Is a PSYD from CSU worthwhile if not leading to licensing?

RESPONSE: The CSU PsyD is a very versatile academic credential in that it can be used for many purposes based on the needs and objectives of the clinician. It's not a matter of whether it is prestigious or of receiving respect from the Psych Community because that is not its primary purpose, but its utility, whatever that may be, in one's professional endeavors.

 

sanantone: Physical therapists and audiologists usually have doctoral degrees, though, and their duties don't overlap with physicians' as much as NPs and physician assistants do.

RESPONSE: In fact in hospitals and private practices, Physical Therapists and Audiologists frequently introduce themselves as "Dr" to patients without clarifying the discipline they represent, leaving the patient with the impression that they are MDs. On a personal level, I have experienced this situation on numerous occasions, resulting in my requesting whether the practitioner was a physician and only then being informed that they weren't.

 

It was easy for me to tell when I was seeing an audiologist when I was sent to a clinic for a pre-employment medical exam. She was testing my hearing. On the other hand, it wasn't obvious that I was seeing an NP for a pre-employment exam for a different employer. She was doing everything a physician would do. I found out she was an NP by glancing at her ID badge.

 

Blind folks would be out of luck....

 

True. Since nurse practitioners are pushing for the DNP to be the entry-level degree, maybe hospitals will come up with some kind of solution to this problem.

 

According an old thread on SDN, several states prohibit healthcare professionals who are not physicians from calling themselves doctor. Here's a 2013 article about Florida considering a law that would prohibit nurse practitioners from calling themselves "doctor" without immediately qualifying that they aren't a medical doctor.

https://www.clinicaladvisor.com/home/the-waiting-room/state-medical-boards-trying-to-limit-who-can-be-called-doctor/

 

Obviously, if an Audiologist is conducting an Audiology exam one can discern their profession. However, in my experience when going for ENT exams I was initially called into the MD's office by persons introducing themselves as "Dr.", only to reveal their discipline when I inquired.

 

Um....I did not say the point was its lack of prestige. Just pointed out the fact that it does not have any BUT that may not matter to someone who is older and not trying to get into competitive or academic Psych, is already a therapist of whatever type (Clinical Social Worker, Lic. Mental Health Counselor, Lic. Chemical/Substance Abuse Counselor, and so on) and wants to be called doctor, cannot afford a bricks and mortor APA program or the ROI is not there.

I think some in the post just felt a PsyD when in a therapy field gave the impression that the person was a Psychologist (means licensed). Like someone in the medical field with MD after their name who is not a doctor.

Be satisfied with your choice because it meets your need and quit trying to hard to convince others of its legitimacy.

 

Um....I did not say the point was its lack of prestige. Just pointed out the fact that it does not have any BUT that may not matter to someone who is older and not trying to get into competitive or academic Psych, is already a therapist of whatever type (Clinical Social Worker, Lic. Mental Health Counselor, Lic. Chemical/Substance Abuse Counselor, and so on) and wants to be called doctor, cannot afford a bricks and mortor APA program or the ROI is not there.

I think some in the post just felt a PsyD when in a therapy field gave the impression that the person was a Psychologist (means licensed). Like someone in the medical field with MD after their name who is not a doctor.

Be satisfied with your choice because it meets your need (and is Regionally Accredited) and don't try so hard to convince others of its legitimacy. It certainly is relatively affordable and convenient.

 

Garp, it's not a matter of convincing others of the legitimacy of CSU's PsyD but a response to correct certain posters false snd unsubstantiated assumptions and/or negative statements about this degree program that may dissuade other posters who may benefit from pursuing this, or similar PsyD's.

 

I have never made any negative statements about CSU’s degree programs at all. Certainly, I object to the notion of for-profit so-called online universities, even if they are RA, but never bothered to delve into the nature of their programs at all. Why? Because I don’t give a shit.

Having said that, I cannot help but notice that this thread is now in its sixth page, a thread about a small-scale for-profit whose Psy.D. program is being picked apart like the remaining shreads of meat on a chicken bone. At the core of its defense is Jan, who shows up at DI on rare occasion to shill for yet another mickey-mouse institution (CSU, Ryokan, UIGS), instigating and antagonizing as many people as she can along the way. (Which is one reason I have predicted that she will never have her own doctorate – I can’t see her acquiescing to the authority of a doctoral committee.)

