Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out

Domain A Eligibility


									                                     Domain A: Eligibility

The San Diego State University/University of California at San Diego Joint Doctoral Program in
Clinical Psychology (SDSU/UCSD JDP) was established in 1985. It was first accredited by
A.P.A. in 1990, and it has been continuously re-accredited since that time. Both SDSU and
UCSD are accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC); in
addition the School of Medicine at UCSD is accredited by the Association of American Medical
Colleges. At SDSU, the Joint Doctoral Program (JDP) is housed in the Department of
Psychology, in the College of Sciences (COS). COS includes the program in its budget and
allots operating expenses to the JDP each year that are managed by the program. COS also
provides travel funds for JDP students who present at conferences. The Psychology
Department provides funds to support instructors for doctoral courses that need to be taught,
two half-time TAs for JDP courses, and partial stipend money to help support two students.
The Graduate School provides tuition waivers for approximately half the students in the
program as well as additional funds that are used to supplement student stipends. The
Graduate School also provides additional non-resident tuition waivers for students who are in
the process of establishing California residency and to international students who are unable
to become California residents. At UCSD the JDP is housed in the Department of Psychiatry in
the School of Medicine. UCSD provides funds to defray UCSD tuition costs for approximately
half the students in the program, as well as funds for student travel, some funds to support
student research, and support for other expenses that arise for which other monies may not be
available (e.g., tutoring, funds to purchase health insurance for students who received A.P.A.
Minority Fellowships).

The number of students registered in fall, 2006, including interns, totaled 73. The program
includes specialized training in one of three tracks, Behavioral Medicine, Neuropsychology,
and Experimental Psychopathology; students apply to and are selected to be in one of these
tracks. The Selection Committee actively works to ensure that the distribution of students
between the two universities and among the three tracks is as even as possible. The JDP is
designed to be a five year program, with the fifth year generally being the clinical internship
year. At least half of the students decide to remain an extra year, either to obtain an M.P.H. as
part of our agreement with the School of Public Health or to increase their publication track
record before going on internship. The universities impose a seven year limit for completing all
requirements, including the dissertation and internship; in the past few years, this has been
more strictly enforced. Extensions are rarely granted, and even then only for compelling
reasons (e.g., serious health conditions). All students are required to be full-time and in
residence throughout their training; we do not accept students on a part-time basis.
Infrequently, we will allow students who have completed all requirements, including having
proposed the dissertation, been advanced to candidacy, and with a clear plan to collect
dissertation data (or with dissertation data collected already), to physically do their last year
before internship at another site, decided on a case by case basis. In those rare instances
where students can make a case for relocating for a year, arrangements must be made in
advance for acceptable practicum experiences, regular face-to-face communication between
the student and his/her research mentor, and acceptable mechanisms for evaluation and

Tuition for all students is covered by the JDP. Approximately 25 students have their tuition
paid at UCSD each year, with the rest at SDSU. Because of the extreme difference in tuition
costs for non-residents, JDP students from out of state are expected to become California
residents by the end of their first year in the program. Regardless of where the tuition is paid,
students register for classes at both universities each quarter/semester of each year, except
during the internship, when students only register at SDSU. After internship, they must remain
registered at SDSU until all requirements are completed. The average time to completion for
JDP graduates form year 2000 to the present, including the internship year, is 5.98 years.

In November, 1996, California voters eliminated affirmative action policies in the state via
Proposition 209. Despite this, our program and both universities have maintained a
commitment to diversity and have made progress, particularly in achieving a more diverse
student population. Both universities have stated non-discrimination policies toward student
admissions and hiring. These stated policies prohibit discrimination on the basis of age,
gender, ethnic and racial background, religion, lifestyle, differing social and individual
backgrounds, and disabilities. We believe that these elements of human diversity reside in the
general populations of faculty and students in this program, as well as in the curriculum and
faculty research. Our commitment to diversity is substantiated by our students‟ nominating the
JDP for a Suinn award in 2006. Please see Domain D for additional specific information.

The policies and procedures of the JDP are delineated primarily in the Student Handbook and
accompanying web pages that can be found at
These webpages have been reproduced and are available in Appendices C (Student
Handbook) and D, Website.

Item                                                                 Appendix       Page #
Student selection                                                    D
Academic preparation and admission requirements                      D
Administrative and financial assistance                              C, D           72-73
Student performance evaluation, feedback, advisement,                C              6-7, 45-56
Student termination                                                  C              35-37
Due process                                                          C              35-37
Grievance                                                            C              7-8

            Domain B: Program Philosophy, Objectives, and Curriculum Plan

B1. Program Philosophy

Our program is based firmly on the scientist-practitioner model, with a distinct emphasis on
training psychological clinical scientists. The JDP is a member of the Academy of
Psychological Clinical Science (APCS). APCS defines clinical science as “a psychological
science directed at the promotion of adaptive functioning; at the assessment, understanding,
amelioration, and prevention of human problems in behavior, affect, cognition or health; and at
the application of knowledge in ways consistent with scientific evidence. The Academy's
emphasis on the term "science" underscores its commitment to empirical approaches to
evaluating the validity and utility of testable hypotheses and to advancing knowledge by this
method.” ( Consistent with this statement is our
conviction that a strong, solid foundation in the science of psychology is essential for
functioning in all the many roles of the clinical psychologist, and that exceptional, high quality
clinical training and experience is a prerequisite for doing outstanding, original research on
clinically relevant issues. We consider the integration of both aspects in our scientist-
practitioner training model to be fundamental to the education of clinical psychologists, and to
be the primary feature that distinguishes clinical psychology from the many other professions
concerned with health and behavior disorders. We believe that clinical psychologists, now and
increasingly in the future, will be employed in diverse settings with responsibilities
encompassing teaching, research, and program design/evaluation, as well as the more
traditional individual assessment and intervention functions, and that in order to function in
these diverse settings, they require a wide array of skills and competencies reflecting a true
integration of both science and practice. We believe that this ensures our graduates will be
particularly well equipped to assume leadership roles in research and service within
increasingly complex education and health care environments.

The JDP is uniquely placed to achieve that mission in that it is a partnership that contains both
a traditional academic Department of Psychology (SDSU) and the clinical and academic
resources of a medical school Department of Psychiatry (UCSD). The program is organized
around three tracks, Behavioral Medicine, Neuropsychology, and Experimental
Psychopathology. We offer less emphasis on practitioner training as preparation for a career
in private practice, which is the major mission of the many California professional schools.
This is not to say that we have fewer or weaker opportunities/requirements for clinical training;
indeed, the quality and diversity of our general and specialty practica are second to none.
However, we do place relatively more emphasis on clinical experience as essential to
meaningful clinical research, because of the need for psychological scientists to have first-
hand experience with the complexities of clinical situations. Consistent with these emphases,
each student in our program is involved in both clinical experience and research activity every
semester/quarter. Students work with a research mentor beginning their first semester, and
continue with that person throughout the program. Similarly, students begin their clinical work
by interviewing confederate master‟s students, progress through seeing a small number of
community-based clients under intensive, video-monitored supervision, and eventually move
to work within the broad array of practicum sites available to us through UCSD Medical School
and the affiliated San Diego Veterans‟ Administration Healthcare System. Most of these sites
are the same ones available to pre-doctoral interns in UCSD/VA San Diego A.P.A.-approved
internship, thus affording our students the opportunity to work with and learn from other
trainees at multiple levels, from graduate student through post-doctoral fellow. We deliberately
strive to avoid separating the clinical and research functions. Thus, whenever possible, faculty
working with students will be both experienced and skillful clinicians and productive
researchers. Even in our practicum settings, we attempt to ensure that the experiences our
students are getting consistently expose them to faculty who exemplify the scientist-
practitioner model. We consider this to be a vital feature of the program, reflecting our
philosophy concerning the optimal training of clinical psychologists.

B2. Program Objectives

The JDP has four major goals/objectives for its graduates. The desired goals, along with the
desired learning outcomes and how these outcomes are assessed, include:

Goal I. Students will develop the skills to competently conduct and evaluate research. These
skills include: conducting literature reviews; understanding the importance of participant
selection for external and internal validity; evaluating the reliability and validity of assessment
methods being considered, and selecting the optimal measures; understanding the strengths
and limitations of research designs; choosing and utilizing basic descriptive and inferential
statistics and more advanced multivariate procedures; choosing an appropriate research
strategy and implementing it systematically; and, finally, preparing a manuscript for publication
and taking it through the publication process. Acquisition of these skills is evidenced by:
    A. Successfully completing the three required statistics/design courses
    B. Successfully completing and submitting a Second Year Independent Research Project
    C. Active participation in grant supported research
    D. Presenting/co-presenting posters, papers, or workshops at professional meetings
    E. Authoring/co-authoring articles in scientific journals or chapters in professional texts
    F. Membership in professional/research societies
    G. Assisting in the preparation of grants for extramural research funding, and ultimately
       preparing and submitting grants, and, if possible, receiving external grant funding for
       his/her own research
    H. Successfully completing and submitting the dissertation
Progress and success for each of these outcomes are formally assessed in a number of ways.
For the first two years a student is in the program, the faculty involved in research, teaching,
and supervision of those students meet annually as a large group and discuss each student‟s
progress; formal letters are written to each student as a result of this meeting. In addition,
each year‟s progress and success are monitored through an annual review by each student‟s
Guidance Committee (see Domain E for a description of Guidance Committees); a summary
of the annual Guidance Committee evaluation data is provided to the Co-DCTs for review (see
Appendix F, Evaluation Forms, for an example of the form used). In addition, a final
reevaluation of these learning outcomes is conducted by the Co-DCTs at the time the student
applies for internship.

Goal II. Students will have the ability to provide theoretically based, empirically supported
treatments (ESTs) and preventive interventions. These skills include: assessment of the
problem, identification of the treatment most likely to be successful, implementation of the
treatment, on-going assessment of the efficacy of the intervention, and, should treatment
prove to be unsuccessful, methods and procedures for implementing a different treatment
strategy. Acquisition of these skills is evidenced by
    A. Successfully completing core courses related to clinical interventions
    B. Successfully completing practica in a minimum of three different settings using relevant
       empirically supported treatments
    C. Successfully matching for and then completing an A.P.A. accredited internship with
       good to excellent ratings on the internship site‟s measure of clinical competence

Outcome A is evaluated by the grades obtained for the relevant courses. Outcome B is
measured by a review of the evaluation forms completed by each supervisor at the end of
each semester; these forms are returned to the Practicum Coordinator, who reviews the
evaluation, monitors each student‟s placement each year, and alerts necessary faculty when
problems are identified. Outcome C is assessed by the Co-DCT and the Practicum coordinator
as six-month and final internship evaluations are received. For both Outcomes A and B, the
overall progress is assessed in a number of ways. For students in their second year, progress
is reviewed during the meeting held each year to discuss first and second year students‟
progress; should problems be identified during this meeting, the Co-DCTs will discuss these
with the student. Following the second year, progress is assessed through an annual review
by the student‟s Guidance Committee; results of this annual review are forwarded to the Co-
DCTs who review them on an annual basis. In addition, a final reevaluation of these learning
outcomes is conducted by the Co-DCTs at the time the student applies for internship.

Goal III. Students demonstrate they can consistently conduct themselves in ethical ways in
clinical assessment and interventions, and in research activities as evidenced by

   A. Successfully completing at least one university‟s training on use of human subjects in
   B. Successfully completing a course on ethics and professional issues
   C. Successfully dealing with ethical issues as they are discussed in the various practica,
      on internship, and in various research settings

All students are required to have approval from both universities‟ IRBs for all research
projects. Both universities require human subjects research training prior to the first
submission, so Outcome A is assessed when the student completes his/her second year
project. Outcomes B and C are assessed by looking at the grades students obtain for both the
ethics course and the practica; in addition, for Outcome C, written evaluations completed by
practicum supervisors are reviewed by the Practicum Coordinator, who monitors each
student‟s practicum placement each year, and alerts the faculty mentor and the Co-DCTs
when problems are identified. In addition, this outcome is assessed by the Co-DCTs and the
Practicum Coordinator as six-month and final internship evaluations are received. Finally, the
absence of any formal or informal ethical complaint about a student in either a clinical or a
research context is taken as further evidence of meeting this goal.

Goal IV. As an overarching goal, it is our desire to produce scientist-practitioner graduates
who will assume active roles in academic/research settings. For those graduates who elect
not to do so, our goal is that they utilize and disseminate science-based practice in applied
settings. It is our hope that, after graduation, all of our alumni will work in positions where
research is part of the job description. We assess this periodically by surveying our alumni
about their current positions and whether they have a) published papers, b) presented at a
professional meeting, or c) written or had grants funded since completing our program.

B3. Curriculum Plan

The program is designed to be completed in five 12-month academic years, including an
internship at an A.P.A.-approved site. Although slight variations in schedules and curricula are
allowed (e.g., if a student has had an acceptable graduate level course, deemed equivalent to
one of our required courses, he/she may replace this with an elective), the standard curriculum
plan most students follow is detailed on pages 29-31, Appendix C, Student Handbook. The
bulk of the core curriculum is presented during the first two years, with increasing
specialization occurring in the following three years. While most of the courses in the first two
years are physically taught at SDSU, both SDSU and UCSD faculty are involved in the
provision of the instruction.

The JDP has a long history of providing broad and general training, as well as specialty
training, in the aspects of psychology that have been deemed essential for professional
practice and for conducting meaningful psychological research. Many of the faculty who teach
our courses are nationally and internationally known for their work in the area. Syllabi for each
of the courses below are provided in Appendix E, Course Syllabi.

    a. Breadth requirements
Biological bases. This requirement is met in one of two ways, depending on the specialization
of the student. Students in the Neuropsychology track take the Basic Neurology course in the
medical school. This course meets at least four to five days a week for half a day for an entire
quarter. In addition to lectures, students conduct brain dissections and learn about functional
neuroanatomy. Students in the other two tracks take Psychology 860, a more typical course in
physiological psychology.

Cognitive and affective aspects. Because of the strength of the UCSD Cognitive Science
Department, students usually decide to meet the cognitive requirement by taking a course
through that department. Several of the JDP faculty have joint appointments in Cognitive
Science. From the array of potential courses available to them, students typically select one
that complements or enhances their research activities. If it is course that has not been taken
by a JDP student in the recent past, the student must obtain a copy of the syllabus, send it to
the Co-DCTs, and have the course approved as covering the cognitive basis of behavior
requirement. Courses that students have taken recently are presented in Appendix E, Course
Syllabi. Cognitive and affective components of human behaviors also are covered in the
required JDP courses. Psychology 856 (Personality Assessment) and 855 (Cognitive
Assessment) each deal with the assessment of cognitive and affective aspects of behavior.
Our cultural psychology course, Psychology 820, deals extensively with cultural variations in
how information is processed and evaluated, and how emotions are influenced as a function
of cultural values and experiences. In addition, Psychology 840 devotes a significant amount
of time to information processing

Social aspects. Students are required to take Psychology 840, Personality and Social
Psychology, which covers much of the current literature in this area. Included are such topics
as attitudes and their consistency, person perception, definitions and concepts of the self, and
stereotypes and prejudice.

History and systems of psychology. The relationship between the history of psychology and
current controversies in the field are covered extensively in Psychology 801 (History and
Ethics). The history of clinical psychology in particular is discussed in Psychology 850 (Clinical
Interventions), while the historical influence of the study of culture on the development of the
field is covered in Psychology 820. The history of assessment and its use and abuse is
covered in Psychology 856 (Personality Assessment).

Psychological measurement. In teaching students how to evaluate psychological assessment
instruments (Psychology 856), a significant amount of time is devoted to instruction in test
construction, with a unique emphasis on how to construct instruments that are valid cross
culturally (and how to assess if an instrument is valid cross-culturally).

