Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I want to share some research findings that are relevant to anyone choosing an MFT program.
A 2025 nationwide survey of 234 students currently in practicum or internship at accredited Master's MFT programs found that only about 29% to 35% of students rated their program's help as "substantial" across the six AAMFT core competency domains (Georgiadou, Hicks, Cuthbertson, & Cooper, 2025, published in the International Journal of Systemic Therapy, DOI: 10.1080/2692398X.2025.2492853).
The biggest gaps were in treatment planning and case management, therapeutic intervention, and legal issues and ethics. These are not elective topics. These are the skills MFTs use every single day.
A 2013 qualitative study by Steele found very similar results over a decade earlier: MFT graduates of an accredited program reported not mastering therapeutic interventions, legal/ethical standards, or research and program evaluation (Steele, 2013, doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University, available through ERIC: ED556030).
Two studies, different methods, different time periods, same pattern.
Accreditation tells you that a program has met a set of structural requirements. It is a floor rather than a prediction of how much clinical skill a given graduate will develop. What the research points to alongside it is whether a program includes structured experiential skills practice, high-quality video-based supervision, and routine outcome monitoring.
Anyone evaluating MFT programs should ask: How much class time is dedicated to actual skills practice versus lecture? Is supervision video-based? Does the program use routine outcome monitoring?
Thorough review here: Clinical Preparation in MFT Training: What 2 Studies Found | Sentio University
A 2025 nationwide survey of 234 students currently in practicum or internship at accredited Master's MFT programs found that only about 29% to 35% of students rated their program's help as "substantial" across the six AAMFT core competency domains (Georgiadou, Hicks, Cuthbertson, & Cooper, 2025, published in the International Journal of Systemic Therapy, DOI: 10.1080/2692398X.2025.2492853).
The biggest gaps were in treatment planning and case management, therapeutic intervention, and legal issues and ethics. These are not elective topics. These are the skills MFTs use every single day.
A 2013 qualitative study by Steele found very similar results over a decade earlier: MFT graduates of an accredited program reported not mastering therapeutic interventions, legal/ethical standards, or research and program evaluation (Steele, 2013, doctoral dissertation, Northcentral University, available through ERIC: ED556030).
Two studies, different methods, different time periods, same pattern.
Accreditation tells you that a program has met a set of structural requirements. It is a floor rather than a prediction of how much clinical skill a given graduate will develop. What the research points to alongside it is whether a program includes structured experiential skills practice, high-quality video-based supervision, and routine outcome monitoring.
Anyone evaluating MFT programs should ask: How much class time is dedicated to actual skills practice versus lecture? Is supervision video-based? Does the program use routine outcome monitoring?
Thorough review here: Clinical Preparation in MFT Training: What 2 Studies Found | Sentio University
Last edited:
