From one Professional School student: warning to all

[Student4Life0]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Ok wow...I haven't checked this thread today (I was too busy at an interview!! 😀) but it really got off topic, didn't it?

My question was this (and I hope somebody can answer it): Does a PsyD from a university based program "look better" than a PsyD from a professional school? No offense to those of us at prof schools, but I would not apply to any of these. The high cost, poor training opportunities, low match rates, etc scared me away. I did however apply to respected University based PsyD programs, that are almost just as expensive as the prof school degrees. So...the cost is the same. But is the degree better? I sure hope so. Like I have mentioned, I am still waiting to hear back from funded/partially funded PhD and PsyD programs. But in the event that a university based unfunded PsyD is my only option, I want to know what I am getting myself into.

Yes...I know that I will have a lot of debt. BUT will my job prospects be better than somebody that went to..let's say...Argosy? Let's keep in mind that even though I will be in a PsyD program, I will be doing research throughout the entire 5 years. I only applied to schools that offer research opportunities. I want to try and present and/or publish during my doctoral career. I want to pursue as many opportunities as I can. When all is said and done, I hope to come out of grad school with a degree that will land me a decent job...perhaps a government job...perhaps a job at a clinical research site, academic hospital, you get the picture. Maybe even be an adjunct professor in the far away future. Does that sound feasible?

 

[Student4Life0]

OR...am I barking up the wrong tree? Should I really be going for a PhD?

 

[aequitasveritas]

OR...am I barking up the wrong tree? Should I really be going for a PhD?

You may want to peruse the other threads in SDN that regard this stuff.

Yes, the name will be better at a respected university Psy.D than at Argosy but it won't be any better or do anything else for you than most of the other pro-schools. Argosy is not representative of "pro-schools."

if you can get into a funded PhD...go. And just make sure you do additional clinical training during and post doc.

...My 2 cents.

 

[O Gurl]

My question was this (and I hope somebody can answer it): Does a PsyD from a university based program "look better" than a PsyD from a professional school?

Yes. Even if it is just on the grounds that you have access to university supports such as courses in related departments. There is also a real prejudice against free-standing professional schools that is undeniable.

Yes...I know that I will have a lot of debt. BUT will my job prospects be better than somebody that went to..let's say...Argosy? Let's keep in mind that even though I will be in a PsyD program, I will be doing research throughout the entire 5 years. I only applied to schools that offer research opportunities. I want to try and present and/or publish during my doctoral career. I want to pursue as many opportunities as I can. When all is said and done, I hope to come out of grad school with a degree that will land me a decent job...perhaps a government job...perhaps a job at a clinical research site, academic hospital, you get the picture. Maybe even be an adjunct professor in the far away future. Does that sound feasible?

Yes. But not easy. My dissertation advisor received her PsyD from a university-based program and a masters in biostats. She is the only PsyD PI at my university. She still has to overcompensate for what is viewed as a background in a less rigorous research training environment.

OR...am I barking up the wrong tree? Should I really be going for a PhD?

Yes. If you want the most direct approach to the career it sounds like you want, the PhD is the better option. But it is not an end-all. It is up to you whether it is worth it to keep taking time out of your life to secure a spot at a clinical PhD program.

 

[Student4Life0]

Yes. Even if it is just on the grounds that you have access to university supports such as courses in related departments. There is also a real prejudice against free-standing professional schools that is undeniable.



Yes. But not easy. My dissertation advisor received her PsyD from a university-based program and a masters in biostats. She is the only PsyD PI at my university. She still has to overcompensate for what is viewed as a background in a less rigorous research training environment.



Yes. If you want the most direct approach to the career it sounds like you want, the PhD is the better option. But it is not an end-all. It is up to you whether it is worth it to keep taking time out of your life to secure a spot at a clinical PhD program.

Thank you for the advice. I have applied to both PhD and PsyD programs, so I suppose I will have some decisions to make in April.

 

[Jegg]

Let's keep in mind that even though I will be in a PsyD program, I will be doing research throughout the entire 5 years. I only applied to schools that offer research opportunities. I want to try and present and/or publish during my doctoral career. I want to pursue as many opportunities as I can. When all is said and done, I hope to come out of grad school with a degree that will land me a decent job...perhaps a government job...perhaps a job at a clinical research site, academic hospital, you get the picture. Maybe even be an adjunct professor in the far away future. Does that sound feasible?

With those objectives, then you want to please as many of that .01% (or .33% if your prefer...) as possible by having the highest credentials possible. Those are all sites that typically house that .01% I was mentioning previously...

