Wright institute

[gboy52]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hi,
I just wanted everyone's opinion on this school and the PsyD program. is it a good program and what is the reputation of the program?

 

[erg923]

Hi,
I just wanted everyone's opinion on this school and the PsyD program. is it a good program and what is the reputation of the program?

FYI..the Wright Institute was one of about 4 schools my VA will NOT consider for our internship program. A couple faculty looked at their stats, the curriculum, and some other variables and decided that it would just be a good program to cut out. A guess there is something pretty bad looking in there to some ppl.

 

[audchik]

FYI..the Wright Institute was one of about 4 schools my VA will NOT consider for our internship program. A couple faculty looked at their stats, the curriculum, and some other variables and decided that it would just be a good program to cut out. A guess there is something pretty bad looking in there to some ppl.

Sorry, off topic, but what are the other 3 schools that your VA site will not consider?

 

[SunnyPsyDUp]

The Wright has a great reputation with many VAs, so one VA shouldn't be enough to discourage you. Many VA's don't look at PsyDs for internship all together.

You start actual clinical work in the first year and almost all coursework material is clinically relevant. If you want to do research, I suggest a PhD program. Go to their website or the APA website and see their match rate statistics for internship. They recently received 7 years APA accreditation (the most you can get). They have a strong multicultural curriculum, and theoretically the professors are strongly psychodynamic or cbt, with some narrative. There are some faculty that are active in their research, but for the greater part, they are dedicated to student learning.

I suggest checking it out.

 

[erg923]

Sorry, off topic, but what are the other 3 schools that your VA site will not consider?

All the Argosy campuses, All Alliant campuses, some place called Regent or something, and anything that is online. Their rationale is that they have to have a way to cut people at the very beggining, before even digging into the pile. Program and hours are the easiest way to do that. The faculty have become increasingly crabby that we get more and more every year due to the imbalance. In the VA, the time spent reviewing apps is not billable and does not count towards clinic workload/productivity. Anything to reduce the initial pile down to a managable number, I suppose.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

The Wright has a great reputation with many VAs, so one VA shouldn't be enough to discourage you. Many VA's don't look at PsyDs for internship all together.

You start actual clinical work in the first year and almost all coursework material is clinically relevant. If you want to do research, I suggest a PhD program. Go to their website or the APA website and see their match rate statistics for internship. They recently received 7 years APA accreditation (the most you can get). They have a strong multicultural curriculum, and theoretically the professors are strongly psychodynamic or cbt, with some narrative. There are some faculty that are active in their research, but for the greater part, they are dedicated to student learning.

I suggest checking it out.

In an attempt to temporarily distract myself from post-doc applications, here are the match statistics for Wright for the past 10 years (per APPIC):

(year / # students / % matched / % unmatched / % withdrawn)
2000 34 50.0% 35.3% 14.7%
2001 29 41.4% 41.4% 17.2%
2002 20 65.0% 30.0% 5.0%
2003 22 59.1% 31.8% 9.1%
2004 22 54.5% 40.9% 4.5%
2005 36 47.2% 36.1% 16.7%
2006 24 66.7% 16.7% 16.7%
2007 35 57.1% 28.6% 14.3%
2008 35 57.1% 34.3% 8.6%
2009 33 72.7% 24.2% 3.0%​

2010 42 61.9% 35.7% 2.4%

The average percent matched from 2000-2010 was 57.2%, average percent unmatched was 32.5%, and average percent withdrawn was 10.2%

 

[erg923]

The Wright has a great reputation with many VAs, so one VA shouldn't be enough to discourage you. Many VA's don't look at PsyDs for internship all together.

Some VAs (mostly Academy of Psychological Clinicial Science sites) will exclude Psy.Ds, but not "many." So no, its not that. It IS something that has to do with your program. However, my VA does adhere to the scientist-practitioner model of training in our internship prorgam (that doesnt mean we exclude psy.d applicants...just means thats our model of training for the internship year), so what we view as a lacking or negative may be different from what other sites think.

My current rotation supervisor was particularly put off by the size of their cohorts (<70) and what this likley says about their acceptance rate, the fact that that there are no summer classes, the fact that you can finish the program in 3+1, the fact that they allow students to do practica in local PPs, their reliance on the CAPIC system of internships.

You start actual clinical work in the first year and almost all coursework material is clinically relevant.

I think this can also be viewed as negative though ("cart before the horse"), even by sites that want/need students with alot of clinical experience. Many could view this as substituting for a poor foundation in basic psychological science. Our chief has a particular hang up about programs that teach clinical "stuff" (assessment/interventions), but neglect good ole "psychology" in the process.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I think the Wright Institute gets dinged for a few of things, some more fair than others. I briefly considered them (~9 years ago). Please take this post with a large grain of salt because a lot can change in 9 years, but here is what I found:

1. They were weak on research training. The "feel" I got from their program was that quantitative research was less of a point of emphasis, and research in general was far down the list on what was most important to learn. They felt much more like a psychoanalytic institute you would attend after being in practice for a few years, which may be why they seem to attract people who are older and have been practicing at the MA/MS level. There was a "learn by doing" approach that I felt like put the cart before the horse&#8230;but some people like this approach. Again, I think it favored the people who have been in practice already.

