Will Only Non-Regionally Accredited MFT Program Be a Bad Idea?

[neutralpalatte]

^^^ I know lots of practicing therapists (and psychologists) from my years doing research and year in an MFT program before I moved. Not to mention from my psych undergrad. I know what is reality and what is not. And these are people who live in my state, which provides me a better guide to reality in this field than anyone else can give me. I also don't need ~*ethics*~ advice from someone who is simply reading my posts off an internet forum and blatantly assuming they know everything about me & my personality.


MODS: Can this thread be moved to the Mental Health & Social Welfare forum where it may be of better use? Even though it is not MSW, many of the topics and posters there are people who have actually attended or will be attending MFT programs, and not psychologists with advice that is less than helpful for MFT. Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[erg923]

There is line between healthy self confidence and building your home in Lake Wobegone, right? I think I have mentioned this before...

California has therapists doing all kinds of new age, nonevidence based nonsense and they don't have a problem attracting worried well clientele. That's for sure. I think neutral pallete will develope her practice and it will sustain her just fine, although there is little evidence to support the notion that it will be some kind of raging success. "Oh, you're an MFT with a "niche" and you do some stuff that sounds, deep and just the right amount of "new agey" without sounding like a complete fruitcake?" Well, welcome to the party, pal. Masters level mental health service in California is a cacaphony of nonsense. You are one of many. Businesses fail because they OVERESTIMATE the quality/value of the product . Be open to the feedback. It's free!

 

[erg923]

I agree with notion that the response you are see seeing is likely due to our perception that you seem to care much more about yourself and your "business" than you do about becoming a well trained mental health practitioner. This is, frankly, not appealing to those of us who sit on admission committees. Now, maybe this perecpetion is off, but you certainly havent done much or written much to counteract it thus far.

 

[erg923]

I might also politely add that "not caring what other think of me"is a counterproductive attitude to have when attempting to build and run a successful service oriented business. So.....other people's opinion better start becoming important to you, or else you you won't be able to keep the lights on, ya did?

 

[chartero]

First of all, it doesn't matter if its accredited or not. It 100% for a fact leads to LMFT licensing in the state of California, upon completion + 3,000 supervised hours. I talked to people who did that exact program who did in fact become licensed.

Second, cntrl + f "world university"
http://www.cpec.ca.gov/Links/LinksSubPage.ASP?LinkType=C

Third, cntrl + f "world university"
http://www.bbs.ca.gov/app-reg/mft_appr_schools.shtml

"The U.S. Department of Education does not accredit educational institutions and/or programs. However, the Secretary of Education is required by law to publish a list of nationally recognized accrediting agencies that the Secretary determines to be reliable authorities as to the quality of education or training provided by the institutions of higher education and the higher education programs they accredit. The U.S. Secretary of Education also recognizes State agencies for the approval of public postsecondary vocational education and nurse education. "

World University in Ojai is not nationally accredited, it's unaccredited. Being clear and correct about this is important for the sake of consumer protection for any potential student who could read this thread.

The crux of your argument that it is nationally accredited is here: "The U.S. Secretary of Education also recognizes State agencies for the approval of public postsecondary vocational education and nurse education."

Please read this carefully, and you'll see that it has nothing to do with World University in Ojai. Is World University an institution of "public postsecondary vocational education?" No. It's a private degree-granting program. Is the clause specific to nurse education relevant here? No.

Therefore the sentence and therefore the paragraph don't apply to World University at all.

There's more: You've quoted the paragraph critically out of context. The sentence does not mean that approval from every state agency for public postsecondary voc ed or nursing ed = national accreditation. There are short lists of state agencies to which it does apply, and neither the California Postsecondary Education Commission nor the California Board of Behavioral Sciences are on the lists. You can see this directly on the DOED website here: National Recognition of State Approval Agencies by the U.S. Secretary of Education, State Agencies Recognized for the Approval of Public Postsecondary Vocational Education, State Agencies Recognized for the Approval of Nursing Education.

 

[erg923]

Am I correct in understanding that there is now a "University of the World" lol?

And what athletic conference do you think they would play in? Seeing the Creighton plays in the "Big East" and USF was never in the SEC makes this a dumb questions though...

 

[psychtalk1274]

Let's be real, the big east is a joke! Other mid major conferences had better tv viewership than the so called big east.

The University of the World, yeah cause that sounds legit.

 

[PsychResearch123]

There is line between healthy self confidence and building your home in Lake Wobegone, right? I think I have mentioned this before...

