Time to completion

[Psyduck]

Hi,

I am starting to narrow down the list of schools I will be applying to this December. One of the deciding factors I might use is time to complete the degree. Supposedly a clinical psych PhD should take 5 years to complete, but in their disclosure data many schools say the average/median is more like 6 or 7, sometimes 8 years. At first I thought this might be skewed by the occasional person who needs 10 years, but then I found that some schools break it down further and show that in some cases 0% of students finished in 5 years. So for the schools that don't list the full info would I be able to find out from the graduate/admissions office? And why does it take so long- dissertation research, class requirements, practica, combination of everything? Are there red flags I should look for in the curriculum (even the schools where no one finishes in 5 years tend to have a timeline showing the requirements taking 5 years)? Any advice on how students can get through as quickly as possible would be appreciated.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[psybee]

i think that there can be many reasons why students don't finish in 5 years, some of them very valid and in no way reflecting the quality of the program.
just a few reasons:

for instance, most programs are majority women, and the trend seems to be people getting thier phds after being out of college for a bit, so you may have some female students having children (or needing to take time off if their partner has a baby). i know my sweetie and i are older, and school fall right in my prime kid-having years. we contemplate a "dissertation baby", which would add a good year to how long it'd take to finish. maybe it was a northeast thing, but i saw pregnant students at half of my interviews.

it can also take longer if for some reason your research gets derailed -- at my program we pick a lab out first year, as opposed to applying directly to a lab like at some other programs, and can switch labs if that somehow dosen't work out, but switching labs can really slow your progress. this is a big worry of mine, and i've done everything i can to make sure before i even start that i'm going into a good lab, and i really hope it works out that way. i am actually amazed that most folks graduate from my school in 5-5.5 years, because we have 140 credits to our program (we do specializations as well as a general clinical psych program), do an in-house clinical placement the first year and 16-20 hour a week externship placements for the next 3 years (on top of in house) while working at least in one lab (i'll be doing 2), and and regularly have students with families with young children. many student work part time too. based on those stats, i would have not flinched at seeing a 6 year grad rate.

of course negative things can cause long grad times. internship match rates (poor ones) can also pose a problem. i chose to not apply to a certian very reputable program because i found out the researcher whose work i really really love has a rep for not signing off on her students dissertations and getting an extra year (or more) of cheap labor in her lab. students in her lab may finally graduate with a fancy diploma from a respected school, but only after 7 years or so.

it'd be good to see if long grad rates are a trend - many programs have well under 10 students in a given year, so one person losing their mentor, another having a kid, a third having some research slowdowns and you've got a bad year. many schools post the grad rates for the past 5 years or so, tho, which would give you a better picture.

good luck!

 

[PsyDr]

first, median data is not skewed by outliers.

the MINIMUM amount of time is 4 years for a program to remain APA approved. i have never heard of anyone graduating so fast.


last time i read up on this, the median across the board was 6 years. this is due to a number of factors including practica (2 yrs min), dissertation (1-2 yrs min), internship (1 yr), masters thesis, etc.

APA requires a disclosure statement, so that data should be available for any approved program.

as for graduating fast: i would make sure that the classes are availble every year, that your PI is known to be a "graduator", etc.

be careful about going down this route. to want to graduate in a reasonable amount of time (i.e., 5 yrs) is fine, but trying to graduate faster can lead one to take too many classes, lower GPA, cause strife, etc.

 

[Psyduck]

Thanks for the replies so far. I understand some people have families or personal issues other than the actual work that might keep them from finishing as soon as they like. But I didn't think this would be typical. Of all my schools the lowest average is 6.3 and median 5.8. I'm not trying to fly through but I've been told all this time that it takes 5 years and really it's looking like the average is 6. Just like to be prepared, and possibly cautious about ones in which 0% get out in 5-6. Example Pittsburgh avg 7.8, median 7.8, none in 5 years or less.

