Palo Alto University

[Doctor Eliza]

I agree that higher education costs are an issue, and I think that goes even moreso when you're looking at fields like psychology with lower salaries on average. An engineer may be able to handle 100k of debt for a BA; an English major likely won't.

Yes. I went to a funded program and have no grad school debt (and only $75/month left from UG). As a PP psychologist approaching 4 yrs post-PhD graduation, I simply cannot imagine shouldering ANY debt on my income. It is very hard to make ends meet. I have found job opportunities very limited (other than PP w/ no benefits) even though I live in a reasonably-sized city with a non-saturated market.

On the other hand, I'm glad that the PAU folks on here have enjoyed their training experiences. Grad school was miserable for me, but I had an awesome UG experience. Many people would say that what my family paid for UG wasn't worth it, but I couldn't imagine my life without those experiences.

Best,
Dr. E

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[SFPsyd]

Kaiser pay is too low and private practice out of the gate sounds like death to me (unless you're some sort of driven, brilliant businessperson).

Having previously worked at Kaiser and now full-time PP, I would agree that starting off full-time private practice right off the bat would be killer (though not undoable if you have business savvy). As for Kaiser there are positive and negatives for sure, but as far as salaried positions I'm not quite sure where you get the "pay too low" information. Kaiser salaries start at around 105k, with steps increasing thereafter each year up to around 140 or so. Not to mention good benefits. I left because I was tired of working in a bureaucracy and wanted to do my own thing, but if you are looking for a salaried clinical position it is tough to beat (along with the VA).

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

What kind of caseload did you have at Kaiser? I have talked w. a few people in the past and I got the impression that their billable requirements are pretty high.

 

[PHD12]

Having previously worked at Kaiser and now full-time PP, I would agree that starting off full-time private practice right off the bat would be killer (though not undoable if you have business savvy). As for Kaiser there are positive and negatives for sure, but as far as salaried positions I'm not quite sure where you get the "pay too low" information. Kaiser salaries start at around 105k, with steps increasing thereafter each year up to around 140 or so. Not to mention good benefits. I left because I was tired of working in a bureaucracy and wanted to do my own thing, but if you are looking for a salaried clinical position it is tough to beat (along with the VA).

The salary isn't bad at Kaiser, but from what I learned you are mostly doing intakes (you will get between 4-8 new patients per week depending on the kaiser site), taking on frequent walk in shifts (8 hours per week is what I commonly heard), managing a large case load of 200+ patients, and funneling them through groups and psychoeducational courses. Most of your patients you will see very infrequently unless they are having a crisis. If you are going to spend 5-7 years in graduate school and pay 200K, I don't know if this is going to be your dream job. I believe that they are the largest employers of psychologists in the area and they are a common employer for PGSP graduates. If someone wants to have autonomy and see patients intensively, its not really a good fit. At least they are paying well enough for the demanding nature of the position. The psychologists there are very open about the demanding workload and emphasize that groups and classes are the primary treatment modality. I think it can work well for someone who likes to be in a very fast paced setting and enjoys brief therapy and juggling a large caseload.

Given the job market in California for psychologists, its actually pretty tough to land a psychologist position at Kaiser these days. Many of the psychologists are pretty solid due to being in a desirable location.

 

[jenna1]

Btw, jenna1, you work with Greene? That's really awesome, I have one of his MMPI-2 books.

I did He retired. It was nice learning from him (he wasn't always the easiest to work with, but I am honored that I did..lol).

 

[jenna1]

Agreed. My thinking was that by having the program switch to a fully-funded model, the cohort sizes would likely necessarily significantly decrease.

I agree. I do think our school should allow less people in. This would make a huge difference.

 

[jenna1]

I whole-heartedly agree (and would say that in the majority of circumstances, $100k for a bachelor's is not worth it).

As has been mentioned above, the internship placement list for PAU has many solid sites on there, which goes along with one of the themes I think I'd mentioned earlier--that few people are necessarily questioning the general quality of training at PAU, particularly in the PsyD program; the PhD program does still have less-than-ideal APA internship match rates (although the overall rates are fine) along with rather large cohort sizes (70+ for the past few years).

