Non-Portability in Academia

[CharmedDiamond]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Why is in that in clinical psych we are required to be so portable? Why is having roots and wanting to stay close to one's family/support system seen as undesirable? 😕

I feel like especially in psychology we should understand that balance is essential to life, thus our field should be more understanding than any other.

 

[erg923]

Well, I'm not sure if its the profession itself that requires this, its primarily due to limited training opps/positions and natural market forces. Regarding your assertion that psychology should the most understanding of any profession regarding this issue....Yes, I suppose, but what you're talking about is a personal life choice regarding priorites. This is your responsibility alone. Its no one elses responsibility to provide that for you. The fact is, researchers and clinical training programs have a job that needs to get done. Thus, they (understandably) look for people that can do that job. Thats their responsibility/bottom line. You are looking out for your priorities and they are looking out for theirs. Make sense?

As far as the forces that drive the frequent need to relocate in this profession-Think about the following reasons:
1. Your local state university simply can not take all the people in your state who are competitive for a doctorate. Thus, people have to apply to other places as well. Moreover, the admissions process is about finding a person who does the research you are interested in. Its just not possible for one department to have them all.

2. There is also the benefit to being trained (whether it be grad school, internship, post-doc, or a job) in different locals with different people and patient populations. For example, I grew up in the Midwest. Attending grad school in CA and seeing patients from literally dozens of different ethnic backgrounds (as opposed to 3, as would be common in my homestate) has provided me with a rich learning experience, both clinically and culturally. Thats definitely a valuable experience to have in a field like clinical/counseling psychology. Internships, post-docs, and jobs really like people with that kind of attitude and diverse exposures.

3. After the Ph.D., its more about natural market forces than anything else. Although it is quite possible (and indeed common) for the average psychologist to pick a location (after internship or post-doc) and just stay put. I really don't know anyone that frowns on that. It's a very natural and understandable desire. That said, it gets frustrating, for sure. My wife and I are very much ready to settle down. Hopefully we don't have to move in order to secure post-doc hours next year. Fingers crossed.

 

[LM02]

I would argue that this issue is specific to academia, and in fact, we have it a little better in clinical psych than in other fields. Most humanities fields are in a terrible state, when it often takes several years on the job market to land a position. And the issue is that it is often *A* position (meaning: you are lucky to even have one offer). That position could be in the frozen tundra somewhere, but it's probably better than a 3rd (or 4th or 5th) year of adjuncting for terrible pay and no benefits.

At least in our field, we have flexibility in what we can do. A PhD in French Medieval Literature is just that. For us, we have clinical skills that are marketable, we can use our research skills to consult with industry, we can work in hospitals, the VA, etc. and still hold an academic appointment. OR we can chase the carrot that is the tenure-track position in a hard money environment.

And I should mention that most tenure track psychology positions pay a lot more than tenure track humanities positions, even within the same university.

 

[CharmedDiamond]

I definitely understand limitations in terms of space per university. The reason I created this thread though, is that I've noticed many threads mentioning that attempting to stay in a specific area is like "shooting yourself in the foot." Obviously, I understand that certain areas have more or less schools (and thus slots for PhD applicants) than others, but I do think it's a bit ridiculous for schools to be biased against someone for simply being from the immediate area. Yes, pulling people from other cities causes diversity, in a sense. However, if you open the pool to people from the area, aren't you likely to get a different type of diversity as well? People who have families are a type of diversity.

This truly isn't a field for people without dedication. In my opinion, however, one doesn't need to move across the country and leave family behind in order to prove dedication.

 

[Student4Life0]

I think you're missing a key issue which is that FIT is what gets people into doctoral programs (in all areas, not just in psychology). This usually requires moving if there is no local place that fits with your research interests and training goals. Schools don't look unfavorably on you if you are from the area AND have a good fit. But they can tell when you're just trying to stay in the area and don't care much about the research and that's what shoots people in the foot. I did my Ph.D. in the same city as my undergrad - not because I planned it or wanted to stay, but because it was truly the best fit. I wasn't dicriminated against because I was local to the area of my program. This summer, I will be moving across the country for postdoc because that's where I need to go to continue my research training.