California has therapists doing all kinds of new age, nonevidence based nonsense and they don't have a problem attracting worried well clientele. That's for sure. I think neutral pallete will develope her practice and it will sustain her just fine, although there is little evidence to support the notion that it will be some kind of raging success. "Oh, you're an MFT with a "niche" and you do some stuff that sounds, deep and just the right amount of "new agey" without sounding like a complete fruitcake?" Well, welcome to the party, pal. Masters level mental health service in California is a cacaphony of nonsense. You are one of many. Businesses fail because they OVERESTIMATE the quality/value of the product . Be open to the feedback. It's free!

Honestly, it's starting to be more like that in more and more places across the US. My parents live in a small town that's not in Cali, and I recently helped my dad by looking for a mental health practitioner. The masters level practitioners doing EMDR, yoga, mindfulness, and other such therapies of the sort are a dime a dozen. They are all pretty (and they aren't able to charge very much). In this area, there are two people who purely practice evidence based therapy. One is an older doctor, and the low end of her sliding scale is double the high end of what the others are charging. Even the young LMHC who only does CBT and DBT charges more for her services than her niche peers.

Thankfully, it turns out that the two therapists doing evidence based therapies were the two therapists that my dad's general practitioner told him about. I'm sure that a few people can have a practice built solely on marketing and Jung, but many nice people just dealing with life's difficulties will go to a medical doctor first. At least, that's what it's like there, maybe these rich LA individuals can afford to pay cash to see a therapist they saw on a billboard.

 

[MCParent]

At least, that's what it's like there, maybe these rich LA individuals can afford to pay cash to see a therapist they saw on a billboard.

I think they're a lot more likely to try to find a crooked psychiatrist who can dose them to the limit.

OP's business plan sounds terrible.

 

[smalltownpsych]

OP's business plan sounds terrible.

That is probably a good thing.

 

[erg923]

OP's business plan sounds terrible.

 

[neutralpalatte]

World University in Ojai is not nationally accredited, it's unaccredited. Being clear and correct about this is important for the sake of consumer protection for any potential student who could read this thread.

The crux of your argument that it is nationally accredited is here: "The U.S. Secretary of Education also recognizes State agencies for the approval of public postsecondary vocational education and nurse education."

Please read this carefully, and you'll see that it has nothing to do with World University in Ojai. Is World University an institution of "public postsecondary vocational education?" No. It's a private degree-granting program. Is the clause specific to nurse education relevant here? No.

Therefore the sentence and therefore the paragraph don't apply to World University at all.

There's more: You've quoted the paragraph critically out of context. The sentence does not mean that approval from every state agency for public postsecondary voc ed or nursing ed = national accreditation. There are short lists of state agencies to which it does apply, and neither the California Postsecondary Education Commission nor the California Board of Behavioral Sciences are on the lists. You can see this directly on the DOED website here: National Recognition of State Approval Agencies by the U.S. Secretary of Education, State Agencies Recognized for the Approval of Public Postsecondary Vocational Education, State Agencies Recognized for the Approval of Nursing Education.

It doesn't matter, and no I did not check if its accredited, and already stated its not regionally. They have never tried to seek regional accreditation. Accreditation doesn't matter as this program STILL directly leads to licensing as a LMFT in the state of California. That's all that matters, end of story. Done replying to you, next!

 

[neutralpalatte]

I think they're a lot more likely to try to find a crooked psychiatrist who can dose them to the limit.

OP's business plan sounds terrible.

My business plan is no worse than any other human being entering a MFT program in the state of California, except I have an income coming in that won't be cut off if I stop working. And I have a track record of being successful with my other businesses, and lots of experience working in the psych (research and mental health in general) field.

I never stated I want to make a HUGE profit off this. I run 3 other businesses, 2 of which will continue to bring in an income while I do this. Hate all you want, I do not care what other naysayers think. I don't know why you care so much and deemed me ~*destined to fail*~ when I already know that won't happen. If telling other people over the internet that they won't make it, makes you feel better, then go ahead I guess. I know for a fact that personal happiness and success in general doesn't stem from negativity and putting other people down.

I'm not going to go over this again, the coursework I like has a Jungian and transpersonal base. I NEVER said that is my niche, its not. Its the coursework I like. There are no other schools that teach that, other than the ones I've mentioned. I don't care if you don't like my program(s). I could care less. I like it, and I don't need random negative people over the internet telling me what I should or shouldn't study. Additionally, the 3,000 hours of supervised training is what properly trains the MFT, and that is not correlated with where you go to school. Not in any way whatsoever. And if it was such a horrible program, it wouldn't lead to licensing as an MFT, but it does.