2. They were far too psychodynamic for my liking. I've heard in more recent years that they have incorporated some CBT faculty, though I think the general view of the program is still very psychodynamic, which works better in some training areas than others. There are obviously some areas of the country where this is a prominent approach, but it may be a harder sell at places that really push CBT, DBT, etc.

3. Their match rate in general is bad, and their APA-acred. site match is horrid, which is a red flag for most people. They seem to get a lot of students who are established in the Bay Area, so they do not want to relocate for internship/post-doc/etc&#8230;so that definitely does not help their match rate. I think the lack of research training is also problematic.

I really liked the feel of the program from a support perspective, as the faculty all seemed very genuine and engaged with the students, but it definitely had a different feel when compared to all of the other programs I considered.

If you do a search, I know this program has been talked about before, and I think I wrote a pretty similar reply then too. 😀

 

[PerhapsMaybeOk]

FYI..the Wright Institute was one of about 4 schools my VA will NOT consider for our internship program. A couple faculty looked at their stats, the curriculum, and some other variables and decided that it would just be a good program to cut out. A guess there is something pretty bad looking in there to some ppl.

Must be a west-coast versus southern thing 😛 I know some people at VA internships who went to Wright.

 

[docma]

Wright has some great professors, a social justice and advocacy emphasis that many schools lack, and they were a leader in getting a regional internship program started (CAPIC) years ago which has definitely been more proactive about addressing the shortage than most schools can claim. And some of their low Match rate is because folks apply only locally and use CAPIC as their backup. My caution would be looking at their dissertation completion time. They don't require proposal and progress before entering the Match (which also limits their students success in matching I think) and some of their students get stuck in limbo post-internship because the degree isn't complete yet. That said, their students can/do go to some great internships, so it is definitely a school to look at closely, especially if you want a psychodynamic emphasis.

 

[erg923]

Must be a west-coast versus southern thing 😛 I know some people at VA internships who went to Wright.

I didnt say you couldnt get a VA internship, I said you couldnt at MY VA. And, although we are a pretty scientist-practitioner oriented place, I wouldn't consider us anything too special or prestitious, so I assume multiple other VAs would have the same thoughts about the school that our faculty does. I was just pointing out the drawbacks my supervior identified. With the internship crisis, I can not advocate going to schools that will put the students at a disadvantage right from the start.

 

[psychst]

I didnt say you couldnt get a VA internship, I said you couldnt at MY VA. And, although we are a pretty scientist-practitioner oriented place, I wouldn't consider us anything too special or prestitious, so I assume multiple other VAs would have the same thoughts about the school that our faculty does. I was just pointing out the drawbacks my supervior identified. With the internship crisis, I can not advocate going to schools that will put the students at a disadvantage right from the start.

I greatly appreciate that you shared your knowledge and I wish that this type of information was more readily available so that we could make informed choices about schools and programs. As a Wright student, I agree that there are definitely difficulties with some types of APA internships and there are many reasons including the large cohort and the "no grade" system (which I support). Most students don't apply to APA internships though and prefer CAPIC where they have a great match rate.

It would be good for students to know not to apply for an internship where they are rejected off the bat (as we all know applications are very time consuming and a financial strain). Would you mind sharing what VA you are in?

On another note, I wonder if there is any ranking system within VAs meaning what VA internships are conducive to a better match with postdoc or finding jobs within VAs or in other medical facilities. If you have any info you are able to share about these type of "rankings," it would be great!

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

On another note, I wonder if there is any ranking system within VAs meaning what VA internships are conducive to a better match with postdoc or finding jobs within VAs or in other medical facilities. If you have any info you are able to share about these type of "rankings," it would be great!

There are no "rankings" per se, but there are some VAs that have some strong academic affiliations, which typically helps students who want to work in other VAs or medical settings.

 

[aequitasveritas]

People seem to talk about working for the VA like it's the pinnacle of a clinical career.
You couldn't pay me enough to work there in any hospital; let alone a government run mill.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

People seem to talk about working for the VA like it's the pinnacle of a clinical career.
You couldn't pay me enough to work there in any hospital; let alone a government run mill.

Uhm...good for you?

People talk about the VA a lot because they are one of the largest training providers for psychologists and they are also one of the biggest employers of them. They also come up a lot in regard to their req. to only accept applicants from APA-acred programs. Most VAs offer a ton of security and a nice quality of life. Some have excellent academic affiliations too. I enjoyed my time in the VA, though it isn't for everyone.

 

[erg923]

People seem to talk about working for the VA like it's the pinnacle of a clinical career.
You couldn't pay me enough to work there in any hospital; let alone a government run mill.

Its not for everyone, but im not sure I understand the disdain. Most VAs are filled with well trained and caring psychologists. Great population to serve. Benefits are good and hefty pension after 30 years. Research opps abound as well. Its a great place for the scientist and the practitioner....😀

 

[PerhapsMaybeOk]

People seem to talk about working for the VA like it's the pinnacle of a clinical career.
You couldn't pay me enough to work there in any hospital; let alone a government run mill.