Research methodology and techniques of data analysis. Three courses are used to cover the
major design and analysis area/topic: Psychology 770A, Psychology 770B (Experimental
Design and Data Analysis in Behavioral Research A and B), and Psychology 775 (Multivariate
Statistics). In addition, important issues related to the conduct of research are also discussed
in Psychology 850 (Clinical Interventions), Psychology 820 (Cultural Psychology), Psychology
856 (Personality Assessment), as well as in other courses (e.g., proseminars in the three
specialization areas). Psychology 850, for example, discusses the process through which
empirically supported treatments become empirically supported, and some of the
methodological issues in conducting randomized clinical trials.

Finally, all students spend a minimum of 20 hours a week, beginning in the first semester of
their first year, working directly in the labs of their faculty mentors. These mentors are all
successful investigators, and so students are involved in research design, implementation, and
analysis from the beginning of their education.

    b. Foundational requirements
Individual differences. This topic is covered in some detail in Psychology 840, Personality and
Social Psychology. In addition, these issues are addressed in both assessment courses
(Psychology 856 and 855), both interventions courses (Psychology 850 and 849), and our
cultural psychology course (Psychology 820). Individual differences are also a part of all of the
didactic courses that coincide with JDP student practicum placement (see Table 2, Practicum
Settings and the practica didactic outlines in Appendix K, Practica Information).

Human development. In our last accreditation review, a question was raised about how we
cover developmental issues. We do teach a course in developmental psychopathology, but
that is only required of students in our Experimental Psychopathology track. While we do not
offer a specific course in human development that is required of all students, we do
incorporate life-span developmental issues in a number of our courses. Specifically,
Psychology 850, 856, and 860 all deal with developmental issues; in addition, Psychology 820
covers cognitive and emotional development from a cultural perspective. Finally, the majority
of the courses that we allow students to take to meet the cognitive requirement have a
developmental component. We have highlighted in blue our coverage of human
development issues in each of the courses in which it occurs.

Psychopathology. Our students take the same psychopathology course required of all medical
students at UCSD. They take this course together with the medical students, and as a result
participate in the same lectures, discussions, small group assignments, and examinations. In
addition to learning about how diagnoses are made and the rudiments of psychological
treatment, students learn a great deal about psychopharmacology and how disorders are
treated with medications; they spend significant time with medical students and learn to “speak
their language;” and they gain an appreciation of the differences between how psychology
conceptualizes abnormal behavior and how medicine does. These experiences prepare them
well for future research and clinical work done conjointly with physician colleagues.

Professional standards and ethics. Both research ethics and ethics related to the practice of
psychology are covered in Psychology 801. Ethics are addressed with respect to testing in
Psychology 856. In addition, ethical issues specific to each practicum site are discussed in
the various sites.

    c. Diagnosing and defining problems
Assessment and diagnosis. Projective, objective, and behavioral methods of assessment,
along with test construction, are covered in Psychology 856 (Personality Assessment).
Cognitive and basic neuropsychological assessment methods are covered in Psychology 855
(Cognitive Assessment). Basic clinical skills, including supervised instruction in the use of
standardized diagnostic assessment instruments (e.g., the SCID), are provided in Psychology
849 (Seminar and Laboratory in Counseling and Psychotherapy). All three of these courses
have both lecture/seminar and laboratory components and are conceptualized as “double
courses” because of the amount of work required of students. Case conceptualization is
discussed extensively in Psychology 850 (Clinical Interventions). Finally, the Psychopathology
course covers how diagnoses are made, and all of the practica sites include didactic
instruction that addresses assessment and diagnosis of the problems being treated at that
Effective intervention and evaluating the efficacy of interventions. Empirically supported
treatments and evidence based practice are discussed extensively in Psychology 850 and
849. Included are not only information and instruction about the interventions themselves, but
also information about how interventions are deemed to be empirically supported, the steps
one goes through to demonstrate empirical support, and problems and concerns about the
concept of empirically supported treatments. In addition, the lectures and seminars
associated with each practicum placement provide instruction regarding the evaluation of the
efficacy of interventions used in the placement; representative outlines for the practicum
lecture/seminars are presented in Appendix K, Practica Information.

Consultation and supervision. Both consultation and supervision are directly addressed in
Psychology 849 (Seminar and Laboratory in Counseling and Psychotherapy). Ethical concerns
involving supervision are discussed in Psychology 801 (History and Ethics). Students also
receive instruction in these topics during their year long practicum in the Community
Psychology Clinic. In addition, these topics are part of each practicum site, and they are
discussed within each site as they are relevant.

     d. Cultural and individual diversity.
As described in Domain D, we require all of our students to take a course in Cultural
Psychology. This broadly defined course goes beyond issues of “counseling” or “therapy” and
reintroduces all of the major domains of psychology to students, only this time the major focus
is from a cultural perspective. In addition, as we also note in Domain D, virtually all of our
courses address culture and diversity at some point, meaning that in addition to the course in
this area, culture and diversity are infused throughout the student‟s training experience. In
order to demonstrate the degree to which we address issues related to diversity and
culture in our instruction, we have highlighted the relevant topics in red in each of the
syllabi that include the topic.

     e. Attitudes essential for life-long learning
There are two major components to our training in this area. First, because we expect that our
graduates will be actively involved in research (regardless of their eventual employment
setting) for the duration of their career, by definition they will need to remain current with the
literature in their area. We encourage students to attend conferences and extra training
sessions, to continue to prepare manuscripts and grants, and to generally remain active
professional participants. Second, beginning with the first practicum in the summer between
the first and second years, we model for our students an empirical, data-informed approach to
conducting clinical work. For example, when a student gets a new case, we require that
he/she do a literature search to see what the most up-to-date treatment for the presenting
problem is; when students present cases at case conferences, they must do so while
demonstrating that they have adequately reviewed the literature. As a result, regardless of
whether our students are doing research or doing clinical work, they are taught that the first
step is a review of the most recent empirical literature on the topic.

Comprehensive examinations. Students take two comprehensive examinations, one in the
general clinical area and another specific to their specialty track. The specialty track
comprehensive examinations are described below. The general clinical comprehensive exam
is typically taken in June of the student‟s third year, after they have had at least two year‟s of
practicum experience and have competed all formal course work. In approximately March of
each year, students scheduled to take the clinical comprehensive examination are given a
reading list. The exam is administered as a group. Students respond to a series of questions
that were originally designed to be similar to the kinds of questions asked of applicants on
previous oral examinations for licensing psychologists in the State of California. Despite the
fact the California has now done away with the oral exam, we have continued examination of
this content as a way for our students to demonstrate an overall comprehensive mastery of the
intervention, diversity, and ethics literature. The examination is administered on a computer
and is structured so that each student‟s work cannot be identified by the graders. The Clinical
Comps Committee develops the questions, establishes the criteria for passing, reads each
answer, and provides feedback to the student about each answer or portion of an answer.
Historically students were merely told that they passed the exam, failed it, or had to do some
type of remediation; however in response to student feedback, about six years ago we began
giving more extensive feedback on students‟ performance to enhance the learning value of the
examination process. An example Clinical Comprehensive Examination, the reading list,
criteria for scoring, and example feedback to students are provided in Appendix G,
Comprehensive Examinations; the reading list and questions for the Neuropsychology Track
Comprehensive exam are also provided. In order to pass the exam, a student must have an
overall average score above 3.5 on a six point scale; however, if an individual question
averages 3.5 or below, students are asked to remediate that specific question. Remediation
typically involves writing a 5 to 10 page paper that covers the problem topic area in more
detail, including providing references and citations.

Specialty training. Each student applies to the program through the track that best
characterizes the research the student wants to do. As noted above, the tracks include:

Behavioral Medicine/Health Psychology. This specialty focuses on developing and integrating
knowledge and techniques in behavioral and biomedical science with application to
prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of a wide range of health conditions.
Current faculty interests include health disparities in disease morbidity and mortality, quality of
life, chronic illness care and prevention, cultural and gender bias in health and health care,
factors in disease prevention and treatment, and addictive behaviors (e.g., alcohol use
disorder, tobacco use). Most of the students in this track obtain an M.P.H. in addition to their
Ph.D. through a cooperative relationship with the SDSU Graduate School of Public Health that
requires an additional year of coursework in this program.

Experimental Psychopathology. Experimental Psychopathology is the study of the causes,
characteristics, and treatment of psychological dysfunction. Theory and research in this area
emphasize assessment and treatment of both childhood and adult disorders. Experimental
psychopathology is broadly defined to provide students flexibility in deciding upon a particular
area for emphasis. Current faculty interests include anxiety disorders, affective disorders,
sleep disorders, schizophrenia, cultural issues in service delivery, child maltreatment, and
mental health services for children.

Neuropsychology. Clinical neuropsychology is a scientific discipline encompassing
identification, description, multivariate quantification, and remediation of psychological
impairments resulting from central nervous system disease and trauma. The
neuropsychological specialization provides a systematic program in human clinical
neuropsychology. Current faculty interests include environmental impact on test performance,
demographic influences, substance use disorders, and the effects of perinatal CNS lesions,
schizophrenia, HIV disease, Parkinson‟s and Huntington‟s diseases, and Alzheimer‟s disease

on cognitive function. Faculty and students have access to all of the latest imaging techniques
for use in their research.

Specialization consists of four aspects. First, when students apply to the program, they apply
to work with a specific mentor who shares their research interests, and first year students
begin to do research with that mentor immediately when they enter the program. Thus, the
first component of specialty training is the research a student does over the years he/she is in
the program. Second, each track has a year long sequence of courses that provide
foundational training in the area. The specific course syllabi for each track are provided in
Appendix E, Course Syllabi. Consistent with our overall model, one of the primary purposes of
these courses is to familiarize students with the broad range of research designs and
approaches that characterize empirical investigations in these specialty areas. At least two of
the tracks require students to prepare National Research Service Award (NRSA) grant
proposals as part of the year long sequence as well. All of the specialization courses include
extensive coverage of research and research designs in the specialty area. The third aspect of
specialization involves the choice of practicum site; especially in years 4 and 5 (after
completing more general clinical practica at both universities), students typically seek
placements that provide clinical experience related to the kinds of topics on which they are
doing research. Because each practicum site has a didactic session that goes along with it,
the practicum placement provides both clinical experience and additional education and
training in the topic area.

The fourth component of specialization is a comprehensive exam in the area. This exam is
typically done in the fourth year. For students in the Neuropsychology track, the
comprehensive examination is a four hour written exam; an example of the examination itself
is provided in Appendix G, Comprehensive Examinations. For students in both the
Experimental Psychopathology and Behavioral Medicine tracks, the comprehensive
examination is a review of the literature in a format that would be acceptable to Psychological
Bulletin. Students propose comprehensive exam topics to both track leaders; while the topics
may be related to the student‟s eventual dissertation, it must not be so specific that the
comprehensive examination could readily become the introduction for the dissertation, and the
track leaders review the proposed topic for the degree of specificity. Each comprehensive
examination is read by at least two faculty members with expertise in the area (one from each
university, including one member of the student‟s Guidance Committee, but not the student‟s
primary mentor), and questions and comments to which the student must respond are
provided. The specific requirements of the specialty comprehensive examinations are provide
in Appendix C, Student Handbook, pages 46-56.

B4. Practicum Experiences

One of the major benefits to our joint program is the availability of such a broad range of
potential practicum sites. At virtually every site the supervisor is a member of the JDP faculty
(rare exceptions exist for specialization practica, when the site provides unique experiences
not available in other program sites), and as a result, each of the sites and supervisors model
directly the scientist-practitioner outcome we seek for our students. Many of these sites are
the same ones that are used for the UCSD/VA San Diego A.P.A.-approved internship, and so
students are exposed to other trainees at various levels in their development. In addition,
because of the number and rich diversity of our settings, there are always more practicum
slots available than there are students to fill them, meaning that students are able to be placed
in sites that provide them with the training they desire.
Issues related to practica (e.g., applications for new sites, problems with sites) are handled by
our Practicum Committee, which consists of the Practicum Coordinator and two
representatives from each campus; either or both Co-DCTs serve ex officio on this committee.
Should a student identify a site at which to gain experience that is not part of our system, both
the site and the supervisor must be vetted through this committee; because of the large
number of sites already available, and our desire to ensure that sites adopt the scientist-
practitioner model we want for our students, it is rare that one of these outside sites will be
approved, and then only on a case-by-case basis. The criteria for being included as a regular
JDP practicum site include the following:

   1. Only practicum sites directly affiliated with UCSD, the VA San Diego Healthcare
      System, or SDSU are acceptable placements
   2. The primary placement coordinator must be a JDP faculty member
   3. A licensed mental health practitioner must be present onsite and available during times
      when a student is seeing clients. Although preference is given to having that practitioner
      be a licensed psychologist, both psychiatrists and social workers are acceptable to
      serve as back ups for the students.
   4. The training experience must include a didactic component.

As a result of changes made in 2001 designed to ensure that our students all receive
graduated, sequential practicum training consistent with their individual skills and abilities, all
students begin their clinical experience by interviewing confederates during the second
semester of their first year. These interviews are videotaped and reviewed in detail for each
student by JDP clinical faculty, with extensive feedback given. Beginning in July of the
summer between first and second year, all students begin to see clients in the Community
Psychology Clinic at SDSU. The Community Psychology Clinic gets referrals from the
community at large (approximately 60% of the total) and from various on-campus student
health services (approximately 40%). The Clinic treats a wide array of general problems in a
diverse population that frequently, because of limited finances, have few other options for
treatment; the cost of treatment is on a sliding scale. Clinically-trained JDP faculty provide the
supervision on a twelve month basis, and supervision is considered to be equivalent to one
course each semester (i.e., two courses a year). Students are supervised for a minimum of
four hours each week. Supervision is typically done in groups of two, with each student
supervised by two different supervisors simultaneously throughout the second year. Students
see two or three clients per supervisor (4 - 6 clients total at a time). Supervision during this
year is designed to be very intensive and to provide students with the necessary basic clinical
skills that will allow them to do more advanced practica in the future. All students are required
to videotape each session for review each week with their supervisors. Supervisors meet as a
group on a regular basis to discuss problems as they occur and to evaluate the progress of
each student throughout the year. The JDP Practicum Coordinator is the individual who serves
as the director of the SDSU Community Psychology Clinic.

Practicum placements in subsequent years are made by the Practicum Committee. During the
annual meeting with their Guidance Committees (see Domain E.2 for a more complete
description of the Guidance Committee) each student discusses possible practicum sites for
the following year; the goal is to identify placements that not only provide the kind of clinical
experiences the student wants, but that also might inform his/her research. A minimum of
three sites are identified, and these are submitted in rank order to the Practicum Coordinator,
who along with the Committee make the final placement decisions. Because the Practicum
Coordinator is an active participant in the training each student receives in the Community
Psychology Clinic, he is very aware of each student‟s relative strengths and weaknesses. As a
result, the Practicum Coordinator is able to provide input in addition to that from the Guidance
Committee so that each student can be placed appropriately, taking into account the rank
ordering. This ensures that each student is placed at a practicum site that will challenge
him/her and prompt the student to grow, but that will not overwhelm the student.

Regardless of site, each supervisor completes an evaluation form for each student at the end
of each semester and gives the student a letter grade based on his/her performance; the
supervisor also confirms the number of direct and support hours the student obtained. A copy
of this form can be found in Appendix F, Evaluation Forms. These evaluations and grades are
reviewed by the Practicum Coordinator, and the number of hours are transferred to a master
database that is used to verify the hours when the student applies for internship. Should
clinical, ethical, or other types of problems be identified, the mentor and the Co-DCTs are
informed, and the problems and possible solutions are then discussed among the Practicum
Coordinator, the Co-DCTs, and the specific supervisor. Depending on the nature of the
problem, the supervisor, the Practicum Coordinator, the Co-DCTs, and/or a student‟s
Guidance Committee will be involved in either solving the problem with the student or
implementing a remediation plan, if necessary. Because grades of B- or below are
considered by the program to be indicative of failing, students who receive a grade of B- or
below in two semesters of practicum (i.e., who fail to remediate or resolve the problem after it
has been identified and a plan has been developed) are put on probation in the program;
students who receive a grade of B- or lower in three semesters may be asked to leave the
program. In this manner, identified problems cannot continue without resolution for longer
than approximately six months without the need for a more thorough intervention/remediation
plan. In addition, students also complete evaluations of the individual practicum site and the
specific supervisor. These evaluations go to the Practicum Coordinator, who reviews them
with the Co-DCT. The Coordinator and the Co-DCT will communicate any concerns or
problems to the specific supervisor or, in extreme cases where problems have persisted over
a number of attempts to resolve, will ask the Practicum Committee to consider no longer
placing students at the site.

