Palo Alto University

[frontbluntt101]

Is this university considered a professional school/diploma mill?
It seems to have great match rates but I have heard from some people that it is not a very well respected school.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[roubs]

It's interesting that their Psy.D. consortium program seems to be smaller w/a better match rate than their Ph.D. program. I wouldn't call the Ph.D. accredited match rate of 40-60% "great" by any means. It's actually quite awful.

 

[PHD12]

Is this university considered a professional school/diploma mill?
It seems to have great match rates but I have heard from some people that it is not a very well respected school.

The PsyD has better match rates than the PhD program. In terms of reputation, all the psychologists in the area know that they accept a large cohort of students and cannot generally provide enough mentoring/dissertation/research support. I've typically heard from people in our field that the top 10% in this program are great. Students from this program do not generally end up working at Stanford or at the VA (they only do unpaid externships here). There are a few that do, but not many considering how many actually graduate from the PhD and PsyD each year. If you don't believe me, look up the psychology faculty at Stanford School of Medicine and you will see that all of them come from funded PhD programs no palo alto university. I also noticed that pretty much all their students go out of state for internship.

This program is also the most expensive professional school. It will cost you 200-250K. This is a nightmare on a psychologist income.

I've seen many graduates from this program in private practice, community mental health centers, and Kaiser.

 

[AnnoyedByFreud]

Two of my undergrad classmates went there. Neither one was particularly bright. It's probably a step up from a true diploma mill (like Argosy), but isn't considered a good school. It's also absurdly expensive and located in one of the most expensive areas of the US where the market is already saturated with psychologists.

 

[JeyRo]

The PsyD has better match rates than the PhD program. In terms of reputation, all the psychologists in the area know that they accept a large cohort of students and cannot generally provide enough mentoring/dissertation/research support. I've typically heard from people in our field that the top 10% in this program are great. Students from this program do not generally end up working at Stanford or at the VA (they only do unpaid externships here). There are a few that do, but not many considering how many actually graduate from the PhD and PsyD each year. If you don't believe me, look up the psychology faculty at Stanford School of Medicine and you will see that all of them come from funded PhD programs no palo alto university. I also noticed that pretty much all their students go out of state for internship.

This program is also the most expensive professional school. It will cost you 200-250K. This is a nightmare on a psychologist income.

I've seen many graduates from this program in private practice, community mental health centers, and Kaiser.

I have pretty intimate knowledge of PAU and I'd say this sounds mostly accurate.

Even if their training and outcomes were better than described above, it still makes the 200-250K price tag pretty impossible to justify.

 

[frontbluntt101]

Would getting a degree from a university like this one make it harder to get a job or would it make no difference (a job as a practicing psychologist)?

 

[Ollie123]

Depends where. Won't keep you from opening a private practice (anyone can - though see recent threads about how the market is quite awful right now, especially in areas like that). Will certainly count against you when applying for jobs at hospitals, VAs, etc. Doesn't mean its impossible, especially if you work to stand out from the pack there - just that its going to be a negative on your CV relative to most other institutions.

 

[JeyRo]

Depends where. Won't keep you from opening a private practice (anyone can - though see recent threads about how the market is quite awful right now, especially in areas like that). Will certainly count against you when applying for jobs at hospitals, VAs, etc. Doesn't mean its impossible, especially if you work to stand out from the pack there - just that its going to be a negative on your CV relative to most other institutions.

To be fair, my understanding is that for clinical jobs (like at VAs) the thing they're most interested in is where you went for internship and postdoc, and secondarily what kind of pubs or other experience you've got.

And some PAU grads are competitive - the Palo Alto VA has a small handful of grads on staff (granted, a small percentage of the numbers they churn out every year). I also recall one instance of a PAU grad about six or seven years ago who was in serious running for a hard-money clinical research position at San Francisco General, had completed the second interview, and they were prepared to make him an offer (then the funding dried up - he went on to land a VA position). Again, though, this all likely represents students in the top 10% at PAU.

Conversely, I am also aware of a PAU grad who started her training approximately 13 years ago (back when it was PGSP) and graduated about three years ago with her PhD. She currently does not work in psychology and continues to do what she always did - sells jewelry at swap meets and county fairs. This doesn't really reflect well on the integrity of PAU as an institution.... I can't imagine what she shelled out for her 10 years. She must have had some sort of arrangement.

I'm aware of another who graduated about six years ago (took him about six to graduate), has apparently failed to attain licensure and is currently working as a motivational speaker for a group that visits schools to teach them about bullying. Not knocking such a gig - but it absolutely doesn't require attaining a 250K PhD degree from a professional school to get it, and I have no doubt he is on the income-contingent repayment program for life.

