Midwestern University (PsyD)

[VAneurodoc]

I don't get the assertation that funded PhD programs are only for financially privileged students and exclude economically disadvantaged students while FSPS provide more access--doesn't the availability of funding make them MORE accessible financially, not less? FWIW, most of the people I've known in funded PhD programs attended public universities for undergrad, frequently on merit scholarships, need-based financial aid, or both. So, the "funded programs are elitist and only open to rich folk" argument makes no sense whatsoever to me. Even if you're arguing that they require access to and completion of an undergrad degree, so do FSPS.

Of course it makes zero sense. All of these arguments are about individuals trying to justify a decision they made to get what they want (i.e., I want to be a Dr., psychologist, help people, etc...) in the face of an onslaught of information indicating it is not a smart decision. Logic has gone out the window at this point. Logic says this is a competetive field that is oversaturated and those with the best training, the least debt, and the most stable path to follow will have the best chance of doing reasonably well.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Pragma]

Of course it makes zero sense. All of these arguments are about individuals trying to justify a decision they made to get what they want (i.e., I want to be a Dr., psychologist, help people, etc...) in the face of an onslaught of information indicating it is not a smart decision. Logic has gone out the window at this point. Logic says this is a competetive field that is oversaturated and those with the best training, the least debt, and the most stable path to follow will have the best chance of doing reasonably well.

I apologize to the OP for getting away from the discussion about Midwestern (which may be a great training environment, but as someone working in academia, I know that these programs sprout up to generate revenue as the primary motivator). But I want to note something related to this discussion.

It may sound like a sob story, but aside from the people that bear the real brunt of the impact of these programs (the students who struggle later financially and in their careers), I do think many of us in the field are a bit slighted as well. If "reasonably well" means "makin' it" then isn't there a problem? Yes!

Part of that problem is having to explain to other professionals, outside of the field, how you are different than some poorly trained students that have done shoddy work and reinforced negative public perceptions of our profession. While every profession has their bad apples, the FSPS market has created a systemic problem that is unique given the lack of public awareness about how the mental health system works. Sure, the Dean/Chair who hired me understood what my training background was compared to someone from Alliant or Argosy, but your average Joe Schmo does not. As a result, we have a significant subset of people in the field doing substandard work that reflects poorly on the entire field. Indirectly, our credibility suffers.

But the more direct issues are obviously debt and employment problems for students that attended these programs without understanding the entire picture up front.

*end unsolicited rant*

 

[Heyheyhey13]

..

 

[Pragma]

My problem is you guys are assuming that grades have anything to do with how well someone is going to do as a Psychologist. This is not the case. A death in the family could bring a 4.0 student down to a 3.5. Any professor I have ever talked to has said the difference between a 4.0 and a 3.5 is circumstances, but because of how competitive Clinical is they need to just go with the top applicants. It helps to just knock off anyone below say a 3.7 and a 160 GRE so that you can focus on the top. I don't know anything about Midwestern either, but I can tell you one this....this forum did not help with that. There was not one thing I learned about Midwestern from this. As much as there are always going to be people that judge you for the school you went to, your career also can be what you make of it. Having said that, I am not sure I would want to make it more difficult for myself by going to a questionable school. Going to the best school, though, and getting a great internship does not make you a good psychologist. I am sure we have all been to or spoken a psychologist that is supposedly the "best of the best" but really sucks at understanding people and is socially inept. Some of being good at what you do cannot even come from school.

Absolutely. I completely agree. But it means something when it comes to being a professional.

 

[pretzels]

I don't know anything about Midwestern either, but I can tell you one this....this forum did not help with that.

I disagree. I learned, among other things, that this is a new program and students matriculating through it will face significantly more hardship than those who attend funded, established university based programs. As someone who is doing everything they can now for the next round of grad school applications, this thread showed me one program i shouldn't consider.

The posts on these forums (specifically the Psychology [Psy.D./Ph.D]) are sometimes very blunt, and may even appear elitist. They are, however, exactly what I and other prospective students need to hear about.

Little over a year ago, i was interviewing some professors at Argosy about one of their many programs in psychology in the Seattle area. Something struck me as odd about their presentations, their answers to questions, the way they presented themselves... i couldn't quite put my finger on it. I didn't find this forum until relatively recently, and only after extensive reading, of some very blunt posts, did i realize how much of a bullet i dodged by not enlisting with them.

I've learned more about clinical psychology and graduate school in the last several months of reading these boards than any professor or psychologist i ever spoke to directly. I've gone so far as to tell some of my advisors and professors about this board so they can refer it out to incoming psychology students at my undergrad.

So although it may seem harsh when some of these programs and schools come under severe criticism by psychologists well entrenched in 'the system', its actually the most benevolent act they can bestow on students. Its because of their criticisms and scrutiny I and other students are capable of understanding the difference between the good and the bad in this field.

No one here is 'judging' people for the schools or programs they went to. But there are people here who are judging the schools and programs themselves, and its for a good reason.

 

[PHD12]

There was not one thing I learned about Midwestern from this. As much as there are always going to be people that judge you for the school you went to, your career also can be what you make of it. Having said that, I am not sure I would want to make it more difficult for myself by going to a questionable school. Going to the best school, though, and getting a great internship does not make you a good psychologist. I am sure we have all been to or spoken a psychologist that is supposedly the "best of the best" but really sucks at understanding people and is socially inept. Some of being good at what you do cannot even come from school.

Your logic is flawed though. Just because there are good psychologists from every type of program does not mean that one should recommend a program with poor outcomes overall (Midwestern only has a 25% APA internship rate). The world is not a meritocracy. People who went to good schools and have the "right" connections are the ones that fare better by a long shot in every field (law, business, finance, medicine), including psychology. It may not be fair, but this is reality. You can always provide examples of anomalies---there are millionaires without college degrees who are better at business than a Harvard MBA. However, the average college drop out is not doing nearly as well as a Harvard MBA grad. The Harvard MBA vs. college drop out is an extreme situation. However, in a sense the typical PsyD graduate from a freestanding school is in a very poor position starting off in this field (vast majority do not get apa internships and are barred from many employment settings) compared to a funded PhD graduate. Even if you are very good at what they do, if you don't have the right connections and attended an unaccredited internship, you will face barriers in your career and salary will be affected.

 

[futureapppsy2]

I personally know a few psychologies who are truly excellent and emerging leaders in the field who I very much respect and who went to large FSPS, so I do believe FSPS can and do produce some amazing and skilled psychologists. With that being said, there is some stigma attached to FSPS in the field, and moreso, I truly find the debt levels associated with FSPS (150-200k or more in loans) to be unteneable. University-based, funded programs are not perfect (obviously), but I don't think the financial difference can or should be hand waved as minor, because its not. Even at one of the more weakly funded university-based PhD programs, a student may take 50-70k in loans. Nothing to sneeze at, but still much more managable than 150-200k. I also think large FSPS tend to be run more like a business and less like a graduate academic program, which can create significant barriers for students. Honestly, when I see someone really excellent come from a large (Argosy/Alliant-type) FSPS, it seems more like the succeeded in spite of their program, rather than because of it.

