PhD/PsyD Enrolled in the PsyD online program: Looking for a study partner

[psych.meout]

What's a WAIS?

Are you missing /s?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PsyDr]

For those curious: here’s what happens IF you complete an online program, and IF you get an internship, and IF you get a postdoc to get licensed, and IF you pass the EPPP, and IF you get licensed, and IF you get a job. The second you get a board complaint, everyone immediately points out that your training is BS, so now you have to try to defend your actions that caused the board complaint AND your education. Hint: they will absolutely bring up that you cut corners and training as evidence that you didn’t do your due diligence in practice. In lawsuits, you’ll have more of the same. And people like me get paid to make fun of you, using terms like “not a real psychologist”. And that type of training really prevents you from more visible types of work, because if you put your head up too high, it’ll all come to light.

I have an affidavit around here somewhere which has all of those plays. That person ended up losing all their business and “retiring” all of the sudden.

 

[deleted75966]

Yeah. No research has been published showing that life coaches with HS degrees are less effective than PsyDs at administering DBT. For that matter, no studies have been published showing that 9th grade dropouts are less effective than physicians at conducting a neurological evaluation.

Oh, and no studies have been published demonstrating that someone with a GED and experience as a Walmart greeter is less proficient than a public defender with a JD from Stetson.

 

[LurkerNow]

Are you missing /s?

Yeah, I'm messing with you.

 

[jdawg2017]

Yeah. No research has been published showing that life coaches with HS degrees are less effective than PsyDs at administering DBT. For that matter, no studies have been published showing that 9th grade dropouts are less effective than physicians at conducting a neurological evaluation.

Oh, and no studies have been published demonstrating that someone with a GED and experience as a Walmart greeter is less proficient than a public defender with a JD from Stetson.

This comment wins the internet.

I still think the most logical reason why online training is iffy is that psychologists are mental healthcare providers. In the same way I would not feel comfortable if members of my healthcare team trained in an online program, I would not be comfortable getting therapy / assessment from a psychologist who trained in an online program, knowing that B&M schools exist that require significant personal investment. B&M schools have significant investment in face-to-face (F-to-F) mentoring of their trainees, especially during their first internal practicum, which prepares for external pracs, internship, and beyond. In online programs, I am unaware (but seriously doubt) significant F-to-F investment in clinical skills exists before practica begin.

As an aside, I am curious what others think about the plethora of online MSW/LMFT programs. If we want to ensure providers are skilled via F-to-F supervision, do these programs violate that model? Or do master's level degrees not need as much rigor? I am honestly curious what more experienced folks think and am playing devil's advocate here, as folks I know getting these degrees appreciate the flexibility it gives them and argue it is not substantially different than F-to-F training models in these professions.

 

[Mindfulpsych22]

And sure- I’ll bite. For the sake of everyone’s enlightenment- please post a link to the studies that show that clinicians who get on-line doctorates practice evidence based therapies at equivalent rates and get outcomes across diagnoses and settings that are equivalent to those who get doctorates from APA accredited B&M programs.

Ah, to my knowledge, no research has compared the treatment outcomes of B&M students vs online students, so that remains an open question. My argument is that b&m phds have no evidence to claim treatment outcome superiority over clinicians with any other type or level of training, including online psyd trainees. For example, I've never seen any evidence that phd's produce better outcomes than master's level clinicians. I've seen studies finding no differences, but none that found superior outcomes for psychologists. If you know of any, I'd sure love to see them because I've scoured the databases and have come up dry.

But I have found the following studies, basically reviews of the relevant literature:

After a review of the relevant literature comparing the effect sizes of amount and type of training, Beutler et al., (2004) concluded that "no clear pattern of effects were observable..." (p. 239).

After his review, uber-psychotherapy outcome researcher (and my hero) Wampold (2017, p. 59) stated that "Generally...the profession of the therapist (e.g. psychology, psychiatry, social work, professional counseling) does not predict outcome."

Miller, Hubble and Chow (2018) take it even further after their review in challenging the effects of rigorous psychotherapy training by concluding that "Study after study reveals that degreed professionals perform no better than students" (p. 2).

Last, but not least, in the most pointed critique of psychologist training, Malouff (2011) reviewed the literature and succinctly concluded that "Overall research findings provide little support for the idea that typical professional training of psychologists leads to better outcomes for their psychotherapy clients" (p. 29). Ouch! Hey Malouff, couldn't you soften it at least a little bit? But no--he then piles on with "There appears to be no evidence to suggest that coursework and research completion, which make up a great deal of required psychology training, have any value to future psychotherapy clients of the students" (p. 30). I also recommend Ladany's (2007) entertaining review of the same topic. His article had me laughing out loud.

