PhD/PsyD Neuropsychotherapist

[OneNeuroDoctor]

I received an email today about the Neuropsychotherapist Institute. They have online training out of Australia. Do we really need more online training? The use of the word Neuro does not seem necessary....why not just the psychotherapist institute. We now have clinical counselors and now neuropsychotherapist. I wonder how neuropsychologist and the neuropsychology associations think about having a neuropsychotherapist association?
I guess this is mostly an online training for multiple disciplines but it seems misleading to provide certificates in neuropsychotherapy. I know the use of the term neurotherapy has been controversial and biofeedback associations do not necessary agree with training or certificate in neurotherapy and often insurance will not cover neurotherapy treatment.

http://www.neuropsychotherapist.com/

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[psych84]

People really have to stop complaining about "online"...it is the obvious future direction of education as a whole.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Basically, if you add "neuro" to anything, it makes it seem more cutting-edge, advanced, and scientifically-grounded. Same thing happens if you add pictures of brains, regardless of what those pictures actually show.

And I agree re: online education. For some topics, it's great. But when there's direct patient care involved, and when in-person collaboration is a crucial component of learning (e.g., when designing and implementing research projects), I don't yet see a way for it to be a viable alternative to brick-and-mortal training. Unfortunately, I think a big part of the reason it's being pushed so hard by colleges/universities/etc. is because it's more profitable owing to the reduced overhead with nearly-unlimited enrollment potential.

 

[BuckeyeLove]

I tend to raise both eyebrows at these "certificates." About ten years ago I think there was a psychologist who got his dog certified in a bunch of psychotherapy related stuff; had the certificates mailed right to his door.

 

[psych84]

Basically, if you add "neuro" to anything, it makes it seem more cutting-edge, advanced, and scientifically-grounded. Same thing happens if you add pictures of brains, regardless of what those pictures actually show.

And I agree re: online education. For some topics, it's great. But when there's direct patient care involved, and when in-person collaboration is a crucial component of learning (e.g., when designing and implementing research projects), I don't yet see a way for it to be a viable alternative to brick-and-mortal training. Unfortunately, I think a big part of the reason it's being pushed so hard by colleges/universities/etc. is because it's more profitable owing to the reduced overhead with nearly-unlimited enrollment potential.

I'm not sure what you are talking about.

It's not like we will ban practicums, internships, and in-person training. What I mean is there is no reason that communication for course-work/projects, between professor and student can't be done through technologies (video conferencing, etc.) The idea that instruction is not effective if it isn't in person is laughable, and there is no research to back that up.

 

[erg923]

Coursework is about 15% of graduate school in this field. This really eliminates online programs as a pragmatic option.

 

[463951]

People really have to stop complaining about "online"...it is the obvious future direction of education as a whole.

No, it isn't. Well, not quality education.

 

[LPPSYD]

I'm not sure what you are talking about.

It's not like we will ban practicums, internships, and in-person training. What I mean is there is no reason that communication for course-work/projects, between professor and student can't be done through technologies (video conferencing, etc.) The idea that instruction is not effective if it isn't in person is laughable, and there is no research to back that up.

Graduate school (especially in psychology) is so much more than this. Even if we're just talking about the coursework.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Coursework is obviously required for training but the day to day mentorship and supervision is where the vast majority of learning happens (at least at the doctoral level).

ps. Adding "neuro" to everything drives me nuts. 99.9% of the time it is a bogus intervention/training.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I'm not sure what you are talking about.

It's not like we will ban practicums, internships, and in-person training. What I mean is there is no reason that communication for course-work/projects, between professor and student can't be done through technologies (video conferencing, etc.) The idea that instruction is not effective if it isn't in person is laughable, and there is no research to back that up.

The other posters pretty much addressed/stated the point I was trying to make. Coursework was probably the least significant part of my doctoral training; it was helpful, definitely, but it was only a small part of the full "grad school experience." And beyond that, I personally do feel that there are differences between attending classes in-person rather than watching them online. I haven't looked into the research in this area at all, but I'd be curious to determine how it was they were measuring outcomes.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Coursework is obviously required for training but the day to day mentorship and supervision is where the vast majority of learning happens (at least at the doctoral level).

ps. Adding "neuro" to everything drives me nuts. 99.9% of the time it is a bogus intervention/training.

+1

I remember on one of the neuropsych listserves, someone brought up this same point re: "neurocognitive" testing, and how that term is basically highly redundant. I mean, do we ever do cognitive testing that doesn't involve the brain...?

 

[psych84]

And beyond that, I personally do feel that there are differences between attending classes in-person rather than watching them online. I haven't looked into the research in this area at all, but I'd be curious to determine how it was they were measuring outcomes.

I know myself, and many of my friends, who have all gone to traditional Uni's, found that we did the best when we learned on our own (without going to class).


