This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I have also been accepted to PGSP-Stanford. Through a combination of scholarships and awards I have figured out that tuition will be manageable for me and comparable to the cost of the other program I have been accepted to (Rutgers).

I'm most interested in the quality of the academics and clinical training offered. Also, as I will be possibly making the move cross country to live in the Bay Area, I'm curious to know what people think of the quality of life there.
 
if you are the average psychologist, you will likely earn $65K/year. Is the tuition at PGSP worth it?
 
if you are the average psychologist, you will likely earn $65K/year. Is the tuition at PGSP worth it?

Is there honestly no way to make this conversation not happen every time this and similar programs are brought up? I have asked nicely that this thread NOT be about that. There are many threads that are; let this one be independent of the cost concerns!
 
I have also been accepted to PGSP-Stanford. Through a combination of scholarships and awards I have figured out that tuition will be manageable for me and comparable to the cost of the other program I have been accepted to (Rutgers).

I'm most interested in the quality of the academics and clinical training offered. Also, as I will be possibly making the move cross country to live in the Bay Area, I'm curious to know what people think of the quality of life there.

Well, its the peoples Republic of California, so its, uh, liberal to say the least.

I think the clinical opps in the area are great but am unsure how heavily involved the program itself is in overseeing clinical training.
 
I have also been accepted to PGSP-Stanford. Through a combination of scholarships and awards I have figured out that tuition will be manageable for me and comparable to the cost of the other program I have been accepted to (Rutgers).

I'm most interested in the quality of the academics and clinical training offered. Also, as I will be possibly making the move cross country to live in the Bay Area, I'm curious to know what people think of the quality of life there.

I would like to echo this question about living in the SF Bay Area/Silicon Valley.
 
Is there honestly no way to make this conversation not happen every time this and similar programs are brought up? I have asked nicely that this thread NOT be about that. There are many threads that are; let this one be independent of the cost concerns!
May I suggest the "Help me Decide" thread?
 
May I suggest the "Help me Decide" thread?

Apologies if I posted this in the wrong place, then. Is there anyway to migrate the post instead of essentially double posting?
 
RIGHT OFF THE BAT: Let's avoid the usual PsyD/PhD money debate that happens on these forums. I get it, I get it, but let's just assume that I can afford the degree and stop worrying about that.

Okay, so, money aside (and I recognize that's a BIG aside)—are there any current or former students who can tell me what they think of the program? I've been offered admission and am seriously considering attending, but am curious to hear what people have to say, both positive and negative.

Thanks!

Mod Note: Merged this into the "Help me decide" thread. End Mod Note

(Foregoing the financial component, as requested)

I pretty much agree with WisNeuro here--of the three options mentioned, I'd probably lean toward PGSP, as (I believe) they have better outcome statistics. I haven't met many folks who attended that program, but the ones I've spoken with seemed happy with it overall, and I believe the training relationships with Stanford and the Palo Alto (or maybe it was the SF) VA can likely be leveraged for some good opportunities. Assuming you feel like you'll be able to get enough "individual attention" in light of average class sizes, there are certainly worse bets out there.
 
It's difficult to have a really useful conversation about PAU/PGSP (or any program) without talking about cost.
For example, lets say we continue to make the monetary cost issue verboten. We can still talk about the opportunity cost of attending PGSP/PAU versus other programs, or doing other options.... for example, what's the opportunity cost of doing another year or two as an RA, getting research experience, getting your GRE score up, and then applying to funded programs and possibly gaining attendance to a 100% funded program? Oops. Can't talk about monetary cost - even if it's through a back door. You see the problem.

Anyways, all I can say is the Psy.D program has had a very nice run of high APA match rates over the last year or so, which is something to consider as a positive. As a negative, while PGSP a few years ago actually had some good geropsychology training (a growth area in psychology if there ever was one), apparently these days they offer virtually no training or supervision to students with an interest in geriatrics. Booo!

For the jt676, congrats on getting the scholarships and assistance - but if your assistance doesn't bring down your expected total debt load to about 65K or less upon graduation (and I'd include your undergrad debt, if any, in that number as well) then I'd question whether that represents "manageable" debt given current realities of psychologist employment prospects and prevailing student loan interest rates.
 
