Non-APA Accredited Clinical Programs

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

leikcaj

Junior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
There's been a lot of talk about APA-accredited programs that are a little suspect, but very little has been discussed about clinical psych programs that are non-APA accredited. How disadvantaged are students who apply to those programs if they eventually want to be liscensed or want to get a job after getting a PhD? Do they have problems getting APA accredited internships? It seems that there are a few experimental psychopathology programs (i.e. Harvard) or developmental clinical programs (Bryn Mawr) that give you an option of a clinical track that matches liscensing requirements, but the programs themselves aren't APA-accredited. So what's the good/bad of being in one of these programs?

Members don't see this ad.
 
leikcaj said:
There's been a lot of talk about APA-accredited programs that are a little suspect, but very little has been discussed about clinical psych programs that are non-APA accredited. How disadvantaged are students who apply to those programs if they eventually want to be liscensed or want to get a job after getting a PhD? Do they have problems getting APA accredited internships? It seems that there are a few experimental psychopathology programs (i.e. Harvard) or developmental clinical programs (Bryn Mawr) that give you an option of a clinical track that matches liscensing requirements, but the programs themselves are APA-accredited. So what's the good/bad of being in one of these programs?

APA accreditation simply means you'll have FAR fewer hurdles to jump through if you'd like to get your license -- supposedly graduating from an APA accredited program "assures" the licensing board that you've had the necessary training.

Of course, take APA accreditation with a grain of salt. Some of the worst programs are APA accredited. As you mention, Harvard's program has not recently been APA accredited because they have no interest in producing clinicians (those who would seek a license), only dedicated academic researchers.
 
JatPenn said:
APA accreditation simply means you'll have FAR fewer hurdles to jump through if you'd like to get your license -- supposedly graduating from an APA accredited program "assures" the licensing board that you've had the necessary training.

Of course, take APA accreditation with a grain of salt. Some of the worst programs are APA accredited. As you mention, Harvard's program has not recently been APA accredited because they have no interest in producing clinicians (those who would seek a license), only dedicated academic researchers.

Yeah that's what got me thinking - if it's really clinical research that I'm interested in, then maybe it doesn't make a huge difference whether I graduate from an APA accredited program or not... though I guess having that extra option is always a nice thing. Food for thought.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Here in Ca, and in Co APA accreditation has nothing to do with licensing regulations. Schools must be accredited by a regional accreditation body (WASC etc.). Some places have adopted APA as some sort of arbitrary measure of quality, but it is really meaningless when it comes to getting your license.
 
leikcaj said:
Yeah that's what got me thinking - if it's really clinical research that I'm interested in, then maybe it doesn't make a huge difference whether I graduate from an APA accredited program or not... though I guess having that extra option is always a nice thing. Food for thought.

Actually, you will have a very tough road ahead of you if you want a purely research career without APA accredited training.

If you puruse any of the current academic job ads for clinical psychology, most (if not all) will specify that they will only consider individuals who have graduated from an APA-accredited program. Also, several of the top internships that churn out clinical researchers are pretty picky about selecting people from APA-accredited programs. Just as an example, look at Brown's stats:

http://www.appic.org/directory/program_display.asp?programID=495

Using the data they report, they have not had one intern from a non-APA accredited program.

Finally, regarding Harvard's program - there's more to it than what has been posted. Historically, it was an "experimental psychopathology" program with no clinical training. In about 2000, they decided to start a clinical track, with promises to their students that they would seek APA accreditation at the earliest possible time (5 years from inception, or 2005). Having known people in that program, it has been quite rocky - at one point, there was even discussion of dismantling the clinical program and returning to an purely experimental psychopathology program. I think that they have resolved some of those issues, but at the same time, have still not received APA accreditation. I don't think it's because they have no interest in seeking it.

