Psy.D. Loma Linda University Interview

[deleted861892]

Has anyone interviewed for the Psy.D. clinical psychology program at Loma Linda University? I was accepted for an interview and would like some advice or comments about the process! Thank you!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[NeuroPsychosis]

Has anyone interviewed for the Psy.D. clinical psychology program at Loma Linda University? I was accepted for an interview and would like some advice or comments about the process! Thank you!

Hey I was wondering what has happened after your interview? have they admitted you? I am in process in applying atm.

 

[NeuroPsychosis]

Their "Student admissions outcomes and other data" are... pretty concerning :/

You must have been looking at the wrong document. Their APA match rate is 91%!! I have tour-ed the school myself and met with admins who gave me legit info about their stats and I personally thought it was impressive. Especially for their PhD program. They are a health sciences university, it makes good professionals in clinical research.

 

[psych.meout]

You must have been looking at the wrong document. Their APA match rate is 91%!! I have tour-ed the school myself and met with admins who gave me legit info about their stats and I personally thought it was impressive. Especially for their PhD program. They are a health sciences university, it makes good professionals in clinical research.

Isn't it about $30,000/year for just tuition?

 

[PsyDuck90]

The PsyD outcome shows that only 78% of their students matched to APA accredited internships in the 2017-2018 internship cycle. Considering there were more sites than applicants last year, that's a red flag. Also, it appears that 63/72 recent graduates obtained their license. What happened to the other 9? This is a PsyD program, so what are the other 12% of graduates doing?

 

[BuckeyeLove]

two anecdotal things. 1. A close friend of mine who was my fellow-forensic fellow years back graduated from the PhD program, and he is top notch. 2. He never said anything bad about the psyd program, but we did know of one of their students who didn't match for like 5 years in a row and racked up private dental school levels of debt in the process (i.e., half a milly)

 

[WisNeuro]

It's on ok program, I've known decent people from there. I just can't get around the level of debt, well into 6 figures.

 

[NeuroPsychosis]

The PsyD outcome shows that only 78% of their students matched to APA accredited internships in the 2017-2018 internship cycle. Considering there were more sites than applicants last year, that's a red flag. Also, it appears that 63/72 recent graduates obtained their license. What happened to the other 9? This is a PsyD program, so what are the other 12% of graduates doing?

Can you please provide me with the link to the source? Loma Linda website does not disclose any PsyD outcomes including match rates according to their own website. So i don't know where you pulled the information from. According to APA, they are not a red flag program at all. You definitely want to trust APA the most source.

Coming to the costs, they offer teaching and research assistant-ships and as well as other forms of funding from research according to the document they provided me which explains "funding options".

 

[NeuroPsychosis]

two anecdotal things. 1. A close friend of mine who was my fellow-forensic fellow years back graduated from the PhD program, and he is top notch. 2. He never said anything bad about the psyd program, but we did know of one of their students who didn't match for like 5 years in a row and racked up private dental school levels of debt in the process (i.e., half a milly)

This could possibly be due to not performing so well in the program? I mean when you want to match, you also want to make sure you are being a stellar applicant both academically and socially, no?

 

[Temperance]

Can you please provide me with the link to the source? Loma Linda website does not disclose any PsyD outcomes including match rates according to their own website. So i don't know where you pulled the information from. According to APA, they are not a red flag program at all. You definitely want to trust APA the most source.

Coming to the costs, they offer teaching and research assistant-ships and as well as other forms of funding from research according to the document they provided me which explains "funding options".

It should be a red flag on its own if student admissions, outcomes, and other data are difficult to find. To answer your question, though, the data for Loma Linda University's Psy.D. program can be found here, and they show that they had a match rate of 78% last year. As @Hk328 said, with more sites than applicants last year, it's quite bad if a program does not have 100% match rate. While it is true that there may be factors such as people wanting to stay within the geographic area and whatnot, that should be something happening occasionally rather than nearly every single year in the past seven years, which is the case here.