 

[erg923]

My problem is you guys are assuming that grades have anything to do with how well someone is going to do as a Psychologist.

You are thinking very narrowly here. Do you think that's the only factor that should go into admission? FYI, admissions committees have many more factors/responsibilities to think about. Let me give you an example:

We recently declined someone admission because they had 2 Cs in a masters program (where grade inflation is already rampant), along with 3 "Ws" Are you honestly telling me that we should discount that as having no predictive value?! They would have failed out of our program 2 times over with that track record! The point is, he may have ultimately become a great psychologist, but if he can't stay in the program, what the point? It's wasted time and money for him (and us) and attrition (which doesn't look good to APA stats reports) for us as well. You think taking a risk like this would be wise for my program's rep? Its resources? My university? The incoming cohort members?

 

[erg923]

There was not one thing I learned about Midwestern from this. Having said that, I am not sure I would want to make it more difficult for myself by going to a questionable school. Going to the best school, though, and getting a great internship does not make you a good psychologist. I am sure we have all been to or spoken a psychologist that is supposedly the "best of the best" but really sucks at understanding people and is socially inept. Some of being good at what you do cannot even come from school.

Then you should read the thread again. Stats have been pointed out, it faculty have been critiqued, its training model has been discussed

Having said that, I am not sure I would want to make it more difficult for myself by going to a questionable school.

These two statements of yours contradict each other, no? You did learn enough about it to make this judgment. And Isn't that the type of conclusion a prospective student wants to be able to make if they are trying to learn about a program- whether its a solid one or a questionable one?

As much as there are always going to be people that judge you for the school you went to, your career also can be what you make of it.

Not if you cant get passed the basic hurdles (internship, post-doc) first, son. Unaccredited internships WILL prevent this, as it puts restrictions on making your career what you want it to be. This was discussed numerous times.

I am sure we have all been to or spoken a psychologist that is supposedly the "best of the best" but really sucks at understanding people and is socially inept. Some of being good at what you do cannot even come from school.

I am sure all would agree with this statement, but I have no idea why that point is relevant to this discussion? Does this program have a special class for the teaching social grace? If not, whats your point?

 

[Pragma]

I disagree. I learned, among other things, that this is a new program and students matriculating through it will face significantly more hardship than those who attend funded, established university based programs. As someone who is doing everything they can now for the next round of grad school applications, this thread showed me one program i shouldn't consider.

The posts on these forums (specifically the Psychology [Psy.D./Ph.D]) are sometimes very blunt, and may even appear elitist. They are, however, exactly what I and other prospective students need to hear about.

Little over a year ago, i was interviewing some professors at Argosy about one of their many programs in psychology in the Seattle area. Something struck me as odd about their presentations, their answers to questions, the way they presented themselves... i couldn't quite put my finger on it. I didn't find this forum until relatively recently, and only after extensive reading, of some very blunt posts, did i realize how much of a bullet i dodged by not enlisting with them.

I've learned more about clinical psychology and graduate school in the last several months of reading these boards than any professor or psychologist i ever spoke to directly. I've gone so far as to tell some of my advisors and professors about this board so they can refer it out to incoming psychology students at my undergrad.

So although it may seem harsh when some of these programs and schools come under severe criticism by psychologists well entrenched in 'the system', its actually the most benevolent act they can bestow on students. Its because of their criticisms and scrutiny I and other students are capable of understanding the difference between the good and the bad in this field.

No one here is 'judging' people for the schools or programs they went to. But there are people here who are judging the schools and programs themselves, and its for a good reason.

What a great post 😀

👍

 

[futureapppsy2]

I disagree. I learned, among other things, that this is a new program and students matriculating through it will face significantly more hardship than those who attend funded, established university based programs. As someone who is doing everything they can now for the next round of grad school applications, this thread showed me one program i shouldn't consider.

The posts on these forums (specifically the Psychology [Psy.D./Ph.D]) are sometimes very blunt, and may even appear elitist. They are, however, exactly what I and other prospective students need to hear about.

Little over a year ago, i was interviewing some professors at Argosy about one of their many programs in psychology in the Seattle area. Something struck me as odd about their presentations, their answers to questions, the way they presented themselves... i couldn't quite put my finger on it. I didn't find this forum until relatively recently, and only after extensive reading, of some very blunt posts, did i realize how much of a bullet i dodged by not enlisting with them.

I've learned more about clinical psychology and graduate school in the last several months of reading these boards than any professor or psychologist i ever spoke to directly. I've gone so far as to tell some of my advisors and professors about this board so they can refer it out to incoming psychology students at my undergrad.

So although it may seem harsh when some of these programs and schools come under severe criticism by psychologists well entrenched in 'the system', its actually the most benevolent act they can bestow on students. Its because of their criticisms and scrutiny I and other students are capable of understanding the difference between the good and the bad in this field.

No one here is 'judging' people for the schools or programs they went to. But there are people here who are judging the schools and programs themselves, and its for a good reason.

This. I don't think undergrad psychology programs do a great job of teaching students what to avoid or look for in programs, largely because a) only a small percentage of psych undergrads go on to psych doctoral programs and b) many faculty went through training before FSPS, the internship imbalance, and the market saturation became the serious issues they are today.

Also, I think it's important to remember that few people on this forum are saying that you can't be a good or excellent psychologist coming out of an FSPS--there definitely are outstanding FSPS grads out there. HOWEVER, the overall outcomes are much weaker (strongly suggesting overall issues with the training model that will likely be a challenge to overcome even if you are an outstanding student), there are serious reputation issues to consider,the training will probably be markedly different from what you would get at a university-based program in terms of mentorship, and the debt load is very high and disproportionate to the salary. These are not issues to gloss over, especially the debt and overall lower outcomes one.

 

[poopyhead]

Psychiatrist
Mean: $174,170
Median: $170,350

Going by the recent salary threads in the Psychiatry forum...this is quite conservative. $180-$220k+ is far easier to find.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clinical/Counseling/School Psychologist
Mean: $73,090
Median: $67,880

Yes...this is a blend across all three areas, as that is how The Fed did it. I gathered this info for a talk from awhile back, so YMMV if there is a more recent report. Below is the APA Workforce Data (2009):

Pardon my ignorance, but it seems the PsyD is a "clinical" degree for those who don't want to do research? In that case, wouldn't it be safer to attend medical school, following by a psychiatry residency? There's absolutely no research required during medical school, and psychiatry is one of the easier to obtain residencies. If I recall, psychiatrists can also do counseling, albeit not as lucrative?

 

[PHD12]

Pardon my ignorance, but it seems the PsyD is a "clinical" degree for those who don't want to do research? In that case, wouldn't it be safer to attend medical school, following by a psychiatry residency? There's absolutely no research required during medical school, and psychiatry is one of the easier to obtain residencies. If I recall, psychiatrists can also do counseling, albeit not as lucrative?

You have to write a dissertation for a PsyD program. All the good PsyD programs require a good amount of research. I also don't think anyone should pursue doctoral level training without some interest in research.