Moreover, when she finds she can’t defend her posision, Jan resorts to attacking the other party’s credentials, experience, choices, ad infinitum, ad nauseam. (And is too dumb to realized that by doing so, she compounds the loss of her argument.)

But there is a message for everyone here (including Jan): If you decide to earn your degree from CSU or any similar institution, you will spend an inordinate amount of time defending your decision. And even after you graduate, you will run into professors, professionals, peers, and even consumers who think your credentials are mickey mouse. Some will say it to your face, most will say it behind your back. But overall, your degree will be an embarrassment to you. And that doesn't include people like me, who will be laughing my ass off at you.

Look at all the time Jan spends defending these programs here at DI alone. Is that what you would want to do with your credentials? Credibility is everything, and you won’t find it with a Psy.D. from CSU.

 

Steve Levicoff: I have never made any negative statements about CSU’s degree programs at all. Certainly, I object to the notion of for-profit so-called online universities, even if they are RA, but never bothered to delve into the nature of their programs at all. Why? Because I don’t give a shit.

RESPONSE: Of course you give a "s__t" because you wouldn't be interjecting your usual inconsequential, negative and bitter comments due to the fact that you feel above everyone else on this board because you possess a "name it and frame it" doctorate, that if offered now, would be viewed with a great deal of suspicion and questions as to its validity and utility.

Steve Levicoff: Having said that, I cannot help but notice that this thread is now in its sixth page, a thread about a small-scale for-profit whose Psy.D. program is being picked apart like the remaining shreads of meat on a chicken bone. At the core of its defense is Jan, who shows up at DI on rare occasion to shill for yet another mickey-mouse institution (CSU, Ryokan, UIGS), instigating and antagonizing as many people as she can along the way. (Which is one reason I have predicted that she will never have her own doctorate – I can’t see her acquiescing to the authority of a doctoral committee.)

RESPONSE: There is no need for me to defend against your spurious comments about my being a shill, because the schools you mention above that you claim I am shilling for, may be of interest to many posters on this forum.

As far as "instigating and antagonizing as many people along the way", that has been your modus operandi on this forum, very infrequently contributing any information that is useful, except to project your bitterness and devaluing comments. In short, you feel that you are entitled to put others down because of your long standing position on this forum. Unfortunately a review of many of the threads on this forum do not correspond with your over bloated self-image of an individual who attempts to dominate other posters due to possessing a "mini mouse" doctorate.

Levicoff: Moreover, when she finds she can’t defend her posision, Jan resorts to attacking the other party’s credentials, experience, choices, ad infinitum, ad nauseam. (And is too dumb to realized that by doing so, she compounds the loss of her argument.)

RESPONSE: I actually feel sorry for you Levicoff. You have no awareness whatsoever, or are too entitled to fathom that the negative characteristics you are ascribing to me actually describe the manner in which you conduct yourself on this forum.

Levicoff: But there is a message for everyone here (including Jan): If you decide to earn your degree from CSU or any similar institution, you will spend an inordinate amount of time defending your decision. And even after you graduate, you will run into professors, professionals, peers, and even consumers who think your credentials are mickey mouse. Some will say it to your face, most will say it behind your back. But overall, your degree will be an embarrassment to you. And that doesn't include people like me, who will be laughing my ass off at you.

RESPONSE: By "Any similar institution", does that include the school you attended and the degree that you obtained, that if existed today, would bring a deluge of criticism regarding its validity, credibility, respect and utility. How does that aphorism go "People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"?

Levicoff: Look at all the time Jan spends defending these programs here at DI alone. Is that what you would want to do with your credentials? Credibility is everything, and you won’t find it with a Psy.D. from CSU.[/QUOTE]

RESPONSE: Unfortunately Levicoff, you can't understand the difference between dispelling and clarifying incorrect assumptions, personal beliefs, anecdotal experiences from being defensive! My responses speak for themselves, clarifying misinformation that may impact on certain posters' decisions regarding whether to attend a school such as CSU or any other distance online PsyD program.

Now let's contrast my contributions with yours regarding this topic; NADA!