I also have experience of attending a distance program as well (which I preffered over the traditional). I actually had more professor contact (much much more)

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I know myself, and many of my friends, who have all gone to traditional Uni's, found that we did the best when we learned on our own (without going to class).


I also have experience of attending a distance program as well (which I preffered over the traditional). I actually had more professor contact (much much more)

People do learn differently, yes, although we can probably both throw around anecdotal experiences all day. But even in the in-person classes, the vast majority of your learning occurs outside class and "on your own;" that's just how graduate (and especially doctoral) education works. However, there's something to be said for being physically located in the same location as your professors' offices so that you can swing by and discuss what you're covering in class anytime. And the same goes with meeting with classmates. Again, much of my learning (and retention) was facilitated by regularly discussing the topics outside of class with folks in the program with me.

Edit: There were also more than a few after-class get togethers with faculty during which we continued discussing topics brought up in class. Again, and as erg pointed out, these are the types of experiences where you're actually beginning to actively manipulate and apply the information (and develop questions related to it) rather than simply being a passive recipient. And have the professor there with you to guide and provide immediate feedback helps to correct your course if you start heading down an incorrect or improbable path.

At the doctoral program, I just don't see how a good distance-learning program would end up being much different than the current setup when all was said and done. You'd still need weekly in-person supervision and research meetings, daily practicum training, and daily research participation. So basically, the "distance" part would really only come into play for the classes...and if you and the faculty are already on campus all day for those other activities, you might as well have the classes there as well.

 

[erg923]

I know myself, and many of my friends, who have all gone to traditional Uni's, found that we did the best when we learned on our own (without going to class).


I also have experience of attending a distance program as well (which I preffered over the traditional). I actually had more professor contact (much much more)

Your personal experience is not an emprical study of the subject.

Even if this were born out to be true via controlled research, your are extending an undergraduate learning paradigm to a VERY different kind of learning and skill set development (applying abtract concepts/theory into tangeable behaviors).

 

[psych84]

Your personal experience is not an emprical study of the subject.

Even if this were born out to be true via controlled research, your are extending an undergraduate learning paradigm to a VERY different kind of learning and skill set development (applying abtract concepts/theory into tangeable behaviors).

I understand your point. At the same time, there is no research to suggest that Phd training couldn't be completed in somewhat of a different manner and have the same results.

 

[OneNeuroDoctor]

I wannabe a Neuroclinicalpsychologistpsychopharmacologistsolutionfocusedfamilytherapistsocialworkerpsyciatristnursepractitioner!!!

This is what the neuropsychotherapist institute provides brain based training for.

I met a family therapist from Australia at a play therapy conference and she only had a BS degree and was certified in play therapy for children with Autism.

People are getting PhD in Education with Autism emphasis and gaining BCBA and charging $2000 bucks for evaluation and they are not even licensed. They will not accept evaluations from Licensed Psychologist claiming traditional evaluations are not valid for children with Autism!

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I understand your point. At the same time, there is no research to suggest that Phd training couldn't be completed in somewhat of a different manner and have the same results.

Very true. But in my opinion, I think the responsibility of demonstrating equivalence then falls to the programs adopting these new methods. And by all metrics, every existing distance-learning doctoral program for applied psychology falls short of the mark.

 

[erg923]

I understand your point. At the same time, there is no research to suggest that Phd training couldn't be completed in somewhat of a different manner and have the same results.

Think of it like a court case. Who has burden or proof? Prosecution of defense?

 

[KillerDiller]

ps. Adding "neuro" to everything drives me nuts. 99.9% of the time it is a bogus intervention/training.

Aw, and I was just about to go out to do some neurogardening or neurobeach-sitting .

 

[psych84]

Very true. But in my opinion, I think the responsibility of demonstrating equivalence then falls to the programs adopting these new methods. And by all metrics, every existing distance-learning doctoral program for applied psychology falls short of the mark.

I agree. But I think it be wrong to use diploma mills as an example of the potential of online education. I hope reputable, real Universities start running such programs, so we can have a fair comparison.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

We need LESS programs and MORE rigorous standards. The "same but different" mantra of online learning goes against both of these ideas,

 

[463951]

I agree. But I think it be wrong to use diploma mills as an example of the potential of online education. I hope reputable, real Universities start running such programs, so we can have a fair comparison.

All of the online clinical psychology doctoral programs are unaccredited. I think there is a reason for that. And why on earth would reputable universities begin going online??

 

[psych84]

All of the online clinical psychology doctoral programs are unaccredited. I think there is a reason for that.

So you think professional schools/diploma mills who are accredited are legit?
Pretty bad logic there.

 

[463951]

it makes it seem more cutting-edge, advanced, and scientifically-grounded. Same thing happens if you add pictures of brains

I know you weren't trying to make a joke, but this is so true and it really made me giggle.

 

[463951]

So you think professional schools/diploma mills who are accredited are legit?
Pretty bad logic there.

When did I say that?? I was talking about unaccredited online schools.

