The APA acredditation issue

[PsyCoCo]

I am starting this topic because of the conversation on another thread:

I'm confused....If Walden and Capella's clinical psych, PhD programs are not APA accredited programs, how are the graduates finding their jobs???? I mean, who's hiring them?

Look, homies....it is a COMPLETE MYTH that you have to go to an APA accredited school in order to get licensed or find a job after you graduate.

Here's the real poop, so LISSEN UP! 😉

When I started looking at grad schools, people told me not to go to a school that doesn't have APA accreditation because, "Oh dear god, you'll ruin your career! You can never get a job if your school isn't APA accredited!"
Well, the thing was, the only school in my area that offered the classes I wanted to take is not currently APA accredited. I called the Dean of the local program I wanted to attend and spoke to her about it. She suggested that I do some research into the issue and that graduates of the school were not having problems getting licensed or finding jobs.

So, I applied my critical thinking skills to this issue:
The APA is a private, professional organization. How could it be that a PRIVATE organization holds so much power and influence that they can control who gets hired and who doesn't? Further, APA accreditation exists only to set standards for schools. And even more, how could a private organization like the APA have so much power that they managed to convince state legislatures to forbid allowing people to work unless they went to a school approved by the organization. That didn't seem legal, to me.

Next, I checked the state laws of several states who allegedly don't license psychologists who did not graduate from an APA-accredited school.
With only one exception, all of the states I checked stipulated that in order to be licensed, a psychologist must have attended a school that has APA accredited curriculum OR EQUIVALENT.
The one exception was Florida. So, I picked up my phone and CALLED the FL Board of Licensing (I know, such a crazy idea). I spoke to a woman who works in the Psychologist licensing division, actually processing the licensure requests. I asked her what the deal was with this law.
She sighed and said she gets this question every single day.
The way that FL law is worded is misleading. The fact is, if you did not attend an APA accredited school and you want to be licensed in FL, all you have to do is submit a letter from the Dean of an APA-accredited doctoral program in Florida, stating that the curriculum of the school you attended is consistent with APA approved curriculum.

There you have it. I wish that this APA-accreditation issue would die already.

The lesson? Don't make assumptions based on heresay. Look into things like this yourself. Pick up the phone and call the decision makers and get the correct information straight from the horse's mouth.

BTW, I am a card-carrying APA member, and have been for the past two years. And I don't mean to come off bitchy in this post. I'm just really sick of this issue being blown out of proportion and I wanted to set the record straight. 👍

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[JockNerd]

Since the discussion was on distance ed programs in particular, this is germane:

http://health.state.tn.us/Downloads/Psy_Min13007.pdf

Minutes from the TN board of examiners in psych from early '07. They denied apa-equivalency to a Capella grad. In the minutes are mention of the same thing being done by the Iowa board.

I don't think posters in the other thread were casting such a spectre of doom as you say. Posters listed the real limitations (VA, Military), and said that getting a license with a non-apa degree could be trouble, depending, and that's correct. Do you want to go through years of education to have a board look at your info and say "no"? As it pertains to online programs, which again was the topic of that thread, that's a real issue.

 

[Jon4PsyD]

Interesting post. Honestly, I think if you went to a major university that was Non-APA...you'd be fine and probably receive licensure. But you're likely going to have to get approval from a dean (as you said) and show the syllabi of the 20 or so doctoral courses you took, and if you went to an online/distance program you're probably going to receive a no. Anyway, after going through all that paperwork, I would assume you'd have to go through the same process all over again if you decide to move to a neighboring state.

What if the doctoral program is ABPP approved but not APA?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

PsyCoCo....interesting post, thanks for the info.

The APA is a private, professional organization. How could it be that a PRIVATE organization holds so much power and influence that they can control who gets hired and who doesn't?

If you dig into lobbying groups and/or PACs you'll probably blow a gasket at how much power/influence they have in regard to laws, position assignments, etc. In my previous career I was politically involved and not only did major legislation get directly influenced by PACs, "consultants", and/or lobbyists.....but every major position in the new regime was reviewed and/or placed by those same people.

In regard to influencing "local" hirings...legislation can directly effect both private and public hirings by changing standards. More informal influence can happen when changes are enacted at public/gov't placements, which then spill over to the private sector.