Either way, one can't defend the idea of going to PAU. To me, I don't need to reflect on much more than the astronomical price tag - quibbling about outcomes is just icing on the stinky cake.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

There are enough challenges in the training process and then in the real world (e.g. varying requirements for licensure in different states, over-saturation in some markets, etc), so it behooves people to try and minimize the challenges they can control. The debt component is often minimized by prospective applicants. Debt is bad, but mounds of debt are worse. Compound interest is NOT your friend in this case, and the removal of subsidized loans now makes every dollar you borrow more expensive. Given the average salaries out there today, taking on more than $20k-$30k of debt does not make sense.

 

[JeyRo]

There are enough challenges in the training process and then in the real world (e.g. varying requirements for licensure in different states, over-saturation in some markets, etc), so it behooves people to try and minimize the challenges they can control. The debt component is often minimized by prospective applicants. Debt is bad, but mounds of debt are worse. Compound interest is NOT your friend in this case, and the removal of subsidized loans now makes every dollar you borrow more expensive. Given the average salaries out there today, taking on more than $20k-$30k of debt does not make sense.

I think it's worth running the numbers in one's head. Let's say one has graduated from PAU, and is in the top 10% of your program - you're that special snowflake.

Then lets say you get a VA position, or one of those vaunted hard-money positions somewhere, and you get a starting salary in the high five figures, or maybe even the low sixes..... great! You still have 200K of debt or more (depending on debt you might have from undergrad).

So, this means you need to go income contingent. Lets say you really win big and you're getting a biweekly paycheck from this great job of yours in the range of 4 grand every two weeks. Fabulous! That's 800 bucks out of your paycheck, per month. Minimum. Assuming you're able to put together the paperwork to properly qualify for ICR (which isn't straightforward)

BTW, if you took out any private loans to cover your tuition bills (not uncommon these days), you can add more monthly payments to your total, and in most cases those private loans can't be rolled into the income-contingent repayment schemes I'm talking about. Suddenly you're paying maybe 1K per month or more out of your monthly take. Multiply that by the next 30 years. Suddenly your 250K loan principal turns into (IDK, making this up) maybe a half million or more of money out of your pocket for the next several decades. Yikes.

I made these numbers up off the top of my head, but I don't think they're off base.

 

[Pragma]

I think it's worth running the numbers in one's head. Let's say one has graduated from PAU, and is in the top 10% of your program - you're that special snowflake.

Then lets say you get a VA position, or one of those vaunted hard-money positions somewhere, and you get a starting salary in the high five figures, or maybe even the low sixes..... great! You still have 200K of debt or more (depending on debt you might have from undergrad).

So, this means you need to go income contingent. Lets say you really win big and you're getting a biweekly paycheck from this great job of yours in the range of 4 grand every two weeks. Fabulous! That's 800 bucks out of your paycheck, per month. Minimum. Assuming you're able to put together the paperwork to properly qualify for ICR (which isn't straightforward)

BTW, if you took out any private loans to cover your tuition bills (not uncommon these days), you can add more monthly payments to your total, and in most cases those private loans can't be rolled into the income-contingent repayment schemes I'm talking about. Suddenly you're paying maybe 1K per month or more out of your monthly take. Multiply that by the next 30 years. Suddenly your 250K loan principal turns into (IDK, making this up) maybe a half million or more of money out of your pocket for the next several decades. Yikes.

I made these numbers up off the top of my head, but I don't think they're off base.

You could be paying 1K a month with just 100K of debt. I can only imagine with 250K...

 

[JeyRo]

You could be paying 1K a month with just 100K of debt. I can only imagine with 250K...

Right, well, I'm making the optimistic assumption that this hypothetical grad can get themselves on an income-contingent repayment plan and that all of their loans are with the government. If you're not on ICR, and/or you have a lot of private loans in the mix, your repayments can go well north of 1K per month. And none of it is currently dischargeable via bankruptcy. That's some scary s**t.

 

[roubs]

Right, well, I'm making the optimistic assumption that this hypothetical grad can get themselves on an income-contingent repayment plan and that all of their loans are with the government. If you're not on ICR, and/or you have a lot of private loans in the mix, your repayments can go well north of 1K per month. And none of it is currently dischargeable via bankruptcy. That's some scary s**t.

Not to mention doesn't any potential spouse's income count "against" you for ICR?

 

[Pragma]

Not to mention doesn't any potential spouse's income count "against" you for ICR?

If you file separately you can avoid that, I think.