I just realized you are the person from that other thread who called students at FSPS mental patients. If I had to pick, I would guess that a student from an accredited FSPS would be a better clinician than a student from an unaccredited online school. You have so much disdain for FSPS, but none for online schools? Interesting...

 

[psych84]

When did I say that?? I was talking about unaccredited online schools.

I just realized you are the person from that other thread who called students at FSPS mental patients. If I had to pick, I would guess that a student from an accredited FSPS would be a better clinician than a student from an unaccredited online school. You have so much disdain for FSPS, but none for online schools? Interesting...

No, you said "there is a reason" they are unaccredited. I'm showing you an example of schools that are accredited that shouldn't be.

No. I've been saying that I think online education is the future, and I think adjustments can be made for it to work and have similar outcomes to traditional brick and mortar institutions. Most schools in Canada now offer at least some degrees online (yes, undergrad, but still). And we also have a reputable public-research Uni that that is totally online/distance.

What I said is I'd like to see a legit, reputable, research-Uni/college in the USA, try to come up with an online program (or blended) program.

 

[463951]

No, you said "there is a reason" they are unaccredited. I'm showing you an example of schools that are accredited that shouldn't be.

No. I've been saying that I think online education is the future, and I think adjustments can be made for it to work and have similar outcomes to traditional brick and mortar institutions. Most schools in Canada now offer at least some degrees online (yes, undergrad, but still). And we also have a reputable public-research Uni that that is totally online/distance.

What I said is I'd like to see a legit, reputable, research-Uni/college in the USA, try to come up with an online program (or blended) program.

Yes, I would agree that there are probably some FSPS schools which have received accreditation and probably shouldn't have – which ones they are – I don't know.

There is a reason that online clinical psychology graduate schools are unaccredited – they do not meet the minimum standards for APA accreditation. I don't know anything about the universities in Canada (online or not), but these online schools in the U.S. I am referring to are just horrible.

There is just no reason for a reputable uni-based program to come up with an online program, especially at the doctoral level. A few other posters have already mentioned some of the reasons why.

Why are you looking into online schools vs. a traditional setting out of curiosity?

 

[MCParent]

So you think professional schools/diploma mills who are accredited are legit?
Pretty bad logic there.

The standard definition of "diploma mill" in the education literature is a university that is not accredited for the degrees it offers (as an online doctoral degree in psych would be). You're confusing "diploma mill" with just "puts out too many students."

 

[sockit]

No, you said "there is a reason" they are unaccredited. I'm showing you an example of schools that are accredited that shouldn't be.

No. I've been saying that I think online education is the future, and I think adjustments can be made for it to work and have similar outcomes to traditional brick and mortar institutions. Most schools in Canada now offer at least some degrees online (yes, undergrad, but still). And we also have a reputable public-research Uni that that is totally online/distance.

What I said is I'd like to see a legit, reputable, research-Uni/college in the USA, try to come up with an online program (or blended) program.

yeah, but it's not just about the content knowledge per se. even apart from clinical stuff (which, huge), professional training involves being socialized into the profession - taking on its norms, etc. not easily done online. plus, when you work under people face to face, you can observe their process in real time, ask questions, etc.

 

[psych84]

Why are you looking into online schools vs. a traditional setting out of curiosity?

I'm not, at least not in the US. But there is a Masters level Psychology program that is course-based in Canada (from reputable Uni in Canada) that I am considering. There aren't any good online programs in the USA, and i am not considering any others.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

I agree. But I think it be wrong to use diploma mills as an example of the potential of online education. I hope reputable, real Universities start running such programs, so we can have a fair comparison.

I would like to add to much of what has been stated; evidence is needed for program facilitation (e.g. distance graduate school learning). A great example of this actually comes from teleneuropsychology; while certain modalities of testing a patient may be feasible, reliable and valid (e.g. videoconference vs. face-to-face), not all assessments have been tested within different modalities. Every program is different, especially if you are trying to indicate that the future of education is online. Who is to say that educational outcomes from a Ph.D. program in developmental psychology is going to be the same as a Ph.D. program in clinical psychology? Again, that would be like saying that the WAIS4 is feasible, reliable and valid in a videoconference setting, so all neuropsychological tests must be valid in this case.

Ultimately, as AA had mentioned, we can't say that because one online program is working best in one field of academia, all fields must operate the same way. Besides, I am not sure if using "reputable" universities will be the gold standard. Maybe, maybe not.

 

[CogNeuroGuy]

Back on topic...yeah, I saw someone on LinkedIn the other day who has a master's degree in counseling and works at a spine/back institute and has decided to coin their position as a neuropsychotherapist. I could certainly see someone providing rehabilitation counseling to someone who has suffered a CNS injury, but the approach in therapy wouldn't be super special...like, providing "medial-temporal lobe therapy."

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I know you weren't trying to make a joke, but this is so true and it really made me giggle.

Hah, no worries, it actually was meant to be a bit of a joke.