Truth of the matter is that, unless you've lived in California AND have gone through a MFT program here, your opinion has absolutely no weight at all with anything I've talked about or asked. You don't know the market here, you don't know the life here (heavily revolves around networking), you don't know what people want here. That's all I need to say until this thread gets moved, thanks

 

[erg923]

Probably because we care about the shoddy treatment your potential clients will receive as a result of your attitude and subpar training.

Word...

 

[erg923]

We interviewed someone for a position here last year, and in response to some terribly convoluted question about treating depression in an individualwho was non compliant with insulin and had who had an A1c of 11, the person said, and I'm not ****ting you, "ya know, all we need is love, because...bla, bla, bla." At which point I zoned out as my eye balls exploded.

Point being that warm and fuzzy happiness and positive encouragement is great and it works...until it doesn't. Truly great "niches" require truly great training. Don't overvalue your product before it's tested, honey.

And Seriously?! No fist bumps for the South Park reference?!

 

[erg923]

And is doing a therapy that "sounds cool" more important than doing one that's effective? Just curious cause I just pubmed and EBSCOed outcome studies on Jungian therapy and, well...

I think you need to ask yourself who you are actually serving here? Patients? Or yourself? Pardon me if your egregious use of me centered language throughout this thread has me suspicious. Maybe that's just a California thing, but I doubt it.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Mod Note: As this thread deals with the MFT specifically, and not about eventual enrollment in a doctoral program, it has been relocated to the Mental Health and Social Welfare forum.

 

[chartero]

It doesn't matter, and no I did not check if its accredited, and already stated its not regionally. They have never tried to seek regional accreditation. Accreditation doesn't matter as this program STILL directly leads to licensing as a LMFT in the state of California. That's all that matters, end of story. Done replying to you, next!

Because the difference matters a lot to any future student who needs or expects an accredited degree, for example, to anyone interested in

• any position or promotion that requires an accredited degree, e.g. becoming adjunct faculty at an accredited school, or prefers an accredited degree,
• seeking any license other than the California MFT license,
• never, ever having to be on the defensive about an unaccredited degree,

let me summarize: World University in Ojai is unaccredited, and it's not nationally accredited.

I recognize that you've stopped saying that it's nationally accredited – thank you.

I do wish you thought enough about other people reading us here to retract the claim more directly. Because the difference between an accredited degree and an unaccredited degree matters a great deal to other people for many good reasons.

Best wishes in your education and career.

 

[PsychBiker]

When a room full of therapists tell you something and you ignore it...

Regardless, i'm curious now. What personal traits do you have that make you think you would be a good therapist?

 

[neutralpalatte]

Probably because we care about the shoddy treatment your potential clients will receive as a result of your attitude and subpar training.

Because the difference matters a lot to any future student who needs or expects an accredited degree, for example, to anyone interested in

• any position or promotion that requires an accredited degree, e.g. becoming adjunct faculty at an accredited school, or prefers an accredited degree,
• seeking any license other than the California MFT license,
• never, ever having to be on the defensive about an unaccredited degree,

let me summarize: World University in Ojai is unaccredited, and it's not nationally accredited.

I recognize that you've stopped saying that it's nationally accredited – thank you.

I do wish you thought enough about other people reading us here to retract the claim more directly. Because the difference between an accredited degree and an unaccredited degree matters a great deal to other people for many good reasons.

Best wishes in your education and career.

Accreditation isn't the issue here. If you're ~*upset*~ that the program leads to licensing as a MFT (and it 100% does), that's not my issue, not my problem. Take it up with the board of behavioral sciences, not me. You guys are bashing the kind of coursework I'm taking. The SAME coursework is found at ITP/Sofia and Pacifica! Calling them degree mills and whatever else. No, the schools I listed are the only ones that focus on the type of coursework that interests me. I even attended ITP/Sofia for MFT. And those are REGIONALLY accredited. And I've said a million times I plan to be self-employed forever and that I'm not leaving California. But hey, continue to care about what someone else does with their life some more. I don't need to defend myself over the internet.


This is the only thing I'm going to be replying to from now on, now that my thread has been moved as I asked:

If you have attended an MFT program in the state of California, or did a distance MFT program and went on to practice as a LMFT in California, please post your experiences! Thanks

 

[psych84]

I don't know why people bother to answer you.

If you are happy with this direction, great for you.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Many of the people on this board have also hired and trained and worked with MA level practitioners. I being one of them. You might consider some of our advice or criticisms as being valid. The level of defensiveness that you have been displaying seems inconsistent with what one would expect from a potential therapist. how are you going to learn anything when you seem to know it all already? I disagree with other posters frequently, but that does not mean their points are not valid, we just have different perspectives. Of course, I am going to give more weight to my peers' perspectives because of their experience. In fact, a neuropsych post-doc who isn't licensed yet usually has more knowledge of many aspects of neuro than I do so it would be wise of me to listen to them about their area of expertise. Until you are able to benefit from others experience and knowledge, you will not make a good clinician.