As in most cases, I say buyer beware. It's ultimately your choice, but I think you will have to overcome a lot of hurdles and bureaucracy to make it worth your while.
 
leikcaj said:
There's been a lot of talk about APA-accredited programs that are a little suspect, but very little has been discussed about clinical psych programs that are non-APA accredited. How disadvantaged are students who apply to those programs if they eventually want to be liscensed or want to get a job after getting a PhD? Do they have problems getting APA accredited internships? It seems that there are a few experimental psychopathology programs (i.e. Harvard) or developmental clinical programs (Bryn Mawr) that give you an option of a clinical track that matches liscensing requirements, but the programs themselves aren't APA-accredited. So what's the good/bad of being in one of these programs?

Well, I can't speak about the implications of a non-apa accredited degree on a research career... but, it's a BIG No-No if you ever decided to fall back on clinical practice, full time or part time... I personally know of a situation where there was a clinician who attended an non-apa accredited program...accumulated all the ours and actually took the PEP... and this person was actually rejected from the state's board to qualify for licensing... and this person apparently went to a big time research school... you don't want to be in that position... licensing, regardless if you are going to use it or not... it's important to have and it will carry you a long way....
 
That is what they want you to think. I have been in clinical practice, on staff at every hospital I have requested privileges for, on every insurance panel I have wanted to be on, and without any limitations with a NON-APA accredited degree. I have said this a million times, but will do so again because people need real information, not APA propaganda; If you can get licensed in your state you are on equal footing with anyone with the same license. I have never once had anyone question my degree............. :cool:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
FYI, I believe that Harvard is working toward accreditation.
 
APA accreditation is equal to agreeing to operate on a political-correct, unfalsifyable premise that traditional wisdom makes sense. That is their focus; pushing hot political issues with no emperical support. I chose NOT to go to one of these schools because of what I wrote above, and because I felt I needed more focus on bio, neuro, chemo as opposed to positive :) psych, defense of AA and its many variants, mesearch taken literally, and the association with thoughsands of egg-heads like me who believe the party line. ............mein kamptf.
 
Interesting article here:

http://gradpsych.apags.org/apr04/accreditation.cfm

I know psisci will proclaim that it's "propaganda," but I found it to be relatively straightforward in terms of clarifying some of the issues. Of particular note, it calls out at least 3 states (as of 2004) that will only license psychologists who have APA-accredited training.

Also, for those states who do accept people for licensure who have graduated from non-APA programs, the onus is on the applicant to demonstrate that they met the standards for licensure. So you essentially have to put together all of this documentation to demonstrate that your training was the equivalent of APA-accredited training. Yet if you really do graduate from an APA-accredited program, they basically take your word on it (except for Massachusetts who puts everyone through the ringer - but that's another story!).
 
In Ca. The school with the highest EPPP pass rates is not APA, WASC or otherwise accredited because they are small, cannot have a library with all the politically correct books, and all the other requirements accreditation bodies need that have nothing to do with quality. Accreditation in general is a political process much more so than a quality assurance process, and APA is the worst in this regard. If I were a student now I would probably feel the need to go to an APA school, and an APA internship etc, but only because if you don't...look out from those who did. Clinical psych training in the USA is very much like communism, but it does not have to be, nor should it be that way. Make your own way....... :cool:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
psisci said:
This is not fiction young Jedi....... :)

I'm confused by your distinction. I agree with your comments about APA facism but fact vs. fiction? Is the APA selling fact or fiction? Perhaps the fictional character I mentioned gets closer to the "truth" of "making your own way"...

...or did you think I was just being snotty?
 
Could you please let me know which program you are talking about, since I desperately search for exactely the qualities you mentioned about them.

The only one I can think of would be RYOKAN.

I am sick and tired of the APA politics and think it is only about sucking money.

Thank you in advance.

Best

:thumbup:
 
Here in Ca, and in Co APA accreditation has nothing to do with licensing regulations. Schools must be accredited by a regional accreditation body (WASC etc.). Some places have adopted APA as some sort of arbitrary measure of quality, but it is really meaningless when it comes to getting your license.