Personal and professional bias is the wildcard, as often hiring is influenced by whomever is at the top and/or in a position to hire. I look at it this way....if two people come in with similar stats and recommendations, I'd need a really good reason to go with the person from the non-acred program, as it is different than the standard.

Further, APA accreditation exists only to set standards for schools. And even more, how could a private organization like the APA have so much power that they managed to convince state legislatures to forbid allowing people to work unless they went to a school approved by the organization. That didn't seem legal, to me.

Often professional organizations are brought in as the "expert witness" and they consult with the legislators and "inform" them as to what they should do. If they are effective in their pitch, they pretty much can shape the legislation in their favor.

It is sad how little depth most elected officials have in regard to mental health / health care. I can't tell you how many staff members didn't know the differences between psychology, psychiatry, etc. The staff members are the ones that need to be educated because they put together the briefings that get reviewed by senior staff, that then get presented to the legislators. The prof. orgs work with the staffers to form the 'guts' of the legislation (often providing research and information to the staffers to strengthen their position), while the higher-ups talk to the legislators about positioning and how it appeals to their constituents, etc.

Most of this happens behind closed doors and is on the up and up in regard to legality, but that doesn't mean it is fair. Lobbyists get paid big bucks to set this in motion, and even more to get the support of the legislators. It is democracy at work!

 

[deleted176373]

Look, homies....it is a COMPLETE MYTH that you have to go to an APA accredited school in order to get licensed or find a job after you graduate.

There you have it. I wish that this APA-accreditation issue would die already.

The lesson?

"It was the determination of the board that Capella University did not demonstrate that it was substantially equivalent to a doctoral psychology program approved by the APA or listed by the ASPPB. Mr. Caye made a motion, seconded by Dr. Kores, to deny Dr. Gill's request. The motion carried."

Yes, the lesson is that in TN, even if you bring your lawyer in... You'll still be denied. Maybe you don't consider the need to hire a lawyer just to get a shot at getting licensed part of an uphill battle. I do.

It's not a myth that you will face an uphill battle. It's a fact, you might not like that fact, but it remains a fact. There is a bias against non-APA programs and it's not just in some states.

Good luck getting the Dean of an APA-accredited program writing a letter stating that they believe the program at Capella is consistent with the program they are selling! If you were Dean, would you undercut your own accreditation this way? I sure as hell wouldn't do it, no reason to do it... NONE.

Mark

 

[BellaPsyD]

i wonder how hard it is to get an internship in TN if you did not go to an APA school

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

i wonder how hard it is to get an internship in TN if you did not go to an APA school

There are a couple different ways:

1. Not all internship sites require someone to come from an an APA accredited school, though most do. Some sites will list "preferred" for APA-accreditation, but will accept apps from non-acred applicants.

2. Some people choose to not participate in the APPIC Match, and instead find alternative placements. I know the California Psych Association has pushed their own accreditation to help out the plethora of CA applicants who want to stay local, but all of the same licensing issues still apply.

People still may be able to find *something*, but the chances it is paid and/or will be accepted by a state licensing board....YMMV at best.

 

[JockNerd]

Yes, the lesson is that in TN, even if you bring your lawyer in... You'll still be denied. Maybe you don't consider the need to hire a lawyer just to get a shot at getting licensed part of an uphill battle. I do.

It's not a myth that you will face an uphill battle. It's a fact, you might not like that fact, but it remains a fact. There is a bias against non-APA programs and it's not just in some states.

Good luck getting the Dean of an APA-accredited program writing a letter stating that they believe the program at Capella is consistent with the program they are selling! If you were Dean, would you undercut your own accreditation this way? I sure as hell wouldn't do it, no reason to do it... NONE.

And, bearing in mind that this was not the first time this person went before the board... it looks as though in October of the previous year there was another meeting, and the board requested more info.

So, even though this is n = 1 (with something anecdotal about another incident), we have lawyer hiring, months of waiting (doing who knows what), and lawyer rehiring, for a "no." Pick it up and try again in the next state over?

