Interview is really fun - don’t stress about it at all! The faculty is there to get to know you and answer any questions. As corny as it sounds, just relax and be yourself!
This was so great to read. I really appreciate this message!Congratulations on the interview! It's a big step
To the person asking the question, as you can see, people can hold strong opinions of programs, and as such, you will assuredly be up against those types of biases come later interviews. It's only natural, and psychologists in decision-making/training roles are, to a degree, justified in their thinking, as they're merely trying to identify folks with whom they want to train/work. That said, none of us even know (likely including you) which subspecialty you'll choose, if any. Aside from grad school being a grueling/transformative process no matter where you go, it would be difficult to not note the price tag of the program, as well as many other PsyD programs, so do keep that in mind. Pragmatically, to avoid such a headache (that is if you're going to rely on financial aid), it really isn't a terrible idea to wait things out and try again later for a funded program. I hope you're not feeling rushed.
Nova has concentrations, but you don't need to do one, with most arguing in hindsight a broader training/perspective without one. I think with all places, there are going to be pros and cons. There are some faculty you're shocked got the job (which you'll still feel as a staff psychologist somewhere) and others on the opposite end of the spectrum. The large cohort gives you an appreciation of the normal distribution (that may make more sense later), and chances to find your people and make close friendships smaller cohorts can't offer in the same way. There are opportunities to learn from, and conduct research with, professors who wrote the current trauma handbook, ran in original VA Boston circles, ran in old Menninger clinic circles, ran in old rehab psychology circles, are respected in forensic settings, there's an older adult community clinic, etc. It all depends on you, your interests and values, and what you put into your training/learning. There are Nova grads at top institutions around the country in academic medical settings, VA hospitals, etc. There are also a handful of students in cohorts that squeak past the checks and balances and head off to internship, who can then taint the image of the program (there's a whole conversation here about places needing to keep APA accred., as schools are obviously paid and concerned about litigious Americans and their parents, etc.). With the price tag, I think you're given many training opportunities in different areas other programs often lack, as reported by students from other programs who have expressed some envy with some training opportunities Nova students often obtain. In grad school, a lot of your thinking and skills come from your three+ practica experiences vs the classroom, which I think is possibly more relevant to you as opposed to a discussion of research, as you stated you got into the PsyD side of things. Regardless of PsyD or PhD, you'll be expected to produce a dissertation/"directed study," and I'd urge you to undertake an empirical study. Nova has strong relationships in the area, and the relationships with available practica in SoFlo will definitely afford you greater diversity training than some armpit of America with white folks in all directions, but of course, can't compete in this way with programs in NYC.
All in all, if you try to be open to learning new information, challenging previous thinking, identifying your own blind spots/biases, you'll assuredly realize one day that (and humility) is where it's at. Things aren't so black/white in terms of programs, internships, fellowships, employers, as with most of life. If you find yourself being judged by others, not by what you say and how you think come interview time, or how well you connect with clients/patients, but instead by what school you went to, you probably don't want to be there. Like Matt Damon mentions in Goodwill Hunting, you can get the same education from a library. So long as you bother to read and continue asking questions, are skeptical, and willing to put forth the effort, you'll be fine
What evidence do you have that they have been trending downwards? I see the opposite when looking at the data. Students receiving APA/CPA accredited internships has gradually increased from 46% in 2010 to 95% in 2020. Also, 91% of graduates within the last 10 years have received licensure. I can get behind throwing rocks at the program for its stupidly high tuition, but let's not tarnish the name of a whole cohort without really looking at the facts. NOVA has a large cohort and there are very bright students, average students, and below average students who attend the program. Tossing out all applications from an APA-accredited university based on misguided assumptions says more about a TD then it does about an individual attending a program. I would hope future TD's are able to assess an INDIVIDUAL's clinical ability, personal achievements, and work ethic as oppose to just looking at what university they attended. In an ideal world of course we would all like to attend a fully funded PhD program. However, until the amount of funded PhD positions is on par with the demand for clinical psychologists, universities like these will exist to help meet that demand.
Sounds like some pretty subjective evidence if you ask me. I'm still not seeing what makes you say that the university has been trending downwards, nothing too complex about providing concrete evidence to back up a critical statement. If all you are trying to say is that you have been unimpressed with neuro applications that you have looked over then I am fine with that. It is not a neuro-based program anyways.
There are 7 concentrations offered along with a generalist track. Students who are in the Neuro track make up 10-15% of the student body at the highest. You are generalizing your subjective experience onto a whole cohort which just doesn't sit right with me. And someone who attended the university 15 years ago on this board says that the reputation has decreased is evidence to you? Sounds more like they want to stay in the good graces of other elitists on this board without having their own reputation take a hit. Show me objective data that depicts the program declining and I will gladly hear you out. The evidence that I have seen shows both EPPP pass rates and APA-accredited internship increasing throughout the decade. I will keep an open mind and look into the Amen clinics that you speak of, but I have not known about or been impacted by any of this research so far (then again I am not affiliated whatsoever with the Neuro department). Have a nice day, I hope you can keep an open mind as well.