Dear 50960,
I wish I could get your email, so I can ask more questions. I was thinking of
The Chicago School of Professional Psychology for my PsyD. Why becasue I must work and they have a program where I can work and attend in person on the weekends. My masters only lets me pursue the LPCC.
 
Certain SDNers can claim that APA accreditation does not matter for either your program or internship, but it does, ESPECIALLY in the world of clinical research. If you are not interested in any kind of clinical work, then go get a different psychology research degree. However, for the vast majority of clinical research positions, coming from a non-APA accredited program means you WILL NOT EVEN BE CONSIDERED. So, it's on you. Make your choice, but you have the information.
 
Dear 50960,
I wish I could get your email, so I can ask more questions. I was thinking of
The Chicago School of Professional Psychology for my PsyD. Why becasue I must work and they have a program where I can work and attend in person on the weekends. My masters only lets me pursue the LPCC.

Face-palm. Here we go with the "I'm too busy for a doctorate so somebody please accommodate me" BS again. I mean, what race to the bottom! Now its whittled down to weekends only?! Are your for real this, dude? How bout we call it the "Psy.D reserves." One weekend a month and 2 weeks a year. Boom..Psy,.D in 2 years now. No internship. Awesome!
 
Last edited:
Licensure is important as it's the government hoop set up that allows us to legally call ourselves a psychologist or psychotherapist and charge money for our time on that basis.

Let's pretend that licensure didn't exist. What, then, would be the justification of going to a school like CSPP or Walden? No employer would hire you. Research positions are out of the question. The preparation they would give you for starting a clinical practice would be substandard at best, and hugely overpriced considering you could spend half as much on a clinical masters program and get paid pretty much the same rate.
 
In Ca. The school with the highest EPPP pass rates is not APA, WASC or otherwise accredited because they are small, cannot have a library with all the politically correct books, and all the other requirements accreditation bodies need that have nothing to do with quality. Accreditation in general is a political process much more so than a quality assurance process, and APA is the worst in this regard. If I were a student now I would probably feel the need to go to an APA school, and an APA internship etc, but only because if you don't...look out from those who did. Clinical psych training in the USA is very much like communism, but it does not have to be, nor should it be that way. Make your own way....... :cool:

you probably went to california school of integral studies. This one is not accredited and students are not able to land internships or qualify for most employment positions.

Wow, stop spreading misinformation. Without an APA program, you cannot apply to most accredited internships and postdoctoral positions. You will need an internship and postdoctoral hours to get licensed in CA (3,000 to be exact). You will also need an APA program to qualify for most employment settings (hospitals, VA, counseling centers). Your advice is more likely to set people up for a useless degree and unemployment.
 
you probably went to california school of integral studies. This one is not accredited and students are not able to land internships or qualify for most employment positions.

Wow, stop spreading misinformation. Without an APA program, you cannot apply to most accredited internships and postdoctoral positions. You will need an internship and postdoctoral hours to get licensed in CA (3,000 to be exact). You will also need an APA program to qualify for most employment settings (hospitals, VA, counseling centers). Your advice is more likely to set people up for a useless degree and unemployment.

was from like 6 years ago. I'm sure he is standing in line for his obama phone now. ;)

I "like the fight the system" attitude he displays though. That pays the bills...
 
In Ca. The school with the highest EPPP pass rates is not APA, WASC or otherwise accredited because they are small, cannot have a library with all the politically correct books, and all the other requirements accreditation bodies need that have nothing to do with quality. :

Again, not true at all. The schools with the highest EPPP pass rates in CA are the UC schools (all APA accredited). UCSD, UCSB, Berkeley.
 
Sorry if this is a little off-topic but I had to ask with all of the conversations going on here and in other threads about the best type of program to enter to get into the field of psychology...

...with all of the difficulties in the clinical psych field nowadays why are non-accredited programs and FSPS even allowed to exist? They don't seem to add anything of use to the field and the APA as a governing body would (it would seem to me) have an obligation to weed out these programs to get the field back to stable ground...


It's mind-boggling to me...ok, random thought out of the way....