If someone posted something baseless about not being able to get a job with a Capella degree (e.g. "All Capella grads are homeless and unemployable!"), which no one did, that would be incorrect. But a sunshiny story about "just" having to get some friendly people to write letters and make some phone calls seems equally incorrect to me.

 

[Ollie123]

I am starting this topic because of the conversation on another thread:



Look, homies....it is a COMPLETE MYTH that you have to go to an APA accredited school in order to get licensed or find a job after you graduate.

On top of what everyone else has said, I'd like to emphasize that I don't think anyone is saying you can't find "A" job. However the jobs that many of us consider the most desireable are completely off the table.

 

[PsyCoCo]

I look at it this way....if two people come in with similar stats and recommendations, I'd need a really good reason to go with the person from the non-acred program, as it is different than the standard.

Not necessarily. APA accreditation is not solely concerned with curriculum.
Also, APA accreditation is purely voluntary.

In order to get APA accreditation, a school must be able to show records of things such as matriculation rates, graduation rates, how many of their graduates become licensed and where their graduates are working after graduation. Curriculum is only one piece of it.

The school I am attending has a curriculum that meets APA standards. In fact, it exceeds them. They don't have accrediation yet because they are a new location and the previous administration was not tracking the kinds of data I mentioned above. The new administration is tracking these things and they expect to become accredited in the next few years.

I did not start this thread to specifically talk about online schools. The other thread was what inspired me to start this thread about APA accreditation in general. There are some excellent schools that are not APA accredited, by choice. My whole point is about jumping to conclusions and making assumptions based on heresay, without checking facts for yourself.

And as far as the APA being a lobbying group, I fully understand how lobbyists can influence laws. That doesn't mean I think it's right. And as much as I appreciate many things the APA does, I think that their "monopoly" on accreditation is unfortunate. There are perfectly good schools that get a bad rap because they choose not to play the APA's game.

And as for the "doom" comments, I was not referring to the other thread. I am talking about what I have been told, personally, to my face by other students in my area who never bothered to look up the information for themselves.

 

[PsyCoCo]

Since the discussion was on distance ed programs in particular, this is germane:

http://health.state.tn.us/Downloads/Psy_Min13007.pdf

Minutes from the TN board of examiners in psych from early '07. They denied apa-equivalency to a Capella grad. In the minutes are mention of the same thing being done by the Iowa board.

And?

The minutes say:
"The board discussed the Capella University materials, and the presentations from Dr. Gill, Mr.Mill and Dr. Schnedler. It was the determination of the board that Capella University did not demonstrate that it was substantially equivalent to a doctoral psychology program approved bythe APA or listed by the ASPPB."

The applicant was denied because the Board found the program to be inconsistent with APA standards.
The applicant was not denied because Capella is an online school or because it's not APA accredited.

IMO, before you apply to a school, talk to the Dean about their program. Then call the Licensing Boards in the state(s) you plan to practice in after graduation. Then call the APA and talk to them about their accrediation standards. (I did- they are very helpful).
And then decide if the school is right for you.

Again, I repeat- don't believe every piece of heresay or offhand comments people make about APA accreditation or lack thereof. Look into the matter for yourselves. 👍

 

[PsyCoCo]

You know, I think that a lot of the rumors and misinformation about this issue may be due to people not really knowing exactly what APA accreditation means and what factors are involved with becoming accredited.

http://www.apa.org/ed/accreditation/

There is information there and contact info on the site if you have further questions. 🙂

 

[erg923]

I think you might be missing the point of all this. You need to ask 2 questions. The issue is, what is the advantage of going to a non-APA accreditted program? And what is the disadvantages/risks of attending a non-APA accredited program? I can't see any advantages and I see several potential disadvatages. When one option significantly outweighs the other, the choice becomes clear. Why put yourself in undue risk of hassles and limitations later in grad school or career? This why everyone gives the advice of "stay away from non acredited programs" and activly disocourages people attending them.

Personally speaking, ALL the jobs I would want would be off the table if my program was not APA accredited. ALL job postings I recieve through Npsych's listserve, NAN, INS, APS, and APA ALL state that qualifications include doctoral degree in clinical or couseling psychology from APA approved doctoral programs AND APA approved internships.