In summary, our students receive both broad and general and specialty training. This training
is provided in traditional classroom, practicum, and research lab settings. Figure 1 below
depicts the components of a student‟s training from matriculation to leaving for internship.
Tasks in red reflect broad and general training in clinical psychology; tasks in blue reflect
specialty training. Courses are presented in regular font, clinical training in italics, and

                                       Figure 1. Flowchart of student progress
        Year 1                                     Year 2                                     Year 3                                         Year 4

                                     General courses                          Clinical comprehensive exam
  General courses                    Research courses                         Specialty courses                             Specialty clinical practicum
  Research courses                   Clinical courses                         Specialty clinical practicum                  Specialty practicum didactic
  Clinical courses                   General clinical practicum               Specialty practicum didactic                  RESEARCH WITH MENTOR
  RESEARCH WITH MENTOR               General practicum didactic               Specialty comprehensive exam                  DISSERTATION
                                     SECOND YEAR PROJECT                      RESEARCH WITH MENTOR
                                     RESEARCH WITH MENTOR

                                   Evaluation                               Evaluation                                Evaluation
                                    Methods                                  Methods                                   Methods
       Grades                                   Grades                                   Grades                                    Guidance Committee Review
       Guidance Committee Review                Guidance Committee Review                Guidance Committee Review                 Dissertation Defense
       Faculty Review                           Faculty Review                           Clinical Comp Exam Grade                  Pre-internship application
                                                Second Year Project                       Specialty Comp Exam Grade                   review

       Broad and General Training                  Specialization Training         Courses Clinical Training            RESEARCH TRAINING

                                           Domain C: Program Resources

C.1. Identifiable Core Faculty

New faculty members who want to be part of the JDP faculty must first be nominated by the
respective Co-DCT; then the graduate deans of each university must give final approval. This
ensures that professional qualifications have been met and competency demonstrated. All
faculty have either Ph.D.s, M.D.s, or, in several cases, both. Most are recognized experts in
the program specialty areas of behavioral medicine, experimental psychopathology, and
neuropsychology (see faculty curriculum vitae). It is the responsibility of the Co-DCTs and the
track leaders to determine if a faculty member is an appropriate role model before granting a
request to mentor a doctoral student. Please see the abbreviated curriculum vitae
(immediately following Table 3) as evidence that our faculty are highly qualified.

The JDP has an unusually large number of faculty who are actively involved in the program,
are identified with the program, and are centrally involved in the program‟s activities.
However, because of the complexities of our program and the unique way it is structured, our
core faculty may be “involved and identified,” but may do so in a myriad of ways, many more
than are outlined in the G&P or in Implementing Regulation C-18. This is because we include
on our faculty both traditional (i.e., Department of Psychology) academic faculty members, for
whom the computation of percent of time may indeed make sense, and full time medical
school faculty members, who for the most part must support themselves by their external
funding activities. Because of these complexities, we have identified the following five
activities that help us define the level of involvement in the JDP. To be considered “core,”
faculty must be actively involved in at least two of these, unless otherwise noted:

   1. Mentoring, providing financial support, and providing training in research methods for a
      doctoral student. We consider this to be the most important task of our Doctoral
      faculty. It is the role that requires the most time, and one that necessitates that the
      faculty member serve as an appropriate role model. Currently it costs each mentor
      approximately $22,000 a year to support one student. Because of the amount of time
      and resources it requires, faculty who have successfully served as mentors to two or
      more students in the past five years are considered to be “core faculty” on the basis of
   these mentoring activities alone. Faculty who have mentored only one student must
   meet two of the other criteria to be considered “core;” otherwise they are considered to
   be “associated faculty.” The mentoring criterion is considered to be so crucial to
   meeting the program‟s goals and objectives that a faculty member who has not actively
   mentored or supported at least one student in the past five years must meet three of
   the remaining criteria below to be considered “core.”

2. Teaching a doctoral level course in the JDP curriculum.

3. Serving on a Guidance or Dissertation Committee

4. Participating on one of the major JDP committees. The JDP is structured so that there
   is always equal representation from both universities, and every effort is made to make
   the experience from one university to the other as transparent and seamless as
   possible for both students and faculty. Despite the size and complexity, the
   administration of the JDP is achieved with relatively few committees. These committees
   a. The JDP Coordinating Committee: This is the university-designated administrative
       body for the JDP. For SDSU, it consists of the Vice-President for Research and
       Graduate Affairs (or the Dean of Graduate Studies), the Chair of the Department of
       Psychology, and the SDSU Co-DCT; for UCSD it consists of the Dean of Graduate
       Studies, the Chair of the Department of Psychiatry, and the UCSD Co-DCT.
       Although this committee met frequently in the early years of the program (in order to
       establish the current program structure), currently it is extremely rare for this
       committee to be called into session. At the present time it would only meet when
       there is a major problem that has not been able to be resolved through other means.
       This committee has not had occasion to meet in the time since the last
   b. The Steering Committee serves as the primary policy-making body of the program
       and provides overall direction. It is composed of three faculty members from each
       university and both Co-DCTs; the department chairs of psychology (SDSU) and
       psychiatry (UCSD) serve in an ex officio capacity. In addition to policy-making, the
       Steering Committee determines if a student needs to be put on or removed from
       probation, or if a student must be terminated.
   c. Curriculum Committee: Comprised of three faculty members from each university
       and two student representatives, this group makes all recommendations regarding
       approval of new courses, changes in current course content or requirements,
       changes in the organization and structure of practicum, and so forth. When a
       change is proposed, the committee typically polls students and faculty to determine
       the general sentiment, and then makes a decision about the most appropriate way
       to proceed. Curriculum Committee decisions must be ratified by the Steering
       Committee before they take effect.
   d. Practicum Committee: This Committee consists of the Practicum Coordinator and
       two members from each university. The Committee evaluates potential new
       practica, makes recommendations about current practica, and whenever necessary
       helps to resolve practicum-related problems and issues. The Committee also helps
       assign students to practica each year based on available slots and student requests.
       Major Practicum Committee decisions must be ratified by the Steering Committee
       before they take effect.

      e. Student Selection: Student applicants to the program are reviewed by the Student
         Selection Committee. Each of the three specialty tracks operates its own sub-
         committee. The sub-committee consists of a chair from each university, those
         faculty from that track who are interested in taking a student for the next year, and
         one or two student representatives. Sub-committee chairs are appointed by the Co-
         DCTs and serve two year terms. A Selection Committee Chair oversees the entire
         process and ensures that all deadlines and requirements are met by the sub-
      f. Grievance Committee: The JDP Grievance Committee allows students to seek
         resolution of complaints about faculty actions or policies, which could not be
         resolved by more direct methods. The committee is comprised of three members
         (one faculty member from each university appointed by the program directors), and
         one student elected by the student body. In addition, the student(s) filing the
         grievance may appoint a fourth ad hoc committee member (from program faculty or
         students) as an advocate during the proceedings. All four members have full voting

   5. Supervising JDP students in practicum settings

Using these criteria, there are 107 faculty in the JDP, 28 from SDSU and 79 from UCSD. Of
these, 40 are considered to be “core” using the above criteria, 34 are considered to be
“associated,” and 33 are “other.” Please see Table 3 for more detail.

That our faculty have the necessary skills, training, and experience to provide our students
with what they need to succeed as scientists and clinicians can be demonstrated in a number
of ways. The January 12, 2007, edition of the Chronicle of Higher Education had an article on
a new method of determining the quality of graduate programs. The method described relied
on a measure called the “faculty productivity index,” which combined the number of
publications, citations, grants, and other similar indices into a single number. This number is
then averaged for the program faculty (i.e., the size of the faculty does not determine the
result). In that article, the JDP was ranked the number one clinical psychology program in the
country in faculty productivity.

C.2. Student Body

We currently matriculate between 10 and 15 new students each year, equally divided as much
as possible among the three tracks (Behavioral Medicine, Neuropsychology, and Experimental
Psychopathology) and across the two universities. The selection committee carefully considers
the entire application of a prospective student and makes decisions based on the applicant‟s
interest, aptitude, prior achievement, grades, scores, match with program offerings and
potential mentors, and possible contributions to diversity of the student body. The JDP has
consistently received approximately 300 applications each year for the past few years; of
these approximately 36 (12 in each track) are invited for an interview. Our acceptance rate
consistently has been around 5%. This means that the program has a substantial applicant
pool from which to draw, ensuring that we are able to keep our standards and our criteria for
incoming students very high. Scores, grades, and educational levels of current students can
be found in Table 5, pages 49-52.

In general, students progress through both of the first two years of courses as a class, thus
providing ample opportunity for peer interaction, support, and socialization. Beginning with the
third year, students become more exclusively involved in their respective specialty tracks,
although students remain together within their specialty track requirements. Each of the three
tracks have track co-leaders (one from each university); these track co-leaders meet once
each semester with the students in the track, with the program usually providing a light dinner
for these meetings. One of the Co-DCTs is present for these meetings as well. These
meetings provide students with an opportunity to socialize with others in their track (from all
levels), to share information about various placements and practica, to clear up questions or
misperceptions about program rules or requirements, to discuss issues and concerns, and to
talk about the internship application process.

The program values are communicated to students in many different ways. Initial orientation
meetings stress the importance of the scientist-practitioner model; individual meetings with the
Co-DCTs stress similar goals. Guidance Committee meetings routinely assess progress in the
research and clinical domains, including coursework. Accomplishment of the program‟s
objective of training scientist-practitioners is reflected in the educational and professional
activities of those who have successfully moved through our program. From Fall 2001 through
Fall 2006, a total of 65 students completed the APPI application to obtain an internship (this
represents 63 different students, as 2 students did not match the first time through, but did
match the second time). Using data obtained at the time students were completing their
internship applications, the mean number of publications per student (counting journal articles
and chapters in books, published or in press) was 5.35 (range 0 to 16); only two students had
no publications, although both had at least two articles under review at that time. All students
had made at least one convention presentation (mean = 10.37, range 1 to 25). Students
reported an average of 1.37 articles under review (range 0 to 6). Of the 63 individual students,
12 had their own National Research Service Awards (i.e., individual NRSAs), while another 7
had obtained other external grants to support themselves (e.g., A.P.A. minority fellowships,
Ford Foundation fellowships for minorities, dissertation funding from the Tobacco-Related
Disease Research Program, and money from the Breast Cancer Research Program); all of
these grants and funding mechanisms are highly competitive, which only serves to underscore
the high quality of the students in our program. With very few exceptions, the eventual
employment of our graduates consistently reflects the goals and objectives of the program
(See Tables 8 and 9 and Appendix I, Alumni Survey Raw Data and Results).

C.3.A. Financial support

Stipends: Each student receives a minimum stipend/salary of $14,000 (up from the $10,000
minimum at our last site visit) for 20 hours per week in a research lab. During the past five
years we have been able to supplement the stipends of those who are being paid the
minimum up to a minimum of $16,000, and this year we will supplement it to $18,000.
Stipends typically are paid through professors‟ research grants, although many other sources
of support are used: approximately two students a year qualify for special two-year fellowships
available through UCSD for students who have overcome significant adversity; a training grant
from National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism provides two years of funding to four
first and second year students; two to four students are supported through a combination of
SDSU Graduate School and Psychology Department funding; and a number of students have
written their own NIH National Research Service Award or A.P.A. minority fellowship program
grant that provides stipend, tuition, and research support. Occasionally when a mentor has
funding problems, advanced students may teach undergraduate psychology courses for their
support; more typically students teach only to obtain the teaching experience to make them
more marketable when they finish graduate school, or to augment their stipend.
Tuition: The program covers tuition for all our students regardless of whether that tuition is
paid at SDSU or UCSD. By agreement between the Graduate Deans, the students “pay” (via
the program) fees and tuition at only one university, yet are considered full time students and
are continuously registered for courses at both. Approximately 25 students have their tuition
paid at UCSD, while the rest have it paid at SDSU. Faculty mentors at both universities
contribute monies to pay whatever portion of the tuition is not covered by each respective
university. Students who have not yet established residency in California as well as
international students for whom establishing residency is precluded receive non-resident
tuition waivers from the SDSU Graduate School.

Medical Insurance: Students whose tuition is paid at SDSU receive an additional $1,500-
$2,000 to purchase major medical insurance; students who pay tuition at UCSD receive
excellent major medical coverage as part of their registration, although as noted above the
tuition at UCSD is substantially higher as a result.

By (1) carefully watching the mentors‟ total cost for student stipends, tuition, and health
insurance, (2) supplementing the stipends when necessary, and (3) asking SDSU faculty
voluntarily to pay higher stipend rates, we have managed to make the cost to the mentors
fairly equal across the two campuses while providing similar levels of stipends and benefits to
students. The obvious goal is to make it so that there are no logistic or financial advantages
for students to have a mentor at one university versus the other.

Travel Funds: Both universities have funds available to JDP students for travel to professional
conferences. In general, a student must be presenting a paper or poster at a conference to be
eligible for these funds. However, students can obtain these funds from either or both
universities, independent of where their mentor has his/her primary affiliation.

C.3.B. Clerical and Technical Support

The JDP is primarily administered through SDSU. The program has a full time associate
director who has a Ph.D. in clinical psychology, a full-time administrative assistant who serves
as office manager, secretary and computer consultant, and a minimum of two undergraduate
work study students who assist with various JDP tasks. The Community Psychology Clinic
operated at SDSU has a full time receptionist who is assisted by work-study students; and an
advanced JDP student who serves as clinic coordinator, a half time paid position involving
client and student contact, as well as other clinic tasks such as record keeping and assigning
clients to student therapists in consultation with the clinic director. The clerical staff works as a
team to ensure that the day to day operation of both program and clinic is carried out in a
professional and timely manner. UCSD has an administrative assistant and has recently
added an associate director who is a faculty member. The UCSD administrative assistant
provides program support by disseminating information to students/faculty, record keeping,
updating material required by that university, maintaining contact with campus departments as
necessary, and coordinating with the SDSU staff on various issues that affect the program and

C.3.C. Training materials and equipment
Both universities have excellent resources for procuring training materials for classroom use.
Faculty at UCSD have access to all of the equipment and resources that are available to
faculty in the School of Medicine, including access to state-of-the-art MRI and other research
grade imaging equipment and facilities. SDSU faculty have access to all equipment and
facilities available to faculty in the College of Sciences. The program itself has its own digital
videotaping equipment, LCD projectors, overhead and slide projectors, copy and fax
machines, printers, and both desktop and laptop computers for student/faculty use. Between
the Medical School and the Clinic, there are exceptional assessment materials and resources
available for training purposes. Both universities provide access to numerous „smart‟
classrooms, and there is a computer lab in the Psychology Department on the SDSU main
campus for all psychology students.