 

[PsyDr]

you want to be VERY careful about selecting your PI. The more trained you become, the more skilled labor you are. However, your pay does not go up. It is a utopian arrangement for some PIs, who eventually have PhD equivalent workers who cost less than joe sixpack in the community. Some take advantage of this.

Others are more of a "graduator" mentality.

 

[Ollie123]

There's lots of factors involved.

First off whoever told you "It takes 5" wasn't too up on reality. SOME schools take 5 (including internship). Many do not. Among the schools I looked at, I'd say it was about 50/50.

There's lots of things that can factor in to people taking longer. Sometimes people focused on academic careers will intentionally take an extra year so they can come out with more pubs/presentations and be a more competitive job candidate. I'm way too early to make any decisions about that, but its somethign I'd consider myself. As mentioned above, some people delay for family obligations. Others delay because they switched labs, they had to go through some extra review cycles on a dissertation grant. There's also the occasional person who is just lazy or incompetent and doesn't get anything done.

There's really a great deal of variance. When I looked, I didn't concern myself with whether it was a 5 or 6 year program since in the scope of things, one year seems fairly trivial. A few programs seem to have really long times, but you also have to remember that occasionally these will be skewed by a few faculty members. In other words, there are 3 professors whose students take forever, with everyone else graduating right on time. So it may depend on the lab as well.

 

[elite1]

If you're not willing to commit to the possibility of spending at least 6 years in graduate school, you probably should not go at all. If you are under a tight timeline, get your MSW so you can be done for sure within 2 years...

I thought I would be done in 4 years + internshp but it simply didn't happen. My professor decided to force me and my fellow students, to stay for 6 years and then apply for intership because he was opening a new clinic that needed staffing and RAs to analyze data for it.

 

[Psyduck]

There's lots of factors involved.

First off whoever told you "It takes 5" wasn't too up on reality.

Try most schools' websites, until you look at the actual disclosure data. I'm sure doing 6 years would be fine, it's not too much of a difference. I don't have my own family or anything that's making me rush. It's more like I said just being prepared. But as a grad student I'm still doing what I want to do right? But for some people who have taken time off after undergrad and don't want to payoff loans for 8 years with a stipend (or rack up more loans), or want to get out of school before starting their family it's good to know.

 

[psybee]

i think when the general website say that it takes 5, they mean that their program is laid out in 5 years. how long it actually takes though -- well you've heard how that can play out, and the disclosure data can give you a better idea of that. hopefully if you can swing it right you'll get into a funded program and either not have to take out loans or only take out subsidized ones, so you don't need to pay interest. it is a sacrifice -- a min of 5 years (more likely 6ish), and then many do a post doc, which usually isn't that well paid -- a lot of years not earning or earning on the low end (and either way not contributing to savings, 401k, etc).

i mean, lots of us are doing it, but it definitely impacts things like when we can afford to buy an apartment, start a family, etc. i was even worried that if we got married it would impact my eligibility for subsidized loans or getting government health care, since "we" don't have enough money to pay an extra 500 a month for one either. such things you have to consider just to become a psychologist!

 

[deleted176373]

If you're not willing to commit to the possibility of spending at least 6 years in graduate school, you probably should not go at all. If you are under a tight timeline, get your MSW so you can be done for sure within 2 years...

I thought I would be done in 4 years + internshp but it simply didn't happen. My professor decided to force me and my fellow students, to stay for 6 years and then apply for intership because he was opening a new clinic that needed staffing and RAs to analyze data for it.

There are programs that keep tight to their schedules. Baylor (Psy.D.), USUHS (Ph.D.), and a few others are known for getting their students through on time. For example the USUHS web page states: "Note: USUHS allows a maximum of seven years to complete all Ph.D. requirements." Most do it in 5 years on the Civilian side and 4 years on the Military side plus the 1 year internship where the student sometimes will also complete their disertation.

Mark

 

[JockNerd]

If you're not willing to commit to the possibility of spending at least 6 years in graduate school, you probably should not go at all. If you are under a tight timeline, get your MSW so you can be done for sure within 2 years...

