Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Lol. At least that's a discussion I don't mind having.
PsyD Neuropsychology Track Programs
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
Meeting qualifications is one thing. Having a better CV than someone is another. Very rarely are we arguing for people with equal CVs. Interviews are next to useless in a majority of situations. This is widely known knowledge in the IO world. You should indeed update your knowledge. This will likely be on the EPPP.
You previously wrote:
I was referring to the poor quality of training offered by your program, which is reflected in the quantitative metrics, including APA internship match, EPPP pass rates, and licensure rates. This leads to the program having a poor reputation, which then prevents many of its applicants from even getting interviews. So, it doesn't really matter how strong your interviewing skills are if your paper application ends up in the shredder.
Right, you don't have to justify your training to internet strangers, but you do have to justify it to basically everyone in the clinical psych community, because your program has the reputation of offering poor training and being very expensive, thereby being predatory. If you went to a funded PhD or PsyD program that is known to offer good training, you wouldn't need to prove you received good training despite your program at every step of your career.[/QUOTE]
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally (There are several other definitions that are accepted as appropriate ways to apply this word, I've provided one of those definitions) -
Literally - d : in a completely accurate way <a story that is basically true even if not literally true>
I think we have exhausted this topic, so I won't waste anymore time on this. If you want, you are more than welcome to visit any of my previous posts to get a snapshot of my thoughts on this topic. Otherwise, I will say that I am not abusing statistics and probability. I am simply advocating for those who are entertaining the idea of becoming a psychologist who may not want to go the Ph.D. route or who may be limited in their schooling options. They should weigh a wider variety of variables to make their decision vs. the handful of variables commonly articulated here on the forum (not that they are incorrect or inappropriate). I would hope that those going into a profession that is not black and white can appreciate that differences and restraints don't have to hold one back, they simply need to adapt to them. Perhaps this profession won't be a good fit for them, but that decision should be made with all of the cards on the table, not just half a deck.
This is just more deflection.
Please, tell us more about all this "wider variety of variables" that are important.
Are they more important than say, your program's 40% EPPP pass rate? You may better know it as the exam required to practice as a psychologist.
http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.asppb.net/resource/resmgr/EPPP_/2016_Scores_by_Doctoral_Prog.pdf
Are they more important than your program's 38.6% APA internship match rate over the past six years and just 54% in the past year?
Are they more important than your program $30,000/year tuition?
http://www.albizu.edu/Portals/0/Documents/cau/mia/MIA_C20.pdf
Honestly, what do any other "variables" matter if they're in debt up to their eyeballs, they can't pass the licensing exam because their training was so poor and their programs has such low quality control in selecting applicants, and they can't get a good job even if they do pass the exam because less than half of them completed an accredited internship?
Again, you're abusing statistics and probability by arguing in favor of anecdote and virtually irrelevant details, when the actual quantitative details should make everyone run away from these programs.
There are a variety of reasons as to why that rate may be low. I was looking at the 2012 dataset as well, and again, they have abysmal pass rates then (38%). I looked at the PR campus as well as Ponce School of Medicine in PR to see if they too had lower scores and they do. A couple of explanations for this: 1. They could be poor test takers, 2. A bulk of the students in all of these programs are primarily Hispanic and may not be comfortable taking standardized tests in English (there is great literature about neuropsychological testing issues related to Spanish-speaking test takers), and 3. There could very well be poor training at these programs. I can only speak to my program and we do have some fantastic students. When I speak of "other variables," I mean things like having a firm understanding of what one wants to accomplish, and that one is a "go getter." They don't wait for opportunities, rather, they actively seek them. Another variation on this is, some students (such as myself) come in with a very strong background and previous graduate education, so, our abilities to get through the program very successfully will be more likely than those entering with just an undergraduate education (especially if their background is not in psychology). Another variable to consider is geographic restrictions (at the time being). Some programs, such as NSU have exclusive relationships with external practicum sites that requires 80% of the "seats" to be reserved for NSU doctoral students; we have these same affiliations, one being with UM Miller School of Medicine. This was something that attracted me to program. I was looking beyond the Psy.D. curriculum, I was looking at, "what do other doctoral students with a focus in neuropsychology go on to do?" I think I have mentioned in earlier posts, many are working at UM as clinical faculty, directors or co-directors of internship and post-doc sites, many others are with Mayo Clinic, Cleveland Clinic, many have done their internships at notable VA centers, Dartmouth's post-doc in clinical neuropsychology and brain imaging research. Others are faculty at schools of medicine in New York, they are forensic psychologists with the DoD (one serving abroad in the U.K. at the moment). I could go on and on. This is something the "data" doesn't necessarily show.
The GRE predicts the ability for one to be successful in their first year of graduate school; it does not predict nor explain the variety of methods they use to overcome or adapt to their advanced studies in order to be successful like those scored high on the GRE. These are important factors, and in particular for me, I was not motivated in the least bit about the GRE. I took a month long course, didn't study for it and took the test and scored terribly (go figure). I was lucky enough to have other variables in place for the admissions committee to let me in, and I proved my worth (10 fold) while in the program. I apply the same technique where I am at now. So, with this in mind, my 279 GRE score (i.e., functional idiot level score 😛 ) told a random committee member I would not be a good fit for the program because I lacked XYZ cognitive abilities needed to be successful in graduate school. I proved them wrong. This is very much anecdotal, I won't argue that. The point of my posts are to shed light on the smaller group of outliers out there who feel they may not be suited to become a psychologist because of limiting factors like the GRE, or in the case of those in my program and those in PR, taking a standardized test in English.