None of this is to say that the above conclusions are the final word on the matter. Yet, I haven't found any reviews of the outcome literature (or any individual studies for that matter) arguing for superior outcomes for psychologists. Yet, psychotherapy outcome research is messy and controversial. Moreover, research comparing outcomes of clinicians with different training backgrounds really hasn't been thoroughly investigated. On considering the "...dearth of research investigating client outcomes across counselor training levels...", Nyman et al., (2011) speculated that "It may be that researchers are loathe to face the possibility that the extensive efforts involved in educating graduate students to become licensed professionals results in no observable differences in client outcome" (p. 12).

Thus, although there is no research investigating outcomes of b&m vs online clinicians that I'm aware of, given the dreary findings comparing psychologists' outcomes with everybody else (e.g. paraprofessionals, students, master's level clinicians), what would be the evidentiary basis for claims that b&m psychologists generate superior treatment outcomes over primarily online-trained psychologists? Maybe the evidence will exist someday, but until it does, and in light of the above research findings, I'm skeptical of psychologists' claims of treatment outcome superiority over anybody. Like I said, if anyone here has any relevant outcome research to the contrary, I'd genuinely love to see it.

I really don't expect to persuade the minds of regular posters on this board; I'm not that naive. But for the many lurkers, and surely there are many, I hope to present a divergent viewpoint from the majority at SDN. Who knows, maybe I'll post again some day if they don't ban me from the site .

Beutler et al. (2004). Therapist Variables. In Bergin and Garfield's handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change, 5th ed.

Ladany, N. (2007). Does psychotherapy training matter? Maybe not. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 44(4), 392-396.

Malouff, J. (2012). The need for empirically supported psychology training standards. Psychotherapy in Australia, 18(3), 28-32

Miller, S. D., Hubble, M. A., & Chow, D. (2018). The question of expertise in psychotherapy. Journal of Expertise, 1(2), 121-129.

Nyman, S. J., Nafziger, M. A., & Smith, T. B. (2010). Client Outcomes Across Counselor Training Level Within a Multitiered Supervision Model. Journal of counseling and development, 88, 204-209.

Wampold, B. E. (2017). What should we practice? A contextual model (hey look! contextual model! get it?) for how psychotherapy works. In T. Rousmaniere, R. K. Goodyear, S. D. Miller, & B. E. Wampold (Eds.), The cycle of excellence: Using deliberate practice to improve supervision and training (pp. 49-67). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Again- huh? This seems like a bunch of straw man-arguments. None of us argued that "psychologists are superior" to other types of licensed professionals. Most of us regularly encourage people to attend reputable masters programs and believe that this is a fine path to becoming a competent clinician. Also most of us believe that there are serious holes in training is it is and that the field has significant room for improvement in our outcomes, so again, this is not what was being questioned.

So most of things you listed are articles in which other psychologists give their opinion and analysis of empirical studies and are not primary sources themselves. I'd be interested to know if you read the primary sources that they reference for their opinions? For example, if you look at the studies that Miller, Hubble, & Chow (2018) referenced following their assertion that "Study after study reveals that degreed professionals perform no better than students", one is a study in which they compared client ratings of things like therapeutic alliance and how helped clients felt after after a single session (all the therapists were graduate students) and found no differences in client ratings across therapist raining variables they looks at (which one would expect given they are all basically at the same training level). Two are review articles conducted by others (so not direct empirical comparison studies)." I would personally consider this pretty weak evidence for point they made. I also shy away from forming opinions off of other's literature reviews because I have not investigated the quality and strength of the study findings myself and a bias of the author could seriously impact this and which evidence they chose to include or discount.


I don't want the thread to get even more off-track so I'll leave it that we agree on the point that there are no direct comparison studies to answer the question I posed to you.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Cue flashbacks to training on the WAIS-R and having one's performance in administering it scrutinized by an evaluator/trainer with a clipboard (and your future) in their hand.

 

[deleted75966]

How about this. We set standards for practice for the field. These standards are based on a complicated set of variables inclusive of ethical practice, knowledge base, intelligence, practical skills, and continuing education. Outcomes studies comparing different standards of training are incredibly hard to execute. We, further, don’t really need them to conclude that it’s important to know neuroanatomy to be a good neuropsychologist or that psychometric knowledge is important for test selection and interpretation as examples. It is a failure of our maintenance of the field to allow substandard training models entry. We are bleeding in that regard. But, I see it as an ethical fight.

For the record, Online school = garbage pail. Psyd for me usually also, but I’ve encountered many exceptions to that and it depends on the context. It’s also half our field. So...

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

For what it's worth, in grad school (before I'd even got my master's while working on my doctorate) I served as a protocol therapist (cognitive therapy for depression) in a treatment outcome study along with social workers and psychiatrists. I had been trained by a guy (who was trained by Aaron Beck) to do cognitive therapy and I followed the protocol for cognitive therapy for depression (as did the social workers and psychiatrists). In this case, I would have been the person with a bachelor's degree going up against people with masters and doctoral (M.D.) degrees. We were all trained on the same protocol, scored for adherence on that protocol, and were treating a single disorder under controlled conditions and with a rarefied sample of patients (most had been screened out due to comorbidities).