 

[PHD12]

Would getting a degree from a university like this one make it harder to get a job or would it make no difference (a job as a practicing psychologist)?

The job market is very saturated in clinical psychology. In CA, it is possibly the worst in the country for psychologists. There are easily 100 applicants for each position. Why make it tougher for yourself by going to a professional school?

You would be better off improving your application for a funded PhD or PsyD program. Desperation is not a reason to go to one of these schools. You don't want to end up desperate + 250K in debt. I really think most people are better off with a BA degree than a professional school degree.

 

[JeyRo]

Desperation is not a reason to go to one of these schools.

Yet, that's their #1 hook.....

 

[jnine]

that's not right to say that Jey Ro because it's insulting to a lot of great professionals, even if you've got a good point

 

[JeyRo]

If you file separately you can avoid that, I think.

The trick is, IIRC, you have to file separately based on the prior tax year. Which means in practice that one has to spend an entire year paying potentially thousands per month in student loan payments before one can successfully qualify for IBR from the federal government. Of course, you can maybe get a 1 year forbearance, but with a 200K+ principal plus 6.8% floor on your interest rate, that means adding potentially tens of thousands (or more) to one's loan principal in the end of the year.

 

[JeyRo]

that's not right to say that Jey Ro because it's insulting to a lot of great professionals, even if you've got a good point

Ironically, I consider myself one of those professionals (maybe not "great" but, "pretty darn good.")

How can I make these points without being insulting?

I've mostly moved on, emotionally, from my FSPS mistake of 10 years ago. I have a nice job, have a great reputation in my community that I've only barely begun to bank on, and I've done OK. I have student loan payments that are large and a loan principal that's big, but compared to students of today what I'm facing looks exceedingly manageable. That's even more reason to listen to what I say. I choose not to wallow in mistakes of the past. No point. But I really consider it part of my responsibility to help others learn from my mistakes. Kind of like what I do as a supervisor sometimes with my supervisees.

Again, absolutely - lots of quality professionals and scholars come from PAU (I know a few of them). The match rates for the PsyD program are pretty good. But it doesn't change the astronomical price tag and the fact that they continue to take people in their program who simply have a heartbeat and a FASFA.

 

[PHD12]

Ironically, I consider myself one of those professionals (maybe not "great" but, "pretty darn good.")

How can I make these points without being insulting?

I've mostly moved on, emotionally, from my FSPS mistake of 10 years ago. I have a nice job, have a great reputation in my community that I've only barely begun to bank on, and I've done OK. I have student loan payments that are large and a loan principal that's big, but compared to students of today what I'm facing looks exceedingly manageable. That's even more reason to listen to what I say. I choose not to wallow in mistakes of the past. No point. But I really consider it part of my responsibility to help others learn from my mistakes. Kind of like what I do as a supervisor sometimes with my supervisees.

I met people over the years from your program and they all echo what you are have been saying pretty much to the T.

Do you know where graduates from your cohort ended up for 1st job after post-doc? Through my linkedin profile, I see that some end up at Kaiser and many are in PP (also difficult in CA). Linked in is actually a great way to find out where graduates from any program end up (put the name of the school in the search box). I know that many people end up in PP because they were unable to land a decent job (although for others its def. a choice).

 

[JeyRo]

I met people over the years from your program and they all echo what you are have been saying pretty much to the T.

Do you know where graduates from your cohort ended up for 1st job after post-doc?

Well, just so I can keep up at least a facade of plausible deniability, I never said I was a PAU grad - just that I know a bunch of them.

I know several at the VA (only because I work at the VA). I already mentioned the two above that failed to attain licensure (one in jewelry sales and the other a motivational speaker). I think I know one who's in PP. I know one who's a VA postdoc (again, quality clinicians do come from the program, I'll be the first to say). I know one who's at Kaiser. Kaiser sounds sort of OK but the pay is significantly below the VA and I don't think the job environment in general is better.

I'd like to just keep my perspective as one who is a FSPS grad and knows people from PAU and can comment on it. I'm sure at this point if someone really worked at it they could find out who I am, but that's OK - nothing I'm saying here isn't something I wouldn't say if I was asked to my face.

 

[JeyRo]

Jey Ro's exactly what I think should happen. On this board and elsewhere, it used to be that I'd encounter a lot of former Fsps people that would defend the system and paint an unrealistic picture. I've always thought that these people were in the best position to see the problem and advocate for change. I agree completely with Jey Ro's post. There are many quality clinicians that come from that environment but it has serious downsides. Palo Alto is the most expensive professional school program amongst a bunch if really expensive education options placing people into a field with an uncertain situation. Potentially disastrous situations for many involved.

