Hi there everyone, I wanted to ask some advice from those in the know here. For better or worse, because of my medical condition (a funny neuromuscular disorder called fibromyalgia,) I would highly prefer staying in the LA area for graduate school. My family and old friends are here, and if I ever need any kind of serious help or feel like garbage and can't do something, which happens reasonably often, I can always ask for some help, which will be much more difficult if I go to school out of state. Right now, my top choice for degree is the PsyD, but I still plan to apply to MFT and possibly MSW programs at the end of this year. I really have absolutely no interest in research, and I can't see myself pushing through the extra year or so, in addition to spending time designing experiments all the time, for a PhD. I would probably quit if I had to do that. The school choices around here aren't the greatest, but I wanted to hear what everyone had to say about them. The choices nearby where I live in Los Angeles, as in about a 45 min drive or less, are Alliant University, University of La Verne and Azusa Pacific University. Rutgers, none of them are, but I don't think as of this point in time, I would be able to survive long outside of LA while going through a doctorate program. Pepperdine is not an option, as they require a master's degree, which I don't have (I'm a recent graduate,) and a teacher I'm close with who will be writing a letter of rec for me tells me that Alliant here is a far superior program to Pepperdine anyways. Perhaps also an MSW or MFT program within 45 minutes of the San Fernando Valley, like CSUN, might be a better choice for me, perhaps not. I'm still not sure, but I want to hear the opinions here so I can make the most informed decision possible. I know it's a big first post, but I appreciate any help I can get.
LA PsyD programs..which one is best for me?
- Thread starter OpenPalm
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,827
- Reaction score
- 5,609
Then you probably shouldnt be aspiring to doctoral level psychologist in my opinion (and many others will second this notion). Contrary to popular notions, the Vale model never wanted or intended for people who have zero interest in research to become doctoral level psychologists. The orginal intention was to provide more clincial training, not neglect the research aspect totally. All psy.ds will have a research componet (usually smaller scale dissertations) and you will need to have interest in research design and research questions in order to effectively synthisize and critque research, both in training and as a professional. If you dont, then you are not a scientist, and therefore, not a psychologist. A scientific mind set in essential to practice doctoral level psychology. Its the foundation of dicipline!
PS: I thought Rutgers was the state university of New Jersey?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,383
- Reaction score
- 4,332
You need to be involved enough to at least be a consumer of research, even if you aren't a producer. MA/MS level programs are more geared towards applied work as they minimize the research requirements, though you'll still have to review articles, etc.
It seems I should have been more clear here. For me, I can live with writing one dissertation, especially if it's based off a case study where you get to apply techniques based off research findings or treatment methodologies for example, which many Psy.D. programs allow. Some programs even allow a dissertation which involves compiling the research and other scholastic papers in a certain field into an insightful paper without having to do original research. What I do not wish to do is to continuously design experiments, having to constantly worry about controlling for extraneous variables and counterbalancing, and publish papers based upon those studies. I understand basic research methodology and am able to be a judicious consumer of research, but I definitely don't want to be a producer of original research, though as I said, I can live with having to do it just once. Now guys, any chance we can get back to the topic at hand guys and discuss the 3 schools in question? That's what I'm primarily interested in, though I welcome comments & critiques in other areas
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1,179
- Reaction score
- 5
While I agree with the posts stating that even PsyDs have to be willing to learn research methods and understand it as a consumer, I wanted to just say that this is fairly doable, even if you're not in love with the research end of psychology.
I will probably take flak for saying this, however, as the majority on SDN are PhD folks who favor research. I respect their opinions, but I'll give you the other side, FWIW, which is that probably 50% of PsyD students have little interest in research and view it as a necessary means to an end (getting the doctorate). So, you gotta learn the research, but you don't have to love it (if you know what I mean).
If you did okay in undergrad stats and research methods, you can probably handle the PsyD research requirements.
As you may have guessed, I'm in a PsyD program.
Edit: As for the specific schools, I don't know much about them. Alliant gets a bad rap, but I think it depends on your professional goals. My advice is be sure to ask around locally, especially among psychologists who attended there. I know the competition is fierce in California. I'd want to know how competitive Alliant grads are in getting internships and in the job market.
Good luck.
I will probably take flak for saying this, however, as the majority on SDN are PhD folks who favor research. I respect their opinions, but I'll give you the other side, FWIW, which is that probably 50% of PsyD students have little interest in research and view it as a necessary means to an end (getting the doctorate). So, you gotta learn the research, but you don't have to love it (if you know what I mean).
