Does anyone have any info on University of Alaska's Clinical-Community PhD program?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

The Cinnabon

Full Member
5+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Messages
215
Reaction score
157
Sorry if this post is a bit too niche. But I had a good research match, am from a western state (the funding is MUCH worse if you're not from a western state iirc), and it seems like a solid program (looks like back in the day it did have an attrition problem). Snagged an interview yesterday.

Still, given its really small cohorts and it being Alaska, I've found next to no information about the program online. Figure maybe someone in here might have interviewed with the program or have some information on it beyond the program handbook?

Oh, I should mention the location isn't a holdup for me. I generally prefer cold and dark climates.

Members don't see this ad.
 
I'd be curious as to why people are taking so long to finish this program.
Yeah, that's 100% something I want to bring up. I saw a bunch of students took 8-10 years.

I think another question I want to ask is where their students are matching?
Their minimum direct hours to graduate is 600, which doesn't seem all that high compared to the 800 or so I looked back and saw most of y'all had like a decade ago.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I interviewed there, but it’s been awhile. It used to be a joint program between UAF-UAA, but I believe now it’s just at UAA.
 
I interviewed there, but it’s been awhile. It used to be a joint program between UAF-UAA, but I believe now it’s just at UAA.
It's just UAA now, which I'm fine with as Fairbanks is a bit "out there."

My largest concerns right now is the average time it takes to finish the program AND where their students have historically been matching (I just want to see a list).
 
Yea, good questions to ask. APA match stats are good. From my brief amount of exposure, internships such as VAs/UCCs/Community Mental Health in places such as AK, HI, MT, and WA.
 
Current student of this program. The 8-10 yrs it used to take to complete the program had to do with how the program was organized - it being joint, larger cohorts, and lack of support for dissertation. This is not the case now, though, as the program has been restructured, so most people finish in 6yrs (it is a dual-focused program, so we have to do extra classes, practicum, and have additional requirements from purely clinical psych programs).

I know the current student rep is putting together an informational booklet on the program to give to interviewees, but if you have any other specific questions please let me know!
 
Last edited:
Yeah, that's 100% something I want to bring up. I saw a bunch of students took 8-10 years.

I think another question I want to ask is where their students are matching?
Their minimum direct hours to graduate is 600, which doesn't seem all that high compared to the 800 or so I looked back and saw most of y'all had like a decade ago.
Regarding internship matching, we've had students match at VAs, community mental health centers, medical centers, and that's just what I can remember off the top of my head. I've never heard of a student of the program not matching - the faculty do an excellent job at prepping students to apply for internship. All the people I know have finished APA accredited internships, as well - I haven't heard of anyone from the program not doing an accredited internship.
 
Past student of this program. The 8-10 yrs it used to take to complete the program had to do with how the program was organized - it being joint, larger cohorts, and lack of support for dissertation. This is not the case now, though, as the program has been restructured, so most people finish in 6yrs (it is a dual-focused program, so we have to do extra classes, practicum, and have additional requirements from purely clinical psych programs).

I know the current student rep is putting together an informational booklet on the program to give to interviewees, but if you have any other specific questions please let me know!

This is not what their self-reported numbers show. Like, at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I was under the impression when I interviewed there, the program wanted you to almost 100% commit to working in Alaska after graduating.
 
This is not what their self-reported numbers show. Like, at all.
The self-reported numbers don't reflect this because of a couple of factors. The program was only restructured about 7 years ago and when people started taking less years to graduate, so all of the history of time to graduate prior to then/amount of time it took people who entered the program prior to the restructure that graduated recently still has to be reported - it's a mix of these that impacts the self-report. So for example, someone who entered the program in 2017 after the restructure will take average of 6 yrs. But someone who entered in 2013 before the restructure and then took 10 years will have technically graduated under the new structure but how they moved through the program was prior to it being restructured and having more support. Both have to be reported (and then averaging 8 years to complete), but they are significantly different and had significantly different experiences/supports available to them.