Your statement does not make sense. It reads as though you do not wish to work in any hospital.

 

[aequitasveritas]

I made one error. I meant to say "in any hospital". Yes, I am opposed to working in any hospital. VAs are the next step down from there.

I work with TriCare, which enables me to see the "deserving" clientele; to do so in the way that I deem fit.

The reasons for my disdain of the VA have to do with bureaucratic dysfunction, which reaches into the workings of therapy. Clinicians are commonly overworked, underpaid, and have the frame of treatment molested by time frames and the like. It also seems that the more profound patients come into the hospitals (obv)...otherwise they would likely use TriCare in the community. My personal interest has little to do with the chronically and psychotically ill.

I do think they do some good work with phantom limb issues and PTSD in group settings.

 

[nitemagi]

I made one error. I meant to say "in any hospital". Yes, I am opposed to working in any hospital. VAs are the next step down from there.

I work with TriCare, which enables me to see the "deserving" clientele; to do so in the way that I deem fit.

The reasons for my disdain of the VA have to do with bureaucratic dysfunction, which reaches into the workings of therapy. Clinicians are commonly overworked, underpaid, and have the frame of treatment molested by time frames and the like. It also seems that the more profound patients come into the hospitals (obv)...otherwise they would likely use TriCare in the community. My personal interest has little to do with the chronically and psychotically ill.

I do think they do some good work with phantom limb issues and PTSD in group settings.

Tricare is for military that were officers or who were career military (20 years+). VA hospitals and outpt system sees anyone who ever enlisted, ever. Their care may or may not be paid for by the VA (based on various issues including service connection for their particular condition). So AQ you're seeing a skewed sample of veteran population, who are likely at baseline higher functioning.

 

[aequitasveritas]

Tricare is for military that were officers or who were career military (20 years+). VA hospitals and outpt system sees anyone who ever enlisted, ever. Their care may or may not be paid for by the VA (based on various issues including service connection for their particular condition). So AQ you're seeing a skewed sample of veteran population, who are likely at baseline higher functioning.

Oh I agree. I se higher functioning folks. I only used "deserving" as it was quoted in a prior post.

Yet as I recall, the VA now has contracted providers in the community for enlisted vets. At least thats how it is in the San Diego area. There are also veteran clinics in the California community. The VA is not the only vein of service for non-officer vets.

Specifics aside, my main point was that the perception here on SDN seems to be that the VA is some sort of pinnacle achievement. I wanted to offer another perspective to those starting out; who may be perusing the site. For some clinicians; actually nearly any clinician in a successful PP, a hospital setting and a Govnt run one at that, is far from ideal.

The idea that it is a pinnacle or some sort of special place because they require an APA internship is likely an artificial criterion. Like any training venue, the VA has serious limitations and is a non-choice for many; actually the majority of clinicians. So I realize I may sound a little derogatory here, but I think it is necessary for accuracy in this moment.

 

[erg923]

and have the frame of treatment molested by time frames and the like.

What does that mean?

And "bureaucratic dysfunction", yes. I have never seen this directly alter a therapy treatment plan/goal though. What have you experienced?

 

[aequitasveritas]

What does that mean?

And "bureaucratic dysfunction", yes. I have never seen this directly alter a therapy treatment plan/goal though. What have you experienced?

I do not have extensive experience at the VA, for sure. I've done some process groups and contracted for independent services, aside from TriCare, but I haven't worked inside per se. Yet I worked closely with ACVOW.

Patients in group have all been given short term CBT and then "graduated". This is along the lines of what I mean about the molestation of treatment. Artificial parameters are engaged to meet the extraordinarily high demand for services.

I remember a few Iraq war vets talking in a group one day about "graduating" from CBT. Each of them had a similar experience. The wait list was horrid, the therapists seemed to have been a tad rigid and over worked. One guy had a psychiatrist break down to him and actually cry about how how hard it was to see vets treated the way they were. The benefit packages are often stonewalls. This is probably the most common complaint I have. As an anecdote, I had a friend who had to wait 3 yrs to get shoulder surgery for a torn rotater cuff.

 

[erg923]

I do not have extensive experience at the VA, for sure. I've done some process groups and contracted for independent services, aside from TriCare, but I haven't worked inside per se. Yet I worked closely with ACVOW.

Patients in group have all been given short term CBT and then "graduated". This is along the lines of what I mean about the molestation of treatment. Artificial parameters are engaged to meet the extraordinarily high demand for services.

I remember a few Iraq war vets talking in a group one day about "graduating" from CBT. Each of them had a similar experience. The wait list was horrid, the therapists seemed to have been a tad rigid and over worked. One guy had a psychiatrist break down to him and actually cry about how how hard it was to see vets treated the way they were. The benefit packages are often stonewalls. This is probably the most common complaint I have. As an anecdote, I had a friend who had to wait 3 yrs to get shoulder surgery for a torn rotater cuff.

