nononora

Dis Member
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Mar 27, 2007
290
4
Philadelphia
psychologymaps.blogspot.com
Status
Psychologist
There is a lot of division in the field, a lot of different opinions on what's good enough, what's "elite," "arrogant," or "ivory tower," and what's practical.
OT:

This is one of the problems I have with a field such as ours - I understand the desire to want to help people but many seem to have a problem with these terms. I don't see anything wrong in expecting people in helping professions to be elite. Although everyone is entitled to an education, not everyone should be entitled to a professional degree that allows you to practice. Just as online MD/JD programs are frowned upon, so should online PhDs/PsyDs in Clinical Psych. The fact of the matter is that not everyone has the ability or the correct circumstances to consider this career path, and making it available to everyone while disregarding academic ability is troubling.

I'd strongly prefer elite people treating me although some seem to think differently.
 

Ollie123

10+ Year Member
Feb 19, 2007
4,797
1,357
Status
Psychology Student
OT:

This is one of the problems I have with a field such as ours - I understand the desire to want to help people but many seem to have a problem with these terms. I don't see anything wrong in expecting people in helping professions to be elite. Although everyone is entitled to an education, not everyone should be entitled to a professional degree that allows you to practice. Just as online MD/JD programs are frowned upon, so should online PhDs/PsyDs in Clinical Psych. The fact of the matter is that not everyone has the ability or the correct circumstances to consider this career path, and making it available to everyone while disregarding academic ability is troubling.

I'd strongly prefer elite people treating me although some seem to think differently.
:thumbup::thumbup:

This. I can't stand that attitude. If someone can't hack it, or life circumstances don't allow for "elite" training, there are plenty of ways to "help" that do not require a doctorate. I'm sick to death of everything in this country being dumbed down in the name of "fairness" and it happens across the board in education. Its no surprise our educational system is in shambles.
 

Therapist4Chnge

Neuropsych Ninja Faculty
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Oct 7, 2006
21,575
2,571
The Beach
Status
Psychologist
:thumbup::thumbup:

This. I can't stand that attitude. If someone can't hack it, or life circumstances don't allow for "elite" training, there are plenty of ways to "help" that do not require a doctorate. I'm sick to death of everything in this country being dumbed down in the name of "fairness" and it happens across the board in education. Its no surprise our educational system is in shambles.
Agreed.

It isn't meant for everyone to be able to do it. I am sure some good candidates are unable to attend because of circumstances, but the standards should not be lowered to accommodate them, because there are other people who get in who shouldn't.

Much of what we do requires sacrifice. It isn't like we give up our first born, but it shouldn't be easy. There is FAR too much to learn already going full-time (before internship, post-doc, etc), so any diminishing of standards will only detract from learning.
 

socialcog

Neuropsychology predoctoral intern
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 17, 2007
425
35
Status
Psychology Student
:thumbup::thumbup:

This. I can't stand that attitude. If someone can't hack it, or life circumstances don't allow for "elite" training, there are plenty of ways to "help" that do not require a doctorate. I'm sick to death of everything in this country being dumbed down in the name of "fairness" and it happens across the board in education. Its no surprise our educational system is in shambles.
Was the poster you're responding to in support dumbing down our educational system? I didn't get that but whatever.

I agree with you and T4C in that I think a healthy dose of uncompromising and idealistic elitism may be what our educational system needs to correct itself, freeing itself from the capitalism in this culture. I know that neither of you used the term 'elitism' but we are talking about the same overarching theme.

However, elaborating on this topic here will likely derail the topic of this thread (EPPP related stuff), so I will stop now.
 

socialcog

Neuropsychology predoctoral intern
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 17, 2007
425
35
Status
Psychology Student
So I am reading this book, The Twilight of American Culture--by Morris Berman, and among many of the themes contained that contribute to the deterioration of our country is the collapse of American intelligence. He compiles a truckload of alarming stats from a variety of sources that supports his position. (T4C, you've warned me once about copyright related issues on this forum once before so I will be mindful of that in this post.)

Some of the data he cites, as alarming as it sounds, is simply too ridiculous to be fabricated. For example, 42% of Americans cannot locate Japan on a map. He states that Garrison Keillor (from NPR) survey revealed that even 15% of Americans cannot locate the US on a map. wtf?! Another stat includes that 40% of American adults didn't know that we were at war with Germany during WWII--that's about 70 million adults...think about it!! This goes on and on for pages.

The chapter then sheds light specifically on the deterioration of our public schools, interviews college graduates (undergrads and grad students) on the simplist of facts (ie: the boiling point of water, who designed the American flag, what is three squared?) and the answers were not only not close, but were humiliating.

Does anyone have any thoughts about this trend and how it may impact our training? Fulsome capitalism is, in short, the major contributing factor and which, as this book predicts, will contribute to the fall of this country, akin to the Roman Empire in the 5th, 6th century. Are professional schools emblematic of the toxic capitalism within our system? Has the 'elite' schools safe from this toxicity? I say 'no'.

thoughts?
 

Quynh2007

the oracle of destiny
10+ Year Member
Jul 16, 2004
710
3
Status
Psychology Student
So I am reading this book, The Twilight of American Culture--by Morris Berman, and among many of the themes contained that contribute to the deterioration of our country is the collapse of American intelligence. He compiles a truckload of alarming stats from a variety of sources that supports his position. (T4C, you've warned me once about copyright related issues on this forum once before so I will be mindful of that in this post.)

