocating for abolishment of the EPPP.

 

[The Cinnabon]

I agree, but you should check in on the percent correct for this section for the known mills and some other programs, it's shocking. Like sub 50% shocking. One of the Chicago Schools was mid-30's. More programmatic and who these schools are admitting is likely the culprit here, but that won't stop people from conducting poor research using these numbers and advocating for abolishment of the EPPP.

There was one that was 19% a while back, or something truly horrific.

 

[R. Matey]

I agree, but you should check in on the percent correct for this section for the known mills and some other programs, it's shocking. Like sub 50% shocking. One of the Chicago Schools was mid-30's. More programmatic and who these schools are admitting is likely the culprit here, but that won't stop people from conducting poor research using these numbers and advocating for abolishment of the EPPP.

Most definitely. I haven't seen a breakdown like this, but I'm certainly unsurprised given that I'm three years out of grad school and I've already heard of proposals to eliminate the EPPP citing 'equity' concerns. FTR, I'm not a great fan of the EPPP for many reasons. But it would be a d*** shame to eliminate our testing requirement essentially because it's too hard for people who went to terrible programs.

You have three choices, you require a basic level, but one of the empirical research training tracks goes much more into the weeds from what I've heard. Which is rather attractive to me because, while I do enjoy qualitative portions to my research, I want strong quant training/opportunities.

This is similar to what I had in grad school and it was sufficient for me to publish academic papers in decent psych journals, if that's your goal. But, I went all in on quant and was often the only counseling student in a room full of stats and measurement PhDs. Our program also had a very large number of first-gen students (including yours truly), which I think led to a lopsided distribution of academic skills, if that makes any sense. Some people were great clinicians and qualitative researchers, but were useless when it came to stats.

 

[Ollie123]

The stats/methods portion of the EPPP is basically a "Do you have any hope of understanding even an entry-level research article at the level of a reasonably competent undergraduate" test. If memory serves, there is really nothing involving math beyond percentages. It covers part of one semester of statistics and what is likely the first 1-2 lectures of an assessment or psychometrics course where they cover things like test-retest vs inter-rater reliability .

Absent enormous test anxiety or having a stroke mid-exam, I can think of zero excuse for failing regardless of program type. Oddly enough, I actually found it more focused on clinically relevant material than many other sections, where you get some really bizarre and obscure content. I'm guessing because many harder/more obscure stats questions get kicked out for poor item performance.

 

[The Cinnabon]

The stats/methods portion of the EPPP is basically a "Do you have any hope of understanding even an entry-level research article at the level of a reasonably competent undergraduate" test. If memory serves, there is really nothing involving math beyond percentages. It covers part of one semester of statistics and what is likely the first 1-2 lectures of an assessment or psychometrics course where they cover things like test-retest vs inter-rater reliability .

Absent enormous test anxiety or having a stroke mid-exam, I can think of zero excuse for failing regardless of program type. Oddly enough, I actually found it more focused on clinically relevant material than many other sections, where you get some really bizarre and obscure content. I'm guessing because many harder/more obscure stats questions get kicked out for poor item performance.

100%

I'm really just trying to discern if it's a program problem or selection bias that it's a counseling program, which tend to be less competitive, in a geographically undesirable area.

If it's just a program that's "forced" to admit some less competitive applicants simply because the location is a harder sell, I'm less likely to care versus a program deficiency as a whole. Especially with solid funding. I know the lab I was admitted to has some serious steam behind it right now and the POI definitely seems to have their stuff together as it comes to future, ambitious, grants.

 

[MCParent]

FYI, one recent relevant pub:

APA PsycNet

dx.doi.org

Tbh I would personally call a sub 90 pass rate a program problem, in the sense that if I were TD it would be on my radar that something is up and needs to be addressed. Sub 70 would be really worrying to me if I were a TD at such a program. Not being able to successfully funnel graduates into the workforce is a major problem. There are lots of possible causes, but I’d be pretty alarmed and would dedicate substantial attention to that if I were TD; it’s not like the test is impossible so I do think the program should be plugging that dam wherever it’s leaking.