The trouble is that the school is continuing to further the cycle of increasing program costs as well as turning out large numbers of graduates to an already-saturated geographic market. That'd be my biggest gripe. If the program were fully- or partially-funded, for example, I'd likely have no qualms.

Edit: As an aside, best of luck with internship. I know all of us "on the other side" of the table can relate to how stressful the process truly is.

Thank you! I am excited and nervous to see where (if...) I will be next year!

 

[jenna1]

Next you are going to tell me that they turned down APA internships to attend unpaid, unaccredited positions (like CAPIC) that will significantly limit their employment and post-doc opportunities. That seems very likely.

btw, university based PHD programs do not have 50% match rates. Free standing schools are responsible for the vast majority of unmatched applicants. Everywhere I applied had a 90% or above apa match rate and my program is usually around 100%. Its not uncommon for university programs to be at 90-100%.

Our school STRONGLY discourages students from applying to CAPIC. I can't defend the ones who made that decision (but I will not complain about their personal decisions, either). Our school assigns EVERY student with an internship advisor EXCEPT those who are going to apply to CAPIC (b/c the application/process is much easier). I am not going to justify or defend something that is not attached to the priorities of my school.

 

[PHD12]

Our school STRONGLY discourages students from applying to CAPIC. I can't defend the ones who made that decision (but I will not complain about their personal decisions, either). Our school assigns EVERY student with an internship advisor EXCEPT those who are going to apply to CAPIC (b/c the application/process is much easier). I am not going to justify or defend something that is not attached to the priorities of my school.

It may not be a priority, but at the same time they are allowing a good number of students to graduate with CAPIC internships (20% in the most recent year). University based programs do not generally allow students to graduate without an APA internships (in some programs you have to petition and this may be granted under very extreme circumstances). I think the whole CAPIC process is unethical given that many of the positions are unpaid and full-time (some are "paid" with 3,000 stipends). I think the program has the responsibility for quality control. They should only let in the number of students that are matching for apa internships, which is around 40 not 80. Its not really ethical for them to allow 70-80 students into the program knowing that only half are matching.

Just out of curiosity, what is the role of the internship advisor? Are these professors or alumni?

 

[Kriya]

It may not be a priority, but at the same time they are allowing a good number of students to graduate with CAPIC internships (20% in the most recent year). University based programs do not generally allow students to graduate without an APA internships (in some programs you have to petition and this may be granted under very extreme circumstances). I think the whole CAPIC process is unethical given that many of the positions are unpaid and full-time (some are "paid" with 3,000 stipends). I think the program has the responsibility for quality control. They should only let in the number of students that are matching for apa internships, which is around 40 not 80. Its not really ethical for them to allow 70-80 students into the program knowing that only half are matching.

Just out of curiosity, what is the role of the internship advisor? Are these professors or alumni?

Incidentally, the PGSP-Stanford PsyD Consortium has just announced a shift to an APA-only model. Ie, moving forward, PsyD students can *only* apply for APA internships (with wiggle room for very special exceptions).

 

[LETSGONYR]

It may not be a priority, but at the same time they are allowing a good number of students to graduate with CAPIC internships (20% in the most recent year). University based programs do not generally allow students to graduate without an APA internships (in some programs you have to petition and this may be granted under very extreme circumstances). I think the whole CAPIC process is unethical given that many of the positions are unpaid and full-time (some are "paid" with 3,000 stipends). I think the program has the responsibility for quality control. They should only let in the number of students that are matching for apa internships, which is around 40 not 80. Its not really ethical for them to allow 70-80 students into the program knowing that only half are matching.

Just out of curiosity, what is the role of the internship advisor? Are these professors or alumni?

You've posted this like seven times, and seem to be forgetting about APPIC internships. Not that they are amazing, but non-APA does not necessarily mean CAPIC. APPIC internships are required to fund interns, for example.

 

[PHD12]

You've posted this like seven times, and seem to be forgetting about APPIC internships. Not that they are amazing, but non-APA does not necessarily mean CAPIC. APPIC internships are required to fund interns, for example.

