Sick of Applying- Should I go to the Wright Institute?

[psyc]

I have applied to psych programs so many times and I am sick of it but I don't want to make the wrong career choice...

1) I applied to 3 PhD programs that I was totally unqualified for in 2002.

2) I applied to 5 PsyD programs in 2003. Got in to two Argosy's but decided not to go there. Got waitlisted at Wright Institute.

3) I applied to 8 PhD schools in 2005 and didn't get any interviews. Got my master's in counseling instead from 05-07.

4) Applied to two PhD schools in 2007. Got an interview at Loyola's PhD in counseling program but didn't get in.

5) Applied to 8 PhD schools (4 counseling, 4 clincal) and the Wright Institute this year. Only got interview at Wright.

If I get into the Wright Institute should I accept or keep pressing on?! I don't want to cut my career short due to my education.

My credentials: 3.67 undergrad GPA, 3.97 MA GPA, 1200 on GREs, 3 years working with SPMI adults, 1 1/2 years as a research coordinator. Strong recommendations.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[FranklinR]

5) Applied to 8 PhD schools (4 counseling, 4 clincal) and the Wright Institute this year. Only got interview at Wright.

1. Are you sure you didn't get an interview anywhere else yet? Some schools are still extending offers. Until you get a rejection, you're not rejected. I'm not saying that to raise false hopes - as time goes on, the odds get worse. But there's no need to jump before you really have to.

2. Your stats seem pretty good. GRE would seem to be the weak point. I wish I knew why you were having the trouble you are. Have you asked at any of the programs that have rejected you? You should only re-apply if you're going to use that year to add significant new goodness to your application package. What kind of goodness? I have no idea.

Imagine that you went to Wright. Visualize your life after it. Make it as real as possible and see if it's something you want. This step sounds trivial, but really dwelling with the idea of being there (after you've done the research) is important.

There are a lot of people here who are down on programs like Wright, some for good reasons (like internship acceptance rates) and some for bad reasons. Their opinions are important - even the ones with bad reasons - since they tell you what you'll deal with for a while after graduating. But only for a while. After you've built a name of your own, where you went to school becomes much less important.*

* Note that there are many here who disagree (with surprising vigor!) with this sentiment.

 

[MorganLilith]

I have applied to psych programs so many times and I am sick of it but I don't want to make the wrong career choice...

1) I applied to 3 PhD programs that I was totally unqualified for in 2002.

2) I applied to 5 PsyD programs in 2003. Got in to two Argosy's but decided not to go there. Got waitlisted at Wright Institute.

3) I applied to 8 PhD schools in 2005 and didn't get any interviews. Got my master's in counseling instead from 05-07.

4) Applied to two PhD schools in 2007. Got an interview at Loyola's PhD in counseling program but didn't get in.

5) Applied to 8 PhD schools (4 counseling, 4 clincal) and the Wright Institute this year. Only got interview at Wright.

If I get into the Wright Institute should I accept or keep pressing on?! I don't want to cut my career short due to my education.

My credentials: 3.67 undergrad GPA, 3.97 MA GPA, 1200 on GREs, 3 years working with SPMI adults, 1 1/2 years as a research coordinator. Strong recommendations.

It sounds like you have great credentials, or at least good enough to get in somewhere. Are you applying to only top notch PhD programs and Psy D programs? If you did, I've read that its smarter to apply to schools all over the board. Some really competitive schools, some medium schools, and some not so competitive schools. I'm not really sure what the Wright Institute is, but if you are feeling like it's hopeless and they have a good curriculum, have students who ultimately do what you're interested in, I'd just go there. But if you feel like you'd do something different next time and DON'T want to go there.. maybe.. another time is the charm?

 

[shumshum81]

Obviously no one here is going to tell you if a school is a good match for you because we don't know you from just your credentials.

My thought from your credentials is that you area good candidate yet your long history of not getting interviews seems to suggest there's something about your application that isn't reflected in the numbers you gave us. Assuming you are reapplying next year, I would make a big effort to get published this year or at least write something for the principal investigator of the study you work/ worked for so that they know you are capable of being published. A letter of recommendation is a lot stringer when the recommender can comment about your ability to publish.

This is just an idea based on the specs you put out there. If you are already doing professional writing a apologize for assuming you weren't. But if you are trying to get into a PhD program and you haven't written in the past 5 years don't have any recent publications or anyone with publications commenting on your ability to produce them, I would say your application will sink to the bottom of the pile.
Good luck!

 

[Ollie123]

Obviously no one here is going to tell you if a school is a good match for you because we don't know you from just your credentials.

This was my initial thought as well...given you have been applying to clinical PhDs, counseling PhDs, PsyDs, and most of the time fewer programs than most people apply to (I think the average is 10-15), I wonder if some of the "soft factors" are an issue.