I completely agree with you that medical school makes a lot more sense than an unfunded clinical psychology program. Length of training is the same, cost is the same, but medical school graduates will earn 3X the PsyD salary and will have a significantly easier time landing a job and making it in general. Unfunded PsyD = worst deal out there.

 

[VAneurodoc]

You have to write a dissertation for a PsyD program. All the good PsyD programs require a good amount of research. I also don't think anyone should pursue doctoral level training without some interest in research.

I completely agree with you that medical school makes a lot more sense than an unfunded clinical psychology program. Length of training is the same, cost is the same, but medical school graduates will earn 3X the PsyD salary and will have a significantly easier time landing a job and making it in general. Unfunded PsyD = worst deal out there.

How about nurse practitioner anesthetist? Seems pretty lucrative for a master's degree.

 

[PsySeeker]

You have to write a dissertation for a PsyD program. All the good PsyD programs require a good amount of research. I also don't think anyone should pursue doctoral level training without some interest in research.

I completely agree with you that medical school makes a lot more sense than an unfunded clinical psychology program. Length of training is the same, cost is the same, but medical school graduates will earn 3X the PsyD salary and will have a significantly easier time landing a job and making it in general. Unfunded PsyD = worst deal out there.

I disagree that unfunded Psy.Ds are necessarily the worst deal out there. Medical school costs $250k+ and to enter a specialty like psychiatry takes years longer. Not all unfunded/partially funded Psy.D programs are equal. Many university based ones, especially public ones may cost $50 or so k in tuition for the entire degree. They may have partial funding to halve (a few elimate) this cost. One wouldn't make specialized MD money, but the tuition could be a fifth or less, and they may gain a few years of practice. I'm not saying it's the best or even a better deal, but if a Psy.D is what you want it doesn't have to be the financial disaster some of you are making it out to be. Now it can be.... but it does not have to be... My main point is that there are huge differences in Psy.D programs and some are more than acceptable, some could be considered good financial decisons for certain people even if they are not 100% funded.

 

[PHD12]

I disagree that unfunded Psy.Ds are necessarily the worst deal out there. Medical school costs $250k+ and to enter a specialty like psychiatry takes years longer.[/I] Not all unfunded/partially funded Psy.D programs are equal. Many university based ones, especially public ones may cost $50 or so k in tuition for the entire degree. They may have partial funding to halve (a few elimate) this cost. One wouldn't make specialized MD money, but the tuition could be a fifth or less, and they may gain a few years of practice. I'm not saying it's the best or even a better deal, but if a Psy.D is what you want it doesn't have to be the financial disaster some of you are making it out to be. Now it can be.... but it does not have to be...

Bolded sentence is not accurate and a common misconception.

There are def. a range of PsyD & MD programs and costs. I'm talking about averages here and it's the same with medical school. Median debt for PsyD is 120K. This is a very similar average to an MD actually. There are also MD public schools out there and some that have scholarships/funding. 250K is nowhere near the average for an MD. I'm sick of hearing people say that MD's take out over 250K in loans so it's okay for a PsyD to take out 150-200K. The 250K is an anomaly for medical school graduates. I also keep hearing that "people take out 150K in loans for a BA degree." Please get the facts, the average is only 26K.

Here is a link to a forum on ranking of medical school debt levels: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=286136. Highest average debt was 181K at a private DO school (2005). If you go to a UC school, on the other hand, debt is only in the 60's.

Psychiatry is 8 years of training post-college (4 year residency). This is very similar to a PsyD program because you will need 1-2 years of postdoctoral hours after you graduate so you are still in training once you have your degree. Plus, most people are not graduating in 5 years out of a PsyD statistically.

 

[PsySeeker]

Bolded sentence is not accurate and a common misconception.

There are def. a range of PsyD & MD programs and costs. I'm talking about averages here and it's the same with medical school. Median debt for PsyD is 120K. This is a very similar average to an MD actually. There are also MD public schools out there and some that have scholarships/funding. 250K is nowhere near the average for an MD. I'm sick of hearing people say that MD's take out over 250K in loans so it's okay for a PsyD to take out 150-200K. The 250K is an anomaly for medical school graduates. I also keep hearing that "people take out 150K in loans for a BA degree." Please get the facts, the average is only 26K.

Here is a link to a forum on ranking of medical school debt levels: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=286136. Highest average debt was 181K at a private DO school (2005). If you go to a UC school, on the other hand, debt is only in the 60's.

Psychiatry is 8 years of training post-college (4 year residency). This is very similar to a PsyD program because you will need 1-2 years of postdoctoral hours after you graduate so you are still in training once you have your degree. Plus, most people are not graduating in 5 years out of a PsyD statistically.

Okay, you seem to have missed my point, and/or bastardized it to fit your narrative. I did not say it was okay to take out 150k to 200k for a Psy.D. This is unequivocally a bad idea. I said it is entirely possible to do a Psy.D at a public university and pay somewhere between 50k and 0k (rarely one could net a small amount). I may have overstated the average cost of medical schools, but it is still in the high mid hundreds of thousands. I was not comparing median to median cost. I did not proclaim paying as much as possible for a Psy.D is a good idea. I did say that you can do a Psy.D for 50 to 0k at quite a few places, and that you can pick up a couple of years of work over an MD (though you will never make as much money). This is a fact. Not all Psy.D programs are equal and not all all MD programs are equal. One can do a reasonable Psy.D program for a reasonable amount of money and get a reasonable return on the degree. Yes, not as good monetarily as a specialized MD, but not awful, and if you love psychology (or did not position one self to enter medial school) the trade off could certainly be worth it! Not everyone wants the same things...If one chooses carefully a Psy.D can be a sensible choice, just as one should choose a medical school carefully.

 

[JeyRo]

Bolded sentence is not accurate and a common misconception.

There are def. a range of PsyD & MD programs and costs. I'm talking about averages here and it's the same with medical school. Median debt for PsyD is 120K. This is a very similar average to an MD actually.

Average debt for a US medical school grad is 156K and change, apparently. Median figures are here and not that far off (and it seems correct that going to a public medical school brings down the average debt load somewhat).

There are also MD public schools out there and some that have scholarships/funding. 250K is nowhere near the average for an MD. I'm sick of hearing people say that MD's take out over 250K in loans so it's okay for a PsyD to take out 150-200K. The 250K is an anomaly for medical school graduates. I also keep hearing that "people take out 150K in loans for a BA degree." Please get the facts, the average is only 26K.

And that's true - the average debt levels for undergrads are a good deal less than professional graduate debt. However, the trend lines, I think, are what disturb a lot of people - debt loads continue to rise. It's not a static picture.

Here is a link to a forum on ranking of medical school debt levels: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=286136. Highest average debt was 181K at a private DO school (2005). If you go to a UC school, on the other hand, debt is only in the 60's.

Psychiatry is 8 years of training post-college (4 year residency). This is very similar to a PsyD program because you will need 1-2 years of postdoctoral hours after you graduate so you are still in training once you have your degree. Plus, most people are not graduating in 5 years out of a PsyD statistically.