20% last year specifically did CAPIC internships. Seems like a high number to me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I personally also think APPIC places significant limitations on your career based on my experiences with the post-doc process. Without my apa internship, I am pretty confident that I would not have landed any post doc position or job for which I applied for in California.

 

[LETSGONYR]

20% last year specifically did CAPIC internships. Seems like a high number to me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I personally also think APPIC places significant limitations on your career based on my experiences with the post-doc process. Without my apa internship, I am pretty confident that I would not have landed any post doc position or job for which I applied for in California.

Oh I agree, CAPIC seems like a very poor idea and 20% is a lot. Personally I did not apply to any non-APA internships, as I want a neuro postdoc. I didn't even apply anywhere in California. Honestly, I hadn't heard of PAU prior to this thread. .

Just stating that APPIC exists.

 

[Psychadelic2012]

It may not be a priority, but at the same time they are allowing a good number of students to graduate with CAPIC internships (20% in the most recent year). University based programs do not generally allow students to graduate without an APA internships (in some programs you have to petition and this may be granted under very extreme circumstances). I think the whole CAPIC process is unethical given that many of the positions are unpaid and full-time (some are "paid" with 3,000 stipends). I think the program has the responsibility for quality control. They should only let in the number of students that are matching for apa internships, which is around 40 not 80. Its not really ethical for them to allow 70-80 students into the program knowing that only half are matching.

Just out of curiosity, what is the role of the internship advisor? Are these professors or alumni?

20% last year specifically did CAPIC internships. Seems like a high number to me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I personally also think APPIC places significant limitations on your career based on my experiences with the post-doc process. Without my apa internship, I am pretty confident that I would not have landed any post doc position or job for which I applied for in California.

This is misleading. You are responding to jenna and she is in the PsyD program, which does *not* have these statistics: http://www.paloaltou.edu/sites/default/files/PsyD c-20 Data Complete_FINAL 9.27.12.pdf.

You are probably citing the PhD program. This has been discussed--they are different.

 

[PHD12]

Thought she was in the PhD program the entire time.....

 

[Psychadelic2012]

Oh. I thought PsyD. My bad if that's the case. It's still confusing when reading this thread, because clearly the programs are different and I'm reading it like they're lumped together.

 

[CaliPsych]

Oh. I thought PsyD. My bad if that's the case. It's still confusing when reading this thread, because clearly the programs are different and I'm reading it like they're lumped together.

I agree that this is getting confusing! I am in the psyd program, but I believe that Jenna has said she is in the phd program.

 

[CaliPsych]

20% last year specifically did CAPIC internships. Seems like a high number to me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I personally also think APPIC places significant limitations on your career based on my experiences with the post-doc process. Without my apa internship, I am pretty confident that I would not have landed any post doc position or job for which I applied for in California.

I agree that APPIC does lead to some significant career limitations, most notably it prevents you from working in VAs or academic med centers. With respect to postdocs, I just want to note that kaiser does accept APPIC interns for postdocs. This may be of interest to some since kaiser has either the most or the second most (not sure if they have more than the VA) postdoctoral positions in CA. This will not be relevant for Consortium students moving forward, however, because APA internships are now required for graduation.

 

[CaliPsych]

As has been mentioned above, the internship placement list for PAU has many solid sites on there, which goes along with one of the themes I think I'd mentioned earlier--that few people are necessarily questioning the general quality of training at PAU, particularly in the PsyD program; the PhD program does still have less-than-ideal APA internship match rates (although the overall rates are fine) along with rather large cohort sizes (70+ for the past few years).


I just want to clarify that the list I posted is only for the PsyD program. I don't have any information about PhD program match rates.

 

[PHD12]

I agree that APPIC does lead to some significant career limitations, most notably it prevents you from working in VAs or academic med centers. With respect to postdocs, I just want to note that kaiser does accept APPIC interns for postdocs. .

On paper they say that they accept APPIC, but they prioritize those that finish APA internships for interviews and spots because they get hundreds of applications. These days their postdocs seem to be from APA internships (unless maybe you are applying for a less competitive position like child/CD).

 

[SFPsyd]

What kind of caseload did you have at Kaiser? I have talked w. a few people in the past and I got the impression that their billable requirements are pretty high.