Regarding non-accredited programs, the APA has essentially done all it can to in effect "weed out" those programs...by not offering them accreditation. It can't, however, force them to close down. The next step would be to have all states require APA accreditation at the doctoral level. Some do, but I agree that the APA should be doing more to lobby legislatures so that this is the case in all states.

As for FSPS (depending on how it's defined), that's a more difficult question. If the schools meet APA criteria, then the APA essentially must accredit them. That, and $$ talks in the form of financial support of the APA by schools and its graduates.
 
This IS the reason why free standing schools with terrible outcomes are accredited. The APA actually gets more money if the class size is enormous:

Annual Accreditation Fee

Doctoral Programs (1-50 Students) — invoiced Aug. 1 $3,750
Doctoral Programs (51+ Students) — invoiced Aug. 1 $4,250

Appeal
Program must provide payment with submission of its letter of appeal.
Doctoral Programs $5,000

Application Fee (Doctoral Programs)

Doctoral Programs (1-50 Students) $3,750
Doctoral Programs (51+ Students) $4,250
 
Yeah, to me if a program isn't APA-accredited that is REALLY bad because there are some pretty terrible programs that managed to get accredited.
 
This IS the reason why free standing schools with terrible outcomes are accredited. The APA actually gets more money if the class size is enormous:

Annual Accreditation Fee

Doctoral Programs (1-50 Students) — invoiced Aug. 1 $3,750
Doctoral Programs (51+ Students) — invoiced Aug. 1 $4,250

Appeal
Program must provide payment with submission of its letter of appeal.
Doctoral Programs $5,000

Application Fee (Doctoral Programs)

Doctoral Programs (1-50 Students) $3,750
Doctoral Programs (51+ Students) $4,250

Hah. Accreditation as a volume business.
 
Sorry if this is a little off-topic but I had to ask with all of the conversations going on here and in other threads about the best type of program to enter to get into the field of psychology...

...with all of the difficulties in the clinical psych field nowadays why are non-accredited programs and FSPS even allowed to exist? They don't seem to add anything of use to the field and the APA as a governing body would (it would seem to me) have an obligation to weed out these programs to get the field back to stable ground...


It's mind-boggling to me...ok, random thought out of the way....

I understand the sentiment behind these questions and fully support stringent requirements and outcome data to justify the maintenance of a clinical psychology program. When this question about non-accredited programs being allowed to exist, though, I always wonder what would need to be in place in order to allow new clinical programs to develop.

Let's go for an extreme (i.e., ideal but likely non-representative) example: let's say hypothetically a university in a rural, underserved area has an established psychology department with undergraduate and M.A. programs. They wish to develop a clinical psychology Ph.D. program. The proposed program would follow the scientist-practitioner model of training, have small class sizes (e.g., 4-6 students/year), and be fully funded.

What sort of process should be in place to support the development of a clinical psychology program not currently accredited? I realize this is a different circumstance than what most people refer to when discussing non-accredited programs, but new programs are still (justifiably) non-accredited, so it seems to be an obstacle that would need to be addressed.
 
I understand the sentiment behind these questions and fully support stringent requirements and outcome data to justify the maintenance of a clinical psychology program. When this question about non-accredited programs being allowed to exist, though, I always wonder what would need to be in place in order to allow new clinical programs to develop.

Let's go for an extreme (i.e., ideal but likely non-representative) example: let's say hypothetically a university in a rural, underserved area has an established psychology department with undergraduate and M.A. programs. They wish to develop a clinical psychology Ph.D. program. The proposed program would follow the scientist-practitioner model of training, have small class sizes (e.g., 4-6 students/year), and be fully funded.

What sort of process should be in place to support the development of a clinical psychology program not currently accredited? I realize this is a different circumstance than what most people refer to when discussing non-accredited programs, but new programs are still (justifiably) non-accredited, so it seems to be an obstacle that would need to be addressed.