Some of the data he cites, as alarming as it sounds, is simply too ridiculous to be fabricated. For example, 42% of Americans cannot locate Japan on a map. He states that Garrison Keillor (from NPR) survey revealed that even 15% of Americans cannot locate the US on a map. wtf?! Another stat includes that 40% of American adults didn't know that we were at war with Germany during WWII--that's about 70 million adults...think about it!! This goes on and on for pages.

The chapter then sheds light specifically on the deterioration of our public schools, interviews college graduates (undergrads and grad students) on the simplist of facts (ie: the boiling point of water, who designed the American flag, what is three squared?) and the answers were not only not close, but were humiliating.

Does anyone have any thoughts about this trend and how it may impact our training? Fulsome capitalism is, in short, the major contributing factor and which, as this book predicts, will contribute to the fall of this country, akin to the Roman Empire in the 5th, 6th century. Are professional schools emblematic of the toxic capitalism within our system? Has the 'elite' schools safe from this toxicity? I say 'no'.

thoughts?
we did a similar experiment in my high school civic/government class. I remember that not many people knew who our vice-president or secretary of state was, and many thought the capital of NY was Manhattan. Ridiculous.

p.s. we even had someone thought there was 51 states b/c during a beauty pageant, there was 51 contestants - including D.C. go figure...
 

Therapist4Chnge

Neuropsych Ninja Faculty
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Oct 7, 2006
21,575
2,571
The Beach
Status
Psychologist
socialcog: I don't mind you citing stats.....you just can't re-post journal articles, protected information, etc. (I don't recall the issue, but water under the bridge).
 

cara susanna

10+ Year Member
Feb 10, 2008
5,581
1,849
Midwest
Status
Psychologist
I'm so tired of people comparing the USA to the Roman Empire. Totally different situation.
 

Wildcat06

10+ Year Member
Mar 2, 2009
384
1
Status
Psychology Student
So I am reading this book, The Twilight of American Culture--by Morris Berman, and among many of the themes contained that contribute to the deterioration of our country is the collapse of American intelligence. He compiles a truckload of alarming stats from a variety of sources that supports his position. (T4C, you've warned me once about copyright related issues on this forum once before so I will be mindful of that in this post.)

Some of the data he cites, as alarming as it sounds, is simply too ridiculous to be fabricated. For example, 42% of Americans cannot locate Japan on a map. He states that Garrison Keillor (from NPR) survey revealed that even 15% of Americans cannot locate the US on a map. wtf?! Another stat includes that 40% of American adults didn't know that we were at war with Germany during WWII--that's about 70 million adults...think about it!! This goes on and on for pages.

The chapter then sheds light specifically on the deterioration of our public schools, interviews college graduates (undergrads and grad students) on the simplist of facts (ie: the boiling point of water, who designed the American flag, what is three squared?) and the answers were not only not close, but were humiliating.

Does anyone have any thoughts about this trend and how it may impact our training? Fulsome capitalism is, in short, the major contributing factor and which, as this book predicts, will contribute to the fall of this country, akin to the Roman Empire in the 5th, 6th century. Are professional schools emblematic of the toxic capitalism within our system? Has the 'elite' schools safe from this toxicity? I say 'no'.

thoughts?
Have you seen it Idiocracy? Awesome movie about this topic. (I have a soft spot for Mike Judge.)
 

JockNerd

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Mar 28, 2007
1,810
9
Status
Psychology Student
Does anyone have any thoughts about this trend and how it may impact our training? Fulsome capitalism is, in short, the major contributing factor and which, as this book predicts, will contribute to the fall of this country, akin to the Roman Empire in the 5th, 6th century. Are professional schools emblematic of the toxic capitalism within our system? Has the 'elite' schools safe from this toxicity? I say 'no'.

thoughts?
Well, though, having a stupid, uneducated public that's saddled with debt and in fear of getting sick or fired is very beneficial to most of the people who run the US, who are quite happy to steal money from the working and middle classes, kick them in the face, buy a yacht, and leave the next generation with an empty smoking husk of a planet.

In the same way, I'm sure professional school admins who take on massive cohorts couldn't give a damn about the future of the profession.
 

socialcog

Neuropsychology predoctoral intern
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Aug 17, 2007
425
35
Status
Psychology Student
Have you seen it Idiocracy? Awesome movie about this topic. (I have a soft spot for Mike Judge.)
I haven't. I will have to check that out. Thanks.

I'm so tired of people comparing the USA to the Roman Empire. Totally different situation.
Interesting. Totally different? How so?
 

cara susanna

10+ Year Member
Feb 10, 2008
5,581
1,849
Midwest
Status
Psychologist
There are a lot of differences, but mainly it's that the USA doesn't rely on overtaxing conquered territory and slave labor for its economy. Lost revenue from Roman territories taken by the barbarians, high costs for maintaining Rome and keeping up its defense, civil wars throughout their conquered territories leading to a loss of respect for Roman law, a thinly-spread and increasingly weak army, and a growing anger from the middle class who had to shoulder all the financial burden contributed to its downfall. Not to mention a series of emperors who were often deposed whenever someone else (namely, the army) found someone they liked better. Many of Rome's emperors near the end were also terrible. I mean, there are some presidents I dislike, but none compare to the bad Roman ones IMO.
 