Sorry I missed this question the other day. My caseload was pretty demanding...I worked on adult outpatient and had to see 5-6 new patients/week, about 20 return visits, and 1-2 groups per week (about 28-30 face to face hours out of 40). The pace was intense and it wasn't the type of work that I enjoyed, hence my departure to PP.

That being said, much depends on your specific department at Kaiser and the type of work you enjoy. I have colleagues who work at other departments and one who works in the addiction program. They do around 80% groups (and love doing group therapy), have a very manageable schedule (more like 25 clinical hours out of 40), and make over 100k doing so. To them, it's one of the best clinical gigs they could imagine. So not to go off topic, but if you are interested in working for Kaiser really do your homework on the unique characteristics of the specific clinic, because they vary widely. Some people love it, and as others have mentioned it pays as well as any salaried jobs (along with the VA). Wasn't for me though.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I'll probably stay in academic med, as I get enough of a mix to keep me interested. I have a biz background, so if I ever just want to do clinical work, I'll hang a shingle. Kaiser seems like a pretty good option in CA if you enjoy mostly/all clinical work. I'm still figuring out what kind of split I want.

 

[CaliPsych]

Hi everyone,

Sorry I've been away from this thread for a few days.... I've been trying to get caught up at practicum after missing a lot of time for internship interviews. Good luck to those who are waiting anxiously for the match results next week!

Someone asked whether I could provide more complete information about our internship match rates. I have attached a document with some additional information. Feel free to let me know if you have additional questions. I will be traveling over the weekend but will try to check back to see if anyone posts or PMs me with questions.

Hello everyone! I hope that many of you are excited today about your match results. I'm sending my best wishes to those of you who will be going in to Phase 2.

I wanted to let you know that I just found out a very exciting piece of news! The PGSP-Stanford Psy.D. Consortium had a 100% APA match rate this year.

 

[deleted407083]

Hello everyone! I hope that many of you are excited today about your match results. I'm sending my best wishes to those of you who will be going in to Phase 2.

I wanted to let you know that I just found out a very exciting piece of news! The PGSP-Stanford Psy.D. Consortium had a 100% APA match rate this year.

That's awesome. Any word on the phd program?

 

[SFPsyd]

Hello everyone! I hope that many of you are excited today about your match results. I'm sending my best wishes to those of you who will be going in to Phase 2.

I wanted to let you know that I just found out a very exciting piece of news! The PGSP-Stanford Psy.D. Consortium had a 100% APA match rate this year.

Wow 100% for APA (not just APPIC)? That's pretty incredible...testament to an excellent program, costs aside. The few graduates I've had the chance to work with have been pretty top-notch. Can anyone confirm these match #'s?

 

[Pragma]

From the data, it looks like the APA match rate has increased steadily over the past 7-8 years. Have they been doing something different to improve these rates? Because they were bad not very long ago but appear to be better now.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The bad %'s were pre-APA acred. I don't have the #'s in front of me, but '06-'08 they became acred.

*edit*

2006.

 

[Kriya]

Wow 100% for APA (not just APPIC)? That's pretty incredible...testament to an excellent program, costs aside. The few graduates I've had the chance to work with have been pretty top-notch. Can anyone confirm these match #'s?

PGSP-Stanford PsyD Consortium -- This morning's internal global notification: "I am delighted to report this morning's results for the APPIC MATCH. 100% of PsyD students matched; all in APA-accredited sites."

PAU PhD program -- This morning's internal global notification: "I am pleased to report the preliminary results of the APA/APPIC (Phase I) match for our Ph.D. students. A total of 49 students have applied so far. One withdrew from the match, but the following numbers include all APA/APPIC applicants: To date, 39 matched (80%), 34 to APA internships (69%) including some of the most sought after and competitive sites in the country."

 

[021884]

I don't understand why so many of you are talking negative about Palo Alto University. For starters, the school counts with the most world-wide known psychologists of the country, such as Zimbardo, Muñoz, Greene. Also, professors from Stanford University, such as Gallagher-Thompson loves to work with their Ph.D students and mentors them. Lots of the students have published, not to mentioned that they from prestigious undergraduate schools such as UC Berkeley, Stanford, Harvard, UCLA. Additionally, lots of agencies recruit students just from PGSP to work for them, such as Palo Alto VA and UCSF... And contrary to what some of you have mentioned, many of the students actually obtain prestigious jobs in hospitals throughout the country, VAs and universities.