The self-reported numbers reflect both, since it is a relatively newer program still, and I think (not positive, though) per APA they are required to report all graduate history.
 
I was under the impression when I interviewed there, the program wanted you to almost 100% commit to working in Alaska after graduating.
It is ideal, as Alaska is a very unique place to live and work and provide MH services, but it is definitely not required or a commitment they expect everyone to follow.
 
The self-reported numbers don't reflect this because of a couple of factors. The program was only restructured about 7 years ago and when people started taking less years to graduate, so all of the history of time to graduate prior to then/amount of time it took people who entered the program prior to the restructure that graduated recently still has to be reported - it's a mix of these that impacts the self-report. So for example, someone who entered the program in 2017 after the restructure will take average of 6 yrs. But someone who entered in 2013 before the restructure and then took 10 years will have technically graduated under the new structure but how they moved through the program was prior to it being restructured and having more support. Both have to be reported (and then averaging 8 years to complete), but they are significantly different and had significantly different experiences/supports available to them.

The self-reported numbers reflect both, since it is a relatively newer program still, and I think (not positive, though) per APA they are required to report all graduate history.

I mean, this still doesn't make sense according to their numbers. You literally said " so most people finish in 6yrs." That has never been true in the entirety of the program according to their stats, even in the most recent year. And, eyeballing the numbers, it doesn't even look like it's trending that way all that significantly in recent years. It's got good stats otherwise, aside from a low licensure percentage, but we should be honest about the numbers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
I mean, this still doesn't make sense according to their numbers. You literally said " so most people finish in 6yrs." That has never been true in the entirety of the program according to their stats, even in the most recent year. And, eyeballing the numbers, it doesn't even look like it's trending that way all that significantly in recent years. It's got good stats otherwise, aside from a low licensure percentage, but we should be honest about the numbers.

I don’t have the materials you are referencing regarding the numbers they advertise, so I don’t know what you are referring to exactly. But like I said, we take extra classes, have extra requirements, and do extra practicum than other programs so that makes it longer than the standard 5 years in regular clinical psych programs for most people in our program.

The people I know who have graduated and took longer than 6-7 years were all part of the program before it was restructured. Most everyone I know that has graduated in 5-7 years started the program after the restructure.
 
How do you not know about your own program's outcome stats that are required to be published on their website?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
How do you not know about your own program's outcome stats that are required to be published on their website?

Because I don’t monitor their website. I'm focused on my own career. This forum was about answering the OP's questions about the program, which I did, as someone who was part of it.
 
Last edited:
Because I’m not in it anymore, and don’t monitor their website. I'm focused on my own career. This forum was about answering the OP's questions about the program, which I did, as someone who was part of it.
Ok, but you're making a very specific claim about the stats. Someone says that the stats put out by your own program don't match up to your claim and you're incredulous about what they are referring to.

1707700982668.png
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Ok, but you're making a very specific claim about the stats. Someone says that the stats put out by your own program don't match up to your claim and you're incredulous about what they are referring to.

View attachment 382376
I never said that they were wrong, I said that the stats being referenced don't show the story (as is a common problem with stats of anything) as the restructure changed things.

I found what you're referencing and if you look further down on that website, more than half of the graduates do it in 5-7 years, so the majority are still graduating in less than 8 years (56% if you include all years, 52.7% if you go from 2017-18 on, which was the first year of the program after restructure). The photo you have included is going off of when people graduated, not what cohort they are in, so it make sense that most of the numbers of people graduating are from people who entered the program prior to it being restructured, also impacting their numbers being higher.

I'm not saying there weren't/aren't people that take more than 6 years to finish, but what is important is that this is changing. It will take time for the numbers to represent what is happening in the program.
 
I never said that they were wrong, I said that the stats being referenced don't show the story (as is a common problem with stats of anything) as the restructure changed things.

