new phd

Its truly interesting that numerous traditional as well as nontraditional universities continue to offer graduate masters and doctoral degrees in Social Work, Counseling Education and Psychology although the job market is inundated and opportunities limited. The primary big earners appear to be the professors who teach in these programs. Many are tenured with very attractive benefit packages and continue to spread the gospel to young and idealistic individuals regarding the social benefits of helping others. Unfortunately, many of these academicians are oblivious or cavalier relating to the realities that their students will be encountering in the wold of work. I have seen countless numbers of young graduates in these professions entering their respective fields with idealistic expectations but unable to find work for many months and the employment they usually found was low paying coupled with low status.

 

Is it the responsibility of the universities to throttle the supply? Or should prospective students be aware of their post-graduation prospects and choose accordingly?

 

1. Licensure is NOT a problem. As a LPC I have the same avenues open to me that a clinical psych does - but BC/BS will not reimburse an LPC. I took a shorter route to the PhD and now I have to take the consequences. I probably should have expended a little more time and a little more money.

2. The schools are businesses - they are there to sell their programs. From the school of economics I remember one term very well "let the buyer beware" - sure wish I could remember how it was spelled in Latin. Finis'. Howard.

 

Fair questions.

When one considers the age and maturational levels of many students when entering graduate programs as well as their idealistic ambitions it is difficult to expect them to be on par with their professors in terms of understtanding the ways and realities of the world. This rings especially true in the fields of social work and counseling where many agencies will hire indiviuals with less than graduate degrees, at extremely low salaries. Professors within these fields and their departments have not generally done enough to rectify this situation by pushing for state legislation which would enhance the opportunities for their graduate students. So the bottomline is that universities, in my opinion, do have a responsibility to clearly delineate the yin and yang of entering their programs especially in terms of employment prospects and to do more to support graduating students rather than to lead them to jobs which are paying salaries based on 1970's standards.

 

...and talking of 1970's standards -

Has anyone thought about the fact that we need, or are told that we need far higher degrees to get the same job that we did in the 1970's with an undergraduate degree.

Is this progress?

...a denigration of the worth of degrees?

...or someone's conspiracy?

Peter French

 

<snip>The process involved in obtaining post certification in Clinical Psychology necessitates having a doctorate in Psychology, completing additional course work, an APA internship...internships are extremely competitive to find...then passing a very difficult national exam...as well as oral boards...This process can take years...<snip>

Internships pay about $14,000 per year and one can spend as much as $2,000 for applications, examinations and exam prep workshops. The difference between an LCSW, LMFT and LMHC (LCPC/LPC in some states) from a clinical psychologist is about $15.00 per hour and certainly not worth the trouble.

 

In terms of reimursements from managed care there definitely is'nt much difference between the divers mental health practitioners. However, if one were young enough and a doctorate in one of the three primary areas of psychology would help their career, and if they have the intellectual capacity and personality characteristics necessary for doctoral level work and for the field, than it may be worth the investment of time and money.

 

The original post seemed to ask whether one could simply get a ph.d. in psychology, add it to existing qualifications in mental health (?) and become a licensed psychologist. I think one has to look carefully at the requirements of the state in which they want to practice. Many state licensing offices specify the course distribution for a degree to be considered "substantially psychological" in nature (so many credits in abnormal psychology, so many credits in psychological assessment, etc). This would mean that simply doing a research dissertation would not necessarily make the degree substantially psychological. If one were able to get all their previous work included on the transcript, that still might not qualify. To be considered a course in psychology, the class would have to meet that states criteria. Often it must have been in a psychology department. Some states will allow classes to count if taught by a psychologist and have a substantial psychological content (check on the credentials of your prof's, keep course outlines etc.)
If you really want to be a l. psychologist look at your individual states requirements. Then find a school program to match them. It might be possible to find a program which would allow you to transfer in everything taught by a psychologist or from a psychology department. I think you would still be looking at two to three years of work.
Good Luck! irat

 

In addition,a number of states are moving in the direction of requiring the doctorate in Psychology to be APA approved, coupled with an APA internship. As examples, Florida and Mississippi have already initiated this requirement and New York and New Jersey are in the process of doing so. So far, with the exception of Fielding, the other big three nontraditional schools are not APA approved. Walden and Union do not plan to seek this accreditation although I believe Capella is in the process. Even if these schools sought and obtained National Register status, it would significantly help their graduates in terms of elevating the status and validity of their degrees.

 

It’s Thanksgiving Day and I don’t have to work; my wife is fixing the bird so I have to time respond to a several questions/issues presented in this string.

