transfatfree

Short answer: both are important. I don't know about the actual article, but based on my familiarity with how faculty are hired at my department, both program prestige and university prestige are considered by different people. The faculty within the department focus on applicants' supervisors (whether they are people our faculty know of and how well our faculty know them) and publications. However, as hiring has to go through the college, the dean has the final say on who should be interviewed or hired. One applicant did not get an offer despite recommendation from the department because they did not go to a "tier-1 school" (whatever it means). I'm sure there are departments with more autonomy in who they hire, but you never know how your applications are evaluated by different people in the process.

The NASP website is your best bet. The school psychology program information page provides information about individual programs including number of applicants, PRAXIS results, student outcome data etc. As the profession is expanding, it is quite difficult for a graduate not to be able to find a job so as long as student outcome data look good and the program is NASP-approved, you can just go ahead. PRAXIS results are not reliable because it is so easy that people don't care much about it. Unless they are originally from another state, most graduates have chosen to work within the state where they did their specialist degree so probably school psychologists there may be able to tell you more about within-state reputation, but such information is probably not accessible to us. So I second the opinion that you should ask around if you want to stay in the same state after graduation.

I agree with all other posters on why you didn't get in. Being an international student is a major issue given the budget cuts. Canadian schools are not so good in terms of funding but U.S. private schools are extremely competitive. If you are really interested in research, you can try PhD in psychology programs with a mental health research focus. Those will be less competitive but won't enable you to get licensed. Another thing you may want to consider is whether you want to stay in the U.S./Canada or go back to your home country after graduation as tenure-track positions everywhere are difficult to get. You had some good experiences but since then you have pursued another career. It may take more elaboration in your personal statement to convince potential supervisors that you're committed as well besides worries about adaptation because there are many local applicants with similar profiles but more recent experience. So I'll suggest you look further into different programs and understand what they allow you to do in the future. In the U.S., all clinical, counseling, and school psychology programs enable to become a licensed psychologist. You may want to reconsider other options and apply to other programs in addition to clinical psychology programs. I was also an international applicant, working full-time as a teacher, studying part-time for my master's, RAing part-time, and preparing for my applications at the same time. I ended up in a PhD program in School Psychology that I really like. Making time is very important. You can make use of your commute time, get up earlier to study before you go to work etc. GRE is just an exam you need to spend more time on and there are a lot of materials available.

Starting early is a great step! I agree with what almondicecream said and have heard similar things. I'd just like to add certain things you may want to pay attention to as an international student. 1. While people may say that some supervisors will consider your non-native background and cut you some slack when it comes to GRE verbal and AW, I believe you can still do better than that. Getting great TOEFL scores can somehow make up to that, but you should check the university websites carefully as many universities now have specific requirements for international students who want to be considered for teaching assistantship. It has something to do with the lack of oral English skills in some international students in the past. I have seen requirements ranging from 25 to 28 for your TOEFL speaking score. Just something to bear in mind. Also, as a developmental graduate student, you may need to collect data from children and interact with parents. It's thus also possible for them to require better English communication skills. 2. You can submit presentation proposals to international conferences. Just make sure you pay attention to their deadlines, requirements, and target audiences. I'm sure there are also some national conferences in China. 3. Some universities publish statistics. For example, http://psychology.berkeley.edu/students/graduate-program/faq-general-admissions. You can say it's competitive as most candidates are well-qualified. You can see there were applicants from Peking University who got in. I'm sure you can ask around and seek advice from professors from your department about who they are and what they did. But in general, Chinese students tend to do cognitive psychology and neuroscience, which require more technical knowledge. 4. I would say if you want to stand out, you should try to publish. If you work for a good research lab, recruitment is more of the professor's concern than yours. You may help with recruitment, but usually they will tell you how. 5. As I said above, you need to convince your supervisor that they should choose you over local applicants. Besides English communication skills, cultural differences can also be an issue. They need to be assured that you'll be able to adapt to life in a different country while staying productive as a researcher. Another thing you may need to is the budget cut that has hit public universities hard. Some public universities are concerned about funding international students who are not eligible for in-state tuition. Private universities usually have more resources. However, the safest bet is to find a supervisor who is doing research that aligns with your interest and is externally funded. Some grants include funding a PhD student in their budget so the department does not have to pay for that student and the supervisor has more autonomy in who they want. I was once taught by a developmental psychologist who did her undergrad at Peking University and her PhD in the US. So it's also possible for you. Good luck!