I found what you're referencing and if you look further down on that website, more than half of the graduates do it in 5-7 years, so the majority are still graduating in less than 8 years (56% if you include all years, 52.7% if you go from 2017-18 on, which was the first year of the program after restructure). The photo you have included is going off of when people graduated, not what cohort they are in, so it make sense that most of the numbers of people graduating are from people who entered the program prior to it being restructured, also impacting their numbers being higher.

I'm not saying there weren't/aren't people that take more than 6 years to finish, but what is important is that this is changing. It will take time for the numbers to represent what is happening in the program.

I don’t have the materials you are referencing regarding the numbers they advertise, so I don’t know what you are referring to exactly. But like I said, we take extra classes, have extra requirements, and do extra practicum than other programs so that makes it longer than the standard 5 years in regular clinical psych programs for most people in our program.

The people I know who have graduated and took longer than 6-7 years were all part of the program before it was restructured. Most everyone I know that has graduated in 5-7 years started the program after the restructure.

Past student of this program. The 8-10 yrs it used to take to complete the program had to do with how the program was organized - it being joint, larger cohorts, and lack of support for dissertation. This is not the case now, though, as the program has been restructured, so most people finish in 6yrs (it is a dual-focused program, so we have to do extra classes, practicum, and have additional requirements from purely clinical psych programs).

I know the current student rep is putting together an informational booklet on the program to give to interviewees, but if you have any other specific questions please let me know!
 
So you quoting me demonstrates consistency in my reporting that 1) number of years to graduate has changed since the restructure, and 2) 8-10 years is not the current average because it doesn't demonstrate the history of the program/changes made.
 
Ok, here's the bottom line, most people are finishing this program in 7+ years. And, that is the current average. Small n's, so small shifts skew the averages a decent amount, but if anything the mean/median number of years to complete the program has been increasing over the years, not decreasing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Ok, here's the bottom line, most people are finishing this program in 7+ years. And, that is the current average. Small n's, so small shifts skew the averages a decent amount, but if anything the mean/median number of years to complete the program has been increasing over the years, not decreasing.

It looks like it is increasing/still a 7+ yr average because people who take 8-10 years have been recently graduating. That’s not what the current cohorts’ trends are. But without talking to someone who knows the program, like myself, the numbers itself look like what you are describing.
 
In the end, this is fine, if students/applicants know what they're getting into. We can talk about the good parts of programs, but we should be honest about the drawbacks.

Like I’ve said before several times, it is a longer program than typical clinical psych programs because of the extra requirements students have. So yes, finishing it in 5 years is very difficult and doesn’t happen often. If someone wants a strictly 5 yr program, they either need to be incredibly disciplined or know that because of the extra requirements it is likely to take longer than just 5 yrs.
 
The questions asked on this forum were about why it is taking students so long to graduate and if it is a requirement to practice in Alaska after graduating. I have answered both questions. If there are other questions about the program - positive AND negative - I’m happy to answer those, as well. I have several thoughts on both.

Regarding the numbers discussion, the numbers just as they are on the website don’t look good. I have attempted to provide context, since numbers/stats sit within context. It is a difficult program, we have extra requirements, and the restructure changed a lot of things. Do I know people who have finished in 5 years? Yes. Do I know people who took 10 years? Yes. But the majority of people I know took 6-7 years. The percentages support this, as well.

Graduate school is long and tough. Applicants to this program should know there are extra requirements which often adds time for people. If you know yourself well and your own self-discipline, finishing around 6 years is very doable. The program is not a degree mill, so while there is the 5 year track they want everyone to be on, it is not a “5 years or else you’re out” program.

There is a reason the program doesn’t accept the GRE and instead asks for personal essays. There is a reason it is a clinical-community program. If you just want a clinical psych degree, this is not the program. If you care about community work, social advocacy, justice, rural and indigenous populations, and the integration of culture and community in your clinical work and research, then this is a good program to look at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Is this program for Alaska to get more Alaskan psychologists?

Is it funded?