Last edited:

Quynh2007

the oracle of destiny
10+ Year Member
Jul 16, 2004
710
3
Status
Psychology Student
There are a lot of differences, but mainly it's that the USA doesn't rely on overtaxing conquered territory and slave labor for its economy. Lost revenue from Roman territories taken by the barbarians, high costs for maintaining Rome and keeping up its defense, civil wars throughout their conquered territories leading to a loss of respect for Roman law, a thinly-spread and increasingly weak army, and a growing anger from the middle class who had to shoulder all the financial burden contributed to its downfall. Not to mention a series of emperors who were often deposed whenever someone else (namely, the army) found someone they liked better. Many of Rome's emperors near the end were also terrible. I mean, there are some presidents I dislike, but none compare to the bad Roman ones IMO.
I think we have an interesting check and balance, where socially/economically/politically it cycles (or pendulum swings) every few years or so, so that it doesn't go one extreme too much too fast.
 

cara susanna

10+ Year Member
Feb 10, 2008
5,581
1,849
Midwest
Status
Psychologist
Yeah, the government structures are just so completely different. After Julius Caesar, Rome was essentially despotism. The US government was formed with certain precautions in mind to minimize that kind of fate.

But, um, on topic: I think the problem is that nowadays people think that they are entitled to be and get whatever they want. Not that self-esteem and encouragement are bad, but some people just don't have certain talents and abilities and our currently society seems to try to ignore that fact.
 

futurepsydoc

10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Jun 9, 2008
200
19
Status
Psychology Student
I find this thread intriguing and frustrating. Please let me explain.

On the one hand, I agree with the need to protect the quality of our profession. We should hold colleagues to a certain level of excellence. When a practitioner is incompetent they reflect poorly on psychology and serve as terrible dimplomates for us all. Along these lines, there is nothing wrong with high standards, striving to be in the "elite," or wanting the best care when you are in need.

The APA, state licensing boards, masters programs (which, IMHO, need to be regulated), and doctoral programs (e.g., Ph.D., Psy.D., Ed.D.) need to consider the state of the field and adapt accordingly. Part of helping other people is ensuring that the system churns out helpful, competent, and capable therapists. This issue seems to be coming to head. We need to have more stringent checkpoints at multiple levels to prevent unprofessional, unqualified, and incompetent providers from practicing. If this thread was about medicine, I find it hard to believe that any poster would want some hack performing a transplant or spinal tap on them. As future psychologists, we clearly have the capacity to harm others. As such, we should absolutely demand more from the field as a whole. If not for ourselves, FOR OUR PATIENTS. I am in favor of increasing the standards for entry into programs, internship, and licensure.

Having said that, I find the tone and distaste for professional students to be atrocious. While I loathe the current APPIC process, the match numbers, managed care in general, and the sheer saturation of psychologists in the field, it is not the professional students fault!!!! They are striving to reach their goals and are succeeding in doing so. God bless em. I am sure many of them are good therapists. Thats not to say they all are. Some will be horrible. But, the same holds true for fully funded, ivory tour, Ph.D. students. A great many are awesome practitioners, a good number are terrible. A slammin vita, GRE scores, and LORs do not equal clinical acumen.

Honestly, if you want something done about these issues, contact the APA, write an article, form an organization or special interest group, create a loboby and address the licensing boards, get involved with ABCT or some other organization. But, please, respect your fellow colleagues. You are training to be a psychologist, ACT LIKE IT. Be respectful, open, and collegial.
 

TenaciousGirl

10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Apr 10, 2009
263
0
Status
Psychologist
I find this thread intriguing and frustrating. Please let me explain.

On the one hand, I agree with the need to protect the quality of our profession. We should hold colleagues to a certain level of excellence. When a practitioner is incompetent they reflect poorly on psychology and serve as terrible dimplomates for us all. Along these lines, there is nothing wrong with high standards, striving to be in the "elite," or wanting the best care when you are in need.

The APA, state licensing boards, masters programs (which, IMHO, need to be regulated), and doctoral programs (e.g., Ph.D., Psy.D., Ed.D.) need to consider the state of the field and adapt accordingly. Part of helping other people is ensuring that the system churns out helpful, competent, and capable therapists. This issue seems to be coming to head. We need to have more stringent checkpoints at multiple levels to prevent unprofessional, unqualified, and incompetent providers from practicing. If this thread was about medicine, I find it hard to believe that any poster would want some hack performing a transplant or spinal tap on them. As future psychologists, we clearly have the capacity to harm others. As such, we should absolutely demand more from the field as a whole. If not for ourselves, FOR OUR PATIENTS. I am in favor of increasing the standards for entry into programs, internship, and licensure.

Having said that, I find the tone and distaste for professional students to be atrocious. While I loathe the current APPIC process, the match numbers, managed care in general, and the sheer saturation of psychologists in the field, it is not the professional students fault!!!! They are striving to reach their goals and are succeeding in doing so. God bless em. I am sure many of them are good therapists. Thats not to say they all are. Some will be horrible. But, the same holds true for fully funded, ivory tour, Ph.D. students. A great many are awesome practitioners, a good number are terrible. A slammin vita, GRE scores, and LORs do not equal clinical acumen.

Honestly, if you want something done about these issues, contact the APA, write an article, form an organization or special interest group, create a loboby and address the licensing boards, get involved with ABCT or some other organization. But, please, respect your fellow colleagues. You are training to be a psychologist, ACT LIKE IT. Be respectful, open, and collegial.

Agree. Very well said.


I agree that we need to protect the quality of our profession. I have noticed that individuals who are not up to par often take themselves out of the game, so to speak. If someone isn't a good student or is at a subpar program, they probably won't get matched and they probably won't get a good internship. Even if someone is a good student at a fairly good program it doesn't mean they will be *successful*. There are a lot of things that factor into this whole situation. I guess I don't really worry about this very much because I know when I get out into the working world, chances are, the people I will be competing with will be well trained, hardworking, passionate, talented, intelligent, etc. In my grad program I have already started to see the almost-natural-selection-like process start to take effect. People who have what it takes rise to the top, and the people who don't start to fall to the bottom. Just my opinion.
 