So, it's not PsyD vs. PhD, it's funded vs. unfunded. If you get a PsyD from an institution that leaves you with little or no debt (and assuming you landed yourself an accredited internship), hey, the possibilities are wide open for you. If you go to a partially funded PhD program, don't live frugally, take out additional loans on the side, you can screw yourself for many years to come.

 

[JeyRo]

Okay, you seem to have missed my point, and/or bastardized it to fit your narrative. I did not say it was okay to take out 150k to 200k for a Psy.D.

You appear to be contradicting yourself? You said:

I disagree that unfunded Psy.Ds are necessarily the worst deal out there.

To be fair, you did go on for awhile, qualifying that statement, but it does seem to be contradictory.

Assuming we're talking about completely unfunded professional programs - I think that they *are* the "worst deal out there."

 

[PsySeeker]

You appear to be contradicting yourself? You said:



To be fair, you did go on for awhile, qualifying that statement, but it does seem to be contradictory.

Assuming we're talking about completely unfunded professional programs - I think that they *are* the "worst deal out there."

Most unfunded Psy.D programs are undoubtedly bad deals, I can't pretend to know if they are the "worst" but they are certainly not good. However, some unfunded public programs cost about 50k in tuition and may have other opportunities to earn money. That is what I was referring to when I stated that unfunded Psy.Ds are not necessarily the worst deal. Some public programs are fairly reasonable.

 

[PsySeeker]

"So, it's not PsyD vs. PhD, it's funded vs. unfunded. If you get a PsyD from an institution that leaves you with little or no debt (and assuming you landed yourself an accredited internship), hey, the possibilities are wide open for you. If you go to a partially funded PhD program, don't live frugally, take out additional loans on the side, you can screw yourself for many years to come."

For the most part I agree with what you are saying here. I can imagine situations where a Psy.D (or certainly PhD) graduate with little or even up to perhaps a third or a quarter of the debt an MD will almost certainly have. Add to that there are many schools with good APA internship acceptance rates with up to 80% of students completing in 5 years, some Psy.Ds could have have 150k or more less debt then an MD, and perhaps up to three years of extra employment. This does not mean it is a better deal, but the point of trying to make is that it can be far from the awful path some people are trying to make it.

Yes, I took liberties with the tuition numbers to illustrate my point (they are going to vary), they can be adjusted up to a certain extent and it still holds.

Lastly, of course you can pay way more than 50k for a Psy.D.. and you can pay way more than 150k for an MD.... I'm just describing a path that can be taken if one is careful and informed.

 

[ResearchGirlie]

I've seen reference to these PsyD programs that provide tuition coverage and funding but when they are named it's always just Rutgers and Baylor. If there are others out there, it might be helpful to accumulate a list so that those who are dead set on getting a PsyD have a starting place.

 

[JeyRo]

i've seen reference to these psyd programs that provide tuition coverage and funding but when they are named it's always just rutgers and baylor. If there are others out there, it might be helpful to accumulate a list so that those who are dead set on getting a psyd have a starting place.

+1

I'm guessing (based on not much) that they might be the only ones out there. However, it does seem like there's a price range in PsyD and professional programs out there, tuition assistance and funding aside. For example, I think Nova is midrange for debt loads for students (just looks like ballpark of 150K for grads), while PGSP-Stanford is probably twice that.

 

[PsySeeker]

Indiana University of Pennsylvania has been offering at least half tuition remittance and few thousand dollar stipend (some do much better) as long as it has existed. Except for this years cohort ;( do to PA budget issues. They full expect to renew the prior level of funding for all students starting in 2014. That being said, if one is in state, this Psy.D program's tuition is around 55k in totality before any assistance.

I'm sure there are others similar to this? I heard Indiana State is decent, but I don't have time to look right now.

 

[JeyRo]

Indiana University of Pennsylvania has been offering at least half tuition remittance and few thousand dollar stipend (some do much better) as long as it has existed. Except for this years cohort ;( do to PA budget issues. They full expect to renew the prior level of funding for all students starting in 2014. That being said, if one is in state, this Psy.D program's tuition is around 55k in totality before any assistance.

I'm sure there are others similar to this? I heard Indiana State is decent, but I don't have time to look right now.

55K definitely puts it in the bottom half of professional programs or better in terms of debt loads for grads. However, if you add in cost of living and other expenses, Indiana might still be saddling grads with debt levels close to what I consider the danger zone - the number I would recommend is no higher than what a first year clinical psychology grad should reasonably expect to earn in the first year of their job upon graduation (post licensure). Like, 50-80K....

I really like what Jon Snow said earlier, though. Probably the best rule to follow is to "pretend unfunded programs don't exist" for applicants, and then just proceed accordingly. No debt is always better than some debt. I think my suggestion is a reasonable compromise.

 

[Heyheyhey13]

You are thinking very narrowly here. Do you think that's the only factor that should go into admission? FYI, admissions committees have many more factors/responsibilities to think about. Let me give you an example:

We recently declined someone admission because they had 2 Cs in a masters program (where grade inflation is already rampant), along with 3 "Ws" Are you honestly telling me that we should discount that as having no predictive value?! They would have failed out of our program 2 times over with that track record! The point is, he may have ultimately become a great psychologist, but if he can't stay in the program, what the point? It's wasted time and money for him (and us) and attrition (which doesn't look good to APA stats reports) for us as well. You think taking a risk like this would be wise for my program's rep? Its resources? My university? The incoming cohort members?

 

[graduatingsoon]

No I agree that this person should not have gained admissions. Especially because part of the reason many people get a masters is to improve a poor undergraduate GPA. I guess I just need help because I had one rough year that lowered my overall GPA from a 3.96 to a 3.6. I was not the standard undergraduate psychology major, as a took the harder Biology and Neuroscience classes and did well in them. The year I did not do well was due to various factors including a death in the family, but schools don't care about that. They care about your GRE scores and GPA. All along I knew the GRE was going to be a weakness of mine because I have never been a good standardized test taker. My strength was supposed to be my GPA. Problem is, I messed that up. I applied to many programs and am having a hard time making a decision on whether to go to a doctoral program with a reputation that is not the best or a masters program, which everyone is saying is a waist of money. I like Midwestern because I feel like it has potential. I am particularly interested in Clinical Health Psychology and Midwestern has a great D.O. program. I also think the class sizes are small and the faculty are impressive. If I am wrong about this I will be making a big mistake so i do appreciate people being honest. I only hope it is honesty and nothing else.

Many traditional PhD programs are going to offer health psychology experience/emphasis. The most important foundation you need to be a health psychologist is a strong foundation as a generalist. It's misleading to students to promote specialty areas during graduate school because you don't need to specialize until internship or even postdoc level. If you go to a good program that is what is going to get you into good health psychology internships and postdoctoral fellowships. Since the majority of midwestern students are not getting APA internships, they are not going to be competitive for health psychology jobs (many of these jobs are at the VA and medical centers). Professional schools try to lure students by having all these attractive specialty areas. All the health psychologists that I know went to general funded PhD programs and completed postdoc fellowships in behavioral medicine/health psychology. All the VA hospitals have health psychology experiences, but their programs are only open to folks who completed APA internships.