The sad thing is it gets worse year after year for FSPS grads, even quality ones. Back in '74 when PGSP (now PAU) was first founded, I'm sure that while the tuition wasn't cheap, it probably would be considered practically a giveaway now. Someone who graduated from PAU in the late 70s or early 80s and has held a job with a reasonable salary since then has probably easily paid off their loans by now using a miniscule portion of their earnings. The picture has drastically shifted over the last 30 years or so.

I believe tuition has roughly doubled over the last 10 years alone. While their outcomes may have improved a bit over the years, the cost-benefit ratio has gotten severely out of whack at PAU and other arguably upper-tier FSPS. Unless your parents are filthy rich or you're financing your PAU education out of your dot-com stock-option slush fund, it seems really difficult to justify considering PAU today.

 

[VAneurodoc]

The sad thing is it gets worse year after year for FSPS grads, even quality ones. Back in '74 when PGSP (now PAU) was first founded, I'm sure that while the tuition wasn't cheap, it probably would be considered practically a giveaway now. Someone who graduated from PAU in the late 70s or early 80s and has held a job with a reasonable salary since then has probably easily paid off their loans by now using a miniscule portion of their earnings. The picture has drastically shifted over the last 30 years or so.

I believe tuition has roughly doubled over the last 10 years alone. While their outcomes may have improved a bit over the years, the cost-benefit ratio has gotten severely out of whack at PAU and other arguably upper-tier FSPS. Unless your parents are filthy rich or you're financing your PAU education out of your dot-com stock-option slush fund, it seems really difficult to justify considering PAU today.

I have encountered clinicians that were trained in FSPS who are very high quality practitioners. This does not make me any more of a fan for three main reasons: 1) quality control, 2) market saturation (our internship has had problem with a single FSPS allowing 12 people to apply to the same internship), and 3) the cost. Students should be required to sit through a day long presentation on economics before being allowed to accept an offer from one of these institutions.

 

[SFPsyd]

Not to go too much off topic, but a quick note re: some of the loan repayment points being made. With the IBR repayment rate going down to 10% of one's disposable income in 2014, and the remainder forgiven after 20 years, it actually becomes quite feasible to make things work depending on one's income and hiring a good accountant come tax time. I made around 150k last year and paid around 640/month in loans. Yes, it is a chunk, but certainly not the end of the world. As mentioned, IBR is only available for government loans, so for private loans it's a bit more dicey. But for the average person coming out of school with debt, it can be a god-send.

I have some philosophical quibbles in that it can promote reckless borrowing, in the sense that it doesn't matter whether one has 60k in loans or 250k, your repayment may look identical over the next 20 years. But as it stands, it can be a great program to get into and make repayment a million times more manageable than it was even 10 years ago.

 

[roubs]

Not to go too much off topic, but a quick note re: some of the loan repayment points being made. With the IBR repayment rate going down to 10% of one's disposable income in 2014, and the remainder forgiven after 20 years, it actually becomes quite feasible to make things work depending on one's income and hiring a good accountant come tax time. I made around 150k last year and paid around 640/month in loans. Yes, it is a chunk, but certainly not the end of the world. As mentioned, IBR is only available for government loans, so for private loans it's a bit more dicey. But for the average person coming out of school with debt, it can be a god-send.

I have some philosophical quibbles in that it can promote reckless borrowing, in the sense that it doesn't matter whether one has 60k in loans or 250k, your repayment may look identical over the next 20 years. But as it stands, it can be a great program to get into and make repayment a million times more manageable than it was even 10 years ago.

It promotes reckless borrowing and it promotes the institution jacking up tuition because now not even the student is accountable for it. You won't see me advocating getting rid of student loans, but this is the kind of eye popping abuse that adds fuel to that argument and fleeces the taxpayer.

 

[SFPsyd]

Another quick note: I did not go to either of the programs but I can say that around the area there is indeed a difference in reputation and opportunities in the Stanford psyd program vs the pgsp phd program. Of course avoid the debt if you can, but depending on one's circumstances either program can be a good option especially the psyd program IMHO. And as referenced in the last post, it certainly doesn't have to break your back financially, at least as long as the current repayment plans continue to be offered.

 

[erg923]

Not to go too much off topic, but a quick note re: some of the loan repayment points being made. With the IBR repayment rate going down to 10% of one's disposable income in 2014, and the remainder forgiven after 20 years, it actually becomes quite feasible to make things work

Thats right, all we have to do is be dependent on good ole Uncle Sam and the American taxpayer. Problem solved...