In other words, are you restricting geographically? Are you applying to say...Yale and talking about running a private practice in your personal statement? Assuming the PhDs are mentor model programs, do you have a solid match with one of the faculty members or are you applying to the "school" and hoping someone there does the right kind of work?

None of this was mentioned in your original post, and it all matters as much or more than things like GPA, GRE. Maybe it goes without saying, but I wanted to check since things like that can definitely trip people up and seeing that you are applying to a variety of programs made me wonder if that was the case.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Fit is really important. You can have great #'s, but still be a poor fit for a program. Geographical restriction, program type, and research areas are all things worth examining.

As for the Wright Institute....I have heard they have pretty good clinical training, though very little training in regard to research. It seems that most of the people going there are looking to stay in CA, so their APA match rate is abysmal.

 

[greensky]

I totally understand. This is my third time applying, and I do not appear to be getting interviews at my top choices either. I also took off time to get an MA to make myself a more attractive candidate for doctoral programs.
The way I am looking at it is getting a PsyD (whether it be from a professional school or univeristy) is a means to do what I want to career wise. I will probably just go if accepted at a 'safety school' this year, mainly because I am sick of applying and want to get started already. I have heard good things about Wright, and although it is hard, try to ignore what people say about professional schools. I know many great clinicians that have graduated from them-- and they will gain more respect in the near future.

 

[numbereight]

man i feel your pain, stay strong sister/brother

wright was my safety. i am into research but if i had to go there to get my doctorate, i would have.


my two cents in a nutshell: (if things play out like you expect) if you want a faculty/academic/med center job, think about reapplying. if you want private practice or clinic work, go to wright.

try not to stress about what you think other people will think and trust your gut. as one of my professors said "not everyone can go to UCLA".

 

[Eruca]

It doesn't surprise me that you'd be tired of applying! I guess I'm questioning your strategies. And wondering if you shouldn't get more advice about the nuts & bolts of applying? Seems like maybe in the past you've been throwing darts (e.g., the cycles where you applied to schools you weren't qualified for, or a couple of the cycles where you only applied to 2-3 schools). But I also think you might benefit from a more systematic approach, looking for fit/match, and applying to more schools in a broad range of tiers.

Wright is definitely one type of option. I have the common concerns regarding professional schools. I also just met a recent Wright graduate who had to take an UNPAID internship (alongside paid interns) and now works as an postdoc at Kaiser (with a TON of loans to pay for Wright, and little income). So I guess you have to consider if you'd prefer your sacrifices to be short or long term. I've heard some great clinicians come out of Wright, but that you are in a class upwards of 70 students. Some Wright grads end up with successful careers, but I think you'd have to really push hard to stand out and get your needs met there.

I feel for you.. not an easy decision.

 

[PSYLAW]

Personally, i would quite wasting time and go to any program you get accepted in and make the best of it. If clinical psychology is what you want, get the education you need and start working.The whole process is extremely long and it takes alot of time after graduation to be able to bill. Life begins after you get licensed,not waiting for some mythical placement. Also , since you have a masters degree ,start working on a LPC while attending school, so you can actually get that license prior to your doctoral degree. I wish i had done that. It makes you more valuable to alot of employers and you will have billing numbers long before your doctoral friends. Ifr you do not have the ability to bill essentially you cannot earn any cash except as a Psy Tech.

 

[dd123]

to the OP:
Have you had someone look over your letters of interest? Have you done a practice interview with a mentor? There's been no mention (I think) of these important aspects of your application.

For all the work that you've done, why not rewrite the GRE after studying for a few months? It shouldn't be too hard to boost your mark.

 

[greensky]

First of all, many students in CA do not get paid internships (not only Wright students) because they do not want to leave the state. If you are open to relocating for an internship, you will more than likely find a paid one.
As far as the debt is concerned, it is an investment in yourself. There are many programs that will pay off your debt for you if you work for them for three years. They will provide health insurance and pay a modest stipend, but it an attractive option to get rid of student loan debt.
As far as the Wright graduate who has a post-doc at Keiser, no post-doc pays well, and you could defer loan payments if is is that much of a problem.
In the big picture, perhaps where you graduated from will help you land your first job, but it is the skills you have as a clinician and academic that will ultimately win you over-- not matter if your degree is from a university or professional school.