Jon Snow

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,378
580
Status
I have noticed that individuals who are not up to par often take themselves out of the game, so to speak. If someone isn't a good student or is at a subpar program, they probably won't get matched and they probably won't get a good internship.
They aren't out of the game. They're just in increasingly low quality placements. They'll still be psychologists.

Well, though, having a stupid, uneducated public that's saddled with debt and in fear of getting sick or fired is very beneficial to most of the people who run the US, who are quite happy to steal money from the working and middle classes.
This, to me, is a driving factor (the latter end of the statement). It's not capitalism, in my opinion, that contributes to a lack of interest in education (and that's what is being demonstrated in these polls). Big government, a dependent society. . . these things are salient to me.
 

Jon Snow

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,378
580
Status
While I loathe the current APPIC process, the match numbers, managed care in general, and the sheer saturation of psychologists in the field, it is not the professional students fault!!!! They are striving to reach their goals and are succeeding in doing so.
No? I agree to an extent, but the professional schools don't exist without the students. Further, the increasing power of the professional schools within the field is due to the quick reproduction/expansion of the professional base. So, it is the students/former students that perpetuate these problems.
 

psychwhy

Simply disillusioned
10+ Year Member
Sep 15, 2006
248
1
New York
Status
Post Doc
futurepsychdoc and TenaciousGirl ... thank you, thank you, THANK YOU ... for finally demonstrating that it is possible to have a concern for your profession, acknowledge its limitations and challenges, without demonizing colleagues.

Ollie123 said:
If someone can't hack it, or life circumstances don't allow for "elite" training, there are plenty of ways to "help" that do not require a doctorate. I'm sick to death of everything in this country being dumbed down in the name of "fairness" and it happens across the board in education. Its no surprise our educational system is in shambles.
OMG -- please tell me your goal is to be a bench scientist. You want to help other people ... really?

"If someone can't hack it" or "life circumstances don't allow for elite (read: conventional) training"?

In one sentence Ollie you have perfectly encapsulated the essence of "elitism" -- the belief that one is better than others because their personal experience has been superior to theirs.

The fact that you seem to believe that "life experience" may not have deprived the world of superb doctors, scientists, artists, and yes, even psychologists simply because the opportunities you now enjoy were somehow (for WHATever reason) unavailable is stunningly dismissive and elitist!

Not everyone can go HS > BA > MA > PhD.
That doesn't mean they couldn't "hack" it.

And how in the world did we get from surviving the EPPP to the status of the profession to "some people can't find the US on the map" which proves professional schools are substandard??

While we're at it, let's explore for a moment the educational model of the prototypical "Jon Snow University". Its a Tier I school, with an extensive research program, a graduate arts & sciences department, medical school, law school -- the whole shebang.

The clinical psychology PhD program -- in order to provide its research based full-ride funding -- has 3 openings.

The medical school, on the other hand, has 100.

Please tell me you are going to dismiss the quality of the medical school applicants as being "dumbed down" because 97 more of them will be accepted than in the clinical PhD program. (And before you all get your transcripts in a bunch, remember, they have 4.0 GPAs and perfect/near perfect MCAT scores, just like you!)

And, of course, we want QUALIFIED and CAPABLE professionals.
But is a 3.85 GPA candidate really that much less "elite" than the 4.0?

This attitude that all professional schools are nothing more than diploma mills letting every Tom, Jane and Freud out there to be a psychologist has got to stop.

It demeans us all ... even the elitists among us.
 

Jon Snow

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,378
580
Status
In one sentence Ollie you have perfectly encapsulated the essence of "elitism" -- the belief that one is better than others because their personal experience has been superior to theirs.
Personal experience? Is that all it is? The entire argument to you is summed up by, "I went to school in this manner, everyone else should do the same, otherwise they are inferior?"

I think you are blatantly ignoring and distorting arguments/statements in order to demonize what you perceive to be adversaries. For example, take this quote from T4change,
I am sure some good candidates are unable to attend because of circumstances, but the standards should not be lowered to accommodate them, because there are other people who get in who shouldn't.

Much of what we do requires sacrifice. It isn't like we give up our first born, but it shouldn't be easy. There is FAR too much to learn already going full-time (before internship, post-doc, etc), so any diminishing of standards will only detract from learning.
What is he saying in your opinion?


The fact that you seem to believe that "life experience" may not have deprived the world of superb doctors, scientists, artists, and yes, even psychologists simply because the opportunities you now enjoy were somehow (for WHATever reason) unavailable is stunningly dismissive and elitist!
1) No one said that life experiences have not deprived the world of superb professionals (distortion from you. . . again). But, that doesn't mean you can take someone that, who otherwise might have been a great professional, from a life situation that has deprived them of needed prerequisites and throw them into medical school. Nor, does it mean that you can take someone who has the prerequisites and put them in a school with significantly different time and educational requirements and expect to get a par professional.

2) The conclusion statement is also not quite accurate in the context of the discussion. Further, he didn't even say what you are calling stunningly dismissive and elitist. The entire premise of your ire is conjured, a fabrication, a lie, untrue, prevarication, false, wrong, etc. . . as usual. It's hard to take you seriously because nearly every time you go off on one of these, "everyone here is an elitist, status-quo maintaining bastard" rants you do this. Feel free to attack and rail, by all means, but if would be more fun/interesting/productive if you actually bothered to argue with what's presented rather than flailing at windmills. If I argued like you, I'd now question your clinical abilities because you obviously must extend this tendency to distort to every facet of your professional and personal life. I might ask, "Do you even bother to listen to what your patients actually say?" But, alas, that would be stupid.