 

[roubs]

With those objectives, then you want to please as many of that .01% (or .33% if your prefer...) as possible by having the highest credentials possible. Those are all sites that typically house that .01% I was mentioning previously...

Someone should seriously issue you a citation for misuse of numbers.

 

[Jegg]

Someone should seriously issue you a citation for misuse of numbers.

If the total population of all health care therapists (including Social workers, who, BTW, likely don't care) in MA in 2000 was .33% of the population, it doesn't take a knowledge of calculus to realize that that will be the ceiling for most people who are likely to care...

 

[KayJay85]

Yes. Even if it is just on the grounds that you have access to university supports such as courses in related departments. There is also a real prejudice against free-standing professional schools that is undeniable.



Yes. But not easy. My dissertation advisor received her PsyD from a university-based program and a masters in biostats. She is the only PsyD PI at my university. She still has to overcompensate for what is viewed as a background in a less rigorous research training environment.



Yes. If you want the most direct approach to the career it sounds like you want, the PhD is the better option. But it is not an end-all. It is up to you whether it is worth it to keep taking time out of your life to secure a spot at a clinical PhD program.

+1

Considering your goals, Student4Life, I'd recommend setting preferences for the following order:

1) A funded clinical PhD program
2) A partially-funded clinical PhD program
3) A funded university-based PsyD
4) An unfunded university-based PsyD

If those do not work out this time around, but you get an offer from an unfunded professional school PsyD, you should do yourself a favor and defer until next year. It is not worth it to gamble the expense, fight for the research training, and then fight against the school reputation. Even if you can manage all of that, certain options that you are interested in (university faculty, VA, medical center) may be closed to you by protocol.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Yes. But not easy. My dissertation advisor received her PsyD from a university-based program and a masters in biostats. She is the only PsyD PI at my university. She still has to overcompensate for what is viewed as a background in a less rigorous research training environment.

Psy.Ds can work at some top placements, in my travels I've found one in the Harvard med system, at least one at Hopkins Med, one on faculty at Boston U, though they are the exceptions. There are some in neuropsych too, but again...the vast minority, at least for ABPP folks.

The HR dept. at my hospital (a top academic medical center) didn't have Psy.D. anywhere in their ID system; I think I might have been the first Psy.D. there.

 

[Jegg]

Psy.Ds can work at some top placements, in my travels I've found one in the Harvard med system, at least one at Hopkins Med, one on faculty at Boston U, though they are the exceptions. There are some in neuropsych too, but again...the vast minority, at least for ABPP folks.

The HR dept. at my hospital (a top academic medical center) didn't have Psy.D. anywhere in their ID system; I think I might have been the first Psy.D. there.

I too have seen an occasional journal article by a PsyD, as well as book chapters.

Here is one at Harvard who writes/edits books: http://www.mindfulness-solution.com/About%20the%20Author.html

 

[Student4Life0]

I too have seen an occasional journal article by a PsyD, as well as book chapters.

Here is one at Harvard who writes/edits books: http://www.mindfulness-solution.com/About the Author.html

And of course he went to Rutgers 🙂 I would LOVE to be at Rutgers next year...

I had applied to everything from funded PhD to unfunded university PsyD. Time to just be patient..

 

[Jegg]

And of course he went to Rutgers 🙂 I would LOVE to be at Rutgers next year...

I had applied to everything from funded PhD to unfunded university PsyD. Time to just be patient..

I read that book on Mindfulness and Psychotherapy; it was enjoyable because it covered a few different theoretical applications of Mindfulness Meditation.

I hear you concerning Rutgers... The chances of being selected from the total applicant pool for an admission invite to Rutgers PsyD is at best ~6.8% and at worst ~4.1% based on admissions data from 2004 to 2010. I really wish the schools would list data on number of students invited for interviews so I could calculate the chances of receiving an admission offer after being interviewed (with all other factors held constant...).

 

[RileyG]

I read that book on Mindfulness and Psychotherapy; it was enjoyable because it covered a few different theoretical applications of Mindfulness Meditation.

I hear you concerning Rutgers... The chances of being selected from the total applicant pool for an admission invite to Rutgers PsyD is at best ~6.8% and at worst ~4.1% based on admissions data from 2004 to 2010. I really wish the schools would list data on number of students invited for interviews so I could calculate the chances of receiving an admission offer after being interviewed (with all other factors held constant...).

your use of numbers is...interesting. if all applications were equal and interviewees were chosen at random, then the statistics you presented may be true. however, that is not the case. the chances of acceptance/interviewing vary by applicant. the applicant who half-assed his/her application has a much lower chance of acceptance than the applicant who has multiple publications, several presentations, and is the niece of the department chair.

based on your previous posts, i have a feeling grad level stats courses will be eye opening for you.