This doesn't seem justified to me. The OP seemed pretty clearly more concerned about people taking nearly a decade to finish and how to interpret student data than about getting in and out as quickly as possible.

I'd say it varies a lot within programs, too. No one in my (quite new) lab has taken more than 5 years, with internship. Another lab regularly takes much more.

This is a reasonable thing to be asking the grad students of specific profs you're interested in working with.

You'd also want to make sure people taking more than 4 or 5 years before internship continue to be funded.

 

[psychanon]

Do you mean 5 years with or without internship? Because that really makes a big difference.

You really shouldn't choose a program based on +/- a year or so. You can always hustle and get through sooner if that's a priority for you. Most advisors are supportive of this, especially if you plan in advance. And a year may seem like a long time, but it really isn't in the grand scheme of things. In particular, if you want a research career, you should definitely not eliminate programs that typically get people through in 5+1, because that would eliminate too many good programs. Few top research-oriented programs typically get people through in 4+1-- I'm not saying none, but few. This is because good research takes a while and because people who want research careers need lots of pubs.

However, you are right to be wary of programs that typically take 7 or more years before internship. This suggests that there is a culture that focuses too much on being in grad school and not enough on getting through grad school. Note that this characteristic of several top programs. However, at the same time, this is not necessarily something you can glean from averages. There may be outliers with extenuating circumstances, or some labs may be different from others. Really, this is info you should gather at interview, NOT before you apply--- after all, after interview you may end up deciding that it's worth it to go there anyway. It's really only one factor out of many, and shouldn't be the make or break aspect of your decision.

PS- If you get into a program with good funding, you probably won't have any significant loans, so don't worry about that. No program is going to take more than 5 years without being fully funded.

 

[psychanon]

Do you mean 5 years with or without internship? Because that really makes a big difference.

You really shouldn't choose a program based on +/- a year or so. You can always hustle and get through sooner if that's a priority for you. Most advisors are supportive of this, especially if you plan in advance. And a year may seem like a long time, but it really isn't in the grand scheme of things. In particular, if you want a research career, you should definitely not eliminate programs that typically get people through in 5+1, because that would eliminate too many good programs. Few top research-oriented programs typically get people through in 4+1-- I'm not saying none, but few. This is because good research takes a while and because people who want research careers need lots of pubs.

However, you are right to be wary of programs that typically take 7 or more years before internship. This suggests that there is a culture that focuses too much on being in grad school and not enough on getting through grad school. Note that this characteristic of several top programs. However, at the same time, this is not necessarily something you can glean from averages. There may be outliers with extenuating circumstances, or some labs may be different from others. Really, this is info you should gather at interview, NOT before you apply--- after all, after interview you may end up deciding that it's worth it to go there anyway. It's really only one factor out of many, and shouldn't be the make or break aspect of your decision.

 

[JockNerd]

I'm going to disagree with a few things...

However, at the same time, this is not necessarily something you can glean from averages. There may be outliers with extenuating circumstances, or some labs may be different from others.

As was mentioned by PSYDR, medians are usually provided in disclosure data. Medians are not skewed by outliers.

Really, this is info you should gather at interview, NOT before you apply--- after all, after interview you may end up deciding that it's worth it to go there anyway.

Why? I can't see a good reason for this. The information is available before interviews by asking grad students who are working with the prof. If you have a lot of potential schools, knowing that one lab takes eternity to finish is useful data and can help eliminate one school from your list. If you know before the interview and still apply, you can talk with the prof and lab about your goals of being done in 6 years.

PS- If you get into a program with good funding, you probably won't have any significant loans, so don't worry about that. No program is going to take more than 5 years without being fully funded.

I wouldn't count on this.

For example, I'm fully funded for 4 years. Getting a tuition waiver for longer would require petitioning. Getting a stipend would require some fandangling. They're not going to extend my fellowship because I ask, so I'd probably need to become a TA, if they let me. And plenty of programs take 6ish years and don't fund at all, waiver or stipend.