I don't know about any "graduations" but we do do alot of protocol-based therapies that, by design, are time limited. PE is generally 10-12 weeks. CBT-Insomnia is 8 or so. We do an anger management that is 6-10 weeks. In my experience, one of the only ways to get the younger OEF/OIF guys to "buy in" to getting help (i.e., psychotherapy) is to be very focused and let them know that they wont have linger around the VA for years like some of the Vietnam era vets they see. Many of these guys are busy, have families, and are happy to find out that they can come in and not be relegated to Victorian couch for a year or two (that's usually what they think of when they think of psychologists).

Although I do carry a couple "long-term" patients, you are right that the VA has been moving away from long-term treatment models. This is precisely because the VA was previously notorious for "long term" treatment. Guys "hanging-out" in PTSD groups for years, becoming dependent on the system, and essentially being told that ongoing treatment is the only way to "manage" their symptoms/disorder. We have one psychologist here in our general outpatient clinic who has some guys that have been coming in biweekly for years, and are actively encouraged to do so. There is no treatment plan, no treatment goals, and no real progress (as far as any other staff can tell). Frankly, that model seems like a silly waste of time and resources to me. And I think that stereotype of psychology and psychotherapy actually turns other people off and prevents them from seeking treatment, especially the younger guys. This is not exactly a population that views "years of therapy" as wonderful opportunity for self-growth and insight the way other members of society might.

 

[aequitasveritas]

I don't know about any "graduations" but we do do alot of protocol-based therapies that, by design, are time limited. PE is generally 10-12 weeks. CBT-Insomnia is 8 or so. We do an anger management that is 6-10 weeks. In my experience, one of the only ways to get the younger OEF/OIF guys to "buy in" to getting help (i.e., psychotherapy) is to be very focused and let them know that they wont have linger around the VA for years like some of the Vietnam era vets they see. Many of these guys are busy, have families, and are happy to find out that they can come in and not be relegated to Victorian couch for a year or two (that's usually what they think of when they think of psychologists).

Although I do carry a couple "long-term" patients, you are right that the VA has been moving away from long-term treatment models. This is precisely because the VA was previously notorious for "long term" treatment. Guys "hanging-out" in PTSD groups for years, becoming dependent on the system, and essentially being told that ongoing treatment is the only way to "manage" their symptoms/disorder. We have one psychologist here in our general outpatient clinic who has some guys that have been coming in biweekly for years, and are actively encouraged to do so. There is no treatment plan, no treatment goals, and no real progress (as far as any other staff can tell). Frankly, that model seems like a silly waste of time and resources to me. And I think that stereotype of psychology and psychotherapy actually turns other people off and prevents them from seeking treatment, especially the younger guys. This is not exactly a population that views "years of therapy" as wonderful opportunity for self-growth and insight the way other members of society might.

These are all good points from your perspective and your take on how therapy/treatment works.

I think it's good for the evidence to be laid out, and for folks to see the difference of opinion. I have a different model of how the mind works, and for my interests the VA is a non-choice. I'm not saying that my position is better. I am simply happy to present the balance here on SDN so that some can see that the VA is only desirable for certain types of orientations.

 

[amy21]

Some VAs (mostly Academy of Psychological Clinicial Science sites) will exclude Psy.Ds, but not "many." So no, its not that. It IS something that has to do with your program. However, my VA does adhere to the scientist-practitioner model of training in our internship prorgam (that doesnt mean we exclude psy.d applicants...just means thats our model of training for the internship year), so what we view as a lacking or negative may be different from what other sites think.

My current rotation supervisor was particularly put off by the size of their cohorts (<70) and what this likley says about their acceptance rate, the fact that that there are no summer classes, the fact that you can finish the program in 3+1, the fact that they allow students to do practica in local PPs, their reliance on the CAPIC system of internships.


I think this can also be viewed as negative though ("cart before the horse"), even by sites that want/need students with alot of clinical experience. Many could view this as substituting for a poor foundation in basic psychological science. Our chief has a particular hang up about programs that teach clinical "stuff" (assessment/interventions), but neglect good ole "psychology" in the process.

I appreciate this info. I am a lawyer who is interested in switching to clinical psychology & pursuing forensic or neuropsychology specifically. While I have the academic background/gre scores to pursue a PhD I have no research background or interest so I'm looking at PsyD's. Wright is the only school I'm interested in because it's in the Bay Area, seems to be credible & is reasonably priced. Question: If your VA doesn't like the Wright, are there other Bay Area PsyD programs it thinks more highly of? Some of the criticisms you mentioned (large cohort, high acceptance rate) seem to be true of PsyD programs in general. Also, given its psychoanalytic focus, would you not recommend it for someone interested in one of these specialties? Again-better alternatives?

2nd Question: How big of a factor does PsyD school name play, assuming it's not on some kind of black list? I am hoping to stand out at a mediocre school with an average/low placement rate & land an APA accredited internship based on individual merit (including prior academics & legal work) but I don't know if that's realistic. Thank you!

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

If you want to go into forensic or neuropsychology work, the Wright Institute probably won't be a good options. Both are very competitive areas that will require an APA-acred internship, and tWI has a very poor match rate to APA-acred sites.