 

[aequitasveritas]

your use of numbers is...interesting. if all applications were equal and interviewees were chosen at random, then the statistics you presented may be true. however, that is not the case. the chances of acceptance/interviewing vary by applicant. the applicant who half-assed his/her application has a much lower chance of acceptance than the applicant who has multiple publications, several presentations, and is the niece of the department chair.

based on your previous posts, i have a feeling grad level stats courses will be eye opening for you.

come on man...he said "all other factors held constant." Give him a break. Are you just up for a fight or something?

 

[Student4Life0]

come on man...he said "all other factors held constant." Give him a break. Are you just up for a fight or something?

Agreed! Why is it always a pissing contest around here? Pardon my French..

 

[Jegg]

come on man...he said "all other factors held constant." Give him a break. Are you just up for a fight or something?

It does seem like some folks are a bit uppity around here... 😀

Indeed, as you mention concerning my quote, I was simply looking at base chances without other variables being taken into consideration.

Knowing that a program tends to accept 64% of their interviewees doesn't guarantee I will get into a program, but it makes it easier to relax during the interview process rather than not knowing, or worse, knowing a program only accepts 20% of the people they interview.

 

[psychmama]

I hear you concerning Rutgers... The chances of being selected from the total applicant pool for an admission invite to Rutgers PsyD is at best ~6.8% and at worst ~4.1% based on admissions data from 2004 to 2010. I really wish the schools would list data on number of students invited for interviews so I could calculate the chances of receiving an admission offer after being interviewed (with all other factors held constant...).

In my experience Rutgers PsyD invites around 50-60 applicants to clinical interview day. If you get to the interview your chances of getting an offer improve considerably. Also, the school places a good deal of importance on the interview. Doing well during interview day is very important. They want to see how you interact with the faculty and also with peers.

 

[Jegg]

In my experience Rutgers PsyD invites around 50-60 applicants to clinical interview day. If you get to the interview your chances of getting an offer improve considerably. Also, the school places a good deal of importance on the interview. Doing well during interview day is very important. They want to see how you interact with the faculty and also with peers.

Thanks for that info!

So if you get an interview your base chance of admission would be somewhere around 33% to 50%.

 

[psychmama]

Thanks for that info!

So if you get an interview your base chance of admission would be somewhere around 33% to 50%.

I'd say that's correct, unless they've greatly changed things from prior years. Good luck!🙂

 

[Jegg]

I'd say that's correct, unless they've greatly changed things from prior years. Good luck!🙂

Thanks! Hopefully I will get my foot in the door for an interview...

 

[Student4Life0]

Thanks! Hopefully I will get my foot in the door for an interview...

Oh, same here!! I feel that I interview quite well, so I just need to get a foot in. Best of luck to both of us Jegg! 🙂

 

[Jegg]

Oh, same here!! I feel that I interview quite well, so I just need to get a foot in. Best of luck to both of us Jegg! 🙂

I'm not sure how I interview, but it is better to have the chance than not. I do prepare a lot. I wish you luck as well!

 

[ClinicalPHD5]

I have many friends who went to reputable PsyD/PHD programs that were partially funded. They came out with 70,000-120,000 in debt from a program that has partial funding.

They have told me that so far the debt level comes out to about $800-$1200 per month for the next 30 years!!! YIKES. That is like rent. So far they are NOT able to pay it without assistance from parents or spouses or have to defer loans or work multiple jobs since they are recent graduates. I think as a psychologist anything above 70,000 in debt would be really risky and limit your life substantially.

--Financial planners say that total debt should not amount to more than your income for 1 year---so anything above $70,000 would be a hardship to pay off as a psychologist.

Basically, you need to have other sources of income or marry rich to pay back this level of debt as a psychologist, particularly since starting salaries are 25,000-40,000.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I have many friends who went to reputable PsyD/PHD programs that were partially funded. They came out with 70,000-120,000 in debt from a program that has partial funding.

They have told me that so far the debt level comes out to about $800-$1200 per month for the next 30 years!!! YIKES. That is like rent. So far they are NOT able to pay it without assistance from parents or spouses or have to defer loans or work multiple jobs since they are recent graduates. I think as a psychologist anything above 70,000 in debt would be really risky and limit your life substantially.