You should be able to go to an MSW program at a good state school with your GPA and with lower GRE scores (the mean scores for MSW programs are not so high). The solution to not getting into a reputable, funded program is NOT taking 150K in loans and attending a lower tier school. This reasoning doesn't work in any field and it's not going to work here (3rd tier law students don't fare so well either). Getting an internship and a decent job in this field is just as fiercly competitive so you will likely be weeded out at the end of training (e.g, not matching for an accredited APA internship, having trouble landing a postdoc fellowship or getting licensed if you don 't attend an accredited internship).

 

[erg923]

I was not the standard undergraduate psychology major, as a took the harder Biology and Neuroscience classes and did well in them. The year I did not do well was due to various factors including a death in the family, but schools don't care about that.

I am not sure what you mean. I mean, I care about it on human level, in the sense that that is unfortunate, and I understand this then may not reflect on your true achievement level. But, this isn't psychotherapy. Its graduate school admissions. You don't admit people who pose statistical risk (whether that's of attrition, or maybe that does represent your true ability level?), when you have plenty of other applicants that don't. Its the same as interviewing for a job. You pick the best candidate. Period.

They care about your GRE scores and GPA.

If this is what you think, then I don't think you researched things very well. That;s a first round cut at many places, but program s value research experience, clinical experiences, passion, and interpersonal skills.

I like Midwestern because I feel like it has potential. I am particularly interested in Clinical Health Psychology and Midwestern has a great D.O. program.

I am not sure what this has to do with anything. There are hundreds of schools that have clinical psychology programs AND medical schools. The existence of one program at a certain school has absolutely nothing to with another unless there is some explicit connection or overlap. And, I have not heard anyone mention that that is the case at Midwestern. Have you?

 

[Heyheyhey13]

Many traditional PhD programs are going to offer health psychology experience/emphasis. The most important foundation you need to be a health psychologist is a strong foundation as a generalist. It's misleading to students to promote specialty areas during graduate school because you don't need to specialize until internship or even postdoc level. If you go to a good program that is what is going to get you into good health psychology internships and postdoctoral fellowships. Since the majority of midwestern students are not getting APA internships, they are not going to be competitive for health psychology jobs (many of these jobs are at the VA and medical centers). Professional schools try to lure students by having all these attractive specialty areas. All the health psychologists that I know went to general funded PhD programs and completed postdoc fellowships in behavioral medicine/health psychology. All the VA hospitals have health psychology experiences, but their programs are only open to folks who completed APA internships.

You should be able to go to an MSW program at a good state school with your GPA and with lower GRE scores (the mean scores for MSW programs are not so high). The solution to not getting into a reputable, funded program is NOT taking 150K in loans and attending a lower tier school. This reasoning doesn't work in any field and it's not going to work here (3rd tier law students don't fare so well either). Getting an internship and a decent job in this field is just as fiercly competitive so you will likely be weeded out at the end of training (e.g, not matching for an accredited APA internship, having trouble landing a postdoc fellowship or getting licensed if you don 't attend an accredited internship).

 

[pretzels]

Thank you for the post. The one thing I would say is that I did notice professional schools doing this, but Ohio State has a very good program in Clinical Health Psychology so I know professional schools are not the only ones offering this. Unfortunately at Ohio State they do reject people that don't pass a certain GPA and GRE so I doubt my essay was even read 🙁. I am curious what would you say about doing a masters program? I have an offer to work as an RA in a social psychology lab and I know some people think this is the better option, but I am concerned that it is not Clinical research and that I will be falling another year behind. If I do a masters some have told me that they were able to count a lot of their credits towards their Ph.D. and it allowed them to not fall behind, but also to keep in the school mind set.

Just regarding the research -- my adviser, whom i'm doing some research with now, made a good point about experience in research when it comes to grad schools after i talked to him about my career interests vs my opportunities to gain experience in the field. He told me "Good research is good research".

Obviously it would be preferable if you could show your POI focused on X that you've been researching X already, but my understanding is that its more important that you be seen as actively engaged in some sort of empirical research. Publications and presentations seem to be the highest regarded currency when it comes to apps, but I believe it extends itself even when the subject of the research is not the same as your POI. I imagine they have to understand that not every undergrad has those very particular research opportunities, or the means of moving across the country just to volunteer at Dr. so-and-so's lab on X so that they can get the experience to later apply to a school in a different part of the country and study under Dr. this-and-that.

But then if i'm way off base and someone reads this, please call me out on it. 👍

 

[ncantone]

I'm a recent graduate. The quality of education was far superior to the other local PsyD programs, especially Argosy and Chicago School. I met people during practicum who had no idea what I was talking about. The multidisciplinary setting was great- our neuro class had one of the DO profs teaching dissection etc. and our psychopharm class was taught by the pharmacy faculty. Midwestern is well known, at least locally and people respect the name.

The politics and the drama of the department itself left a slightly bad taste in my mouth, even though I stayed away from it all. Stay away from the drama and you'll like the education you get there. They're supposed to hear about APA accreditation soon so I hope that helps too.

 

[erg923]

I'm a recent graduate. The quality of education was far superior to the other local PsyD programs, especially Argosy and Chicago School. I met people during practicum who had no idea what I was talking about. The multidisciplinary setting was great- our neuro class had one of the DO profs teaching dissection etc. and our psychopharm class was taught by the pharmacy faculty. Midwestern is well known, at least locally and people respect the name.

The politics and the drama of the department itself left a slightly bad taste in my mouth, even though I stayed away from it all. Stay away from the drama and you'll like the education you get there. They're supposed to hear about APA accreditation soon so I hope that helps too.

Where did you intern? what are you doing now?

 

[graduatingsoon]

Where did you intern? what are you doing now?

If you look at previous posts, the graduate is doing a postdoc in PP in a different state. I would also be curious to know the type of internship he/she was able to secure? Income range they are getting as a postdoc? Whether he/she was able to secure a formal postdoc vs. PP? These are crucial questions that prospective students need to ask before attending a new program like this (and hopefully speak to multiple alumni from the program).

 

[JeyRo]

If you look at previous posts, the graduate is doing a postdoc in PP in a different state. I would also be curious to know the type of internship he/she was able to secure? Income range they are getting as a postdoc? Whether he/she was able to secure a formal postdoc vs. PP? These are crucial questions that prospective students need to ask before attending a new program like this (and hopefully speak to multiple alumni from the program).

It's nice to do dissections with DOs and get general good feelings when you're attending classes at an expensive PsyD program, but if you can't nail an accredited internship and get decent employment after graduation, then it's just purely time and gobs of money wasted.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

It's nice to do dissections with DOs and get general good feelings when you're attending classes at an expensive PsyD program, but if you can't nail an accredited internship and get decent employment after graduation, then it's just purely time and gobs of money wasted.

Ultimately, I would agree. In the end, the market is one such that attending accredited training programs is (as it should be) quickly becoming necessary. Also, those types of educational experiences are often available on internship and postdoc, so if you didn't have it in grad school, don't fret too much.