 

[amy21]

If you want to go into forensic or neuropsychology work, the Wright Institute probably won't be a good options. Both are very competitive areas that will require an APA-acred internship, and tWI has a very poor match rate to APA-acred sites.

Are there options in the Bay Area that would be better? I was hoping to just get the externships that would help me & take the relevant classes, like I would at any PsyD program. I've heard the schools that emphasize different 'tracks' are just relying on marketing gimmicks..

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Are there options in the Bay Area that would be better? I was hoping to just get the externships that would help me & take the relevant classes, like I would at any PsyD program. I've heard the schools that emphasize different 'tracks' are just relying on marketing gimmicks..

Different tracks aren't necessarily always marketing gimmicks, but they definitely aren't necessary (or even preferred) at the grad school level, which is viewed by many as the most important time in your training to obtain a solid generalized experience.

A couple things, though--1) the classes you take really won't matter very much at the internship and job level; at most, if you're going for something like neuropsych for example, it'll save you from having to take a class while on post-doc; 2) I'm sure there have been multiple motivated individuals who've attended Wright, yet its match numbers remain low, meaning that the odds would be stacked against you from the beginning; beyond that, it's possible that one of the reasons the school's applicants don't fare well is that Wright simply doesn't have the ability to offer the types of placements that make them competitive (purely conjecture there, as I know nothing about Wright)

 

[amy21]

Different tracks aren't necessarily always marketing gimmicks, but they definitely aren't necessary (or even preferred) at the grad school level, which is viewed by many as the most important time in your training to obtain a solid generalized experience.

A couple things, though--1) the classes you take really won't matter very much at the internship and job level; at most, if you're going for something like neuropsych for example, it'll save you from having to take a class while on post-doc; 2) I'm sure there have been multiple motivated individuals who've attended Wright, yet its match numbers remain low, meaning that the odds would be stacked against you from the beginning; beyond that, it's possible that one of the reasons the school's applicants don't fare well is that Wright simply doesn't have the ability to offer the types of placements that make them competitive (purely conjecture there, as I know nothing about Wright)

Thank you. By placements, do you mean externships? If it's not the coursework, is that what makes students strong internship candidates? Or is it a political process that depends on the school's ties to different internship sites? I'm still unclear on what makes a candidate competitive for an internship. I also thought the Wright Inst's placement might be low because a lot of their graduates want to stay local & don't aim for the APA-accredited sites. I'm not sure how well/poorly they stack up against other PsyD schools in terms of training if a student wants to get a forensic psych focused internship, not neuropsych forensics (& if you need more research experience, would any PsyD program be able to offer it?)

 

[psychtime101]

As someone who is presently going through the internship process now, I can speak a little as to my experience. Firstly, it seems as though the number of people applying each year for APA internships in increasing. Many of big sites (think Bellevue) cannot possible spend as much time as they might like on each application, so they need some marker to begin to make cuts. I think the program you attend may be one of these major cuts. Even if your externships, coursework, letters of rec, research experience are of a high quality and are comparable, sometimes qualified people get cut. In terms of what they are looking for, I have found it to be less related to how you do in courses. Many people I know do very well in their courses and really the transcript is looked at more to assess for the types of courses you have taken (perhaps particularly if applying to npsych) or any major red flags. Clinical experience in similar populations, or types of work such npsych, or ethic composition may all be things they would look for. It doesnt have to be an exact match as I believe Erg has pointed on other threads- they want to teach you things, but should be that you have a solid foundation to grow. Many sites also look at research experience including presentation/publications. I cant speak towards forensics or the Wright institute, this is just my overall experience with the match this year.

 

[erg923]

As someone who is presently going through the internship process now, I can speak a little as to my experience. Firstly, it seems as though the number of people applying each year for APA internships in increasing. Many of big sites (think Bellevue) cannot possible spend as much time as they might like on each application, so they need some marker to begin to make cuts. I think the program you attend may be one of these major cuts. Even if your externships, coursework, letters of rec, research experience are of a high quality and are comparable, sometimes qualified people get cut. In terms of what they are looking for, I have found it to be less related to how you do in courses. Many people I know do very well in their courses and really the transcript is looked at more to assess for the types of courses you have taken (perhaps particularly if applying to npsych) or any major red flags. Clinical experience in similar populations, or types of work such npsych, or ethic composition may all be things they would look for. It doesnt have to be an exact match as I believe Erg has pointed on other threads- they want to teach you things, but should be that you have a solid foundation to grow. Many sites also look at research experience including presentation/publications. I cant speak towards forensics or the Wright institute, this is just my overall experience with the match this year.

I agree that programs are becoming a cut criteria at internship sites. Thus, you can be an outstanding candidate from Wright, but that wouldn't matter because my internship site would cut you before they dug into your CV. Again, as JS stated in another thread, its not an impossibility, its just not the ideal scenario. It puts you behind (or at least at a slight disadvantage) before you even start. With the internship situation being what it is (and its not gonna get solved in the next 5 years, I'm pretty sure of that) it would be silly do make any choices that would taint you before you even start the journey.