 

[paramour]

If I'm repeating someone, please forgive me as I haven't quite made it through everyone's responses yet.

You really should not think that a PhD should only take 5 years. You need to look at the individual programs and their requirements. Some may require more coursework (or other things) more than others. For example, my program is fairly course heavy. It is structured to be completed in 6 years, not the alleged 5. IF you enter with a master's degree, then you may be able to get out in 5. Otherwise, 6 is the minimum, with the average being 7-8 years for those individuals.

You may be omitting some excellent programs based upon your misconception that all programs are equivalent and should take an equal amount of time to get out (omitting all those pesky things that tend to delay students).

 

[psybee]

If I'm repeating someone, please forgive me as I haven't quite made it through everyone's responses yet.

You really should not think that a PhD should only take 5 years. You need to look at the individual programs and their requirements. Some may require more coursework (or other things) more than others. For example, my program is fairly course heavy. It is structured to be completed in 6 years, not the alleged 5. IF you enter with a master's degree, then you may be able to get out in 5. Otherwise, 6 is the minimum, with the average being 7-8 years for those individuals.

You may be omitting some excellent programs based upon your misconception that all programs are equivalent and should take an equal amount of time to get out (omitting all those pesky things that tend to delay students).

totally. my program is 140 credits, and is equal emphasis (lots of clinical work) so while it may on the website be set up for 5 years, unless your research soars right out of the gate, it'd be a good six. with us, our coursework declines after we finish the masters part, and with the masters one is eligible for all sorts of other work, from clinical to teaching, so if i have an extra year or so it may be unfunded at that point, defending on how flush we are doing that year, but i will also not be in class, and will "only" have to get my dissertation done, so at that point working will be way more doable. i also look at this thinking that i'll be finishing my dissertaion before internship, which i know lots of folks don't, hoping to get done quicker, but right now it's not so appealing.

 

[psychanon]

As was mentioned by PSYDR, medians are usually provided in disclosure data. Medians are not skewed by outliers.

Perhaps. However, each class is typically such a small N, so it's difficult to draw conclusions from them. In a class of 4, if one person has a baby and goes part time for two years, another has health problems,another just wants to take extra years to use a grant or get publications, and another's just a slacker, that's gonna screw up the median as well.

Why? I can't see a good reason for this. The information is available before interviews by asking grad students who are working with the prof. If you have a lot of potential schools, knowing that one lab takes eternity to finish is useful data and can help eliminate one school from your list. If you know before the interview and still apply, you can talk with the prof and lab about your goals of being done in 6 years.

I'm assuming he/she wants a research-oriented school and some element of research in his/her career. Maybe that's not correct, but it makes this discussion more relevant because it's the research schools that can take a long time. If you want to do research, it's really difficult to have a wide range of schools because so few schools are going to be a good match for you. Since match is the most important element, to eliminate schools on other factors may leave you limited. Moreover, what a lab typically does may not be the same thing as what you can do if you're motivated enough. Maybe most grad students get through 7 years because they choose to spend a long time getting lots of pubs and grants. That's a choice that you don't have to make. Or, maybe you will want to make, because you may find that your priorities shift while in grad school. The point is that even though applying to a school costs $50 or so, if it's a good match, you might want to have it as an option. You may well not get an interview there, and if so the decision is made for you. And if you do, you can always compare it to your other options. Maybe you won't get in anywhere else and you'll decide it's better than nothing.

I wouldn't count on this.

For example, I'm fully funded for 4 years. Getting a tuition waiver for longer would require petitioning. Getting a stipend would require some fandangling. They're not going to extend my fellowship because I ask, so I'd probably need to become a TA, if they let me. And plenty of programs take 6ish years and don't fund at all, waiver or stipend.