C.3.D. Physical facilities
The main JDP program office is located at 6363 Alvarado Court, Suite 103, in the Alvarado
Medical Center area, in SDSU Research Foundation-administered buildings that are adjacent
to the SDSU campus. The facilities include the Community Psychology Clinic and the offices
of the SDSU Co-DCT, Associate Director, and other JDP administrative support staff. SDSU
JDP faculty research labs are located in various buildings in and around the Alvarado Medical
Center, on the main campus, at Children‟s Plaza (which is part of Rady Children‟s Hospital),
and in other office buildings owned by the SDSU Research Foundation on Sky Park Drive. The
main JDP suite includes a conference room that is used for classes, case conferences, and
other program meetings. There is a student lounge, computer room, and small kitchen area
equipped with sink, refrigerator, microwave, coffee maker, and bottled water. A number of
SDSU faculty doing collaborative research with faculty at UCSD have offices at UCSD as well,
including offices at the UCSD Moores Cancer Center.

The UCSD program faculty have offices, clinical facilities, and lab space at a variety of
locations. Included in these locations are the Veterans‟ Administration Medical Center, the VA
Outpatient facility in Mission Valley, UCSD Outpatient Psychiatric Services, Basic Science
Building and Clinical Sciences Building, the UCSD Medical offices in Hillcrest, UCSD Thornton
Hospital and Medical Center, and several locations in other parts of the city where UCSD
Medical Center has a presence.

We are currently in the process of working with the SDSU Dean of the College of Sciences to
renovate and/or move the location of the Community Psychology Clinic. Currently the Clinic is
located in space that is used for a number of activities, and we would like to have the clinic be
located in space that is entirely dedicated for that purpose. We anticipate a similar amount of
space, although the configuration will no doubt be very different. Currently, the Psychology
Clinic (within Suite 103) contains:
a. 7 cubicle treatment rooms equipped with videotaping monitoring, including one large
enough for family therapy and a small one specifically for children;
b. A waiting room and reception area (300 sq. ft.);
c. A student library located within the student lounge;
d. Four offices, two for the clinic coordinator and the TA for the assessment courses, and two
serving as client and academic program file rooms.

C.3.E. Student support services.

Computer and shop services. The College of Sciences maintains a completely equipped
electronics shop, a wood shop, a metal shop, and computer support facilities with several high
end Unix servers, all staffed with full-time technicians. SDSU has modern computer
infrastructure and support services. In addition, there are a large number of computer
systems readily available for student use within the Department of Psychology.
Tutoring and writing support. The program makes available advanced graduate students to
serve as tutors for students having difficulties with the statistics sequences. In addition,
students having difficulty with scientific writing, particularly if English is not a student‟s first
language, may also receive tutoring and assistance to bring their writing skills up to a level
more functional for doctoral work in this country.

Library Resources. The Malcolm A. Love Library at SDSU, established in 1971, has over 6.4
million items in its collections. These items include books, government publications, maps,
sound recordings, archival papers, and microform items. With a 2005/2006 budget of
$9,157,191, the library has over 20,000 print serial titles and almost 24,000 electronic
subscriptions. Students have access to both print and electronic versions of the library

The UCSD Libraries consist of: the Social Sciences and Humanities Library; the Science and
Engineering Library; the four Arts Libraries (Art and Architecture, Film and Video, Music, Film
and Video, and Visual Resource Collections), the Mandeville Special Collections Library (all
housed in the Geisel Library Building, named after the author of the Doctor Seuss books); the
Biomedical and Medical Center Libraries; the Scripps Institution of Oceanography Library, the
International Relations and Pacific Studies Library; and a new library in Galbraith Hall. UCSD
also provides access to the California Digital Library, making available collections throughout
the UC system, one of the largest university systems in the world. With a total budget of
almost $31.5 million, the libraries are designed to support undergraduate, graduate, and
medical instruction as well as research; each is staffed with personnel to provide appropriate
assistance to students, faculty, and staff.

Because students register for classes at both universities, they are eligible for library services
at both universities. As a result they have extensive print and electronic access to materials
from around the world.

Health and Mental Health Services. Students are provided with health insurance as part of
their support (see above). The program maintains a list of mental health providers in the area
who have agreed to see students, psychiatry residents, and fellows for reduced fees. Student
health services at both universities also provide necessary medical care, although students
must seek care at the university where they pay their tuition.

C.3.F. Practicum sites
As described in B4 above, the JDP Practicum Committee and the Practicum Coordinator
maintain contact with faculty who serve as practicum supervisors, supervisors in other
settings, and all students placed in practicum settings. Each practicum placement is for one
year. Students are only permitted to change placements by following a specific JDP
procedure. See Table 2 for a summary of the practicum settings used by the program since
the last self-study.

Practicum supervisors evaluate and grade students each semester and submit a formal
evaluation (including a letter grade). Students also evaluate practicum supervisors and submit
a formal evaluation at the end of each year (see Practicum Evaluation Forms, Appendix F,
Evaluation Forms). With rare exceptions, all practicum sites are within the auspices of either
university (or the VA) and program faculty do the direct supervision of students. At those few
sites outside the universities, it is the JDP Practicum Committee's responsibility to evaluate
whether the site and supervisor's credentials are acceptable for the JDP. Ensuring that we
obtain ongoing evaluation of the student, of the supervision, and of the training experience is
the responsibility of the Practicum Coordinator.

C4. Consortium Arrangements

While the conjoint structure of the JDP is rather unique within clinical psychology, JDP
programs have been successfully maintained in the California State University system across
several other disciplines. Prior to the initiation of the Ph.D. Program in Clinical Psychology in
1985, there already were two doctoral programs conducted jointly between SDSU and UCSD,
in Biology and Chemistry. Now there are a total of eighteen Joint Doctoral Programs, eleven of
which are joint with UCSD. When the psychology program was in the initial phases of
planning, the proposal was drafted in the same manner as the preceding two programs. A
committee representing faculty from both universities met to discuss and write each section of
the proposal. The proposal was then submitted for approval to all appropriate levels of both
the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU) systems. The JDP
in Clinical Psychology is now considered to be a model for these kinds of cooperative
programs system-wide, in both the UC and the CSU.

Once the proposal was approved by these entities, it became the official agreement between
SDSU and UCSD. Then Graduate Deans, Dr. Cobble and Dr. Attiyeh, considered that
proposal to be the only agreement necessary; since that time, similar proposals have served
as the only agreement necessary for other SDSU/UCSD doctoral programs. Although no
other agreement is available, a copy of the approved proposal can be provided.

               Domain D: Cultural and Individual Differences and Diversity

The importance of diversity to both our faculty and students is a cornerstone of our program.
Because of our location on the border to Mexico and at the edge of the Pacific Rim, San
Diego‟s population is quite diverse, and both our research and our clinical work require faculty
and students who are willing and able to deal with a range of populations. This is reflected in
the work our faculty do, the students we recruit, and the kinds of experiences we make sure
students receive before they graduate.

Faculty. With respect to gender, our faculty composition reflects the changes that have
occurred in clinical psychology over the past decade or so; specifically, 47, or 43.9%, of our
faculty are women. However, our ability to recruit faculty from ethnically/culturally
underrepresented groups has not been as successful as we would have liked; only 4 of our
faculty are from underrepresented groups. Our success has been limited for a number of
reasons. On the SDSU side, for example, the frequent and severe budget crises that have hit
the State of California in the past seven years have resulted in relatively few hires, despite the
large number of retirements; our searches for clinical positions were cancelled two years in a
row. Since 2000, we have hired a total of four clinical psychologists at SDSU; of these three
have been women and one is from a group that is underrepresented in psychology (Asian
American). On the UCSD side, there are very few positions that do not require new faculty to
be able to support themselves through external funding. Given the relatively large decrease in
federal funding over the past seven years, this has resulted in UCSD‟s limiting its hiring. As a
result, the number of underrepresented new faculty has been limited there as well.

There are a number of initiatives that, if successful, may result in increased numbers of faculty
at either or both institutions. For example, the National Cancer Institute has awarded a pair of
U56 partnership planning grants to the UCSD Cancer Center and the College of Sciences at
SDSU; the two institutions have applied for U54 full partnership status. Should these grants be
funded, some of the outcomes will include: 1) funding for collaborations between the
universities on research related to cancer disparities, with an emphasis on supporting
underrepresented graduate students; 2) funding two to four post-doctoral fellows doing social-
behavioral science research in cancer disparities, with the goal being to facilitate their
transition to funded faculty; and 3) providing ancillary funds for recruitment and start-up for
underrepresented faculty doing research in cancer disparities. If the U54 is funded, the SDSU
Department of Psychology has made a commitment to hire an individual with a primary
research focus in cancer disparities; this person would have an obvious role to play in the
Behavioral Medicine track of our program.

While we have not been as successful as we would like in recruiting underrepresented faculty
to either university, we have been successful in recruiting, selecting, and training the next
generation of diverse faculty in clinical psychology.

Students. The JDP has taken a number of steps to ensure that the classes we recruit are
diverse. First, we have found that the most important attribute we have that makes us
successful in recruiting underrepresented students is the fact that many of our faculty are
doing research that is relevant to issues of diversity. Specifically, of the 107 faculty members,
37, or over one-third, have published research in the last seven years that had a diversity
component. Second, despite the fact that few of our faculty teach undergraduate courses,
many of our SDSU clinical faculty actively mentor undergraduates from the many programs at
SDSU that are designed to provide support and educational enhancement for
underrepresented students in the sciences; similarly, UCSD faculty support and mentor
underrepresented students who are part of the summer program UCSD offers each year.
These include students in the Minority Access to Research Careers (MARC), Minority
Biomedical Research Support (MBRS), McNair, and Career Opportunities in Research (COR)
programs. All of these programs have annual meetings where students and faculty come
together to describe the research being done; because these undergraduates attend meetings
and talk about the diversity-related research being done by JDP faculty, we attract a large
number of underrepresented student applicants who have participated in these various
programs. Third, our program has not only been active in, but actually developed the original
idea and serve as the coordinating organization for the “Diversifying Clinical Psychology”
reception held each year at the Mid-Winter Meeting of the Council of University Directors of
Clinical Psychology (CUDCP). This reception, which has been funded by the A.P.A.
Education Directorate and Minority Fellowship Program, brings outstanding underrepresented
students from all over the country to the CUDCP meeting; students bring posters and their
vitae and have the opportunity to talk in depth with DCTs who actively try to recruit them.
Because our program has been identified with this activity (which celebrated its third
anniversary this past January) and because this activity has been described each year in
publications (e.g., the A.P.A. Monitor), we have attracted students because of our close
association with it. As a result of these initiatives, the JDP typically has a larger than average
pool of underrepresented applicants from which to choose.

Figure 2. Ethnicity of Incoming Class by Year of First Matriculation

                   2000    2001     2002     2003     2004     2005    2006     2007
                                  White                      Underrepresented

Because of Proposition 209 (see page 2 of this document for a brief description), our Student
Selection Committee is not allowed to consider race/ethnicity as a factor in selection.
Nonetheless we are allowed to consider aspects of diversity such as being the first in one‟s
family to attend college, socioeconomic status, and overcoming adversity. As a result, our
Student Selection Committee is able to invite a diverse group of potential students to interview
on our campuses, and many of the students who receive offers of admissions are
underrepresented. The mean percentage of underrepresented students admitted to the
program since its inception is 27.6%. For the years up to and including 1999, the mean
percentage was 22.9% (range 0 – 54%); since our last site visit in 2000, the mean percentage
of our student body who are underrepresented is 37.6% (range 25%-54%, see Figure 2).

For the past eight years, UCSD has had programs in place to increase the diversity of its
doctoral programs. Originally funded by NIH, these programs now are locally administered,
competitive, two year fellowships designed to provide the first two years of funding for students
who have overcome unusual adversity to get into graduate school. Overwhelmingly, these
students are from underrepresented groups. We routinely apply for and are awarded a
minimum of two of these each year. The advantage to our faculty mentors is that, when a
student qualifies for one of these fellowships, it means the mentor will get a student in his/her
lab for the first two years at little or not cost (versus the typical $22,000 cost per student per
year); as a result, there is real incentive for our faculty to seriously consider accepting and to
make every effort to recruit eligible students to work with them.

D.2 Student Education

One of the unique aspects of the training provided to our students is the manner in which
diversity is handled throughout the JDP. There are a number of ways in which diversity
education can be conceptualized. For example, some programs choose to teach a course
typically entitled “multicultural counseling” or “multicultural therapy;” alternatively, other
programs attempt to infuse all of their instruction with coverage of diversity issues. The JDP
has adopted a broader, more inclusive approach to instruction in diversity. First, we do not
teach a counseling- or intervention-specific course. Rather we teach a course in “cultural
psychology,” broadly defined. We believe that a “culture” represents a way of viewing the
world, and as a result all of our behaviors and interactions are culturally-saturated. These
worldviews begin to be formed during infancy and early childhood, and they are reinforced and
reified repeatedly whenever one interacts with one‟s environment. Thus, rather than
conceptualizing “culture” (or ethnicity or race or gender or social class) as an independent
variable through which one looks to find “differences,” our instruction focuses on the
underlying constructs that form the basis for what appears, superficially, to be
ethnic/cultural/gender/SES differences. In other words, our instruction focuses on the
underlying constructs that attempt to explain or correct for the variance in differences among
groups, not simply on the differences themselves. So, our basic course covers the major areas
of psychology with a focus on what has been demonstrated to occur in other cultural groups
versus what appears to be a Western middle class phenomenon. In that way, our students
become familiar with ways of thinking, conceptualizing, and even doing research that is
designed to help explain differences rather than just identify them. From this beginning,
students are able to make real diversity-focused suggestions about their mentors‟ work, and
bring a cultural focus to the research and clinical work they are doing.

In addition to the cultural psychology course, virtually every other core course has a specific
component devoted to culture or diversity, ensuring that topic-specific coverage is provided as
well. As indicated above, we have identified the specific components of each course that
focus on diversity in red (see Appendix E, Course Syllabi). Finally, because of our location
our students all see diverse clients/patients in each of their practicum settings. We are
particularly sensitive to issues of language. Some of our students are fluent Spanish speakers,
and as a result, are often asked in a variety of settings to see patents or research subjects
who do not speak English. In order to ensure that our students are adequately prepared to do
this, for the past four years we have offered Spanish-speaking students the opportunity to see
Spanish-speaking clients and to be supervised in Spanish. This is provided during the second
year practicum in the Community Psychology Clinic. Our students have had the opportunity to
see individual clients, couples, and even to run a cognitive-behavioral therapy group for
Spanish-speaking mothers in a local school. Supervision is provided either by Spanish-
speaking faculty, or more often by Spanish-speaking post-doctoral fellows, who supervise the
students under the supervision of one of the JDP clinical faculty members. This ensures that
when students continue in their education they have had good training and exposure to the
unique requirements of interacting with patients/clients or research participants who do not
speak English.

                            Domain E: Student-Faculty Relations

E.1. Treating students with courtesy and respect

Joint Doctoral Program faculty make every effort to maintain the longstanding tradition of
positive student-faculty relations that has characterized our program from its inception.
Individual student-faculty interactions are usually excellent and, as a group, student-faculty
relations are very positive as well. Faculty respect for their students is routinely shown in the
extent to which students are included on faculty research as co-authors. For example, all but
two students applying for internship in the last five years have had publications with faculty,
and all have had presentations. Faculty respect for students is also shown in their inclusion on
a number of important committees including curriculum, student selection, and grievance.
Data from the survey of our graduates and from the students‟ program evaluations since the
last site visit point to a general positive morale among our clinical student body.

Appendix I, Alumni Survey Raw Data and Results, provides both raw and summary
information from our recent survey of program alumni. As can be seen, regardless of whether
one is looking at all 117 students (of 158) who responded or only at the 68 (of the 73) who
obtained their degree since the last site visit, students report overall satisfaction with the
program. Mean ratings of faculty availability and research supervision were both above 5 (on a

1 to 6 scale). In fact the lowest mean rating (regardless of whether one looked at only those
who recently got their degrees or at everyone) was a 4.49 for job preparation.