 

[deleted176373]

I think you might be missing the point of all this. You need to ask 2 questions. The issue is, what is the advantage of going to a non-APA accreditted program? And what is the disadvantages/risks of attending a non-APA accredited program? I can't see any advantages and I see several potential disadvatages.

Actually there are some advantages.

1. Non-Accredited programs, like non-accredited internships are often easier to secure. (Exceptions exist, yes, I know... Harvard, for example)

2. Often times you can fulfill requirements in a non-traditional way (e.g. distance learning)

Are these advantages enough? I don't think so, but if you were stationed in the middle of BFE and a military dependent you might. It's things like this that confirm a bias regarding APA accreditation.

http://www.psychboard.ca.gov/exams/unaccredited.shtml

Assembly Bill 400, authored by Assembly member Ted Lempert, passed the Legislature on August 21, 2000 and was approved by Governor Davis on September 24, 2000. This bill became effective on January 1, 2001.
Among other things, Assembly Bill 400 added section 94814.5 to the California Education Code. This new section of the Education Code requires those California schools that are not regionally accredited but are "approved" by the California Bureau of Private Post secondary and Vocational Education to provide to prospective students a "California Unaccredited Graduate Psychology School Disclosure Form." This form shall inform prospective students of the practice limitations imposed on graduates of the school. The prescribed language that is required for this purpose shall read:

"Prospective students should be aware that as a graduate of an unaccredited school of psychology you may face restrictions that could include difficulty in obtaining a teaching job or appointment at an accredited college or university. It may also be difficult to work as a psychologist for some federal government or other public agencies, or to be appointed to the medical staff of a hospital. Some major managed care organizations may not reimburse individuals whose degrees are from unaccredited schools. Graduates of unaccredited schools may also face limitations in their abilities to be listed in the "National Register of Health Service Providers' or to hold memberships in other major organizations of psychologists."


In addition to providing the above statement on the disclosure form, section 94814.5 (a)(1) and (2) requires the form to disclose the number of graduates of the school who have taken and the number who have passed the licensing examinations in California for the previous four years. Additionally, section 94814.5 (a)(2) requires the form to disclose the number of graduates of the school who have become licensed psychologists in California for the previous four years.

If this wasn't a problem, do you think they would pass such a law?

Mark

 

[PsyCoCo]

I think you might be missing the point of all this. You need to ask 2 questions. The issue is, what is the advantage of going to a non-APA accreditted program? And what is the disadvantages/risks of attending a non-APA accredited program? I can't see any advantages and I see several potential disadvatages. When one option significantly outweighs the other, the choice becomes clear. Why put yourself in undue risk of hassles and limitations later in grad school or career? This why everyone gives the advice of "stay away from non acredited programs" and activly disocourages people attending them.

Personally speaking, ALL the jobs I would want would be off the table if my program was not APA accredited. ALL job postings I recieve through Npsych's listserve, NAN, INS, APS, and APA ALL state that qualifications include doctoral degree in clinical or couseling psychology from APA approved doctoral programs AND APA approved internships.

I don't feel I am missing the point of this at all. Did even you read my last post?
I said:
"IMO, before you apply to a school, talk to the Dean about their program. Then call the Licensing Boards in the state(s) you plan to practice in after graduation. Then call the APA and talk to them about their accrediation standards. (I did- they are very helpful).
And then decide if the school is right for you."

In my case, my career goals and future ambitions in the field lined up well with the school I chose. I did my homework and weighed all of the possible outcomes of my choice, including the negative ones. And then I decided that the school I wanted to apply to is the right choice for me.
What is right for YOU may not be right for me and that is perfectly OK.
Regardless, students need to understand what APA accreditation really means and how it works so they can make a decision based on reality and not on rumors.
It DOESN'T mean a school is better. It MAY mean that you will have a tougher time getting your dream job. It DOESN'T mean you can't get a job at all and a good job, at that.

AGAIN, my point is:
DO YOUR HOMEWORK BEFORE APPLYING TO SCHOOLS.
DON'T make your decision based only on rumor or heresay.

So how, exactly, am I "missing" the point?

 

[erg923]

I don't feel I am missing the point of this at all. Did even you read my last post?
So how, exactly, and I "missing" the point?

