• A new admissions hurdle is becoming more common: the CASPer test. Learn more about it at a free webinar hosted by SDN and PrepMatch on May 6th. Register now!
  • Livestream AMA: Join SDN as we welcome Dr. John Ligon, a Pediatric Oncologist with the National Cancer Institute on May 11th at 8:00 PM Eastern. Register now!
Feb 2, 2021
9
1
Hi everyone! I have been accepted into NSU PsyD program in clinical psychology which has good stats (licensure rates, APA-match rates above 88%). However, the cohort is over 50 people. Can I have any advice from those familiar with this program? I could really use any input!
 

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
13,253
14,479
Somewhere
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
Their reputation has been trending downward for a while now. Doing a lot of research with the Amen clinics was pretty much the last nail in the coffin for me accepting any of these students for intership.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Feb 2, 2021
9
1
Congrats on the acceptance! How was the interview? I got invited for an interview and I have no idea what to expect
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!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
About the Ads

HomoHumilis

7+ Year Member
May 5, 2012
7
6
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
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 :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Feb 2, 2021
9
1
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 :)
This was so great to read. I really appreciate this message!
 

R. Matey

A Pirate
5+ Year Member
Jul 15, 2014
742
870
Treasure Island
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
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.

You can get equivalent clinical experience in a Ph.D. program and I'm not sure why you'd want to talk less about the science that informs your practice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
13,253
14,479
Somewhere
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
You can get equivalent clinical experience in a Ph.D. program and I'm not sure why you'd want to talk less about the science that informs your practice.

Perhaps the lack of research discussion is a reason why this program entered into a relationship with a known purveyor of pseudoscience...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Nov 17, 2020
44
151
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
Their reputation has been trending downward for a while now. Doing a lot of research with the Amen clinics was pretty much the last nail in the coffin for me accepting any of these students for intership.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
13,253
14,479
Somewhere
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
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.

Everyone's internship match rate has increased dramatically in that time period. Because a large number of spots were added in that time period. I'm speaking mostly to the neuro program, because I see many applications from it every single year. And, if rejecting people whose sole research experience is garbage pseudoscience is biased, I'm fine with that. Couple that with the few times we have invited the better looking of the applicants to interview, and then not being able to coherently discuss a clinical vignette, and yeah, we're fine with assigning the DNR on those. We generally got >15 apps per spot offered, so we make some easy cuts at the top. If you want to be considered highly, don't attend a school with a poor reputation in your field, nothing too complex about that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Nov 17, 2020
44
151
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
Everyone's internship match rate has increased dramatically in that time period. Because a large number of spots were added in that time period. I'm speaking mostly to the neuro program, because I see many applications from it every single year. And, if rejecting people whose sole research experience is garbage pseudoscience is biased, I'm fine with that. Couple that with the few times we have invited the better looking of the applicants to interview, and then not being able to coherently discuss a clinical vignette, and yeah, we're fine with assigning the DNR on those. We generally got >15 apps per spot offered, so we make some easy cuts at the top. If you want to be considered highly, don't attend a school with a poor reputation in your field, nothing too complex about that.
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.
 

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
13,253
14,479
Somewhere
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
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.

Neuropsychology is one of the concentrations that they have marketed heavily over the years. Also, if you'd like, there are people who went to this place, who also agree with the sentiment about lowered reputation. Also, go around and ask researchers and professionals in neuro about the reputation of the Amen clinics. Even better, read all about it on Quackwatch.
 
About the Ads
Nov 17, 2020
44
151
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
Neuropsychology is one of the concentrations that they have marketed heavily over the years. Also, if you'd like, there are people who went to this place, who also agree with the sentiment about lowered reputation. Also, go around and ask researchers and professionals in neuro about the reputation of the Amen clinics. Even better, read all about it on Quackwatch.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

R. Matey

A Pirate
5+ Year Member
Jul 15, 2014
742
870
Treasure Island
Status (Visible)
  1. Post Doc
Perhaps the lack of research discussion is a reason why this program entered into a relationship with a known purveyor of pseudoscience...

Hence me signature line...

Look Down Los Angeles GIF by LA Clippers
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
13,253
14,479
Somewhere
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
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.