E.2. Accessibility and guidance and support

A key element in the quality of student-faculty relations in the JDP is the utilization of
Guidance Committees. Each student in the program has a Guidance Committee. The
committee members are responsible for directing each doctoral student‟s program of study
and for a continuing evaluation of the student‟s clinical and research competence. Three
committee members (the student‟s mentor and one JDP faculty member from each campus)
are nominated by the student and approved by the Program Directors. At least one of the
three must be trained as a clinical psychologist. Incoming students are required to form a
Guidance Committee by the end of the spring semester of their first year. In the interim, the
student‟s research advisor and the two program directors serve as the Guidance Committee.
Guidance Committees are required to meet with the student a minimum of once per year, with
a formal written evaluation required at the end of each academic year. Additional meetings
may be held if the student is having any difficulties and/or either the student or committee
members deem it necessary.

The next level of student mentoring and guidance occurs after the student has passed the
comprehensive examinations and core coursework has been completed, when a Dissertation
Committee is selected. This committee is composed of a minimum of five members and must
include at least two from each university. Typically, the student‟s major research professor
serves as Chair of the Dissertation Committee with other members of the student‟s Guidance
Committee involved or not depending on their particular research specialties. The Dissertation
Committee is responsible for the evaluation and approval of the dissertation. The committee
also conducts and evaluates the student‟s oral defense of the dissertation proposal and the
final defense of the dissertation, both of which are open to all faculty, students, and the
general public. Written announcements are distributed to all faculty and students and posted
at both universities. Final approval of the dissertation rests with the Dissertation Committee.

Positive interactions among faculty and students occur in other ways encouraged by the
program. As described in more detail in F.1.b, Informal assessment procedures, we provide
students with numerous opportunities to interact with faculty in more informal environments.
One of the Co-DCTs meets with the first year class over brunch a minimum of twice during the
first year, at the end of each semester; in addition the Co-DCT meets with the first year class
within the first few months to check in and see how the students are progressing. The Co-DCT
meets again briefly with the second year class at least once per semester. One or both Co-
DCTs participate in the meetings held each year by the track leaders for students within each
track. We have two program social events each year, a beginning-of-the-year-party to
welcome the new students, and an end-of-the-year party to celebrate those that are leaving
and to mark the end of another academic year.

A group internship advisement meeting for students planning on applying for the match the
next year is held in mid-March or April. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the
internship application process for the following year. We include those who have just
completed the match and will be leaving for internship the following year in this meeting to
answer student questions, allay concerns, and provide whatever information they can from
their recent experience. We meet again as a group with those intending to apply for internship
the following September, immediately before they begin to apply. The purpose of this meeting
is to answer any final questions, provide any additional information, and discuss what else
needs to be done. Finally, one of the Co-DCTs meets individually each September-October
with each internship applicant before the APPIC form is completed to discuss final progress,
outline strengths and weaknesses, talk about future goals and so forth; this final meeting
assures that the Co-DCT has sufficient direct knowledge of each student to be able to
complete Part II of the AAPI with confidence.

Another mechanism that contributes to positive student-faculty relations is the participation of
student representatives in various committee meetings. Students have active involvement in
the issues and decisions facing the clinical program. These decisions include participation in
the interviews of candidates for clinical faculty positions and interviewing and hosting student
applicants to the program; in both instances we actively seek out student input and give
considerable weight to their comments and suggestions about candidates. In addition,
decisions to change the curriculum in any way are always done only after careful input and
consultation with students.

Faculty are accessible to students either by means of standard office hours, general
availability during the week, or via email for quick questions and information seeking. Because
faculty and students work together as co-authors, co-investigators, or clinical supervisors and
supervisees, there are many different contexts in which they interact and many opportunities
to provide guidance and mentorship.

E.3. Respect for cultural and individual diversity

We strongly encourage faculty to show respect for individual and cultural diversity among the
students. As noted under Domain D, this is evident in the composition of our student body, in
course syllabi, and in the fact that many faculty actively seek out diverse students to enhance
their research labs. Not surprisingly with this sensitive topic, sometimes we are not as
successful as we would like to be. In our most recent current student survey we asked if
students ever felt discriminated against in any way. Of the 79 students who responded, 6 said
“yes” to this question. When asked to elaborate, 1 did not respond and 2 did not answer
because they felt if they did it would disclose who they were. Of the remaining 3, one was a
non-minority student who said that his/her answers were devalued in the cultural class.
Another who said yes said that he/she was not discriminated against, but did feel it was wrong
to ask individuals from various minority groups to speak on behalf of the members of that
group; he/she felt that the program does not ask White students to speak on behalf of all
Whites. And the final student who said “yes” felt that minority student responses in at least
one class were evaluated differently than majority student responses. There were also a few
complaints about the cultural course not covering what the students felt they needed; these
comments all refer to the year the regular course instructor was unavailable. Since this issue
was identified, we have met with groups of students to reiterate the program philosophy that
discrimination will not be tolerated. We have asked that those students who feel they have
been discriminated against come and talk to faculty members with whom they feel comfortable
so that we can address this issue.

E.4. Evaluation of students

Prior to the start of classes each year, new students participate in a half day orientation to the
program. During that orientation, policies and procedures, how questions and concerns are
handled, aspects of the program that students need to be aware of, the web location of the
Student Handbook, and other pertinent information about the program are provided to
students. Updates, changes, and so forth that may occur at other times are communicated via
email messages to all students. For example, when we recently added the policy about
webpages and blogs which could reflect negatively on the individuals and the JDP, we emailed
a copy of the new policy to all students before it became effective so students were informed
immediately of the upcoming changes.

Students are formally evaluated at the end of each year. As noted earlier, each student
selects a three person Guidance Committee, consisting of their research mentor and one
representative from each university. We take the role of the Guidance Committee very
seriously, and any change a student may want to make in his/her program must be discussed
with and approved by the Guidance Committee. Each Guidance Committee meeting begins
with the student summarizing his/her progress in each of the major domains (e.g., courses;
non-course degree requirements; practica and clinical experience; research productivity
including grants, publications, and presentations). Once this is discussed, including problems
and any issues that have been raised, plans for the next year in each of these areas are
agreed upon, and the formal evaluation form is signed by all members of the Guidance
Committee and the student (see evaluation forms, Appendix F, Evaluation Forms). One copy
of this form goes to UCSD where it is reviewed by one Co-DCT; students are not allowed to
register for the following quarter if the completed form has not been filed. A second copy is
reviewed by the other Co-DCT and goes into the student‟s file in the JDP office.

In addition to the annual Guidance Committee review, students in the first two years of the
program are reviewed in a meeting involving all faculty who teach and/or supervise first and
second year students, and as many members of the Guidance Committees as possible. In
these meetings, problems or issues that beginning students may be having are discussed in
detail. For example, when a student did not pass one or more of the statistics sequence
courses, this time is used to decide what kind of remediation plan (e.g., re-taking the class
completely, auditing it) is most appropriate, and how to handle the resulting delays in
progressing through the program. Similarly, students who have difficulty with writing or some
other aspects of the program are discussed, and plans for remediating deficits are developed;
the Co-DCTs then implement the plans and ensure that they are followed. Although the
purpose of this meeting is to evaluate first and second year students (i.e., to make sure all is
well before the student moves ahead beyond the M.S. degree), students from prior years who
had been identified as having had problems may be discussed as well, if only to ensure that
the problems have been resolved. Following this meeting, all students in the first and second
year classes receive a formal letter informing them of their progress. Students who are
experiencing problems may also receive oral feedback from their mentors and/or from one or
both Co-DCT as seems appropriate. After the second year, students receive a written
evaluation from their clinical supervisor and then an overall written evaluation is completed as
part of the Guidance Committee evaluation. Examples of all the forms used to evaluate
students can be found in Appendix F, Evaluation Forms.

If a student presents with a serious problem or concern, particularly a concern that impacts
their ability to function adequately in a clinical situation, the JDP has established a policy to
deal with these situations. That policy can be found in Appendix C, Student Handbook, page
35-36, and students are informed of it early on in the program. That policy was prepared to
protect the student, the program, and the public.

Students who feel they have been treated unfairly in these evaluations, or in any other way,
may file a grievance. The JDP has its own grievance procedures, which are described in the
Student Handbook. The University also has established policies and procedures through
which students may file grievances. A copy of the University‟s Academic Grievances Policy
and Procedures is presented in Appendix L. Fortunately, we have not had a grievance filed in
the history of the program.

              Domain F: Program Self-Assessment and Quality Enhancement

F.1. On-Going Self Study Methods and Outcomes

   a. Goals and objectives: Outcome data
As already described in Domain B, the program has the following four goals for its current
students and its graduates:
       Goal I. Students will develop the skills to competently conduct and evaluate research.
       Goal II. Students will have the ability to provide theoretically based, empirically supported
       treatments (ESTs) and preventive interventions.
       Goal III. Students demonstrate they can consistently conduct themselves in ethical ways in
       clinical assessment and interventions, and in research activities
       Goal IV. As an overarching goal, it is our desire to produce graduates who will assume active
       roles in academic/research settings. For those graduates who elect not to do so, our goal is that
       they utilize and disseminate science-based practice in applied settings.

We assess our success in meeting these goals in a number of ways for both current students
and graduates. With respect to Goal I for current students, as noted in Domain B we review
their progress immediately before they apply for internship. These data can be found in
Appendix J, Internship Applicant Data. Since the last site visit, a total of 63 students completed
AAPI applications to participate in the match (2 students did not match the first time, and data
from their first application are omitted here). Of these, only 2 students (3.2%) had no
publications (including peer reviewed journal articles and chapters published or in press),
although both had at least two articles under review. At the time of internship application, the
total group of 63 students ranged between 0 and 16 publications, with an average of 5.4
publications each (standard deviation = 3.54). A total of 19 students (30%) had obtained their
own research funding of some kind, 12 with National Service Research Awards and 7 with
some other type of funding (A.P.A. Minority Fellowship Awards, dissertation awards). Seven
students (11%) also received the M.P.H. and one earned an interdisciplinary doctorate in
clinical psychology and cognitive science. The combination of publishing and the large
proportion of students who obtained their own funding suggest to us that students meet criteria
for Goal I at the time they leave for internship.

With respect to Goals II and III, the Co-DCTs and the Practicum Coordinator review the six
month and one year evaluations obtained for each of our students from their various internship
sites. Uniformly our students receive high praise for the quality of the work they do, for the way
in which it is done, and for the high ethical standards they display.

We also assess our success meeting these goals for our graduates using our alumni survey.
These data can be found in Appendix I, Alumni Survey Raw Data and Results. With respect to
Goal I, of the 117 alumni who responded to our questionnaire, only 22 (18.8%) had not
published an article in a referreed journal or a book chapter since they got their degree; the
remaining 95 (81.2%) had published. The number of articles ranged from 0 to 90, with a
mean of 12.76 publications (standard deviation = 16.50) per graduate. Sixty-nine of those who
responded had had research grants funded (range 0 to 15 grants per person, mean = 1.96,
standard deviation = 2.56). These data suggest to us that students continue to conduct
research and do research-related activities after they graduate. With respect to Goal IV, of the
117 alumni who responded, 79 (67.5%) reported that their primary work environment was an
academic institution; only 18 (15.4%) reported that their primary work environment was
individual practice. A total of 81 (69.8%) were licensed (although those without licenses
include individuals who were not yet eligible for licensure); of the 82 alumni who took the
EPPP exam, only 2 had to take it more than once. Taken together, these data suggest that
we are meeting our goals both with respect to the current students and with respect to our

Finally, as indicated by the data we present in Tables 6 and 7, we feel we do a good job of
selecting students who want to finish their degrees and who then go ahead and do so. Since
the last site visit, only three students have left the program, one to go to medical school, one
to become a professional dancer, and one international student decided that having a
master‟s was sufficient in his home country and so he left when his wife finished her Ph.D.
degree in our program. Similarly, since our last self- study, only six students took longer than
seven years to complete their degree. One obtained dual Ph.D. degrees in clinical psychology
and cognitive science, and this combined program, understandably, required additional time to
complete. Two gave birth during the time they were in the program, and their progress was
delayed as a result. One student‟s mentor was out of the county for seven months and the
student did not want to complete her degree until the mentor returned. The fifth student was
delayed because of difficulties her mentor was having, and a need to switch mentors as a
result. Thus, only one student took longer than seven years for no discernable reason. Finally,
there is a seventh student who we have not counted for years because she has been on leave
as a result of life-threatening health problems; it appears that these problems have improved
in recent months and so she has just recently petitioned the university to reenter the program
to complete her dissertation.

   b. Goals and objectives: Process data

The program also seeks feedback from students and faculty in a variety of ways, some formal
and some informal. Copies of all forms used to solicit input about the program are provided in
Appendix F, Evaluation Forms. Also, raw data from the Current Student Survey, the Alumni
Survey, and the internship applicant data are also provided in Appendices H, I, and J,
respectively. Included are comments when available.

Formal assessment procedures

Each class required of doctoral students is evaluated using two different kinds of forms. First,
the university has a standard evaluation form that is placed in the teaching faculty member‟s
personnel file and is part of the consideration for faculty promotion and tenure. This form is
computer scored and faculty members receive both summary statistics and the written
narrative comments made by students. We were concerned that this form would not be
conducive to students providing honest feedback about these courses for a number of
reasons. First, faculty are sometimes given forms with comments in the student‟s handwriting;
we were concerned that students would be less than fully honest if they felt their handwriting
might later be identified. Second, students know that the forms are used for tenure and
promotion decisions; we were concerned that students might be less than fully forthcoming for
fear of negatively impacting the faculty member‟s promotion. Finally, we wanted to make sure
that the evaluations we were receiving addressed specific questions and concerns related to
training in clinical psychology. As a result, our students fill out a separate JDP course
evaluation, in addition to the university course form. This JDP evaluation is not part of the
materials faculty include in their promotion and tenure package; all handwritten statements are
transcribed by JDP staff into a single typed document so that no one‟s handwriting can be
identified; and students are told to be very honest in their comments. These comments are
reviewed by the SDSU Co-DCT at the end of each semester. Problems and issues that may
be identified in this manner are then brought to the instructor, the group of instructors who
teach the core courses, the UCSD Co-DCT, the JDP Curriculum Committee, and/or the
Steering Committee as appropriate. We have included copies of the most recent evaluation for
each course along with the syllabus for that course in Appendix E, Course Syllabi.

We utilize a similar method in our evaluation of practica. Students complete a form at the end
of the practicum experience that provides feedback on the supervisors‟ performance. Forms
used to obtain feedback from students are presented in Appendix F, Evaluation Forms.

Informal Assessment Procedures

In addition to the above formal written evaluations, we have a number of more informal ways
students can express their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with elements of the program. First,
as indicated in Domain B, our program is divided into three tracks. Each track has a pair of
track co-leaders, one form each university. The track co-leaders meet informally with students
in their tracks about once a semester, usually over a light dinner for which the program pays.
This provides a forum for students to ask questions, get information about possible practica
sites and requirements, talk about internship, and so forth. At least one of the Co-DCTs is
present for part of each meeting to answer any questions or hear any problems or issues that
may require intervention at that level; the Co-DCT may leave to allow for more candid
conversations among students and with the track leaders if this seems desirable. Questions,
problems, concerns, or issues that may be raised at these meetings are thus brought to the
attention of the Co-DCTs, who then can devise a plan for dealing with the issues. For
example, questions about master‟s degrees and the M.P.H. program (see section F.1.c) were
first raised through these informal meetings.

Second, as indicated earlier the Co-DCTs have regularly scheduled meetings with students.
Specifically, one Co-DCT meets with the first year class after about the first month of classes
to assess how they are adjusting, how the work is going, and if there are any problems with
mentors or anything else. This meeting reinforces the idea that students do not have to
remain with a mentor if it is not working out, while providing an opportunity to implement plans
to prevent potential problems if necessary. The Co-DCT meets with the first year class twice
more that first year, at the end of each semester, and meets with the second year class briefly
at least once. Finally, the Co-DCTs meet with students who are going on internship within a
week or so after the match to talk about their experiences in the match, and to do an informal
“exit interview” with students in a group as they are leaving the program.

