Psy.D. Programs are continuing to flood the market by taking on more students (for their tuition $$$) than the market can bear. This is an excerpt from an e-mail (de-identified) was written by a Psy.D. student to express concerns to the Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology (CUDCP), that this student saw in the the field and their own program. Student e-mail: "I am not coming to you as a liaison, but as a concerned student who is advocating for my program and fellow students. As you probably know, my program has a large clinical psychology graduate program, which has its advantages as well as disadvantages. Since I have been involved with this program, we have had on average over 70 students enter the program each academic year. This coming year, however, this number will be increased to over 110, which is I believe to be the cut-off point that keeps our campus within APA regulations regarding the student-faculty ratio. The program has increased the number of both full-time and adjunct professors. However, with this recent increase of admits, it seems as though the resolution they enacted is no longer effective as we are back to the strained student-faculty ratio. As you can imagine, our training suffers due to the large number of students being admitted to the program. The quality of teaching suffers due to the large class sizes. There is no intimacy or true cohesion among faculty, staff, and students. There are not enough faculty to chair our master's thesis and doctoral dissertation. Obtaining a practicum is challenging because we are flooding the area market, causing other local programs to "jump the gun" so to speak and apply earlier to get ahead of the game. Not that I blame them, but this puts our students at a severe disadvantage thus affecting our quality of training and internship competitiveness. We even have students driving out of state for pracitcums because there are not enough sites in the local area to meet our needs. And, all of this is occurring prior to the increase of student admits, which begins this coming fall. Because our administration is mandated to allow a specific number of students to enter the program, the quality of incoming students has decreased, therefore decreasing the quality of student performance and output. The cost of tuition goes up each year, and now they are increasing the number of students. It seems as though our program is more interested in their profits than the quality of training their students receive. Although our program may be within APA guidelines as far as the actual number of students and faculty are concerned, meaning that APA believes this ratio to be adequate for superior training, the reality of the matter is that it is not... " Second student e-mail: "This is a huge concern amongst clinical psychology students in California. Alliant/CSPP and other Psy.D. programs that operate on a business model rather than a true university model are taking in more students to raise tuition funds, without any concern over the supply/demand the market will bear. As it is, there are already too many psychologists in California, and research shows that its going to get worse in the coming years: http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/38/7/13 The APA needs to take a stance and stop accrediting questionable Psy.D. programs. You cannot get a medical degree online, so why should you be able to get an online Psy.D.? In an age where we are fighting for equity for mental health services, continuing to accredit programs that operate for profit instead of the interests of the field, is akin to the APA committing career suicide on our behalf. The APA needs to take a strong stance in not accrediting schools with low internship match rates and cap incoming class sizes, so that in the future, 90%+ of students can match to internships (unlike the current situation, where some schools have match rates as low as 10-20%). The American Medical Association and American Dental Association actively cap the number of graduating doctors and dentists to ensure quality of training, available number of post-graduate training opportunities, and keeping supply and demand in equilibrium. The APA needs to follow suit, or high-quality students will continue to forgo entering clinical psychology for other more viable career paths."