What does the debt situation look like.

Honestly, 8 years doesn't sound that bad, if debt free.
 
It looks like it is increasing/still a 7+ yr average because people who take 8-10 years have been recently graduating. That’s not what the current cohorts’ trends are. But without talking to someone who knows the program, like myself, the numbers itself look like what you are describing.

Sure, future graduating classes could bring that number down, but that's not what you claimed. It's just a clarification for transparency sake. It'd good to have, otherwise you look like you're trying to pull one over on applicants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The questions asked on this forum were about why it is taking students so long to graduate and if it is a requirement to practice in Alaska after graduating. I have answered both questions. If there are other questions about the program - positive AND negative - I’m happy to answer those, as well. I have several thoughts on both.

Regarding the numbers discussion, the numbers just as they are on the website don’t look good. I have attempted to provide context, since numbers/stats sit within context. It is a difficult program, we have extra requirements, and the restructure changed a lot of things. Do I know people who have finished in 5 years? Yes. Do I know people who took 10 years? Yes. But the majority of people I know took 6-7 years. The percentages support this, as well.

Graduate school is long and tough. Applicants to this program should know there are extra requirements which often adds time for people. If you know yourself well and your own self-discipline, finishing around 6 years is very doable. The program is not a degree mill, so while there is the 5 year track they want everyone to be on, it is not a “5 years or else you’re out” program.

There is a reason the program doesn’t accept the GRE and instead asks for personal essays. There is a reason it is a clinical-community program. If you just want a clinical psych degree, this is not the program. If you care about community work, social advocacy, justice, rural and indigenous populations, and the integration of culture and community in your clinical work and research, then this is a good program to look at.

They absolutely do not, aside from the 16' and 17' classes, which barely got to a majority, this has not happened in recent cohorts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
They absolutely do not, aside from the 16' and 17' classes, which barely got to a majority, this has not happened in recent cohorts.

I’m telling you as someone who knows recent cohorts what is happening. The numbers they are reporting aren’t based on cohort, it’s based on the relevant academic year.
 
Sure, future graduating classes could bring that number down, but that's not what you claimed. It's just a clarification for transparency sake. It'd good to have, otherwise you look like you're trying to pull one over on applicants.

I agree that there should be more transparency regarding the numbers and what they mean on their website.

And yes, I claimed that both more recent cohorts would be and possibly future cohorts could be bringing the number down, as the program’s restructure has an impact for future cohorts.
 
I’m telling you as someone who knows recent cohorts what is happening. The numbers they are reporting aren’t based on cohort, it’s based on the relevant academic year.

They are reporting the actual numbers of people who have actually graduated. It is possibel that future cohorts, who have not yet graduated, could do it more quickly. But that has not happened yet. In terms of economic terms, that is an unrealized gain. It has not yet manifested.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Is this program for Alaska to get more Alaskan psychologists?

Is it funded?

What does the debt situation look like.

Honestly, 8 years doesn't sound that bad, if debt free.

The program was originally designed to create more psychologists for the state of Alaska, but it does not only accept people from Alaska/that want to stay in Alaska. When I entered, I was not from Alaska and they knew I wouldn’t stay.

It is partially funded if you get an assistantship. People have had teaching assistantships, research ones, service ones, so there’s a variety. When I had an assistantship, assistantships didn’t pay much but the pay has recently increased and they are also working on unionizing student workers.

Debt depends on the person/how you want to live and also if you come from a western state. There’s the western state agreement to get in state tuition in the program. I was not from a Western state so had to wait 2 years to get in-state tuition which made my debt higher than those who were paying 1/3 of what I was for the first 2 years of the program. But, I also chose to take out more loans to help provide for myself/my medical needs/etc, so it wasn’t just the tuition that impacted my level of debt.
 
