another question i have is this: i have heard that some psyd students, depending on where they go to school, are able to work part time to offset some of the tuition expenses. is anyone here currently doing this? how possible is this? i worked my way through undergrad and a very rigorous grad program, and feel i have the drive to do it through a doctoral program, if possible. everyone is talking about many psyd grads coming out with tons of debt.. so are there people who are able to work while in school to lessen this amount??
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1,179
- Reaction score
- 5
Regarding Widener, I've always heard their program is well-respected, and I think having the captive internship could remove a lot of stress and uncertainty. I think it ends up costing more because your'e still paying the school while on internship.
As far as working while getting the doctorate. I attended Rutgers Psyd, and there were some students who worked 20-25 hrs/week while in school (after the first two years anyway). It's hard to do full-time because you need to do practica and research as well as classwork. I think it's hardest in a Phd program where you must be in the lab a lot and perhaps TA'ing as well. Then again, those types of programs usually offer good funding to their grad students, so working is not as necessary. Bottom line is: don't expect to be able to work full-time all the way through school, but it's possible to offset costs quite a bit with part-time work.
As far as working while getting the doctorate. I attended Rutgers Psyd, and there were some students who worked 20-25 hrs/week while in school (after the first two years anyway). It's hard to do full-time because you need to do practica and research as well as classwork. I think it's hardest in a Phd program where you must be in the lab a lot and perhaps TA'ing as well. Then again, those types of programs usually offer good funding to their grad students, so working is not as necessary. Bottom line is: don't expect to be able to work full-time all the way through school, but it's possible to offset costs quite a bit with part-time work.
thanks. i wouldnt dream of working full-time. i guess i figured that in phd programs, you kind of ARE working part-time, doing RAs and TAs.. and in a psyd, you usually dont have that option, so maybe doing part time fee for service (or waiting tables, whatever) takes the place of that extra RA or TA work phds do.
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1,179
- Reaction score
- 5
Exactly. Some of the jobs people in my program have done: assessments for a research study; supervision/caregiving for autistic children; TA for undergrad psych courses; grad assistant or test librarian for the school clinic; behavioral assistant in a hospital.
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
When it comes to the financial aspect of attending a PsyD program, this is the area that has caused me to question my choice of PsyD... Many of the individuals in our program (me included) worked part-time the entire time. Further, paying $800+ per credit (12 credits per semester, 3 semesters per year for 3.5 years...) we all have huge tuition/loan bills. Time-wise, it is difficult as my program specifically requires 25+ clinical hours per week, 3-5 hours per week doing research and/or dissertation, in addition to 4 classes. So, if you did not work throughout college or are not accustomed to 60+ hour work weeks, then this will require a significant adjustment. But it is definitely do-able... I did it - and I'm a mom, too.
Regarding Widener's reputation, I have certainly heard positive things. Just be aware that one of the most important aspects to training in a PsyD program (in my opinion..) is to be aware of your position in the empirically supported treatment movement. My PsyD program is highly trained in EST's, such as CBT and those falling under the third wave umbrella (DBT, ACT, MI, FAP, CBASP, etc.). However (and anyone from Widener SHOULD correct me if I am mistaken), I have always been under the impression that Widener operated from a more Psychodynamic perspective. Clearly, this is an area of debate in the field (EST's a la Chambless's report), so understanding your beliefs on this issue are essential as the majority of programs operate/train from one side of the issue. But, being exposed to many treatment techniques and being encouraged to integrate them in a way that maximizes the benefits for your clients (as demonstrated in clinical practice AND empirical evidence) was the best lesson I took home from my program... and is a belief that many programs, including psychodynamic ones, also subscribe to.
Far too many people depend on the "prestige" of a school to determine their future success. No doubt online programs are suspect simply because you lack the support that faculty can offer. However, any program, including Forest, offers not only classes on research design, stats, and opportunities to publish and present at conferences, but also the guidance needed to do accomplish these well. This is what you get from an APA approved school. At the end of the day, how well you do or your success is in your hands. I spoke with the Navy's top psychologist who leads the board that selects interns. He clearly states that doing well at an "average school" (i.e. Forest) is better than doing average at a "great" school (perhaps Baylor). Furthermore, select a school that is known for something. Forest has a top Forensics and Neuropsych. program. Dr. Denney is the President of the National Academy of Neuropsychology (NAN) and professor at Forest. The staff is split evenly between Ph.D's and Psy.D's, with all being board certified in their respective fields.
Case and point: Don't allow you're pride over prestige guide your life decisions. If it does, what does that say about your clinical skills? Finally, if provided with the correct resources and opportunities (a clinic to practice, community contacts, research opportunities), a school is what YOU make of it.
Yes. I go to Forest.
Hmmm. The above quote is interesting. I think the question to ask is "why WOULDN'T a Ph.D. suggest a Ph.D?" As far as opportunities go, ANY school is what you make of it. You're always GIVEN the opportunity, it's whether you're prepared to take it (i.e. have published). If you've been trained by an APA school to design and understand research and practice empirically based treatments, then you've been given the tools you need. If you want to teach, go publish. If you want to practice, go get practicum hours. Universities need to be shown that you're competent- you're degree isn't an automatic "in". They need you to be competent to bring in money in the form of grants. That money then goes to pay for additional research to bring in more money....and so the cycle continues. In the meantime, if there is a doctoral program, some of that grant money pay's for students stipends. They also reduce costs with TA's. They don't have to charge you much because they get state funding (if a state school) AND they have free labor (aside from the stipend).
Psy.D schools said, "heck, there's already good research being done, lets develop competent clinicians to practice all that good stuff". Problem was, they had to fund these new schools. And institutions (including govt.) aren't giving out huge sums of money to train clinicians. They might for research, but not for training. So, lo and behold, they have to charge a lot to keep their head above water.
Finally, with so much good research coming out, and with such incredible increases in knowledge and access to knowledge, I believe that Ph.D are being replaced by Psy.D's because their skill set is needed in one area of the field, while the Psy.D's is needed in another. Their filling certain "economic" gaps that have "naturally" evolved. With lots more people in the U.S. and the growing acceptance of mental health, Ph.D's can't fill it all- nor would they be wholly qualified to do so (with their typically limited clinical experience in grad school as compared to Psy.D's).
Finally, LCSW's can't do testing. They're not qualified nor have the training. Granted, and I agree with the post, if you want to simple practice talk therapy in your own clinic rather than participate in mild forms of research, join the military as a psychologist, or work in a hospital or prison, maybe you should think about an LCSW.
Opportunities? They're there. Are you prepared to take them on?
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2009
- Messages
- 379
- Reaction score
- 3
I agree with your bottom line, which seems to be "Your education is what you make of it." Buuuuut a lot of what you say is based on common misconceptions about how the PsyD and PhD differ. PsyDs are not replacing PhDs and are not simply clinically focused. Also... PhDs do not have "limited clinical experience compared to PsyDs..." that's entirely false.