 

[JeyRo]

Another quick note: I did not go to either of the programs but I can say that around the area there is indeed a difference in reputation and opportunities in the Stanford psyd program vs the pgsp phd program. Of course avoid the debt if you can, but depending on one's circumstances either program can be a good option especially the psyd program IMHO. And as referenced in the last post, it certainly doesn't have to break your back financially, at least as long as the current repayment plans continue to be offered.

Again, you have to wait at least one year for IBR to kick in. Second, private loans aren't covered under IBR, which often have very high interest rates and are taken out frequently by PAU students due to the extremely high tuition (Fed loans don't cover it, typically). There's other issues. IBR is not a free lunch, gold at the end of the rainbow - far from it:

http://talk.collegeconfidential.com...ng-about-crushing-debt-when-theres-ibr-2.html

 

[JeyRo]

It promotes reckless borrowing and it promotes the institution jacking up tuition because now not even the student is accountable for it. You won't see me advocating getting rid of student loans, but this is the kind of eye popping abuse that adds fuel to that argument and fleeces the taxpayer.

It's not a bug, it's a feature. Which is why I'm for getting rid of federally subsidized student loans; getting the government out of intervening in the higher education market and hopelessly distorting it the way it has is the only way to prevent a much larger bubble-popping catastrophe in the future.

 

[PHD12]

Not to go too much off topic, but a quick note re: some of the loan repayment points being made. With the IBR repayment rate going down to 10% of one's disposable income in 2014, and the remainder forgiven after 20 years, it actually becomes quite feasible to make things work depending on one's income and hiring a good accountant come tax time. I made around 150k last year and paid around 640/month in loans. Yes, it is a chunk, but certainly not the end of the world. As mentioned, IBR is only available for government loans, so for private loans it's a bit more dicey. But for the average person coming out of school with debt, it can be a god-send.

That's a nice salary. Are you in PP or attending at a hospital?

 

[Rivi]

Is this university considered a professional school/diploma mill?
It seems to have great match rates but I have heard from some people that it is not a very well respected school.

My blunt advice:

Do not go there. Go to a school with funding, or go into another field.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

One note on IBR: To the best of my knowledge, unless you go IBR + public sector loan forgiveness, you'll have to pay taxes on the portion of your loans that's forgiven after 20 years. Thus, if you still have, say, $40-50k left by the time you hit the 20-year mark, that could work out to a not-insignificant sum.

 

[Member6523]

My blunt advice:

Do not go there. Go to a school with funding, or go into another field.

Seconded. There are other avenues to pursue mental health work if you are unable to land a funded clinical psychology program.

 

[roubs]

It's not a bug, it's a feature. Which is why I'm for getting rid of federally subsidized student loans; getting the government out of intervening in the higher education market and hopelessly distorting it the way it has is the only way to prevent a much larger bubble-popping catastrophe in the future.

We already have gotten rid of federally subsidized loans (for grad school), you mean federally backed loans? And given how much of the economy is dependent on education spending, I think pen-stroking away the federal loan program is the surest, quickest way to a bubble-popping catastrophe. People borrowing more than they can realistically pay back hasn't been a rampant problem for the whole existence of federally backed loans, so how about trying changes that address over borrowing and institutions which exist wholly on federal loans. Relying 100% on private loans would bring it's own set of problems.

 

[JeyRo]

We already have gotten rid of federally subsidized loans (for grad school), you mean federally backed loans?

You're right, and actually, I think we both mean federally-originated loans - as of a few years ago the government completely nationalized the Stafford loan programs - all loans now orignate from the Treasury.

And given how much of the economy is dependent on education spending, I think pen-stroking away the federal loan program is the surest, quickest way to a bubble-popping catastrophe.

Government interventionism overwhelming tends to cause economic bubbles and sustain them. All bubbles pop eventually. The question is to we want to engineer deflating them over time or do we want this to happen on it's own in much bigger, much more catastrophic form?

People borrowing more than they can realistically pay back hasn't been a rampant problem for the whole existence of federally backed loans,

It's been a problem that's gradually built over time: http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/20...ive/gNl6prWo5TcY514mpIpPXL/story.html?camp=pm

As college and professional school have risen in cost (due to government interventionism), loan limits have risen, which has compounded the problem further. The only way to get yourself out of a proverbial hole is to stop digging.

so how about trying changes that address over borrowing and institutions which exist wholly on federal loans. Relying 100% on private loans would bring it's own set of problems.