If you did okay in undergrad stats and research methods, you can probably handle the PsyD research requirements.As you may have guessed, I'm in a PsyD program.
Edit: As for the specific schools, I don't know much about them. Alliant gets a bad rap, but I think it depends on your professional goals. My advice is be sure to ask around locally, especially among psychologists who attended there. I know the competition is fierce in California. I'd want to know how competitive Alliant grads are in getting internships and in the job market.
Good luck.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2009
- Messages
- 422
- Reaction score
- 38
Do you think that there will ever be a time that you would be able to leave that general area? It seems like limiting yourself in terms of location is really going to set you back. Unfortunately, it's really difficult to get into doctoral level graduate school in psychology. If you are only able to apply to 3 schools, the chances of you getting in become very very small. I know that there are lots of PsyD's out in California compared to the PsyD's where I live. Perhaps you could wait a little bit longer and apply to more programs that are a little bit farther than you want now (if this is possible later on). Many people apply to 10-15 programs per cycle, and usually get less than half those in interviews and half that in actual offers (obviously depending on the applicant). And MSW might be good for you. You can do counseling with this degree, however it is obviously not as advanced. I am curious wat you mean when you say you might not be able to do something and can ask for help with your friends and family around. Also, I have heard the same about Alliant, but not sure about the others.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2009
- Messages
- 422
- Reaction score
- 38
OP used Rutgers as an example for a great PsyD program. Saying that the programs he/she is applying to are not as great as Rutgers, but are still good nonetheless.
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 100
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm not sure who told you Alliant is better than Pepperdine, but in general you need to check out the internship match rate for each school. LA Alliant's scores are absymal: last year, 166 students applied for some-sort of internship. ONLY 23 APPLIED TO APA/APPIC INTERNSHIPS (in case you didn't know, APPIC is not as good as APA. you want to know who got an APA internship). The other students only applied to CAPIC internships, which don't go through an accredidation process. Of the 23 who APPLIED for APA internships, only 3 obtained an APA internship. 6 obtained an APPIC internship. So, out of a class of 166, only 3 obtained an APA internship. This is horrible. Pepperdine, on the other hand, does much better. Most recently, they had 29 students apply for internship (their class sizes are much smaller, also a good sign). Of those, 22 received an APA internship and 4 got an APPIC internship. Still not perfect, but much more acceptable. I would contact the school about the master's requirement, I know someone who is starting this year straight from undergrad. Also, if you're not willing to leave the LA area then you should at least consider getting a master's degree as well so you can attend a decent program (Pepperdine).
- Joined
- May 3, 2009
- Messages
- 88
- Reaction score
- 1
Wow. I'm not sure what is more frightening, the fact that they had 166 people eligible for internship (most university-based programs have 3-5), or the fact that less than 5% obtained an APA match.
It is clear that these programs are contributing to the saturation of doctoral-level providers - especially in CA - and to a lowering of the reputation of psychology as a whole (can you imagine if medical schools had such programs? where only 5% of a class matched in residency? the respect towards medicine would take a major hit for allowing such programs to be accredited). APA needs to revoke accreditation if the match rate for a program consistently falls below a certain threshold, but inlikely given that these CSPP/Argosy programs have disproportionate influence in the APA government from all the $$$$ they bring.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2008
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 0
Yea, I guess they have some kind of power. Congresswoman Judy Chu who represents the 32nd district of California is a graduate of CSPP's PhD program. Also, Dr. Teresa Chapa, another CSPP graduate, serves as director of the office of minority health in the US Department of Health and Human Services. That's just a few. While I do look at match stats and consider them very important, I also look at what alumni is doing. I think too, some of those students are "non-traditional" and do not necessarily seek APA internships, but take CAPIC because their families reside in California. As far as graduates are concerned, I'm sure someone will argue that the percentage of those who achieve great stature compared to the whole graduate pool is dismal. I wonder how that compares to other universities. Anyone do the stats?
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2009
- Messages
- 1
- Reaction score
- 0
Have you looked into Ryokan?