I'm a PsyD applicant. I've applied to no PhD programs, but I think it's really important to know what's what.
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2009
- Messages
- 379
- Reaction score
- 3
Excellent post Philly.
A stereotype begins to die?
I'm not sure it will ever die. But we can change the world one poster at a time.
J
Janey
Hi Everyone:
I am in a top clinical PsyD program in California so I can share my thoughts on this one. First of all, please consider the cost of the PsyD and whether it is reasonable to afford. For example, most of my classmates are taking out between 100,000 to 200,000 loans. Even a PsyD can take you between 5-8 years to complete, depending on the program. Plus, internship salaries are only 25,000 and many post-docs pay in the range of 15,000-40,000 (i've seen some that don't pay at all).
Basically, what i've found is that unless your family is wealthy or you don't mind living below the poverty line, this degree is not doable. Please don't make uninformed decisions.
Also, look at the APA internship match rates: they should be at 95% to 100% or else you may not find a post-doc to get the hours you need for licensure.
I am in a top clinical PsyD program in California so I can share my thoughts on this one. First of all, please consider the cost of the PsyD and whether it is reasonable to afford. For example, most of my classmates are taking out between 100,000 to 200,000 loans. Even a PsyD can take you between 5-8 years to complete, depending on the program. Plus, internship salaries are only 25,000 and many post-docs pay in the range of 15,000-40,000 (i've seen some that don't pay at all).
Basically, what i've found is that unless your family is wealthy or you don't mind living below the poverty line, this degree is not doable. Please don't make uninformed decisions.
Also, look at the APA internship match rates: they should be at 95% to 100% or else you may not find a post-doc to get the hours you need for licensure.
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2008
- Messages
- 1,179
- Reaction score
- 5
Janey makes some good points. Getting a PsyD can be an expensive investment when one considers the salaries/profits most psychologists earn. The applying to post-docs (which I'm trying to get through now) is rather depressing, to be sure. However, I'm close to getting my PsyD and my experience has not been as grim as Janey describes. My debt is manageable (much less than 100k) and I matched to an APA accredited internship. My program is university-based rather than a professional school. Also, it's not in California. From what I've heard, the competition among PsyDs is especially fierce in California due to all of the professional schools out there.
Anyway, I just want to offer a slightly different perspective on the PsyD. I think some PsyD programs are worth the money you spend on them. Some are probably not such a great investment -- especially if the match rate for internship is low.
Anyway, I just want to offer a slightly different perspective on the PsyD. I think some PsyD programs are worth the money you spend on them. Some are probably not such a great investment -- especially if the match rate for internship is low.
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2009
- Messages
- 379
- Reaction score
- 3
This is really isn't the case at all. And many PsyD programs cost well below 100k. Also take into account paid (low waged) internships that help take some of the edge off of tuition costs.
I am an "older" student pursuing a doctorate in clinical psychology. I've read much of the forums on PsyD vs PhD. Your posts have been really insightful. I have applied to a PsyD program at a professional school. The program seems intense and really consistent with my career path. It is also APA accredited. I've even interviewed former students who have done VERY well after completing the program. I feel as though I am too old to be spending the majority of my time in a lab (although I LOVE research), and I ultimately wish to practice when I've graduated. I want to be completely prepared to pass the boards and practice psychology. The program to which I've applied will also allow me to do some research (though it is not research focused), and I will get a lot of clinical experience. Former students say that the program actually HELPED them be more competitive when pursuing opportunities after graduation. So...
Question: When will the elitism end? Nevermind. You don't have to answer that one.
I too, believe that the degree mills need to be stopped, but if you find a good program, interview everyone involved (counselors, current and former students), research any report you can find on matching, accreditation (and the process for accreditation), even textbooks used. If you like what you find, sign up!
The only issue I have with the program I've been accepted to is the cost. Whoa! Maybe PsyDs should advocate for better and more scholarship programs and dollars.
Question: When will the elitism end? Nevermind. You don't have to answer that one.
I too, believe that the degree mills need to be stopped, but if you find a good program, interview everyone involved (counselors, current and former students), research any report you can find on matching, accreditation (and the process for accreditation), even textbooks used. If you like what you find, sign up!
The only issue I have with the program I've been accepted to is the cost. Whoa! Maybe PsyDs should advocate for better and more scholarship programs and dollars.
Excellent response PhillyDave! My sentiments exactly! Very encouraging.
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,380
- Reaction score
- 4,315
I wanted to add on to a comment I made awhile ago....
I still believe if you know you want to be an academic, get a Ph.D. If during your Psy.D. training you develop a stronger interest in doing more research oriented work, you can try and play catch-up to make yourself more competitive, though it still isn't the recommended route. These recommendations are also appropriate for students at balanced programs that want to shift more towards a research focus.
1. Increase your research/stats experience through classes and being more heavily involved in a lab/grant/project. This may also include securing Research Assistant positions. Research Coordinator positions are also good, but harder to get.
2. Get publications. If you can get on as a 3rd author or higher, it is probably worth your time, particularly if it is aimed at a more competitive journal. Of course, the goal is 1st and 2nd author publications, so focus on getting a few of them. Also, if you can get grant writing experience/mentorship, that can be helpful.
3. Look at internships that allow you to interact with academics and/or gain additional research experience. Academic medical centers, (some) consortiums, and (some) VAs would be good places to look. There are a handful of well known research internships, but those are ridiculously competitive.
4. Look for fellowships at places similar to those listed above. You may or may not be a strong candidate for the more research heavy positions, but you can position yourself to be a strong candidate for more clinically-focused positions. (80% clinical/20% research, 70/30, etc). If you can get at least 20-30% of your time for research, you have a shot at showing some productivity during your fellowship. It is far from a sure thing, but it would be a tough sell to a university if you came from a fellowship/post-doc that did not have a research component.
Obviously starting with a more research heavy Ph.D. program is the preferred route, but if you can't do that, there are still options. The earlier you start, the better off you'll be.
Regarding choosing PsyD. I think there needs to be a positive PsyD post on here.
I was a masters level licensed therapist in California when I decided that I really wanted more training. I had a mortgage and a job and needed something that would work for me. I have taken classes at Johns Hopkins and been left with utter disappointment. I ended up going to Alliant CSPP in a Psy.D. program. I know individuals that completed their doctorates at Columbia (Teacher's College)and Boston College who served as gophers for their chairs and had no choice in their research. One from USC who was delayed 2 years due to his chair's extended sabbatical. We could go on forever about the perceived quality of a program but on here I see most are concerned with perceived reputation. Most think CSPP is a for profit institution which is untrue. It is noon-profit institution. It was started by the California Psychological due to the lack of doctoral education in clinical psychology available at the time California (now there are too many schools). People are sure that PsyD students only have to complete a literature review or doc project to graduate. Not true at my campus as a full dissertation was required though qualitative research was allowed. I seem to see a lot of people talking about the professional schools in California, but the real problem in California has been a licensure law that allows those who go to non-regionally accredited schools(the real diploma mills) to obtain a psychologist license.