I believe it depends on your goals and priorities. Northeastern provides different concentrations so if you're interested in becoming a BCBA along the way, you can choose their ABA concentration. Other than that you can become an NCSP after completing either program. Worcester State didn't provide data to NASP this year. Otherwise you could also compare other information such as cohort size, PRAXIS passing rate etc. You can certainly ask Worcester State for the info. You may also consider where you want to work in the future. While being an NCSP gives you mobility, many school psychologists choose to find a position in the nearby areas. Attending Northeastern also means higher COA. Whether you're willing to take on more debt is a personal choice.

check pm

When I applied last year funding was quite bad for both because of state-wide budget cut. Madison is still a bigger name and I've heard bad things about Milwaukee and was advised against applying to it because of lack of organization and faculty members.

I think it depends on how bearable you find staying at School #1. Of course it's true that potentially the brand name and your adviser's network can get you somewhere after graduation, but you cannot ignore the 5-7 years you're gonna spend on working toward your PhD. It can be difficult to endure without passion for what you do or where you stay for that matter. I also agree that the adviser at School #2 is both an opportunity and a risk. You never know what may happen. So obviously School #1 is the safer choice, but if you want to experience something new, School #2 won't be a wrong choice either, especially when diverse experiences are valued

Congratulations on your acceptance! Sorry to hear about your funding situation. I heard that funding has always been tricky at Temple. And funding is poorer in school psych than clinical/counseling psych in general. While you can always try to negotiate, you can talk to current students and see whether this is typical first. Then you can decide how you can approach it more appropriately.

All the applicants invited to the interview day of my program had some research experience. The least I saw was a senior with some lab experience. While I would say never say never, your chances are slim. I think what you can do is offer to work for professors. I was in your shoes back then (working full-time, studying part-time) and I worked for a lab for 10 hours a week for a year on weekday nights, on Saturdays, and during long holidays. I'm not sure if you can find something similar but you can ask around and see.

It may be a good idea for him to do the MA/MS first and figure out what he wants to do. There are different licenses with requirements that vary from state to state. In general, a doctoral degree is required to become a licensed psychologist in the US and a professional master's to become a licensed mental health counselor. He may want to do more research on how these qualifications and careers are different from each other.

Another way is do an MA/MS in (general) psychology. There are one-year and two-year programs that prepare you for further studies in specialized areas of psychology. He can do that in Japan if there are similar programs. You should ask him what his goal is after getting a master's in clinical psychology. He cannot practice in the US with just a master's, but I'm not sure if he can do so in Japan.

Because that's what NASP says: https://www.nasponline.org/standards-and-certification/national-certification/ncsp-eligibility You should note that NASP is an organization primarily for specialist-level programs and the information from the link above applies to specialist-level programs only. That's why the term "practicum" is used to refer to the hours they do in their 2nd year while "internship" in their 3rd year. It's different for doctoral-level programs. We typically complete the 600 hours required by NASP in our 3rd or 4th year doing advanced practicum/field-based experience/advanced fieldwork/whatever the school chooses to call it. You can refer to P.7-8 of the following document: https://www.nasponline.org/Documents/Standards and Certification/Standards/2_Credentialing_Standards.pdf I haven't heard a problem like this in my program so I just assumed that is the case for all doctoral programs, especially those that encourage you to do an APA-accredited internship. But I'll certainly confirm with those schools who said your internship must include 600 hours in a school setting and ask what their students/graduates typically do as program requirements vary from program to program.

Those programs aim to train researchers only and you cannot become an NCSP automatically. You should note that many PhD students found out that they're more interested in practice instead of research in the middle of their studies. Going to a non-NASP-approved program doesn't give you the convenience if you decide to become a practitioner. Of course you can still apply to become an NCSP if you fulfill all the requirements but it's just more troublesome.

Thanks for sharing the survey. It's an interesting read. I'm not sure if much can be done as there aren't many quantitative psychologists to begin with (as shown clearly in the survey. There are two quantitative psychologists in my department but both are Europeans). And many soft scientists just follow statistical conventions without understanding the underlying principles and remain users of statistics only. I also agree that changes must be made at the undergraduate level as many programs (except for APA-accredited programs that have many more requirements) only require one or two years of coursework. It may be difficult to fit stat/method courses into the curriculum.