 

[Pavlov81]

Additionally, lots of agencies recruit students just from PGSP to work for them, such as Palo Alto VA and UCSF...

I don't care about the program, but factual errors are annoying: the Palo Alto VA rarely (if ever) takes PAU students for postdoc, and even more rarely for internship or faculty slots. PAU students do practicums there, because they're the closest source of graduate student trainees, but that does not translate into paid employment.

 

[ResearchGirlie]

I don't care about the program, but factual errors are annoying: the Palo Alto VA rarely (if ever) takes PAU students for postdoc, and even more rarely for internship or faculty slots. PAU students do practicums there, because they're the closest source of graduate student trainees, but that does not translate into paid employment.

If the Palo Alto VA didn't take PAU practicum students then they'd either have to get other local FSPS students or not take anyone. The closest university based program is UC Berkeley and that's not an easy commute.

 

[SFPsyd]

I don't understand why so many of you are talking negative about Palo Alto University. For starters, the school counts with the most world-wide known psychologists of the country, such as Zimbardo, Muñoz, Greene. Also, professors from Stanford University, such as Gallagher-Thompson loves to work with their Ph.D students and mentors them. Lots of the students have published, not to mentioned that they from prestigious undergraduate schools such as UC Berkeley, Stanford, Harvard, UCLA. Additionally, lots of agencies recruit students just from PGSP to work for them, such as Palo Alto VA and UCSF... And contrary to what some of you have mentioned, many of the students actually obtain prestigious jobs in hospitals throughout the country, VAs and universities.

In fairness, most of the negativity seems to be regarding cost, not quality of the program. As someone out in the field and doing pretty well financially (mid 100k) I can still tell you it's a pain to be shelling out 800/month in loan repayment. It's not nearly as doom and gloom as some on here say, and I wouldn't trade what I'm currently doing for anything, but it is still something worth thinking long and hard about in terms of the debt. As for the program itself, it's up there with the very best in the country these days as far as clinical programs go, the difference being most of the other top programs don't cost nearly as much (or in many cases, nothing at all).

 

[SFPsyd]

I don't care about the program, but factual errors are annoying: the Palo Alto VA rarely (if ever) takes PAU students for postdoc, and even more rarely for internship or faculty slots. PAU students do practicums there, because they're the closest source of graduate student trainees, but that does not translate into paid employment.

To be fair, the past few years have seen several grads from the psyd program at least receive postdocs and even full staff positions at the sfva and pava, a trend which will likely only grow now that the program apparently continues to gain a stellar rep in the area (evidenced by 100% apa match this year). I don't want to share their identities on here but I have colleagues who have recently been hired (2 at Menlo park va, one at sf) all of whom graduated from the psyd program the past few years. Per their website, 2 more apparently have been hired by Stanford as well. So at least in terms of employment their grads seem to be doing great. The costs on the other hand...tough pill to swallow and it is why I did not attend the program nor can I fully endorse anyone doing so.

 

[PHD12]

I don't care about the program, but factual errors are annoying: the Palo Alto VA rarely (if ever) takes PAU students for postdoc, and even more rarely for internship or faculty slots. PAU students do practicums there, because they're the closest source of graduate student trainees, but that does not translate into paid employment.

This is accurate from what i've seen as well and accurate in terms of other VA locations in the area. Kaiser seems to be a very common employer (i'm willing to bet the most common employer) for PAU PsyD/PhD graduates actually and private practice.

I'm not doubting that the program has good training. However, some of the posts on this forum seem like they are recruiting/marketing for PAU. I'm surprised that none of the students have discussed the drawbacks of the program. I haven't met psychology students who are only enthusiastic about their program (maybe this is the case at PAU).

 

[PHD12]

To be fair, the past few years have seen several grads from the psyd program at least receive postdocs and even full staff positions at the sfva and pava, a .