--Financial planners say that total debt should not amount to more than your income for 1 year---so anything above $70,000 would be a hardship to pay off as a psychologist.

Basically, you need to have other sources of income or marry rich to pay back this level of debt as a psychologist, particularly since starting salaries are 25,000-40,000.

The average starting salary for a psychologist isn't quite as dismal as that, unless you're only considering post-docs. I believe the most recent number falls somewhere around $60k/year, give or take. Additionally, I believe you're still able to defer student loan payments while on post-doc, so you could use that brief break to save money, or begin paying down your principle (or, at the least, covering the interest).

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Basically, you need to have other sources of income or marry rich to pay back this level of debt as a psychologist, particularly since starting salaries are 25,000-40,000.

As mentioned above, this isn't at all accurate. While post-doc salaries can be in that range (mine is above it), once you are licensed you should be able to make at least $60k. It is woefully less than it should be, but it is no where near $25k-$40k.

 

[berlin81]

After reading through this entire thread, there are a couple of things I would like to comment on...

One person mentioned about having one's student loans "forgiven" if they are working within some sort of government system after 10 years. Yes, that does sound attractive, but I would caution making that move. I worked within a state government system after getting my master's. Although I got paid well, I frequently heard rumors about massive layoffs due to state government budget cuts. After two years I could not deal with the anxiety and got out of there. Perhaps some can handle it, but in this day and age you have to be careful where you go because some places could be on the brink of closing shop.

Second, it is my belief that if one is going into any doctoral program, the location is key. I live in Chicago and right now considering on going to a professional school for my PsyD. Yes, the cost is outrageous and that is something I have to consider over the next couple of months. However, it has been my experience that if you are in a program that is located in a large urban area with a ton of opportunities, it could work to your benefit.

Third, and this might be somewhat controversial. Unfortunately, most funded psychology programs have become way too competitive and have left many (such as myself) out of the loop. It is my opinion that the professional schools are the alternative for those of us who cannot get into the schools with all the funding and stipends. And although I do not credit myself as being a genius, I think that the degree of motivation and work experience that one has in this field has been ignored by most admission committees. I do believe the there are several professional schools that offer great courses and support to their students, but tuition rates are getting out of control and many programs are not being truthful about their history, internship rates, and knowledge towards relevant licensure.

If there is any hope/suggestions I can make, its that prepare yourself for what you taking on financially and consideration must be given to what program best matches your interests.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Second, it is my belief that if one is going into any doctoral program, the location is key. I live in Chicago and right now considering on going to a professional school for my PsyD. Yes, the cost is outrageous and that is something I have to consider over the next couple of months. However, it has been my experience that if you are in a program that is located in a large urban area with a ton of opportunities, it could work to your benefit.

Location is definitely important, although everyone should keep in mind that urban isn't necessarily better. Many programs in or near rural areas have access to sites and populations that you simply won't see in the city. Additionally, because many of these areas are heavily underserved, your responsibilities as an extern--as well as each externship site's flexibility and willingness to let you try new things--can be significantly greater than in many higher-demand areas. I'm fortunate in that my program has access to both urban and rural populations and sites, and after having worked at multiple locations in both areas, I can definitely see the pros and cons of each.

As for your last point, that's quite a big can o' worms. Many would argue that the admissions criteria and acceptance rates for clinical Ph.D. programs are fine, and that professional programs are simply letting in too many individuals in general, and too many who may not be qualified to study or practice psychology in particular. Conversely, many also feel the same as you do. I have my own opinion on the matter (which I'll keep to myself for fear of completely derailing this thread), but I will say that in general, motivation and work experience are far from ignored by most Ph.D. admissions committees. I wasn't a research superstar in undergrad, but my other experiences, along with my letters of recommendation and personal statements, apparently set me apart enough to get me noticed. And now that I've been on the other side of things for a few years, I can definitely see first-hand how non-academic and non-research factors often weigh heavily in the admissions decision process.

 

[erg923]

Third, and this might be somewhat controversial. Unfortunately, most funded psychology programs have become way too competitive and have left many (such as myself) out of the loop. It is my opinion that the professional schools are the alternative for those of us who cannot get into the schools with all the funding and stipends.