Hi there,
I know your post is from a few years ago. Some I hope you made the best choice and now you can help me. I am basically in the same situation as you were on 2009. The only difference is that I cannot leave LA for a different personal reason. I was wondering what was your choice, and if your recommend getting an MFT from CSUN and then applying for PsyD? Or do you recommend a direct psyD after psych bachelor? I am interested in therapy and maybe teaching as a professor, but I am not interested in research. It's not that I have zero interest, but it is not my favorite area in psychology. I am currently a junior majoring in psychology at CSUN, and my GPA is high, and I am trying different internships every semester. I really appreciate if you share your experience with me. Thanks
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2010
- Messages
- 9,353
- Reaction score
- 5,654
You're no doubt going to hear something similar from other posters, but please do keep in mind that by restricting yourself geographically (not only to a specific state, but to only one city in that state), you're really setting yourself up for a very tough time come internship, postdoc, and employment. Combine that with the staggering price tag associated with non-funded Psy.D. programs, and I'd strongly urge you to reconsider going down that path.
California has some very, very well-respected funded Ph.D. programs (e.g., UCLA), but they're very research-heavy, and thus don't sound like a good fit for you. There are certainly more clinician-friendly and clinician-focused Ph.D. programs out there, but you're likely going to need to leave CA to find them.
The OP hasn't posted in over two years, so I'm not sure the odds are good of him/her replying to you. However, I believe another poster asked a similar question regarding Psy.D. programs in California; you might want to try searching the forums to see if you can find it.
California has some very, very well-respected funded Ph.D. programs (e.g., UCLA), but they're very research-heavy, and thus don't sound like a good fit for you. There are certainly more clinician-friendly and clinician-focused Ph.D. programs out there, but you're likely going to need to leave CA to find them.
The OP hasn't posted in over two years, so I'm not sure the odds are good of him/her replying to you. However, I believe another poster asked a similar question regarding Psy.D. programs in California; you might want to try searching the forums to see if you can find it.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2006
- Messages
- 297
- Reaction score
- 1
If you are absolutely set on a PsyD I'm not really clear as to why you'd put yourself even further into debt by paying for a master's degree as well. Is there something that I'm missing? You will have no problem getting into a professional school as long as you have money or a loan to pay for it.
Given that you're in LA (a highly oversatured market) looking to stay there with a less desirable degree, there is a high chance that you will end up with a CAPIC internship which will severely limit your jobs. I don't know any place that would hire a professor with this degree/internship experience (maybe a prof school, but the ones I've seen have required APA internship) so you're career will be set on doing clinical work at places that are ok with a PsyD and likely a CAPIC internship.
Not trying to be harsh but want you to realize what you're signing up for. Since you aren't willing to leave your area I'd say you need to do some heavy research at the front end to see where each schools graduates (a) end up on internship and (b) end up career wise and how long it took them to get there.
Given that you're in LA (a highly oversatured market) looking to stay there with a less desirable degree, there is a high chance that you will end up with a CAPIC internship which will severely limit your jobs. I don't know any place that would hire a professor with this degree/internship experience (maybe a prof school, but the ones I've seen have required APA internship) so you're career will be set on doing clinical work at places that are ok with a PsyD and likely a CAPIC internship.
Not trying to be harsh but want you to realize what you're signing up for. Since you aren't willing to leave your area I'd say you need to do some heavy research at the front end to see where each schools graduates (a) end up on internship and (b) end up career wise and how long it took them to get there.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,548
- Reaction score
- 7
you can work as an adjunct with a masters. in a competitive academic market like LA you'll have trouble getting more than PT work teaching anyway, especially if you don't see yourself developing a research career (more important than teaching for academic posts).
good luck with your decision. at least the passage of Prop 30 provides a bit of hope for public ed in CA, so CSUN may not be a bad bet given your goals.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,383
- Reaction score
- 4,332
I can't even fathom how low that pay will be for anyone in that type of position....definitely not livable (even PT) in CA.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,548
- Reaction score
- 7
Not advocating adjuncting as a vocation (though many with uni-based doctorates in other disciplines do get stuck with this dismal "option"). Just stating that one doesn't need a doctorate to teach on the scale that the OP appears to have in mind. One of my friends on the academic job market says that even the teaching institutions s/he interviewed with only want to know about his/her research. "Just want to teach but not do research" probably = adjunct.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2006
- Messages
- 297
- Reaction score
- 1
Yeah, an adjunct has to teach a ton of classes (often at a number of schools) to make anywhere close to enough to live on. None of the big UC schools would hire a masters in psych but the community colleges and perhaps the State schools would as well?