Regarding income, the reality for me is that 1 1/2 years from graduation, I earn 100,000 with many other PsyDs from Alliant who are earning the same living. The alumni network over here for CSPP is great as most of my co workers also went to Alliant(and employers). It is easier to get a psychologist job for CSPP grads at many institutions. Also, I have already received 50,000 in student loan repayment for working in an underserved area (NHSC) and can continue until my loans are paid off. There are these types of opportunities across the country.
I think my point is that I have found no stigma and a great career. If you have a good feel for a program don't listen to what a few people on this thread say as they are often uninformed on some important facts.
I was a masters level licensed therapist in California when I decided that I really wanted more training. I had a mortgage and a job and needed something that would work for me. I have taken classes at Johns Hopkins and been left with utter disappointment. I ended up going to Alliant CSPP in a Psy.D. program. I know individuals that completed their doctorates at Columbia (Teacher's College)and Boston College who served as gophers for their chairs and had no choice in their research. One from USC who was delayed 2 years due to his chair's extended sabbatical. We could go on forever about the perceived quality of a program but on here I see most are concerned with perceived reputation. Most think CSPP is a for profit institution which is untrue. It is noon-profit institution. It was started by the California Psychological due to the lack of doctoral education in clinical psychology available at the time California (now there are too many schools). People are sure that PsyD students only have to complete a literature review or doc project to graduate. Not true at my campus as a full dissertation was required though qualitative research was allowed. I seem to see a lot of people talking about the professional schools in California, but the real problem in California has been a licensure law that allows those who go to non-regionally accredited schools(the real diploma mills) to obtain a psychologist license.
Regarding income, the reality for me is that 1 1/2 years from graduation, I earn 100,000 with many other PsyDs from Alliant who are earning the same living. The alumni network over here for CSPP is great as most of my co workers also went to Alliant(and employers). It is easier to get a psychologist job for CSPP grads at many institutions. Also, I have already received 50,000 in student loan repayment for working in an underserved area (NHSC) and can continue until my loans are paid off. There are these types of opportunities across the country.
I think my point is that I have found no stigma and a great career. If you have a good feel for a program don't listen to what a few people on this thread say as they are often uninformed on some important facts.
Last edited:
Well thanks for the break down Jon. I definitely concede that the PsyD. will limit research options, work in academic settings, etc. I also believe that it is different for someone like me who enters a PsyD program following years of work in mental health as opposed to someone fresh from undergrad. When I interview for a job I bring my PsyD along with a lot of other experience in the field. If I was choosing as a 23 year old, might be different. A solid career is definitely possible with a PsyD.
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 0
Hi, you have a good list started already, Pepperdine is very expensive but they do have a good program.
In terms of PsyD programs they are going to be very hit or miss, I can mention a few programs that are better in than most in CA although all will be more expensive tuition wise than a Ph.D
Pepperdine
Stanford Consortium- look out for $
Biola-Rosemead
Antioch University, Santa Barbara and New England
Fuller-
If you are about Psychoanalysis
it might also be worth at least glancing at Wright
I sugget you check out class size, cost, APA involvement, and Orientation of the programs you are looking at. Find a school you feel comfortable in, tiny classes? Cohorts? Research? Practice? good luck
[/QUOTE]
Also, it's quite clear that PhD programs are looking for students with interests that "fit" a particular professor. How about PsyD programs? What do they tend to look for? Previous clinical work experience (and how do you get that if you don't have the qualification the the first place... does volunteering at a inpatient psych ward help for example)?[/QUOTE]
PsyD programs are going to interested in experiences with human contact- if that means a clinic, a suicide hotline.. etc. At the same time a research background almost never goes a miss. They are looking for well rounded individuals with a good presence, and relevant experiences. The best programs would prefer you are a driven student with at least a decent GPA to stand behind. They may also request writing samples and life experiences that steered you into the line of mental health work.
-Hope this is helpful
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 0
Hello all,
The PsyD degree is a great fit for some people just as the Ph.D is a good fit for others. Are there more "bad" programs with PsyD degrees granted? Perhaps.. are PsyD degrees more expensive? They can be, and they are a lot of time, but not always. Are Ph.D programs longer on avg.? Generally speaking they are. Does this mean that living expenses are higher? Depends on the stipend etc, but generally a Ph.D student will be paying rent longer to go to school (Does not mean they will have more debt).
Does APA accredit bad and good programs for both PsyD and Ph.D ? I think so.
Should one go to Ph.D if they can get in and not a PsyD?
This is going to depend on several factors.
1. Is your priority Practicing? Academics? Research?
2. What orientation to feel suits you, are you looking for a program with an integrative approach a psychoanalytic, CBT.. ETC
3. Can you plan out what kinds of debt you are going to have and how you should handle those? E.G. are you going to 80K in student loans? Are you going to take 3 more years to finish a program? Are you going to get to explore your own interests or would you prefer to work under a professor for their interests.
There is no right or wrong to this, in many cases people chose a program because they can be near to loved ones, or have special needs, or would like to network in a state they will eventually be practicing in. My advice is to figure out what YOU want and need out of a program, after that the PsyD vs. PhD thing is purely semantics.
In short great clinicians derive from both models- we should look positively on the fact that there is now greater access for people to treat mental health conditions, and that the field is getting a boost of excitement out of the new models.
The PsyD degree is a great fit for some people just as the Ph.D is a good fit for others. Are there more "bad" programs with PsyD degrees granted? Perhaps.. are PsyD degrees more expensive? They can be, and they are a lot of time, but not always. Are Ph.D programs longer on avg.? Generally speaking they are. Does this mean that living expenses are higher? Depends on the stipend etc, but generally a Ph.D student will be paying rent longer to go to school (Does not mean they will have more debt).
Does APA accredit bad and good programs for both PsyD and Ph.D ? I think so.
Should one go to Ph.D if they can get in and not a PsyD?
This is going to depend on several factors.
1. Is your priority Practicing? Academics? Research?
2. What orientation to feel suits you, are you looking for a program with an integrative approach a psychoanalytic, CBT.. ETC
3. Can you plan out what kinds of debt you are going to have and how you should handle those? E.G. are you going to 80K in student loans? Are you going to take 3 more years to finish a program? Are you going to get to explore your own interests or would you prefer to work under a professor for their interests.
There is no right or wrong to this, in many cases people chose a program because they can be near to loved ones, or have special needs, or would like to network in a state they will eventually be practicing in. My advice is to figure out what YOU want and need out of a program, after that the PsyD vs. PhD thing is purely semantics.