 

[Eruca]

First of all, many students in CA do not get paid internships (not only Wright students) because they do not want to leave the state. If you are open to relocating for an internship, you will more than likely find a paid one.
As far as the debt is concerned, it is an investment in yourself. There are many programs that will pay off your debt for you if you work for them for three years. They will provide health insurance and pay a modest stipend, but it an attractive option to get rid of student loan debt.
As far as the Wright graduate who has a post-doc at Keiser, no post-doc pays well, and you could defer loan payments if is is that much of a problem.
In the big picture, perhaps where you graduated from will help you land your first job, but it is the skills you have as a clinician and academic that will ultimately win you over-- not matter if your degree is from a university or professional school.

While I appreciate the comments, I noticed you're listed as 'pre-psych' and so wonder a little bit about your sources and familiarity. I'm a 5th year clinical phd student and a CA native, so I feel somewhat familiar with the system at this point. Although of course these are still only my opinions. I know many who have gotten paid internships in CA and those trend towards coming from non-professional schools. This is certainly not always the case, but I feel it can add an extra hurdle. You're absolutely right, not limiting yourself geographically does help the chances.

I think the debt is an issue, whether you conceptualize it as an investment in you, your future, or otherwise. It's still $100k+ in debt PLUS interest. I might be crazy, but since I've just spent the last 5 years having my tuition paid in exchange for teaching services, I can't help but have some reservations about loans this large given the return of money for a psychologist is often not what we'd like it to be.

I'm quite familiar with post-doc salaries (as I'm <1 yr from applying for them). They actually can differ as much as $10k. You can do a search on APPIC, and it will show you this. I don't agree that where you go to school only accounts for your first job and not subsequent opportunities. I also think I was quite clear that some very successful clinicians come out of Wright (and other prof schools). But there are some significant factors that make the decision to go to a professional school a more difficult one, and I think that may be why the OP posted to begin with.

 

[myelin]

I have applied to psych programs so many times and I am sick of it but I don't want to make the wrong career choice...

1) I applied to 3 PhD programs that I was totally unqualified for in 2002.

2) I applied to 5 PsyD programs in 2003. Got in to two Argosy's but decided not to go there. Got waitlisted at Wright Institute.

3) I applied to 8 PhD schools in 2005 and didn't get any interviews. Got my master's in counseling instead from 05-07.

4) Applied to two PhD schools in 2007. Got an interview at Loyola's PhD in counseling program but didn't get in.

5) Applied to 8 PhD schools (4 counseling, 4 clincal) and the Wright Institute this year. Only got interview at Wright.

If I get into the Wright Institute should I accept or keep pressing on?! I don't want to cut my career short due to my education.

My credentials: 3.67 undergrad GPA, 3.97 MA GPA, 1200 on GREs, 3 years working with SPMI adults, 1 1/2 years as a research coordinator. Strong recommendations.

I don't have any advice, but I just wanted to tell you that I no longer feel bad for myself for not getting in after the first year. You must be VERY frustrated at this point. I admire your perseverance.

 

[deleted176373]

I have applied to psych programs so many times and I am sick of it but I don't want to make the wrong career choice...

If I get into the Wright Institute should I accept or keep pressing on?! I don't want to cut my career short due to my education.

My credentials: 3.67 undergrad GPA, 3.97 MA GPA, 1200 on GREs, 3 years working with SPMI adults, 1 1/2 years as a research coordinator. Strong recommendations.

Something is wrong, and I think that it's going to be somewhere in your application or in a detail that you have omitted here (possibly for good reason.)

On the surface, it would appear that you have solid credentials, and I will assume that your undergrad in psychology and masters in counseling were from reputable institutions. I would say that you appear to be a strong candidate at most institutions, yet at Wright you have been waitlisted before, putting you somewhere in the bottom 2/3's of applicants. That makes NO SENSE.

I would carefully examine your transcripts, your personal statement, and possibly retain new letter writers on your behalf. Because something stinks, and my guess is that it isn't you. Something is killing your application, I hope you can find out what that something is, good luck.

That said, there is no way that I would spend the level of money required to pay for a program like this without a solid game plan on how the money invested in a professional program would pay off. I have a number of professional acquaintances/friends who have played this game and live with a mountain of debt. It makes no sense to them now, but it's too late, they owe the money. This is a great career, but process of gaining the credentials needed to practice has become too expensive to justify for many. If you have a plan that will pay off, then only then, would I attend an unfunded program.

Mark

 

[applyingtopsych]

I have applied to psych programs so many times and I am sick of it but I don't want to make the wrong career choice...

1) I applied to 3 PhD programs that I was totally unqualified for in 2002.

2) I applied to 5 PsyD programs in 2003. Got in to two Argosy's but decided not to go there. Got waitlisted at Wright Institute.

3) I applied to 8 PhD schools in 2005 and didn't get any interviews. Got my master's in counseling instead from 05-07.

4) Applied to two PhD schools in 2007. Got an interview at Loyola's PhD in counseling program but didn't get in.