Because, your first post stated "Look, homies....it is a COMPLETE MYTH that you have to go to an APA accredited school in order to get licensed or find a job after you graduate.

I would argue that this missed the point of the issue and ignores the more important implication we were all getting at. No one ever said you couldn't get "a job." But can you get the job you want? You've eliminated the hope of a APA internship, most formal post-doc opportunties, government jobs, VA positions, faculty jobs, academic research, academic hospitals/med centers, and every job I have ever seen in the emails I get from APA, APS, etc. People were arguing that it is not wise to put such large restrictions on your future career before you even entered the field. Career goals and interests often change while in grad school, and it would be shame have your vocational options already limited when you go in.

 

[PsyCoCo]

If this wasn't a problem, do you think they would pass such a law?

The way I see it, the problem is not that graduates of non-APA schools may not be able to secure all of the same positions as APA grads.

The problem, IMHO, is that students are not doing their research before choosing a school.

Jesus, I feel like a broken record.

For example- the woman who was denied licensure in TN (in an above post). Well, gee - no kidding. She should have checked into the licensing standards BEFORE she chose her school.

It's not up to the school to meet APA standards for the student's benefit or covenience. It's up to the student to research the program and choose a school that fits their needs. If you go to whatever school is most convenient for you and later you find out it was a poor choice for your career goals, you can't blame anyone but yourself.

If you want to go to an APA school to get what you feel are the "best" jobs (whatever that means), then go for it. But please don't criticize those of use who carefully choose our schools based on curriculum, location, affordability, etc., but happen to be non-APA.

And please don't ASSUME that you are better, smarter, more qualified, etc. just because your school is APA. Find out the facts, check into the school. You might be surprised at the excellent quality of a non-APA school, who is not yet accredited ONLY because they are a new campus, etc.

As aspiring Psychologists, aren't we supposed to carefully research things, check facts and try and control our personal bias? (rhetorical question, BTW)

 

[PsyCoCo]

People were arguing that it is not wise to put such large restrictions on your future career before you even entered the field. Career goals and interests often change while in grad school, and it would be shame have your vocational options already limited when you go in.

I completely agree. I didn't miss this point at all. I still maintain the opinion that it should be a conscious choice - a risk you are willing to take, based on having all of the facts.

Whether or not it is "wise" to restrict your future in such a way is subjective and totally up to the individual making the choice.

Based on my career ambitions and interests, it was the right choice for me. And if I turn out to be wrong, well....sucks to be me. But it's not the school's fault. I did my research well before applying. I know the limitations and I am OK with taking the risk. So?

 

[deleted176373]

And please don't ASSUME that you are better, smarter, more qualified, etc. just because your school is APA. Find out the facts, check into the school. You might be surprised at the excellent quality of a non-APA school, who is not yet accredited ONLY because they are a new campus, etc.

You're right, I won't assume that I am better, smarter, or more qualified. I think that I made your point above in stating that there are exceptions, and excellent non-APA schools do exist. I never insinuated that I was going to be smarter, more qualified, or better than anyone else period, and certainly not because the program I attend is APA accredited.

However, I will be more marketable and have more opportunities having attended a program with APA accreditation than I would without.

I am open minded, so tell us why you decided that a non-APA program was the right choice for you? Specifically, what were the advantages that made this decision the right one for you?

Mark

 

[PsyCoCo]

Because, your first post stated "Look, homies....it is a COMPLETE MYTH that you have to go to an APA accredited school in order to get licensed or find a job after you graduate.

I would argue that this missed the point of the issue and ignores the more important implication we were all getting at. No one ever said you couldn't get "a job." But can you get the job you want? You've eliminated the hope of a APA internship, most formal post-doc opportunties, government jobs, VA positions, faculty jobs, academic research, academic hospitals/med centers, and every job I have ever seen in the emails I get from APA, APS, etc. People were arguing that it is not wise to put such large restrictions on your future career before you even entered the field. Career goals and interests often change while in grad school, and it would be shame have your vocational options already limited when you go in.

*sigh*
This is the exact kind of misinformation I am talking about. (I highlighted it in your post above)
You CAN get an APA internship even if you attend a non-APA accredited school.