I'd love to see a properly done study (or series) addressing the issue of whether a degree, or experience, or training matters. Take 500 patients presenting to a VA outpatient clinic and hand half of them off to a bachelors of social work with an online degree vs. a PhD clinical psychologist with 10+ years of clinical experience. That would be an interesting study.

 

[deleted106747]

For what it's worth, in grad school (before I'd even got my master's while working on my doctorate) I served as a protocol therapist (cognitive therapy for depression) in a treatment outcome study along with social workers and psychiatrists. I had been trained by a guy (who was trained by Aaron Beck) to do cognitive therapy and I followed the protocol for cognitive therapy for depression (as did the social workers and psychiatrists). In this case, I would have been the person with a bachelor's degree going up against people with masters and doctoral (M.D.) degrees. We were all trained on the same protocol, scored for adherence on that protocol, and were treating a single disorder under controlled conditions and with a rarefied sample of patients (most had been screened out due to comorbidities).

I'd love to see a properly done study (or series) addressing the issue of whether a degree, or experience, or training matters. Take 500 patients presenting to a VA outpatient clinic and hand half of them off to a bachelors of social work with an online degree vs. a PhD clinical psychologist with 10+ years of clinical experience. That would be an interesting study.

It would be interesting indeed.
My thought about these studies is that they are all psychotherapy focused. It is indeed possibly true that there is no difference - for psychotherapy. And I think psychotherapy should be broadly available to those who want/need it. But pychologists' place is in supervisory positions, program implementation positions, assessment, neuropsych assessment. Our training and background are more than psychotherapy alone.
As for the students, aren't they being supervised? That seems like a confound. Supervisors can actually provide their students with better interventions I think, at times, than in their own work because they get to think about it outside of the heat of the therapy moment.

 

[StellaB]

Yeah, I also don't understand the hyper-focus on psychotherapy, because all these studies Mindfulpsych22 posted confirms the idea that getting a master's degree from a brick and mortar school (from which one can easily obtain licensure / won't be laughed out of most jobs) is a FAR more prudent path if you want to do psychotherapy as a career. Psychologists do far more than psychotherapy. I don't do psychotherapy at all anymore. FWIW, I also do not understand why anyone goes to a B&M psychology doctoral program if their career plan is to do therapy. It just does not make sense to get the training in education, learning, child development, test construction, psychodiagnostics, assessment, research, program development, etc. if you have literally no plan to use it at all. I'd bet a lot of master's programs (LPC/MFT/even SW) have better therapy training than psychology programs, because that's almost their entire focus.

 

[cara susanna]

Yeah, I also don't understand the hyper-focus on psychotherapy, because all these studies Mindfulpsych22 posted confirms the idea that getting a master's degree from a brick and mortar school (from which one can easily obtain licensure / won't be laughed out of most jobs) is a FAR more prudent path if you want to do psychotherapy as a career. Psychologists do far more than psychotherapy. I don't do psychotherapy at all anymore. FWIW, I also do not understand why anyone goes to a B&M psychology doctoral program if their career plan is to do therapy. It just does not make sense to get the training in education, learning, child development, test construction, psychodiagnostics, assessment, research, program development, etc. if you have literally no plan to use it at all. I'd bet a lot of master's programs (LPC/MFT/even SW) have better therapy training than psychology programs, because that's almost their entire focus.

Can I ask what you do if it isn't psychotherapy? I'm always curious to hear about the options we have for our degree.

 

[StellaB]

Can I ask what you do if it isn't psychotherapy? I'm always curious to hear about the options we have for our degree.

Sure. I do clinical and forensic evaluations; almost exclusively forensics, and expert witness testimony.

 

[LurkerNow]

Again- huh? This seems like a bunch of straw man-arguments. None of us argued that "psychologists are superior" to other types of licensed professionals. Most of us regularly encourage people to attend reputable masters programs and believe that this is a fine path to becoming a competent clinician. Also most of us believe that there are serious holes in training is it is and that the field has significant room for improvement in our outcomes, so again, this is not what was being questioned.

So most of things you listed are articles in which other psychologists give their opinion and analysis of empirical studies and are not primary sources themselves. I'd be interested to know if you read the primary sources that they reference for their opinions? For example, if you look at the studies that Miller, Hubble, & Chow (2018) referenced following their assertion that "Study after study reveals that degreed professionals perform no better than students", one is a study in which they compared client ratings of things like therapeutic alliance and how helped clients felt after after a single session (all the therapists were graduate students) and found no differences in client ratings across therapist raining variables they looks at (which one would expect given they are all basically at the same training level). Two are review articles conducted by others (so not direct empirical comparison studies)." I would personally consider this pretty weak evidence for point they made. I also shy away from forming opinions off of other's literature reviews because I have not investigated the quality and strength of the study findings myself and a bias of the author could seriously impact this and which evidence they chose to include or discount.