 

[erg923]

If you look at previous posts, the graduate is doing a postdoc in PP in a different state. I would also be curious to know the type of internship he/she was able to secure? Income range they are getting as a postdoc? Whether he/she was able to secure a formal postdoc vs. PP? These are crucial questions that prospective students need to ask before attending a new program like this (and hopefully speak to multiple alumni from the program).

It appears the person is a PP with a ****ty split and locked into to some kind of contract (2 years). Pretty much the least desirable "post-doc" one could ever hope for.

 

[futureapppsy2]

It appears the person is a PP with a ****ty split and locked into to some kind of contract (2 years). Pretty much the least desirable "post-doc" one could ever hope for.

That's hyperbolic, considering that unpaid post-docs (including at major university medical centers!) are, sadly, a thing in clinical psych now and that many graduates struggle to find ANY paid post-doc. Although it doesn't sound like an especially great post-doc based on what the poster has posted about it, it's hardly the "least desirable" situation for someone to be in for a post-doc these days.

 

[PurplePants80]

That's hyperbolic, considering that unpaid post-docs (including at major university medical centers!) are, sadly, a thing in clinical psych now and that many graduates struggle to find ANY paid post-doc. Although it doesn't sound like an especially great post-doc based on what the poster has posted about it, it's hardly the "least desirable" situation for someone to be in for a post-doc these days.

I also think the post-doc is in Iowa (IA) so there's less saturation. The chances of finding that same post-doc for a grad from Midwestern in Cali, eastern seaboard would be difficult without some serious networking or extremely specialized skills.

 

[Lyra33]

[post deleted]

 

[MWUstudent]

I currently train in Chicago, and while some practicum sites do take students from Midwestern, many sites are apprehensive because of the lack of APA-accreditation. I also know a few recent graduates who have completed all their requirements for licensure and it is taking them a considerable amount of time due to that factor as well. I would just be wary about the accreditation factor.

Hi all,

I am currently a 3rd year student at MWU in Downers Grove and am going into my advanced practicum year. This is the first time that I have posted on this forum and, frankly, it's due to a lot of speculations and misconceptions about MWU's program. I have been in this program for a while and, if anyone does have any questions, I will try to answer them as honestly as possible.

First of all, there is the above "practicums in Chicago" misconception-- that statement is simply not true. While there are some sites that we cannot apply to due to a lack of APA accreditation (i.e., UofC neuro), most sites that we are allowed to apply to are the same as the rest of our Chicago peers. I won't lie-- we sometimes have to deal with some apprehension from more "competitive" sites but, in my experience, once we demonstrate our clinical skills and knowledge we are more than welcome. Like I previously stated, I am currently going into my advanced (or 3rd) practicum. To give you a better idea of my previous experiences, I will state that my 1st (diagnostic) practicum was at a huge community mental health center; my 2nd (therapy and current) practicum is at a large metropolitan hospital in downtown Chicago; and my 3rd (advanced/neuropsych) practicum will be at another large, well-respected hospital in the suburbs of Chicago (it is also a neuropsych site). I also have completed clerkships at another metropolitan hospital (i.e., neuropsych) and a psychiatric nursing home. The other students at my sites are from well-respected schools in the area (i.e., Roosevelt, IIT, DePaul, etc.) and I am lucky to have both good relationships with them as well as their respect as a clinician (the same can be said from the supervisors I have worked with). I don't give these credentials as a means to brag-- instead, I want to encourage any MWU students out there who feel discouraged because of the negative stigma surrounding our program. Additionally, in the three years I have been applying to practicum, I have always received 6-7 interviews (I applied to 12 sites my first two years and 6 this last year) and around 4-5 first-round offers. I have never been to the clearing house and I have always received my 1st or 2nd choices (2nd my first year, 1st these last 2 years). Likewise, my classmates have received placements each year in very reputable places such as Alexian Bros., Allendale, University of Illinois, DePaul Counseling Center, etc. However, I should mention that the majority of my classmates (myself included) came into the program with a clinical master's degree (in psych or social work) and a great deal of clinical experience. I myself am highly specialized in a certain population and had a great deal of previous clinical (and non-clinical) experience before entering the program.

I apologize for this post being so long-winded, but I found myself looking through this forum and feeling very discouraged. I won't lie-- with the looming APA accreditation decision I feel very anxious about applying to internship because I know that our students have had difficulty receiving APA-accredited sites in the past (which is perfectly understandable and I do not blame the sites at all for being cautious). However, each year there is typically at least 1 student who receives an APA-accredited internship due to hard work, perseverance, and usually an extra advanced practicum. Would life be easier if my program was APA-accredited and/or had a solid reputation? Of course it would! However, I only applied to three programs (two Ph.D./accredited and MWU) due to a lack of advisement and this is where I ended up (I blame a lack of research experience). Although I probably would have reconsidered if I knew what a huge deal APA-accreditation was at the time, I will say that I am fortunate to be at MWU. Because of the campus and other schools, I have now participated in clinical research, held leadership positions, taught graduate-level courses, and thrown huge charity events with my classmates. All of these things have aided me in obtaining amazing clinical practicums and becoming a better, well-rounded clinician.

Again, I apologize for writing such a long post. However, I simply want to assure people that, while MWU does face stigma and disadvantages due to a lack of APA accreditation, it is as good of school as any of the other Chicagoland programs and you can still achieve a well-rounded CV with a great deal of training. I wish everyone (including all non-MWU students out there) the best with your training!

 

[Member6523]

The part that blows my mind is that you actually have to apply for and interview at practicum sites. Really? Is that how things are for this program? Or is this widespread in Chicago? I obtained my PhD in another large city and we basically just pointed at our prac sites and rarely didn't get it - only if say 3+ students wanted a spot that could only accommodate 1-2 people, but even this rarely occurred.

 

[Ollie123]

Its common in the more saturated areas (NYC, Chicago, CA).

My situation is more similar to yours - not everyone can get their first choice each year but there are few situations where someone wants to do something and they don't get to do it at some point during their training. Personally, I'd be pretty pissed if I got into grad school but still had to "compete" each year to make sure I'd get appropriate training for the sort of career I want to have. I don't get the impression its THAT competitive for folks at legit schools, but its still a great deal of stress that I don't think should be there. From what I know from folks in NYC, it also seems to be abused by sites. Many are just looking for free slave labor, expect people to work ridiculous numbers of hours if brought on, offer little training, and leaving partway through the year would get you kicked out of your program and/or unable to get any clinical training that year. Of course - the upside to these areas is there are also many excellent training sites available.

 

[MWUstudent]

The part that blows my mind is that you actually have to apply for and interview at practicum sites. Really? Is that how things are for this program? Or is this widespread in Chicago? I obtained my PhD in another large city and we basically just pointed at our prac sites and rarely didn't get it - only if say 3+ students wanted a spot that could only accommodate 1-2 people, but even this rarely occurred.