I'm from an accredited program that pretty much matches your description. I think the way to handle "startups" like that is to give them a time frame, eg. This program has 7 years from inception to become accredited before being disbanded. At the 10 year mark, this program must be putting 60% of its students into APA accredited internship positions, etc.

Feel free to debate my numbers, but at least I'm throwing out a starting point.
The other option is for the APA to take a stand and say something like NO NEW PROGRAMS WILL BE ACCREDITED FOR 10 YEARS, thus halting any new programs from even thinking about existing, and as such controlling a tad more of the over-saturation of psychologists.
 
I'm from an accredited program that pretty much matches your description. I think the way to handle "startups" like that is to give them a time frame, eg. This program has 7 years from inception to become accredited before being disbanded. At the 10 year mark, this program must be putting 60% of its students into APA accredited internship positions, etc.

Feel free to debate my numbers, but at least I'm throwing out a starting point.
The other option is for the APA to take a stand and say something like NO NEW PROGRAMS WILL BE ACCREDITED FOR 10 YEARS, thus halting any new programs from even thinking about existing, and as such controlling a tad more of the over-saturation of psychologists.

Personally, I don't think I'd be against such a moratorium on new program accreditation. It would then afford the APA more time and resources to focus on improving the current accreditation process and standards, addressing the internship imbalance (in a way that's actually constructive and likely to produce results), and improving lobbying efforts to have psychologists and psychological practice better represented in new legislation.
 
Dear 50960,
I wish I could get your email, so I can ask more questions. I was thinking of
The Chicago School of Professional Psychology for my PsyD. Why becasue I must work and they have a program where I can work and attend in person on the weekends. My masters only lets me pursue the LPCC.

What did you decide? I am thinking of doing the same thing because it is only every other weekend. I recently was accepted, but worried about it not being APA certified and the cost factor, too:-(
 
What did you decide? I am thinking of doing the same thing because it is only every other weekend. I recently was accepted, but worried about it not being APA certified and the cost factor, too:-(

Do a search on this forum about non-APA accredited programs. The folks who attend these programs as well as other non-reputable APA programs (see alliant, argosy) always seem to post on this forum once they are unemployed, cannot get licensed, take on an unpaid postdoc, or would like to find out how to earn more $ because they can't survive on the salary with loans. Some post here because they want to drop out and need advice while others post about all the horribly unethical crap that goes on behind the scenes. It's not pretty.

Check out this the last post from someone who left an unaccredited program: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/archive/index.php/t-939542.html
 
Last edited:
What did you decide? I am thinking of doing the same thing because it is only every other weekend. I recently was accepted, but worried about it not being APA certified and the cost factor, too:-(

Weekend doctorates?! :laugh:

Are you paying them for ink on the diploma too....
 
What did you decide? I am thinking of doing the same thing because it is only every other weekend. I recently was accepted, but worried about it not being APA certified and the cost factor, too:-(

IMHO:

Funded, APA accredited > funded, unaccredited (e.g., seeking accreditation) > unfunded, APA accredited > unfunded, unaccredited

If debt would be a problem for you and you have any career interests whatsoever beyond setting up a private practice, getting a PsyD from an unaccredited, unfunded program is probably the worst idea of all. Even if money was no object and all you wanted to do was private practice, I'd still say there are far better options out there (e.g., looking into functioning as a masters level therapist, for example).
 
Unacred. is a real barrier for almost any job that isn't private practice, and even then the insurance companies may not allow you on their panel w/o coming from an APA-acred program. Some gov't jobs require it (with no exceptions) and others strongly prefer it...which in practical terms mean they will require it if there is *any* kind of competition for the job. Most/All hospitals won't want to go through the hassle of trying to get someone credentialed who hasn't completed APA x2 and is licensed or at least license eligible. Having to "prove equivalency" is asking for trouble with licensing and also on a job hunt because there are too many other clinicians who have the background and are already licensed.

APA acred program (at least partially funded if not fully funded)
APA acred internship
Formal post-doc/fellowship

Anything less than that and the student is asking for an uphill battle for at least their early career if not their entire career.
 