Finally all students know that either or both Co-DCTs are available to meet with them either
individually or in a group to deal with questions or problems as they arise. Both Co-DCTs
maintain an open door policy and students are aware that they can make appointments or
drop in anytime to discuss any issues or concerns they may have.

   c. Goals and objectives: Utilization of feedback

As part of the self-study for our most recent site-visit in 2000, then-current students had been
surveyed. The results at that time were summarized as follows:

      The current program students were asked to rate each item on a 1 (very dissatisfied) to 6 (very
      satisfied) scale reflecting their own experience and asked two open-ended questions. There
      was overall satisfaction with the program in general, with only five areas of 29 failing to reach
      the 4.0 level of satisfaction or higher. Favorable evaluations encompass research facilities and
      training; practicum experiences and supervisors; mentor/faculty openness, support and
      availability.   On the downside, only one area was rated below 3.5 and that was
      Multicultural/Gender/Sexual Identity issues (M=3.29). Much of this dissatisfaction can be directly
      traced to the unhappiness associated with the multicultural course that was offered for a
      number of years. The rating for General student morale (M=3.95) was also somewhat
      surprising as we had assumed it would be higher. Also core courses in the first two years and
      comprehensive exams were rated below 4.00…. Finally, we asked the JDP Curriculum
      Committee to review the entire program course offerings and make any recommendations for
      curriculum changes to the Steering Committee. We hope all of these efforts will lead to
      improvement in these areas in the next student evaluations.

Subsequent to the last site visit and as a result of these data, we undertook a complete review
of the curriculum. We met with students in small groups, had the student representatives to
the Curriculum Committee talk to their classmates, and looked carefully at the data from the
alumni survey. In addition, all of the course syllabi and student evaluations for the courses for
the prior 3-4 years were reviewed. Finally, we became more active in national organizations
involved in the training of professional psychologists in order to ensure that the training we
were providing represented the most advanced and cutting edge in the field. The following is a
summary of the changes that resulted from these activities:

   1. The content and order of many of the first and second year core courses were
      substantially modified. Specifically we:
      a. Reversed the order in which Personality Assessment and Cognitive Assessment
         were taught. Personality Assessment covers many of the psychometric aspects of
         testing and test construction and we felt it was important for students to have this
         information early in their training. Also, our program is nationally known for the high
         quality of its neuropsychology training; we felt that it was important that all students
         who graduate from our program, even those that specialize in areas other than
         neuropsychology, have basic instruction in neuropsychology as part of the Cognitive
         Assessment course. Since 2001, this course has been taught by a
         neuropsychologist from UCSD.
      b. Reversed the order and significantly changed the content for the two interventions
         courses. The courses now cover methods for establishing empirically supported
         treatments, case conceptualization, basic clinical skills, structured diagnosis,
         supervision, and consultation. We have added interviewing skills, including
         videotaped administration of the SCID and other assessments done with mock
         clients. One of the courses now includes much of this content in a lab that is taken
   2. The nature of the practicum experiences was better defined and codified; now,
      students‟ first year of practicum includes intensive videotape monitored supervision and
      begins in the July between the first and second years of their training. This provides a
        strong foundation for the graduated, sequential training they now receive after the
        second year. These changes are more fully described in Domain B.
   3.   Students were distressed that, when they went on internship, interns from other
        programs had master‟s degrees and our students did not. This was due to the fact that
        historically, obtaining the master‟s degree in our program had been a particularly
        cumbersome process that few students pursued. We put through the necessary
        curricular changes so that now all of our students obtain the M.S. degree when they
        complete the required coursework and their second year independent research project.
   4.   Some students wanted to be able to get an M.P.H., but again the process was labor
        intensive, unclear, and required that students actually apply for admission to the
        Graduate School of Public Health along with all the other applicants. We have
        developed a cooperative degree between the two programs so that students in the JDP
        no longer apply for admission like other M.P.H. students, are able to use some of the
        JDP requirements to meet M.P.H. requirements, and as a result are able to obtain the
        M.P.H. by taking a manageable number of additional courses and remaining only one
        more year before going on internship. Virtually all of the students in the Behavioral
        Medicine track have elected to take this option.
   5.   Students reported that the Statistics Comprehensive Examination that we administered
        in the spring of each class‟ second year did not meet our goals. Specifically, we
        required that students “teach themselves,” with little faculty guidance, some of the more
        advanced materials on which they would eventually be tested. This produced
        unintended anxiety and questionable long-term (i.e., after the exam) retention. We put
        a lot of effort into addressing this. We asked faculty their reactions, got guidance from
        former students regarding their perceptions of the value of the comprehensive exams
        years later, and, of course, also asked current students. We relied heavily on input from
        the faculty who teach these topics and who grade the exams when they are
        administered. Eventually the Curriculum Committee recommended to the Steering
        Committee that the Statistics Comprehensive Examination be discontinued and that
        instead students be required to take an additional course in multivariate techniques; the
        Steering Committee agreed and we have since discontinued the exam and added the
        course requirement.
   6.   Students reported long-standing problems with IRBs. Each university feels the need to
        have students be reviewed by its own IRB in order to ensure that the university is
        protected. Because we are a joint program, each time a student conducts independent
        research, that research has to be reviewed by the IRB at each university. At the last site
        visit, students were reporting review times as long as a year, although more typically
        around 6 months, to complete both reviews (i.e., the first university approves it, the
        student puts it through the other university, the second university requires a few
        changes, the student then has to go back to the first university for a review of the
        modification, etc.). We now have arranged concurrent and/or coordinated sequential
        IRB reviews so that it does not take substantially longer to go through both IRBs than it
        does to go through one; there is even joint “boiler plate” language available for students
        (and faculty) to use in their consent forms.

That these changes were successful in dealing with the concerns described above from the
last site visit is evidenced by the results of the student survey we did in preparation for this
self-study. We used 28 of the same questions from last time, and added an additional 8 more
that allowed us to evaluate aspects of the program separately (e.g., last time we asked a
general question about “administration;” this time we divided it into various parts like the
support staff, the Co-DCTs, the website, and so forth). We relied on the same 1 (very
dissatisfied) to 6 (very satisfied) Likert-type scale. Last time 5 items did not reach a mean of
4; this time, the lowest mean over all of the questions was for the program website (M = 4.09,
standard deviation = 1.37). Only 7 other items had means below 5, and for these 7 the means
were all between 4.56 and 4.94. For the two items specifically described in the paragraph
above from the prior site visit, this time our mean rating for the coverage of multicultural and
gender issues was 4.92 (standard deviation = 1.08) and our mean rating for student morale
was 4.74 (standard deviation = 1.09). We believe that this provides evidence that we
remediated the concerns raised in prior reviews, and to the satisfaction of the current students.

F.2. Systematic Reviews
a. SDSU and UCSD missions and goals

Please see the organizational chart in Appendix A. Since our last accreditation review, there
have been administrative changes at both universities. At UCSD, Dr. Richard Attiyeh, Vice
Chancellor for Research and Graduate Education and one of the major administrative forces
facilitating the faculty‟s work to develop the JDP, retired. His position was divided into two
positions, and now Dr. Kim Barrett is the Graduate Dean. Similarly, there has been turnover in
the position of Dean of the Medical School, with two other individuals having served in that role
before Dr. David Brenner, the current Dean of the School of Medicine. Through this, Dr. Lewis
Judd has remained Chair of the Department of Psychiatry. At SDSU, Dr. James Cobble, Vice
President for Research, Dean of the Graduate School, and the other administrator who
facilitated the faculty‟s work in developing the JDP, also retired. His position also was divided
into two, with a new Vice-President for Research and Graduate Studies, Dr. Thomas Scott,
now overseeing the office of the Graduate Dean; the Vice-President‟s position was vacant for
a few years, and the Dean of Graduate Studies position has been filled by two interim people
for the past few years. In the College of Sciences at SDSU, there have been two individuals
serving as Dean and Interim Dean before Dr. Stanley Maloy became permanent Dean.
Finally, there has been a change in the Chair of the Department of Psychology since the last
site visit; Dr. Claire Murphy is beginning her fifth year in that position.

Because of these changes, the faculty reviewed the administrative reporting relationships
within the JDP at each university, in part to ensure that the new administrators had the same
understanding we did. At UCSD, it was determined that the administration of the JDP remains
within the office of the Dean of Graduate Studies as already indicated in the organizational
chart. Because the faculty at the medical school must fund themselves through extramural
grants, there are few resources to compete for, meaning that rarely does the JDP have to
argue for resources within the department or medical school. Nonetheless, faculty and other
personnel decisions like salaries still fall within the domain of the Department of Psychiatry
and the Psychiatry Department Chair, and they continue to do so for JDP faculty as well.

Likewise, at SDSU, all of the JDPs exist both within and outside of their respective
departments. This JDP in particular has faculty not only outside of the Department of
Psychology, but also outside of the College of Sciences (i.e., within the Graduate School of
Public Health). The operating budget for the JDP program is separate, and there are staff
assigned solely to the program who are under the direct supervision of the SDSU Co-DCT.
With respect to the administration of the JDP, the SDSU-based Co-DCT reports to the Dean of
Graduate Studies, who now reports to the Vice-President for Graduate Education and
Research, as indicated on the organizational chart. However, neither the Vice-President nor
the Graduate Dean has control over the resources necessary to operate the program; those
resources are under the control of the Dean of the College of Sciences. Part of the
administrative review at SDSU involved re-affirming the nature of these reporting relationships.
Hiring, promotion, tenure, and other personnel decisions for JDP faculty occur within the
Department of Psychology, and the JDP goes through regular departmental channels and
procedures when personnel issues arise. However, currently the Co-DCT reports directly to
the Dean of the College. This is consistent with the functioning of other doctoral programs in
the College of Sciences. This reporting structure increases efficiency of reporting and needs
resolution, and insures that the program has its interests well-represented at the College level.

    b. Local, regional, and national needs
Because our goal is to train individuals who will function primarily in academic and/or research
settings, we remain vigilant with respect to the need for and the availability of academic
positions for which our students would qualify. Based on data from our own universities and
national indicators, it is clear to us that over the next 10 years or so, a combination of
increased enrollments coupled with increased numbers of faculty retirements will mean that
there will be a reasonable supply of academic jobs for the foreseeable future. This is despite
the fact that grant funding for the health sciences has remained relatively flat for the past few
years and that for virtually all funding sources, it has become more difficult to get grants
funded. Our success in placing students in academic jobs of all kinds, even through the
period of time when few universities were adding many faculty members, serves to reinforce
that there will be places to employ our graduates. We will, however, continue to monitor the

    c. National standards of practice
We are active in a number of organizations that help to keep us abreast of changes in the
field. We are members of the Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology (CUDCP),
one of the major groups that provides input to CoA and other major groups in the field; one of
our Co-DCTs is Chair-elect of CUDCP. Consistent with our emphasis on combining research
with practice, we are also active members of the Academy of Psychological Clinical Science.
Many of our faculty have trained to be accreditation site visitors and as a result we are aware
of emerging trends in the field. We use the information we receive from these professional
service activities to make sure our program is consistent with the most recent best practices
and when we identify aspects that may need changing, we raise those issues with our
Curriculum and Steering Committees as appropriate.

    d. Evolving body of knowledge
One of the benefits of being a program where the faculty publish as much as ours does is that
we not only remain current in the field, many of our faculty are producing the data that
constitute remaining current. Our faculty serve as editors, associate editors, and reviewers for
a number of journals representing the array of topics that comprise contemporary clinical
psychology. We hold offices at national levels in major organizations that help to promote and
define the science of clinical psychology. Of the 107 faculty we list as part of our program,
only 3 have failed to publish since 2000. For the rest, the number of publications ranges from
2 to 309, with a mean of 41.4, a median of 27, and a standard deviation of 45.58, across both
campuses and including those individuals whose role is primarily to provide and supervise
clinical service. Consistent with this, we monitor the syllabi used by our faculty to ensure that
they are updated each year.

   e. Graduate job placements and career paths
Finally, as indicated above we periodically contact our graduates to find out where they are
working and if they have published, gotten grants, and/or contributed to the literature in other
important ways. Given the program‟s success in having our graduates obtain jobs in academic
settings, we have not had to modify our curriculum because of this factor. We will continue to
monitor our graduates‟ success at getting academic jobs and will listen to any feedback they
provide about steps we might take to increase our success in this area.

                                Domain G: Public Disclosure

G1. Complete and Accurate Presentation to the Public

All information about our program including the goals, objectives, training model, admission
and graduation requirements; application procedures; disclosure data, including the
information newly requested by the Committee on Accreditation; curriculum; faculty and their
research interests; practicum sites; and administrative policies and procedures are clearly
described on our website. The site includes our Student Handbook. We do have a very brief
brochure that we hand out at various recruiting functions, but the brochure also directs the
reader to our website. The overall website is revised and updated annually. New policies and
procedures are added as soon as they are approved or implemented by our Steering
Committee. Since the last self-study, we have attempted to phase out most of the hard copies
of all of our materials. All of the materials on our website can be found in Appendices C,
Student Handbook and D, Website.

We have been proactive in terms of providing potential applicants with all of the data they
need to decide if this is the correct program for them. To that end, we have been compliant
with the CUDCP requirements to post on our website five year data for GPAs, GRE scores,
internship match rates, number of applications, and number admitted to the program; the new
disclosure data now required by the Committee on Accreditation has been added to the
existing data we already posted, and we have increased the time span for the data we post to
represent the past seven years.

G2. Facilitating applicant decision making

We have tried to be as thorough and as specific as possible regarding information
disseminated to the public that will assist prospective applicants in making informed decisions
about applying to the program as well as accepting an offer from the JDP. We continue that
effort when applicants come to campus for interviews as well. Interviews are held on two days,
the first at SDSU and the second at UCSD. An orientation meeting, conducted by the Co-
DCTs, is held for all interviewees prior to their individual interviews with faculty. At that time,
general information is given about the program and about each university. Specialty track
meetings are also held to introduce applicants to the faculty in the track of their greatest
research interest. Applicants are encouraged to ask questions at any time during and after
their stay in San Diego. During these visits, all applicants are repeatedly reminded verbally
and in writing that we support the requirement that students have until April 15 th to make their
final decision. We do, however, encourage applicants to inform us as soon as possible when
they have made a final decision, so that we can make offers to other students if necessary.
We arrange for applicants to stay with our current students during the interviews. This not
only saves the applicant money, but staying with students permits an opportunity for applicants
to ask student-specific questions about the program in more informal settings. We believe
that it is important for applicants to be as informed as possible, and that one way of
accomplishing that goal is to allow sufficient time for conversation in a variety of settings and
from differing perspectives. We feel strongly that in order for us to make the best admissions
decisions and for applicants to make the best decisions about the program that would be right
for them, open honest communication is necessary.

                      Domain H: Relationship With Accrediting Body

H1. Abides by published policies and procedures

We make every effort to keep up with information provided by the Committee on Accreditation.
We review each proposed change in the Guidelines and Principles and/or in the Implementing
Regulations for its potential impact on our program and on the field, and, where we feel the
change might not be in the best interests of the discipline, make our views known. For
example, we were one of the first programs to include the new disclosure data on our website,
and even provided our format to other programs for their use.

H2. Timely updating of the accrediting body

The last time we had a change that necessitated informing the Committee on Accreditation
was in 2000, when Dr. Elizabeth Klonoff became the SDSU Co-DCT. There have been no
other changes in the environment, plans, resources, or operations during the past seven years
that would significantly affect the quality of the program.

H3. Program is in good standing

The JDP submits annual reports and other information as required by A.P.A. in a timely
manner, and when that is not possible, we seek permission to submit late items. Yearly fees
are paid by San Diego State University, and every effort is made to ensure that the University
does so in a timely manner as well.