Compare funding options at Loma Linda University with the modal form of funding for university-based Ph.D. programs in clinical psychology: full tuition remission with a stipend funded by a fellowship, assistantship, or professor's grant for all admitted students. Based on what I'm reading on LLU's information sheet here, only four to six students out of 25 admitted students receive partial tuition remission. Everyone has their own level of comfort with regards to how they are paying for their education, but I generally make this comparison to let people know that the norm is to have the doctoral program completely pay for one's attendance there.

 

[ClinicalABA]

The PsyD outcome shows that only 78% of their students matched to APA accredited internships in the 2017-2018 internship cycle. Considering there were more sites than applicants last year, that's a red flag. Also, it appears that 63/72 recent graduates obtained their license. What happened to the other 9? This is a PsyD program, so what are the other 12% of graduates doing?

Looking a little more into the outcome data shows that between 2008-2009 and 2016-2o17 years, about 25% of students srating the program in those years left for reasons other than degree conferral. That’s a very high attrition rate and should make perspective students a little weary. This skews the internship rate a little, as much lower rates of students who begin the program end up getting an approved internship than the figures quoted above. In summary, a very large percentage (25-35%) of students who started the program experienced significant difficulties in completing the program. Sounds like people are being “weeded out” after significant investment, rather than through good admissions decisions. I’d definite ask about that during the interview.

 

[ClinicalABA]

Can you please provide me with the link to the source? Loma Linda website does not disclose any PsyD outcomes including match rates according to their own website.

It’s right there on the program home page in the “Application Information” section. As an APA approved program, they are required to post such data.

According to APA, they are not a red flag program at all. You definitely want to trust APA the most source.
.

APA acreditation is a minimum standard, not an endorsement of overall program quality. The outcome data allows for a more detailed analysis of accredited programs (there should be NO analysis of non-accredited programs- they aren’t worth it).

 

[psych.meout]

Can you please provide me with the link to the source? Loma Linda website does not disclose any PsyD outcomes including match rates according to their own website. So i don't know where you pulled the information from. According to APA, they are not a red flag program at all. You definitely want to trust APA the most source.

Coming to the costs, they offer teaching and research assistant-ships and as well as other forms of funding from research according to the document they provided me which explains "funding options".

And how much of the tuition costs does this funding cover? And what percentage of students receive this funding for every year they are in the program?

What you're not getting is that properly funded programs guarantee full funding for every year of the program, including complete tuition remission, health insurance, and stipends for living expenses.

Clearly, you are looking for reasons to justify your decision in applying to this program and not looking for any disconfirming information.

 

[NeuroPsychosis]

And how much of the tuition costs does this funding cover? And what percentage of students receive this funding for every year they are in the program?

What you're not getting is that properly funded programs guarantee full funding for every year of the program, including complete tuition remission, health insurance, and stipends for living expenses.

Clearly, you are looking for reasons to justify your decision in applying to this program and not looking for any disconfirming information.

I am not justifying any sort of actions to this program. I am just trying to provide the correct information to my fellow posts where sources are not adequately provided.

Regarding funding, I wasn't aware you were asking for a fully funded program. You may need to clarify that. And for that, yes. LLU is NOT a fully funded program. it's hardly available at private institutions, unless you are looking at the top (very large) universities in the nation. So therefore, that is a personal choice when it comes to funding. I was just providing information that partial funding resources are available.

After all, why would a red flag program still be meeting minimum standards and still not shut down? I do not get some people's complicated philosophy that they tend to be red-flagging universities at their own discretion without sources stating so.

 

[NeuroPsychosis]

It should be a red flag on its own if student admissions, outcomes, and other data are difficult to find. To answer your question, though, the data for Loma Linda University's Psy.D. program can be found here, and they show that they had a match rate of 78% last year. As @Hk328 said, with more sites than applicants last year, it's quite bad if a program does not have 100% match rate. While it is true that there may be factors such as people wanting to stay within the geographic area and whatnot, that should be something happening occasionally rather than nearly every single year in the past seven years, which is the case here.

Compare funding options at Loma Linda University with the modal form of funding for university-based Ph.D. programs in clinical psychology: full tuition remission with a stipend funded by a fellowship, assistantship, or professor's grant for all admitted students. Based on what I'm reading on LLU's information sheet here, only four to six students out of 25 admitted students receive partial tuition remission. Everyone has their own level of comfort with regards to how they are paying for their education, but I generally make this comparison to let people know that the norm is to have the doctoral program completely pay for one's attendance there.