Here are a few listings of recent jobs posted to a popular psych listserv. I copied the ones that were for doctoral-level candidates and specified degree training and/or boarding requirements. I added the red font.

---------------------------------------------------------
Barrow Neurological Institute At Phoenix Childrens Hospital
Pediatric Psychologist

Required Qualifications: Qualifications for the position include doctoral training and internship at APA-accredited programs, with post-doctoral training in a medical setting. Graduate and internship training with an emphasis on assessment and treatment of children and families affected by medical illness, and experience with pediatric consultation/liaison work is essential. At least three years of demonstrated, post-doctoral experience and proficiency with crisis assessment, family therapy, and brief therapeutic intervention with children and teens with medical conditions is strongly preferred. The successful candidate must be board certified or eligible, with board certification obtained within 1 year of initial employment with PCH, and having obtained psychology licensure by the State of Arizona prior to the employment start date.
---
Stony Brook University

Postdoctoral Associate Position at Stony Brook University
Qualifications: a doctoral degree in clinical psychology, completion of an APA-approved internship, demonstrated knowledge of psychotherapy outcome research, as well as a minimum of one first-authored publication.
---

Boise State University

University Health Services: Counseling
The preferred candidate will have:
·Five (5) years experience in similar type of work, or three (3) years experience in same type of work.
·Board credentialed or eligible for credentialing in the supervision of professional interns and trainees.
---

Weill Cornell Medical College's Department of Psychiatry

Weill Cornell Medical College's Department of Psychiatry is seeking a full-time child psychologist to join our faculty for a clinical position based at the NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Westchester Division in White Plains, New York.

Minimum requirements: Applicants must have a doctoral degree in Clinical Psychology from an APA-accredited program and should possess or be eligible for NY state licensure. Start date is flexible with earliest start date July 1, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------
 
Sorry to be cynical, but you'd be better off withdrawing all of your money from the bank, putting it into a pile and burning it, and going to prison for at least the next 6 yrs. It is a terrible financial and career move to pay for a degree that at best will gain you very little and worst will limit your career options severely.

I have a friend in PP who went to a program that was accredited when he went there but lost its accreditation 2-3 yrs after he graduated. One large insurance panel that he was on dropped him because of this. Imagine explaining that one to your patients! I imagine the hurdles are even greater if your program was not accredited at all.

Don't do it!

Dr. E
 
but you'd be better off withdrawing all of your money from the bank, putting it into a pile and burning it, and going to prison for at least the next 6 yrs.

I HAVE to borrow this!!

I have a standard one that I like to use too, if you want to trade? :laugh:
 
Sorry to be cynical, but you'd be better off withdrawing all of your money from the bank, putting it into a pile and burning it, and going to prison for at least the next 6 yrs.

BUT....then I can tell everyone that I am a DR. Dammit, I Deserve the title DR. (my parents told me I can do anything growing up).
 
What's your phrase?

"I haven't seen so much crying since little Johnny's soccer team went 0-12 and he saw the other kids getting trophies. Never fear, society made sure that when I paid my sons league fees that little Johnny got one too. Doctorates for all!"
 
What about APA-equivalent programs?

I have read many of the posts on here.... but I have a very specific question to posit. It may vary state to state, but I know for a fact that in Colorado (where I am), a person may attend and APA-equivalent program, and apply for and receive licensure, because I called the office of licensure in Colorado and they said they've issued psychology licenses before and will again for APA-equivalent, Walden and Capella U programs, respectively. I have in mind either Fielding Graduate, which is a hybrid program at a 150K price tag, or Walden or Capella at a 75K price tag.

Given that I can receive a license, what is the selling point for the APA accredited? Is it worth the extra 75K to say I have a psychology license and I graduated from an APA-accredited university, rather than simply that I have a psychology license? I hope to do clinical practice, and am finishing up a masters program as a mental health counselor right now. I'm not really sure how important it will be to me to do research, down the road.