Last edited:
They are reporting the actual numbers of people who have actually graduated. It is possibel that future cohorts, who have not yet graduated, could do it more quickly. But that has not happened yet. In terms of economic terms, that is an unrealized gain. It has not yet manifested.
And of the people who have graduated, a majority are from when the program was combined/before the restructure. So that skews the numbers because it doesn’t reflect the current state of the program.
 
And of the people who have graduated, a majority are from when the program was combined/before the restructure. So that skews the numbers because it doesn’t reflect the current state of the program.

Yes, it's people who have graduated. Future cohorts could graduate in fewer years, but that is not what you claimed, as the reality has actually been a slight increase in mean/median. It is yet to be seen if the restructure actually leads to a huge drop in those numbers. Time will tell.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Yes, it's people who have graduated. Future cohorts could graduate in fewer years, but that is not what you claimed, as the reality has actually been a slight increase in mean/median. It is yet to be seen if the restructure actually leads to a huge drop in those numbers. Time will tell.
It isn't just future cohorts, it is also past ones since 2016-2017. The increase in mean/median is because of people from older cohorts prior to the restructure graduating - if someone from a cohort pre-restructure took 10 years and graduated the same year as someone from a cohort after the restructure that took 6 years, the mean is 8 years. But the numbers solely do not represent the change in context, only that it took 8 years, which does not reflect what is actually happening. The numbers reflect a slight increase because of people from pre-structure cohorts finally graduating, not because of what post-restructure cohorts and graduates are doing.

You are correct in that time will tell what future cohorts do, but there is a stark difference in people who have already graduated from before the restructure and after the restructure in how long it is taking.
 
Interested students probably want to know more about the program, as the time to completion piece is there and can be seen in the outcome data. The posts about funding are definitely helpful for those looking at programs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It isn't just future cohorts, it is also past ones since 2016-2017. The increase in mean/median is because of people from older cohorts prior to the restructure graduating - if someone from a cohort pre-restructure took 10 years and graduated the same year as someone from a cohort after the restructure that took 6 years, the mean is 8 years. But the numbers solely do not represent the change in context, only that it took 8 years, which does not reflect what is actually happening. The numbers reflect a slight increase because of people from pre-structure cohorts finally graduating, not because of what post-restructure cohorts and graduates are doing.

You are correct in that time will tell what future cohorts do, but there is a stark difference in people who have already graduated from before the restructure and after the restructure in how long it is taking.
When those new people graduate, their numbers may reflect that. But, as for students who have actually graduated, your claim was factually incorrect. The numbers on people who have graduated, from 2023 on back, do not reflect any decrease in time in program, if anything, there is an ongoing increase.
 
When those new people graduate, their numbers may reflect that. But, as for students who have actually graduated, your claim was factually incorrect. The numbers on people who have graduated, from 2023 on back, do not reflect any decrease in time in program, if anything, there is an ongoing increase.
"New people" have graduated. There is a difference in current students and recent, post-restructure graduates. I am talking about post-restructure graduates, and based on their trend and my own experiences making a statement about the changes the program has gone through to support students graduating in a timelier manner. The increase, again, is because of people who started the program pre-restructure and are just now graduating. There are more of those graduates than post-restructure graduates, so, yes, the numbers are skewed. Hence why context matters.
 
"New people" have graduated. There is a difference in current students and recent, post-restructure graduates. I am talking about post-restructure graduates, and based on their trend and my own experiences making a statement about the changes the program has gone through to support students graduating in a timelier manner. The increase, again, is because of people who started the program pre-restructure and are just now graduating. There are more of those graduates than post-restructure graduates, so, yes, the numbers are skewed. Hence why context matters.

If new people have graduated, they are present in the numbers reported there, and the numbers reported never show that a majority "finish in 6yrs." For those who have in the past, most of those occurred prior to when you said the program was restructured. It's right there in the actual numbers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
If new people have graduated, they are present in the numbers reported there, and the numbers reported never show that a majority "finish in 6yrs." For those who have in the past, most of those occurred prior to when you said the program was restructured. It's right there in the actual numbers.
Exactly my point! A majority of those who have graduated were part of the program pre-restructure, so their graduation years are combined with those who graduated post-restructure. So of the people who started the program post-restructure and have since graduated, a majority have finished in 6yrs but the numbers aren't separated so one wouldn't know this just by looking at the numbers :) There's fewer people who have graduated since the restructure just because of when they started the program, so the numbers reported are skewed towards those who started the program pre-restructure.
 