Thank You for finding the information on the PsyD statistics, on my end I was not able to pull it up since their website always gave me an error. Regarding that, the statistics are still looking good to me. Out of 8 people, 7 got an APA match. 1 person did not. Well, statistically that does not explain a red flag. First of all, the program had a very small class size, of course in this case it dragged the means down. But could this possibly be due to not everyone in the program having the same career goals? isn't rare to find a %100 success rate of matches in all programs?

You being in that class, 7 out of 8 match, then you definitely have a high chance being among the 7 if your abilities are unquestionable.

 

[psych.meout]

I am not justifying any sort of actions to this program. I am just trying to provide the correct information to my fellow posts where sources are not adequately provided.

Regarding funding, I wasn't aware you were asking for a fully funded program. You may need to clarify that. And for that, yes. LLU is NOT a fully funded program. it's hardly available at private institutions, unless you are looking at the top (very large) universities in the nation.

That's because the quality programs at public and private institutions all offer full- or nearly-full funding. Funding is "hardly available" at the diploma mills where it's a crapshoot if you get the proper training, mentorship, and experience.

So therefore, that is a personal choice when it comes to funding. I was just providing information that partial funding resources are available.

It's not really a "personal choice" when these programs rely on deceiving applicants and students about the realities of the amount and gravity of debt they put their students into, as well as the typical earnings for psychologists. If they were fully honest with their students about these things, as well as their outcome statistics, mentorship, etc., they would struggle to maintain their enrollment figures.

After all, why would a red flag program still be meeting minimum standards and still not shut down?

APA accreditation is an incredibly low bar for meeting the minimal acceptable training standards. It's really not that hard to maintain accreditation once you initially get accredited. Just because a program has not lost its accreditation does not mean it's a good program or that you should attend it. That's like saying a restaurant with cockroaches everywhere and staff that doesn't wash their hands is a good place to eat, because it hasn't yet been shut down by the health department.

I do not get some people's complicated philosophy that they tend to be red-flagging universities at their own discretion without sources stating so.

That's completely dishonest and disingenuous. People here and in other threads have been completely upfront about how they are evaluating programs, and it's not at all "complicated" or without sourcing. They have noted the program costs compared to earnings data for psychologists and specific outcome statistics, especially APA internship match rates, EPPP pass rates, and licensure rates.

If a program ostensibly focused on training practitioners can't get their students APA internships or get them to pass the EPPP and become licensed, then they are of poor quality.

 

[deleted861892]

Hey I was wondering what has happened after your interview? have they admitted you? I am in process in applying atm.

I interviewed with them and was accepted to their program. I did not accept their offer as they were not my top choice.

There were a few things that I enjoyed about their program. They have their own on-site clinic, which you probably will see or have seen during interview days. They will give you a placement for it. I also interestingly met someone who entered in their PsyD program but later switched to their PhD program, which is very rare but I found that it shows the connection between their two programs. I was worried about their whole environment, not allowing caffeine, no meats allowed but it seemed like all students and professors were aware but were not strict about the rules. Their APA match is alright. I would say look at other programs and the cost of attending is so high. Also, you would need a car living there and they do not provide transportation costs like other schools I interviewed at. The cost of living there is also generally high. My interview was awhile back but let me know if theres anything else you'd like to know!

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Also, as an aside, I think it's important to note that while the overall number of internship spots last year exceeded the number of applicants, the number of accredited internship spots did not (3366 accredited spots to 3779 registered applicants and 3661 applicants who submitted rank-order lists). However, that is still a notable increase proportion-wise to years past, and overall, >90% of applicants from accredited doctoral programs matched to accredited internships.

We all likely understand that having a small applicant cohort has the potential to substantially impact program match numbers if even a single applicant does not match. And in general, small cohorts are a good thing. But we'll also probably need to adjust our internal barometers of what a "good" match percentage is going forward, given the increasing parity between applicants and spots.

 

[psych.meout]

I interviewed with them and was accepted to their program. I did not accept their offer as they were not my top choice.