It's not about proving dedication by moving. But this field does require relocation a lot of times (especially for people pursuing research), and if you're not willing to move, again it may not be the best idea to try to pursue a research career.

So how does all of this apply/differ for people obtaining their PsyD? Obviously, the degree is less research focused, and many would argue that any decent university based PsyD program would fit in with their training goals (assuming that the school provides good training and practicum placements). Although I will be pursuing this degree, I am also very interested in research. However, there really isn't anyone who is a great fit to my research interests at one of the programs that I may end up at. However, there are ample opportunities to be involved in research. It all begins to get very confusing, doesn't it?

So with that being said, are PhDs more likely to have to move around than PsyDs?

 

[LM02]

I think you're missing a key issue which is that FIT is what gets people into doctoral programs (in all areas, not just in psychology). This usually requires moving if there is no local place that fits with your research interests and training goals. Schools don't look unfavorably on you if you are from the area AND have a good fit. But they can tell when you're just trying to stay in the area and don't care much about the research and that's what shoots people in the foot. I did my Ph.D. in the same city as my undergrad - not because I planned it or wanted to stay, but because it was truly the best fit. I wasn't dicriminated against because I was local to the area of my program. This summer, I will be moving across the country for postdoc because that's where I need to go to continue my research training.

It's not about proving dedication by moving. But this field does require relocation a lot of times (especially for people pursuing research), and if you're not willing to move, again it may not be the best idea to try to pursue a research career.

Exactly. It's not about being biased against someone who is clearly from the same geographical area. But even if there are, say, 5 schools in your general vicinity, there's no guarantee that they are all advertising a position every year. Then, when they do advertise a position, it is usually a fairly circumscribed position - if your work is in adult anxiety disorders, and the university is seeking someone with specialty in autism and developmental disorders, then you're not going to get that one job anyway.

And even if the job were the perfect match for you, it's likely that there are other applicants who have strong credentials (from all over the country) vying for that one spot.

 

[Student4Life0]

I would say yes with the caveat of if you want to actually be an academic researcher. Most people go get a Psy.D. because they mainly want to be involved in clinical or administrative work. If this is the case, then as long as the program is consistent with your training goals, there's a good fit. Although, there are probably fewer university-based quality Psy.D. programs than Ph.D. programs, so someone might still have to move (and with internship match being what it is, you never know with that either).

However, if you think you want to do more research than the minimum in your Psy.D. and might want to pursue an academic career, you need to go to a place where you will be able to do that research. Otherwise, you won't really be able to build a consistent research story that will make you successful for postdocs and academic jobs later down the road.

Ok, makes sense. Thank you. I do want to be involved in research more than just the minimum requirements that are part of most PsyD programs. I plan to pursue strong clinical training, and also be involved in research. Hopefully I will be able to churn out a strong quantitative dissertation (I know that many PsyD programs offer the option of a qualitative). Hopefully that can translate into having a career that doesn't involve ONLY clinical work.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

"Fit" is probably the #1 reason. There is also the impact of desireable v. less desireable locals impacting availability. Many people may prefer to live in NYC or Chicago, but there are also programs in Iowa and Kansas. Any doctoral level training will (most likely) require relocation, it is part of the sacrafice.

As for the Ph.D/Psy.D....it isn't "minimal research requirements" v. "research"....at least not at university-based programs. I'm tired of reading people characterize an entire degree by this distinction.

 

[erg923]

but I do think it's a bit ridiculous for schools to be biased against someone for simply being from the immediate area. Yes, pulling people from other cities causes diversity, in a sense. However, if you open the pool to people from the area, aren't you likely to get a different type of diversity as well? People who have families are a type of diversity.

This truly isn't a field for people without dedication. In my opinion, however, one doesn't need to move across the country and leave family behind in order to prove dedication.

As others have said, I am not sure that actually happens. There is no bias regarding where you are geogrpahically located. There is, however, sometimes a bias if you went to that same instituition for undergrad. Again, its the diversity of training issue. But, no, no one is going to deny you admission to the clinical program at UW-Madison simply because you grew up in Madison. Thats never gonna be the kicker that deciedes your fate there.

I am not sure what you mean by the statement "people who have families are a type of diversity" Um, well, we all have families. Or did you mean like a married couple with children?