Not everyone can go HS > BA > MA > PhD.
That doesn't mean they couldn't "hack" it.
Of course not.
And how in the world did we get from surviving the EPPP to the status of the profession to "some people can't find the US on the map" which proves professional schools are substandard??
It's a tangent. I don't think people are arguing that because people suck at geography that professional schools are substandard.


The clinical psychology PhD program -- in order to provide its research based full-ride funding -- has 3 openings.

Usually, they have at least twice that many openings.
Please tell me you are going to dismiss the quality of the medical school applicants as being "dumbed down" because 97 more of them will be accepted than in the clinical PhD program. (And before you all get your transcripts in a bunch, remember, they have 4.0 GPAs and perfect/near perfect MCAT scores, just like you!)
Of course not. But, the overall pool of medical school applicants is rather superior to the overall pool of psychology applicants. Further, medical schools ARE generally at high quality universities, whereas the Argosys of the world are. . .. not.

That SOME professional schools are nothing more than diploma mills letting every Tom, Jane and Freud out there to be a psychologist has got to stop.

It demeans us all
I agree :)
 
Last edited:

Jon Snow

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,378
580
Status
Further comment on capitalism. . ..

One might see the existence of professional schools as a result of capitalism (supply and demand for the service professional schools provide) and the enabling loan system. However, the loan system is partially a product of government intervention. There are positive and negative effects for this. On one hand, there is unprecedented educational access in this country. On the other hand, there are some exploitative situations in terms of cost and quality of those educational opportunities. . . and further, because of differences in demand characteristics (who is the "customer?") there is an apparent quality problem with the student as well.
 

Jon Snow

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,378
580
Status
I am in favor of increasing the standards for entry into programs, internship, and licensure. . . it is not the professional students fault!!!! They are striving to reach their goals and are succeeding in doing so. God bless em. I am sure many of them are good therapists. Thats not to say they all are. Some will be horrible. But, the same holds true for fully funded, ivory tour, Ph.D. students. A great many are awesome practitioners, a good number are terrible. A slammin vita, GRE scores, and LORs do not equal clinical acumen.

Why do you believe that we should increase standards of entry into programs, internship, and licensure if you think the same ratio of good to bad professionals exists regardless of standards?
 

cara susanna

10+ Year Member
Feb 10, 2008
5,581
1,849
Midwest
Status
Psychologist
I think professional schools are just not a good decision because they charge so much money that IMO does not give an education on the level the person paid for. For the tuition they require, they should be having top internship match rates, not the bottom of the barrel.

Of course, I do not think these schools should be shut down because I am a free market person. What would be ideal is if people stop giving them business; sadly, that will probably never happen. I suppose loss of APA accreditation would work as well.
 

psychmama

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Aug 14, 2008
1,179
2
NYC Area
Status
Psychologist
I think professional schools are just not a good decision because they charge so much money that IMO does not give an education on the level the person paid for. For the tuition they require, they should be having top internship match rates, not the bottom of the barrel.

Of course, I do not think these schools should be shut down because I am a free market person. What would be ideal is if people stop giving them business; sadly, that will probably never happen. I suppose loss of APA accreditation would work as well.

If a professional school is shown to provide sub-par preparation of students, I'm for yanking their accreditation. On the other hand, it does seem to me that a lot of people who have the view that professional schools are sub-par don't attend them. I'm not arguing that all programs are the same and there should be no standards. However, there's a fine line between protecting the profession and unfounded snobbery.

I think APA should get more involved in assessing the accreditation process. Let the facts determine the outcome of the professional schools. If they can cut it, they stay accredited. If not, I say "shape up or ship out.":thumbup:
 

Ollie123

10+ Year Member
Feb 19, 2007
4,797
1,357
Status
Psychology Student
psychwhy, you have once again proven my point by demonstrating your clear inability to even comprehend the discussion, let alone contribute something worthwhile to it. Keep the straw men coming. Just don't expect me to waste my time addressing them.
 
Jul 13, 2009
610
4
Status
Psychology Student
I think it is safe to say that Rome did not fall for any one particular reason. Likewise, the decline of America is the result of a lot of factors. We, like Rome, consume far more than we produce. In my opinion, the military-industrial state which has been created since WW2, and the empire being maintained overseas (800+ foreign military bases throughout the world) is bankrupting us at home (both economically, morally, and politically). We are supposedly a democracy, yet our representative government won't substantially investigate clear deception and lies that led to the death of thousands of Americans, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians (Iraqis), and the plundering of hundreds of billions and soon to be trillions of dollars. What kind of grand democracy is that?

I enjoy history/political discussions, but isn't this a psych forum?

Regarding the field being "washed down" I often wonder how difficult things we do truly are. For example, we have people trained for years to provide therapy in various forms, yet masters trained individuals perform just as well or better than the supposedly well trained doctoral level psychologist. Perhaps in aspiring to our career paths, we are truly plebiscites just aspiring to be elitists?

Yeah, the government structures are just so completely different. After Julius Caesar, Rome was essentially despotism. The US government was formed with certain precautions in mind to minimize that kind of fate.

But, um, on topic: I think the problem is that nowadays people think that they are entitled to be and get whatever they want. Not that self-esteem and encouragement are bad, but some people just don't have certain talents and abilities and our currently society seems to try to ignore that fact.
 

cara susanna

10+ Year Member
Feb 10, 2008
5,581
1,849
Midwest
Status
Psychologist
aagman: Yes it is, which is why I tried to steer back on-topic. We'll have to save a discussion of whether or not the US is like the Roman Empire for another place. ;)

psychmama: I'm talking strictly internship match rates, really. I can't judge the quality of education when, like you said, I don't attend said program.
 