More of a front door to it. Out of those three options, I'd say PGSP is probably a safer bet. All fairly expensive. I'm wary of Widener because their stats look fishy.

What about their stats look fishy to you? I'm curious because I might've missed something!
 
What about their stats look fishy to you? I'm curious because I might've missed something!
The problem is that APPIC doesn't list them, and they list their match rates as 100% despite gigantic class sizes. Even top tier programs miss every now and then, the fact that they list themselves as not missing a match out of about 500 students in the past 7ish years is a bit odd.
 
Is there honestly no way to make this conversation not happen every time this and similar programs are brought up? I have asked nicely that this thread NOT be about that. There are many threads that are; let this one be independent of the cost concerns!
Mod Note: Merged this into the "Help me decide" thread. End Mod Note

(Foregoing the financial component, as requested)

I pretty much agree with WisNeuro here--of the three options mentioned, I'd probably lean toward PGSP, as (I believe) they have better outcome statistics. I haven't met many folks who attended that program, but the ones I've spoken with seemed happy with it overall, and I believe the training relationships with Stanford and the Palo Alto (or maybe it was the SF) VA can likely be leveraged for some good opportunities. Assuming you feel like you'll be able to get enough "individual attention" in light of average class sizes, there are certainly worse bets out there.

I think that pretty much sums up my feelings about PGSP/PAU, other than my point about geriatrics. I have pretty intimate knowledge of PGSP/PAU and I can second the point about individual attention - you may have to make significant effort to get the attention you might need in completing a quality dissertation or Psy.D. doctoral project. On the other hand, I'm pretty confident they *will* give you a significant amount of attention in terms of making sure you get matched for an APA internship... that seems quite clear from what I can tell.

Note that their consortium is between the Psy.D. program, the Palo Alto VA, and Stanford's Psychiatry Department.

[edit: also see this thread http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/palo-alto-university.980468/ ]
 
Last edited:
The problem is that APPIC doesn't list them, and they list their match rates as 100% despite gigantic class sizes. Even top tier programs miss every now and then, the fact that they list themselves as not missing a match out of about 500 students in the past 7ish years is a bit odd.

They arrive at the match rate numbers via a combination of a couple practices: the first practice is they seem to take great care in identifying student interests early on and matching them with available training sites as they progress through their training. That sounds good.

The other practice I've heard about PGSP/PAU using is perhaps a little more questionable, IDK - I hear they frequently ask weaker students to sit out applying for the internship match (say, for a year, while they get more practicum training and bulk up their application) so as to not drag down their percentage. That has the advantage of bringing up their match rate, but those unfortunate students of course have to shell out for an additional year of tuition... I think at a reduced rate, but it still costs them significantly (cost of living, opportunity costs, etc).
 
Last edited:
The other practice I've heard about PGSP/PAU using is perhaps a little more questionable, IDK - I hear they frequently ask weaker students to sit out applying for the internship match (say, for a year, while they get more practicum training and bulk up their application) so as to not drag down their percentage. That has the advantage of bringing up their match rate, but those unfortunate students of course have to shell out for an additional year of tuition... I think at a reduced rate, but it still costs them significantly (cost of living, opportunity costs, etc).
Sounds pretty shady to me.
 
The problem is that APPIC doesn't list them, and they list their match rates as 100% despite gigantic class sizes. Even top tier programs miss every now and then, the fact that they list themselves as not missing a match out of about 500 students in the past 7ish years is a bit odd.

Oh, well that's because they have a bunch of captive APA-accredited part-time internship sites in that you have to attend while in your 4th and 5th years (assuming you've met all the other requirements.) An advantage in many ways, but not if you're not particularly eager to stay and potentially have your career forever be in the region.
 
Sounds pretty shady to me.

That's pretty crummy. I'm sure it's presented as giving those students the best possible chance, but still… did you hear about that from a student?
 
That's pretty crummy. I'm sure it's presented as giving those students the best possible chance, but still… did you hear about that from a student?

It was from a student.

For what it's worth, I doubt it's a practice they heavily rely on, since it seems like students generally finish in 5-6 years by large margins....
 
Last edited:
MSPP, Adler school, or Chicago school for clinical psych PsyD ?
 
It was from a student.

