George Washington PsyD on probation?

[futurepsychologist]

I was just accepted into GW's PsyD program and originally wasn't planning on considering it due to their APA accreditation "on probation" status. However, there are definitely some pros about GW: I would love to be in DC, the university has a good reputation in general, and most people finish the PsyD in 4 years as opposed to 5 or 6, which would save money. Does anyone have thoughts about GW's program or about their accreditation status? Would it be an unwise decision to choose to go to a school "on probation" when I have other acceptances?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[erg923]

I was just accepted into GW's PsyD program and originally wasn't planning on considering it due to their APA accreditation "on probation" status. However, there are definitely some pros about GW: I would love to be in DC, the university has a good reputation in general, and most people finish the PsyD in 4 years as opposed to 5 or 6, which would save money. Does anyone have thoughts about GW's program or about their accreditation status? Would it be an unwise decision to choose to go to a school "on probation" when I have other acceptances?

Do any of the above "benefits" matter if you dont match for an APA internship cause of the "on probation" status? I think that would also negate the 4 year thing...

 

[PsychBoxe]

I always heard folks (some on this site) speak very highly about GWU's program. I wonder what factor(s) led to the probation status?

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Honestly, that'd be enough of a deterring factor in and of itself to cause me to select another program if I had other options. It's of course not certain they'll lose their accreditation, but given that they're one step closer to doing so, it's no guarantee they'll keep it, either.

 

[WisNeuro]

I always heard folks (some on this site) speak very highly about GWU's program. I wonder what factor(s) led to the probation status?

Their PhD program is solid, I haven't heard much about the PsyD besides their troubling match statistics.

 

[ClinPsychEnthus]

Is there anyone that you can ask about the details? A program chair or faculty member? I think that the specific details may (possibly) impact your thoughts and opinions about this program and your willingness/desire to attend.

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

I believe some program on probation are high quality programs but with the APA internship shortage they are now on probation due to less than 50% match with APA accredited predoctoral internship sites.

Some very high quality APA programs are now having their students go to phase two or not matching. I think this figures into the accreditation process leading to APA on probation. Often times programs on probation become fully accredited again during the probation timeline. Without knowing the outcome data GWU program may have been affected by the APA internship imbalance.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I believe some program on probation are high quality programs but with the APA internship shortage they are now on probation due to less than 50% match with APA accredited Predoctoral internship sites.

Some very high quality APA programs are now having their students go to phase two or not matching. I think this figures into the accreditation process leading to APA on probation. Often times programs on probation become fully accredited. Without knowing the outcome data GWU program may have been affected by the APA internship imbalance.

Not that it may matter, but GWU has a high quality Basketball team and they are in the March Madness tournament 🙂

I know this was mentioned as being possibly included in the accreditation standards at some point, but that was fairly recently; has it actually been implemented already? If so, that would be a super fast turnaround for a program to then be placed on probation.

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

Actually I am not sure. One of the programs I know of that was APA accredited on probation several year ago, only had one of their students out of five match with an APA accredited site that year. The program was placed on probation. This was two-years ago. The students and program went into crisis mode. They did a review of their whole program and changed program chairperson and DCT faculty member. They fine tuned with students the whole process of qualifying and applying for internship. They required students to have proposed their dissertation, data collection, and complete their oral defense before beginning internship. Apparently a number of students did not graduate within the seven year timeline due to dissertation issues. These students had completed all other requirements including an APA accredited internship, but they were dismissed due to the timeline.

All of their students matched with APA accredited sites last year and this year. They had their on probation site study last Spring and they are fully accredited again. One other thing that was a problem is they had some faculty members who were not from APA accredited programs and these faculty were retained but reassigned to work in undergraduate or the MS LPC program.

I checked the outcome data for GWU and they have large cohorts in the 30-40 student range. Less than half of their students match with APA sites. The most recent class had 42 students apply for internship and 20 matched with APA sites. They are psychodynamic focused program and tuition is in the $1,390.00 per hour range. They have over 400 applications per year and it seems that GRE scores are in the range for most high quality programs.

My question is based on the high GRE scores. For each cohort year the students could most likely gain admissions into many high quality programs nationally. I guess they have many students with interest in psychodynamic approaches.