It depends on how much debt one already has and one can take. Tuitions vary a lot from program to program. But when school psychologists are in demand in most states, an Ed.S is not a bad investment option.

It'll be ideal if you can find out whether the faculty dominantly received their qualifications from the UK or the US. They should be more familiar with the education system they went through. Like my home country which used to follow the British system, it has transformed into the US system over the years and more faculty did their education in the US than in the UK. I think such recognition is important when you look for jobs in your home country. If it's the subject ranking, that's really a red flag as there may only be 80 schools in that subject ranking. In addition to professors, I think it's also important to have intellectual interaction with peers. In this regard, I believe Rochester and Madison are able to attract more able peers you can learn from. It's great that you were able to find someone who did the program. They should be able to tell you more about the program and see whether that's what you're looking for.

I guess one thing that only you would know is career prospects after doing those programs in your home country. It looks like you want to go back to your home country and become an education consultant, but we don't know how the schools in your home country view these qualifications. I did my undergraduate and master's in the UK and am now doing a PhD in the US. In general, I prefer the education I received in the UK as it was more solid, organized and in-depth compared with what I'm getting in the US. However, in your case I would say that the schools you applied to in the US and that in the UK are NOT in the same tier. Rochester and Madison are both internationally renowned universities while Anglia Ruskin is a new, regional university that has not yet built a reputation. I studied in two different universities (one top 10, the other top 50) and the difference in the quality of education was huge. I would therefore advise against Anglia Ruskin purely based on potential educational experience unless you've heard good reviews about that particular program. In terms of environment, you'll be fine anywhere you choose. I would still say I felt safer in the UK and in the US, but I'm sure after studying in the US for years you should know that the US is still a safe country to be, even when Trump becomes the president. And they're all great cities for your studies. You're also right about visas. Your spouse will be able to work in the UK and he'll need a J-2 visa to do so in the US. Hope Rochester can give you a more concrete answer soon. Hope my comments help. I can't comment on time, money and interests as you may have different priority when it comes to these aspects.

What you are referring to is a professional degree. Some professional degrees "happen" to be terminal degrees, depending on the requirements of specific fields. There is also a difference between terminal degrees and terminal master's. You can take a look at how Yale defines terminal master's: http://gsas.yale.edu/sites/default/files/page-files/terminal-masters-programs-review-2013.pdf

Pepperdine, AU, CSULB, CSUN, CSULA

Heard that funding is limited but not offered to every student (Well I guess the whole UC system struggles). Also, if you care about APA-accredited internships, Berkeley is NOT the place to be because students are required to do a two-year half-time internship instead of a one-year full-time internship.

I'll choose a non-academic LOR over no LOR. You won't even make the cut without the required number of LORs.

Congratulations! You can look at school psych posts in previous years. Some students shared the questions you may encounter at interviews. They are pretty comprehensive, covering different areas. The interviews may include a combination of an informal social event the night before the interview, introduction to the program, individual/group interviews with multiple professors, interviews with current grad students and/or a school tour. It should give you not only what your POI is like but also a sense of the whole community.

I think you make quite a competitive applicant for PhD programs with your research experience making up for your quant score. If you find programs that you're interested in, you should definitely apply to them. Some programs consider PhD applications for EdS admissions if they can't offer them a place in their PhD programs. You should check with their director of admissions and see whether they do that. Funding is in general better for PhD students, but funding for EdS students varies a lot from school to school. A good starting point is NASP's database on program information even though it's not always accurate/clear when it comes to the funding part. Many PhD programs guarantee funding only for the first year, which means you save at least 3x credits. Credit requirements for PhD programs range from 9x to 11x credits, so how much debt you will get into depending on whether you will receive more funding in subsequent years, how many credits you need to take, where you live etc. My advice will be to apply to a variety of programs and ask them about funding on the interview day. You can then weigh your options when you're offer admissions. With your credentials, if you do reasonably well at interviews, I'm sure you'll end up somewhere. Just apply first and get ready for the interviews later.

Second this, but my guess is your GPA is fine, especially when you have a fair amount of research experience. I did a master's in the UK as well and have the same impression. Their condition offer may require a certain GPA or honors, depending on your country's university system.