5) Applied to 8 PhD schools (4 counseling, 4 clincal) and the Wright Institute this year. Only got interview at Wright.

If I get into the Wright Institute should I accept or keep pressing on?! I don't want to cut my career short due to my education.

My credentials: 3.67 undergrad GPA, 3.97 MA GPA, 1200 on GREs, 3 years working with SPMI adults, 1 1/2 years as a research coordinator. Strong recommendations.

I never even heard anything from the Wright Institute...nor is anything listed on these forums? Anyway, that sucks for me. Where did you get your undergrad?

 

[cleverhans]

While I appreciate the comments, I noticed you're listed as 'pre-psych' and so wonder a little bit about your sources and familiarity. I'm a 5th year clinical phd student and a CA native, so I feel somewhat familiar with the system at this point.

As an actual recent graduate from a prof school and recently licensed CA psychologist I disagree and agree with Eruca on several points and could even speak with more experience than she has. The only "high paying" post-docs are with the VA (>$40's). State Hospitals also pay in the $40's, but in contrast to what Eruca stated, most state hospitals in CA hire from professional schools. I did my post-doc at Kaiser for $37k last year. Essentially, there is no way to "win big" financially with any pre-licensed pre or post doc. You are going to break even until licensure.

As for professional schools, the graduates are just as likely to get high-paying jobs and internships as non-prof schools. That's a fact, and I can tell you this from extensive comparison with other psychologists here in CA.
From experience now working in the State Hospital system (the only place in CA with starting salaries around $100) the vast majority of the psychologists in fact went to prof schools). From what I hear it's also the same in the prison system, the other high paying employer for psychologists, as most psychologists there went to professional schools as well. The VA is the only exception, as the require an APA vs CPA internship, which excludes some professional school grads who want to stay in CA. The VA employs a very small number of the total psychologists in CA anyway. Bottom line, there is no difference in clinical jobs for non-prof psychologists - in fact, a prof school grad can end up more qualified for strictly clinical work vs someone who spent most of their time doing research.

I do agree with Eruca through when it comes to financial concerns - the loans are a drag! Create a budget and think about the long-term financial consequences of 100k. If you come from a rich family maybe it's okay, but now as an early career psychologist the loans are a burden, though I do feel like I received a great clinical education from a CA prof school.

 

[deleted176373]

As an actual recent graduate from a prof school and recently licensed CA psychologist I disagree and agree with Eruca on several points and could even speak with more experience than she has. The only "high paying" post-docs are with the VA (>$40's).

Don't forget the military.

As for professional schools, the graduates are just as likely to get high-paying jobs and internships as non-prof schools. That's a fact, and I can tell you this from extensive comparison with other psychologists here in CA.

Could you point me to the data that supports that?

From experience now working in the State Hospital system (the only place in CA with starting salaries around $100) the vast majority of the psychologists in fact went to prof schools).

Professional schools are pumping out Psychologists by a factor of 10:1 or more compared to university based Ph.D.'s and Psy.D.'s (Baylor/Rutgers). So that hardly seems surprising.

 

[cleverhans]

Could you point me to the data that supports that?


Professional schools are pumping out Psychologists by a factor of 10:1 or more compared to university based Ph.D.'s and Psy.D.'s (Baylor/Rutgers). So that hardly seems surprising.

I speak from personal experience as a member of several professional associations and obsessive research and observation from recent job hunting in CA among the best paid employment sites (State Hospitals, VA, Kaiser, etc). I would be interested to read an empirical study regarding any pay differences between non-prof and prof grads for clinical jobs. From experience, I would highly doubt any differences. Why would there be? There certainly are no differences in clinical skills between prof and non-prof school grads so I don't see why or how there would be any pay difference. Sheer numbers of graduates of prof schools wouldn't be the only reason the top paying sites are hiring many of them - wouldn't they want to hire the best qualified clinical psychologists for a limited number of positions? I'm sure non-prof grads are applying here in CA!

I do agree that prof schools have bloated the market. (10:1 might be a good estimate) but bloated enrollments is only one part of the problem facing the field. Other problems are much greater threats, such as insurance companies reimbursing psychologists at LPC or MFT rates for providing similiar services and political struggles (here in CA the Governator in Sacramento is attempting to eliminate the Board of Psychology and form one Board of Behavioral Science merging MFTs and LCSW's and PhD/PsyD all together, further demeaning the value of psychologists as a professional body. Historically, these problems are the result of a wimpy APA and have little to nothing to do with prof schools and have more to do with money than anything else - we don't have the support of the pharmaceutical companies.

Other fields such as law and medicine have many professional schools as well, although the return on the investment is higher for the above stated reasons.