Students and applicants are free to take whatever info they get and make a decision. If they want to accrue 6 figure+ debt and roll the dice on their careers, that's on them. Also, where is this evidence that their EPPP pass rates are getting better? 70s is still bad for any program that considers themselves reputable, particularly their sub 60 on the research portion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Nov 17, 2020
44
151
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
Students and applicants are free to take whatever info they get and make a decision. If they want to accrue 6 figure+ debt and roll the dice on their careers, that's on them. Also, where is this evidence that their EPPP pass rates are getting better? 70s is still bad for any program that considers themselves reputable, particularly their sub 60 on the research portion.
Comparing 2012 vs 2016/17 EPPP pass rates
2012 [PDF] 2012 Psychology Licensing Exam Scores by Doctoral Program - Free Download PDF
2016 https://cdn.ymaws.com/asppb.site-ym.com/resource/resmgr/EPPP_/2016_Scores_by_Doctoral_Prog.pdf
2017 https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.asppb.net/resource/resmgr/eppp_/2017_Doctoral_Report.pdf

I would like to see more recent results from 2019+ to see if this trend is consistent/increasing. But at least we can see that EPPP pass rates have increased since 2012. It is also consistent with the increase in APA-accredited internship match rates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
13,253
14,479
Somewhere
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
Comparing 2012 vs 2016/17 EPPP pass rates
2012 [PDF] 2012 Psychology Licensing Exam Scores by Doctoral Program - Free Download PDF
2016 https://cdn.ymaws.com/asppb.site-ym.com/resource/resmgr/EPPP_/2016_Scores_by_Doctoral_Prog.pdf
2017 https://cdn.ymaws.com/www.asppb.net/resource/resmgr/eppp_/2017_Doctoral_Report.pdf

I would like to see more recent results from 2019+ to see if this trend is consistent/increasing. But at least we can see that EPPP pass rates have increased since 2012. It is also consistent with the increase in APA-accredited internship match rates.

They actually went down in 2017, seems more like variance then a trend upwards.
 
Nov 17, 2020
44
151
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
They actually went down in 2017, seems more like variance then a trend upwards.
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
The rates from 2016 and 2017 suggest an average EPPP pass rate amongst all doctorate programs (Psyd and Phd) which would suggest an overall increase in EPPP pass rates in the last decade. I have still yet to see any data that suggests Nova has been on the decline in terms of objective data.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
13,253
14,479
Somewhere
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
I don't believe that study listed individual programs someone mentioned it below in another comment, but they did not provide the number. Again, I see no evidence that there was an increase in pass rates, and given the n's and SDs of the years that were posted, it would fall within normal variance.
 

psych.meout

5+ Year Member
Oct 5, 2015
2,143
1,928
Status (Visible)
  1. DO/PhD Student
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.
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?

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.

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.
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.

The large cohort gives you an appreciation of the normal distribution (that may make more sense later),
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?

and chances to find your people and make close friendships smaller cohorts can't offer in the same way.
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.
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.).
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?

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.
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?
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.
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.
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 :)
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
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.
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.
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
The rates from 2016 and 2017 suggest an average EPPP pass rate amongst all doctorate programs (Psyd and Phd) which would suggest an overall increase in EPPP pass rates in the last decade. I have still yet to see any data that suggests Nova has been on the decline in terms of objective data.
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.
 

Attachments

  • 1612322286124.png
    1612322286124.png
    29.5 KB · Views: 18
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Nov 17, 2020
44
151
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
13,253
14,479
Somewhere
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
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.

I think you overestimate that demand for many locales. I'm not even in what is considered a saturated market and most healthcare orgs do not hire psychologists for therapy. 3 of the largest third party payors are not accepting new psychologists or neuropsychologists to their panels. It's easy for those of us with established reputations, but I wouldn't want to be a newly licensed person in a lot of markets. Always demand in rural areas, but in the mid-size metro and up, the supply is much higher than the demand.
 

HomoHumilis

7+ Year Member
May 5, 2012
7
6
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
You can get equivalent clinical experience in a Ph.D. program and I'm not sure why you'd want to talk less about the science that informs your practice.
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.
RE the latter part, you are 100% correct there, too. All I meant was, since the person applied to the PsyD vs PhD, I would type less about the research side of things vs practica, not speak less of research, as I'm guessing that's what they care more about. I love research and accept not everyone cares to contribute time to its production. RE Nova and research, is the program a well-known R1? Of course not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

HomoHumilis

7+ Year Member
May 5, 2012
7
6
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
Perhaps the lack of research discussion is a reason why this program entered into a relationship with a known purveyor of pseudoscience...
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.
RE the neuropsych concentration side of things, there are a great number of kids at Nova that avoid the concentration and the person heading it, who's either infamous or famous depending on who you ask. The decisions or associations they and some admin folks make aren't felt too hard by the students (of which I'm sure are fueled by greed) but I also urge you to keep hearing out kids from Nova, and should they be from the concentration, know they're coming from a cult-like atmosphere and offer to help them see what it's like to receive guidance/mentorship that's a bit healthier. People are impressionable, let alone someone in their twenties trying to find their way. People in established institutions all thought fMRI was reliable until someone pressed it may have been given too much stock. I guess all I mean to say is try not to overgeneralize or associate all the kids passionate about neuropsychology with an individual's decisions. Lacking abilities in interviews, though, is a different story.
 