I'm open to advice from any and all takers...

~Jake
 
What about APA-equivalent programs?
This isn't a thing. Accreditation is a legal ability bestowed on organizations by the department of education. Only the APA can accredit psychology graduate programs. Programs can call their program APA-equivalent or APA-adjacent or APA-emulating or whatever they want, but it means nothing at all.
State boards decide who can be licensed. State boards vary in what they think of non-APA programs, and among non-APA programs vary in what they think of those. You can read the rules for every state on the board web sites.
I have in mind either Fielding Graduate, which is a hybrid program at a 150K price tag, or Walden or Capella at a 75K price tag.
All of those programs have poor outcomes for their graduates in terms of internship match rates
https://www.appic.org/Portals/0/downloads/APPIC_Match_Rates_2011-14_by_Univ.pdf
and EPPP pass rates
http://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.asppb.net/resource/resmgr/EPPP_/2012_ASPPB_Exam_Scores_by_Do.pdf
I wouldn't go to any of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
What about APA-equivalent programs?

I have read many of the posts on here.... but I have a very specific question to posit. It may vary state to state, but I know for a fact that in Colorado (where I am), a person may attend and APA-equivalent program, and apply for and receive licensure, because I called the office of licensure in Colorado and they said they've issued psychology licenses before and will again for APA-equivalent, Walden and Capella U programs, respectively. I have in mind either Fielding Graduate, which is a hybrid program at a 150K price tag, or Walden or Capella at a 75K price tag.

Given that I can receive a license, what is the selling point for the APA accredited? Is it worth the extra 75K to say I have a psychology license and I graduated from an APA-accredited university, rather than simply that I have a psychology license? I hope to do clinical practice, and am finishing up a masters program as a mental health counselor right now. I'm not really sure how important it will be to me to do research, down the road.

I'm open to advice from any and all takers...

~Jake

First of all, "apa equivalent" is make believe. This is not a thing.

To answer your question: It will be very difficult to get a internship. It will be very difficult to get a post-doc. Why hire you, when there is NO shortage of individuals from programs who actually have the APAs blessing?

Your salary will likely, if we are looking at the mode, be less than 100k, and it will take years to get there. Common financial sense dictates you don't take out loans greater than your expected starting salary. 75k in loans in too much, although you can get by.

Your lack of apparent concern about the quality and rigor of your training (just want to be able to get a license, apparently), as evidenced by opting for programs that by all objective metrics provide the worst possible training, its a red flag to this psychologist. Who is also, by the way, an assistant director of an internship training program (who can't accept students from non-APA accredited programs and probably wouldn't even if we could).
 
Last edited:
There's an online medical school. It doesn't mean that the graduates get into residency, get to practice, or get good jobs.

75k now could yield you a 30k-80k difference in starting salary. Pays off in 1-3 years. Going to a crap program could result in getting no offers, meaning that 75k will cost over 100k in student loans over the course of maturity.

Last time I hired someone, I got Ecp applicants from great programs, professors, etc. I also got a few from these bs online schools. Immediately went in the trash. One had the gall to email me using text shorthand. Obviously I didn't respond. She then emailed back and asked for advice for future applications. What do you say? "My best advice is to learn how to use English?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
In Ca. The school with the highest EPPP pass rates is not APA, WASC or otherwise accredited because they are small, cannot have a library with all the politically correct books, and all the other requirements accreditation bodies need that have nothing to do with quality. Accreditation in general is a political process much more so than a quality assurance process, and APA is the worst in this regard. If I were a student now I would probably feel the need to go to an APA school, and an APA internship etc, but only because if you don't...look out from those who did. Clinical psych training in the USA is very much like communism, but it does not have to be, nor should it be that way. Make your own way....... :cool:
Did anyone ever figure out what this (probably mythical) school is?
 
Did anyone ever figure out what this (probably mythical) school is?

The communism reference was interesting. I do not recall my professors sharing any of their yearly earnings with the lower class...:)
 
Last edited:
Top