There is only 1 on staff at the SFVA, 1 from the palo alto VA, and i didn't see anyone employed at the Northern California VA from the PsyD program. Maybe the website/brochure is not updated? Keep in mind that there are 30 graduates each year (not the the VA is the only possible employer).

 

[SFPsyd]

There is only 1 on staff at the SFVA, 1 from the palo alto VA, and i didn't see anyone employed at the Northern California VA from the PsyD program. Maybe the website/brochure is not updated? Keep in mind that there are 30 graduates each year (not the the VA is the only possible employer).

In this case yes, the brochure is not up to date as these are fairly recent hires...we all know how the govt takes its time updating these things

 

[SFPsyd]

There is only 1 on staff at the SFVA, 1 from the palo alto VA, and i didn't see anyone employed at the Northern California VA from the PsyD program. Maybe the website/brochure is not updated? Keep in mind that there are 30 graduates each year (not the the VA is the only possible employer).

Also even according to this outdated brochure, it still looks like there are 9 on staff from the pgsp phd program, in addition to any from the psyd program:

http://www.paloalto.va.gov/docs/MentalHealth/PsychologyTraining/PsychologyTrainingStaff.pdf

I would guess that as the years go on, more and more will be hired from the psyd program as well.

 

[PHD12]

In fairness, most of the negativity seems to be regarding cost, not quality of the program. As someone out in the field and doing pretty well financially (mid 100k) I can still tell you it's a pain to be shelling out 800/month in loan repayment. .

On a side note, its great that you are making over 100 in PP. The people i've networked with out here who are early career are really struggling in private practice (around 50K), especially in the first 2 years.

The most recent APA salary survey, which only looks at doctoral level psychologists who are in full-time private practice with about 22 years of experience, reports that the median salary in SF is 90K and in San Jose it was only 55K for private practitioners (not early career folks). Living in SF with 200K in loans (from a school like PAU) and earning the median in private practice seems very unmanageable. I think anyone interested in attending PAU because he/she wants to stay in CA should pay attention to these numbers (the numbers just don't add up given the incredible high cost of living here and the debt levels).

 

[SFPsyd]

On a side note, its great that you are making over 100 in PP. The people i've networked with out here who are early career are really struggling in private practice (around 50K), especially in the first 2 years.

The most recent APA salary survey, which only looks at doctoral level psychologists who are in full-time private practice with about 22 years of experience, reports that the median salary in SF is 90K and in San Jose it was only 55K for private practitioners (not early career folks). Living in SF with 200K in loans (from a school like PAU) and earning the median in private practice seems very unmanageable. I think anyone interested in attending PAU because he/she wants to stay in CA should pay attention to these numbers (the numbers just don't add up given the incredible high cost of living here and the debt levels).

Completely agreed. I wouldn't recommend attending a program like pau unless a person either comes from money or has an additional skill-set to make repayment more feasible (e.g. A real knack for business, or a very marketable specialty). Even with some of the newer repayment plans, having 200k in debt and earning less than 6 figures is pretty unmanageable. If you're earning the median then it's just unrealistic.

 

[pretzels]

. I also noticed that pretty much all their students go out of state for internship.

I'm taking this one quote out of context of the entire thread for a minor derail -- what does this mean? I didn't think it was very significant if an internship took you across the country, especially if it was APA accredited and paid.

Is there a stigma attached / any other drawbacks to having to go out of state for your internship? Or is just the obvious troubles of having to pack up and move? Is it more common for "top tier" schools to have all their students stay in-state and near campus? I'm sorry if this question seems odd, im running on almost no sleep but i was curious.

 

[JeyRo]

I'm taking this one quote out of context of the entire thread for a minor derail -- what does this mean? I didn't think it was very significant if an internship took you across the country, especially if it was APA accredited and paid.

Is there a stigma attached / any other drawbacks to having to go out of state for your internship? Or is just the obvious troubles of having to pack up and move? Is it more common for "top tier" schools to have all their students stay in-state and near campus? I'm sorry if this question seems odd, im running on almost no sleep but i was curious.