I don't think that's the alternative we're facing. Massive government intervention in higher education funding is what has caused massive rises in tuition over the past several decades, so it stands to reason that getting rid of this intervention would cause tuition rates to fall back to earth. There was a time when people could self-finance their own undergrad or professional educations simply by taking on a job (which my 75 year old uncle did when he went to law school), or with modest support from their middle class parents.

 

[ClinPsychEnthus]

Not to go too much off topic, but a quick note re: some of the loan repayment points being made. With the IBR repayment rate going down to 10% of one's disposable income in 2014, and the remainder forgiven after 20 years, it actually becomes quite feasible to make things work depending on one's income and hiring a good accountant come tax time. I made around 150k last year and paid around 640/month in loans. Yes, it is a chunk, but certainly not the end of the world. As mentioned, IBR is only available for government loans, so for private loans it's a bit more dicey. But for the average person coming out of school with debt, it can be a god-send.

I have some philosophical quibbles in that it can promote reckless borrowing, in the sense that it doesn't matter whether one has 60k in loans or 250k, your repayment may look identical over the next 20 years. But as it stands, it can be a great program to get into and make repayment a million times more manageable than it was even 10 years ago.

I haven't heard this information about income based repayment anywhere... can you post some links to where you got this information? I'd like to read about it. Thanks!

 

[ClinPsychEnthus]

Seconded. There are other avenues to pursue mental health work if you are unable to land a funded clinical psychology program.

Slightly off the intended PAU topic but, I'm confused sometimes why people seem so set on the idea that all mental health work only requires a Masters degree. While some more straightforward counseling can easily be done with a Masters, if you work with complexities or comorbidities, a Masters level education is often not enough. Most of the people I know who pursued PsyD's (myself included) did so for this reason.

Some of us may not be top notch researchers (though I completely agree with some who say that engaging in research as part of schooling and doing a real dissertation should be minimum standards)... some of us may not have known at age 21 when we graduated from undergrad that doctoral level training was for us... but the motivation and goals in doctoral level training vary, making the PsyD a reasonable option for some.

I think that accreditation should require caps on class sizes, and that front end control of tuition and operating costs could help address the problem. In that sense, any PsyD for- profit schools could (should?) lose accreditation for flooding and abusing the system.

 

[frontbluntt101]

Let's try to get back on topic for one moment here:

Say I did have filthy-rich parents. In this case, would the school be a good option?
Essentially, would you back it if it was a fully funded program?

I am definitely trying my best to get in to more respectable funded programs.

What I'm asking is if it's okay to fall back to this if debt is not a problem.

Also, if people could give me constructive answers instead of just telling me I'm a spoiled dickhead, I would really appreciate it. I already know I'm spoiled and don't deserve it, and trust me I'm doing my best to get into great programs.

However, Palo Alto seems to me at the moment the best thing to fall back to because it's close to home for me (and I'm very family-oriented) and it seems to be a more high-caliber FSPS.

So, to reiterate, if Palo Alto was a fully funded school, would you recommend it?

Thank you for your answers to a clueless undergrad.

 

[Pragma]

I haven't heard this information about income based repayment anywhere... can you post some links to where you got this information? I'd like to read about it. Thanks!

Just search for IBR and ICR and you will got lots of information.

One highlight is that if you aren't getting the public service loan forgiveness after 10 years, then you'll be paying taxes on the forgiven balance anyways after you reach the end of the 25 years in the program. It is something that helps you in the short term, but in the long term you accumulate a lot of interest.

One thing I don't know a lot about is what lenders think of being on IBR or ICR. I suppose your repayment plan could influence whether or not someone will give you a mortgage.

Edit: Haha just noticed AA said something to this effect already.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

So, to reiterate, if Palo Alto was a fully funded school, would you recommend it?

No. Here are some reasons why:

1. The cohort sizes are too large. The intern #'s for the last 2 years for their Psy.D. and Ph.D. have been 28, 32 & 62, 82 respectively. It has been my observation that the larger cohort classes (at most/all academic programs) need to really fight for training and mentorship from faculty, and that adds yet another hurdle to the training experience.

2. There is a glut of students all fighting for a finite # of practica placements in CA. The top-notch training sites can be picky about who they choose (some barring whole programs bc they receive too many applicants already), and many of the lowest rung sites are glorified sweat-shops for "training."

3. Cost. I know you said that you don't want to consider it, but as a field (and country), the cost of an education impacts far more people than just those writing the check. Paying exorbitant tuition and fees validates the current model and pricing, which hurts everyone but the programs collecting the fees. Not only is it a scenario of "keeping up with the Jones", but it reinforces irresponsible borrowing habits.