                                                         TABLE 1

                                                  Doctoral Programs
                                                 Domain A (Eligibility)

                SDSU/UCSD Joint Doctoral
Program Title: Program in Clinical Psychology           Substantive Area: __Clinical Psychology___

Degree(s) Awarded to Program Graduates - (Check all that apply)

         Ph.D.    X         Psy.D.             Ed.D.____

Date of Last Site Visit:    October 10-11, 2000

Number of Program Students Awarded Degrees Each Academic Year for the Past 7 Years1:

Degree         2006-2007       2005-2006       2004-2005       2003-2004       2002-2003      2001-2002       2000-2001
Ph.D.          10*             7               10              12              10             11              7

*Another 2 should be graduated by Fall 2007.

Are any students in your program currently respecializing2? Yes                                No ___X

A copy of the most recent program Handbook is provided in Appendix               C    .

A copy of the department/college/institutional Procedures and Policies applicable to students is provided in Appendix
C.1 .

1 Depending on your program’s site visit cycle assignment, numbers may not be available for the current academic year.
  Any students who already hold a doctoral degree, but are undergoing training for the purposes of changing their specialty.
                                                                                   Table 2
                                                                               Practicum Settings
For the past seven academic years, please provide the following information for the practicum settings in which one or more of your students was
     Name of      Yrs. setting   Highest degree   Credentials            Number of Students Placed/yr                         Type of           Services
     Setting         used         of Supervisor     of Sup.       2000   2001 2002 2003 2004 2005                2006         Setting           provided     Types of Clients served

      SDSU                                        Licensure and
    Psychology                                       License                                                            33-Univ. Psychology                  Outpatients of all ages from
      Clinic      2000-present        PhD             eligible    11      12      13      14      13      14      14           Clinic            2,3,4,5     community

                                                                                                                         33-Student Health
    SDSU-SHS      2004-present        PhD           Licensure                                      1       0      1           Service            2,3,4,5     SDSU College Students

     Center for
       Child                                        License                                                                 33-Teaching                      Abused children & their
     Protection    2000-2001          PhD           eligible.      2       0       0       0       0       0      0           Hospital           2,3,4,5     families

      VAMC        2000-present     PhD & MD         Licensure     14      11      15      15      16      14      23             7               2,3,4,5     Inpatient veterans & dep.

     VAMC-OC      2000-present        PhD           Licensure      3       3       2       3       2       2      1              7               2,3,4,5     Outpatient veterans & dep.

                                                                                                                        33-Univ. Psychiatric
     UCSD-OC      2000-present    PhD & MSW         Licensure      2       0       2       0       4       4      2       Outpatient Clinic      2,3,4,5     Outpatients of all ages

     UCSD-MC      2000-present     PhD & MD         Licensure      2       2       1       2       1       0      0              3               2,3,4,5     Inpatients from community

    UCSD-CAPS 2000-present            PhD           Licensure      1       2       0       2       2       3      4              1               2,3,4,5     Inpatient children & adol.

     Children's                                                                                                                                              Inpatient & outpatient children
      Hospital    2000-present     PhD & MD         Licensure      4       2       3       4       2       3      1     33-TeachingHospital      2,3,4,5     and adolescents

      Sharp                                                                                                                                                  Community inpatients &
     Hospital     2004-present        PhD           Licensure                                      1       0      0              6                2,3,5      outpatients

    U of Miami
     Mailman                                                                                                                                                 Community inpatients &
      Center       2006-2007          PhD           Licensure                                                     1              3               2,3,4,5     outpatients

 If the same practicum site was used in more than one year and there were no substantial changes in the supervision, services provided, etc., you only need to provide detailed
information about the site for the earliest year and the number of students placed there in each of the subsequent years.

                                                                            TABLE 3
                                                                  Current Program Faculty
                                                                          (Summary Information)1

                                                                                                                                          Other [Non-program]
                                                                    % Of time Devoted to Program
Name                          Title                                 [Must be >50%]                        Role/Contribution to Program    Responsibilities
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Amir                          Associate Professor                   100                                   Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Ancoli-Israel                 Professor                             70                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Bondi                         Professor                             60                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Brown, S.A.                   Professor                             70                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Brown, G.                     Professor                             50                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Calfas                        Professor                             60                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Delis                         Professor                             70                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Dimsdale                      Professor                             50                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Drummond                      Assistant Professor                   70                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Eyler                         Assistant Adjunct Professor           50                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Filoteo                       Associate Professor                   60                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Gallo                         Associate Professor                   85                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                                          Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Garland                       Professor                             65                                    Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching

1 For each person identified in these tables, please prepare a curriculum vita according to the format provided
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Granholm    Professor                     70         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Grant       Professor                     65         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Heaton      Professor                     85         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Klonoff     Professor                     100        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Landrine    Adjunct Faculty               50         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Litrownik   Professor                     85         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Malcarne    Professor                     100        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Marcotte    Associate Adjunct Professor   50         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
McQuaid     Associate Professor           70         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Murphy      Professor                     60         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Myers       Professor                     70         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Palmer      Associate Professor           50         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Price       Professor                     70         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Riley       Professor                     70         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Roesch      Associate Professor           50         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Rutledge    Assistant Professor           50         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Sallis      Professor                     70         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Salmon      Professor                     50         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Schulte     Professor                     100        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                     Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Stein       Professor                     50         Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching

                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Stiles            Professor                     60                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Tapert            Assistant Professor           55                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Wall              Professor                     70                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Weersing          Assistant Professor           60                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Woods             Assistant Adjunct Professor   50                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Yeh               Associate Professor           60                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Zhu               Professor                     50                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching

                                                                                                               Other [Non-program]
Name              Title                         % Of time Devoted to Program   Role/Contribution to Program    Responsibilities
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Afari             Assistant Adjunct Professor   25                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Akshoomoff        Assistant Adjunct Professor   30                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Braff             Professor                     15                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Brown, S.J.       Associate Professor           15                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Caligiuri         Professor                     35                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Courchesne        Professor                     25                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Cronan            Professor                     25                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Elder             Professor                     25                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Gilbert           Assistant Professor           45                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Gollan            Assistant Adjunct Professor   25                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                               Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Hovell            Professor                     25                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching

                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Judd, P.       Professor                     15        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Lang           Associate Professor           15        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Marshall       Professor                     25        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Matt           Professor                     40        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Mattson        Associate Professor           35        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Mayer          Professor                     25        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Mills          Professor                     25        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Muller         Associate Professor           25        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Norman, S.     Assistant Adjunct Professor   15        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Parry          Professor                     25        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Patterson      Professor                     15        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Reilly         Professor                     25        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Sadler         Professor                     20        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Schuckit       Professor                     25        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Schweinsburg   Assistant Adjunct Professor   25        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Sieber         Assistant Adjunct Professor   15        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Sparta         Professor                     10        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Swerdlow       Professor                     25        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Taylor         Assistant Professor           15        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                       Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Thomas         Associate Professor           15        Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching

                                                                                   Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Trauner               Professor                     35                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Twamley               Assistant Adjunct Professor   15                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research Mentoring, Teaching,
Wetherell             Assistant Professor           15                             Supervision, Administration     Research and Teaching

                                                                                                                   Other [Non-program]
Name                  Title                         % Of time Devoted to Program   Role/Contribution to Program    Responsibilities
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Atkins                Professor                     2                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Atkinson              Professor                     1                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Ballantyne            Associate Project Scientist   1                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Bellugi               Professor                     10                             consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Cadenhead             Associate Adjunct Professor   1                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Carver                Assistant Professor           1                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Cherner               Assistant Professor           1                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Feifel                Associate Professor           2                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Geyer                 Professor                     2                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Haist                 Assistant Professor           1                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Harrington            Adjunct Professor             1                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Jernigan              Professor                     1                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Jeste                 Professor                     10                             consultation and support        Research and Teaching

Judd, L.              Professor                     2                              Administration                  Research and Teaching
                                                                                   Research and/or clinical
Kelsoe                Professor                     1                              consultation and support        Research and Teaching

                                                    Research and/or clinical
Kremen       Adjunct Faculty               2        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Kulik        Professor                     1        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Kutas        Professor                     1        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Levine       Professor                     2        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Martin       Professor                     2        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Max          Professor                     2        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
McCabe       Assistant Adjunct Professor   1        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Nichols      Assistant Adjunct Professor   1        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Norman, G.   Assistant Adjunct Professor   2        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Paulus       Professor                     2        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Patrick      Professor                     1        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Perry        Professor                     1        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Schreibman   Professor                     2        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Squire       Professor                     2        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Strathdee    Professor                     1        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Townsend     Associate Professor           2        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Wulfeck      Professor                     1        consultation and support   Research and Teaching
                                                    Research and/or clinical
Zisook       Professor                     1        consultation and support   Research and Teaching

                                                Table 3 Continued

               Faculty Demographics (number of Current Faculty who identify themselves as):

                                    Core Program Faculty       Associated Program         Other Contributors
American/Black               F      1

                             M      22                         16                         17
                             F      13                         17                         15

                             M      1
Latino                       F

                             M      2                          1                          1
Pacific Islander             F      1

identifying with more        F
than 1 above)

                             M      25                         17                         18
                             F      15                         17                         15

Total Number Subject to
Americans with               F
Disabilities Act
Foreign Nationals            M                                 2
(individuals who are not
U.S. Citizens or resident    F

1 For those individuals who are categorized as multiethnic, be sure to only include them in this category and not in other ethnicity
                                  Table 3 Continued
 Professional Activities for the Past Seven Years (for current faculty only – the
                                number who are):

               Members of    Authors/Co-   Authors/Co-      Recipients   Engaged in
               Professiona   authors of    authors of       of Grants    Delivery of
               l Societies   Papers at     Articles in      or           Direct
                             Professiona   Prof/Scientifi   Contracts    Professiona
                             l meetings    c Journals                    l Services
Core           36            27            37               38           22
               24            18            35               31           15
               27            14            31               27           10

                                                           Table 4
                                                      Student Statistics
Please report the number of students in the last seven years who:

(Year entering program)           2006-2007       2005-2006       2004-2005      2003-2004       2002-2003          2001-2002   2000-2001

Applied to program:               295             323             342            306             278                279         279

Were offered admission:           15              15              16             19              19                 18          9

Enrolled in Academic              11              14              13             11              14                 13          8

Of total enrolled, number             0           0               0              0               0                  0           0
admitted as

Student Professional Activities Since Enrollment in the Program (based on students entering
 during each academic year, consistent with the above table): Of those who responded to our
                              request, the numbers are as follows:

Of students entering each         2006-2007       2005-2006       2004-2005      2003-2004       2002-2003          2001-2002   2000-2001
year, how may are:
                                  7               10              9              7               12                 8           6
Members of Professional

Authors/Co-authors of             10              12              12             10              14                 11          7
Papers at Professional

Authors/Co-authors of             9               11              12             9               14                 13          7
Articles in Prof/Scientific

1 Complete only if you answered “yes” to the respecialization question in Table 1; otherwise, please leave blank.
                                                Table 4 Continued

    Student Demographics (number of students entering the program during the noted academic year1 who

                                                       identify themselves as):

                                    2006-         2005-          2004-          2003-         2002-          2001-          2000-2001
                                    2007          2006           2005           2004          2003           2002
                              M                                                               1
American/Black                F                                                 1                            1

                              M     1             1                             3                            3              2
                              F     4             9              11             3             5              3              4

                              M                   1                                                          1
Latino                        F     3             2                             2             3              2              1

                              M                                                                              1
Pacific Islander              F     3             1              1              1             3              2              1

Multiethnic 2(individuals
identifying with more than    F
1 above)
Other or No Response
                              F                                  1              1             2

                              M     1             2                             3             1              5              2
                              F     10            12             13             7             13             8              6

Total Number Subject to
Americans with                F
Disabilities Act
Foreign Nationals             M
(individuals who are not
U.S. Citizens or resident     F     1 and 1       1              2              1             3              1              1
Aliens)                             dual res.
Number of students            M
enrolled who are
respecializing 3              F

1 Academic Year (September 1- August 31)
2 For those individuals who are categorized as multiethnic, be sure to only include them in this category and not in other ethnicity
3 Complete only if you answered “yes to the respecialization question in table 1; otherwise, please leave blank.
                                        Table 4 Continued

Please report on students applying for internships for the last seven academic years1:

(Year of         2006-2007        2005-2006       2004-2005            2003-2004   2002-2003   2001-2002   2000-2001
# of             13               8               11                   11          11          9           8
Applied for
# Who            12               7               11                   11          11          9           8
# Who            0                0               0                    0           0           0           0
# Who            12               7               11                   11          11          9           8

1 Based on application/acceptance for each noted academic year.
                                                                              Table 5
                                        Educational History of Students Admitted to Doctoral Program
                                           UG      Year of                 GRE          GRE          Graduate                            Obtained_    Graduate_
ID #     UG institution      UG Major     degree   degree    UG GPA       Verbal     Quantitative   _Institution      Major     Degree   Graduate       GPA
00.001 SDSU               Psychology     BA          2000             4        570           650
00.002 UCOLOB             Psychology     BA          1992         3.5          700           630
       Stanford                                                                                  Stanford
00.003 University         Sociology      BA          1996        3.61          720           680 University        Sociology    MA             1997         3.83
       U of Maryland,
00.004 College Park       Psychology     BA          1996         3.4          590           650
00.005 UC, Riverside      Psychology     BA          1996         3.3          510           640 SDSU              Psychology   MA             1999         3.78
00.006 U PA               Psychology     BA          1997        3.36          690           730
       U of Bologna,
00.007 Italy              Psychology     BS          1997         3.8          630           580
00.008 U of IL            Psychology     BA          1999        3.56          580           640

01.001 UCLA               Psychology     BA          2000        3.54          600           680
01.002 Wellesley College Psychology      BA          1999        3.31          640           730
01.003 University        Psychology      BA          1997         3.2          630           640
01.004 UCSD               Psychology     BA          2000        3.91          760           720
       Thammasat          Industrial
01.005 University         Engineering    BE          1998        2.36          590           760 NYU               Psychology   MA             2000          3.8
       University of
01.006 Rochester          Psychology     BA          2001         3.4          590           740
01.007 Berkeley           Psychology     BA          2000        3.68          540           650
01.008 Duke               History        BA          1994        3.92          720           720
01.009 University         Psychology     BA          1995        3.45          660           610
                                                                                                 School of
01.010 Tufts University   Psychology     BA          1997        3.71          610           730 Psychology        Psychology   MS             1998         3.92
01.011 UCLA               Literature     BA          2000        3.91          680           680
       CSU, San                                                                                  CSU, San          Experimenta
01.012 Bernardino         Psychology     BA          1998        3.33          610           630 Bernardino        l Psychology MA             2001         3.79

01.013 U of Pittsburgh     Psychology      BS       1998   3.66   600        740

02.001 UC Berkeley         Science         BA       1993     3    640        650 SFSU         Psychology   MA   2001    3.9
       Smith College,
02.002 MA                  Psychology      BA       1996   3.56   620        660
02.003 Vassar College      Psychology      BA       1999   3.64   700        760
02.004 Lasapienza, Rome Psychology         Laurea   1999          590        580 Northridge   Psychology   MA   2002    3.9
       University of
02.005 Maryland         Psychology         BS       2001     4    640        620
02.006 University       Psychology         BA       1999    3.5   570        650
02.007 UC Berkeley         Psychology      BA       2001   3.58   580        730
       University of
02.008 Kansas              Psychology      BA       2001     4    570        670
       Johns Hopkins
02.009 University       Psychology         BA       1999   3.65   600        580
02.010 Brown University Neuroscience       BS       2002    3.9   640        750
02.011 SFSU                Psychology      BA       2002   3.83   620        640
02.012 Clemson U           Psychology      BA       2002     4    690        640
02.013 UCSD                Psychology      BA       2002   3.44   490        660
02.014 University          Urban Studies   BA       1999   3.34   610        740