I don't want the thread to get even more off-track so I'll leave it that we agree on the point that there are no direct comparison studies to answer the question I posed to you.
[/QUOTE]
1) my position is that there is no evidence to suggest that online degrees result in worse outcomes than b&m degrees. Given that b&m hasn't produced better outcomes than master's level clinicians (assuming Bruce Wampold's position is credible, and I believe it is, you may not), it is an open question whether b&m degrees produce better outcomes than online psyd degrees. For those online psyd students that already have a master's from a traditional program (like me), it can be assumed that their outcomes on the whole would approximate those of of b&m doctoral programs, since it is implausible that attending an online psyd degree would make their outcomes worse.

2) Your point regarding accessing primary sources is a good one. I have read some studies but not all the ones that form the basis for the researchers' conclusions. Yet, I don't think Miller et al's conclusions were based just on the studies they cited. Miller's repeated that position in numerous other papers and presentations. Additionally, when renowned researchers (e.g. Wampold/Scott Miller) dedicate their entire lives to studying therapy outcomes, I don't think it is fair to dismiss their findings out of hand because they don't conform to preexisting biases, especially when no other researchers have stepped forward to refute their findings. In fact, Michael Lambert, another giant in the tx outcome literature, has come out with the same position regarding students and different training levels obtaining roughly equivalent outcomes. Are they the final word? No, but not fair to dismiss out of hand, either.

So yes, we agree that there is no evidence making direct comparisons between b&m/onlinepsyd, but we each account for that reality quite differently.

I agree with everyone pointing out real world challenges for students with online psyd degrees. Yet, the claim that they obtain inferior outcomes lacks an evidentiary basis and appears weak in the context of other relevant outcome comparison findings.

I'm out and won't be back anytime soon. I need to get some work done.

 

[1010690]

Hi,

I thought over it a lot and want to do the online PsyD. But, I also want to be employed. Am sure about the work I will be putting in. Like you can see my post is about looking for a study partner. But, replies are way off.

Thanks a lot for your view.

Would you please give me some advice on prepping up for the PsyD? Books/portals/links/planning etc.
It shall be very helpful

OP, if you didn't already know it, you've just learned that there is a contingent of licensed psychologists that look down on online PsyD degress. Hmm, "look down" isn't strong enough of a description; They LOATHE online PsyD degrees with a fire and passion that is truly something to behold.

I am taking the same online PsyD path as you, but I have already worked out the details--I already have my post PsyD California internship and employment lined up. I am not worried that people here would toss my application in the trash--I am not seeking an internship/employment with their agency. Also, I couldn't care less if online bullies look down on me . I think it's funny, actually. That said, if it bothers you, then you should consider aborting your plans.

Should you pursue on online PsyD degree that isn't APA accredited? I wouldn't presume to tell you yes or no, because I don't know your situation. For me it was a no-brainer, but my situation is unique. It's safe to say I'm not your average online PsyD student. I do believe that many online PsyD students don't do their homework and then are surprised/blindsided to learn about the hurdles that await them down the road. My suggestion to you is to not totally ignore what people here say, but take it all with a grain of salt. Most importantly, talk to prospective internship sites/employers now to determine if they will accept your degree. Don't wait until you are halfway through with your program or later to find out that it's going to be a dead end. Any path is fraught with risks--know what the risks are with this one by reaching out to potential internship/employment sites now to make sure your degree won't be an obstacle. That is all.

I though

 

[WisNeuro]

Find a good, affordable home there in CA as you will likely not be licensable out of state.

 

[StellaB]

Again- huh? This seems like a bunch of straw man-arguments. None of us argued that "psychologists are superior" to other types of licensed professionals. Most of us regularly encourage people to attend reputable masters programs and believe that this is a fine path to becoming a competent clinician. Also most of us believe that there are serious holes in training is it is and that the field has significant room for improvement in our outcomes, so again, this is not what was being questioned.

So most of things you listed are articles in which other psychologists give their opinion and analysis of empirical studies and are not primary sources themselves. I'd be interested to know if you read the primary sources that they reference for their opinions? For example, if you look at the studies that Miller, Hubble, & Chow (2018) referenced following their assertion that "Study after study reveals that degreed professionals perform no better than students", one is a study in which they compared client ratings of things like therapeutic alliance and how helped clients felt after after a single session (all the therapists were graduate students) and found no differences in client ratings across therapist raining variables they looks at (which one would expect given they are all basically at the same training level). Two are review articles conducted by others (so not direct empirical comparison studies)." I would personally consider this pretty weak evidence for point they made. I also shy away from forming opinions off of other's literature reviews because I have not investigated the quality and strength of the study findings myself and a bias of the author could seriously impact this and which evidence they chose to include or discount.