For what it's worth, I doubt it's a practice they heavily rely on, since it seems like students generally finish in 5-6 years by large margins....

Right. As ever, one has to maintain the ol' "if I work hard enough" attitude. Of course, everybody's trying to work their butts off, presumably.
 
MSPP, Adler school, or Chicago school for clinical psych PsyD ?

I'm on my phone at the moment, so I can't look it up, but doesn't Adler have marginally better APA match rates?
 
Caveat: I'm not intimately familiar with any of those programs, but knee-jerk reaction is that I don't know if I'd be particularly thrilled about any of them, unfortunately.
Do you have any constructive info for me?
 
Chicago school got highest this year

How much higher? Do you feel like one of them has a leg-up in the internship race?

And do you have any gut feelings from your interviews?
 
How much higher? Do you feel like one of them has a leg-up in the internship race?

And do you have any gut feelings from your interviews?
Only interviewed at Chicago school (and got in) so far and liked it. Chicago school isn't much higher but higher in apa sites more so
 
I'm on my phone at the moment, so I can't look it up, but doesn't Adler have marginally better APA match rates?

MSPP (Clinical Psych Psy.D.): 61% licensed (2003-2011); APA-accredited internship match rates ranging from 7-35% from 2007-2014 (most other students obtained non-APA, non-APPIC internships); recent class sizes ranged from 52-96 students

Adler (Chicago): 49% licensed (2003-2011); APA-accredited internship match rates ranging from 14-55% from 2006-2013 (most others obtained a mix of either APPIC-member or "other" internships); recent class sizes ranged from 75-110 students

CSPP: 73% licensed (2003-2011); APA-accredited internship match rates ranging from 39-67% from 2006-2013 (others obtained a mix of either APPIC-member or "other" internships); recent class sizes ranged from 65-121 students


Again, for $38-46k/year, I don't know that I'd be especially excited about any of the three, unfortunately.

Of the three, Chicago School seems to have the "best" numbers, but they also have the largest class sizes in general/recently, and are I think the most expensive.
 
Only interviewed at Chicago school (and got in) so far and liked it. Chicago school isn't much higher but higher in apa sites more so

Did you get into the other programs without interviewing? If so, that's a little fishy. And I'd try to stick to the program with the highest APA match rates.
 
Did you get into the other programs without interviewing? If so, that's a little fishy. And I'd try to stick to the program with the highest APA match rates.
No their interviews are next week.
 
MSPP (Clinical Psych Psy.D.): 61% licensed (2003-2011); APA-accredited internship match rates ranging from 7-35% from 2007-2014 (most other students obtained non-APA, non-APPIC internships); recent class sizes ranged from 52-96 students

Adler (Chicago): 49% licensed (2003-2011); APA-accredited internship match rates ranging from 14-55% from 2006-2013 (most others obtained a mix of either APPIC-member or "other" internships); recent class sizes ranged from 75-110 students

CSPP: 73% licensed (2003-2011); APA-accredited internship match rates ranging from 39-67% from 2006-2013 (others obtained a mix of either APPIC-member or "other" internships); recent class sizes ranged from 65-121 students


Again, for $38-46k/year, I don't know that I'd be especially excited about any of the three, unfortunately.

Of the three, Chicago School seems to have the "best" numbers, but they also have the largest class sizes in general/recently, and are I think the most expensive.
Coming in with a 60hr masters lets me transfer some credits which helps
 
Do you have any constructive info for me?

I think the best "constructive info" you are going to get is that, in reviewing current outcomes metrics (objective data) and tuition cost, NONE of them are "recommended."

If you want to be one of those people who could very well succeed from largely subpar programs/training, then go ahead. Its just a big risk (looking at a large Ns) and current psychologists are NOT going to actively encourage it.
 
Last edited:
I think the best "constructive info" you are going to get is that, in reviewing current outcomes metrics (objective data) and tuition cost, NONE of them are "recommended."

If you want to be one of those people who could very well succeed from largely subpar programs/training, then go ahead. Its just a big risk (looking at a large Ns) and current psychologists are NOT going to actively encourage it
Well info I'm looking for is whether these programs lead to successful careers and if they're worthwhile. Why do you believe they're subpar? Compared to which programs?
 
Objective data tells me that they are. Compared to most all university-based programs.