Lastly In the real world what matters once you have your degree is your interpersonal connections, networking capabilities, and one's proven clinical skills within an area of expertise. One's degree and licensure is a sort of "ticket" - what one does with it is up to the psychologist. In our ego-driven society we get so caught up in "brand-name" educations that we can lose perspective.

 

[deleted176373]

I speak from personal experience as a member of several professional associations and obsessive research and observation from recent job hunting in CA among the best paid employment sites (State Hospitals, VA, Kaiser, etc). I would be interested to read an empirical study regarding any pay differences between non-prof and prof grads for clinical jobs. From experience, I would highly doubt any differences. Why would there be? There certainly are no differences in clinical skills between prof and non-prof school grads so I don't see why or how there would be any pay difference. Sheer numbers of graduates of prof schools wouldn't be the only reason the top paying sites are hiring many of them - wouldn't they want to hire the best qualified clinical psychologists for a limited number of positions? I'm sure non-prof grads are applying here in CA!

True, it may not be the only reason, it would be telling especially if the data showed a discrepancy in pay or career trajectories between Psy.D. and Ph.D.

What I do know is that there is a huge discrepancy between what I will be making even as an intern, and what most early career psychologists make. I actually find it pretty offensive, given the amount of schooling required, that most early career psychologists are expected to earn between 20-40k during internship and ~40k during a post-doc.

We should all be offended, first year lawyers graduating from top law schools make anywhere from 60k-160k with similar debt loadings their first year out and psychologists have to make due with a fraction of that (excepting very rare circumstances like mine.)

I do agree that prof schools have bloated the market. (10:1 might be a good estimate) but bloated enrollments is only one part of the problem facing the field. Other problems are much greater threats, such as insurance companies reimbursing psychologists at LPC or MFT rates for providing similiar services and political struggles (here in CA the Governator in Sacramento is attempting to eliminate the Board of Psychology and form one Board of Behavioral Science merging MFTs and LCSW's and PhD/PsyD all together, further demeaning the value of psychologists as a professional body. Historically, these problems are the result of a wimpy APA and have little to nothing to do with prof schools and have more to do with money than anything else - we don't have the support of the pharmaceutical companies.

I was not criticizing what professional schools are doing, they are simply meeting a demand, what concerns me is why is the demand so high when the financial incentive to get an advanced degree so low. Granted, we do this because we love it, but psychologists shouldn't have to eat top ramen the rest of their lives to pay for it.

Lastly In the real world what matters once you have your degree is your interpersonal connections, networking capabilities, and one's proven clinical skills within an area of expertise. One's degree and licensure is a sort of "ticket" - what one does with it is up to the psychologist. In our ego-driven society we get so caught up in "brand-name" educations that we can lose perspective.

I would have to agree with much of what you said, once you have cleared all the hurdles, much of what occurs is a result of the above stated factors. On the other hand, those "brand-name" educations often open doors that might otherwise be inaccessable to people without "brand-name" educations.

This is why law students compete so hard for placement in top institutions, because that "brand-name" predicts to a great deal their starting salary and likely career trajectory. In the DC area, where I am currently stationed, I would rather graduate at the bottom of the class at Georgetown or GWU, than at the top of the class at UDC.

The same does happen to some extent in psychology. When dealing with small university programs, where the interaction is much more personal, you have the opportunity to network as part of a smaller cohort. It does provide an advantage, the significance of that advantage may be equivocal though. I appreciated your thoughtful post, the last thing I want is for this to turn into another Ph.D. vs Psy.D. discussion. My point is that the level of debt incurred vs the level of pay offered at internship and post-doc is criminal, and that this debt loading affects Psy.D.'s disproportionately due to the nature of going to an unfunded professional program.

Mark

 

[Elle758]

I have applied to psych programs so many times and I am sick of it but I don't want to make the wrong career choice...

1) I applied to 3 PhD programs that I was totally unqualified for in 2002.

2) I applied to 5 PsyD programs in 2003. Got in to two Argosy's but decided not to go there. Got waitlisted at Wright Institute.

3) I applied to 8 PhD schools in 2005 and didn't get any interviews. Got my master's in counseling instead from 05-07.

4) Applied to two PhD schools in 2007. Got an interview at Loyola's PhD in counseling program but didn't get in.

5) Applied to 8 PhD schools (4 counseling, 4 clincal) and the Wright Institute this year. Only got interview at Wright.

If I get into the Wright Institute should I accept or keep pressing on?! I don't want to cut my career short due to my education.

My credentials: 3.67 undergrad GPA, 3.97 MA GPA, 1200 on GREs, 3 years working with SPMI adults, 1 1/2 years as a research coordinator. Strong recommendations.