All of the important elements in becoming a solid clinician such as the ability to synthesize research, critique it and to produce a new body of literature is something I have done and will continue to do. The clinical skills needed to getting a clear and full picture of the client's presenting problem while producing a differential diagnosis is something I have been doing well at. My APA writing style is stellar (go figure with the research). I am also shifting my writing styles to accommodate the appropriate context (research vs. clinical writing). I am partaking in fantastic practicums where I am exposed to a very rich and diverse population of Miami-Dade (everything from psychotic spectrum disorders, court ordered evaluations, and neuropsychological referrals). I am still very early in my doctoral training but having completed my first semester with all A's, while being a researcher at UM and at Albizu and being an officer in our campus's research group is something I find enjoyable and very rewarding. I know of several students in my program that don't do this, they attend class (most of the time) and do okay on their coursework. I have seen some who have had to repeat some courses. I have identified a lot of the key components they struggle with and that contribute to their sub-optimal performance, but I keep that to myself. Several of these folks come to me for help and I gladly provide my opinion on the matter as a colleague. I hope the best for them, however, they may very well become part of the statistics we are seeing now that you have brought up.
Lastly, considering that the South Florida area has two Psy.D. program, NSU has a higher tuition rate than Albizu's. I have found that almost half of each cohort in our program was offered admissions into NSU's Psy.D. program but rejected them because they preferred the smaller class size, the lessened tuition (albeit, not extremely less) and what I have often heard from them; the ability to remain closer to home (which, I drive 45 min. each way from Fort Lauderdale to Miami, but whatever). I believe you have been hinting at the lack of rigor in our program, at least that's the way it's coming off. I can assure you that is not the case. Most likely, and the reason I believe from personally attending the program and meeting a lot of the students is, several of these students want to stay in South Florida. They honestly don't care if their internship is APA accredited or not. Their externships are done in private practices and post-docs as well. They do the minimum amount of work needed to get a passing grade (I kid you not, I have heard from some of my colleagues that getting a passing grade is all they wanted). With this in mind, unless this trajectory is left unadjusted, they will most likely struggle in the program and when it comes time for licensing. This has more to do with quality control, and is something that our new director has taken a very active effort in establishing. They just implemented the GRE last fall (both the subject and general tests) plus several pre-req courses. They will also be looking at admitting more people who have an additional advanced degree as the supposition follows: if you can complete a 2-3 master's program, you've exceeded the predictive validity the GRE provides.
For me, I suppose I got lucky with getting in the year before they implemented the GRE. Needless to say, my assumptions have been good so far in that, I am doing exceedingly well, so, I hope to maintain this. I am co-authoring several papers (one in behavioral health dealing with emotional abuse and another on neuro-rehabilition dealing with electrical injury and neurocognitive performance). I have positioned myself to do my externships (7 total) at UM (in both the rehabilitation and neuropsychology departments). This is anecdotal obviously, but it has worked out well for me. My husband will be graduating next year, he will do his residency in Miami in infectious disease. He already works as a clinical pharmacist (intern) for one of the hospitals here in Fort Lauderdale. He will wait for me to finish, when I do, we will move for internship if I don't stay at UM and we will be fine with moving for post-doc. For me, things will work out. I can only hope for the best for those in my program; the curriculum is very solid and is rigorous. Before coming to Albizu, I was used to a very intense graduate program in cognitive neuroscience. Our courses we took were all doctoral level, and if we stayed, I would have possibly just completed the 3 remaining years for the Ph.D. Our courses were taught with medical students as well as Au.D. students. UT-Dallas is a Tier 1 university and at first, I was reluctant to go to Albizu because it would be like being exposed to a finely crafted burger, only to go back to McDonalds. This was not the case. On a final note about Albizu, with our new director, she has implemented a requirement for all students to get APA internships (this has been optional for the longest time, or at least suggested). This year, I have talked with over half of the students that have applied for internship and they have all received 8-10 invites for internships (that is a VERY good number, considering we are encouraged to apply to 16-20 programs). Some students are getting accepted into internships that have historically only accepted Ph.D. students. As I am sure you know, this is anecdotal. What's great about anecdotal information is, it can become significant in the future. So, if a student was seeking Psy.D. training in my area, I would definitely refer them to NSU but also our program, I would provide them all of this data as well as the relative framework to approach these phenomena. I think on this site, there is an inclination to get "trigger happy" on Psy.D. programs, especially ones that are not top tier, and it is often led by some of the same underlying themes with respect to the APA match rates and some of the inflated exaggerations on casualties for those numbers.
I hope this might provide some clarification in my thought process on the topic, if not, I am sure we can find other ways to debate!
Last edited:
Yes, there are lots of reasons that those professional markers can/ be low. These reasons are not specific to a single school. People may have geographic restrictions at any program, they may be a bad test taker, etc. When a single school has scores that low repeatedly it says something not about these regular and nationally-present challenges but something specific about a school. Internship match and EPPP failure speaks as a prime instance to what the program is NOT providing. There is a pattern specific to the for a reason.
I will admit that I did not read all this. But I think the length suggests that you are working very hard to explain some pretty clear facts, data and outcomes.
I think I will go with parsimony for now, and I would advise students reading this to as well.
Good thinking, as it's just more anecdotes meant to deflect from actual quantitative data about his program.
Thanks for reading this for me so I wouldn't have to. Maybe I could get you to do lit reviews on topics of interests or need for me and provide one or two sentence summaries. "Based on an extensive survey of literature, you should be doing x, y, and z for this patient with Q diagnosis."
😀
But wouldn't that be "elitist" and ignore all the anecdotal evidence if we just stick to the empirical literature?
You could always just tell me to forget all of that ridiculous psychological research. After all, your Aunt Gertrude had the same problem and all she had to do was stop eating gluten and do a colon cleanse and now she is free from any psychological distress whatsoever. Miracle cure!