Again, part of this is because you appear to be striving for the MOST competitive area of this field by attending the LEAST competitive, lowest common denominator programs...its just not gonna add up the way you want it to, I'm afraid.

 

[amy21]

I agree that programs are becoming a cut criteria at internship sites. Thus, you can be an outstanding candidate from Wright, but that wouldn't matter because my internship site would cut you before they dug into your CV. Again, as JS stated in another thread, its not an impossibility, its just not the ideal scenario. It puts you behind (or at least at a slight disadvantage) before you even start. With the internship situation being what it is (and its not gonna get solved in the next 5 years, I'm pretty sure of that) it would be silly do make any choices that would taint you before you even start the journey.

Again, part of this is because you appear to be striving for the MOST competitive area of this field by attending the LEAST competitive, lowest common denominator programs...its just not gonna add up the way you want it to, I'm afraid.

I appreciate all the info in these threads, although none of it is positive. When you say 'least' competitive, do you mean the Wright Inst per se, or all PsyD programs? If you think any of them would provide a better foundation for getting into one of these fields (maybe better research opp's), are there any you would recommend in California?

Can you think of any fields of clinical psychology that would be assessment/diagnostic focused (as opposed to counseling-oriented) that would be less research-oriented than forensic or neuropsych? (i.e., field that a PsyD would be a better choice for)..

 

[NPIntern]

Just a side note... I am currently on internship at one of the largest VAs in the country. One of my cohort members is from the Wright Institute and is very well trained. He seems to be highly regarded by the faculty and the veterans whom he serves. Research is not his strong-suit, but he is an excellent clinician, for what that's worth!

 

[amy21]

Just a side note... I am currently on internship at one of the largest VAs in the country. One of my cohort members is from the Wright Institute and is very well trained. He seems to be highly regarded by the faculty and the veterans whom he serves. Research is not his strong-suit, but he is an excellent clinician, for what that's worth!

Is this a site with neuropsych-related testing emphasis? If you should happen to speak with him & want to relay his thoughts on this topic (what he thought of the Wright & whether research training was an issue), & then post it-that would be nice. But thanks for this input.

 

[Psychstuca]

Hi Amy 21,
I am from the Wright and currently doing my internship at a VA. If you are interested in research this is probably not the best school for you. I have attempted to do some research there, but this is difficult, simply because there are very few (literally 2-3) faculty members who are involved in research. However, if your question about research is related to your internship concerns, I have to tell you there are plenty of internship sites including VAs that are clinically oriented and don't care much about your reseach background beyond the disertation research. I am speaking from my own experience as well as from my classmates'.

Neuro is a different story, as it makes you competitive for majority or VA internships. At the Wright you will have a strong neuro training. Besides a year of coursework that includes neuroanatomy and all, there is a referral-based one-year neuro practicum at the Wright led by a board certified neuropsychologist, where you can get an experience doing real neuro assessments. I foudn this to be a great experience. In addition, If you are proactive enough, you can land a clinical practicum in one of the local neuro/cog rehab sites.

The thing with the external practicum sites and the Wiright is that, although the Wright can educate you and advice you on the external practicum sites, and some sites (including neuro) like the Wright students, nothing is guaranteed and you will have to complete for these placements with bunch of other applicants (Iam talking here about external sites, not the ones affiliated with the school like the neuro clinic mentioned earlier) . Speaking about the local psychology schools, I believe only PGSP Stanford PsyD program is in a better position regarding landing pracicum placements, due to their close affiliation with Stanford and Palo Alto VA.

On a positive note, you'll have an advantage over many other students when it comes to practicum placement, coming from another field with your life and work experiences and transferrable skills. I am also so-called non-traditional student, and the placement directors loved this. Not to offend our younger collegues, but I have been told multiple times that the program directors would rather prefer "mature" individuals with prior work experience to handle their patients, especially during the first couple years of practica.

In regards to forensics, there is an "informal" forensic track now at the Wright where you can take forensic electives, including a mock trial training. Also, there are well known (locally and nationally) forensic experts who are affliated with the Wright and teach there. They can be a foundation of your professional network, providing advice on forensic career opps, directing you to conferences in the field, and more.

A few more points to make: First, at the Wright you start clinical practicum from the very first year which is something you won't get anywhere else. Secondly, the Wright's reputation as a psychodynamic school is outdated. I personally chose a CBT route and am very pleased with my training.

To conclude, if you are interested in a Psy.D program in the Bay Area, you can certainly look at PGSP Stanford where you would get decent research background, less stress about searching for practicum placements, and an access to a wider spectrum of internship sites. If you are scared away by their tuition or an extra year in the program, however, your choice is the Wright Institute. I would not recommend CSPP or Argosy, their local reputation isn't nearly as good as that of the Wright, although I am sure there are exceptional students at every school. You are welcome to pm me if you need more info. Good luck!


P.S. To clarify I am not the student mentioned in the NPIntern's post, although I think I may know who that person is at the NPIntern's VA. This is a small world 🙂

 

[Zen Master]

Thank you for this detailed information, Psychstuca. I just got an interview invitation with the Wright Institute and am really excited.