What data are you using to guide you towards applying to these programs? In other words, what makes you think they are good programs? And why are you wanting to spend 200k for a modal salary of 75K?
 
My coworkers at my practicum go to two of these programs and I am interested in the classes and work they're doing. These are my second choice since I have not gotten into any phd programs unfortunately.
 
Thats not objective data.
 
Cost (tuition) vs median psychologist income? Total debt load at graduation? APA Match rate? EPPP pass rate? Size of student cohorts? Quality of Supervision of clinical activities? Number of EBT protocols learned? Diversity of practicum sites and diversity of practicum activities (Hopefully we are doing more than just therapy and testing)? Number of faculty involved in scholarly productivity with students? Number of students presenting empirical projects at conferences? Number of students contributing to the literature in their area of clinical interest? Group/cohort outcomes? Work place setting post graduation?

And numerous people have told you, based on the data they do know (some of the above), none are recommended. You did not find this to be "constructive?"

Many of these are availabke online or by calling the school and asking. Have you explored these?
 
I did not find the one person saying they don't recommend those schools constructive without telling why and that's why I asked if they had constructive comments for me.
 
I've reviewed applications from CSPP for internships and postdocs. Granted, small n, but they were lackluster and easily in the bottom half of the pile.
Why were they lackluster? What were they missing?
 
Gotcha. Thank you

Its possible to succeed from these programs, sure. Same way that is possible to go to school in inner city Baltimore and get a good edu and be accepted to an ivy league. Some people can rise above and some just have luck despite other variables NOT woking in their favor. Would I ever recommend that as a viable path to that end state? NO!

Those of us in the field have an ethical, and moral, I would argue, obligation not to recommend inordinately high risk (both financially and clincially) paths to the field. Its for the good of the student, as well as for the field as a whole. Does that makes sense?
 
Last edited:
Congratulations to all of the prospective students on this thread who are deciding between programs. I am a current student in the PGSP-Stanford PsyD program (currently a 5th year student on internship now) and would be happy to answer any questions people have about the program. I will try to reply to some of the points made previously on this thread.

Thisisaname and Jt676-
Both of you posted requesting additional information about the program and specifically stated that cost isn’t an area of concern for you. I won’t address the cost concerns brought up previously in this thread since that wasn’t what you asked about, but am happy to PM further about those if you have questions.

As I said above, I am currently on internship and am graduating from the consortium in June 2014. I have had a wonderful experience in the program so far and am very happy that I decided to attend. I feel that the quality of the academics in the consortium is very high. I took classes from PAU and Stanford faculty that are experts in their fields and I feel like my academic coursework prepared me well for a career as a psychologist. The coursework is heavily focused on evidence based practice, which has prepared me well for working in a variety of settings. I received incredible support and mentorship from both my academic and my dissertation advisors, as well as from other program faculty members. I also really benefited from the relationships that the program cultivates with top practicum sites in the bay area. The practicum coordinators meet at least once/year with each practicum supervisor to ensure that the site meets their standards, so the quality of the training is well controlled. They only select sites that are focused on evidence based practice, so the practicum training closely relates to what you learn in class. For me, by far the biggest advantage of this program is the support they provide throughout the internship application process. I am thrilled to be completing an APA internship in the bay area, and the support of the program faculty allowed me to accomplish that.

With respect to living in the Bay Area, I must admit that as a native Californian I might have a bias. I absolutely love living here, and many of my friends who moved here from other parts of the country are intent on settling here. The cost of living is high, but the many perks outweigh the cost (in my opinion).

I’m sorry to tell you that I am not very familiar with the Widener or Roosevelt psyd programs, so I don’t have much to offer by way of comparison. I do have a friend who is at the Rutgers program and likes it very much, but I don't have any concrete information about the pros/cons of that program. Hopefully students from those programs will be able to chime in.

Jeyro-
You are correct that we have had a 100% APA match rate for the past 2 years. I have previously posted about our high match rates for the past several years. I believe that a lot of the information you posted is inaccurate. It is important when talking about PAU to distinguish between the PsyD and the Phd programs, as they have different application processes, faculty, match rates, class sizes, missions, etc.

Some of the information you posted may be applicable to the PhD program but not the PsyD program. For example, the Psyd program has never offered a geropsychology specialty track. It has always been a generalist program that offers well-rounded training, whereas the PhD program offers various tracks.