In short great clinicians derive from both models- we should look positively on the fact that there is now greater access for people to treat mental health conditions, and that the field is getting a boost of excitement out of the new models.
J
Janey
Hi Everyone:
As someone who recently graduated from a top clinical PsyD program that has an excellent reputation and is part of a university based program, I can tell you a bit about the PsyD from an insider's perspective. First of all, let me put all the facts on the table:
Cost of clinical psyD: $100,000- 250,000 plus (depending on the program and whether it is private or public)
Length of program: 5 years-7 years plus. Typically, 4 to 5 years of school, and 1 year internship. The average to complete my program is 6 years, and it took me 6 years.
Internship salary: $0 -$25,000 (yes, some are unpaid)
First job after graduate school: $25,000-30,000 for a clinical post-doc
Right now, I am getting paid $25,000 as a recent graduate in a clinical post-doc position. I work about 50-60 hours per week so I end up making less than minimum wage. My salary comes out to about $1600 per month, and my loans come out to about $900 per month so I am unable to make ends meet, and thus have taken on an additional job as a waitress on the weekends just to make additional income. Plus, I don't eat out and live with roommates. Do you think getting this degree is worth it? That depends on how much you are willing to sacrifice and how comfortable you are living in poverty for a while.
As someone who recently graduated from a top clinical PsyD program that has an excellent reputation and is part of a university based program, I can tell you a bit about the PsyD from an insider's perspective. First of all, let me put all the facts on the table:
Cost of clinical psyD: $100,000- 250,000 plus (depending on the program and whether it is private or public)
Length of program: 5 years-7 years plus. Typically, 4 to 5 years of school, and 1 year internship. The average to complete my program is 6 years, and it took me 6 years.
Internship salary: $0 -$25,000 (yes, some are unpaid)
First job after graduate school: $25,000-30,000 for a clinical post-doc
Right now, I am getting paid $25,000 as a recent graduate in a clinical post-doc position. I work about 50-60 hours per week so I end up making less than minimum wage. My salary comes out to about $1600 per month, and my loans come out to about $900 per month so I am unable to make ends meet, and thus have taken on an additional job as a waitress on the weekends just to make additional income. Plus, I don't eat out and live with roommates. Do you think getting this degree is worth it? That depends on how much you are willing to sacrifice and how comfortable you are living in poverty for a while.
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2009
- Messages
- 379
- Reaction score
- 3
Are you actually asking if it is worth it? Judging from your last two posts it sounds like you've already made up your mind. Your economic situation seems less then satisfactory, and I hope it changes for you soon; however, what are you getting at?
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,380
- Reaction score
- 4,315
Ouch.
Even with an income based repayment plan, that is still really rough. Internship pay is suprisingly bad. Being at a VA I make the top end of internship pay (excluding military and BOP), and it is still barely enough to live on.
As for post-doc pay, here is what I've seen in my search and on the listservs for the past couple of years:
-2-yr neuro fellowships mostly ranged from $36k-$45k, with a couple of outliers around $33k and $55k+.
-2-yr neuro fellowships at most VAs are $41k-$43k.
-2-yr rehab fellowships at universities seem to range $36k-$50k.
-1 yr Post-doc fellowships in the VA seem to be in the low $40k's.
-1 yr Post-docs at hospitals seem to be $30k-$40k
-1 yr Post docs at counseling centers seem to be $25k-$35k
-Psychologist-I jobs in the VA are in the $50k's (GS-11, step 1, unlicensed), and after your post-doc it goes to GS-12, step 1, licensed.
-Private practice assessment jobs seem to be $20-$30k, though I'm sure people have worked out better deals. (I know the least about this area, since I only looked at formal fellowships.)
-The research fellowships I've seen are close to NIH recommendations, though some have been better, particularly out in CA.
All of the formal 2 yr fellowships above and many of the 1 yr fellowships are very competitive, so I would not consider them average or what someone should expect to get. On average, the vast majority of people coming out of internship do informal post-docs or get jobs.
Even with an income based repayment plan, that is still really rough. Internship pay is suprisingly bad. Being at a VA I make the top end of internship pay (excluding military and BOP), and it is still barely enough to live on.
As for post-doc pay, here is what I've seen in my search and on the listservs for the past couple of years:
-2-yr neuro fellowships mostly ranged from $36k-$45k, with a couple of outliers around $33k and $55k+.
-2-yr neuro fellowships at most VAs are $41k-$43k.
-2-yr rehab fellowships at universities seem to range $36k-$50k.
-1 yr Post-doc fellowships in the VA seem to be in the low $40k's.
-1 yr Post-docs at hospitals seem to be $30k-$40k
-1 yr Post docs at counseling centers seem to be $25k-$35k
-Psychologist-I jobs in the VA are in the $50k's (GS-11, step 1, unlicensed), and after your post-doc it goes to GS-12, step 1, licensed.
-Private practice assessment jobs seem to be $20-$30k, though I'm sure people have worked out better deals. (I know the least about this area, since I only looked at formal fellowships.)
-The research fellowships I've seen are close to NIH recommendations, though some have been better, particularly out in CA.
All of the formal 2 yr fellowships above and many of the 1 yr fellowships are very competitive, so I would not consider them average or what someone should expect to get. On average, the vast majority of people coming out of internship do informal post-docs or get jobs.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2006
- Messages
- 22,380
- Reaction score
- 4,315
MOD NOTE: In an effort to re-organize the top of the forum, I added this thread to the "most useful" list for applicants, which will be stickied at the top of the forum. -t4c
that's interesting. do you know any more about the program?
would you know of other similar programs?
thanx!
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2011
- Messages
- 24
- Reaction score
- 1
I'm not sure if anyone is still reading this thread because it appears some time has passes since the past post. I have read through the complete thread and I still have some questions. This year I applied to 15 schools (14 PhD & 1 PsyD). I received 4 interviews and ultimately received one offer and a wait list position. The offer I received was at a clinical PsyD program. The reason I did not apply to many PsyD programs is because I was warned not to by the faculty at my university. However, the place that I felt the strongest fit was the PsyD program. I even spoke to the DOT at length after the offer to clarify some key points that were important to me. The university is a tier 2 research institution, not a professional school, that is fully funded (tuition remission + stipend that was better than most of the PhD programs I visited). Additionally, the program wants students to actively do research and present as well as publish. I already have a few national conference presentations as an undergrad but I need to work on publications. They also want to have students active in learning how to write and submit grants (something that I would really like to learn). The faculty is enthuastic and work very closely with students. The cohorts do not exceed 8 students. In reality what I would like to do as a career is to practice while doing some adjunct teaching. Eventually I would like to open my own facility working with a particular population and work on treatment outcome research there. However, it's a long time off and I know some of my plans 6 years ago are not quite what they are now. I hear that you can do the same with a PhD that you can a PsyD but the reality of it is that I am not going to put myself through the application process again. I am competitive enough that I probably could make it in a PhD program if I tried again next year, but I'm done. With all the negative talk (even posts that claim they are not against PsyD's but the language used betrays them) I want to know if I am making a mistake about going to this university that feels so incredibly right because it is a PsyD. If money is removed from the equation, are the true differences lessened? Ugh, I hate you graduate school application process!!!