 

[WisNeuro]

FYI, one recent relevant pub:

APA PsycNet

dx.doi.org

Tbh I would personally call a sub 90 pass rate a program problem, in the sense that if I were TD it would be on my radar that something is up and needs to be addressed. Sub 70 would be really worrying to me if I were a TD at such a program. Not being able to successfully funnel graduates into the workforce is a major problem. There are lots of possible causes, but I’d be pretty alarmed and would dedicate substantial attention to that if I were TD; it’s not like the test is impossible so I do think the program should be plugging that dam wherever it’s leaking.

Despite having the data, these and the Sharpless always conspicuously leave certain analyses out when making their charge for advocacy.

 

[cara susanna]

I think I know to which programs/university the OP is referring, and in this case I can say that students in the clinical program definitely had a perception that the counseling program was less rigorous than the clinical program, especially when it came to stats and research methods. There is a lot of shared coursework for foundational courses, though.

 

[The Cinnabon]

I think I know to which programs/university the OP is referring, and in this case I can say that students in the clinical program definitely had a perception that the counseling program was less rigorous than the clinical program, especially when it came to stats and research methods. There is a lot of shared coursework for foundational courses, though.

During the interview I asked an applicant that was in similar shoes to me or at least knew a lot about the counseling program, and yes it's generally seen to have a great degree of "work-life-balance." While I'm not trying to utterly destroy myself during grad school, I'm also not looking for an "easy" program that people can just call in.

This seemed to be an issue at a different counseling program I interviewed at where the pendulum is swinging in the opposite direction of grad should have amazing "work life balance."

I know myself enough to know that I believe I would be disciplined enough to make it rigorous, but professional reputation matters in such a small world. The idea of being judged because people in my own cohort "called in" a lot of grad school doesn't seem all that appealing.

 

[R. Matey]

N = 1, but I can't recall a week in grad school where I put in less than 60 hours/week.

I think it depends on what you want. There were people in my program who did the bare minimum, never published, and now work in some large group practice as a therapist. There were other people who published and have faculty positions (as clinicians) in at the local AMC. IMO, the main thing from a programmatic perspective is whether the opportunities exist for students to pursue their career goals.

 

[WisNeuro]

N = 1, but I can't recall a week in grad school where I put in less than 60 hours/week.

I think it depends on what you want. There were people in my program who did the bare minimum, never published, and now work in some large group practice as a therapist. There were other people who published and have faculty positions (as clinicians) in at the local AMC. IMO, the main thing from a programmatic perspective is whether the opportunities exist for students to pursue their career goals.

There were some sub-40 weeks for me, but those were the exception, not the rule. Around 60 was probably the norm, especially in the later years when I was balancing 3 prac days, minimal class time at that point, and cranking away on dissertation

 

[Dazen]

I’m curious to see what getting rid of the GRE does to the EPPP pass rate in the future, given that people who can do well on one standardized test can often do well on others. Especially since I’ve talked with a lot of students post-GRE who said they would have really struggled to earn competitive scores on the GRE.

 

[The Cinnabon]

I’m curious to see what getting rid of the GRE does to the EPPP pass rate in the future, given that people who can do well on one standardized test can often do well on others. Especially since I’ve talked with a lot of students post-GRE who said they would have really struggled to earn competitive scores on the GRE.

I wonder if we'll see another correction where the majority of programs begin to reimplement the GRE. I can already see some "nightmare cases" where otherwise very strong programs start having a few graduates who just aren't able to hack the EPPP and end up stuck.

 

[WisNeuro]

I’m curious to see what getting rid of the GRE does to the EPPP pass rate in the future, given that people who can do well on one standardized test can often do well on others. Especially since I’ve talked with a lot of students post-GRE who said they would have really struggled to earn competitive scores on the GRE.

I'm curious to see if programs go the way of universities now bringing back the ACT/SAT after they found that dropping them wasn't having the effect they were hoping for.