I don't want the thread to get even more off-track so I'll leave it that we agree on the point that there are no direct comparison studies to answer the question I posed to you.

1) my position is that there is no evidence to suggest that online degrees result in worse outcomes than b&m degrees. Given that b&m hasn't produced better outcomes than master's level clinicians (assuming Bruce Wampold's position is credible, and I believe it is, you may not), it is an open question whether b&m degrees produce better outcomes than online psyd degrees. For those online psyd students that already have a master's from a traditional program (like me), it can be assumed that their outcomes on the whole would approximate those of of b&m doctoral programs, since it is implausible that attending an online psyd degree would make their outcomes worse.

2) Your point regarding accessing primary sources is a good one. I have read some studies but not all the ones that form the basis for the researchers' conclusions. Yet, I don't think Miller et al's conclusions were based just on the studies they cited. Miller's repeated that position in numerous other papers and presentations. Additionally, when renowned researchers (e.g. Wampold/Scott Miller) dedicate their entire lives to studying therapy outcomes, I don't think it is fair to dismiss their findings out of hand because they don't conform to preexisting biases, especially when no other researchers have stepped forward to refute their findings. In fact, Michael Lambert, another giant in the tx outcome literature, has come out with the same position regarding students and different training levels obtaining roughly equivalent outcomes. Are they the final word? No, but not fair to dismiss out of hand, either.

So yes, we agree that there is no evidence making direct comparisons between b&m/onlinepsyd, but we each account for that reality quite differently.

I agree with everyone pointing out real world challenges for students with online psyd degrees. Yet, the claim that they obtain inferior outcomes lacks an evidentiary basis and appears weak in the context of other relevant outcome comparison findings.

I'm out and won't be back anytime soon. I need to get some work done.

May I ask why you are pursuing this degree if you already have a master's degree? What doors do you expect this to open?

 

[1010690]

Psychology is a great field, however there are no shortcuts. Best case scenario is that you’ve been misled. Worst case scenario is you’ve been exploited and taken advantage of by a predatory program that knows full well that it has little to no chance of helping you meet your career goals. I’m truly sorry that this happened to you within the context of my field. Please- get out of this before you end up losing more money and time.

Short cut? To getting a license?
I dont think there is any such.
However, if you have gone through hardships of paying a huge debt and traveling 30 minutes to school or relocating to different location etc. That is a choice and also possibly a personal situation.

 

[StellaB]

Short cut? To getting a license?
I dont think there is any such.
However, if you have gone through hardships of paying a huge debt and traveling 30 minutes to school or relocating to different location etc. That is a choice and also possibly a personal situation.

Psychology is a science, and as such most serious psychologists relocated for graduate school, as they are nationally, and internationally competitive, and to attend the program with the specific training they were looking for. It's not a common degree. You do not just go to the local college to get a doctorate in psychology. Online programs and diploma mills have distorted the field, but make no mistake: most employers are aware of this. In the case of diploma mills such as Argosy (RIP), Alliant and their ilk: some graduates will be able to rise above and get a decent job. In the case of online programs, you will most likely struggle to even get enough hours to qualify to take the licensing exam in the first place, let alone the number of hours needed to complete the licensure process, and at the end of all of that, you will have difficulty getting a job. I don't know why anyone would sign up for such a process with their eyes open. These schools typically don't require GRE scores or any other pre-screening measures, because they don't care if you succeed, or even finish the program. They just want you to buy as many products (classes) as possible; consequences be damned. This is not how reputable programs operate.

 

[1010690]

Find a good, affordable home there in CA as you will likely not be licensable out of state.

May I ask why you are pursuing this degree if you already have a master's degree? What doors do you expect this to open?

I have a Masters from the UK. I have learnt psychotherapy. However, I often feel the need to have an profound understanding of the assessments. I want to be thorough in the areas I lack especially it is only 2 years since I am in California. Cutlural relevance for therapy and assessments also matter. Besides, jobs opportunities are far more for Psychologists compared to MFT.

 

[1010690]

It’s not bullying to give honest feedback as a professional in the field.

I’ll never understand why someone would want to get into this field with a degree that requires them to worry/wonder/inquire if it’s an obstacle or not.

At any rate, this thread will be interesting.

My post was to look for a study partner. The thread took is its most popular topic up. No one answered the thing that has been asked.

I can understand some are concerned. But, those that mock are Failed Psychologists in my view. Some throw corny smileys and have no interest in answering correctly... I can only truly see that the field is a mess of its own. Sad.

 

[StellaB]

I often feel the need to have an profound understanding of the assessments.

Besides, jobs opportunities are far more for Psychologists compared to MFT.