Well first, I have to commend you for your perserverence in applying those previous years. You really sound like you have a strong passion for working in the field, and that is so very important.

With the information you have posted about yourself, there definitely seems to be a mismatch somewhere in the application/interview process. You sound like a strong applicant, so there has to be something in your application (essays, rec letters, etc) that is pulling your down somewhere.

I think it is okay to apply one last time to places, but not before doing some things differently. For instance, I would absolutely recommend working closely with someone (ideally a professor, post-doc, advanced grad student,etc) to go over everything in your application with a fine tooth comb. Send your essays to people for feedback. Also, perhaps it might be a good idea to practice your interviewing skills. Sometimes, it is hard to know how your come across in interviews.

Another suggestion would be to really make sure you are applying to programs that are a good fit with your background and interests, and are not just applying to mostly "name" programs. The training faculty will be able to easily tell (either through your application, or during interview day) if you fit their program or not.

Finally, maybe do some self-reflection before you decide to apply again (if you do so). It sounds like you applied to a range of programs from Ph.D to Psy.D., from Counseling to Clinical. Clearly, there are similarities between these programs and degrees -- and in some ways it is smart to keep your options open. However, I wonder if this range may also come across through essays or in interviews that you are not entirely sure where exactly you want to be? Are you interested more in research or more in clinical practice, or do you want to do both? What about counseling vs. clinical -- where do you lean mostly? If you spend some time thinking about those things, and then highlighting that throughout your application and in interviews, it may be helpful.

Now after saying all of that, if you decide to accept an offer from Wright this year...that is great as well. You could start working toward your career goals earlier!

Good luck in your journey.

 

[psychmama]

Good post Mark. Despite the unfairness of the pay disparity, I'll take psychology over law. There are some things money can't buy; career satisfaction is one.

Of course, if you can be satisfied and well off financially, so much the better!

 

[cleverhans]

What I do know is that there is a huge discrepancy between what I will be making even as an intern, and what most early career psychologists make. I actually find it pretty offensive, given the amount of schooling required, that most early career psychologists are expected to earn between 20-40k during internship and ~40k during a post-doc.

We should all be offended, first year lawyers graduating from top law schools make anywhere from 60k-160k with similar debt loadings their first year out and psychologists have to make due with a fraction of that (excepting very rare circumstances like mine.)

You're totally right about all this Mark. I'm imagining you eating Top Ramen now, lol. I think a lot of it is political, over a decade ago the APA made some bad decisions to "go it alone" and not "unionize" with medical professionals in a united front against the insurance companies, which would have helped stabilize our income. I think it's going to require the APA and local Psych Associations being more aggressive and politically active, for one thing.
Lawyers know how to stand up for what they deserve a little better than us psychologists and future psychologists, due to our inclination to be healers.

 

[Eruca]

As an actual recent graduate from a prof school and recently licensed CA psychologist I disagree and agree with Eruca on several points and could even speak with more experience than she has. The only "high paying" post-docs are with the VA (>$40's). State Hospitals also pay in the $40's, but in contrast to what Eruca stated, most state hospitals in CA hire from professional schools. I did my post-doc at Kaiser for $37k last year. Essentially, there is no way to "win big" financially with any pre-licensed pre or post doc. You are going to break even until licensure.

Just for the record, I never claimed there were "high paying" post-docs, what I did claim was that post-docs can differ in pay as much as $10k sometimes even a little more. Internships can also differ in pay by as much as $10k for that year. If we just use those who want to stay in CA as an example, I would be curious to see what the real numbers are for students who (very unfortunately) wind up having to take unpaid internship and/or postdocs (?) What types of programs are they coming from? (and I would argue, if you do have loans AND live in higher cost CA that extra $10k is VERY helpful)

It seems you've done quite well, and that's really awesome! What bothers me sometimes about these conversations is that all many of us keep arguing is that the amount of money charged for a prof school education is really hard to swallow, particularly if you've had the opportunity for full tuition remission plus a stipend. Especially when the argument I'm hearing is that we end up in a similar end job market. In a graduating class of 50+, of course there are going to be folks (like yourself) that do very well. You probably would have done well no matter the field. Is that the case for all 50+ grads every year? Do we even have the resources to support that outcome? In your last post, it seemed like many of the generalized prof vs. non-prof schools 'facts' appear to be more observational or anecdotal from one specific part of the country. Like Mark, I'd really like to see some numbers. On many accounts, I hope you're right, as I want the field and those who choose to dedicate their lives to it to indeed succeed.