Jon Snow

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,378
580
Status
n my opinion, the military-industrial state which has been created since WW2, and the empire being maintained overseas (800+ foreign military bases throughout the world) is bankrupting us at home (both economically, morally, and politically).
Economically, at least, that's not a sustainable argument. Military bases do not an empire make. Over 50% of our yearly budget goes to Social Security, Medicare/medicaid, and interest. That's not counting the rest of our social programs. Remind me again, what's bankrupting us at home?

We are supposedly a democracy, yet our representative government won't substantially investigate clear deception and lies that led to the death of thousands of Americans, hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians (Iraqis), and the plundering of hundreds of billions and soon to be trillions of dollars. What kind of grand democracy is that?
Clear deception? To whom? We (current regime) are plundering trillions of dollars at home. . . Democracies crash this way. "A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."
- George Bernard Shaw

Class warfare is our biggest enemy. Plundering the middle class to pay for social programs and fund central government control of our lives is how you kill the economy. Killing the economy, along with said central control, is how you eliminate freedom. It is the best path to tyranny.


That's pretty much the democratic party platform, is it not? It's the handout party versus the god party. . . and that is democracy. The thing is, we were never supposed to be a democracy, but a representative republic built on libertarian principles. The real robbery in this country is the central consolidation of power. It started long ago, but has really picked up steam recently.

For example, we have people trained for years to provide therapy in various forms, yet masters trained individuals perform just as well or better than the supposedly well trained doctoral level psychologist.

Outcome measures/studies are difficult things. How do you fund them? What do you choose as your metric? And so on. We could say the same thing of many professions including various medical specialties. For supportive therapies, I agree. A masters, an AA degree, maybe even a high school diploma are just fine.
 
Last edited:

psytudent

Member
10+ Year Member
Nov 3, 2007
25
0
Status
Psychologist
A very lively discussion, but I agree, let's stay on topic.

Perhaps it is worth considering whether the discrepancy in APA internship match rates between PsyD and PhD students is based purely on skill and competency, or if other factors contribute to the numbers, namely old-fashioned negative bias, lack of initiative/funding for certain sites to petition for APA approved status, etc. Let's also keep in mind that a certain percentage (although I'm sure only nominal) of APA-approved internship sites are moderatly to heavily research-oriented, and therefore might not attract PsyD applicants who are pursuing a more focused clinical route
 

JockNerd

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Mar 28, 2007
1,810
9
Status
Psychology Student
That's pretty much the democratic party platform, is it not? It's the handout party versus the god party. . . and that is democracy.
Well the republicans and democrats both believe in handouts. I'd say without hyperbole that both parties are staunch socialists. It's just that they give money to people who are already rich.



(Except Ron Paul)


EDIT: Yeah, sure, back on topic.



Ron Paul 2012.
 
Last edited:

Jon Snow

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,378
580
Status
Well the republicans and democrats both believe in handouts. I'd say without hyperbole that both parties are staunch socialists. It's just that they give money to people who are already rich.
I guess it depends on your definition of handout, but yes, I agree both are liberal with their redistribution of wealth policies. I'm not sure I agree they really differ on their treatment of the very rich.



(Except Ron Paul)
- Long live Ron Paul!

edit: Good point to keep this on topic. . . please ignore.
 
Last edited:

cara susanna

10+ Year Member
Feb 10, 2008
5,581
1,849
Midwest
Status
Psychologist
Sorry guys, it's my fault the discussion started.
 

Ollie123

10+ Year Member
Feb 19, 2007
4,797
1,357
Status
Psychology Student
A very lively discussion, but I agree, let's stay on topic.

Perhaps it is worth considering whether the discrepancy in APA internship match rates between PsyD and PhD students is based purely on skill and competency, or if other factors contribute to the numbers, namely old-fashioned negative bias, lack of initiative/funding for certain sites to petition for APA approved status, etc. Let's also keep in mind that a certain percentage (although I'm sure only nominal) of APA-approved internship sites are moderatly to heavily research-oriented, and therefore might not attract PsyD applicants who are pursuing a more focused clinical route
All valid points, though I'd point out there are at least as many (probably far more) that will not be attractive to someone research-oriented as there are internships that won't be attractive to someone clinically-oriented.

There are clearly a ton of factors that go into internship placement, so its obvious important not to be too reductionist. However, along the same lines, I think its important to keep in mind that arguments are not based solely off internship placement. I won't speak for others, but I personally would put much less stock in it if we just had a single piece of evidence. However, everything we can measure appears convergent, and anecdotal evidence seems to support it as well. These measures are obviously imperfect, but when all signs are pointing in the same direction it becomes hard to ignore.
 

psychwhy

Simply disillusioned
10+ Year Member
Sep 15, 2006
248
1
New York
Status
Post Doc
psychwhy, you have once again proven my point by demonstrating your clear inability to even comprehend the discussion, let alone contribute something worthwhile to it. Keep the straw men coming. Just don't expect me to waste my time addressing them.
Spoken like a true elitist ... again!
I'm sorry, who's proving whose point?

I SO look forward to the day when I find you in one of my classes!
I bet you'd be the first one lining up to complain to the dean because I was "mean" to you after insisting you cease your ignorant bloviation and actually respond thoughtfully and substantively to what is being said.

Or you could just drop the class because having to move past sound-bite rhetoric is just too difficult!
 

TenaciousGirl

10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Apr 10, 2009
263
0
Status
Psychologist
They aren't out of the game. They're just in increasingly low quality placements. They'll still be psychologists.
.