 

[ela]

This bump is NOT regarding the psyd at wright. Rather, curious if anyone has any experience with their post-doc in psychoanalytic/dynamic therapy?

 

[ClinicalABA]

There are some faculty that are active in their research, but for the greater part, they are dedicated to student learning.

This was posted a while ago, and is not the topic of the bump, but felt the need to chime in anyways. It needs to be emphasized that "active in their research" and "dedicated to student learning" are not mutual exclusive. In fact- I'd venture to say that satisfying both the conditions a hallmark of a truly good clinical educator- one who should be sough out by all psychology trainees.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

This bump is NOT regarding the psyd at wright. Rather, curious if anyone has any experience with their post-doc in psychoanalytic/dynamic therapy?

I believe the Wright Institute in LA that offers the dynamic post doc is not related to the poorly rated program in NCal. The Wright Institute in LA is highly regarded.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Oh I agree. I se higher functioning folks. I only used "deserving" as it was quoted in a prior post.

Yet as I recall, the VA now has contracted providers in the community for enlisted vets. At least thats how it is in the San Diego area. There are also veteran clinics in the California community. The VA is not the only vein of service for non-officer vets.

Specifics aside, my main point was that the perception here on SDN seems to be that the VA is some sort of pinnacle achievement. I wanted to offer another perspective to those starting out; who may be perusing the site. For some clinicians; actually nearly any clinician in a successful PP, a hospital setting and a Govnt run one at that, is far from ideal.

The idea that it is a pinnacle or some sort of special place because they require an APA internship is likely an artificial criterion. Like any training venue, the VA has serious limitations and is a non-choice for many; actually the majority of clinicians. So I realize I may sound a little derogatory here, but I think it is necessary for accuracy in this moment.

I've worked at a VA for the past three years and, far from characterizing it as a 'pinnacle achievement' I have been concerned that my posts (amply expressing my frustration with it's dysfunction) have possibly been too consistently critical and derogatory (that happens while in a venting mood🙂).

 

[WisNeuro]

Did you just respond to a comment more than 2 years ago? 🙂 As a VA worker, I would agree that it should not be viewed at as an ideal, that's just a silly way to view any position in general. We all want different things career-wise for the most part. I, for one perspective, want to do mostly clinical work, with research and teaching/supervision constituting a smaller part of my job. Oh, I also want to work less than 45 hours a week for a good salary with good benefits. So, for me, the VA is pretty nice at this stage of my career. That will likely change mid-career, especially as I get more into forensic work, but it works for now. It's not everybody's cup of tea, so they can pursue something close to their ideal elsewhere.

I believe that the reason people mention the VA often is that it is a huge employer of psychologists nationwide, and their is likely a VA either in the city, or relatively close by where you may want to live. And, permanently shutting that possibility out limits your possible options. I always counsel students to hedge their bets for flexibility career-wise when they can. The more options you have, the better.

 

[ela]

Re-bumping to un-derail.

This bump is NOT regarding the psyd at wright. Rather, curious if anyone has any experience with their post-doc in psychoanalytic/dynamic therapy?

 

[futureapppsy2]

I know this thread hasn't been used in a while but i could use some advice, especially if there are any Wright Alums willing to chime in. I've been accepted to the Wright Institute for the fall, it was the only school I applied to. I have good credentials (not a lot of research experience though) 1340 GRE 3.75 GPA and a year working in my undergraduate advisor's lab which focused on my current interests, and I have a year plus clinical experience working with youth with addictions. I don't want to leave the bay area for many reasons, one of which i suffer from terrible seasonal affective disorder and have never been happier since moving to oakland. My interests are mainly clinical, hence going to Psyd route, and I honestly don't think I could survive an intensive Clinical Phd program (balanced) due to some health limitations. I'm wondering if the Wright institute will provide me with the education I desire, I have no desire to work in academia/teach but want to secure a good clinical job, I know this depends greatly on me and what I'm willing to put in, just wondering if anyone has any input. I guess quality of life is of the utmost importance to me due to my own past and present circumstances, but I don't want to regret going to a school that doesn't provide me with a good education. Thank you! Also is it true Wright doesn't grade?

It's going to be very hard to find a job in the Bay Area. It's very saturated with psychologists and psychotherapists in general and coming from a school with uneven reputation like Wright, will only hurt you, especially without an APA internship. You are very unlikely to match to an APA internship if you restrict yourself to the Bay Area, especially given Wright's suboptimal match rates. Also, I don't know how a program could just "not grade"--there has to be someway to determine competency or lack thereof in your coursework and placements.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I'm totally fine leaving the bay area for an internship, I'm open to going just about anywhere as I would only accept an APA placement

Their match rate is between 18%-30%...meaning unless something drastically changes you'll have between a 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 chance of matching to an APA-acred. internship site.

Those data should really concern any student considering their program.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I think that's reflective of people not wanting to leave the bay/CA , or at least that's the impression I've gotten. correct me if i'm wrong?