"If money is removed from the equation"... does that mean the PsyD you got accepted to is truly fully funded? What is the average debt load of students graduating from your PsyD program? If it's, say, less than 5-10K, then great.
If you're essentially talking about a fully funded program, then it becomes more a question of the time and opportunity costs you're investing in the training. Assuming it's fully funded, if the APA match rates are good (90+ percent) and you like the program, I say go for it, it's a no-brainer.
I'm amazed by how bad things have gotten for new professional school / PsyD grads these days. I almost feel like I got off comparatively easy having graduated in '04.
- Joined
- May 25, 2009
- Messages
- 613
- Reaction score
- 1
VAs are upper end of internship??? I thought it was middle road 20ks??? I know state hospitals i.e., Patton pay quite well too, just below BOP, and well below Army then Navy... My understanding was that state hospitals pay higher than VAs... be curious
Also, since when does anyone have to pay even over 50% of their income for student loan repayment??? I would say that someone needs to look into income-based loan repayment!!!
Yeah, if you're paying 900 bucks a month out of a 1600 dollar salary for loans, you need to be on an income contingent program, like, yesterday. Federal Direct Loan consolidation, the way to go.
No, not all PhD-awarding professional school clinical psych. programs are APA accredited. Some are, many aren't.
My mistake, I meant in terms of the PhD/PsyD comparisons
how would phd from a professional/apa accredited school rank?
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,827
- Reaction score
- 5,609
How would it rank? Dont get caught up in rankings, there is no one metric that is sufficent for such a classifying system for phd clinical programs.
There are, however, tons of threads on here about professional schools. Do a search.
There are, however, tons of threads on here about professional schools. Do a search.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2008
- Messages
- 200
- Reaction score
- 19
I agree that there is no such metric for classifying PhD programs, as training will vary based on one's mentor, the area of study, and the degree of emphasis placed on clinical work vs research. It's all about goodness of fit for the applicant, with respect to career goals and the training needed to achieve them. While the prestige of the institution plays a role down the line when looking for work, it is not the key to finding the right program. The ranking system is not all that useful.
As for PsyD programs, I think there is a lot useful information for future applicants to review. Especially with respect to match rates, expenses, and training opportunities. However, I also think the information provided on this forum is pretty jaded. More often than not, the PsyD is talked about as being inferior in several respects. Sometimes the criticisms leveled against the degree are justified. In other cases, I am not so sure. In total, only a handful of schools are ever spoken about in a positive light. Even then, I am not completely sure if members genuinely respect the existence of those programs or are simply paying lip service to not seem completely bias. I wonder what the majority field considers about even the "best" PsyD programs.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,827
- Reaction score
- 5,609
I am not so sure. I used to be somwwhat skeptical of the Vail Model, and although I am still a big proponent of the scientist-practitioner training model (and their underlying definition of what a psychologists truly is), I see no real problem with the Vail model when its implemented CORRECTLY. I think the bias seen on this forum (and elsewhere) comes from the "unsciency" types that have sometimes flocked to that degree. The last thing we need in clinical psychology at the moment is LESS focus on science. With mid-level-encroachment, decreasing reimbursement, and insurance companies demanding some actual outcome studies to justify our rates over midlevels (or npsych evals)...I am big believer in training people who are committed to the science of psychology and who can implement it in an applied fashion.
Last edited:
It really depends on the program itself. Some PsyD programs are clinically focused without much research trainig and other PsyD programs incorporate mroe research training. Same with phD programs. There are some PhD programs that are very researched focused (e.g. UNC chapel Hill) that focus more on research. There are other PhD programs (e.g. Marquette in WI) that are more balanced and/or have more of a clinical focus. My PsyD program has research components (e.g. a doctoral reseach project/dissertaion) other PsyD programs require a large lit review. It depends on the program. A really good resource for you would be The Insider's Guide to Graduate Programs in Clinical and Counseling Psychology by Norcross, Sayette and Mayne (2009). It has a breakdown of all the APA accredited programs and their stats (e.g. percentage of students with funding, faculty research iterests, GRE mean/cutoff, cohort sizes, etc). The book also has a 1-7 scale with 1 referring to purely clinically focused programs and 7 for purely research based programs. Some PsyD programs score as high as 4 on this scale, indicating a balance between research and clinical work. Other PsyD programs score in the 1-3 range, indicating more clinical focus. Some PhD programs score a 4, indicating balance, and others are as high as the 5-7 range, indicating more research focus. This book helped me get into grad school and is a great resource when scoping out programs to apply to, as well as which ones you qualify for (e.g. based on GRE mean/cutoff).
Realating with what you can do, PhDs and PsyDs can practice psychology and qualify for licensure. The difference occurrs with teaching and research. We have a PsyD teaching in our program, but we are a PsyD program. A PsyD probably cannot teach at a large state school because of the predominantly clinical focus of the degree. PsyD's can teach but most do so in a PsyD progam or colleges that value teaching students (smaller schools) as opposed to conducting research (big research 1 institutions such as state schools like Penn State or Ohio State). PsyDs can also conduct research if they recieved some training in it and enjoy it. However, most PsyDs are practitioners. My mother always said, "it's not where you get your degree, it's what you do with it." If you get a doctorate in psychology whether a PsyD or PhD, you are probably able to achieve your career goals if you work hard and engage in activities that will help you acheive your goal. Hope this helps.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,548
- Reaction score
- 7
I'm currently in a non-psych social science PhD program at a decent but not stellar R1 state school. My BA was from a very highly ranked R1 state school in psych. I'm currently considering a return to psych (probably at a "reputable," university-based PsyD program), and noticed that this thread had recently been revived, so I thought I'd chime in to add to 1) the discussion about stigma, and 2) complicate the discussion about funding a little bit.