Comparing 2012 vs 2016/17 EPPP pass rates
I can agree with you that there should be more data to make any concrete conclusions. However, the last two available data on EPPP pass rates are from 2016 (84%) and 2017 (79%) which are both higher than the EPPP pass rates of 2012 (74%). This post also shows an article which stated that Nova was among the worst EPPP pass rate programs between 2005-2009 that were frequently below or around 60% EPPP Pass Rates Study
Is it a "bias" if it's a conclusion drawn by the outcome statistics, including their EPPP pass rates and licensure rate?
psychology.nova.edu
Um, this is not a problem at all programs. I may not get along equally well with all faculty in my program (some I rarely see, especially with COVID, and with others I just have cordial, but relatively uninvolved relationships), but it's readily apparent that they are very competent and productive, which is why they hold their positions.
Or you could get an appreciation of this like every other programs does, i.e., through robust didactics, research, and practica. Do you really not see how this is an indictment of Nova's greedy practices in admitting students who are not (maybe never will be) prepared for doctoral training?
This is such a weird spin on having massive cohorts. Individual Nova cohorts are twice as large as my entire program, which is absolutely going to mean you won't get anything close to the kind of mentoring you'd receive in funded programs, though I guess you may not want that if some of the faculty who be mentoring you are questionable, at best.
Is it just a "handful?" That Nova had to start using a captive internship site to gets internship match numbers up beyond 40-50% indicates that it is a broader, more systemic problem.
What might those be and are they worth the sticker cost compared to getting those training opportunities by other means, like internship, post doc, or post licensure training?
That "non-empirical studies" are options for the dissertation milestone indicates the insufficiency of Nova's research training, which is a core competency of doctoral training.
This is disingenuous. That there might be some good or even great psychologists coming out of a given program is not the point. It's important to look at modal outcomes and discern whether these people are succeeding because of their program (what is supposed to happen) or in spite of it.All in all, if you try to be open to learning new information, challenging previous thinking, identifying your own blind spots/biases, you'll assuredly realize one day that (and humility) is where it's at. Things aren't so black/white in terms of programs, internships, fellowships, employers, as with most of life. If you find yourself being judged by others, not by what you say and how you think come interview time, or how well you connect with clients/patients, but instead by what school you went to, you probably don't want to be there. Like Matt Damon mentions in Goodwill Hunting, you can get the same education from a library. So long as you bother to read and continue asking questions, are skeptical, and willing to put forth the effort, you'll be fine
The program has a bad reputation based on actual data. Therefore, it's graduates need to demonstrate that they are the exceptions to the poor quality training offered by their program. Compare this to most other psychologists who don't carry around that baggage and their program is an asset to help them and not an albatross around their neck to be overcome.
Again, the objective data is that they use a captive internship to artificially inflate their match rates and it's a practitioner focused program but their EPPP pass rates, licensure rates, and other clinical outcomes are below clinical science and other research-focused programs.
Thank you, this response was more constructive and I could see how this would increase their internship match rate but I don't see how it would influence EPPP pass rates or licensure. My only beef has been with the comment that the program has been declining because I have not seen any evidence of that. I am by no means saying it is an outstanding research oriented program, and agree that there are many things wrong with it which raise concerns (excessively high tuition, large cohorts). The truth of the matter is that the program is what you make of it. No one is going to hold your hand and make sure that you pass everything with flying colors. In regards to OP's original comment, If you are competitive and hard working, then you will likely land a non-captive APA accredited internship and be just fine in obtaining licensure. If you frequently find yourself in the bottom 15-20% of your previous programs, then you will likely be throwing your money away. It all depends on your own work ethic and belief in yourself. If you have options to attend a funded program... then take it!! No one is advising against that! Like I said previously, in an ideal world of course we would all like to attend a fully funded PhD program. However, until the amount of funded PhD positions is on par with the demand for clinical psychologists, universities like these will exist to help meet that demand.
You are absolutely correct. One can get equivalent experience. All I meant was, due to its size and relationships within the SoFlo area, there are tons of sites to choose from in different subspecialties. I've spoken to others from programs around the country who just didn't have as much variety/options is all.
The great majority of cohorts are PsyDs, and with that, they definitely have lesser experience writing grants, appreciating how grueling research can be, etc. The program does a fairly decent job at teaching kids how to discern issues with methods used, stresses knowledge of psychometrics, discusses issues found in research (e.g., replication troubles), etc.
I think I have been pretty clear that the price is outrageous so I do not know who you are arguing with here. My point this whole time has been that data in regards to pass rates and licensure/match rates have not shown any indication of trending down over the past decade or two, and likely indicate the opposite. And no not everyone *works hard* in doctorate programs and it’s pretty clear to see that the ones flying under the radar are usually the ones struggling. It was too expensive when you went there and it is too expensive now.