There were a few things that I enjoyed about their program. They have their own on-site clinic, which you probably will see or have seen during interview days. They will give you a placement for it. I also interestingly met someone who entered in their PsyD program but later switched to their PhD program, which is very rare but I found that it shows the connection between their two programs. I was worried about their whole environment, not allowing caffeine, no meats allowed but it seemed like all students and professors were aware but were not strict about the rules. Their APA match is alright. I would say look at other programs and the cost of attending is so high. Also, you would need a car living there and they do not provide transportation costs like other schools I interviewed at. The cost of living there is also generally high. My interview was awhile back but let me know if theres anything else you'd like to know!

What?

 

[PsyDuck90]

What?

Is this is a school or a "lifestyle"?

 

[psych.meout]

Is this is a school or a "lifestyle"?

I just Googled it. The school is affiliated with Seventh Day Adventists.

 

[NeuroPsychosis]

Is this is a school or a "lifestyle"?

It's a Seventh Day Adventist church-affiliated school. Based on the tour they gave me, they seem to have standards (healthy) for their lifestyle on campus that is not "enforced" individually. They are one of the blue zones in the world, where people live longer than average. And looking at their science curriculum, it looked solid to me.

 

[Justanothergrad]

It's a Seventh Day Adventist church-affiliated school. Based on the tour they gave me, they seem to have standards (healthy) for their lifestyle on campus that is not "enforced" individually. They are one of the blue zones in the world, where people live longer than average. And looking at their science curriculum, it looked solid to me.

I'm always curious about this when undergrads evaluate graduate program quality in which they have no experience or expertise- what do you think qualifies you to make a good assessment of what curriculum is sufficient for training and what information did you weigh in this determination?

 

[NeuroPsychosis]

I'm always curious about this when undergrads evaluate graduate program quality in which they have no experience or expertise- what do you think qualifies you to make a good assessment of what curriculum is sufficient for training and what information did you weigh in this determination?

Their science curriculum looking solid to me is when I am stating that hence they are a religious school; they are not anti-science. Reading their coursework/curriculum there seem to be a good focus on science courses over religious courses. Therefore, creating a solid balance. I don't need a PhD to evaluate a minor piece of information like this one. I am advanced enough at a top undergraduate institution trained to critically think and evaluate information without supervision. Back to your claim, I am not evaluating a curriculum for "training" purposes (that's something I may need you for). I am evaluating a health "sciences" university that is heavily affiliated with a "church", building up on the previous convo. Any other information in my previous post regarding church and blue zone are facts not an evaluation.

 

[deleted861892]

It's a Seventh Day Adventist church-affiliated school. Based on the tour they gave me, they seem to have standards (healthy) for their lifestyle on campus that is not "enforced" individually. They are one of the blue zones in the world, where people live longer than average. And looking at their science curriculum, it looked solid to me.

Yes, they are affiliated with the Seventh Day Adventist. One of their applications essays included this: LLU believes deeply in integrating spiritual values into the educational experience. As a result, religion courses and chapel attendance are part of the curriculum. Tell us why you believe such a faith-based education would be of special benefit to you. With that being said, you are required to go to church (right behind the psychology department) during certain days of the month, but as the further along you go the program, they are more lenient on you skipping. The students told me that they usually do homework during their hours at church. In regards to drinking and eating, it seemed like they didn't care much but they just want you to be aware and not "show off" your food/items.

 

[NeuroPsychosis]

Yes, they are affiliated with the Seventh Day Adventist. One of their applications essays included this: LLU believes deeply in integrating spiritual values into the educational experience. As a result, religion courses and chapel attendance are part of the curriculum. Tell us why you believe such a faith-based education would be of special benefit to you. With that being said, you are required to go to church (right behind the psychology department) during certain days of the month, but as the further along you go the program, they are more lenient on you skipping. The students told me that they usually do homework during their hours at church. In regards to drinking and eating, it seemed like they didn't care much but they just want you to be aware and not "show off" your food/items.

Yep. They seemed cool overall. I know it's a preference at the end of the day as some individuals oppose attending a religious school. I honestly don't mind as long as their religious requirements don't screw over the appropriate training needed for the program.