You know what? If you want to believe everything you hear, go right ahead. If you aren't going to PICK UP THE PHONE and start calling decision makers such as Deans and Licensure Boards, then nothing I say will help you understand.

Honestly - I am not trying to attack you, but your post is a good example of why I started this thread.

This thread gives me a headache.

(edited to de-editorialize, somewhat)

 

[deleted176373]

*sigh*

This thread gives me a headache.

Then why did you start it? 😉

Mark

 

[PsyCoCo]

You're right, I won't assume that I am better, smarter, or more qualified. I think that I made your point above in stating that there are exceptions, and excellent non-APA schools do exist. I never insinuated that I was going to be smarter, more qualified, or better than anyone else period, and certainly not because the program I attend is APA accredited.

However, I will be more marketable and have more opportunities having attended a program with APA accreditation than I would without.

I am open minded, so tell us why you decided that a non-APA program was the right choice for you? Specifically, what were the advantages that made this decision the right one for you?

Mark

Thanks for asking, Mark. I didn't mean that you specifically were insinuating being smarter, etc. It was meant as a general "you."

First off, my choices were limited to my geographic area, where there are only two APA accredited programs out of six options within a driveable distance. I have a home and animals to care for, so moving out of state is not an option at this time.
One of the APA options is a VERY research-oriented school. I am not interested in making a career of research. After considering PhD vs. PsyD, I decided PsyD was right for me.
I am very into the biological aspects of psychology and neuropsychology. I'm all about nature AND nurture. That limited my choices to two schools, which are the only local grad schools that offered classes in neuropsych. and physiological psych.
One was APA the other was not.
When I compared the curriculum, I found that the non-APA school was more science based, while the APA program was more theory based.
I prefer science to theory when available.
The non-APA program offered a much wider range of assessment classes.
The APA program did not offer psychodynamic therapy classes or cognitive-behavioral therapy classes, both of which I am leaning toward. The non-APA school offered both of those types of therapy classes.
Also, the non-APA school offered classes which were a continuation of my undergraduate education, which is heavy in science and biology. I felt that my undergrad experience dovetailed nicely into those classes, offering me a chance to learn more in depth about the subjects. Overall, the non-APA school was a better academic choice for me and offered more of the types of classes I wanted to take.

Then I called the Dean, the APA and the state Licensure Boards in the states where I thought I may want to practice. I sent a couple of licensure boards copies of the non-APA curriculum for their opinion.

Then I researched jobs and found that the types of jobs I am interested in generally did not require APA grads. I am interested in consulting, providing therapy and doing assessments.

And then, I researched PsyD vs. MA salaries and compared those to my estimated monthly student loan payments after graduation.

I also spoke to my professors and asked what they had heard about the schools I was considering and got their feedback. Taken with a grain of salt, of course (although no one said anything negative about either school).

After gathering all of those facts, the clear choice, for me, was the non-APA PsyD program.

 

[PsyCoCo]

Then why did you start it? 😉

Mark

I can't remember. 😕 😉

Actually, I thought I was being "helpful."

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

PsyCoCo, it definitely seems like you have thought it through and found that it works for you (which is what people should do when they decide to do take a different route). I think where people are running into issues is that although it may work for you, it is important to understand that it may not work well for others.

 

[PsyCoCo]

PsyCoCo, it definitely seems like you have thought it through and found that it works for you (which is what people should do when they decide to do take a different route). I think where people are running into issues is that although it may work for you, it is important to understand that it may not work well for others.

Agreed. Absolutely!

 

[deleted176373]

Thanks for asking, Mark.

After gathering all of those facts, the clear choice, for me, was the non-APA PsyD program.

Great answer, thanks.

Similarly, I found that I had my hands tied and had to attend an APA accredited program to accomplish my goals. In my case I wanted to return to the military, which is an APA only club. For better or worse that's the way the game is played in the military.... It's an APA program or the highway.


Mark

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I thought this was a particularly well written e-mail from a listserv I frequent, so I thought I would pass it on. The e-mail talks about evaluating applicants for internship positions, and how accreditation and a past history of placement success can play a role in the decision making process.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Blair raised an interesting and important question about the impact of a particular school or particular training model, and its impact on the selection process. What follows are my thoughts and perspectives.