 

[chartero]

Accreditation isn't the issue here.

Is it wrong of discussants to consider accreditation an issue in the thread you titled

"Will Only Non-Regionally Accredited MFT Program Be a Bad Idea?"

with the poll question you titled "In my case (please skim bkgrnd info), would a non-regionally accredited MFT program be a bad idea?"

 

[erg923]

When a room full of therapists tell you something and you ignore it...

Regardless, i'm curious now. What personal traits do you have that make you think you would be a good therapist?

I honestly don't think thats necessary. I do think it necessary, as an aspiring mental health professional, to be able to defend ones use of a particular therapeutic modality. While its true that she doesn't have to "defend" her choice of intervention to US, she is obligated to do so to patients. Thus, I am naturally curious, as "because that's what I like" lacks substance and critical thought about the issue...not to mention evidence.

 

[erg923]

Calling them degree mills and whatever else. No, the schools I listed are the only ones that focus on the type of coursework that interests me. I even attended ITP/Sofia for MFT. And those are REGIONALLY accredited.

As general rule, I distrust "universities" that do not have NCAA conference affiliations. I'm kidding of course, sort of...

 

[wesleysmith]

And Seriously?! No fist bumps for the South Park reference?!

hahaha, I used that exact reference yesterday while describing a CoC council I have to be a part of for my current job.

 

[CaliMac]

I think you need to ask yourself who you are actually serving here? Patients? Or yourself? Pardon me if your egregious use of me centered language throughout this thread has me suspicious. Maybe that's just a California thing, but I doubt it.

It's not. There are a huge amount of vain, entitled people here but it's not a residency requirement. There are also gorgeous (or not), humble people who care very much about bettering the lives of others. My volunteer group is full of them.

SDN is entertainment disguised as education and I love it!

 

[erg923]

I agree. But no doubt there are pockets of locations, both in California and a few other states, that are markedly disconnected from how most of America is rasied and what they value. The "me, me, me" focus is certainly one of those.

 

[Goobernut]

The OP is correct that in her situation she "technically" does not need to worry about accreditation for her university. Though I believe T4C did brought up a good point about supervision. Neutral, you said that everyone has to do it, so it doesn't matter, but it kinda does matter to most people. I understand that you have a disposable income to spend as you see fit, but most of those seeking licensure don't have that kind of income. When others have brought up difficulties you might encounter, your answer has been, "I have the money, so I don't need to worry about that situation." So you're right, you don't need to do half the work that others seeking licensure might have to do, because you can just pay your way through the situation.

I know this is addressing an issue that neutralpalette didn't directly ask, but I felt the need to add in more information about why accreditation is important for people looking at getting a terminal master's. For those that do not have the $$$ to do it as neutralpalette is doing, accreditation does matter. In quite a few states it is required for your program to have a national accreditation to gain licensure in that state. Most people in the industry believe that all states are slowly moving to this model. If you think you might ever move between states, you really need to go to an accredited school.

Here are several of the accrediting bodies: COMAFTE (http://www.aamft.org/iMIS15/AAMFT/Content/COAMFTE/COAMFTE.aspx) is the accrediting body for Marriage and Family therapy . For Counseling (LPC or LMHC depending on the state), it's CACREP (http://www.cacrep.org/). For social workers it's CSWE (http://www.cswe.org/Accreditation.aspx). Social work is a little bit different in that no matter what state you live in, your school has to be accredited for licensure. You can't get licensed in any state with an unaccredited social work degree.

On top of not being able to get licensed in some states, if you do not attend an accredited school, you will find it difficult to get on some insurance panels. Tricare is revising it's requirements so that you have to have attended a CACREP school in order to bill for LPC services, and that is in addition to having a state license. LPCs and LMFT's still can't bill Medicare, no matter what school they went to (though they have been working on it since 2009? I think?). Again, neutralpalette sounds like she wants to open up a private practice for starlets, so this isn't going to be an issue for HER, but it will be an issue for 95% master's level practitioners.

For example, in my state, the LPC license is not highly regulated. There is no requirement for accreditation, so the local state university's human resources program takes in people who want to get a counseling degree. They have this lovely little explanation on how you can get your license etc. on the department website. Even though students think they are making a good choice, they get out into the community and find that very few people will hire them. They just don't have the training to work for an agency (that would potentially get them supervision). They can pay for supervision (always someone around to charge $$ an hour for supervision) but can't work anywhere to get the needed client hours, because again no one will hire them, or even let them volunteer -- because they don't want their clients harmed. In the end, they do work somewhere, but not as a therapist. Or they go back and get a different master's degree. This is just an example, and I'm not saying this will happen to everyone in the OP's situation. I just believe that program accreditation is becoming more and more important at the master's level.