1) Stigma: As an undergraduate, I originally intended to go the clinical PhD route, but it quickly became clear to me that, at least at my (prestigious, ahem!) department at that time a) people intending to do clinical work were not welcome to apply, and b) the clinical subfield and faculty were themselves stigmatized by many non-clinical research psychologists (applied research being valued less than basic research). I began the honors program, taught by I believe it was the vice chair of the department at the time, who was also serving in a prestigious position at the APA, and within the first 5 minutes of class he laid it out: "If you want to become some sort of shrink or pseudoshrink, do NOT apply to our clinical program." (These words were burned into my brain. He also made a snide remark about teaching right off the bat, how one had to tolerate it in order to do research--disheartening, since at the time, he was teaching us). This message was repeated in numerous ways from both faculty and then-grad students: a desire to do clinical work should be concealed until after the hooding ceremony, you had to fight to receive your clinical training, clinical skills could simply be "picked up" later (as those who stated this, condescendingly, believed that little actual "skill" is involved). The only grad student I met (a wonderful TA--very bright) who didn't exhibit these attitudes quit after the MA, intending to do clinical work. I'm sure that this isn't true of all PhD programs, but it was certainly true of the most "fully funded" (I'll get to that in a minute), reputable one within a manageable geographic distance for me. The school I am at now (again, in another social science field, but I am nonetheless acquainted with the clin psych department) is also R1 but less prestigious, and though I don't think these issues are that extreme, folks I've talked to in clinical say that there is still a stigma against intending to actually do clinical work--you are being trained as academics, pure and simple. This program would rank as much more of a "balanced" program, and yet the stigma remains, and folks who want to practice feel the sting.
2) Funding. It's more complicated than whether or not a particular program is (representing itself as) "funded." What KIND of funding is provided and what kind of variation is there amongst a given cohort in what kind of funding is provided? If there are "haves" and "have-nots" within a given cohort, which are you likely to be? There is a big difference between the kind and extent of work you may be doing with an RAship and with a TAship (working as a teaching assistant). Don't underestimate the trade-off (stipend and/or tuition remission for TA labor). If instead of receiving a fellowship or RAship you receive a TAship, your undergrad students will demand constant attention and greatly reduce the amount of time you have to spend on your own intellectual and professional development. As I understand it, the psych program at my current school is represented as funded (and has been represented on this forum as funded), but from what I've been told, the psych folks at my school receive very different funding packages, and those lucky enough to even get TAships can find themselves working their asses off. Instead of working a single 50% appointment (1 class, supposed to be limited to 20 hours a week), they may find themselves trying to cobble together two 25% appointments, which is vastly more work for the same money (two classes full of students to grade and manage). I TA most quarters and, unless I'm working for my advisor, I go WAY over my TA hours most weeks (usually 30-35+ hours, just on TA-related duties: meetings, office hours, lecture, prep, section, reading, grading, email). Most TAs don't feel empowered to tell profs they assign too much work--knowing they'll just be told to work more efficiently. Going to the union is the nuclear option no one wants to use, so we just suck it up, but it slows our progress. There's also a psychological toll to thinking of yourself as a scholar and being treated like...well, dog poop by a bunch of teenagers who are more interested in grade grubbing than learning. I've been blatantly disrespected on a quarterly basis, enduring constant plagiarism (the most recent case took over 12 hours of documentation, emails, and meetings, and admin told me that I still might need to attend a hearing), one student left my discussion section without a word and came back 15 minutes later giggly and obviously high, another student threw her final exam in my face...you get the picture.
So what am I driving at with this very, very long post?
1) If you are considering applying and are concerned about the (alleged?) stigma of the PsyD, remember that amongst some, clinical work itself and clinical PhDs are also stigmatized. In fact, I daresay that the broader field of psych is stigmatized amongst many in academia. Many of the "hard scientists" see the discipline as too unscientific (with the exception of neuro), many contemporary social scientists and virtually all folks in the humanities regard psychology as too "positivistic." Yes, program/degree stigma can have concrete consequences with regards to placements and finances, and it's not inconsequential by any means, but some applicants here have expressed concerns about the respect afforded various degrees, and I'm trying to point out that there are many hierarchies, especially within academia. The top of one may be the bottom of another.
2) Yes, PsyDs pay for their training, but there are also costs to accepting certain types of funding associated with the "funded" PhD programs. These can sidetrack your own progress.
3) Try to talk to people in your prospective programs to sort out the programs' propaganda ("we are a balanced program," "we provide funding opportunities to all our students") from the perspectives of people on the ground. If the "funding opportunities" are TAships rather than fellowships or RAships, you are taking on a lot of work.
4) Lastly, for those of you who are inclined towards the PsyD, but are considering the PhD only because you want to leave open your options for an academic path open: the academic bubble has burst. Even doing all the "right" things (good school, lots of pubs and conferences, good letters) aren't a surefire recipe for success: there are now literally hundreds of applicants for many jobs (not just tenure track, but VAP and post-docs too). My friend has two books and a list of journal articles and book chapters as long as your arm and three years on the market, applying both nationally and internationally, have yielded no offers. Moreover, people with MAs may be more competitive (than PhDs) for adjunct lecturer positions because they can be paid less. Not that adjuncting pays much to begin with. It's really sad, but the academic job market is simply flooded.
1) Stigma: As an undergraduate, I originally intended to go the clinical PhD route, but it quickly became clear to me that, at least at my (prestigious, ahem!) department at that time a) people intending to do clinical work were not welcome to apply, and b) the clinical subfield and faculty were themselves stigmatized by many non-clinical research psychologists (applied research being valued less than basic research). I began the honors program, taught by I believe it was the vice chair of the department at the time, who was also serving in a prestigious position at the APA, and within the first 5 minutes of class he laid it out: "If you want to become some sort of shrink or pseudoshrink, do NOT apply to our clinical program." (These words were burned into my brain. He also made a snide remark about teaching right off the bat, how one had to tolerate it in order to do research--disheartening, since at the time, he was teaching us). This message was repeated in numerous ways from both faculty and then-grad students: a desire to do clinical work should be concealed until after the hooding ceremony, you had to fight to receive your clinical training, clinical skills could simply be "picked up" later (as those who stated this, condescendingly, believed that little actual "skill" is involved). The only grad student I met (a wonderful TA--very bright) who didn't exhibit these attitudes quit after the MA, intending to do clinical work. I'm sure that this isn't true of all PhD programs, but it was certainly true of the most "fully funded" (I'll get to that in a minute), reputable one within a manageable geographic distance for me. The school I am at now (again, in another social science field, but I am nonetheless acquainted with the clin psych department) is also R1 but less prestigious, and though I don't think these issues are that extreme, folks I've talked to in clinical say that there is still a stigma against intending to actually do clinical work--you are being trained as academics, pure and simple. This program would rank as much more of a "balanced" program, and yet the stigma remains, and folks who want to practice feel the sting.