When I review an application, I think about the school, its training model, its accreditation status, and yes, its reputation. I understand that when considering an applicant's individual application, I am reviewing that person, not the academic program, and I would anticipate an argument that it is not "fair" to judge an individual by the program with which she or he is associated. I respectfully disagree.

I consider training programs, as well as their track records and their reputations, and I think it is appropriate to do so. Given the nature of our internship, we seem to attract applicants from programs with an emphasis on psychology and law, so each year, we anticipate applicants from a number of particular schools. Over the years, we have had multiple interns from some of those schools. As a result, we are familiar with the nature and quality of the training offered at those schools, and we have some degree of relationship with staff from those schools. (For the record, most years, we also have interns from schools that have not previously provided any interns.)

For example, imagine that a student is from the imaginary University of Timbuktu. Imagine that we have had three previous interns from the University of Timbuktu, and each of the three arrived at our internship with similar knowledge, experience, and career goals. Imagine that we corresponded regularly with the Clinical Training Director from that university, who consistently impressed us as a fantastic psychologist who only recommends students who are clearly ready for internship. Further, imagine that each of those previous students excelled during internship.

When a student from the University of Timbuktu applies next year, she is going to have some advantage, because we have knowledge about her training program that we might not have about other programs. In my view, she has an undeniable advantage insofar as we have accrued information about this applicant's experiences that we do not have on all applicants. It would be disingenuous to say that we don't consider that information. (Honestly, I do not think that we could avoid giving that some weight - to say that we did would reflect either dishonesty or an appalling lack of insight.)

Clearly, we have an obligation as a training program to consider all applications using the same criteria. I am confident that we do this. But imagine that we have two applicants whose clinical experiences are similar, whose essays reflect equal strengths, whose letters of recommendation are similar, and who were equally impressive during interviews. Imagine one is from the University of Timbuktu, while the other is from a program that rarely provides us with an applicant. Given all their similarities, these two applicants will probably be right next to each other on our rank order list, but the one from the program with the established track record of success will probably be ranked just before the other one.

Similarly, if we see two applicants who appear similar, and one is from an accredited program while the other is from a program that is not accredited, or from a program on probation, we are going to view that as a meaningful distinction, especially when the applicants are similar in other aspects of their applications. (If we do not attend to that information, accreditation fails to serve one of its purposes.)

With limited information about applicants, some weight is going to be placed on factors that are beyond the applicant's control. This is why I believe it is essential for students to get good advice as undergraduates, and to be aware of these issues while considering graduate programs. I think the requirement for schools to make their match rates public represented an important step forward, but I recognize that without good advice, few undergraduates would know what to make of that information. That is likely to be an ongoing problem. . . .

Dr. Rick DeMier

----------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Eruca]

And?
IMO, before you apply to a school, talk to the Dean about their program. Then call the Licensing Boards in the state(s) you plan to practice in after graduation.

Again, I repeat- don't believe every piece of heresay or offhand comments people make about APA accreditation or lack thereof. Look into the matter for yourselves. 👍

You're talking about having a pretty certain idea where you want to practice about 5-8 years before you actually apply for licensure. ??? This seems like quite a prediction to me (and probably most people) particularly when you consider changes that can occur when you have a spouse (who may also have a career), the need to take care of an ill family member in another state, predicting where you will want to live a decade from now, predicting where you will find the job you most want, etc.

Yes, yes, you comprehensively researched your program before choosing it. We get it.

 

[apumic]

You're talking about having a pretty certain idea where you want to practice about 5-8 years before you actually apply for licensure. ??? This seems like quite a prediction to me (and probably most people) particularly when you consider changes that can occur when you have a spouse (who may also have a career), the need to take care of an ill family member in another state, predicting where you will want to live a decade from now, predicting where you will find the job you most want, etc.

Yes, yes, you comprehensively researched your program before choosing it. We get it.

agreed.

This kind of statement suggests some kind of educational deficiency.

I get what the OP is trying to say, and it makes sense on the surface (albeit, it sort of violates what science is, but it sounds nice upon first glance). That is, it's nice to have facts that feel "firm" -- even if it is little more than an illusion much of the time!