There are soooooo many pitfalls to going to a non-accredited school. However, I guess if the OP has money to throw at the situation, she can avoid all those pitfalls. Most people pursuing licensure aren't in the OP's situation, thus all the advice the OP is getting. I feel that trying to get by with the minimum standards shouldn't be someone's end goal though... I think it does matter to clients/patients.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Is it wrong of discussants to consider accreditation an issue in the thread you titled

"Will Only Non-Regionally Accredited MFT Program Be a Bad Idea?"

with the poll question you titled "In my case (please skim bkgrnd info), would a non-regionally accredited MFT program be a bad idea?"

This kind of reminds me of people who ask, "Do you think I have a problem with drinking?" They usually don't want the truth.

 

[CaliMac]

There are soooooo many pitfalls to going to a non-accredited school. However, I guess if the OP has money to throw at the situation, she can avoid all those pitfalls. Most people pursuing licensure aren't in the OP's situation, thus all the advice the OP is getting. I feel that trying to get by with the minimum standards shouldn't be someone's end goal though... I think it does matter to clients/patients.

That's the source of my confusion here, and maybe this perspective is what OP asked for originally: the choice of schools was based on modality but, as the modalities are not empirically-supported (grants) and the schools are not accredited, they are pricey, though convenient due to her schedule and income. Future payments are also limited to a small slice of potential clients (ie cash only) due to lack of eligibility for various positions and reimbursement methods.

What about an accredited program that leads to dual (LMFT and LPCC) licensure, is affordable to most people, is convenient in terms of location and hours, and is recognized by everyone in the target demographic and beyond? Then, post-grad, receive additional training in her favorite modalities as ECE units? She'd have security for if/when the current appearance-based businesses begin to decline and appeal to a wider market due to the breadth of knowledge. Given the low price tag of the degree and the post-grad trainings, she'd probably also spend less overall.

AND, most importantly though not specifically asked about, clients would receive the benefit of a well-trained MH worker.

State unis fit the above description.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

There are soooooo many pitfalls to going to a non-accredited school.

This should be the takeaway from this thread.

Hopefully if other prospective students come across this thread in the future they will recognize this issue and make an informed choice about training.

 

[erg923]

Let's be real, the big east is a joke! Other mid major conferences had better tv viewership than the so called big east.

The University of the World, yeah cause that sounds legit.

Jim Beheim will through a chairs at you better than any of those mamby pambys from the PAC-12 or Mountain west.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The PAC12 and MW are barely conferences….I'm pretty sure if Notre Dame joined either they'd be called Notre "Dame +12" or "Notre Dame + Schools w. Rocks". FTR…I very much dislike ND, but they still carry some pull out there.

 

[Goobernut]

CaliMac, I honestly think the OP wanted to know if there would be future repercussions in attending a school without accreditation. I think she has long since decided there are no problems with her current plan. I think it's been made pretty obvious that it might impede her ability to go on to a PhD program, a PsyD program, get on insurance panels, or be licensed in other states as a master's level clinician. She has also made it clear that none of those things matter to her business plan.

Your post was spot on with why people should throughly look at going to a local state school. There are so many certificate options etc.. It's the foundation that is the hardest to acquire.

 

[neutralpalatte]

Many of the people on this board have also hired and trained and worked with MA level practitioners. I being one of them. You might consider some of our advice or criticisms as being valid. The level of defensiveness that you have been displaying seems inconsistent with what one would expect from a potential therapist. how are you going to learn anything when you seem to know it all already?

Because I actually talked to working professionals in my area AFTER I made this thread, and what they are saying is the opposite of anonymous posters on SDN. I will trust someone I know in person, and who works in my state, over some random person on the internet lol.

I agree. But no doubt there are pockets of locations, both in California and a few other states, that are markedly disconnected from how most of America is rasied and what they value. The "me, me, me" focus is certainly one of those.

As a mental health "professional", you sure do seem to be judgmental. I thought that mental health providers were trained to be non-judgmental and not jump to conclusions about other people? Also, pretty sure you've never lived in California (and probably never visited lol) because its most definitely NOT like that at all. Especially in the Bay Area. But if you want to regurgitate harmful & untrue stereotypes, that's your own problem.

There are soooooo many pitfalls to going to a non-accredited school. However, I guess if the OP has money to throw at the situation, she can avoid all those pitfalls. Most people pursuing licensure aren't in the OP's situation, thus all the advice the OP is getting. I feel that trying to get by with the minimum standards shouldn't be someone's end goal though... I think it does matter to clients/patients.