You know, this is exactly one of the reasons why many on here do not like professional schools. They take candidates who, 30 years ago, never would have made it into this profession. And unfortunatley, your attitude is often present in those who choose professional schools. Yes, clinical psychology programs are competitive. They should be. They are only deemed "too competitive" by you is because you didnt make the cut. Yes, they left you of the loop. Sorry, but you are not entitled to be in it.

While this may sound mean, it is not. It is simply the hard truth. A hard truth for me, for example, was that I loved, loved, loved the Trojans growing up. My dream was to to get a football scholarship to USC. Unfortunately, although I was was one heck of ball player (if I do say so myself), USC only wanted the cream of the crop. Dissappointing, but I understood. I understood that because demand was so high and the availiblity so limited, they could afforrd to be super-duper picky. It was supply and demand. It made perfect sense. And I made peace with it.

 

[paramour]

As mentioned above, this isn't at all accurate. While post-doc salaries can be in that range (mine is above it), once you are licensed you should be able to make at least $60k. It is woefully less than it should be, but it is no where near $25k-$40k.

Y'ouch! I should hope not; I would have to bash myself in the head for quitting a position making well over that to go to grad school to make peanuts after graduation. 🙄 I certainly am not in it for the money (or I would have stayed in my previous life), but $25K after amassing tons of financial debt and other personal setbacks isn't worth the exchange rate.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Y'ouch! I should hope not; I would have to bash myself in the head for quitting a position making well over that to go to grad school to make peanuts after graduation. 🙄 I certainly am not in it for the money (or I would have stayed in my previous life), but $25K after amassing tons of financial debt and other personal setbacks isn't worth the exchange rate.

I feel your pain. Even a good job offer ($75k-85k+) is half of what I'd be making if I stayed in my old career. 🙁 I think I ate lead paint chips or something. I actually enjoy my job now, so it isn't all bad.

 

[O Gurl]

You know, this is exactly one of the reasons why many on here do not like professional schools. They take candidates who, 30 years ago, never would have made it into this profession. And unfortunatley, your attitude is often present in those who choose professional schools. Yes, clinical psychology programs are competitive. They should be. They are only deemed "too competitive" by you is because you didnt make the cut. Yes, they left you of the loop. Sorry, but you are not entitled to be in it.

While this may sound mean, it is not. It is simply the hard truth. A hard truth for me, for example, was that I loved, loved, loved the Trojans growing up. My dream was to to get a football scholarship to USC. Unfortunately, although I was was one heck of ball player (if I do say so myself), USC only wanted the cream of the crop. Dissappointing, but I understood. I understood that because demand was so high and the availiblity so limited, they could afforrd to be super-duper picky. It was supply and demand. It made perfect sense. And I made peace with it.

Yes. I agree with everything you said above. However, I do think we (as a profession) should have more reasonable options for people with Bachelor's or Master's level degrees in psychology. I also think we should do a better job of letting undergrads know just how competitive the doctoral route really is. I remember not being fully aware until my senior year in UG when one of my letter-writers said to me: "you know, getting into a psychology PhD program is much harder than medical school." Yeah. Great timing for that little jewel of knowledge.

 

[PsychScience]

As for your last point, that's quite a big can o' worms. Many would argue that the admissions criteria and acceptance rates for clinical Ph.D. programs are fine, and that professional programs are simply letting in too many individuals in general, and too many who may not be qualified to study or practice psychology in particular. Conversely, many also feel the same as you do. I have my own opinion on the matter (which I'll keep to myself for fear of completely derailing this thread), but I will say that in general, motivation and work experience are far from ignored by most Ph.D. admissions committees. I wasn't a research superstar in undergrad, but my other experiences, along with my letters of recommendation and personal statements, apparently set me apart enough to get me noticed. And now that I've been on the other side of things for a few years, I can definitely see first-hand how non-academic and non-research factors often weigh heavily in the admissions decision process.

Agreed, can of worms for sure! Without addressing my own opinion of the issue, I will say that my experience was the same as the above. I was not a research superstar in undergrad. I certainly had some research experience but it was far from extensive. That being said, I think there were other parts of my application that really set me apart. Now, being on the other side of the application process and having some insight into the admission decisions I know they are based on much more than just one or two numbers or a publication. When all is said and done, I am happy I put in the extra years of work after my bachelors that got me into a funded PhD program.

Hi all,


You've gotta really pay great attention to what the financial strain will be like in your life from living on loans and owing more money than your degree is worth. I simply cannot state that enough.
If you are headed into a professional school of psychology you better be independently wealthy or have a really really good financial investment on the other end of the 5 yr stint.

Average debt coming out of my school.....over $200,000.