It is 100% false that the PsyD program encourages students to defer internship for a year. Having been through the process, I can say with confidence that nobody is discouraged from applying to internship during their 4th year. Some students decide to defer for personal reasons (having a baby, pursuing international clinical research opportunities, etc), but they are certainly not held back by the program. You can see from our stats that mean time to graduation is 5 years, which clearly indicates that students aren’t being discouraged from applying to internship in a timely fashion.

I know that these threads can get heated at times, so I just want to be clear that my intention is to provide information to those students sincerely interested in learning more about the consortium. Please feel free to post or PM me if you have additional questions. Best of luck in your decision making process.
 
Last edited:
Congratulations to all of the prospective students on this thread who are deciding between programs. I am a current student in the PsyD program (currently a 5th year student on internship now) and would be happy to answer any questions people have about the program. I will try to reply to some of the points made previously on this thread.

Thisisaname and Jt676-
Both of you posted requesting additional information about the program and specifically stated that cost isn’t an area of concern for you. I won’t address the cost concerns brought up previously in this thread since that wasn’t what you asked about, but am happy to PM further about those if you have questions.

As I said above, I am currently on internship and am graduating from the consortium in June 2014. I have had a wonderful experience in the program so far and am very happy that I decided to attend. I feel that the quality of the academics in the consortium is very high. I took classes from PAU and Stanford faculty that are experts in their fields and I feel like my academic coursework prepared me well for a career as a psychologist. The coursework is heavily focused on evidence based practice, which has prepared me well for working in a variety of settings. I received incredible support and mentorship from both my academic and my dissertation advisors, as well as from other program faculty members. I also really benefited from the relationships that the program cultivates with top practicum sites in the bay area. The practicum coordinators meet at least once/year with each practicum supervisor to ensure that the site meets their standards, so the quality of the training is well controlled. They only select sites that are focused on evidence based practice, so the practicum training closely relates to what you learn in class. For me, by far the biggest advantage of this program is the support they provide throughout the internship application process. I am thrilled to be completing an APA internship in the bay area, and the support of the program faculty allowed me to accomplish that.

With respect to living in the Bay Area, I must admit that as a native Californian I might have a bias. I absolutely love living here, and many of my friends who moved here from other parts of the country are intent on settling here. The cost of living is high, but the many perks outweigh the cost (in my opinion).

I’m sorry to tell you that I am not very familiar with the Widener or Roosevelt psyd programs, so I don’t have much to offer by way of comparison. I do have a friend who is at the Rutgers program and likes it very much, but I don't have any concrete information about the pros/cons of that program. Hopefully students from those programs will be able to chime in.

Jeyro-
You are correct that we have had a 100% APA match rate for the past 2 years. I have previously posted about our high match rates for the past several years. I believe that a lot of the information you posted is inaccurate. It is important when talking about PAU to distinguish between the PsyD and the Phd programs, as they have different application processes, faculty, match rates, class sizes, missions, etc.

Some of the information you posted may be applicable to the PhD program but not the PsyD program. For example, the Psyd program has never offered a geropsychology specialty track. It has always been a generalist program that offers well-rounded training, whereas the PhD program offers various tracks.

It is 100% false that the PsyD program encourages students to defer internship for a year. Having been through the process, I can say with confidence that nobody is discouraged from applying to internship during their 4th year. Some students decide to defer for personal reasons (having a baby, pursuing international clinical research opportunities, etc), but they are certainly not held back by the program. You can see from our stats that mean time to graduation is 5 years, which clearly indicates that students aren’t being discouraged from applying to internship in a timely fashion.

I know that these threads can get heated at times, so I just want to be clear that my intention is to provide information to those students sincerely interested in learning more about the consortium. Please feel free to post or PM me if you have additional questions. Best of luck in your decision making process.

Just to help clarify, as you might've been re-directed here from the merged thread link rather than the main "Help me decide" link--I believe CaliPsych is talking about PGSP.
 