The last paragraph shows a fundamentally poor understanding of the biggest determining factor in admission to a clinical psychology program- The "fit"/research interests match. Yes, it does necessitate that because that is what needs to be optimal for both parties. Thats what the Ph.D. is about. Obviously, this would necessitate applying to programs/faculty that are likley to be out of your state.

 

[CharmedDiamond]

As others have said, I am not sure that actually happens. There is no bias regarding where you are geogrpahically located. There is, however, sometimes a bias if you went to that same instituition for undergrad. Again, its the diversity of training issue. But, no, no one is going to deny you admission to the clinical program at UW-Madison simply because you grew up in Madison. Thats never gonna be the kicker that deciedes your fate there.

I am not sure what you mean by the statement "people who have families are a type of diversity" Um, well, we all have families. Or did you mean like a married couple with children?

The last paragraph shows a fundamentally poor understanding of the biggest determining factor in admission to a clinical psychology program- The "fit"/research interests match. Yes, it does necessitate that because that is what needs to be optimal for both parties. Thats what the Ph.D. is about. Obviously, this would necessitate applying to programs/faculty that are likley to be out of your state.

I actually did have a DCT tell me that the school I applied to very rarely accepted people from in-state, in order to create diversity. That's not all schools, but it is a prominent school in the midwest. I know he doesn't speak for every school, but I did find that a very telling point.

I definitely don't mean location at cost of proper fit. I may be biased because in IL, we have a LOT of schools in the immediate area, and just in my own personal experience, it hasn't been difficult to find a place with a solid research match. Obviously, those from rural areas or interested in uncommon research would not have it as easy.

The family thing . . . I do mean those with spouses and children, but I also just mean immediate family. We live in a culture where people go to school far away from family just go live out their party years, or because they want to experience life in the city/country/etc (again, not in all cases). In my culture, it comes down to that you just don't leave family. I come from a very group oriented culture, and leaving behind one's aging parents is just not done. It's simply considered to be unnecessary in most cases, and extremely selfish. In some families, its normal to see each other only during the holidays, in some families, seeing each other once a week is on the low side! I definitely feel that being from a group-oriented minority gives me a unique viewpoint in the research I conduct.

Haha, I just reread part of my paragraph and the "you just don't leave family" part makes me sound like I'm in the mafia

 

[erg923]

I understand. But thats your culture. The dominant culture of academia is that work is your family..haha. The reason for this is that academia in America grows out of American and Western values that imply independence and autonomy is the ultimate goal of adulthood. For example, my parents encouraged me to go out of town for college (not necessarily out of state though) and once I moved out for college at age 18, I had zero desire to go live back home again. And, frankly my parents liked that. They had time to go on "adult vacations" and cruises and I could stay out as late as I wanted drinking beer without anyone asking me any questions. Another issue here is the idea and concept of "the American Dream." One of the central features of this concept is that one wants to see their children do "better" than they did...either financially or academically. Parents put alot of pride in their childrens accomplishments in this country and often hold their childrens' dreams and ambitions in high regard...over and above their own needs in many cases. Thus, an aging mother and father in America are much more likley to encourage their child to live a productive, fullfilling, and happy life (even if that means living in another state) rather than giving all that up so they can be near home. Again, the childs' dreams and happiness over their own.

BTW, When I left home, my parents were 48 and 45. Hardly "aging." They are adults and they have been around longer than me...Im sure they can handle the world on their own. Thats my perspective anyway.

My wife and I would now like to be closer to my family, but yet a good "buffer zone" is still important for us. A long lunch with my mother is taxing...I can imagine having to see her nearly everyday.

 

[Ollie123]

1) Many married couples with kids DO relocate, though I'm sure its not easy. Only taking out-of-state applicants does not mean you won't get people with families (though I do find it a bit odd if the rule is as hard and fast as implied).