Hope you don't plan on qualifying for a mortgage...

I think the OP really points out some of the consequences of jumping into one of these programs without all the necessary information and I do think there are some professional schools that take advantage of students who want a doctorate, but don't always know what they are getting into long term. At the outset of applications its easy to think about just wanting a degree, no matter where it comes from, without thinking of things like match rate or the consequences of >100,000 in loans. Much like we do in research, I think these programs should have a much better informed consent process.

 

[OneAtATime]

You know, this is exactly one of the reasons why many on here do not like professional schools. They take candidates who, 30 years ago, never would have made it into this profession.

I find it interesting to read posts on the same board complaining that the salaries for doctoral-level psychologists are too low and that it's too competitive to get into a funding Ph.D. program. There's a link between the number of psychologists produced and their salaries; if the only doctoral-level psychologists came out of APA-accredited programs that fund students, there would be sufficient spots in the Match for everyone and salaries would increase - the latter is simple economics.

Please don't mistake what I'm saying to mean that I believe only funded-Ph.D. programs should exist. I'm not saying that. I'm only saying that there's a link between the selectivity of the profession and the salary.

 

[DocRacz]

I think I have to fully agree with Erg923 - if you didn't get into a funded PhD program, there's most likely a good reason for it. Either your experience is not up to par, you didn't prove yourself academically worthy, or you flopped the interview and they felt that you wouldn't make a good addition to their program or the profession.

Is it a bit rough to say that you only have a few undergrad years to academically exceed expectations, to gain research or clinical experience, and around one or two days of interviews at each school to base this whole decision on? Yes, of course it is. That's why Psychology is a prestigious profession. If you aren't deemed "good enough", rethink your strategy. I didn't get a single acceptance (and only 1 interview out of 7 schools applied to) my first round of applications, so I upped my game. I spent the next year working my ass off in research, doing an internship, and working in an acute care crisis facility. Was it worth it? Yes, because the next year, I got in.

While I'm not about to pull a Jegg and spout off some numbers regarding the situation, I do feel that it is the influx of PsyD programs that is leading to less respect for the profession and less pay for those involved in it. You've got people who work their tails off to get into a good school, and others who take out these extravagant loans at a different type of program. In the end, they're both "Dr." psychologist, but to me, one of them deserves that title a bit more than the other. This may be my undergraduate training talking, but from the professionals I know, PsyD just isn't as good as PhD. Debatable? Yes. I'm sorry, but if I had only gotten into a program that would've put me hundreds of thousands in debt, without the prospect of decent wages, I don't think I would have accepted. To each his/her own though.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

While I'm not about to pull a Jegg and spout off some numbers regarding the situation, I do feel that it is the influx of PsyD programs that is leading to less respect for the profession and less pay for those involved in it.

This may be my undergraduate training talking, but from the professionals I know, PsyD just isn't as good as PhD.

There are definitely some weaker Psy.D. programs out there, but not all Psy.Ds (like Ph.Ds) are created equal. University-based programs are typically well respected and have similar acceptance rates as Ph.D. programs (clinical and counseling). Like most new grad students, you definitely have a lot to learn about the field, the politics, and the "real" world.

 

[Jegg]

While I'm not about to pull a Jegg and spout off some numbers regarding the situation...

I suppose there are worse insults than having your name used to represent the act of using numbers to quantify a point.

 

[PsychScience]

There are definitely some weaker Psy.D. programs out there, but not all Psy.Ds (like Ph.Ds) are created equal. University-based programs are typically well respected and have similar acceptance rates as Ph.D. programs (clinical and counseling). Like most new grad students, you definitely have a lot to learn about the field, the politics, and the "real" world.

Very true. As is already pointed out earlier in the thread, there are quite a few PsyD programs that exist that are much stronger than some PhD programs, and the best PsyD programs are on par stats wise with the best PhD programs. Drawing the line at PsyD versus PhD does not quite capture the complexity of the issue. For example on average Rutgers gets >400 applicants for it's PsyD program while still only having between 15-19 students in each cohort, and successful applicants still have >1200 GRE. Not to mention, many of these students have some sources of funding. This is really not that different from some of the best PhD programs (SDSU/UCSD has comparable stats >400 applicants last year, 15 students matriculated, average GRE >1200). I think this a good example of why the OP aimed the original complaint against professional schools and not necessarily PsyD programs.