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
13,253
14,479
Somewhere
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
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.
RE the neuropsych concentration side of things, there are a great number of kids at Nova that avoid the concentration and the person heading it, who's either infamous or famous depending on who you ask. The decisions or associations they and some admin folks make aren't felt too hard by the students (of which I'm sure are fueled by greed) but I also urge you to keep hearing out kids from Nova, and should they be from the concentration, know they're coming from a cult-like atmosphere and offer to help them see what it's like to receive guidance/mentorship that's a bit healthier. People are impressionable, let alone someone in their twenties trying to find their way. People in established institutions all thought fMRI was reliable until someone pressed it may have been given too much stock. I guess all I mean to say is try not to overgeneralize or associate all the kids passionate about neuropsychology with an individual's decisions. Lacking abilities in interviews, though, is a different story.

There is no comparison to the problems with fMRI and the Amen clinic research. fMRI actually started from an empirical basis, and still has one. It's just that people are doing inappropriate analyses. The Amen clinic started from junk science at the get go. Honestly, at the internship/postdoc level, I don't have the time or desire to beat the pseudoscience out of trainees. They made a bad choice, I'm not going to be the one to pay for it. I'd rather spend my time and effort on people who put in the work to get a solid foundation to start with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users

Therapist4Chnge

Neuropsych Ninja
Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
Oct 7, 2006
21,863
3,153
The Beach
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychologist
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.

Besides cost, one of the biggest issues frequently cited about NSU is the variance in the quality of the grad students produced from the program. The issue isn't the top 2-3 quartiles, it's the 4th quartile of student who shouldn't have been accepted. Given the larger cohort size, this ends up producing more sub-par graduates than average sized programs.

Using your example, students in the bottom 15-20% in their undergrad or grad program SHOULDN'T make the cut into a doctoral program. It isn't about being elitist, which is a common claim. Instead, it is about ensuring a high quality education. APA accreditation was developed to be the minimum training requirements needed. Unfortunately, some people argued they could establish equivalency, which opened up more spots, which then flooded some geographic areas over the past few decades.

The program would be viewed much better if they slashed the cohort size by atleast 50% (pref. 75%) and did the same to practica sites and faculty. They have some quality faculty (e.g. neuro, substance abuse) and researchers, but again the variance between the top faculty and the bottom faculty is too wide. Same with practica supervisors.

They are uni-based w. some nice connections w. the various health science programs (DO, DDS, NP, etc) and training sites (e.g. jackson memorial), but if you aren't in the handful of students that get those opportunities....it can be a grind. Everyone thinks they will just work hard to be successful....but *everyone* works hard in doctoral programs.

Ultimately, the cost is untenable between the tuition and cost of living in south florida. Tuition was $640/credit when I attended....and I just checked their 2020-2021 tuition estimate is $46k, which is more than double what it cost me per year. Plus ~$7k estimates for uni fees, books, etc. $53k/yr is *nuts*.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Nov 17, 2020
44
151
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
Besides cost, one of the biggest issues frequently cited about NSU is the variance in the quality of the grad students produced from the program. The issue isn't the top 2-3 quartiles, it's the 4th quartile of student who shouldn't have been accepted. Given the larger cohort size, this ends up producing more sub-par graduates than average sized programs.

Using your example, students in the bottom 15-20% in their undergrad or grad program SHOULDN'T make the cut into a doctoral program. It isn't about being elitist, which is a common claim. Instead, it is about ensuring a high quality education. APA accreditation was developed to be the minimum training requirements needed. Unfortunately, some people argued they could establish equivalency, which opened up more spots, which then flooded some geographic areas over the past few decades.

The program would be viewed much better if they slashed the cohort size by atleast 50% (pref. 75%) and did the same to practica sites and faculty. They have some quality faculty (e.g. neuro, substance abuse) and researchers, but again the variance between the top faculty and the bottom faculty is too wide. Same with practica supervisors.

They are uni-based w. some nice connections w. the various health science programs (DO, DDS, NP, etc) and training sites (e.g. jackson memorial), but if you aren't in the handful of students that get those opportunities....it can be a grind. Everyone thinks they will just work hard to be successful....but *everyone* works hard in doctoral programs.

Ultimately, the cost is untenable between the tuition and cost of living in south florida. Tuition was $640/credit when I attended....and I just checked their 2020-2021 tuition estimate is $46k, which is more than double what it cost me per year. Plus ~$7k estimates for uni fees, books, etc. $53k/yr is *nuts*.
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.
 
Last edited:

HomoHumilis

7+ Year Member
May 5, 2012
7
6
Status (Visible)
  1. Psychology Student
There is no comparison to the problems with fMRI and the Amen clinic research. fMRI actually started from an empirical basis, and still has one. It's just that people are doing inappropriate analyses. The Amen clinic started from junk science at the get go. Honestly, at the internship/postdoc level, I don't have the time or desire to beat the pseudoscience out of trainees. They made a bad choice, I'm not going to be the one to pay for it. I'd rather spend my time and effort on people who put in the work to get a solid foundation to start with.
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]).
 
About the Ads

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
  7. This thread is locked.