I think there are more pitfalls in just getting an MFT degree in general (over MSW). I think that is a bigger issue than accreditation. Most state schools in my state have actually discontinued their MFT programs because it is a degree that is being phased out, at least in this state. However, MFT is still the coursework I prefer, and very much so over MSW.

That's the source of my confusion here, and maybe this perspective is what OP asked for originally: the choice of schools was based on modality but, as the modalities are not empirically-supported (grants) and the schools are not accredited, they are pricey, though convenient due to her schedule and income.

Well I mean, the World U 2-year program is only ~11k for tuition. Pacifica's is nearly 50k for tuition. I'd hardly call 11k pricey.

 

[erg923]

Who told you that? That's obviously ridiculous.

Human beings judge things. And It's often part of the job of a psychologist (although not usually part of psychotherapy).

 

[Goobernut]

I think there are more pitfalls in just getting an MFT degree in general (over MSW). I think that is a bigger issue than accreditation. Most state schools in my state have actually discontinued their MFT programs because it is a degree that is being phased out, at least in this state. However, MFT is still the coursework I prefer, and very much so over MSW.

I didn't suggest that you get an MSW . Getting an MSW is a round about way to therapy at a significant number of schools. I believe it should only be undertaken if you agree with the philosophy behind it or really want to work with the Medicare population. It sorta makes it easier to get into medical/health counseling (though not necessary), as well as the military populations (there is still a reluctance to recognize other master's level licenses, though it's slowly changing).

Do you know which programs/universities got rid of their MFT programs? According to many posts on this board MFT is the reigning king of master's level licenses in CA, so I'm curious/confused as to why MFT is falling out of favor. What license is falling into favor?

 

[463951]

We interviewed someone for a position here last year, and in response to some terribly convoluted question about treating depression in an individualwho was non compliant with insulin and had who had an A1c of 11, the person said, and I'm not ****ting you, "ya know, all we need is love, because...bla, bla, bla." At which point I zoned out as my eye balls exploded.

Point being that warm and fuzzy happiness and positive encouragement is great and it works...until it doesn't. Truly great "niches" require truly great training. Don't overvalue your product before it's tested, honey.

And Seriously?! No fist bumps for the South Park reference?!

I did not realize this thread had picked back up...I laughed out loud at about four of your posts, you're on a roll today...haha.

 

[Nahsil]

Can I brag about paying -$1500/semester for my Masters degree?

 

[chartero]

From California Board of Behavioral Sciences LMFT Standard Written Examination Statistics for the most recent period I see published, 1/1/13 to 6/30/13. Source: http://www.bbs.ca.gov/pdf/exam_stats/mftwbs.pdf , accessed today.

From the unaccredited World University in Ojai:

World University of America [Ojai]
2 candidates failed
0 candidates passed
0% pass rate

Compare other programs in California also friendly to humanistic, transpersonal, phenomenological, depth, positive, etc. emphases, but that are regionally accredited:

California Institute of Integral Studies
1 failed
29 passed
96.67% pass rate

Pacifica Graduate Institute
1 failed
15 passed
93.75% pass rate

Saybrook University
1 failed
5 passed
83.33% pass rate

Institute of Transpersonal Psychology [Sofia University]
3 failed
5 passed
62.50% pass rate

John F. Kennedy University
29 failed
47 passed
61.84% pass rate

 

[erg923]

From California Board of Behavioral Sciences LMFT Standard Written Examination Statistics for the most recent period I see published, 1/1/13 to 6/30/13. Source: http://www.bbs.ca.gov/pdf/exam_stats/mftwbs.pdf , accessed today.

From the unaccredited World University in Ojai:

World University of America [Ojai]
2 candidates failed
0 candidates passed
0% pass rate

Compare other programs in California also friendly to humanistic, transpersonal, phenomenological, depth, positive, etc. emphases, but that are regionally accredited:

California Institute of Integral Studies
1 failed
29 passed
96.67% pass rate

Pacifica Graduate Institute
1 failed
15 passed
93.75% pass rate

Saybrook University
1 failed
5 passed
83.33% pass rate

Institute of Transpersonal Psychology [Sofia University]
3 failed
5 passed
62.50% pass rate

John F. Kennedy University
29 failed
47 passed
61.84% pass rate

But, But, Its regionally accredited! Thus, there cant possibly be anything wrong with. Just like the FDA would never approve a drug that was harmful (Thalidomide, Viox, Zyprexa, etc.)

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

For context…none of those programs are exactly stiff competition in regard to academics….