1 - you will not have a "profound understanding of the assessments" from an online program. Learning how to do assessment requires hands-on experience with assessment tools. It's not all interview; assessments also have moving pieces and you have to learn how to use them with clients/patients. As a non-psychologist, you cannot go out and buy these tools. The school will expect you to find your own practica, and it is very unlikely you will find one that will do assessment, let alone one that will train you in this, let alone one that will have an adequate variety of assessment tools for base-level training. It can be hard to find good assessment practica coming from an established program! Most brick and mortar schools (I'm guessing basically all of them with the exception of some very poor-quality ones) have a school department clinic with a bank of assessment tools you can use and the faculty supervise you as you assess people. The first few assessments are usually for free to the client, because the quality is not great since you'll be a student. Then you may start taking paying clients as you gain proficiency.

2 - There are more job opportunities for licensed mental health practitioners than unlicensed, full stop. Do not assume that a job open to psychologists is open to psychologists with online degrees. An online degree is not going to pass the credentialing committee of most hospitals. You will not be able to get a VA job. Those two strikes make up a huge proportion of the jobs open to psychologists but not MFTs. Social Workers can do therapy, can get hired at hospitals, can work for the VA, and do not often relocate for school. The reason psychologists make more money and have more opportunities is because of their training, not because of a certification. If it was that easy, there would be more psychologists than masters-level clinicians. The online programs are selling a mirage. Technically they aren't a *complete* fraud, because a handful of their graduates have become licensed. The vast majority have not.

 

[StellaB]

My post was to look for a study partner. The thread took is its most popular topic up. No one answered the thing that has been asked.

I can understand some are concerned. But, those that mock are Failed Psychologists in my view. Some throw corny smileys and have no interest in answering correctly... I can only truly see that the field is a mess of its own. Sad.

Take what you will from it. I realize you're getting reactions that you don't like, but none of us is stopping anyone from posting or PM'ing you about being a study buddy. If someone came here asking how to commit medical billing fraud, we would all tell them not to do it. It's not an answer to their question, of course, but it is the pertinent answer.

 

[WisNeuro]

My post was to look for a study partner. The thread took is its most popular topic up. No one answered the thing that has been asked.

I can understand some are concerned. But, those that mock are Failed Psychologists in my view. Some throw corny smileys and have no interest in answering correctly... I can only truly see that the field is a mess of its own. Sad.

Random capitalization, lack of insight, use of "sad," is this Donald Trump?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

For those online psyd students that already have a master's from a traditional program (like me), it can be assumed that their outcomes on the whole would approximate those of of b&m doctoral programs, since it is implausible that attending an online psyd degree would make their outcomes worse.

I absolutely can see multiple arguments about how additional online training can lead to worse outcomes.

1. If someone is taught non-empirically validated treatments in their online training, they definitely could become worse clinicians. The curriculum could be full of moon beam therapy and other BS treatments.

2. If someone over-estimates their abilities bc they completed some sham program, they could easily practice unethically, which could easily lead to worse outcomes.

3. Given the hands-on nature of training and mentorship, the person won’t recognize their blind spots bc they didn’t have 1,000+ hours of direct formal and informal supervision, in addition to tiered supervision.

4. Licensed psychologists from quality programs can still struggle with different types of formal assessment, so having someone setup their own training and cut corners will likely not have a positive effect on their assessment skills.

And so on.

 

[msgeorgeeliot]

Random capitalization, lack of insight, use of "sad," is this Donald Trump?

That is such a good joke. I’m destroyed.

In a parallel universe, I can so picture Donald Trump signing up for a “perfect, perfect” online PsyD degree against all reasonable advice, then dropping out quickly bc he knows way more about psychology than any so-called experts. Fake news!

 

[WisNeuro]

That is such a good joke. I’m destroyed.

In a parallel universe, I can so picture Donald Trump signing up for a “perfect, perfect” online PsyD degree against all reasonable advice, then dropping out quickly bc he knows way more about psychology than any so-called experts. Fake news!

In addition to the "SDN Old Guard" t-shirts, we now need to make up some "Failed Psychologists" t-shirts, with "Sad" on the back.

 

[psych.meout]

That is such a good joke. I’m destroyed.

In a parallel universe, I can so picture Donald Trump signing up for a “perfect, perfect” online PsyD degree against all reasonable advice, then dropping out quickly bc he knows way more about psychology than any so-called experts. Fake news!

Wouldn't he be the one operating the online diploma mill, a la Trump University?

 

[deleted106747]

In addition to the "SDN Old Guard" t-shirts, we now need to make up some "Failed Psychologists" t-shirts, with "Sad" on the back.

gotta add the exclamation point. "Sad!"

Actually, I really kind of want that T shirt.

 

[Mama Bear]

Wouldn't he be the one operating the online diploma mill, a la Trump University?

I believe that’s defunct.

 

[LurkerNow]

The curriculum could be full of moon beam therapy and other BS treatments.

Moon beam therapy? Really?

 

[boomshakalaka]

Hot/semi-serious take here. As much as I love reading the wacky dissonance in these threads and look forward to the next iteration of whichever one of these yahoos decides to study the intricacies of Raven-speak, can we just straight up ban and censor these people?