Do you think it's possible that the reason that people get tend to get through in 4 years at your school is because you lose your funding afterwards? I've noticed that people who go to schools that cost 30k a year typically hustle a bit. People respond to incentives and disincentives. And also, just because funding isn't guaranteed for 5 years, the OP shouldn't assume that it's impossible to get, because that's not always true, at least it never is at my school.

 

[Ollie123]

Try most schools' websites, until you look at the actual disclosure data. I'm sure doing 6 years would be fine, it's not too much of a difference. I don't have my own family or anything that's making me rush. It's more like I said just being prepared. But as a grad student I'm still doing what I want to do right? But for some people who have taken time off after undergrad and don't want to payoff loans for 8 years with a stipend (or rack up more loans), or want to get out of school before starting their family it's good to know.

I got the impression you had heard from someone in the field it takes 5 years to complete - maybe that wasn't the case.

I looked at quite a few schools and saw a pretty even split...maybe the websites aren't being clear whether they mean 5 years + internship or 5 years with internship? I don't think the programs are saying it to be underhanded about it - the reality is that the students often have as much or more control over how quickly they get out than the school does. I know a few people who planned on soaring through but decided to take an extra year once they learned the rate they'd have to be working to get out on time.

Regardless, the reality is that 5 years total is certainly doable in many programs, but is rarely a guarantee even at the programs that do push people through quickly. It can be hard to tell at times, since labs can be very autonomous and your experiences may be very different from others in your program based on your advisor. This is why interviews are absolutely essential - they let you get a better feel for what the actual grad school experience is going to be like, regardless of what the website says.

 

[JockNerd]

Perhaps. However, each class is typically such a small N, so it's difficult to draw conclusions from them. In a class of 4, if one person has a baby and goes part time for two years, another has health problems,another just wants to take extra years to use a grant or get publications, and another's just a slacker, that's gonna screw up the median as well.

You can draw data from more than just the past year. 5 years @ 5 students/year = 25 data points. Not bad. Reasonable to use that information.

I'm assuming he/she wants a research-oriented school and some element of research in his/her career. Maybe that's not correct, but it makes this discussion more relevant because it's the research schools that can take a long time. If you want to do research, it's really difficult to have a wide range of schools because so few schools are going to be a good match for you. Since match is the most important element, to eliminate schools on other factors may leave you limited. Moreover, what a lab typically does may not be the same thing as what you can do if you're motivated enough. Maybe most grad students get through 7 years because they choose to spend a long time getting lots of pubs and grants. That's a choice that you don't have to make. Or, maybe you will want to make, because you may find that your priorities shift while in grad school. The point is that even though applying to a school costs $50 or so, if it's a good match, you might want to have it as an option. You may well not get an interview there, and if so the decision is made for you. And if you do, you can always compare it to your other options. Maybe you won't get in anywhere else and you'll decide it's better than nothing.

I'm not sure you fully grokked my last post. Contacting current grad students would let you know more about the things you mentioned, like what the status is on things like most students deciding to take more time to work on grant research, or if people are finishing in 4+1 if they want to, or if (as another poster mentioned) the prof just doesn't sign off on dissertations just to keep cheap labor. If there are better alternatives elsewhere, then that's useful info.

I'm not aware of data saying research-focused schools take longer. I know PhDs tend to take 1.5 years longer than PsyDs, but I'm not aware of research on within-PhD time to completion. If I'm missing it, please direct me to it. Intuitively, I'd think research-focused programs might have an advantage over dissertation stalling, since a student might have another project on the go that could be swapped for a stalling one.

Do you think it's possible that the reason that people get tend to get through in 4 years at your school is because you lose your funding afterwards? I've noticed that people who go to schools that cost 30k a year typically hustle a bit. People respond to incentives and disincentives. And also, just because funding isn't guaranteed for 5 years, the OP shouldn't assume that it's impossible to get, because that's not always true, at least it never is at my school.

We don't lose funding, we're just only guaranteed it for 4 years. My point was that the OP shouldn't make the assumption that funding will continue if it takes 7 or 8 years to finish.