Unfortunately, it's the same for every program in this area (there may be some exceptions that I don't know about) whether it's APA-accredited/non-APA or Ph.D./Psy.D. We even have an organization that manages it all (ACEPT). I agree with the other poster that it is ridiculous, overly competitive, and extremely stressful-- however, I try to look at the positives. For example, there are many types of experiences you can obtain and some really top-notch training sites. However, I agree that there is a huge problem with some sites taking advantage of students. I work probably 30 hours a week at my practicum, a huge portion of that being direct contact, but I am blessed to have amazing supervision and excellent training. Basically, each year you have to submit around 15 applications (less if you are advanced or at a highly saturated school with 100+ students) complete with recommendation letters, CV's, writing samples, etc. Then you wait around for interviews, complete your interviews, and pray for a call during a selected "match week". It's pretty stressful, especially since you have to compete with not only your own classmates but also neighboring schools (there are so many in Chicago).

 

[Pragma]

Again, I apologize for writing such a long post. However, I simply want to assure people that, while MWU does face stigma and disadvantages due to a lack of APA accreditation, it is as good of school as any of the other Chicagoland programs and you can still achieve a well-rounded CV with a great deal of training. I wish everyone (including all non-MWU students out there) the best with your training!

I don't mean to pile on at all, but how do you operationalize that? I have heard of the other programs you mentioned but had never heard of Midwestern until this thread. Does it have comparable outcomes to the other programs? Because the use "as good of school" in the context of a lot of reputable programs in Chicago (and some mid-tier and some crappy ones) seems very subjective.

I am glad that you find the program to be fulfilling and that you have found good sites to do practicum. I wish you luck in the internship market. From my perspective, having only 1 person (out of how many in a cohort?) get an APA internship match each year would be very discouraging, although I could see how someone could view that as encouraging being enrolled in the program.

 

[Pragma]

We even have an organization that manages it all (ACEPT).

Isn't that a Psy.D. thing? I had some friends in Ph.D. programs in Chicago that told me about that, but said they never had to participate in it. They pretty much got in wherever they wanted because they were in good training programs.

 

[MWUstudent]

I don't mean to pile on at all, but how do you operationalize that? I have heard of the other programs you mentioned but had never heard of Midwestern until this thread. Does it have comparable outcomes to the other programs? Because the use "as good of school" in the context of a lot of reputable programs in Chicago (and some mid-tier and some crappy ones) seems very subjective.

I am glad that you find the program to be fulfilling and that you have found good sites to do practicum. I wish you luck in the internship market. From my perspective, having only 1 person (out of how many in a cohort?) get an APA internship match each year would be very discouraging, although I could see how someone could view that as encouraging being enrolled in the program.

You are correct-- that was an incredibly subjective statement. I suppose I was suggesting that, in comparison to other professional schools, we receive the same level of training. However, that is simply my opinion and I'm sure that others can try to dispute it. Also, thank you so much for the kind words! It is funny that, while most students would see that as a negative, we MWU-ers see it as a plus. 😉

Isn't that a Psy.D. thing? I had some friends in Ph.D. programs in Chicago that told me about that, but said they never had to participate in it. They pretty much got in wherever they wanted because they were in good training programs.

Like I said, I'm sure there are some exceptions. However, I know several Ph.D. students in Chicago whose programs did not follow ACEPT but had to do the same competitive procedure because a lot of the practicum sites DO follow ACEPT principles. Frankly, if I didn't have to do it, I would be thrilled! I think it's wonderful that they are able to get into sites simply based on the merit/name of the school and don't have to jump through hoops. The rest of us lowly professional students, on the other hand, have to fight hard for what we get 😉

While I understand the reply (Mwu) student, it is quite the statement to say it is equivalent to any of the other Chicagoland programs. First, those programs aren't equivalent to each other. As I understand it, only northwestern, DePaul, Loyola, UIC and Rosalind Franklin are funded programs. Everything else is a professional school that trains their students by farming them out as free labor to practicum sites.

I can see your point-- obviously, that was a very subjective statement on my part. For what it's worth, the majority of my professors were graduates of these funded programs and they sound like wonderful schools. I wish that I had had a strong research background and a 1200+ GRE score when I was applying to other schools but, unfortunately, clinical experience only counts for so much in those programs. I didn't mean offense to the other schools in comparing my academic experience to their students'-- I simply meant that, in my very subjective opinion based on working side-by-side with some of these students-- our clinical training has been comparable. Every student has both their strengths and weaknesses in terms of clinical skills.

 

[PHD12]

I work probably 30 hours a week at my practicum, a huge portion of that being direct contact, but I am blessed to have amazing supervision and excellent training. Basically, each year you have to submit around 15 applications (less if you are advanced or at a highly saturated school with 100+ students) complete with recommendation letters, CV's, writing samples, etc. Then you wait around for interviews, complete your interviews, and pray for a call during a selected "match week". It's pretty stressful, especially since you have to compete with not only your own classmates but also neighboring schools (there are so many in Chicago).

Let's be clear that these are UNPAID practicum experiences. I don't know how anyone reading your post would enroll in a program that costs 200K and where they have to compete and apply each year to 15 practicums, then work 30 hours per week in an unpaid role, and then to top it all off only 1 student per year gets an APA internship. How is anyone with even minimal intelligence going to enroll in such a program? I'm sorry if I'm offending you and it sounds like you didn't have the information available at the time.

The whole point is that if you were in a reputable, funded program you would not have to go through any of this hassle (unless in NYC) and you would have a 90-100% of landing an APA internship. Plus, your DCT/Program would actually protect you from working 30 hours per week in an unpaid practicum. That is poor training. The practicum sites that my program contracted with were not allowed to work us more than 16 hours (maybe 20 hours tops). I got 5-6 hours of individual and group supervision for a 2 day practicum with audio/videotape review (there was some sort of ratio that my program recommended). They were giving me more training than face to face hours with patients at times. I was in a more competitive location than Chicago. How many hours of supervision are you getting per 30 hours of work? As you can see, I take issue with sites working students 30 hours per week in an unpaid role. A good program would protect you from this or at least strongly discourage it, and issues some guidelines for sites.

Good luck with the rest of your training. It sounds incredibly stressful so you must be really persistent to hang in there.

 

[edieb]

Let's be clear that these are UNPAID practicum experiences. I don't know how anyone reading your post would enroll in a program that costs 200K and where they have to compete and apply each year to 15 practicums, then work 30 hours per week in an unpaid role, and then to top it all off only 1 student per year gets an APA internship. How is anyone with even minimal intelligence going to enroll in such a program? I'm sorry if I'm offending you and it sounds like you didn't have the information available at the time.

The whole point is that if you were in a reputable, funded program you would not have to go through any of this hassle (unless in NYC) and you would have a 90-100% of landing an APA internship. Plus, your DCT/Program would actually protect you from working 30 hours per week in an unpaid practicum. That is poor training. The practicum sites that my program contracted with were not allowed to work us more than 16 hours (maybe 20 hours tops). I got 5-6 hours of individual and group supervision for a 2 day practicum with audio/videotape review (there was some sort of ratio that my program recommended). They were giving me more training than face to face hours with patients at times. I was in a more competitive location than Chicago. How many hours of supervision are you getting per 30 hours of work? As you can see, I take issue with sites working students 30 hours per week in an unpaid role. A good program would protect you from this or at least strongly discourage it, and issues some guidelines for sites.