2) Funding. It's more complicated than whether or not a particular program is (representing itself as) "funded." What KIND of funding is provided and what kind of variation is there amongst a given cohort in what kind of funding is provided? If there are "haves" and "have-nots" within a given cohort, which are you likely to be? There is a big difference between the kind and extent of work you may be doing with an RAship and with a TAship (working as a teaching assistant). Don't underestimate the trade-off (stipend and/or tuition remission for TA labor). If instead of receiving a fellowship or RAship you receive a TAship, your undergrad students will demand constant attention and greatly reduce the amount of time you have to spend on your own intellectual and professional development. As I understand it, the psych program at my current school is represented as funded (and has been represented on this forum as funded), but from what I've been told, the psych folks at my school receive very different funding packages, and those lucky enough to even get TAships can find themselves working their asses off. Instead of working a single 50% appointment (1 class, supposed to be limited to 20 hours a week), they may find themselves trying to cobble together two 25% appointments, which is vastly more work for the same money (two classes full of students to grade and manage). I TA most quarters and, unless I'm working for my advisor, I go WAY over my TA hours most weeks (usually 30-35+ hours, just on TA-related duties: meetings, office hours, lecture, prep, section, reading, grading, email). Most TAs don't feel empowered to tell profs they assign too much work--knowing they'll just be told to work more efficiently. Going to the union is the nuclear option no one wants to use, so we just suck it up, but it slows our progress. There's also a psychological toll to thinking of yourself as a scholar and being treated like...well, dog poop by a bunch of teenagers who are more interested in grade grubbing than learning. I've been blatantly disrespected on a quarterly basis, enduring constant plagiarism (the most recent case took over 12 hours of documentation, emails, and meetings, and admin told me that I still might need to attend a hearing), one student left my discussion section without a word and came back 15 minutes later giggly and obviously high, another student threw her final exam in my face...you get the picture.
So what am I driving at with this very, very long post?
1) If you are considering applying and are concerned about the (alleged?) stigma of the PsyD, remember that amongst some, clinical work itself and clinical PhDs are also stigmatized. In fact, I daresay that the broader field of psych is stigmatized amongst many in academia. Many of the "hard scientists" see the discipline as too unscientific (with the exception of neuro), many contemporary social scientists and virtually all folks in the humanities regard psychology as too "positivistic." Yes, program/degree stigma can have concrete consequences with regards to placements and finances, and it's not inconsequential by any means, but some applicants here have expressed concerns about the respect afforded various degrees, and I'm trying to point out that there are many hierarchies, especially within academia. The top of one may be the bottom of another.
2) Yes, PsyDs pay for their training, but there are also costs to accepting certain types of funding associated with the "funded" PhD programs. These can sidetrack your own progress.
3) Try to talk to people in your prospective programs to sort out the programs' propaganda ("we are a balanced program," "we provide funding opportunities to all our students") from the perspectives of people on the ground. If the "funding opportunities" are TAships rather than fellowships or RAships, you are taking on a lot of work.
4) Lastly, for those of you who are inclined towards the PsyD, but are considering the PhD only because you want to leave open your options for an academic path open: the academic bubble has burst. Even doing all the "right" things (good school, lots of pubs and conferences, good letters) aren't a surefire recipe for success: there are now literally hundreds of applicants for many jobs (not just tenure track, but VAP and post-docs too). My friend has two books and a list of journal articles and book chapters as long as your arm and three years on the market, applying both nationally and internationally, have yielded no offers. Moreover, people with MAs may be more competitive (than PhDs) for adjunct lecturer positions because they can be paid less. Not that adjuncting pays much to begin with. It's really sad, but the academic job market is simply flooded.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,827
- Reaction score
- 5,609
Although there are certainly some truths in your post, the whole point of this thread is how to choose the degree that will give one the best training and prepare for ones career goals. One the big myth that we have tried to overcome here is this silly notion that the "Ph.D. is for research and the Psy.D is for clinical work." I think its quite obvious that this false dichotomy has been perpetuated by programs and program chairs in order to steer away the unscienctific, "stats are icky" crowd away from applying to their program. And indeed they have a good point. If thats your attitude, then go do something else. Clinical psychology is the application of the principles of psychological SCIENCE to human behavior. Research and stats are going to be a part of that. Period.
Although academia will always have some snobbery, this bias toward clinical work that you speak of is much overblown and the majority of faculty realize that its YOUR career not THEIRS and support/help you as much as possible to achieve those goals. The vast majority of Ph.D are practitioners (they have to be, not enough research positions out there) and one can, and generally will get, very solid clinical training at any clinical Ph.D. program
Although academia will always have some snobbery, this bias toward clinical work that you speak of is much overblown and the majority of faculty realize that its YOUR career not THEIRS and support/help you as much as possible to achieve those goals. The vast majority of Ph.D are practitioners (they have to be, not enough research positions out there) and one can, and generally will get, very solid clinical training at any clinical Ph.D. program
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,548
- Reaction score
- 7
Hmm...I think there are certainly some truths in your post as well...but I read through the entire 5 page thread last night, and it does seem that the issue of choosing the program (and I think some have emphasized here that the real issue is the best individual program, not all PsyD vs. all PhD programs) with the best degree and the best preparation encompasses a variety of issues, including the actual lived reality of the training experience. I'm not attempting to reify the PsyD = clinical, PhD = research split. No doubt faculty do try to chase off the anti-stats crowd. I'm sharing the experience of myself and others as they have reported it to me from a prestigious R1 research program. It's not just faculty members' scare tactics for prospectives. Grad students brave enough to risk sharing their own experience with a trustworthy (until now?) undergrad either endured or evinced hostile attitudes towards clinical work. But my larger point is that there's a sliding scale for stigma, and even the bullies have persecutors. And whether or not any particular program is characterized by such attitudes is to be discovered by the applicant, hopefully during the program-researching phase. Whether or not any particular individual would benefit by enduring such attitudes at an institution like my alma mater in order to acquire a pedigree and connections, as well as (hopefully) good training in research and clinical work is an individual choice.
It's worth noting that there's a lot of variability WITHIN programs as well: obstructionist advisors, the possibility that your promising career could be derailed by being sexually harassed by a lab "colleague" (one of my friends on the MD/PhD neuro track reported that this was commonplace in her undergrad lab), etc. I looked into laterally transferring into the clinical psych dept at my current school, but the students of the person with whom I wanted to work suggested that s/he was obstructionist: discouraging students from early publication (notably, the prof hadn't published much as a grad student), and one former student claimed to have gotten screwed out of co-authorship.
There's a lot of nuance to consider when making these decisions. And it's not just preparation for some hoped-for future career, but 4-7+ years of your actual life that you have to enjoy or endure, day by day. Same with TAing--it sounds reasonable on paper, but the lived reality can be rough. Any dreams you have of mentoring bright undergrads (as a teacher, not in the lab) will likely be dashed when you realize that the profs cherry pick all the smarties out for their honors section, leaving the TAs with the dullards and tosspots. My undergrad TAs complained bitterly and made no effort to hide their discontent from us.
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2008
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm sorry that you have had such a hard time with TAs. My department is nowhere near what you are describing. Grad students pick the undergrad TAs and have to vouch for them to the professors to have them on board. Furthermore, you get thrown into teaching independently but with ALOT of support and guidance even though you are teaching.There is obviously departmental differences.