You are right, they are a poor comparison. You and I seem to share a distaste of quackery. I can also empathize with choosing to spend your time/effort with kids who share the same distaste. I think what I'm trying to elucidate is not everyone from Nova thinks Amen stuff is anything but quackery, and the majority outside neuro don't even know about it. As such, it's an overgeneralization, IMHO. I think you're possibly missing out on a lot of great talent because of past experiences with a select few. I'm sure you're well sought out and have no issue attracting talent, but in the instance you ever do, you may want to reconsider rigidly judging future kids from that program off past ones (especially ones who're pursuing neuropsychology and didn't do the concentration [or felt there wasn't a choice so they could ensure getting courses/opportunities at times reserved for those in a concentration]).
Pleaseee help me with finding a list of 5 programs, or a website that will help me figure out which PsyD programs have a solid academic layout.Is it a "bias" if it's a conclusion drawn by the outcome statistics, including their EPPP pass rates and licensure rate?
What about the program's use of captive internship sites to inflate their match rate?
Internship & Training Programs | College of Psychology | NSU
Learn more about the doctoral internship programs at the College of Psychology.
They're purposefully obfuscating the match rate with this tactic, which prevents prospective students from realizing the problems with the program, instead of, you know, actually improving the quality of their program to increase the match rate?
Thus, their match rate is deceptive and therefore isn't really comparable to programs with similar rates that don't rely on captive sites.
Um, this is not a problem at all programs. I may not get along equally well with all faculty in my program (some I rarely see, especially with COVID, and with others I just have cordial, but relatively uninvolved relationships), but it's readily apparent that they are very competent and productive, which is why they hold their positions.
Or you could get an appreciation of this like every other programs does, i.e., through robust didactics, research, and practica. Do you really not see how this is an indictment of Nova's greedy practices in admitting students who are not (maybe never will be) prepared for doctoral training?
This is such a weird spin on having massive cohorts. Individual Nova cohorts are twice as large as my entire program, which is absolutely going to mean you won't get anything close to the kind of mentoring you'd receive in funded programs, though I guess you may not want that if some of the faculty who be mentoring you are questionable, at best.
Is it just a "handful?" That Nova had to start using a captive internship site to gets internship match numbers up beyond 40-50% indicates that it is a broader, more systemic problem.
Also, didn't you just say that this was a good thing that the program admits too many students who are operating below the average for doctoral trainees?
What might those be and are they worth the sticker cost compared to getting those training opportunities by other means, like internship, post doc, or post licensure training?
That "non-empirical studies" are options for the dissertation milestone indicates the insufficiency of Nova's research training, which is a core competency of doctoral training.
This is disingenuous. That there might be some good or even great psychologists coming out of a given program is not the point. It's important to look at modal outcomes and discern whether these people are succeeding because of their program (what is supposed to happen) or in spite of it.
A program should be helping students do these things and not leave it up to them to
The program has a bad reputation based on actual data. Therefore, it's graduates need to demonstrate that they are the exceptions to the poor quality training offered by their program. Compare this to most other psychologists who don't carry around that baggage and their program is an asset to help them and not an albatross around their neck to be overcome.
Again, the objective data is that they use a captive internship to artificially inflate their match rates and it's a practitioner focused program but their EPPP pass rates, licensure rates, and other clinical outcomes are below clinical science and other research-focused programs.
To directly answer your question, the PsyD programs that are generally the most well respected are also the ones that are funded (e.g. Rutgers, Baylor); however, these school are almost indistinguishable from funded PhD programs in terms of admission rates/competitiveness and focus on empirical research. I'd recommend searching this forum if you're looking for more info on reputable PsyD programs, since there's a lot of great info already here, but here's an example of one thread:
forums.studentdoctor.net
If this is your goal, you should at least be considering funded PhD programs since an immersive experience includes being involved in conducting and publishing original research, psychotherapy and assessment training, and coursework and this will be pretty much guaranteed when attending any funded, APA-accredited clinical or counseling psychology PhD.
Not saying this is the case but people can have subjectively good experiences on something that may be objectively less than ideal. I also definitely would not make a $200,000+ life decision based on potentially biased word of mouth.
A list of what schools you should apply to can't really be generated by someone else - graduate school fit is pretty individualized. I would go to the APA's list of accredited programs (includes both PsyD and PhD) and start looking at websites for information. High quality PsyD programs tend to run more similarly to quality PhD programs, which mean they are university-based (not for-profit), have small cohorts (talking under 10? maybe a little more if they have a large full time faculty?), offer funding (either a stipend or tuition remission, ideally both), and have research opportunities/requirements (maybe less than a PhD, but research still matters). You'll of course also want to pay attention to internship match and licensure data which you can find on program websites.
What are the Amen clinics? I go to nova and am unfamiliar with this
This is sort of off-topic, but I have been writing a guide for students looking into doctoral programs, wherein I am trying to explain what to look for in programs, what counts as a “red flag,” and to explain how fallacious the “I will be the exception to the rule and succeed in this program with a bad reputation” line of thought is. Would you be willing to collaborate with me on addressing some of these issues in my guide? I’d be happy to share what I have with you, and of course I wouldn’t ask you to go beyond what you are willing and able to provide in terms of feedback and time. This is something I’m doing casually in my free time but I do hope to have it published online so that it is free and widely available. Thanks for sharing your experience!
Hi, yes! Feel free to message me with details 😊
Will do!
Done! Thanks again.