Good luck with the rest of your training. It sounds incredibly stressful so you must be really persistent to hang in there.

I agree with your whole post, especially the bolded portion. People seem to confuse the idea that a high number of hours of training is equal to good training. However, long hours usually mean you're being trained as a technician, not as a psychologist. Also, when one has to put in 15 applications multiple times a year, that is time taken away from training to be a psychologist. To top it off, all the anxiety about obtaining a practicum site just interferes with learning even more

People keep on wanting everybody to accept these bottom-of-the-barrell programs as legit, but they simply aren't. IMO, if you don't have the GRE scores to get into a good program, maybe you should look into less competitive fields, such as social work, etc.

 

[MWUstudent]

Let's be clear that these are UNPAID practicum experiences. I don't know how anyone reading your post would enroll in a program that costs 200K and where they have to compete and apply each year to 15 practicums, then work 30 hours per week in an unpaid role, and then to top it all off only 1 student per year gets an APA internship. How is anyone with even minimal intelligence going to enroll in such a program? I'm sorry if I'm offending you and it sounds like you didn't have the information available at the time.

The whole point is that if you were in a reputable, funded program you would not have to go through any of this hassle (unless in NYC) and you would have a 90-100% of landing an APA internship. Plus, your DCT/Program would actually protect you from working 30 hours per week in an unpaid practicum. That is poor training. The practicum sites that my program contracted with were not allowed to work us more than 16 hours (maybe 20 hours tops). I got 5-6 hours of individual and group supervision for a 2 day practicum with audio/videotape review (there was some sort of ratio that my program recommended). They were giving me more training than face to face hours with patients at times. I was in a more competitive location than Chicago. How many hours of supervision are you getting per 30 hours of work? As you can see, I take issue with sites working students 30 hours per week in an unpaid role. A good program would protect you from this or at least strongly discourage it, and issues some guidelines for sites.

Good luck with the rest of your training. It sounds incredibly stressful so you must be really persistent to hang in there.

We actually have around 4-5 hours of group and individual supervision and more if you count the supervision my program provides (and this is also with videotapes). I have 12 individual clients (the majority of my work is with families and children) and I run 3 groups. Likewise, my work is strongly based in empirically-validated therapies and techniques (i.e., CBT, ABA therapy, etc.). The nature of my work requires a great deal of overtime to prep for sessions (I work primarily with children with DD and autism and therefore I need a lot of visual supports, social stories, PECS, etc.) as well to write notes, perform school consults, and collect/analyze the data from my sessions. The practicum is technically supposed to be 20 hours per week but, because I take on a lot of extra responsibilities and experiences (partially because I feel pressured to make up for my lack of APA accreditation), it tends to be more for me. I certainly do not receive poor training and my site is one of the most reputable in my area of specialization. Like I said previously, I attend this practicum with students from "prestigious" schools who undergo the same training as I do. While I certainly do know of sites that use their students as "technicians," I can assure you that this is not one of them. Likewise, I'm somewhat shocked that you as a professional would label a site as having "poor training" based on very little information. ALL of the students I worked with who applied for internship received APA-accredited sites with good reputations. Additionally, as stated previously, this is the process that the majority of Chicagoland psychology students undergo. I'm not quite sure why it would be okay for NYC to put their students through this process but it would not be good for Chicago to do so. Likewise, medical students (both MD and DO) are required to work without pay for two years during medical school-- would you consider this poor training as well?

I agree with your whole post, especially the bolded portion. People seem to confuse the idea that a high number of hours of training is equal to good training. However, long hours usually mean you're being trained as a technician, not as a psychologist. Also, when one has to put in 15 applications multiple times a year, that is time taken away from training to be a psychologist. To top it off, all the anxiety about obtaining a practicum site just interferes with learning even more

People keep on wanting everybody to accept these bottom-of-the-barrell programs as legit, but they simply aren't. IMO, if you don't have the GRE scores to get into a good program, maybe you should look into less competitive fields, such as social work, etc.

Unfortunately, as you all know, internships are very concerned about direct hours when applying to them. The average number of direct therapy hours is around 500. I can definitely see your point regarding the statement that more hours don't equal better training. I agree wholeheartedly; however, there are some sites out there that require you to work hard but provide you with a great deal of supervision.

Also, forgive me for saying so, but your last comment was very condescending and, to be frank, crass. I simply wanted to provide others on this board with a different perspective of MWU. Although there is truth in your statement in that those with lower GRE scores will likely not get into these schools, the way you presented it was hurtful and disrespectful. Additionally, I have a MSW and I went back to school in order to be able to do more for my clients.

 

[edieb]

We actually have around 4-5 hours of group and individual supervision and more if you count the supervision my program provides (and this is also with videotapes). I have 12 individual clients (the majority of my work is with families and children) and I run 3 groups. Likewise, my work is strongly based in empirically-validated therapies and techniques (i.e., CBT, ABA therapy, etc.). The nature of my work requires a great deal of overtime to prep for sessions (I work primarily with children with DD and autism and therefore I need a lot of visual supports, social stories, PECS, etc.) as well to write notes, perform school consults, and collect/analyze the data from my sessions. The practicum is technically supposed to be 20 hours per week but, because I take on a lot of extra responsibilities and experiences (partially because I feel pressured to make up for my lack of APA accreditation), it tends to be more for me. I certainly do not receive poor training and my site is one of the most reputable in my area of specialization. Like I said previously, I attend this practicum with students from "prestigious" schools who undergo the same training as I do. While I certainly do know of sites that use their students as "technicians," I can assure you that this is not one of them. Likewise, I'm somewhat shocked that you as a professional would label a site as having "poor training" based on very little information. ALL of the students I worked with who applied for internship received APA-accredited sites with good reputations. Additionally, as stated previously, this is the process that the majority of Chicagoland psychology students undergo. I'm not quite sure why it would be okay for NYC to put their students through this process but it would not be good for Chicago to do so. Likewise, medical students (both MD and DO) are required to work without pay for two years during medical school-- would you consider this poor training as well?



Unfortunately, as you all know, internships are very concerned about direct hours when applying to them. The average number of direct therapy hours is around 500. I can definitely see your point regarding the statement that more hours don't equal better training. I agree wholeheartedly; however, there are some sites out there that require you to work hard but provide you with a great deal of supervision.

Also, forgive me for saying so, but your last comment was very condescending and, to be frank, crass. I simply wanted to provide others on this board with a different perspective of MWU. Although there is truth in your statement in that those with lower GRE scores will likely not get into these schools, the way you presented it was hurtful and disrespectful. Additionally, I have a MSW and I went back to school in order to be able to do more for my clients.[/QUOT

Sorry but the facts are the facts. If you don't have the qualifications for a particular field, you should work harder to earn them or go into a less competitive field.