I, too, am an aspiring clinical psychologist, and though I am only a sophomore (in the fall), I have done much of the research in the application to graduate school. I don't want to procrastinate and be sorry later. Well, the problem is that I am unsure about which type of program is right for me, either a Ph.D or Psy.D program. I know the differences between the two, and I know my interest would be in applied psychology as opposed to research, but I still don't know if I am sold on the Psy.D degree yet. Psy.D programs do not typically offer the type of financial support that Ph.D programs do, and the Psy.D does not seem quite as marketable as the Ph.D (not just academic careers). Maybe I'm wrong, you could perhaps let me know.

I think my preference lies with a clinically oriented Ph.D program like the one at the University of Michigan; however, although my grades are very good (3.7), most students in their program boast GPAs of 3.9 or better. And this goes for most other top-notch programs as well. I realize that grades aren't the only criterion for admission, but I don't consider myself a particularly adept test-taker, so my GPA will probably be better than my GRE scores. Clinical and research experience are also very important, among other things, so I will make sure I take advantage of that. Basically, I would like to know what you think about clinically-oriented Ph.D programs versus Psy.D programs, the advantages and disadvantages of both. Thanks for taking the time to read over my concerns. VR

I think you're asking two questions: (1) What's the difference between these kinds of programs in terms of career options? and (2) How can I maximize my probability of acceptance into a school?

First, as you know, a Psy.D. is, in theory, a practice degree, while a Ph.D. is often more research oriented. Norcross' book on preparing for graduate school does a nice job, however, in making clear that both Psy.D. and Ph.D. programs vary significantly in their missions and in the degree of research orientation of the program. Some Psy.D. programs are more research oriented than the least research oriented Ph.D. programs. Choose programs that match your interests -- as well as seem to maximize your probability of getting in!

Ph.D. programs offer more marketability if you are planning -- even vaguely -- on going into academics. Many colleges and universities will not consider hiring someone with a Psy.D., in part because the degree advertizes that you don't have an academic or research bent and in part because the search committee is likely to be made up of Ph.D.s who don't understand Psy.D.s. In other words, if you are thinking academics, choose a Ph.D. program. (But I have a friend who went from a Psy.D. program to a good academic job.)

Psy.D. programs also have the disadvantage, as you are aware, of offering less financial assistance. This is, in part, because they want to encourage you to get as much clinical experience as you can. This will put you a step up when you are applying for internships and jobs. In other words, the decreased financial assistance could be either a strength or a weakness.

Research oriented Ph.D. programs can be very frustrating for students who entered not knowing the program's orientation. Students often enter wanting to do therapy -- Now! -- and don't understand why they need to take so many statistics and methods courses. The Boulder model, on which this approach is based, argues that you will be a stronger clinician with the intellectual and scientific background coming from a research oriented training. While my heart is with the Boulder model, there is not concensus in the field -- thus the genesis of Psy.D. programs.