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2010
- Messages
- 1,548
- Reaction score
- 7
Thanks for the commiseration, and I'm genuinely glad to hear that your dept is not what I'm describing. But I think we might be talking about separate things. I've mostly been talking about the experience of BEING a TA, meaning being a grad student whose funding is derived from serving as a teaching assistant, responsible for grading and wrangling (and sometimes teaching) tenured profs' undergrads. The difficulty I (and my colleagues) have is with my/our own undergrad students, and the profs who bury their TAs in grading (and the accompanying student emails and meetings) by requiring too much written work of undergrads. I've graded as many as 700 papers in one 10 week quarter. Again, I'm not in psych at present, but the psych folks I've talked with at my university often have to resort to the same TAships I have because their department doesn't provide many (despite appearing to be a funded department). I brought it up because I was trying to tease out the funded/non-funded dichotomy--it's more complex, and having to work as a TA usually distracts from your own work. It may or may not inform your own scholarship; it may or may not be a better option than waitressing, either in terms of the money or the aggravation.
I also mentioned having had graduate students as TAs when I myself was an undergrad. They were just as bitter as I am now about the whole thing, they just didn't put as much effort as I do into hiding it (from their students at least--no hiding goin' on right now!). They only graded one 3-page paper per student for the whole term, but griped about it like it was killing them (or like we cared). Undergraduates are not allowed to TA at my institution--it's the main funding source for grad students. We also get to serve as "teaching associates" sometimes and run our own classes, but there isn't much support for that, sometimes quite the opposite. You're right, these things do vary by department!
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2008
- Messages
- 7,531
- Reaction score
- 6,693
It's really different depending on what professor you TA for in my dept. Sometimes you'll have a ridiculous amount of work, and sometimes you'll get a really sweet assignment where you don't have to do much at all.
- Joined
- Sep 2, 2008
- Messages
- 313
- Reaction score
- 85
Same in my department.
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2011
- Messages
- 24
- Reaction score
- 1
The program is fully funded. The debt load of students is low >20k. Most take out minimal loans as do a lot of PhD students. With regards to the match rates it leaves something to be desired. However, it is a new program at an R1 institution and the faculty are well aware of where they fell short on process and are committed to making the future cohorts much more competitive. If I'm not mistaken, the students also have a part in how well they match by what they do during their time as a grad student. This program has the research focus + the practice focus with an emphasis on a under-served population. I could definitely see myself there for the next 5 years. I don't know, I feels right but I don't know if that is cognitive dissonance kicking in.
I'm having a bit of a dilemma regarding what kind of program to apply for. To be completely honest the only thing that I really know is that I want to be able to practice psychotherapy with a CBT perspective, and other than that I don't really care how I get there. Prestige really doesn't matter to me, and I'm not above LPC MSW or PsyD but the reason why I'm leaning towards PhD is that a lot of programs are funded and I really have no idea how I could possibly fund anything myself (I'm already 15 grand in debt and counting with my BA that I'll finish next year).
A lot of the PhD programs I'm looking at basically seem to say "no future practitioners need apply" so I was wondering if there are any PhD programs that are specifically practice friendly? I know that fit means a lot for PhD programs so I want to be able to truthfully admit my goals without my application being thrown away. Any other comments about which degree to go for are welcome. I think that in general I can be a pretty competitive candidate for any program, and while I'm not too terribly interested in research, I'm very willing to do anything as long as my main goal as stated in the first paragraph is fulfilled and I can afford the program to begin with.
A lot of the PhD programs I'm looking at basically seem to say "no future practitioners need apply" so I was wondering if there are any PhD programs that are specifically practice friendly? I know that fit means a lot for PhD programs so I want to be able to truthfully admit my goals without my application being thrown away. Any other comments about which degree to go for are welcome. I think that in general I can be a pretty competitive candidate for any program, and while I'm not too terribly interested in research, I'm very willing to do anything as long as my main goal as stated in the first paragraph is fulfilled and I can afford the program to begin with.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Messages
- 919
- Reaction score
- 145
You're in a little bit of a catch-22 as many/most/all funded PhD programs AFAIK require applicants to demonstrate research productivity and interest in research as a condition for acceptance.
There are a number of high-caliber, partially funded PsyD programs out there (which are doctoral degrees geared for people intending to be primarily practicioners), Rutgers being one that comes to mind, but you'll find it more difficult to avoid further debt going that route.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2008
- Messages
- 7,531
- Reaction score
- 6,693
There are a lot of clinically-focused PhD programs but you will still have to demonstrate some interest in research.
There are a lot of funded PhD programs that are perfectly fine (and happy to) accept people who primarily want to practice. Check out the insider's guide to graduate programs in clinical and counseling psychology - it asks programs to rate their clinical vs. research emphasis. Its not a perfect system, but it does give you a general sense.
Any legit psychology program will at least make you do SOME research and get exposure to it, so if you are looking for a program where that won't be the case you will have a tough time. That said, not all programs expect students to run large grants, do dissertations suitable for top-tier journals, etc. Just as students in those research-heavy programs can't say "I don't like clinical work" and still get a clinical degree without ever seeing a patient, the field generally frowns upon people getting clinical degrees without any serious research training.
That said, if you are willing to do some research, there are a lot of opportunities and excellent training programs. The insider's guide should get you started.
Any legit psychology program will at least make you do SOME research and get exposure to it, so if you are looking for a program where that won't be the case you will have a tough time. That said, not all programs expect students to run large grants, do dissertations suitable for top-tier journals, etc. Just as students in those research-heavy programs can't say "I don't like clinical work" and still get a clinical degree without ever seeing a patient, the field generally frowns upon people getting clinical degrees without any serious research training.
That said, if you are willing to do some research, there are a lot of opportunities and excellent training programs. The insider's guide should get you started.
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Messages
- 919
- Reaction score
- 145
I think it's an interesting dance that clinical psychology programs do with applicants.
I'm certainly aware that a very large majority of clinical psychology graduates intend to practice (many exclusively) as clinicians after they graduate, and doctoral programs know this. However, you can't get into (at least, funded PhD) programs saying, "I don't want to do research." My understanding is that you frequently have to demonstrate some track record of research productivity prior to acceptance, and that you have to otherwise demonstrate that you at least value research (e.g., the scientist-practicioner model). Saying you "don't like research" isn't the way to get into a quality PhD program. Not saying that the OP is saying this, but it could be.
Well as I said, I'm more than willing to do anything that allows me to practice. I do have research experience and plan on getting much more before I graduate. I never said I wouldn't do research, just in general it doesn't interest me like the prospect of actual practice. I can think of things that I wouldn't mind researching in grad school, but really the question was more about which schools aren't so biased against practice. I'll definitely look into the book that was mentioned, when I return to the states I'll read the hell out of it.