 

[WisNeuro]

I know this was mentioned as being possibly included in the accreditation standards at some point, but that was fairly recently; has it actually been implemented already? If so, that would be a super fast turnaround for a program to then be placed on probation.

To my knowledge, this has not been implemented yet. There is likely another reason for the probation. You had to do something very wrong to get on that list considering that APA Accreditation is a pretty low bar.

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

Here is what is on the APA COA website regarding the revoking of APA accredited process.

What happens when a program's accreditation is revoked?
An accredited program cannot have its accreditation revoked without first being placed on “accredited, on probation” status. Programs placed on “accredited, on probation” status will be reviewed in no fewer than one and no more than two years. This provides the public with notice that the program is not currently consistent with the Guidelines and Principles for Accreditation of Programs in Professional Psychology (G&P) (PDF, 460KB).

Revocation of accreditation occurs when the Commission on Accreditation (CoA), in its review of a program on “accredited, on probation” status, has evidence that the program continues to be inconsistent with the G&P.

The effective date of the revocation is the date of the CoA meeting in which the decision was made. If the program appeals the CoA's decision to revoke, and that decision is upheld, the revocation will take effect 30 days after the appeal hearing is held. Individuals completing the program after that date are not considered to have completed an accredited program.

George Washington University (PhD)
Department of Psychology
Washington, DC 20052
April 1, 1970
Accredited
Next site visit scheduled 2014

George Washington University (PsyD)
Center for Professional Psychology
Washington, DC 20037
Feb. 16, 2001
Accredited, on probation (under appeal)

 

[gwpsych]

I'm a student at GWU's Psy.D. program. Made a new account to protect my anonymity. Not interested in another infamous SDN debate 😉 so I'll give my semi-brief response to some things that are being said here, and you can PM me with further questions if you'd like.

We received great feedback after the site visit, so were all shocked when the "on probation" notification came. From what we've been told, there were two main reasons for the decision and they have nothing to do with our outcomes:
1) We typically admit a few students who did not major in psychology as an undergrad because we value differing perspectives and individuals who change careers. The APA was concerned that we couldn't be sure those students were adequately prepared for graduate study in psychology. We addressed our stance on this when we filed our appeal, obviously.
2) The APA would like for our supervisors to evaluate our testing skills more thoroughly (as in feedback about each specific measure used, not just how the student is performing in testing overall). Easily fixed.

And there it is. I don't think we've done anything "very wrong" to deserve the status, which is why we're appealing. Our cohort sizes have become increasingly smaller, and I believe our most recent was under 30. Obviously larger than Ph.D. programs, but it's nowhere near the 100+ of some programs. Those applying for internship numbers (the 42 that was mentioned), that's also accounting for individuals who have decided to add additional years on and are applying later than those they began the program with; it's not the original cohort size.

From what I understand, our outcome numbers are not entirely representative, as for whatever reason, a lot of program graduates do not respond to inquires. I wish our APA internship rate was better, but I'll give an insider's perspective on why it isn't. Many of our students want/need to stay in DC. It's a very competitive area, which leads to choosing non-APA. Additionally, because our program is accelerated, our hours tend to be lower than average (which certainly hurts our chances). In my opinion, if you stay an extra year and spend that year just doing clinical work (which you can because your MAP/dissertation is finished and so are classes), your hours will go up and you'll greatly improve your chances. Finally, I think the "on probation" status being published as internship applications were due this past November may have further hurt this year's cohort in applying.

Re: our GRE scores. I appreciate you pointing that out! I know I'm biased, but the vast majority of people in our program come from very, very good schools and are highly intelligent. Most of us, to my knowledge, had multiple offers and chose GW. It's not fully funded, but a good deal of students DO get partial funding. GW has its positive and negative qualities, and the probation status is certainly something to consider, but I'm confident that it will get resolved and be a non-factor.

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

Thanks for responding. Hopefully the original poster will PM you. Similar to the program I mentioned; their site visit went well and they were a program that began in the 80's and was APA accredited ever since their initial site visit. Similar to GWU they had high quality students with very good GRE scores and from very good undergrad schools such as Stanford, Purdue, etc...

They were completely shocked when they were put on probation. Up until that year all of their students were accepted to APA accredited sites. They made all of the requested changes and they were able to retain their APA accreditation. I believe most schools put on probation retain their APA accreditation. This program had to make some administrative changes and clinical faculty changes.