2) I agree with others...there seems to be a complete misunderstanding of why it works this way. Believe me, I don't know of anyone who WANTS it to be this way. It would be wonderful if we could all do exactly what we want to do, exactly where we want to do it, without any problems or concerns. (i.e. have your cake and eat it too). That's not reality though. We can wish it all we want, that isn't going to convince a university to lay down the money to hire 20 more faculty members than they need just because they really want to stay in the area. It doesn't mean those faculty are going to pick a "decent" applicant every other year when they take someone into their lab when they had 5 other equal or better candidates from around the globe just because that person wants to stay in the area. It doesn't mean an employer is going to pick someone who isn't qualified for a job because they went to the local grad school even though it wasn't a great match for what they want to do. You need to do what you need to do in order to be successful. I think most/all psychologists are perfectly understanding of the notion that not everyone wants the nomadic lifestyle of academia and may thus turn to other careers. However, they also understand what goes along with academia and that entering the field was a choice, not something forced upon them, and that the world doesn't always work how we want it to.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

1) Many married couples with kids DO relocate, though I'm sure its not easy. Only taking out-of-state applicants does not mean you won't get people with families (though I do find it a bit odd if the rule is as hard and fast as implied). We had several in my undergrad institiution, and we had several

2) I agree with others...there seems to be a complete misunderstanding of why it works this way. Believe me, I don't know of anyone who WANTS it to be this way. It would be wonderful if we could all do exactly what we want to do, exactly where we want to do it, without any problems or concerns. (i.e. have your cake and eat it too). That's not reality though. We can wish it all we want, that isn't going to convince a university to lay down the money to hire 20 more faculty members than they need just because they really want to stay in the area. It doesn't mean an employer is going to pick someone who isn't qualified for a job because they went to the local grad school even though it wasn't a great match for what they want to do. You need to do what you need to do in order to be successful. I think most/all psychologists are perfectly understanding of the notion that not everyone wants the nomadic lifestyle of academia and may thus turn to other careers. However, they also understand what goes along with academia and that entering the field was a choice, not something forced upon them, and that the world doesn't always work how we want it to.

Exactly. That last bit in particular is something I'll often have to go over with friends, fellow students, and patients alike--no one said life is always easy, fair, or fun.

As for the in-state rule, I would imagine many schools always want to avoid becoming "stale" in terms of training styles and professional philosophies. Even if there are multiple programs nearby, those departments want to avoid always trying to pull applicants from the same pool, and thereby decreasing the diversity between the individual programs.

 

[berlin81]

I think the original poster does bring up an interesting issue, but as many have already said, going into advanced collegiate studies does require some sacrifice as we are all expected have some grasp of what we want to do with our lives.

That aside, it would not surprise me if some schools are privately biased, but perhaps its because they have recently realized that they need to broaden its student body. For example, many years ago (when I was looking for a school to get my MA), I was accepted and visited a school in Indiana. I visited the campus and met with a couple faculty members, they were VERY nice to me. However I also met with some of the current students, and they grew up and currently lived in the area. A few of them were shocked that I was from another state (which was just to the north of them!). I have to admit that it did concern me since I was looking for some amount of diversity. And yes, I did turn the school down and went somewhere else.

So as far as I'm concerned, its a great opportunity to have some diversity in your life and to learn about those who simply have a different lifestyle. We all know that most doctorate programs have to have tough standards because of the nature of our work, but having a diverse student body I believe can greatly influence one's communication skills and social awareness, which are basic necessities in both clinical work and research.

 

[KillerDiller]

3. After the Ph.D., its more about natural market forces than anything else. Although it is quite possible (and indeed common) for the average psychologist to pick a location (after internship or post-doc) and just stay put. I really don't know anyone that frowns on that. It's a very natural and understandable desire. That said, it gets frustrating, for sure. My wife and I are very much ready to settle down. Hopefully we don't have to move in order to secure post-doc hours next year. Fingers crossed.

I have a question for the board related to this point. I am in my 4th year of my Ph.D. program and will be applying for internship this fall. My husband and I are considering buying a house (well, a condo) in the area. It's a good time to buy, we would both like to live here longterm, and he is very happy at his current job. I did not restrict myself geographically when applying to grad school (I moved to attend this program), and will also be applying nationally for internship. I know that my husband and I will quite likely need to spend that year apart. How do people view restricting oneself geographically after that stage, though? I agree with erg's view above--that it is a natural thing to want to do--but want to make sure I wouldn't be killing my chances at a good career. FWIW, we are looking to buy in the Boston area where there are many universities, hospitals, CMHCs, etc.