Exactly my point! A majority of those who have graduated were part of the program pre-restructure, so their graduation years are combined with those who graduated post-restructure. So of the people who started the program post-restructure and have since graduated, a majority have finished in 6yrs but the numbers aren't separated so one wouldn't know this just by looking at the numbers :) There's fewer people who have graduated since the restructure just because of when they started the program, so the numbers reported are skewed towards those who started the program pre-restructure.

The numbers are separated for those who have graduated. It reports on individuals and how long they have taken to graduate. With the numbers reported, the claim that "the majority graduate in 6 yrs or less" is simply untrue. Pure and simple, with the numbers that exist, that is a lie. In future graduating years, it could become true, but it is not true now.
 
The numbers are separated for those who have graduated. It reports on individuals and how long they have taken to graduate. With the numbers reported, the claim that "the majority graduate in 6 yrs or less" is simply untrue. Pure and simple, with the numbers that exist, that is a lie. In future graduating years, it could become true, but it is not true now.
The numbers are not separated based on who has since graduated and were in the program post vs pre-restructure. My words of "the majority graduate in 6 yrs or less" is regarding those who entered the program post-restructure and have since graduated. It is not true of those who were part of the program pre-restructure.
 
The numbers are not separated based on who has since graduated and were in the program post vs pre-restructure. My words of "the majority graduate in 6 yrs or less" is regarding those who entered the program post-restructure and have since graduated. It is not true of those who were part of the program pre-restructure.

Ok, let's take your assertion and run the numbers, you claimed that the restructure took place with the first students being admitted in 2017 after the restructure. So, how many students who graduated in 2023 did it in 6 years or less? 1. 1 student did this according to their numbers.
 
Correction, the 2017 cohort did have a couple students who did it in 5, next year, no one did it in 5. So, if anything, at the moment, all we can say is that the 2017 cohort is an outlier, the 2018 cohort did not replicate, and too soon to tell about the others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Ok, let's take your assertion and run the numbers, you claimed that the restructure took place with the first students being admitted in 2017 after the restructure. So, how many students who graduated in 2023 did it in 6 years or less? 1. 1 student did this according to their numbers.
That is just for that academic year. For 2022-23 there were 2 that completed it in 5 years. And I have 3 friends in the program currently that will be graduating this academic year after either 5 or 6 yrs (those numbers aren't reported yet, obviously). Two of those are in the 2018-19 cohort, also. One is in the 2019-20 cohort.
 
That is just for that academic year. For 2022-23 there were 2 that completed it in 5 years. And I have 3 friends in the program currently that will be graduating this academic year after either 5 or 6 yrs (those numbers aren't reported yet, obviously). Two of those are in the 2018-19 cohort, also. One is iun the 2019-20 cohort.

According to numbers, no one in this cohort did it in 5 years.
 
So that would not be a majority.
That 2018-19 cohort is only 3 people, so it actually is. I said that the majority of students who entered the program post-restructure finish in around 6yrs. So that statement is still true.

I never claimed it was a 5 yr program. Completing the program in 5 yrs is not typical, but can be done. Around 6 yrs (6-7yrs) is more normal.
 
That cohort is only 3 people, so it actually is. I said that the majority of students who entered the program post-restructure finish in around 6yrs. So that statement is still true.

In that case, as the original class was 5, so there must have been 2 from that cohort that left the program, though that is also concerning. Of the 10 that entered those 2 years post restructure, 2 dropped out, 2 did it in 5, 1 did it in 6. So, 3/8 of actual graduates did it.
 
Top