Also we seem to be working a lot with assumptions about the training received (myself included). I'm actually a clinically bound job candidate from a research-oriented program. My clinical hours far outweigh my research hours, despite what others assume based on the program I attend. But now towards the end, I'm glad I did it this way. I have far fewer loans, the opportunity for a career in the VA or medical centers, or private practice..and have been able to work with folks in the field who my association with (or exposure to) has already helped in regard to attaining additional opportunities. It sounds like the path you took is working for you as well. I understand the fierce loyalties we all have to the decisions we've made. There is a ton of heterogeneity within and between programs (I assume you'd admit that not all prof schools are the same? Or have the same reputation?) I know I would argue that for university-based programs.

 

[deleted176373]

You're totally right about all this Mark. I'm imagining you eating Top Ramen now, lol.

Don't imagine me eating Top Ramen, I will have incurred no debt in my Ph.D. program and I will be making well more than double what most interns make during my internship year (provided I make it through the program.) The military pays extraordinarily well, a USUHS grad on internship in Bethesda makes AT LEAST $85k on internship, being that I am prior service, I will see right around $100k. Not exactly Top Ramen money.

On the other hand, I can be deployed and forced to work in places I'd rather not... I have to agree to spend at least 6 years after graduating in the military, etc.

Mark

 

[Ferenzsci]

The original poster was struggling with having been rejected from many psych schools. The thread then seemed to evolved into a criticism of PsyD Professional schools for pumping too many psychologists in the market.

I am the product of a PsyD school (which also has a PhD program.) My school was VERY expensive. On the other hand, on Internship, I discovered that my education and training was far superior clinically to that of my internship peers. But, now, I often regret having gone to grad school. It was years of training, and psychiatrists, who are less well trained than us, earn more and have more control in institutional settings. The master's level clinicians, who don't at all have the training we have, are darlings of insurance because they get paid less. That is our true competition in the private practice market place.

If you have been rejected from PsyD/PhD programs, perhaps you should consider it a blessing. Maybe you should re-evaluate your goals. If you wantto be called doctor, then maybe this is not the path. On the other hand, maybe you could try for a licensable master's program. All things fall along a normal curve. There are as many master's level clinicians are are good at truly helping people as there are doctoral level clinicans who are unskilled in therapy. What is your goal? To help others? To be an academician? To do research? To be a psychologist? There may be many routes to get to where you want to go. Oh! By the way, Industrial Organizational psych won't get you licensed, but it pays well and is in demand.

 

[Eruca]

On the other hand, on Internship, I discovered that my education and training was far superior clinically to that of my internship peers.

Um, you sort of talk a lot of smack considering what sounds like a very small n for comparison of clinical skills. Heterogeneity of clinical skills seems awfully more complex than graduate program alone...

But, now, I often regret having gone to grad school. It was years of training, and psychiatrists, who are less well trained than us, earn more and have more control in institutional settings. The master's level clinicians, who don't at all have the training we have, are darlings of insurance because they get paid less. That is our true competition in the private practice market place.

...Maybe you should re-evaluate your goals.

Hmmm...interesting advice considering the above. Also in their defense, some MA/MS/LCSW therapists may have fewer years of education, but many have seriously awesome clinical skills and are excellent therapists. Personally I think if you're private practice only bound, then getting a Masters degree seems to be an economical, efficient, and sound route to that end.

So early in your career, Ferenzsci, and so jaded already?

 

[numbereight]

IMHO,

Everyone is entitled to their opinions on this forum and they should not be ridiculed for expressing them.

A person commented regarding their experiences. I do understand and generally agree with your concerns with their statements.

However, I believe that this forum is *for* opinions to be aired. If you have a conflicting opinion, I think that you can state it without sarcasm and putting someone down.

its no big deal really, i don't think you really let the person have it or anything. Plus, i think that there is a time for sarcasm and getting into it with someone.

But, i do think that you saw something you disagreed with and resorted to mocking because it's the easy way.

 

[cleverhans]

J What bothers me sometimes about these conversations is that all many of us keep arguing is that the amount of money charged for a prof school education is really hard to swallow, particularly if you've had the opportunity for full tuition remission plus a stipend. Especially when the argument I'm hearing is that we end up in a similar end job market.

You are right about the money issue- my loans from prof school are a "downer" now that I'm actually making money. On the other hand, when I looked at University based programs, everywhere I interviewed in CA said that if I wanted to be an applied clinical psychologist, their research based programs were not the way to go. Since I wanted to do clinical work I was discouraged from attending several programs during the interview process. With prof schools being so expensive, many people go to research based programs with the full intention of being a clinician and not a researcher.
It sounds like you and others have come up with a creative and cost-effective way of getting your needs met. However, university counselors and graduate school guidebooks themselves are telling students that to go to a university based program you should primarily be interested in research.