This exists in all professions ... even in medicine. Ever heard of a doc in a box? This aspect of underachieving low quality professionals will always exist.
 

TenaciousGirl

10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Apr 10, 2009
263
0
Status
Psychologist
A very lively discussion, but I agree, let's stay on topic.

Perhaps it is worth considering whether the discrepancy in APA internship match rates between PsyD and PhD students is based purely on skill and competency, or if other factors contribute to the numbers, namely old-fashioned negative bias, lack of initiative/funding for certain sites to petition for APA approved status, etc. Let's also keep in mind that a certain percentage (although I'm sure only nominal) of APA-approved internship sites are moderatly to heavily research-oriented, and therefore might not attract PsyD applicants who are pursuing a more focused clinical route
good point. thanks.
 

psychwhy

Simply disillusioned
10+ Year Member
Sep 15, 2006
248
1
New York
Status
Post Doc
Jon,

How can you so utterly, blatantly prooftext my response while accusing me of doing the same thing?

Jon Snow said:
That SOME professional schools are nothing more than diploma mills letting every Tom, Jane and Freud out there to be a psychologist has got to stop.

It demeans us all

I agree
Except, what I said was ... "The ATTITUDE that all professional schools ... "

This sort of manpulative editing is precisely the problem and illustrative of your tendency to skew/misstate other's comments.

Sorry if having that pointed out offends your sensibilities. But it is rather tiresome to be accused of things you have just done yourself.

Regardless, it is more than apparent your mind is made up ... you have not changed your tone or message on this board in the 2+ years I have been a member.

Ultmately, it appears we are the matter and anti-matter of the SDN psych board.

Beyond finishing my degree and working in the field, I have actually collaborated with national and state professional associations and lobbied elected officials regarding issues related to the profession -- all after researching the pertinent information.

What have you done to advance/improve the profession beyond bloviate on this board?
 

Therapist4Chnge

Neuropsych Ninja Faculty
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Oct 7, 2006
21,575
2,571
The Beach
Status
Psychologist
Beyond finishing my degree and working in the field, I have actually collaborated with national and state professional associations and lobbied elected officials regarding issues related to the profession -- all after researching the pertinent information.

What have you done to advance/improve the profession beyond bloviate on this board?
*MOD NOTE: Please stay on topic and not make this personal.*
 

Jon Snow

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,378
580
Status
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jon,

How can you so utterly, blatantly prooftext my response while accusing me of doing the same thing?
That was the joke. . .hence the smile.


you have not changed your tone or message on this board in the 2+ years I have been a member.
Oh come on, I'm much nicer now than I was before.
What have you done to advance/improve the profession beyond bloviate on this board?
Bloviate. . . funny.

Published a few articles, various CME presentations, invited talks here or there, you know. . . the usual.
 
Last edited:

psytudent

Member
10+ Year Member
Nov 3, 2007
25
0
Status
Psychologist
All valid points, though I'd point out there are at least as many (probably far more) that will not be attractive to someone research-oriented as there are internships that won't be attractive to someone clinically-oriented.
Good point, however whereas I am confident that nearly 100% of those internships that include a serious research element are APA approved, the same cannot be said about every focused clinical placement to which a research-oriented applicant chooses not to apply. In any event, I do agree that APA internship match rates should not be the only benchmark in this debate, but I am simply cautioning, as you pointed out, that several people on this board rely on convenient reductionism to make their case.

As I have made clear in other threads, I am a staunch advocate for tighter admission standards in professional schools, and think that their needs to be external pressure placed on these institutions to trim the fat, so to speak. How this can be effectively accomplished is a much bigger question - a question, by the way, that I have not really seen posed in any serious manner. Instead, I observe people, both on SDN and elsewhere, bemoan the status quo of American psychology, buttressing their acrid complaints with hyper-rational arguments - none of them the least constructive.

As far as anyone is aware, is there currently any concerted political effort, even if it's a minority effort, within APA to remedy these problems, or are we just cantankerous elitists or defensive apologetics?
 

psychmama

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Aug 14, 2008
1,179
2
NYC Area
Status
Psychologist


As far as anyone is aware, is there currently any concerted political effort, even if it's a minority effort, within APA to remedy these problems, or are we just cantankerous elitists or defensive apologetics?
Excellent question. I was wondering the same thing? Does anyone know what's being done, if anything, within APA or elsewhere?:confused:
 

Jon Snow

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Aug 5, 2005
3,378
580
Status
Spoken like a true elitist ... again!
I'm sorry, who's proving whose point?

I SO look forward to the day when I find you in one of my classes!
I bet you'd be the first one lining up to complain to the dean because I was "mean" to you after insisting you cease your ignorant bloviation and actually respond thoughtfully and substantively to what is being said.

Or you could just drop the class because having to move past sound-bite rhetoric is just too difficult!
Now, I'm going to try and not make this personal. But, let me point out that it is rare that anyone actually really bothers to attack you, but you're over here calling people ignorant, accusing people of arrogance, irrationality. . . bloviate is not a nice word. . . I understand you seem to be angry about the positions that posters like Ollie and I have taken. . . hell, you've even repeatedly gone after T4Change, who makes an effort not to offend anyone, just because he doesn't agree that online education is good for the field. People aren't expressing these opinions to be jerks. Certainly, t4change isn't anywhere near as inflammatory as I have been in the past with my references to professional schools as devry-like, and my talk of inferior resources, product, etc. . . However, even I'm not saying, "Oh, look at that idiot, Psychwhy. He went to an online program. Ha, ha, ha. Moron." The discussions are usually about what's good for the field and the student and they are presented that way, for the most part.
 

futureapppsy2

Assistant professor
Moderator
Gold Donor
10+ Year Member
Dec 25, 2008
5,296
1,240
For example, 42% of Americans cannot locate Japan on a map. He states that Garrison Keillor (from NPR) survey revealed that even 15% of Americans cannot locate the US on a map
"It took the children twenty minutes to locate Canada on the map."