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,548
- Reaction score
- 7
UCs would would/do hire folks with MAs, but internally (i.e. their own current doc students as a source of funding). From what I've seen in the UC system, other adjuncts are usually recent grads on the job market or alums who never got FT jobs and just got mired in the permanent adjunct pool.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2006
- Messages
- 297
- Reaction score
- 1
But hiring their own students is different than adjuncts. That's for funding purposes for their own students who are in a PhD program.
And I agree, they hire a lot of recent PhDs from their programs as adjuncts who are on the job market. That's why I can't imagine they would ever hire an MA from another school (especially a PsyD). Maybe in the smaller ones like UC Merced but not at the big established UCs.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,548
- Reaction score
- 7
Agreed.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,383
- Reaction score
- 4,332
If someone wants to be an academic, adjuncting too much can be the kiss of death because programs will wonder why you couldn't land a TT. It definitely is not advisable for most people because of the above and because the money tends to be pretty poor.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,548
- Reaction score
- 7
True. This is one of the many complaints voiced by the post-academic blog community: more experience = less qualified. I've read/been told alternately that you're hottest the fall just before or the fall just after defending your diss, and that by three years past graduation you've pretty much timed out (no T-T job yet = time to retrain for a new career). Folks who've been keeping up with academic blogs know that recently a few humanities departments have incensed many by making this long tacit assumption explicit in their job ads:
http://parezcoydigo.wordpress.com/2012/09/10/old-phds-need-not-apply/
Of course, attempting an academic career within a fixed geographical region isn't advisable either, especially if you don't attend the top ranked program in your discipline within that region. Check out the faculty pedigrees for the (old) OP's prospective school, Pepperdine. Stacked with an awful lot of UCLA grads who appear to have really taken a shine to the LA weather.
Of course, none of this or discussion in recent posts applies to the poster who revived this zombie thread (at #13), who doesn't even seem to want an academic career. Or to the topic of this thread.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2011
- Messages
- 3,455
- Reaction score
- 910
Yeah, while I would agree that it is getting more competitive and there is sort of a "sweet spot" (within 3 years sounds about right) for landing that TT job, that isn't true at all places.
It really depends on what type of position it is, first and foremost. Someone could go be a research scientist somewhere and build up lots of pubs, then come back a few years later and land a great job on the market. That is what I heard happened to a lot of people on the market last year - they were fresh grads with nice CVs, but couldn't compete with the folks who had gone out and gotten grants/lots of pubs and had 4-5 years of postdoctoral experience of some kind. When I looked at who got some of the positions I didn't get, this appeared to be the case as well (which made me feel a little better, comparing my CV with theirs).
But I agree that there is a big danger in how you approach your time after formal training. If you are unsuccessful on the job market, you want to do something that is improving your credentials. Straight-up adjuncting is not going to look good at most places. Having a research job + adjuncting, or having a full time instructor position (ideally at a decent institution) are going to make you more competitive on the academic market depending on what type of institution you are looking for. If you just say "I'm worn out" and stop being productive as a scholar, then your "sweet spot" is going to fade away and that academic career is unlikely (except for maybe going to work at a CC or FSPS - which some would argue also would lessen your chance at getting to a more "prestigious" type of institution in many cases).
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,383
- Reaction score
- 4,332
I would caution that during the interim time ppl should be doing things that directly build a CV, not just string together some adjunct classes, have a loose affiliation with a research group, etc. JS...you did squeeze in a neuro fellowship and sig. research gig during your gap, so your path is much more acceptable to a search committee.
I purposely didn't push for a clinical TT position bc all of the R1s I considered had pretty brutal expectations for primarily clinical and research faculty. TT can be another 6-7+ yrs of heavy lifting, but it depends what you want. In the above scenario of timing-out, I guess you fight to get any TT job, but it is far from cushy.
As a student in a PsyD program that is APA accredited you must take stats and research design so some interest would be helpful. It is possible this interest might develop once you are exposed to the material.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2011
- Messages
- 827
- Reaction score
- 16
Wow. It's amazing to me how this mirrors the Ph.D.. application process--the idea of having a "sweet spot" that is either straight out of a traditional undergraduate program or only 1-2 years out, and beyond that the applicant is overlooked in many places. I hate this snobbery. It's all because certain academic environments are full of their own kind, so the tradition continues.