 

[Jegg]

Very true. There are quite a few PsyD programs that exist that are much stronger than some PhD programs, and the best PsyD programs are on par stats wise with the best PhD programs. Drawing the line at PsyD versus PhD does not quite capture the complexity of the issue. For example on average Rutgers gets >400 applicants for it's PsyD program while still only having between 15-19 students in each cohort, and successful applicants still have >1200 GRE. Not to mention, many of these students have some sources of funding. This is really not that different from some of the best PhD programs (SDSU/UCSD has comparable stats >400 applicants last year, 15 students matriculated, average GRE >1200). I think this a good example of why the OP aimed the original complaint against professional schools and not necessarily PsyD programs.

When you get into EPPP or ranking by publications and citations most of the PsyD programs drop to the bottom (Social Psychology Network). Don't get me wrong, I think we are comparing apples and oranges, but I wanted to pull a pseudo-Jegg. 😀

 

[DocRacz]

Jegg - wasn't an insult, "pulling a Jegg" doesn't have to mean a derogatory term, rather, insinuating that you like to spout out statistics...
Therapist4Chnge - yes, I agree that I have a lot to learn about the "real world". I guess I should have said "but from the standpoint of the professionals I know", my mistake. What I am reporting is that from the professionals that I know (through clinical experience, internship, undergrad, and graduate school), most agree that they would not regard a PsyD as highly as a PhD upon first glance. Yes, they are not all created equal. Obviously, if you say you have a doctorate from Rutgers, most people aren't going to give a flying you-know-what if it's a PsyD versus PhD. I'm sorry for generalizing all PsyD's into one lump (must be my extreme lack of experience in the profession, politics and this real world you speak of), but as a whole, the professionals I know tend to regard PhD's as better than PsyD's. For the sake of avoiding future misunderstandings: those professionals that I know tend to feel that a PhD student is more qualified and "hire-able" than a PsyD student, especially one in a "professional" program (versus a university based program).

To address another issue there, what is the purpose of quoting my statement about PsyD's possibly leading to less pay for all psychologists? If you disagree with the statement, I would like to know why (and not just that you think I'm a long ways from being knowledgeable enough to speak about the situation). It is my belief that professional schools specifically (again, sorry for not explaining myself to a T earlier) cause many to view Psychology as less-worthy nowadays. If you had to hire a mechanic, would you rather hire the guy who spent 4 years in an apprenticeship, or the guy who paid a buttload of money to learn about cars in a classroom?

 

[DocRacz]

And maybe it is just that those professionals I know feel a bit more strongly about publications and citations. I have not asked each of them specifically about it, but most seem to agree that if you come out of a "money in, degree out" program, you're not going to work with them.

 

[Jegg]

Jegg - wasn't an insult, "pulling a Jegg" doesn't have to mean a derogatory term, rather, insinuating that you like to spout out statistics...

True. Thanks then! 🙂

 

[DocRacz]

More power to you if you like to quote statistics haha!

 

[Jegg]

To address another issue there, what is the purpose of quoting my statement about PsyD's possibly leading to less pay for all psychologists? If you disagree with the statement, I would like to know why (and not just that you think I'm a long ways from being knowledgeable enough to speak about the situation). It is my belief that professional schools specifically (again, sorry for not explaining myself to a T earlier) cause many to view Psychology as less-worthy nowadays. If you had to hire a mechanic, would you rather hire the guy who spent 4 years in an apprenticeship, or the guy who paid a buttload of money to learn about cars in a classroom?

There is much more to the issue than PhD versus PsyD. MA (including social workers) level therapist degrees and CADC (Certified Alcohol and Drug Counselor--A degree that takes a year to complete in NY state) degrees certainly have a tremendous bearing. The medicalization of mental illness and pharmacotherapy is another big issue that is squeezing psychology out in favor of 15 minute psychiatry med management sessions. Likewise, a lot of issues that used to be more nebulous are finding a stronger grounding now in neuroscience and empirical testing using fMRIs and other medical equipment. There is definitely a movement in the field away from the abstract and into concrete functioning because it is quantifiable to those who are paying the bills. Insurance coverage issues when it comes to prescribing pills versus weekly visits to a psychologist are a factor. I'm sure other forum participants can list a lot more issues that come into play. Thankfully psychological assessment is hard to replace as of yet.

Then there are issues of sexism as well...

 

[erg923]

Then there are issues of sexism as well...

Not too get off on too much of a tangent here but after reviewing two decades of research, Ceci and Williams (2011) reported that a woman in academic science typically fares as well as, if not better than, a comparable man when it comes to being interviewed, hired, promoted, financed and published. This is by no means the first review to contradict the long held assumption of a "glass ceiling" in academia for woman either.