Other than the expense and logistical trouble with having to relocate for internship, I've heard it's easier to find work in the geographical region where you did your internship (or postdoc, as the case may be). So, if a PAU student wanted to stay in California after licensure, they have the added trouble of having to re-relocate after their training, on top of dealing with the already highly challenging and extremely saturated market that's the case here in the Golden State....

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Other than the expense and logistical trouble with having to relocate for internship, I've heard it's easier to find work in the geographical region where you did your internship (or postdoc, as the case may be). So, if a PAU student wanted to stay in California after licensure, they have the added trouble of having to re-relocate after their training, on top of dealing with the already highly challenging and extremely saturated market that's the case here in the Golden State....

I'd also say CA is fairly unique (along with a small group of other states) in that it has a good number of internships in-state to the point that remaining there for training is at least possible. Thus, whether or not you remain in CA or NY to attend internship, for example, could mean something much different than if you came from, say, my program (where we had had only a small handful of internships in the state, none of which I applied to).

What could be a more informative metric would be the rate at which PAU grads remain in state vs. students at other CA schools such as UCLA, the various UC's, etc. Although even that data could be muddied by various extraneous factors.

 

[JeyRo]

I'd also say CA is fairly unique (along with a small group of other states) in that it has a good number of internships in-state to the point that remaining there for training is at least possible. Thus, whether or not you remain in CA or NY to attend internship, for example, could mean something much different than if you came from, say, my program (where we had had only a small handful of internships in the state, none of which I applied to).

What could be a more informative metric would be the rate at which PAU grads remain in state vs. students at other CA schools such as UCLA, the various UC's, etc. Although even that data could be muddied by various extraneous factors.

More directly, I think that pretzels was also asking whether doing internship out of state somehow imparts a 'mark of Cain' of sorts upon PAU students trying to get into the job market in California (or perhaps elsewhere?).

Personally, I would be surprised if this was the case - given that this hypothetical PAU (let's say, PsyD) grad would have APA accredited training down the line, I would think most employers are interested simply in whether your training experiences were quality and relevant to the job being applied for, and then all of the other usual stuff stood out as being of relative quality (e.g., the applicant had other relevant experience, publications, specialty certifications, etc). Wouldn't mind hearing others weigh in on that particular point, though - again, this is just my impression.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

More directly, I think that pretzels was also asking whether doing internship out of state somehow imparts a 'mark of Cain' of sorts upon PAU students trying to get into the job market in California (or perhaps elsewhere?).

Personally, I would be surprised if this was the case - given that this hypothetical PAU (let's say, PsyD) grad would have APA accredited training down the line, I would think most employers are interested simply in whether your training experiences were quality and relevant to the job being applied for, and then all of the other usual stuff stood out as being of relative quality (e.g., the applicant had other relevant experience, publications, specialty certifications, etc). Wouldn't mind hearing others weigh in on that particular point, though - again, this is just my impression.

I would agree. I was just pointing out that as I haven't trained in CA, and as CA is a unique state in which multiple quality in-state sites are available, I also wasn't sure if not remaining in-state would somehow be seen as a bad thing. Hence why I suggested looking at PAU's in-state rates relative to those of other CA schools (e.g., UCLA, the UC's) could be informative.

Like you, though, I'd be surprised if not remaining in-state were seen as a bad thing overall. I'd imagine it's likely more a matter of the general quality of internship training as a whole regardless of the state in which the programs are located.

 

[Doctor Eliza]

I'm taking this one quote out of context of the entire thread for a minor derail -- what does this mean? I didn't think it was very significant if an internship took you across the country, especially if it was APA accredited and paid.

Is there a stigma attached / any other drawbacks to having to go out of state for your internship? Or is just the obvious troubles of having to pack up and move? Is it more common for "top tier" schools to have all their students stay in-state and near campus? I'm sorry if this question seems odd, im running on almost no sleep but i was curious.

I don't think it is a drawback at all. I'm wondering if it was mentioned because a common reason for people to attend a professional school with a hefty price tag is because they are geographically limited and cannot move for grad school. People who picked that school for that reason might be unhappy if they couldn't find a nearby internship.

