- Joined
- Oct 16, 2006
- Messages
- 333
- Reaction score
- 1
Craighead, L.W., & Craighead, E.W. (2006). PhD training in clinical psychology: Fix it before it breaks. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 13(3), 235-241.
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2006.00030.x
This is a great article. Unfortunately, it isn't available free online, but I'm hoping most people can access it online through their schools libraries.
The basic premise is that clinical psychology programs should switch to the training model used by medical schools, where the PsyD serves as the practice credential (like an MD, JD, or DDS), and joint PsyD-PhD programs would only be necessary for people students interested in research careers (like an MD Phd) (see link above for the abstract).
The system has the potential to solve many of the problems we discuss on this forum, including divisiveness between PsyD and PhD programs, the lack of university-based PsyD programs, the struggle to obtain post-doctoral supervised hours, inadequate APA accreditation standards, issues with balancing training in research and practice, the list goes on.
I would love to hear your thoughts on this (please, at least try to read the article first).
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2006.00030.x
This is a great article. Unfortunately, it isn't available free online, but I'm hoping most people can access it online through their schools libraries.
The basic premise is that clinical psychology programs should switch to the training model used by medical schools, where the PsyD serves as the practice credential (like an MD, JD, or DDS), and joint PsyD-PhD programs would only be necessary for people students interested in research careers (like an MD Phd) (see link above for the abstract).
The system has the potential to solve many of the problems we discuss on this forum, including divisiveness between PsyD and PhD programs, the lack of university-based PsyD programs, the struggle to obtain post-doctoral supervised hours, inadequate APA accreditation standards, issues with balancing training in research and practice, the list goes on.
I would love to hear your thoughts on this (please, at least try to read the article first).
