Harvard clinical psych PhD

[PsychStudent]

Does anyone know anything about this program besides it's newness (and current unaccreditation)? I'm asking for a friend who's interested in applying there and is curious about the quality of the program, admissions statistics, etc. Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[LM02]

Does anyone know anything about this program besides it's newness (and current unaccreditation)? I'm asking for a friend who's interested in applying there and is curious about the quality of the program, admissions statistics, etc. Thanks!

My understanding is that, like any new program, there have been several growing pains. It has taken students a long time to get through the program, and there have been difficulties securing clinical practica placements. I'm not sure if they even have a training clinic in their department, which is pretty standard for most clinical psych PhD programs. I once spoke with a student in the program at a conference, and she explained that, at one point, there had been talk about discontinuing the program altogether.

On the flip side, the faculty are really excellent, and Boston is a fun, vibrant city.

At one point, it stated on their website that the earliest they could be up for accreditation was this past year, 2005. Not sure if they have had their site visit, though.

 

[PublicHealth]

My understanding is that, like any new program, there have been several growing pains. It has taken students a long time to get through the program, and there have been difficulties securing clinical practica placements. I'm not sure if they even have a training clinic in their department, which is pretty standard for most clinical psych PhD programs. I once spoke with a student in the program at a conference, and she explained that, at one point, there had been talk about discontinuing the program altogether.

On the flip side, the faculty are really excellent, and Boston is a fun, vibrant city.

At one point, it stated on their website that the earliest they could be up for accreditation was this past year, 2005. Not sure if they have had their site visit, though.

Small faculty as well. Only two (McNally and Nock) are active clinicians.

Details about the program: http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/psych/Harvard Clinical Psych Handbook_2005_web.pdf

 

[JatPenn]

I have a good friend who started the program this year. They made her take SIX (6) classes this semester

 

[PublicHealth]

Is everyone funded 100%?

 

[PublicHealth]

Here's the way I'd look at it. If they allow you to pick any research mentor and the program is a research based clinical program, it could be a really good situation. Potentially, you would get top notch research training/mentorship. Clinical training is really secondary in graduate school. Do a few practicums, do a summer externship at a good place, take your core classes. No big deal. You'll have your internship to devote fully to seeing patients and half a post-doc.

Great points. Questions for you:

(1) Where did you complete your PhD/PsyD?

(2) What kind of starting salaries are graduates of your postdoctoral program in clinical neuropsychology being offered?

 

[psychologystudent]

Came across this old thread, and am curious about the state and reputation of this program now that it's accredited. It looks great online -- anyone here have experiences or opinions on how it compares to other highly competitive programs (Yale, Berkeley, Wash U, etc.)?

 

[smalltownpsych]

Came across this old thread, and am curious about the state and reputation of this program now that it's accredited. It looks great online -- anyone here have experiences or opinions on how it compares to other highly competitive programs (Yale, Berkeley, Wash U, etc.)?

If it's accredited, fully-funded, good match rate, and they have a PI with research interests similar to yours who is taking students, then go ahead and apply. I think that the same could generally be said about any university clinical PhD program. There isn't really much of a reputation effect except for the negative effect of the low match high cohort professional schools. You will be building your own reputation during the process more than anything else. No one will care where you went as much as what did you do and what are you doing now.

 

[WisNeuro]

If it's accredited, fully-funded, good match rate, and they have a PI with research interests similar to yours who is taking students, then go ahead and apply. I think that the same could generally be said about any university clinical PhD program. There isn't really much of a reputation effect except for the negative effect of the low match high cohort professional schools. You will be building your own reputation during the process more than anything else. No one will care where you went as much as what did you do and what are you doing now.

Still occurs. When I've been applying to jobs, I still have people comment on my training, people and places. Neuro is a small world and people definitely care where you were. Not sure how much this happens in other specialties, but it's a factor in the better neuro jobs.

 

[psych.meout]

Still occurs. When I've been applying to jobs, I still have people comment on my training, people and places. Neuro is a small world and people definitely care where you were. Not sure how much this happens in other specialties, but it's a factor in the better neuro jobs.

But aren't those reputations based on the training available (e.g. practica) and the faculty? Aren't they based on the strength of those programs in neuro? That doesn't really seem to be the same as undergrad, where the ivies, UChicago, Stanford, etc. have particular reputations that may not necessarily reflect the strength of a given major program of study. many people who haven't done much research about doctoral programs in clinical psych seem to think they are like undergrad and need to go to a "top ranked" program, which is entirely based on prestige and name cache rather than underlying structure and rigor.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Still occurs. When I've been applying to jobs, I still have people comment on my training, people and places. Neuro is a small world and people definitely care where you were. Not sure how much this happens in other specialties, but it's a factor in the better neuro jobs.

Agreed...and not just at AMCs, though it is probably most common there.

One nice thing is you have a chance to go from a middle of the pack grad school to a solid internship to a top-notch fellowship. You don't have to come from U of Florida or similiar juggernaut to land a top fellowship, but it helps. Once you are out in the field, your school matters less and less bc by then you'll have built your own reputation.

 

[WisNeuro]

But aren't those reputations based on the training available (e.g. practica) and the faculty? Aren't they based on the strength of those programs in neuro? That doesn't really seem to be the same as undergrad, where the ivies, UChicago, Stanford, etc. have particular reputations that may not necessarily reflect the strength of a given major program of study. many people who haven't done much research about doctoral programs in clinical psych seem to think they are like undergrad and need to go to a "top ranked" program, which is entirely based on prestige and name cache rather than underlying structure and rigor.

Yes, strength of the programs (doctoral) as well as internship and postdoc. I assumed that the poster who revived this thread was talking about graduate work. I was also specifically replying to STP, who remarked that people would not care where you trained for the most part as long as it had decent match rates and the like. Def not the case though. T4C is right, as you go on, matters less as your reputation is built, but, as an ECP, the reputation of who trained you will open and close doors.

 

[smalltownpsych]

As I look back at the thread, one of the concerns expressed was whether or not they have secured solid practicum sites. One strength of my own program was it's access to good sites which led to excellent experiences and further opened doors. We also had a good reputation that led to our students getting the pick of the local placements in a competitive market. So I guess reputation does matter. Finding out if the program is placing students at good sites and has a good local reputation might be a little more difficult. I don't know the Boston area other than a few conferences in Cape Cod and plenty of good seafood so will defer to others on that question.

 

[rerope]

Im curious about this program too but aside from the faculty's work interests its hard to find personal anecdotes.

 

[rerope]

In my opinion, it's a very strong program. I am particularly familiar with one lab, though I have known a few students in others. Of course, a big factor in how strong the program is comes down to research fit, like everything else. Most of the students I've known have done practica at McLean, which (as far as I'm concerned) is about as good as it gets for specialty units. Very strong researchers, some producing a ton of research. Lots of good research opportunities (connections with all those Harvard-affiliated hospitals), nice facilities, well-funded, etc. I think it's right up there with the other very competitive programs.

Thanks! From what I saw it looked that way (and way out of my league so I'm not holding my breath!) but an applicant can dream. There aren't many results on TGC so the timeline of the admission process is pretty fuzzy as well.