Psy.S School Psychology at Nova Southeastern University

[Dragon416]

Has anyone attended the Psy.S program at Nova? Was it hard to get in? How was the time there? etc. Thank you.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I don't have much to add regarding your question, unfortunately, but I did want to say--Psy.S.? Wow, is Nova actually inventing new degrees now?

It's being billed as a 3+1 program; not sure how that's viewed in the school psych world, but it tends to be seen negatively in clinical and counseling.

 

[futureapppsy2]

My impression is that Nova's PsyS is like an EdS, so it would qualify you to be a school psychologist but not work outside of the schools or be licensed as a psychologist. Plus, it's one year long than most EdS programs, IIRC, so I fail to see the benefit.

 

[bmedclinic]

had the same question as AA-- seems sketchy like that Arizona State doctorate of behavioral health consulting degree.

 

[aagman01]

No,the program is not "sketchy". It does seem impractical to complete a 3+1 program in which you basically get the equivalent of a MA or EDS which is 2+1. On top of that, Nova is a professional school so you shouldn't expect ANY funding (especially for a masters level training). Why not save a year and get your specialist from another program? Or, if your ambitious and interested in advanced training/education, why not go for the doctorate. If you arrange everything properly and work hard, you can complete that in 4 years + 1

 

[snowcherries]

The program itself might not be sketchy, but I'd argue that it is sketchy to abbreviate a specialist/EdS degree in school psych as a "Psy.S." To me, this comes off as a backhanded way to convince people that a specialist degree is equivalent to a doctoral degree. I'm in school psych and I've never heard the degree referred to in this way.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

There are already too many degrees out there. What we need is 1 degree level for a school psychologist....a doctorate. If they want to use the title of psychologist (in any fashion), it should only be done at the doctoral level. All of these other degrees, certificates, whether or not someone needs to be licensed, etc....it is overly confusing to the public and other professionals. Ridiculous.

 

[Dragon416]

Has Any one attended this program at Nova though?

 

[voyeurofthemind]

No,the program is not "sketchy". It does seem impractical to complete a 3+1 program in which you basically get the equivalent of a MA or EDS which is 2+1. On top of that, Nova is a professional school so you shouldn't expect ANY funding (especially for a masters level training). Why not save a year and get your specialist from another program? Or, if your ambitious and interested in advanced training/education, why not go for the doctorate. If you arrange everything properly and work hard, you can complete that in 4 years + 1

Again, Nova is NOT a professional school. It is a free standing private university. There are both undergraduate programs and graduate programs.

 

[mcvcm92]

I took a look at the program, and it seems a bit odd because it wants students to complete 3 years of coursework and 1 full time internship, making the total 4 years. All of the other "specialist" level school psychology programs require 2 years of courses & 1 year of interning... so why is this one an extra year? And I have never heard the title "Psy.S" used besides this program.

 

[xXIDaShizIXx]

Again, Nova is NOT a professional school. It is a free standing private university. There are both undergraduate programs and graduate programs.

Did you ever get that PM I sent you?

 

[Member6523]

Terms. Nova is a self identified professional school. http://www.ncspp.info/schools.htm What you mean is that nova is not argosy/Alliant et al. Nva has some good faculty; it is in a desirable location. but, and this isn't all on nova, I think, effectively, for most that go thru any of the programs on the list I linked, there isn't necessarily a huge difference in outcome. Nova is, as far as I know, just as expensive as the other professional schools.

Nova's a ponzi scheme really...there's the top 5-10% of PhD folk (mostly neuro I believe) who do quite well but the rest suffer just as much as the average Argosy and Alliant grads.

 

[xXIDaShizIXx]

Nova's a ponzi scheme really...there's the top 5-10% of PhD folk (mostly neuro I believe) who do quite well but the rest suffer just as much as the average Argosy and Alliant grads.

From what I have seen, I don't know if that is actually the case.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I don't know if it's restricted just to the top 5-10% doing well, nor do I know if the "lower-tier" of Nova students have outcomes similar to the average Argosy and Alliant graduate. However, I can certainly say that I've seen significant variability in the quality of Nova students/applicants, ranging from strong to very weak (and with what I would deem to be an unnecessarily monocular focus on subspecialty area).

 

[xXIDaShizIXx]

I don't know if it's restricted just to the top 5-10% doing well, nor do I know if the "lower-tier" of Nova students have outcomes similar to the average Argosy and Alliant graduate. However, I can certainly say that I've seen significant variability in the quality of Nova students/applicants, ranging from strong to very weak (and with what I would deem to be an unnecessarily monocular focus on subspecialty area).

I mean as with any program aren't there bad and good students?

 

[Ollie123]

I mean as with any program aren't there bad and good students?

There will always be some variability but the whole argument surrounding professional schools (and pseudo-professional schools or whatever we want to term Nova) is that they allow far too much of it. At the doctoral level there should be no ceiling on performance. However there should definitely still be a floor below which you simply don't find people performing. Many of these schools seem to have removed that, which is what irritates so many people about them. Bad students should be exceedingly rare at the doctoral level but seem to be becoming more and more common. Where Nova falls on the spectrum I can' t say but my limited sample fits with what AA said.

 

[Dragon416]

but has anyone attended this program personally?

 

[xXIDaShizIXx]

but has anyone attended this program personally?

It doesn't seem to be so.

 

[Dragon416]

?

 

[xXIDaShizIXx]

?

It is not a doctoral degree. Try to ask in the master's forum.

 

[PHD12]

I mean as with any program aren't there bad and good students?

Inequality in outcomes is the big issue here even more than the students. Reputable funded programs in clinical psychology tend to have nearly 100% APA internship match rate whereas many professional programs tend to vary between 2%-50% in APA internship match rates. Nova is somewhere around 50% so it's not near the bottom, but still high risk for students given cost. We know that people from 3rd or 4th tier law schools on average don't do nearly as well as those from Harvard, Stanford, Yale etc. It's not quite as black-white in psychology, but there is a ton of inequality in our field as well. I personally know people who were close to the "bottom" of their PhD programs (plus socially weird and not great clinically), but still managed to match for an APA internship because the program was reputable and had connections to sites. It's the same reason why 99% of harvard's law school class is employed even in a recession, but it can be as low as 50% in a low tier law school. Is it possible that all the harvard law graduates are good lawyers? No.

I have also never heard of a PsyS Degree so it would be interesting to find out if employers would prefer a degree that is known over one that is not established.

 

[bcliff]

(plus socially weird and not great clinically)

 

[Rivi]

(plus socially weird and not great clinically)

I wish you guys wouldn't talk about me in this thread.