IMO, the problem with the current educational system for psychologists is that it's so dichotomized - do a primarily research based program for $0 or do a clinical program for a $100k. I know there are clinically focused PhD programs that are university based, but they're few and far between. Where's the middle ground - in many ways the system or "machine" for producing psychologists is a problem.

 

[Eruca]

You are right about the money issue- my loans from prof school are a "downer" now that I'm actually making money. On the other hand, when I looked at University based programs, everywhere I interviewed in CA said that if I wanted to be an applied clinical psychologist, their research based programs were not the way to go. Since I wanted to do clinical work I was discouraged from attending several programs during the interview process. With prof schools being so expensive, many people go to research based programs with the full intention of being a clinician and not a researcher.
It sounds like you and others have come up with a creative and cost-effective way of getting your needs met. However, university counselors and graduate school guidebooks themselves are telling students that to go to a university based program you should primarily be interested in research.

IMO, the problem with the current educational system for psychologists is that it's so dichotomized - do a primarily research based program for $0 or do a clinical program for a $100k. I know there are clinically focused PhD programs that are university based, but they're few and far between. Where's the middle ground - in many ways the system or "machine" for producing psychologists is a problem.

I think you make some very good points here.. and in many ways, I'm sorry you received some of the information/messages you did. I worked as an RA for 2.5 yrs before grad school, and honestly, I knew very little about other ways to do this (beyond Masters programs). If I hadn't gotten into a phd program, I would have gone the MA route. I didn't really know what kind of career I exactly wanted when I applied. And I probably could have been propelled toward a more research career if my advisor hadn't totally sucked. But I found that I loved teaching, and loved seeing clients & running groups. My clinical hours are quite high for my program, but even so, our clinical training is very good in general.

I definitely wasn't duplicitous when I interviewed (not that you were saying I was)...but now I'm heading in the direction of staff hospital psych or integrated medicine with the option to teach, join a research group, or open a private practice. I really wanted all the options for the least cost. In the end, I may have worked the system a little... but for the most part, I did it unknowingly. [although I was quite aware saying you want to become a clinician during interview = kiss of death] I worked F/T to get through undergrad (7 years!)...already owed money for that, and have taken out some money for grad. I needed a 'more sure' deal. Not sure if that really exists, but it really felt like it at the time.

 

[Aggieanthony]

Other problems are much greater threats, such as insurance companies reimbursing psychologists at LPC or MFT rates for providing similiar services and political struggles (here in CA the Governator in Sacramento is attempting to eliminate the Board of Psychology and form one Board of Behavioral Science merging MFTs and LCSW's and PhD/PsyD all together, further demeaning the value of psychologists as a professional body.

The only source I've found that evidences your claim that the Governator wants to merge all the "degrees" together is a broken Fresno Bee link =( Do you have anything else? The Google came up empty besides Fresno Bee.

 

[cleverhans]

The only source I've found that evidences your claim that the Governator wants to merge all the "degrees" together is a broken Fresno Bee link =( Do you have anything else? The Google came up empty besides Fresno Bee.

Look at the California Psychological Association's website (cpapsych.org)

It was the headline of the CPA's newsletter last month.

 

[Aggieanthony]

Look at the California Psychological Association's website (cpapsych.org)

It was the headline of the CPA's newsletter last month.

Thanks!

This is very worrisome to me...

 

[numbereight]

You don't agree that a statement like, "I discovered that my education and training was far superior clinically to that of my internship peers," deserves to be mocked? Especially, given the attempt to generalize?

If I said, I am the Alpha and the Omega of clinical psychology, and a bunch of people got irate about it, I think I might deserve it.

Jon, on 11/2/2006, you wrote:

"...professional school graduates masquearading as legitimately trained psychologists are the likely undoing of this field."

I think that you mocking someone else for over-generalizing is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. However, I respect your opinion, am glad to hear it, and understand where you're coming from, even if I do not completely agree.

 

[numbereight]

Thanks!

This is very worrisome to me...

If this is the case, let's begin a SDN letter writing campaign. It looks like they're fighting, but a few more letters couldn't hurt. I will write a letter.

anyone else have any additional info? i am gonna have to research this.

edit: the CPA says join them and they'll help fight this change. it does look like a bad move to merge the governing bodies for LCSW, MFT, Psychologist, Psych Tech, into one board. Under this proposed plan, each title will get one seat on the board that determines the rules for all of the professions. This proposed board will also have public members sitting on it in a majority over the professional members. This appears to seriously weaken the governing power of psychologists. The CPA statement makes a "slippery slope" type of argument, saying this will lead to equivalency of the degrees. It looks rational to me. (I got this info from "capital notes for the goverer's plan.. http://www.cpapsych.org/associations/6414/files/files/gov-affairs/capnotes/cn09-0115.pdf It's propaganda for sure, but the facts look solid to me)