1) Nosborne asked about the PsyD v. Ph.D. – War was a significant factor in the development of ‘small c’ clinical psychology in the 20th Century. WW I created a need for differentiating ability levels which saw the development of the Army Alpha and Beta tests. WW II created a need to assist returning veterans and VA became a backbone for development of the profession. Counseling psychology stepped into the void for vocational development and clinical psychology for war-related emotional trauma. One of the earliest conferences about the direction of the profession created the Boulder, or scientist-practitioner Model. Boulder holds that psychologists should first of all be scientists and then practitioners. It endorsed the Ph.D. as the professional degree. Controversy ensued over the next couple of decades about the scientist-practitioner model and some came to suggest alternatives like a clinician-scholar model. As I recall (it has been a long time since I memorized this material for pre-lims) the Vail Model endorsed the Doctor of Psychology degree with less emphasis on coursework in statistics and research design. PsyDs typically complete a ‘project,’ which is something like a lit review in an area of clinical interest as opposed to an original research-based dissertation. I confess I’ve never read a PsyD paper but I’ve had any number of interns describe their projects, which sound like chapter two in most dissertations. As I recall, the first PsyDs were implemented at the University of Illinois and Rutgers University. Illinois has since dropped the degree. I don’t think anyone envisioned the mushrooming of the freestanding schools.
2) PSalmon remarked about supply/demand ratio. Several years ago I had contact with my doctoral advisor who had since moved onto another university where he is the department chair. He reported that counseling psychology programs nationwide had elected to admit fewer applicants. I have no information about how university-based clinical or school programs have responded nor have I any information about whether and, if so, how the professional school association has responded. Horror stories circulate about thin academic coverage in professional schools many of which reputedly exist by way of freeway faculty. One story that may be true or may simply be urban legend is about students having difficulty organizing a final defense because of insufficient faculty available to serve as a committee.
3) Simon commented about how faculty and universities benefit from a surfeit of training programs. I have heard more than one psychologist comment about organizational inefficiency in university governance. The typical issue is multiple programs with a suggestion to streamline costly administrative overhead by integrating separate psychology department in the colleges of education, arts and sciences, and in some cases yet a third within the college of business. The ‘conservative’ position is to house the various programs and departments under a common structure. One sometimes hears the more ‘radical’ proposition of creating a single generic foundation and have students specialize in the internship or the increasingly common post-doc residency. Right, I know some psychologists who are also MBAs J. This is not as far-fetched as it sounds; APA does currently endorse mixed programs. Simon also comments on the issue of responsibility to advise students with regard to marketability. I have for a number of years wondered about when disgruntled, un- or underemployed graduates might sue and legal counsel come to insist upon signed informed consent disclosures prior to matriculation.
4) Irat touched upon retraining in psychology. The academic market was soft in the late 70s and there were many unemployed PhDs with degrees in areas like experimental psychology. These folk needed work and many sought to ‘bootleg’ (small c) clinical licensure. APA responded with a provision for Respecialization in Psychology. This typically involves a couple of years of coursework/practica and an internship. Upon completion the student is awarded a certificate, which is the equivalent of a PhD in one of the applied areas. One’s first doctorate must be in psychology, which is Howard’s problem.
5) Mike Albrecht asks a very good question. Howard, if in the interim Capella has implemented what you see as a credible psychology doctorate why not approach the faculty for transfer?
6) Jimmy Clifton mentions a $15 differential as insufficient motivation for him to extend beyond master’s level training. In retrospect, thinking back on the many evenings and weekends I sacrificed life’s tender mercies mastering some very complex material (learning theory and neuroanatomy come to mind), I’m not sure I would have ventured past the MSW. However, I don’t think an aspiring psychologist should accept this deterrence at face value. I did some quick calculation and I came up with the following. Over the course of a 20-year career, assuming one has 20 contact hours per week for 20 years, this is an additional 312K income. At 25 contact hours/ week this is 390K and at 30 contact hours/week this is 468K. Jimmy’s concern also overlooks marketing assessment, which is the skill that differentiates psychology from other mental health disciples. Areas like forensics and neuropsychology can be extremely lucrative and would likely ratchet up the income differential well beyond these numbers. Moreover, many psychologists find that things like social security disability assessments form the backbone of their practice. Why, because social security pays on time and without hassle unlike reimbursement for counseling by HMOs.
7) Peter French commented on degree creep. The doctorate has, in my lifetime, remained the practitioner’s degree. No change, no conspiracy. If anything, Peter, here in the ‘States what is more prevalent are complaints about ‘dumbing down.’ Physicians complain about physician extenders (nurse practitioner and physician assistants), MSW social workers complain about BSW licensure, RNs complain about AA-level RNs and so on).
8) Simon comments on the transformation of psychology licensure whereby some states are moving toward requiring APA-approval. I don’t recall reading anything about this in the Monitor but that certainly doesn’t mean there isn’t a movement in progress. I’ll keep my eye out for information about this topic. There is a movement afoot to simplify interstate/provincial transfer which is way overdue. I moved several years ago and it was almost more burdensome to obtain my license by reciprocity than retake the EPPP. I was required to submit 13 sources of credentialing on top of having an APA-approved degree and internship. I could sort of understand this if I had a Caribbean medical degree but last I knew Indiana State University is located right here in the US of A. Additionally, Simon’s informed recognition of things like National Register status causes this old dog to think he may be more than a layperson when it comes to background in mental health.

 

David,

I hope your turkey did'nt burn! That was some in depth reply.

If I were asked my opinion by a young person, interested in the field of mental health, I would advise them to seek a medical degree with specialization in psychiatry, if they had the ability, aptitude and personality characteristics for this work. A degree in psychiatry gives one the latitude to find work in a vast array of areas and the salary, although low for physicians, is light years ahead of those for Psychologists. If asked, I would apprise them of the myriad number of issues centering around the diverse mental health professions, as well as the concommitant low pay, difficult client popultations and high rates of general dissatisfaction emanating from the inordinate stress and low status of these fields. As noted, Psychology is in the upper echalon of the mental health professions, but an overview of the salaries, effort and expense involved in obtaining a doctorate and the inordinate level of competition for the better jobs does not make this a viable choice for most.

Nonetheless, if an individual has their heart set on becoming a Psychologist and knowing all the realities associated with this field, by all means they should go for it.