"Oh, Marge, anyone can miss Canada, all tucked away down there!"

(Sorry--I love that quote series!)

On topic:

I think with psych PhD admissions, once you get past the initial cuts, you aren't really getting "Applicant X is phenomenally better than applicant Y"--you're getting "Applicant X has a slightly better research match/is a slightly better writer/has slightly more glowing LORs/has an applicant that was read on a day where the POI was in a better mood (one of my advisors/recommenders will freely admit that admissions isn't streamlined or anywhere near perfect--you can have a perfect app and be a perfect research match, but if your app is read the day your POI is sick/ihas had dog die/had a bad encounter with a student/etc., you may not get that interview, regardless). "

I really doubt there is that huge of difference between those who are interviewed and wait listed and those who are interviewed and admitted. When you get to the final crop(s) of applicants, you are really choosing from among the best, and that can get hard to differentiate well at that level, IMO. So, an applicant who doesn't get admitted may be almost, or even just, as awesome as one who did, just a little less glowing or a little less lucky.
 

Ollie123

10+ Year Member
Feb 19, 2007
4,797
1,357
Status
Psychology Student
Excellent question. I was wondering the same thing? Does anyone know what's being done, if anything, within APA or elsewhere?:confused:
I know discussion of professional schools has been tossed around in the discussion of resolving the internship issues - namely the responsibility of schools when it comes time for internship. What has or will come of it, I have absolutely no idea. I heard unsubstantiated rumors (possibly on this board) that lawyers were involved since some of what APA was proposing to add accountability violated various fair trade regulations. That could be complete BS though given I've never seen any official sources regarding it, so take it with a grain of salt.

Beyond that I've heard very little, unless you count the APCS (or whatever organization they have been subsumed under - APS, APA Div. 12, SSCP - I can't figure out where the exact boundaries lie) movement for a separate accreditation system since the APA seems to be moving further away from what many of us support. I've heard very little from it lately, though the webpage was finally updated. It certainly lacks the political clout of APA right now, and isn't even that widely known, but who knows what the future will bring. Ideally, I'd like to see them gain enough recognition and political standing that the involved schools can either withdraw from the APA system, or have it be recognized as an enhanced credential that supercedes APA (think board-certification for schools). I think its getting towards the latter, but its a long ways off from having the widespread recognition and political sway to really take off.
 
Last edited:

Minnesotan4PsyD

10+ Year Member
Apr 1, 2009
35
0
Kentucky
Status
That's pretty much the democratic party platform, is it not? It's the handout party versus the god party. . . and that is democracy. The thing is, we were never supposed to be a democracy, but a representative republic built on libertarian principles. The real robbery in this country is the central consolidation of power. It started long ago, but has really picked up steam recently.

QUOTE]

You do realize that the United States is both a democracy AND a republic, yes?

Sorry, I just wanted to get that in. :p
 

Therapist4Chnge

Neuropsych Ninja Faculty
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Oct 7, 2006
21,575
2,571
The Beach
Status
Psychologist

As I have made clear in other threads, I am a staunch advocate for tighter admission standards in professional schools, and think that their needs to be external pressure placed on these institutions to trim the fat, so to speak. How this can be effectively accomplished is a much bigger question - a question
I've proposed only allowing programs to offer as many spots as they can consistently place (average over the previous 4 years?). According to prior match statistics, the majority of unmatched applicants come from a handful of programs, so this should greatly reduce chronic offenders. The 4 years average should account decently for a bad year, and the majority of programs wouldn't see a change in their enrollment. If a program can show a history of placements, they can add spots in a more responsible manner.

I also believe that since internship is required for licensure, programs should be held more accountable for their placement rates, and thus their accreditation status should require a certain level of match success. While there is some variability in student restrictions (geographic), I don't believe they would be a major impact on the overall match numbers.


As far as anyone is aware, is there currently any concerted political effort, even if it's a minority effort, within APA to remedy these problems, or are we just cantankerous elitists or defensive apologetics?
Formerly I did some consulting work with a number of very large associations, and almost without exception the largest revenue stream for these organizations were:

1. Membership Dues
2. Training / Seminars
3. Publications
4. Networking / Partnership agreements

The majority of psychologists are not members of the APA, and there are now alternative organizations fighting for their membership. So how does APA increase membership? Increase member services (costs $), recruit more aggressively (costs $), offer discounted renewals (costs $), or increase the # of fish in the pool (makes $!)?

To complicate things, there are a group of long-standing members that have reduced membership fees, which also allows them to join as many divisions as they'd like (and vote). Considering many members don't vote, those "free" votes add up. So it is no wonder that the APA leadership is composed mostly of a handful of individuals that swap positions. The leadership is also largely academic, which contributes to the lip service that most private practice related issues receive.
 

Therapist4Chnge

Neuropsych Ninja Faculty
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Oct 7, 2006
21,575
2,571
The Beach
Status
Psychologist
The discussions are usually about what's good for the field and the student and they are presented that way, for the most part.
This is why I present the pros/cons of various training models. I admit my bias up front, but my critiques are about the training model, and not individuals.

As for JS's posting, he is far more friendly than in previous years; I think he has softened with age. :D