At the very least, can we have a sticky that says “ONLINE SCHOOLS = VERY BAD IDEA” and make it a mega thread?

Hats off to those of you crafting well reasoned and thoughtful responses to these folks. I don’t have the patience and am much more juvenile.

My advice: Please attend your online schools so I can continue to have a revenue stream where all I do is undo your terrible work.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Moon beam therapy? Really?

Yup. Tongue in cheek, but representative of the ridiculous treatments out there. The amount of junk “interventions” I see and hear about on a daily basis is astounding. My practice is 90%+ assessment and it includes a lot of independent medical evaluations (IMEs) and 2nd opinions.

I could literally target a handful of local quack clinicians and do nothing but get paid to rip apart their sham treatments and horrid assessments in IMEs and associated depositions. I like having more variety in my work, so I also do regular clinical assessment and some behavioral interventions to change things up.

 

[1010690]

In addition to the "SDN Old Guard" t-shirts, we now need to make up some "Failed Psychologists" t-shirts, with "Sad" on the back.

You should.

 

[1010690]

Take what you will from it. I realize you're getting reactions that you don't like, but none of us is stopping anyone from posting or PM'ing you about being a study buddy. If someone came here asking how to commit medical billing fraud, we would all tell them not to do it. It's not an answer to their question, of course, but it is the pertinent answer.

Let me tell you that is harsh. I value your opinion. And also checking with the merit it holds.

However, most people on the thread are apparently high on their trainings or being a psychologist. Jokes are shameful and judgmental. I guess, for those who love the idea of T shirts "Sad" and "Trump" should wear it to work. At least the clients would know who they are dealing with.

 

[psych.meout]

You should.

Let me tell you that is harsh. I value your opinion. And also checking with the merit it holds.

However, most people on the thread are apparently high on their trainings or being a psychologist. Jokes are shameful and judgmental. I guess, for those who love the idea of T shirts "Sad" and "Trump" should wear it to work. At least the clients would know who they are dealing with.

Look, I get that this thread did not end up as you originally intended, but you have to understand that psychologists have professional and ethical responsibilities to protect the field and the public. Online, unaccredited programs sharply deviate from the standards of the field and only continue existing through legal loopholes. Dissuading potential students from those programs is important to preventing them from making bad decisions by obtaining training that does not comport with the standards of the field and which may result in harm to the public.
It's understandable that there are personal limitations preventing you from attending an accredited, in-person program, but that doesn't justify attending an online, unaccredited program, especially one focused on providing clinical services to the public. There's no civil right to be a psychologist, or any other job for that matter. Yes, that sucks, but those are the breaks.

 

[PsyDr]

For some reason this came to mind...


Swearing, so use your judgement

 

[1010690]

Look, I get that this thread did not end up as you originally intended, but you have to understand that psychologists have professional and ethical responsibilities to protect the field and the public. Online, unaccredited programs sharply deviate from the standards of the field and only continue existing through legal loopholes. Dissuading potential students from those programs is important to preventing them from making bad decisions by obtaining training that does not comport with the standards of the field and which may result in harm to the public.
It's understandable that there are personal limitations preventing you from attending an accredited, in-person program, but that doesn't justify attending an online, unaccredited program, especially one focused on providing clinical services to the public. There's no civil right to be a psychologist, or any other job for that matter. Yes, that sucks, but those are the breaks.

I am going for an accredited program from an approved school by California board. However, it is online. Not on campus or face to face.

 

[psych.meout]

I am going for an accredited program from an approved school by California board. However, it is online. Not on campus or face to face.

The only accreditation that matters is APA. Maybe PCSAS as it gets more popular and accepted, but APS doesn't even want to accredit PsyD programs, so good luck there.

 

[1010690]

For some reason this came to mind...


Swearing, so use your judgement

Funny. But, it does not answer why you assume an online accredited degree is a shortcut or jumping the line? You feel that most of those who opt online education gets certification delivered like ordering from Amazon. I am sure, in person trained psychologists are far big in number and the group is big enough to challenge the modesty and earnest abilities of Online studies.

I might not opt for the course after talking to many of you.

But, as professionals be prepared for a good pool of professional who are better than you are and have made their life smoother through online programs. You might just learn to see in a few years. Btw I have attended some programs by Psychologists from big named universities in California and also heard about them sitting with client with no interventions. The clients come out saying Why did I just pay this person?!

In short be open minded.

 

[1010690]

The only accreditation that matters is APA. Maybe PCSAS as it gets more popular and accepted, but APS doesn't even want to accredit PsyD programs, so good luck there.