Jeyro-

Some of the information you posted may be applicable to the PhD program but not the PsyD program. For example, the Psyd program has never offered a geropsychology specialty track. It has always been a generalist program that offers well-rounded training, whereas the PhD program offers various tracks.
I didn't say that PGSP/PAU (either it's PsyD program or the PhD program) ever offered a geropsychology specialty track. Given that geropsychology is only just now poised to be recognized as a boarded specialty by ABPP, offering a specialty track (e.g., like a certificate program) in that area probably would be highly premature, although less so now.

What I was referring to was that PGSP/PAU used to do a much better job offering specialty geropsych training to their students (via classwork and specialized dissertation supervision) with interests in geropsych - they actually in the past had faculty who specialized in geropsychology and apparently did a poor job at retention.

My understanding now is there is no faculty at PGSP/PAU, nor any specialized classwork offered (either PhD or PsyD) in geropsychology. I consider that a shortcoming, particularly since geropsychology is poised to achieve ABPP specialty status.

It is 100% false that the PsyD program encourages students to defer internship for a year.

Again, I heard that from a student - I'm not making it up out of whole cloth.

You're correct that if it's a practice they used more frequently, it should probably show up in their statistics on "time to complete dissertation." However, allegedly PGSP/PAU also has part-time captive APA internship sites, which sub-part Match applicants may be getting fed into in lieu of applying to the match (don't know if this is true, but someone else alleged this in this very thread). I'd be curious of other ways statistics like this can be fudged.

Let's be clear - I actually don't believe that PGSP/PAU's "true" PsyD match statistics are probably that far off from 100%, to their credit. They appear to largely be an exception from the majority of other FSPS programs in that respect. In another thread (which I linked to above) I've said previously that if money was truly no object (which is true for only a very small number of us), PGSP/PAU probably offers one of the best, if not the best training of all of the FSPS professional programs in psychology out there. Of course, I also said that if money is an issue - I couldn't recommend PGSP/PAU to anyone, period.
 
Last edited:
I didn't say that PGSP/PAU (either it's PsyD program or the PhD program) ever offered a geropsychology specialty track. Given that geropsychology is only just now poised to be recognized as a boarded specialty by ABPP, offering a specialty track (e.g., like a certificate program) in that area probably would be highly premature, although less so now.

What I was referring to was that PGSP/PAU used to do a much better job offering specialty geropsych training to their students (via classwork and specialized dissertation supervision) with interests in geropsych - they actually in the past had faculty who specialized in geropsychology and apparently did a poor job at retention.

My understanding now is there is no faculty at PGSP/PAU, nor any specialized classwork offered (either PhD or PsyD) in geropsychology. I consider that a shortcoming, particularly since geropsychology is poised to achieve ABPP specialty status.



Again, I heard that from a student - I'm not making it up out of whole cloth.

You're correct that if it's a practice they used more frequently, it should probably show up in their statistics on "time to complete dissertation." However, allegedly PGSP/PAU also has part-time captive APA internship sites, which sub-part Match applicants may be getting fed into in lieu of applying to the match (don't know if this is true, but someone else alleged this in this very thread). I'd be curious of other ways statistics like this can be fudged.

Let's be clear - I actually don't believe that PGSP/PAU's "true" PsyD match statistics are probably that far off from 100%, to their credit. They appear to largely be an exception from the majority of other FSPS programs in that respect. In another thread (which I linked to above) I've said previously that if money was truly no object (which is true for only a very small number of us), PGSP/PAU probably offers one of the best, if not the best training of all of the FSPS professional programs in psychology out there. Of course, I also said that if money is an issue - I couldn't recommend PGSP/PAU to anyone, period.

The part-time captive sites are at Widener, not PGSP-Stanford. Things got muddled/confused at some point I guess.
 
AcronymAllergy- Thanks for clarifying that I was talking about the Consortium. I edited my post to make that more clear.

JeyRo- Your comments about geropsychology are not relevant to the questions/concerns posed by the applicants, so unless you're considering applying to the Consortium to study geropsych and have questions about that I think I'll just refrain from commenting further.

With respect to our internship match rates, I would like to clarify that the PsyD program has no captive internship slots. The PhD program has worked with some Bay Area APPIC sites to help them gain APA accreditation, and in exchange for that has at least one captive APA internship slot at Marin County.

I am attaching our most recent APA match statistics, which clearly illustrate our 100% match rate and should clear up any confusion.
 

Attachments

Top