CA Psychboard: # of Students Licensed 1-1-01 to 12-31-04, by School

Re: Re: Well, It's Interesting BUT

However, there is more to it than admitting very bright students or good test takers. Take Ryokan College as an example. Here is a state approved school that I am quite certain is not selecting top of the rung students for their doctoral programs in Psychology YET their graduates score higher than many RA graduates on the national psychology exam. So what is the bottomline. Ryokan gears the content and instruction of each of their courses to parallel the content areas of the national psychology exam. No more, no less.

 

Understood. Let me see if I can summarize. You stated that Ryokan is exorbitant. I stated that Ryokan and PGSP both lead to licensure in CA, but PGSP is significantly more expensive, so Ryokan may not be exorbitant in the big picture. You stated that SCUPS is less expensive than Ryokan. You also stated that PGSP is much, much better than Ryokan. Those were interesting points but they don't completely support your opinion that Ryokan is exorbitant.

Dave

 

Re: Better schools=better students?

I suppose I was wondering whether good schools are good because they only admit the brightest students or whether the educational process is so good. On the other hand, if one was to gather a group of extremely talented individuals and then waste three years of their time, would they still be sharper or better prepared than a group of untalented students subjected to a highly effective academic process?

Dave

 

Again, I can only speak to law schools, first because that's MY professional degree and second because I have sworn and will not repent that I will post here on no other subject.

Anyway, to a very large extent, a J.D. is a J.D. is a J.D. The ABA accreditation system coupled with the fact that a SMALL handful of law schools are heavily overrepresented among law professors means that there is a LOT of uniformity in law school curricula. (That, in fact, is one of the criticisms frequently levelled at American law schools but I digress). There are (last time I checked) fewer than 200 ABA accredited law schools in the country, which isn't a lot when you think about it...one law school for each 1.5 million Americans.

So given that the basic law school experience and the basic faculty background is pretty much the same from school to school, about all that's left is the quality of the students.

Prestigious schools like Yale, Harvard, Stanford and Columbia have their pick of applicants. Schools with a somewhat different mission, like the University of New Mexico or Southern University make an effort toward increasing diversity in their student body and in the profession meaning that they can't work JUST from LSAT scores and ugpa.

The Texas Bar study I referred to earlier concluded, BTW, that race alone is NOT a factor in Bar exam success. A low LSAT or poor law school grades will have precisely the same effect regardless of race or ethnicity (or sex, either, IIRC) A similar study from Southern or Howard, I forget which, arrived at the same conclusion. Now, as to WHY female or nonwhite male applicants tend to display lower LSAT scores and tend to perform less well in law school itself, THAT is another question entirely.

But if you were, say, an ambitious young Hispanic man wanting to be a lawyer and your ugpa and LSAT scores were commendably high giving you the choice between Yale and, say, a run-of-the-mill school like Thomas Jefferson, where would YOU go?

So even if Yale decides to pursue diversity (which Yale does), Yale will STILL come out ahead come Bar exam time. Prestige breeds prestige. Success breeds success.

 

Simon, I'm referring to my own reading of the Ryokan and SCUPS websites, and to the data that started this thread. From 1-1-01 to 12-31-04 there are six cases that agree with you and 49 that don't.

Dave

 

I'll do one better. No one agreed with Christopher Columbus either and swore that the world was flat and we know who was right in that case.

Numbers don't prove your point and quite frankly I more than adequately answered your issue regarding the EXORBITANT costs of an education at Ryokan as well as the cost benefit of obtaining a doctorate in Psychology at SCUPS if one is very motivated and self directed. It will lead to the same outcomes. Next case please.

 

Of course, associate with the best group of students and hope that the educational process is good also.

If a good school is measured only by output, it is difficult to tell whether the output would be good if the input was not so stellar. For example, if SCUPS and Harvard were to exchange law student populations, then SCUPS graduates would start appearing on the U.S. Supreme Court, and Harvard would have trouble getting people through the Bar, I would imagine.

Dave

 

Simon, I understood from the beginning that you think you are right. Thanks for explaining why you think you are right. It is possible that you are right. However, it is always interesting to know what people think, regardless of whether they are correct or incorrect.

Best wishes,

Dave

 

Dave,

With all due respect from the beginning you thought you were right as well. In fact it is not a matter of "thinking" one is right but whether information presented is valid and can be substantiated. I have responded to your questions and issues with that in mind and unless you can demonstrate that my position is inaccurate, and I am receptive to such feedback, than the issue is closed.

BTW, I agree that it is important to hear others' thoughts and feeback. However, at the end of the day it is important to discern fact from fiction because there are many posters in this forum who depend of reliable and confirmable information on which to make critical educational/life decisions. Regards, Simon

 

Dave,

No, I don't think you can make that assumption based on the evidence I allude to.

The comparison I was making was between schools with very similar educational processes and significant minimum facilities. SCUPS and Harvard have radically different systems of legal education.

A big difference is that, as a D/L institution, SCUPS cannot provide the daily personal student to student or student to teacher interaction that a resident school does. By its very nature, the common law is personal and adversarial and is therefore best learnt, or so I believe, in a controlled but challenging and adversarial environment.

Another BIG difference is that athe Harvard student has easy access to a genuine physical law library. A SCUPS student might, or might not, have such access. He certainly won't have the undivided attention of the law professor who RUNS the library. I do a LOT of research. Online services are a frustratingly limited resource unless the researcher has a clear idea of what he wants to know and where to find it, the very things few if any first year students are likely to know.

There are other, significant differences: A Harvard student will, at a minimum, have the opportunity to engage in the closely supervised practice of law. A SCUPS student MIGHT arrange a clerkship at the local District Attorney office but then again, maybe not and nothing in the California correspondence law school rules rewards such efforts.

 

While this may be the case, it is not necessarily the case. The second sentence might more appropriately read, "It could lead to the same outcomes." I know that I'm picking nits but it seems that nitpicking was where this thread was headed anyway.
Jack

 

Nosborne,

Hi. Agreed, not on that alone. I yield, as law really isn't my area of expertise; and it is yours...

Best wishes,

Dave

 

Your position is inaccurate as evidenced by the data Bill presented and what is presented on the Ryokan and SCUPS websites, as I have stated previously.

Moreover, since SCUPS has deleted, added and now deleted again some doctoral programs over the last few years, who knows what the future of the SCUPS Psy.D. will be.

Personally, I like SCUPS in general and am disappointed by all the strategy adjustments.

Best wishes,

Dave

 

I agree. It is unusual that SCUPS doesn't have more students who have become licensed.

Dave

 

CORRECTION:

I have subsequently determined that the information I received above was not accurate. According to Florida State statues a state approved doctoral degree CANNOT be used in Florida. In fact one with a doctorate from such a school cannot refer to themselves as "doctor" in any form or manner. Please review the accompanying statute that delineates the specific degree accrediting requirements.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=CH0817/Sec567.HTM