APA is not mandatory in California. Besides, the ones which are APA accredited have the most horrible reviews. I have applied to one and also got accepted. Just that it is 5 times the price of an online degree and students are weeping

 

[futureapppsy2]

An issue I have with comparing students to licensed professionals is that students are supervised. That hopefully keeps a fair amount of BS and ineffective treatment ideas from being played out in therapy and provides guidance and feedback to the student/trainee clinician.

 

[psych.meout]

APA is not mandatory in California. Besides, the ones which are APA accredited have the most horrible reviews. I have applied to one and also got accepted. Just that it is 5 times the price of an online degree and students are weeping

APA is the minimum standard for doctoral training. Think of it this way, as "horrible" as those APA accredited programs are, at least they are APA accredited. That's how low the bar is for that minimum standard for accreditation is, and yet your online program could not even get that.

 

[psychRA]

If a friend or family member needed surgery, would you want them to be operated on by a surgeon who had completed an online degree? Do you think that most people would be comfortable with a surgeon who trained online?

This isn't about professional egos. This is about protecting the public from receiving subpar services.

Becoming a competent psychologist requires a substantial amount of hands-on training. Yes, there's also a lot of of coursework, and maybe you could do that part online - I honestly don't know. But you cannot be fully proficient in research, assessment, psychotherapy, etc. from an online course. And while not every psychologist practices in every one of those areas, you can't skip any aspect of that training and expect to function just as well.

 

[PsyDr]

Funny. But, it does not answer why you assume an online accredited degree is a shortcut or jumping the line? You feel that most of those who opt online education gets certification delivered like ordering from Amazon. I am sure, in person trained psychologists are far big in number and the group is big enough to challenge the modesty and earnest abilities of Online studies.

I might not opt for the course after talking to many of you.

But, as professionals be prepared for a good pool of professional who are better than you are and have made their life smoother through online programs. You might just learn to see in a few years. Btw I have attended some programs by Psychologists from big named universities in California and also heard about them sitting with client with no interventions. The clients come out saying Why did I just pay this person?!

In short be open minded.

In academia, medicine, and legal professions there is substantial weight given to definitions and consensus. Clinical psychologist training has been decided. A duck cannot be defined as an earthworm. No reasonable amount of openness can change that. After seeing the the irony in stating one should be more open while eschewing others opinions, you might want to think about the logical ends of such reasoning. “Be more open minded” has not been an effective legal argument and it won’t be in clinical psych either.

 

[GradStudent2020]

Hi
I will be starting with PsyD in Jan 2020. I would like a study partner/group for mutual support and guidance. Is anyone doing a similar program interested? In-person/skype/WhatsApp

location: Sunnyvale/Santa Clara/South San Jose (CA)

Your best bet for study buddies are your cohort, who will presumably be going through the same coursework.

I’m not confident that the program you are describing will help you reach your career goals. Have you been able to speak to any graduates of the program? As many posters mentioned, APA is really a minimum standard. Many states accept degrees/training that are “APA equivalent”, but that is not guaranteed. It will require a lot more paperwork to “prove.” If you are interested in licensure you may want to re-think your choice. If you are just wanting more training/exposure to various clinical topics, then the program you describe might be useful. (Although there may be less expensive/time consuming ways to get that content).

 

[msgeorgeeliot]

APA is not mandatory in California. Besides, the ones which are APA accredited have the most horrible reviews. I have applied to one and also got accepted. Just that it is 5 times the price of an online degree and students are weeping

This moved me unexpectedly. Not to be dramatic (clearly #toolate), but it plucks my clinical strings to see young people so intent on making financially ruinous decisions.

I’ve treated many patients who are intent on killing themselves. Some complete, some don’t. It can be painful to hope that you can make a difference.

I have no desire to create a false equivalence between career/financial suicide and life suicide. But after a certain number of reps, it becomes (at least for me) more difficult to respond to exhibitionistic self-harming behaviors without a protective callus. This can entail the defense mechanisms of humor and detachment.

OP, I sincerely hope that you will take this thread to heart. You’ve received, for free, the value of thousands of dollars of expert input. It is up to you what you do with it.

 

[BorderlineQueen]

In academia, medicine, and legal professions there is substantial weight given to definitions and consensus. Clinical psychologist training has been decided. A duck cannot be defined as an earthworm. No reasonable amount of openness can change that. After seeing the the irony in stating one should be more open while eschewing others opinions, you might want to think about the logical ends of such reasoning. “Be more open minded” has not been an effective legal argument and it won’t be in clinical psych either.

I'm just curious I know online PhD/PsyD training is a bust and wrong and won't train you to be a great clinician. But why do we allow NPs and PAs that go to online programs to get licensed ?

 

[PsyDr]

I'm just curious I know online PhD/PsyD training is a bust and wrong and won't train you to be a great clinician. But why do we allow NPs and PAs that go to online programs to get licensed ?

Not my circus, not my monkeys.

 

[BorderlineQueen]

Not my circus, not my monkeys.

Okay just though I would ask since I know you're involved in the legal system so I though you would know the answer.