4. It further contributes to the internship imbalance. The cohort size applying to internship for the Ph.D. program has increased ~56% from the '05-'06 to '11-'12 years (46 to 82). Over the same timespan, the Psy.D. program has seen a 39% gain in internship applicants (17 to 28). By numerous objective measures there are too many students in CA and too many students in the match nationally. Kicking the can down the road and letting someone else worry about it is a poor way to go through life (see our national debt and inability to balance the federal budget for prime examples of the cause/effect of this approach).

I came from a middle of the road university-based Psy.D., and I had to fight for resources and proactively pursue the most competitive placements and training, and the 'local' competition was far less from neighboring universities than it would be in Palo Alto. I took loans for part of my time in training (at far lower interest rates than are available now AND the loans were subsidized), and that was with partial albeit still insufficient funding for 3.5 of my 5.0 years; with the end result being loan payments for the next 15-20 years. I can't even imagine paying $200k just in tuition, let alone the crazy cost of living of Palo Alto.

 

[VAneurodoc]

Let's try to get back on topic for one moment here:

Say I did have filthy-rich parents. In this case, would the school be a good option?
Essentially, would you back it if it was a fully funded program?

I am definitely trying my best to get in to more respectable funded programs.

What I'm asking is if it's okay to fall back to this if debt is not a problem.

Also, if people could give me constructive answers instead of just telling me I'm a spoiled dickhead, I would really appreciate it. I already know I'm spoiled and don't deserve it, and trust me I'm doing my best to get into great programs.

However, Palo Alto seems to me at the moment the best thing to fall back to because it's close to home for me (and I'm very family-oriented) and it seems to be a more high-caliber FSPS.

So, to reiterate, if Palo Alto was a fully funded school, would you recommend it?

Thank you for your answers to a clueless undergrad.

Cannot recommend it (at least the Ph.D.). Of the students I have encountered from there, they have had significant problems with basic knowledge and we have had to do remedial work with them (ex. basic CBT intervnetions and conceptualization). At this time, we typically do not consider their students for our internship due to the problems we have had. I know of several good clinicians from PAU/PGSP and I had a neuropsych postdoc from there who was excellent some years ago. But the quality control is a problem and training is certainly not stellar by a long shot.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

One thing I don't know a lot about is what lenders think of being on IBR or ICR. I suppose your repayment plan could influence whether or not someone will give you a mortgage.

It definitely jacks up your income to debt ratio, which is one factor banks look at when deciding on mortgage amounts and viability of the mortgage applicant. I have been told there are some but few lenders that take into account the earning potential in high leverage situations, though we still are not making the same kind of money our physician colleagues make...so it still may be a rough process. I am projecting to do pretty well this year (top 10%), and I am still worried about qualifying for a decent mortgage loan as a single income household. My Plan B of marrying rich is a toss up, and my Plan C of winning the lottery is kind of a long shot.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I know of several good clinicians from PAU/PGSP and I had a neuropsych postdoc from there who was excellent some years ago.

Ditto, but they were top 10% and from 3-4+ years ago.

 

[VAneurodoc]

Ditto, but they were top 10% and from 3-4+ years ago.

Agreed.

 

[JeyRo]

Let's try to get back on topic for one moment here:

Say I did have filthy-rich parents. In this case, would the school be a good option?
Essentially, would you back it if it was a fully funded program?

Let's stick with the filthy-rich parents idea, because then it's a little less counterfactual. I might recommend it, but only if you can reasonably guarantee you'll end up being in the top 10-20 percent. How does one get in the top tier at PAU? Working hard is part of it, but part of it is luck - you have to work to get attention from professors, and sometimes people aren't successful.

It's entirely possibly you could toil for 4-5 years at PAU, get thrown in with a dissertation project you don't much care for, get no publications (maybe a poster or two), and strike out for internship for 1,2,3 years until you get desperate and take a CAPIC slot, and then proceed to guarantee yourself mediocre (at best) prospects for the rest of your career.

Best case scenario is you're a good networker, you figure out where the hot research groups and professors are, get yourself some crackerjack practicums, churn out a half-dozen publications, and do real well for internship. But again, there's nothing guaranteed at PAU.

Typical funded R1 programs (or funded clinical psych. programs of reasonable quality) work with a front-end filter. They only take the top 1-5% of applicants.

PAU and other arguably "top tier" FSPS programs work in the opposite fashion. They take virtually all applicants, and then filter them out, at best, several years down the line (after they've been drained of 150K or more of student loan monies). Sometimes they don't filter them out at all, like the psychologist I know who graduated from PAU on the 10-year-program.

I am definitely trying my best to get in to more respectable funded programs.