 

Oh, you mean my non-profit RA Ph.D.? (I've added the "non-profit" part because I think it's a nice touch. Especially after the Argosy debacle, which I have been thoroughly enjoying.)

And your doctorate? Oh, I forgot - you don't have one, and are unlikely to get one. (By my count, you've been doing these posts for well over a dozen years in more than one forum and under more than one name. Are you ever gonna get it together to actually earn a doctorate? Hell, you've been ABD longer than sanantone at this point.)

Anyway, I feel no need to defend my credentials since they're public and well-established. You will always ultimately be an anonymous troll, so enjoy yourself, schveetheart.

 

Steve's obsession with me continues. If I would have attended a junk school like him, I would have been finished years ago. Some non-profits are just as bad as the for-profits.

What did Steve get from his bottom tier degree? He thinks it gives him the right to brag to strangers on a forum where no one cares. In the end, he's just like all the other losers out there.

 

Maybe, but at least I'm not another Ph.D. wanna-be. Back to you, sanantone - this time I'll let you get the last word in.

 

It's amazing that a man as old as you puts all of his value in a PhD from a school that would accept just about anyone and let people make up a degree in anything. Are you in your 50s, 60s, or 70s? Is Phd wannabe the best insult you could come up with? That's not even an insult.

You could have written the books only a couple of schools care to use without a PhD. You could have driven trucks without a PhD. You could have had temporary teaching jobs, especially back in your days, without a PhD. You could have trolled this forum for almost two decades without a PhD. Just like the life you have led, your PhD is largely insignificant.

If I'm not mistaken, I think you're the guy who played a guitar and BS'd a bunch of PLAs to get his bachelors degree. Thank goodness TESU increased its standards. Then, you studied theology outside of a real school of divinity. Theology and religion, while I find them interesting, are areas in which a bunch of low-IQ charlatans get degrees. You didn't study anything challenging.

 

I don't know either. but I can speculate. In order to be recognized as equivalent to board-recognized clinical psychology graduate programs in NY State, an out of state PsyD program must include as part of its syllabus a year long supervised practicum.

http://www.op.nysed.gov/prof/psych/psychlic.htm

Cal Southern allows its students the option of doing 1500 hours of supervised professional experience before graduation.

But (here's where my speculation kicks in) Cal Southern's program is 100% DL. Neither California nor New York seem to recognize remote DL supervision for the required supervised experience hours. The way Cal Southern seems to do it in California (I'm kind of guessing here) is have students find a licensed psychologist, hospital or public agency supplying psychological services willing to supervise that student face-to-face. Then Cal Southern will note those hours on the student's transcript if they are completed before graduation.

I'm guessing that NY wants the university to provide the first year of supervision themselves, in house, using its own staff. And since the supervision has to be face-to-face, I'm guessing that NY won't accept any DL PsyD program.

In California, the post-graduation supervisee typically has to be registered with the Psych Board as a Psychological Assistant or some title like that. There are several variations and exceptions, but that's the general rule. The Board warns that if a graduate fails to register prior to performing the hours, not only will the hours not count, the individual might be referred to a District Attorney for practicing without a license.

Yes, finding a suitable supervisory situation might be another hurdle.

On one hand, it means lots of extra work for the supervisor. On the other hand, the supervisor gets a cheap assistant. I don't think that these always have to be hospital placements like we see with MDs, they can be placements with psychologists in private practice. (At least that's what my cursory reading of the California regulations suggested.) The supervisor only needs to be a licensed clinical psychologist in good standing, willing to perform the supervision and fill out the paperwork.

 

Living in the bitter cold of the Arctic, I been starve for entertainment. Anyway, prolong meanness to each other is no fun, well for me. I like the professional, or specifically, educational achievement rivalry; It can be motivational; but not when it comes with animus. Anyway keep on rolling- hit back harder is a decent strategy but to what ends.
==
Two very accomplished people:
sanatone - five degrees
Steve - four degrees with Doctorate

 

In the interest of not misrepresenting myself, I have a total of three degrees, not four. But then, I've never been in competition with regard to the number of degrees one holds.

So, even if sanantone fulfills my prophecy and craps out on her doctorate, she'll still have more degrees than me. To which she is more than welcome.

 

Now that you have ”retired”, you can be DI expert course tester.