Has it really gotten so bad in MFT/other therapy fields where the minimum bar is now Saybrook?!

 

[neutralpalatte]

I'd hardly call that a good sample size

 

[chartero]

I'd hardly call that a good sample size

But those 2 students aren't just a sample – they're the entire population of World University students who sat the MFT licensing exam in the period. The period was long enough that 1,533 students from all schools sat the exam; 953 passed. National University alone sent 121 students (54 passed). World University, 2 (0).

Although it's a small population, it's an entire population, and the researchers (us) haven't done anything to it that could bias its composition.

By contrast, a convenience sampling method like you described earlier – searching LinkedIn and personal networks for people who openly list a World University degree – has a very high threat from source bias. People who find that their unaccredited degree doesn't get them where they wanted to go will often downplay, even omit, the degree or its source from their résumés, profiles, and marketing. Your search method is likely to systematically exclude members of this "hidden population" of unsuccessful World graduates.

It is true that the MFT statistics above don't include the entire population of World University students ever. My guess is that we could find several who were licensed in the past. Although: Did you ask your convenience sample of World graduates if they were licensed as MFTs on the basis of their World degrees? Some may be unlicensed human service workers, life coaches, etc., which they could have done without the degree. How many are licensed? Out of how many World graduates total in your sample?

Best wishes.

 

[neutralpalatte]

^^^ And whose to say that the TWO people from World U who attempted to even take the exam, only went to World U because their GPA was too low for other programs, or didn't have the resources to devote to a better school, thus meaning that they had less time (from lack of resources or low GPA from prior coursework) to actually learn the material on the exam? I don't fall into either of those categories, and lets not forget that I did, in fact, already spend about a year taking MFT coursework from a regionally accredited school.

And... TWO people from World U? Really? I contacted more people from there than two WITH a license, so that's obviously a (really poor) sample size. Or a ~*people who sat during the selected time period*~ size, as you prefer to call it. Its still a sample size.

Yes, all that graduated from there that I did contact, were licensed as a result of their MFT program. Obviously. Sure, they could have secretly gone to a different MFT program after World U and not listed it, but who would even do that??? That would be completely pointless. These weren't people with PsyDs or PhDs. They were people who (obviously) wanted a terminal masters in order to practice.

There also could be even more World U grads licensed who just stopped practicing and have no reason to state that they even went to graduate school because that isn't their field anymore. It goes both ways. Speculation is completely pointless.


I will stick to the known fact that where you get your degree does not matter as long as it gives you the ability to sit for your license. If you enjoy the coursework, its not like its a total loss anyway. Liking the coursework + eligible for your license? Yes please.

 

[chartero]

^^^ And whose to say that the TWO people from World U who attempted to even take the exam, only went to World U because their GPA was too low for other programs, or didn't have the resources to devote to a better school, thus meaning that they had less time (from lack of resources or low GPA from prior coursework) to actually learn the material on the exam?

There are "better schools," and then there's World University.

I don't fall into either of those categories, and lets not forget that I did, in fact, already spend about a year taking MFT coursework from a regionally accredited school.

Why did you stop? Could you see going back there?

I will stick to the known fact that where you get your degree does not matter as long as it gives you the ability to sit for your license.

That's not a known fact. If you care about promoting your credentials in the competitive marketplace, that your unaccredited graduate degree met the minimum legal requirements to sit for licensure isn't the only factor of interest to many potential customers. Or potential referral sources, or potential employers for readers interested in keeping that door open.

I especially think well-off Angelenos tend to value quality, high-end brands, and health providers trained at quality, good-name schools, at the very least not at unaccredited schools whose main feature is that they meet the legal minimum to sit for licensure. I don't know, maybe the wealthy Angelenos in your niche wear off the rack from Family Dollar because a shirt is a shirt, stay at EconoLodge on vacation because a bed is a bed… yet are also an untapped market for cash-pay Jungian therapy. This is possible.

 

[erg923]

She doesn't care about patients, per se, from what I can tell. Nor does she care about quality of the clinical training, per se. What she does care about, from what I can tell, is how she can market "just barely good enough for a licensing board" training to potential patients so that she can make money. It's just another business (one of three apparently) to her. I have counted exactly one post in 5o that expressed the care, passion, and intellectual curiosity that most mental health programs need to see a track record of in order to admit most students.

However, because this poster is only considering universities that are known to be private, for-profit, degree mills, she will likely not have to run through the usual gamut of admission criteria. Which is the really sad part about the reality of having a two-tiered higher education system in this county. Again, because it's the patient-consumer who ultimately pays the price, right? Crystal ball angel therapy when they could be getting legit, evidence-based therapies for half the price. Maybe even covered by insurance. It really does make me sad.