What I'm asking is if it's okay to fall back to this if debt is not a problem.

You'd be taking a risk.

Also, if people could give me constructive answers instead of just telling me I'm a spoiled dickhead, I would really appreciate it. I already know I'm spoiled and don't deserve it, and trust me I'm doing my best to get into great programs.

However, Palo Alto seems to me at the moment the best thing to fall back to because it's close to home for me (and I'm very family-oriented) and it seems to be a more high-caliber FSPS.

So, to reiterate, if Palo Alto was a fully funded school, would you recommend it?

Thank you for your answers to a clueless undergrad.

I'm a spoiled dickhead, so join the club.

 

[PHD12]

Say I did have filthy-rich parents. In this case, would the school be a good option?
Essentially, would you back it if it was a fully funded program?

However, Palo Alto seems to me at the moment the best thing to fall back to because it's close to home for me (and I'm very family-oriented) and it seems to be a more high-caliber FSPS.

So, to reiterate, if Palo Alto was a fully funded school, would you recommend it?

Thank you for your answers to a clueless undergrad.

Even if you were filthy rich I wouldn't recommend it either for the many reasons that others have posted already (e.g., large class sizes, difficulty in obtaining practica).

I will also add that if you want to stay in the bay area, you will most likely not be able to for internship coming from this program. Everyone i've met from this program has left CA for internship. Bay area is incredibly competitive for internship and most sites will NOT consider Palo Alto University students (maybe if you are in the top 5%). It is also incredibly tough to land a post-doc (you will need this to attain licensure in CA) in this location if you went to a professional program. Maybe you should consider Berkeley's MSW program? Its nearby and only 2 years. Clinical psychology is not a good fit for people who cannot relocate. Many people re-locate for internship, post-doc, and/or first job. This is especially going to be the case coming from a professional school.

 

[JeyRo]

Even if you were filthy rich I wouldn't recommend it either for the many reasons that others have posted already (e.g., large class sizes, difficulty in obtaining practica).

I will also add that if you want to stay in the bay area, you will most likely not be able to for internship coming from this program. Everyone i've met from this program has left CA for internship. Bay area is incredibly competitive for internship and most sites will NOT consider Palo Alto University students (maybe if you are in the top 5%). It is also incredibly tough to land a post-doc (you will need this to attain licensure in CA) in this location if you went to a professional program. Maybe you should consider Berkeley's MSW program? Its nearby and only 2 years. Clinical psychology is not a good fit for people who cannot relocate. Many people re-locate for internship, post-doc, and/or first job. This is especially going to be the case coming from a professional school.

I went to school in CA and I was forced to relocate for internship and postdoc. I think you have to basically be able to walk on water to land an internship in California these days, whether you come from a pro-school or not.

BTW PAU's consortium program includes the Palo Alto VA as kind of a captive externship site - so I don't think it's so much of a problem getting practica (although I do think there are increasing numbers of students at PAU having trouble getting a reasonable practicum placement) as it is getting quality research training. There's too many students and too few quality research groups of reasonable productivity - in other words, there's just not enough opportunities to go around for students to get themselves on publications and get into true mentorship relationships with professors, which really hurts their changes when internship application time comes around - coming from a FSPS and having no real meaningful research experience and particularly publications makes you generally pretty uncompetitive for APA-accredited predoc programs.

Goes back to cohort size, again.

 

[Pragma]

I went to school in CA and I was forced to relocate for internship and postdoc. I think you have to basically be able to walk on water to land an internship in California these days, whether you come from a pro-school or not.

That's kind of funny, because a few of my classmates did their internships in CA (my program was not in CA). Admittedly, most of them were people who wanted to move back there and had relocated for the early portion of graduate school.

 

[PHD12]

That's kind of funny, because a few of my classmates did their internships in CA (my program was not in CA). Admittedly, most of them were people who wanted to move back there and had relocated for the early portion of graduate school.

. You don't have to fight as hard when you go to a reputable non-professional program (of course, Ii worked super hard on my applications though until they were near perfect).

 

[JeyRo]

I also landed a good internship in CA. You don't have to fight as hard when you go to a reputable non-professional program (of course, Ii worked super hard on my applications though until they were near perfect).

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if you're right about that. I actually completely struck out when I applied for internship and didn't match to anything - but I ended up landing a quality APA internship in the Clearinghouse (although out of state). It was tough, but it ended up working out well for me. Still, would have much more appreciated staying in CA for internship and postdoc.

I agree if you are at PAU or any other FSPS you probably need to resign yourself, barring some sort of miracle, that you'd have to do your internship out of state (assuming you don't break down and do CAPIC).