This could happen to any program as there are no guarantees that the program accepted into will be accredited when you finish in five to six years. One concern is having an accelerated curriculum of four years or less. Probably GWU may need to reduce cohort size or not have an accelerated curriculum as this seems to be a risky enterprise. There tends to be a steadfast rule that a doctoral degree should not be less than five-years and more commonly six-years.

From what I can tell from reviewing GWU they seems to be a high quality program on paper. Hope you do well with the appeal. Maybe you will finish up before the hearing. It does seem harsh that current students would not qualify as graduating from an APA accredited program. Is the PhD program separate from the PsyD program as I see that they are having their site visit soon.

 

[gwpsych]

I appreciate your well wishes very much! Even if in the worst-case scenario we were to lose accreditation (very very unlikely from what the faculty says), they plan to immediately reapply and we can delay graduation (even after completing internship) until we get it back. Not ideal, but there's a plan in place for each scenario. I'd definitely wait because, as you said, it's very harsh after all the work we've put in. And yes, the Ph.D. program is separate from our program but we're allowed to take each other's courses (as well as courses in other doctoral psychology programs in universities in DC/MD/VA).

Switching to a five year program has been something we've been discussing for awhile from what I understand. Grad school is stressful enough, and it gets exacerbated during an accelerated program. We'd also get more hours and make us much more competitive for internship, and likely lead to a better APA match rate. It really would not surprise me if that was a change that occurred over the next few years.

 

[MCParent]

If I were in OP's position I would request copies of the program self-study and of the APA accreditation team's report. I think that is a perfectly reasonable request given the circumstances, and what you are being asked to invest. If the report is what GW suggests, then that would not seem like a major problem to me. But I have a hard time seeing a decision that harsh meted out based on reasons so weak. Every program evaluation has some hiccups and the kinds of things suggested to be the reason are the kinds of things that typically merit a statement of how they intend to fix the problem, not putting the program on probation.

If you're looking to invest that much in a program, they should be willing to provide you with the actual report.

 

[gwpsych]

^ I agree that the reasons given are incredibly weak, which is part of why we were all surprised and why I think we'll win the appeal. I'm relaying the information I've been given about it, and I don't see why the faculty would hide anything from us, but it certainly couldn't hurt to ask to see it. There was a period in which the APA gave us a list (like you were saying), we responded with how we would fix it, and then the decision for "on probation" came based on the two things I listed above. I don't know why our other responses were seen as acceptable but those two weren't. We'll see how it shakes out, but we're optimistic. Anyhow, I don't blame the OP for being apprehensive, as I would absolutely be if I were in that position. I'd contact our program director if you want to take MCParent's advice, he's a very nice man and I'm sure he'd be happy to talk to you about it.

 

[MCParent]

^ I agree that the reasons given are incredibly weak, which is part of why we were all surprised and why I think we'll win the appeal. I'm relaying the information I've been given about it, and I don't see why the faculty would hide anything from us, but it certainly couldn't hurt to ask to see it. There was a period in which the APA gave us a list (like you were saying), we responded with how we would fix it, and then the decision for "on probation" came based on the two things I listed above. I don't know why our other responses were seen as acceptable but those two weren't. We'll see how it shakes out, but we're optimistic. Anyhow, I don't blame the OP for being apprehensive, as I would absolutely be in their position as well. I'd contact our program director if you want to take MCParent's advice, he's a very nice man and I'm sure he'd be happy to talk to you about it.

It's fully possible you just got a weird accreditation team decision; the accreditation rules are vague and subject far too much to interpretation by individual teams. But I'm saying if I were OP, I wouldn't put money on it without checking for myself.

 

[gwpsych]

That's good to know, thank you! Given that we're all supposed to meet the same exact standards as programs, it's frustrating to hear that there's a good deal of subjectivity to the process. And I'd look into myself if I were the OP as well. Can't hurt!

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

I wonder if having both a PhD and a PsyD program in clinical psychology factored into APA review of the PsyD program at GWU? I realize some programs such as Rosemead, Alliant, Nova, and other programs have multiple program options including PhD or PsyD in clinical psychology with the primary difference between the two programs being the emphasis on additional statistics, research design, and other research courses for the PhD program. I believe they have different admissions standards for each program under this scenario.