Dr. E

 

[ResearchGirlie]

I think the point about going out of state is that students at California FSPS (don't know about PAU specifically) are told to apply outside the state to internships in geographically less desirable places with the thinking that there won't be as much competition.

At the UCs (UCLA, UCSD, Berkeley) I imagine placement is more a preference of location and training than anything else. I'm at a UC and every year it just varies as to whether people stay in state or go somewhere else. At my school if someone goes out of state it seems to be far more about preference rather than lack of options in California.

 

[JeyRo]

BTW I did a little brief digging and there is no explicit policy anywhere that I'm aware of (it was mentioned awhile back and I promised I'd look into it) that calls for VAPAHCS to discriminate against PsyD students for internship - I just leafed through the internship manual on this. Also having sat in on a few selection meetings over the past few years, I'm pretty confident it's not something we do.

More to the point, however, is that I believe that the trend of PAU students not matching for internship to the VAPAHCS is something that will continue to hold, although time will tell over the coming years (say, starting in 2014-15, who knows).

I think it's great that the PsyD program seems to continue to improve in terms of at least some of it's outcomes (e.g., match rates in particular). However, this won't mean that much to me until they can start meaningfully reducing the effective debt load of their students over the next few years - I still can't recommend PAU for prospective students in good conscience, and yes, it's because of the cost.

 

[021884]

I don't care about the program, but factual errors are annoying: the Palo Alto VA rarely (if ever) takes PAU students for postdoc, and even more rarely for internship or faculty slots. PAU students do practicums there, because they're the closest source of graduate student trainees, but that does not translate into paid employment.

If the Palo Alto VA didn't take PAU practicum students then they'd either have to get other local FSPS students or not take anyone. The closest university based program is UC Berkeley and that's not an easy commute.

Although it is true that the school accepts a large number of students and that tuition is expensive; I think the training program outweighs its cost.

I noticed in this forum someone arguing the integrity of the school based on ONE person that was unable to succeed in the field. Really based on N=1 you are going to draw conclusions of the entire student body? What type of researcher does that?

You need to look at the facts. Sure, the program has some flaws, but its training is respected and well known. Otherwise, why would a famous psychologist like Dr. Sue ever accept a job with the university?

Questioning a training program with highly known psychologists as the students’ mentors is equivalent to saying that those well-known professors’ contributions are not good enough. Students follow their mentors, and learn from their training supervisors.

There are in fact other schools around the Bay Area such as JFK University, CSPP and other professional schools throughout. If UC Berkeley students were truly interested in obtaining high quality training they would be willing to drive to Palo Alto VA. By the way, many UC Berkeley alumni pursue their graduate training at Palo Alto University.

As for Palo Alto VA not hiring students from Palo Alto University, is in fact not true. If you look at their staff body, you will find many graduates from the program working there. This is also true about other VAs throughout the country.

As for the matching rate, the range goes from 80% to 100% in APA accredited sites, which include some of the most respected programs. Also, I personally know many training directors that highly prefer to work with Palo Alto University students to the extent that they only offer practicum and internship positions to them.

In short, look at the facts and weigh its pros and cons. In my opinion the training program at this school is outstanding, and if students are willing to pay the cost to learn from the best in our field, then that’s a decision they make.

 

[ResearchGirlie]

There are in fact other schools around the Bay Area such as JFK University, CSPP and other professional schools throughout.

I meant reputable schools. Competing against JFK (are they still accredited) and CSPP for practicum spots is hardly something to get too excited over.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Although it is true that the school accepts a large number of students and that tuition is expensive; I think the training program outweighs its cost.

This decision is obviously going to be a one that each potential student will simply need to weigh on their own. PAU does seem to offer solid training, I just couldn't justify the cost to myself, given that equivalent opportunities can be had elsewhere for substantially less money. That's just my own viewpoint, though, and generalizes to no one but me.

Personally, I would suggest that anyone anticipating entering grad school right now assumes that IBR, public sector loan forgiveness, and other such programs won't be available to them upon graduation. That way, if the programs are done away with or significantly altered, you'll have factored in the standard repayment of loans into your long-term financial plan. Conversely, if IBR/PSLF/etc. does still happen to be around, it's just an added bonus and another potential solution to handling the debt.