I have, on numerous occasions, offered this poster a recent article from Scott Lillinefels's group at Emory on treatments that are empirically correlated with a worsening of psychological status. However, she has consistently refused to acknowledge this offer. I can only surmise this means she does not really care to know which treatments are legit and which treatments are simply "smoke and mirrors" or myth.

 

[neutralpalatte]

There are "better schools," and then there's World University.



Why did you stop? Could you see going back there?



That's not a known fact. If you care about promoting your credentials in the competitive marketplace, that your unaccredited graduate degree met the minimum legal requirements to sit for licensure isn't the only factor of interest to many potential customers. Or potential referral sources, or potential employers for readers interested in keeping that door open.

I especially think well-off Angelenos tend to value quality, high-end brands, and health providers trained at quality, good-name schools, at the very least not at unaccredited schools whose main feature is that they meet the legal minimum to sit for licensure. I don't know, maybe the wealthy Angelenos in your niche wear off the rack from Family Dollar because a shirt is a shirt, stay at EconoLodge on vacation because a bed is a bed… yet are also an untapped market for cash-pay Jungian therapy. This is possible.

I moved for work, and it was one of the best choices I made. The difference between there and where I live now is like a 7 hour drive. And their distance program is 4 years long, no thanks!

Yes, continue to give people advice about people in place you have never lived lol. Where you go to school does not equal brand. Where you go to school is not your marketing. Where you go to school is not the quality of the care you provide. Where you go to school is not even always the model in which you practice (that's where the 3,000 hours come in). You build a brand. You have to do it regardless if you want to be successful as a small business.

And for the record, no, this is the entertainment capital. What people value here are entrepreneurial/business skills, and most of the people who live here actually attended trade and professional schools, or don't go to school at all unless they are trying to get a license of some sort, regardless of what their career is. For MFT practitioners in Los Angeles, a great deal have actually attended Pacifica actually... which is a distance program as well. For the record, the job market for Northern California (where I came from) is very much different, so many people are over-educated and most people pursue at least a bachelors. It all has to do with the jobs available in the area in which you're living, as far as education trends go. Neither is "right" or "wrong" and there is no "better" place to live. They both have their pros and cons, and will help you accomplish different things. And neither one is their stereotype, in reality .

I am done explaining my opinions and experiences in this thread

 

[chartero]

Flip toward the back of the unaccredited World University's current (2011-14) catalog [pdf], and you'll see their 2012 School Performance Fact Sheet of statutory disclosures. For the MA in Counseling Psychology, which is World's MFT-track program,

• in 2010, 1 student began the program and zero students graduated.
• in 2011, zero students began the program, and 1 student graduated.
• in 2012 year to date (what date this was prepared appears to be unspecified), 1 student began the program and zero students graduated.

In 2010 and 2011, zero students began or graduated from any other World University degree or certificate program. Each year, 29 to 41 individual one-off open-enrollment courses were completed. There's no 2012 YTD data for these categories, only for the MA in Counseling Psychology.

Further:

PART 2: EXAM PASS RATE
This refers only to students who completed World Iniversity’s [sic] MA Program in Counseling Psychology, which prepares students for the California MFT License Exam.

Received MFT License Date of Graduation Place of employment
Maria Biasiotto June 25, 1993 Private Practice
Stephen Dansiger June 4, 2007 Private Practice
Lynnel Holtby June 1998 Private Practice
Kevin McCormack June 29, 1993 County of Ventura
Lindsey E. McCormack June 29, 1996 County of Ventura
Larry Meltzer June 24, 2006 Drug Addiction Counseling
Celia Suarez June 27, 1992 Private practice

Preparing for Exam
Justin Leitstein December 2011

None of the other degree or certificate programs at World University focus on areas in which there is a license exam.

From the content, context, and what else we about World's very small entrant, graduate, and state MFT exam taker numbers, a reasonable interpretation is that this is every known World graduate who's ever received a CA MFT license. (neutral, if your convenience sample included anyone not on this list, they might not be licensed as an MFT. Appearances can be deceiving: People could be marketing outwardly similar things under unlicensed hats like life coach or spiritual minister, or separate occupations they trained for elsewhere like addiction counseling or nursing.)

Elsewhere in World University's catalog, we see that 3 of the 5 trustees, and the entire senior administration, share the same last name. Unless the web/tech support guy is senior administration. This includes the CEO/President, the Chief Academic Officer, the COO/Financial Officer, the Administrative Officer/Acting Registrar, and the Advertising & Marketing Officer. Three of their names are also listed later, as part of the graduate psychology faculty.