That is a part of it, but the other part is the match process is very competitive and students in many programs struggle to match. Unfortunately the WI's reputation is mixed (at best), so students will really have to sell themselves. Students believe they will be the outlier, but by definition...most won't.

 

[WisNeuro]

I think that's reflective of people not wanting to leave the bay/CA , or at least that's the impression I've gotten. correct me if i'm wrong?

That would not also explain the much lower than acceptable EPPP pass rate. I have yet to see a rankable applicant from here for internship and postdoc slots that I have reviewed for.

 

[bmedclinic]

I think that's reflective of people not wanting to leave the bay/CA , or at least that's the impression I've gotten. correct me if i'm wrong?

This MAY be the case, but...literally every program in a self selected desirable location (e.g. I dont want to live in CA, but they might) says this. Sounds a lot more like dissonance to me. I've heard this from people in the NE, West coast (especially), east coast, south, etc. Everyone that thinks they're in a desirable location and does not want to face that the field as a whole may view their program with quite a bit of trepidation or worse, basically. Also heard from people that dont match on internship avoiding that they failed. So, I'd put about 0% stock in this. Essentially, this means that people would rather not match at the end of their doctoral program and hang around another year and take out extra loans rather than go live somewhere "undesirable" for 1 year.

FWIW I only applied to a few california places... who would ever want to live there, right??? 😉

 

[Lurking Oracle]

This MAY be the case, but...literally every program in a self selected desirable location (e.g. I dont want to live in CA, but they might) says this. Sounds a lot more like dissonance to me. I've heard this from people in the NE, West coast (especially), east coast, south, etc. Everyone that thinks they're in a desirable location and does not want to face that the field as a whole may view their program with quite a bit of trepidation or worse, basically. Also heard from people that dont match on internship avoiding that they failed. So, I'd put about 0% stock in this. Essentially, this means that people would rather not match at the end of their doctoral program and hang around another year and take out extra loans rather than go live somewhere "undesirable" for 1 year.

FWIW I only applied to a few california places... who would ever want to live there, right??? 😉

This MAY be the case, but...literally every program in a self selected desirable location (e.g. I dont want to live in CA, but they might) says this. Sounds a lot more like dissonance to me. I've heard this from people in the NE, West coast (especially), east coast, south, etc. Everyone that thinks they're in a desirable location and does not want to face that the field as a whole may view their program with quite a bit of trepidation or worse, basically. Also heard from people that dont match on internship avoiding that they failed. So, I'd put about 0% stock in this. Essentially, this means that people would rather not match at the end of their doctoral program and hang around another year and take out extra loans rather than go live somewhere "undesirable" for 1 year.

FWIW I only applied to a few california places... who would ever want to live there, right??? 😉

It is not only a California thing. I am in NYC, and am amazed (along with shocked and appalled) at what so many native New Yorkers (i.e., New Yorker by random chance of birth) students/interns/postdocs/etc will SETTLE for in terms of low EPPP rates, astromical debt, pseudodynamic zealotry, and so forth, just to be able to stay within a subway ride of Manhattan. Granted, NYC really IS the greatest city on the face of the earth (no bias here, oh no), but you need to be flexible if you want thorough, evidence-based, legitimate training.

 

[cara susanna]

On SDN it seems to pop up mostly with California, but I have seen it a few times with NYC. Granted, this may also be because California has a ton of sketchy programs.

I remember WisNeuro mentioned something about delayed gratification and I agree with that a lot. No one is saying that you can't get a job in the California Bay Area or wherever, but you might have to wait until you're done with internship or at least grad school.

 

[Lurking Oracle]

On SDN it seems to pop up mostly with California, but I have seen it a few times with NYC. Granted, this may also be because California has a ton of sketchy programs.

I remember WisNeuro mentioned something about delayed gratification and I agree with that a lot. No one is saying that you can't get a job in the California Bay Area or wherever, but you might have to wait until you're done with internship or at least grad school.

I agree entirely with you, and also with WisNeuro. Postponing gratification (Hello? Any hopeful psychologists ever hear of Walter Mischel?) is an important developmental milestone. But, this quality SHOULD extend well into adulthood and, IMHO, is a required attribute of psychologists that really want to test/push the limits of what can be accomplished professionally. That means being willing to relocate significant distances (hundreds or thousands of miles) for career opportunities. I have done this multiple times, and have always moved up professionally-- and FINANCIALLY -- each time. Self-reported "salary surveys" are unverifiable and therefore, frankly, not valid. Being able to objectively prove to a prospective employer what you are already making is priceless. CA and NYC (and certainly other areas) have PLENTY of psychologists willing to work for whatever the MBAs that control the purse-strings dictate is OK. If one is willing/able to settle for that... well, that is one's choice, and I suppose that is fine if one has a spouse that is a major earner, or has no concern about the fiscal realities in the US of A. But, it always strikes me as odd when folks that have put muchos años into a PhD/PsyD program, APA-accred internship, and APA/APPCN postdoc suddenly go stupid just to live/work a few hundred yards (figuratively speaking) away from they grew up... and at wages far below what they are worth.