I see now on the APA COA website some programs who already have a PsyD combined clinical psychology and school psychology program and they are applying for APA accreditation for a PhD programs. I see that James Madison University has withdrawn their application for a site visit for a PhD combined clinical and school psychology program and it notes that they already have a PsyD APA accredited program in combined clinical and school psychology programs. The Virginia Consortium in Professional Psychology is doing the same thing, applying for a PhD APA accredited program in clinical psychology. I believe when you have these programs PhD and PsyD where students from both programs attend the same classes; it may result in program identity confusion to some degree. You have a small cohort in the PhD program and a large cohort in the PsyD program. At GWU all of the PhD students match with APA accredited sites but less than 50% for the PsyD students. Albeit, the PhD averages five students per cohort and the PsyD averages between 30 and 40 students per cohort. I have known of similar situations where the PhD students assistantships are teaching lab sections for assessment and therapy courses for the PsyD program students to the point where PhD advanced students are even involved with the statistical analysis for CRP for the PsyD students and the PsyD students are paying the PhD students for this consultation and service.

As others have recommended, you may need to consult with the program chair about the status of the APA accredited, on probation. I hate to be negative, except some program chairs are not completely honest when their income is based on how many students are recruited for each yearly cohort. Due to the cost of this program and the accelerated curriculum, it will be a high stress load as you start practicum classes your first year and it appears the curriculum is 12 credit hours per semester. You have lab courses but you don't receive credit hours for labs. Accelerated curriculum is somewhat misleading, as you will be paying $60,000 per year for tuition alone and have an intensive course load with the end result being difficult with matching to an APA accredited internship with over $300,000 in student loans. Depending on which State you apply for provisional licensure, it may involve one to two-years postdoctoral training to become fully licensed. Now if you are already wealthy or your parents are paying for your education, it may not matter. My guess is you are not so lucky. I've known some students who are wealthy or they have family wealth, and pay cash for their doctoral degree. You indicated being accepted at other APA accredited programs, so if it is not too late; you might need to pursue these options just in case GWU is denied accreditation based on their appeal.

 

[gwpsych]

I should mention that we're not as enmeshed as the program you're speaking of, as it's not the norm to take each other's classes unless there's something that one program doesn't offer that you'd like to take or if you've got a conflict in time/day at externship with a required course. Our advanced Psy.D. students do the TA/IA work for our classes as well. I'm not sure where you're seeing 15 credits/semester. It's typically between 9 and 11 🙂 (this is accurate: http://programs.columbian.gwu.edu/psyd/curriculum). Although, still, it is an intense course load.

Aside from that, really interesting info. I wonder if you're right and there's something to this pattern you've found (on the COA's end).

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

I should mention that we're not as enmeshed as the program you're speaking of, as it's not the norm to take each other's classes unless there's something that one program doesn't offer that you'd like to take or if you've got a conflict in time/day at externship with a required course. Our advanced Psy.D. students do the TA/IA work for our classes as well. I'm not sure where you're seeing 15 credits/semester. It's typically between 9 and 11 🙂 (this is accurate: http://programs.columbian.gwu.edu/psyd/curriculum). Although, still, it is an intense course load.

Aside from that, really interesting info. I wonder if you're right and there's something to this pattern you've found (on the COA's end).

From looking at the curriculum, GWU PsyD is an outlier program due to being only three-years of courses before internship and students having less than two-years of practicum before applying for internship. My guess is the APA site review team had reviewed many PsyD programs and due to these difference, red flags developed and the program was put on probation. GWU PsyD probably will need to add one or two years to the program while reducing the number of students in their cohorts.

Most University-based PsyD programs are four to five-years with over 100 credit hours before beginning internship. GWU is three-years and 83 credit hour program before beginning internship. Standards are changing for MS programs and some are now three-year programs with 60-70 credit hours for LPC licensure. This is close or equivalent to the GWU PsyD course curriculum. If GWU PsyD program was not APA accredited many licensing boards would require additional coursework for approval of provisional licensure.

I am not sure if appealing APA on probation strategy is the best option. All GWU would need to do is to update/ change their curriculum to be in compliance with APA standards and they would be fully accredited again.