 

[Jegg]

Not too get off on too much of a tangent here but after reviewing two decades of research, Ceci and Williams (2011) reported that a woman in academic science typically fares as well as, if not better than, a comparable man when it comes to being interviewed, hired, promoted, financed and published. This is by no means the first review to contradict the long held assumption of a "glass ceiling" in academia for woman either.

I haven't had a chance to read the whole paper (assuming we are discussing the same paper, "Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science"), but at a glance it appears to concern "math-intensive" fields (not psychology), and it appears to refer to academia. I wouldn't say that is generalizable to clinical psychology in general, especially when dealing with medical environments.

Likewise, on the second half of the first page they mention the following: "Other examples of discrimination in nonmath fields are similarly striking, e.g., correlations between masculineness of women’s first names and likelihood of being awarded judgeships (13), downgrading of psychologists’ and sociologists’ curriculum vitae when they bear a woman’s name (14, 15), or discriminatory pay for female at- torneys (16). This evidence from nonmath fields raises the specter that similar biases explain the current dearth of women in math- intensive fields."

The paper seems to be about proving that one cannot draw conclusions about math-intensive fields based on research in other fields including psychology (where there were studies--the ones listed as 14 and 15--that showed discrimination issues).

Reference: Ceci, S. J., & Williams, W. M. (2011). Understanding current causes of women's underrepresentation in science. Retrieved from: http://www.pnas.org

 

[PsychScience]

When you get into EPPP or ranking by publications and citations most of the PsyD programs drop to the bottom (Social Psychology Network). Don't get me wrong, I think we are comparing apples and oranges, but I wanted to pull a pseudo-Jegg. 😀

I don't quite think we are truly comparing apples to oranges at all, both degrees result in the individual becoming a clinical psychologist. Now, do I think your typical university based funded PhD program is a different fruit than a professional school that admits more than 50% of its applicants? Why yes, yes, I do.

My point is still the same, some PsyD programs are just as strong as PhD programs. Even in the link you provided of EPPP scores Loyola Maryland and Rutgers (both PsyDs) ranked above Northwestern. Granted, the differences in the average score for all three programs is negligible. However, I think it echoes my original sentiment that there are some very strong PsyD programs that are on par with PhD programs in many areas.

J

To address another issue there, what is the purpose of quoting my statement about PsyD's possibly leading to less pay for all psychologists? If you disagree with the statement, I would like to know why (and not just that you think I'm a long ways from being knowledgeable enough to speak about the situation). It is my belief that professional schools specifically (again, sorry for not explaining myself to a T earlier) cause many to view Psychology as less-worthy nowadays.

Not that I quoted you, but I think that a better distinction can be made between professional schools and university based programs rather than PhD versus PsyD. This is something that you clarified in your subsequent post.

 

[Jegg]

I don't quite think we are truly comparing apples to oranges at all, both degrees result in the individual becoming a clinical psychologist. Now, do I think your typical university based funded PhD program is a different fruit than a professional school that admits more than 50% of its applicants? Why yes, yes, I do.

My point is still the same, some PsyD programs are just as strong as PhD programs. Even in the link you provided of EPPP scores Loyola Maryland and Rutgers (both PsyDs) ranked above Northwestern. Granted, the differences in the average score for all three programs is negligible. However, I think it echoes my original sentiment that there are some very strong PsyD programs that are on par with PhD programs in many areas.

I think the emphases and goals are different enough between the programs you mention, e.g. Rutgers PhD versus Rutgers PsyD, that making a comparison is like comparing two different fruits. Likewise, I would think that the people leaving these programs are expecting to be two different types of fruit. OK, enough of the fruit analogies.... 😛

I personally don't mind PsyD programs, so I'm not sure why I decided to play Devil's Advocate...

Perhaps we can agree to refer to professional schools as happy meals and be done with it.

 

[PsychScience]

Likewise, I would think that the people leaving these programs are expecting to be two different types of fruit.

Although I agree with you that some PsyD programs have different models of training than PhD programs (hence the different types of fruit thing), the reality is that in the world of psychology many PsyD recipients plan to do the same type of work as PhD recipients.

 

[Jegg]

Although I agree with you that some PsyD programs have different models of training than PhD programs (hence the different types of fruit thing), the reality is that in the world of psychology many PsyD recipients plan to do the same type of work as PhD recipients.

True.