From completing a PsyD program awhile ago, I was not ready for internship after three-years and I did not apply and begin internship until five years in the program. Now, some students may be ready after three-years, but if almost all PsyD programs are four to five-years before internship application, red flags develop about the different program.

Additionally, GWU PsyD has a psychodynamic emphasis and doctoral programs are suppose to have breadth and depth of training rather than specialization. Similarly, internships must have breadth and depth of training for APA accreditation. Postdoctoral fellowship is where you receive specialization training.

 

[gwpsych]

If that were the case in terms of GW, why wouldn't the COA mention the curriculum as something we needed to change? I'm not saying you're wrong, I just would think that that's something they would tell us and, to my knowledge, they have not. Again, I encourage the OP to speak to our program director, because all of this is speculation.

Although we do have a psychodynamic emphasis, we have supervisors and externships that are not, as well as classes in other orientations. We have people placed at VA's, hospitals, etc. where we are trained and practice other orientations. Some people choose to focus on dynamic, yes, but there are plenty of options to expand your training. We've always been dynamic, and it has never been an issue for the COA because of these other options.


edit: I did a three minute look around at other program's curriculums and the second one I looked at was a university based program, four years of classes and 87 credits. So if it is an issue, I'd expect some more reputable programs in trouble soon.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The "accelerated" idea always concerned me. I briefly looked at GW, but the heavy psychodynamic slant wasn't my bag.

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

The "accelerated" idea always concerned me. I briefly looked at GW, but the heavy psychodynamic slant wasn't my bag.

Doctoral degree and Accelerated... Isn't this somewhat of an oxymoron? Furthermore, when the program has a psychodynamic emphasis, it becomes even more convoluted. Psychodynamic therapy is normally long-term, so how can you learn it in three-years? I believe psychoanalytical institutes require MD and PhD/PsyD candidates to have three or more years of their own analysis before beginning formal analytical training and they are paying $300 dollars per session out-of-pocket for self-analysis.

 

[penguinbean]

Doctoral degree and Accelerated... Isn't this somewhat of an oxymoron? Furthermore, when the program has a psychodynamic emphasis, it becomes even more convoluted. Psychodynamic therapy is normally long-term, so how can you learn it in three-years? I believe psychoanalytical institutes require MD and PhD/PsyD candidates to have three or more years of their own analysis before beginning formal analytical training and they are paying $300 dollars per session out-of-pocket for self-analysis.

I don't really have a horse in this race one way or the other, but psychodynamic =/= psychoanalytic. There are many varieties of psychodynamic treatments or psychodynamic influenced treatments, including time-limited or short term ones (says not-a-dynamic-theoretical-person) I agree three years seems quite short though.

 

[Jxz]

1) I don't think they're going to release the full report of the Commission on Accreditation. They'd have to be basically insane to email it to someone nowadays as it could easily be released on the internet.

2) To comment on one of the above commentators. The decision on whether to put them on probation or not was made by the entire Commission. It was informed by the site visitor's report as well as the documents the program submitted but the entire CoA makes the decision.

3) The question is not so much what happened rather (to use their own trick against them) look at it psychodynamically as to why it happened. Was there a sense among faculty that they could not follow the rules laid down by APA and instead follow their own judgement. Was there something more important to them than APA? I think that's likely and it's that psychodynamic focus of theirs at a time when APA is moving toward evidence based.

4) They basically got in trouble for admitting people who weren't prepared to study psych on the grad level. That's a relatively basic mistake. Where were their consultants? Why did they take the eye off the ball like that? I don't think it's because these people didn't major in psych--rather because they didn't even have the basic psych courses as an undergrad. And according to APA, that would be unprepared. See 3.

5) Today they're on probation because of this. Tomorrow APA is ramping up the requirements to place people at APA sites. Next day it's something else. The twilight is coming for many of these PsyD programs. And it's not the big Argosies who are gonna get hit. As mentioned repeatedly on this board they sponsor the APA convention, they've got a ton of consultants making sure they follow the rules to the letter, they've got consortiums for their students that they can just paperwork into APA internships anyway. They have the student population to support the investment necessary to keep up. Mid-sized programs like GW, that compete for resources with other psych dept.'s are the ones that are gonna get hit hardest and go under.