03.001 Brown University    Composition     BA       1998   3.74   720        720
       University of Las
03.002 Vegas Nevada        Psychology      BA       2002   3.77   640        600
       University of New
03.003 Mexico              Psychology      BA       2002   3.85   580        690
       Point Loma                                                                CSU, Long
03.004 Nazarene USD        Psychology      BA       1998   3.64   670        580 Beach        Psychology   MA   2003     4
03.005 Stanford            Human Biology   BA       2000   3.45   690        660
       Ohio State
03.006 University          Biochemistry    BS       2003   3.95   550        740
       University of
03.007 Pennsylvania        Psychology      BA       2001    3.7   540        680
       St. Xavier's                                                              U Mambai,    Clinical
03.008 College, India      Psychology      BA       1998    3.7   640        610 India        Psychology   MA   2000   3.66
03.009 University          Psychology      BA       2001    3.9   630        720

       University of
03.010 Rochester         Psychology   BA   1988   3.05   650        570 SUNY         Psychology   MA    2003    3.8
03.011 University        Psychology   BA   1999    3.5   650        750

04.001 Boston U          Psychology   BA   2002   3.83   630        670
       University of
04.002 Connecticut       Psychology   BA   2004   3.94   560        700
04.003 College           Psychology   BA   2001   3.82   570        670
04.004 ICU Tokyo, Japan Psychology    BA   2000   3.61   470        790 SDSU         Psychology   MA    2003   3.78
04.005 University       Psychology    BA   2004    3.2   570        690
       CSU, Los                                                         CSU, Los
04.006 Angeles          Psychology    BA   2002   3.97   590        620 Angeles      Psychology   MA    2004     4
04.007 Drew University   Psychology   BA   2001   3.84   630        640
04.008 SUNY              Psychology   BS   2002   3.82   490        670
       University of                                                                 Health
04.009 Puget Sound       Psychology   BA   2000   3.68   550        720 SDSU         Promotion    MPH   2003   3.84
       University of
04.010 Rochester         Psychology   BA   2002   3.93   690        630
04.011 UCSD              Psychology   BS   1999   3.82   660        650
       Santa Clara
04.012 University        Psychology   BS   2001   3.71   660        630
                         Brain and                                                 Clinical
04.013 Brown U           Behavior     BA   1998   3.67   760        730 Columbia U Psychology     MA    2001   3.95

05.001 Santa Clara U     Psychology   BS   2003   3.81   580        650
05.002 U of AZ           Psychology   BS   2000   3.23   730        660
05.003 USD               Psychology   BA   2003    3.5   550        650
05.004 UC, Berkeley      Psychology   BA   2002   3.46   570        710
05.005 Vanderbilt U      Psychology   BA   2002   3.07   530        780
                                                                        CSU,         Clinical
05.006 Lebanese U        Psychology   BA   2002     4    560        770 Northridge   Psychology   MA    2005
05.007 Cornell U         Psychology   BA   2002   3.83   580        770
                                                                        CSU, Long
05.008 UC Davis          Psychology   BA   2002     4    510        760 Beach        Psychology   MA    2005
05.009 Truman State U    Psychology   BA   2004   3.95   650        720
05.010 U of AZ           Psychology   BS   2005   3.44   490        700

05.011 Northwestern      Communication BS     2002   3.35   620        770
05.012 UC Berkeley       Psychology      BA   2002   3.78   630        680
05.013 Georgetown U      Psychology      BA   2002   3.81   710        730
05.014 SDSU              Psychology      BA   2005   3.64   590        720

       Dartmouth         and Brain
06.001 College           Sciences        BA   2006    3.7   590        730
06.002 U of Washington   Psychology      BS   2004   3.77   650        720
06.003 Peking U          Psychology      BS   2003   3.49   700        800 Peking U   Psychology   MS   2005   3.94
06.004 Stanford          Psychology      BA   2004   3.56   590        700
06.005 Commonwealth      Psychology      BS   2002    3.4   480        560 SDSU       Psychology   MA   2005    3.8
06.006 U of Michigan     Psychology      BA   2004   3.84   540        670
06.007 U of Iowa         Psychology      BS   2006   4.16   640        760
06.008 SDSU              Psychology      BA   2005    3.5   560        670 SDSU       Psychology   MA   2005    3.9
06.009 Brandeis U        Psychology      BA   2002   3.37   620        720
       Indiana U,
06.010 Bloomington       Psychology      BA   2006     4    570        640
06.011 UC, Berkeley      Psychology      BA   2004   3.32   640        720

                                                    Table 6
                                          Students’ present status

                          For                       For              For students that did not
                          students                  Students         complete degree:
                          still in                  that
                          program:                  graduated:

                 ID #      Year in      Full or        Year of        Date left   Reason for leaving
                           Program     Part-time    graduation (if    program
                 93.001            7         Full             2000
                 93.002            7         Full             2000
                 93.003            7         Full             2000
                 93.004            7         Full             2000
                 93.005         141          Full

                 94.001            6         Full             2000
                 94.002            6         Full             2000
                 94.003            6         Full             2000
                 94.004            6         Full             2000
                 94.005            6         Full             2000
                 94.006            6         Full             2000
                 94.007            7         Full             2001
                 94.008            8         Full             2002

                 95.001            5         Full             2000
                 95.002            5         Full             2000
                 95.003            5         Full             2000
                 95.004            5         Full             2000
                 95.005            5         Full             2000
                 95.006            6         Full             2001
                 95.007            6         Full             2001
                 95.008            6         Full             2001
                 95.009            7         Full             2002
                 95.010            8         Full             2003
                 95.011            9         Full             2004

1 Not included in figures due to serious medical issues that necessitated medical leave for a number of years
95.012   6   Full               2001 New Position

96.001   5   Full        2001
96.002   5   Full        2001
96.003   5   Full        2001
96.004   6   Full        2002
96.005   6   Full        2002
96.006   6   Full        2002
96.007   7   Full        2003
96.008   8   Full        2004
96.009   9   Full        2005
96.010   5   Full               2001 New Position

97.001   5   Full        2002
97.002   5   Full        2002
97.003   5   Full        2002
97.004   5   Full        2002
97.005   5   Full        2002
97.006   5   Full        2002
97.007   6   Full        2003
97.008   6   Full        2003
97.009   6   Full        2003
97.010   6   Full        2003
97.011   6   Full        2003
97.012   7   Full        2004

98.001   5   Full        2003
98.002   5   Full        2003
98.003   5   Full        2003
98.004   6   Full        2004
98.005   6   Full        2004
98.006   6   Full        2004
98.007   6   Full        2004
98.008   6   Full        2004
98.009   7   Full        2005
98.010   7   Full        2005

99.001   5   Full        2004
99.002   5   Full        2004
99.003   5   Full        2004
99.004   5   Full        2004
99.005   6   Full        2005
99.006   6   Full        2005
99.007   6   Full        2005
99.008   7   Full        2006
99.009   7   Full        2006
99.010   7   Full        2006
99.011   8   Full
99.012   3   Full               2002 Medical School

00.001   5   Full        2005
00.002   5   Full        2005
00.003   5   Full        2005
00.004   7   Full
00.005   6   Full        2006
00.006   5   Full        2005
00.007   6   Full        2006
00.008   6   Full        2006

01.001   6   Full
01.002   6   Full
01.003   6   Full
01.004   6   Full
01.005   6   Full
01.006   6   Full
01.007   5   Full        2006
01.008   5   Full        2006
01.009   6   Full
01.010   6   Full
01.011   6   Full
01.012   6   Full
01.013   6   Full

02.001   5   Full
02.002   5   Full
02.003   5   Full
02.004   5   Full
02.005   5   Full
02.006   5   Full
02.007   5   Full
02.008   5   Full
02.009   5   Full
02.010   5   Full
02.011   5   Full
02.012   5   Full
02.013   5   Full
02.014   5   Full

03.001   4   Full
03.002   4   Full
03.003   4   Full
03.004   4   Full
03.005   4   Full
03.006   4   Full
03.007   4   Full
03.008   4   Full
03.009   4   Full
03.010   4   Full
03.011   4   Full

04.001   3   Full
04.002   3   Full
04.003   3   Full
04.004   3   Full
04.005   3   Full
04.006   3   Full
04.007   3   Full
04.008   3   Full
04.009   3   Full
04.010   3   Full
04.011   3   Full
04.012   3   Full
04.013   3   Full

05.001   2   Full
05.002   2   Full
05.003   2   Full
05.004   2   Full
05.005   2   Full
05.006   2   Full
05.007   2   Full
05.008   2   Full
05.009   2   Full
05.010   2   Full
05.011   2   Full
05.012   2   Full
05.013   2   Full
05.014   2   Full

06.001   1   Full
06.002   1   Full
06.003   1   Full
06.004   1   Full
06.005   1   Full
06.006   1   Full
06.007   1   Full
06.008   1   Full
06.009   1   Full
06.010   1   Full
06.011   1   Full

                                                     Table 7

                         Current Students Matriculating Beyond Their 7th Year in the Program

ID # (e.g.   Unfinished Requirements                    Expected          Current Financial Support
98.001)                                                 Graduation Date
93.005       Dissertation Defense                       Fall 2007         None
99.012       Dissertation Defense                       Spring 2007       None

                                                             Table 8

                              Program Graduates: Internship and Dissertation/Final Project

                                                       APA or CPA         Funded
                            Name and location of       Accredited:         Yes or                                          Dissertation/Project
ID #     Year_Graduated         Internship              Yes or No           No       Title of Dissertation/Final Project   Advisor
                                                                                    The Development of
                                                                                    Morphosyntactic Ability in Children
                                                                                    With Language Impairment and
95.005            2000 UCSD Consortium                 Yes                Yes       Children with Early Focal Lesions      Judy Reilly
                                                                                    Development of a Relapse Model
                                                                                    Integrating Temporally Proximal
95.004            2000 UCSF Medical Center             Yes                Yes       and Distal Contextual Factors          Sandra A. Brown
                                                                                    Assessment of Interhemispheric
                       University of Chicago Medical                                Interaction in Children with Heavy
95.003            2000 Center                          Yes                Yes       Prenatal Alcohol Exposure              Edward Riley
                                                                                    Olfactory Event-Related Potentials
95.002            2000 US Navy, San Diego              Yes                Yes       in Alzheimer's Disease              Claire Murphy
                                                                                    Relationships Between Perceived
                                                                                    Burden, Physical Health, and Health
                                                                                    Care: Use Among Spouses of
                       Yale University Medical                                      People with Fibromyalgia
95.001            2000 School                          Yes                Yes       Syndrome                            Theresa Cronan
                                                                                    Papillary Responses Index
                                                                                    Information Processing Efficiency
94.006            2000 VAMC, Palo Alto                 Yes                Yes       Across Cultures                     Eric Granholm
                       VAMC, Southwest                                              Determinants of Adherence with
94.005            2000 Consortium Albuquerque          Yes                Yes       Nasal CPAP Therapy                     Sonia Ancoli-Israel

                                                               Cognitive, Motor, and Behavioral
              VAMC, Southwest                                  Correlates of Functional Decline in
94.004   2000 Consortium Albuquerque          Yes        Yes   Huntington’s Disease                David Salmon
                                                               Cerebral Activation as Measured
                                                               with Functional Magnetic
                                                               Resonance Imaging During Learning
                                                               and Working Memory Probes
                                                               Before and After Total Sleep
94.003   2000 VAMC, Tucson                    Yes        Yes   Deprivation                         Chris Gillin
                                                               Eyeblink Classical Conditioning to
                                                               an Olfactory Stimulus in Older
                                                               Adults, Patients with Alzheimer's
              University of Florida Health                     Disease, and Older Adults at Risk
94.002   2000 Sciences Center                 Yes        Yes   for Alzheimer's Disease              Claire Murphy
                                                               Tobacco Control Policy Attitudes,
                                                               Smoking Beliefs, Smoking-Health
                                                               Risk Knowledge, and Smoking
94.001   2000 VAMC Palo Alto                  Yes        Yes   Behavior in Acculturating Latinos    John Elder
                                                               Mechanics of the Relationship
              University of Illinois at                        Between Childhood Attachment
93.004   2000 Chicago Psychiatric Institute   Yes        Yes   and Adult Anxiety and Depression     Rick Ingram
                                                               Inhibitory Deficits in Obsessive
93.003   2000 VAMC Palo Alto                  Yes        Yes   Compulsive Disorder (OCD)            Neal Swerdlow
                                                               Predictors of Posttraumatic Stress
                                                               Symptomatology (PTSS)
93.002   2000 VAMC, Loma Linda                Yes        Yes   Among Maltreated Children            Alan Litrownik
                                                               Functional Magnetic Resonance
              Hillside Hosp., Long Island                      Imaging of the Cerebellum in
93.001   2000 Jewish MC, NY                   Yes        Yes   Autism                               Eric Courchesne
                                                               Do Adolescents Affiliate with 12-
                                                               Step Groups? A Multivariate
              Children's Hospital of Orange                    Process Model of Intermediate and
96.003   2001 County                          Yes        Yes   Long-term Effects                    Mark Myers
                                                              Negative Affect among Patients
                                                              with Binge Eating Disorder:
                                                              Impact at Baseline and Following
96.002   2001 VAMC, Minneapolis              Yes        Yes   Treatment                              Denise Wilfley
                                                              The Role of Child Maltreatment
                                                              and Peer Victimization in the
                                                              Prediction of Playground Social
                                                              Behaviors in Early Elementary
96.001   2001 VAMC, West Los Angeles         Yes        Yes   School                                 Joseph Price
95.008   2001 UCSD Consortium                Yes        Yes   Sensory Gating in Schizophrenia        David Braff
                                                              A Cerebellar Contribution to
                                                              Cognition: Evidence from Williams
95.007   2001 VAMC, Palo Alto                Yes        Yes   Syndrome                               Judy Reilly
                                                              The Utility of Education Corrections
                                                              in Interpreting
              University of Florida Health                    Neuropsychological Performance in
95.006   2001 Sciences Center                Yes        Yes   Schizophrenia                          Dilip Jeste
                                                              The Effects of Early Environmental
                                                              Experiences on African-American
                                                              Neuropsychological Test
94.007   2001 Brown University, Consortium   Yes        Yes   Performance                            Robert Heaton
                                                              Moral Judgment and Reasoning in
              UCLA Neuropsychiatric                           Children and Adolescents With
97.006   2002 Institute                      Yes        Yes   Prenatal Alcohol Exposure              Edward Riley
              UCSD Consortium/VA Medical                      Visual and Verbal Learning in a
97.005   2002 Center                         Yes        Yes   Genetic Metabolic Disorder             Doris Trauner
                                                              Psychological and Physiological
                                                              Health Status in African
                                                              American and Caucasian
97.004   2002 VAMC, West Los Angeles         Yes        Yes   Alzheimer’s Caregivers                 Igor Grant
                                                              Alcohol Involvement in Jewish
97.003   2002 VAMC, Long Beach               Yes        Yes   Americans                              Tamara Wall

                                                             Project SHAPE: An Experimental
                                                             Evaluation of a Group Versus
                                                             Computer-based Intervention to
              University Washington                          Improve Food Portion Size
97.002   2002 Medical Ctr., Psychiatry      Yes        Yes   Estimation Skills                     John Elder
                                                             Multiple Pathways from ADHD to
                                                             Substance Use Disorders in
97.001   2002 Brown University Consortium   Yes        Yes   Adolescents                           Sandra A. Brown
                                                             The PACE+ School Study:
                                                             Evaluation of the Efficacy of
                                                             Promoting Change in a Single
96.006   2002 UCSF Medical Center           Yes        Yes   versus Multiple Health Behaviors      James Sallis
                                                             Aging and Sleep in Schizophrenia
                                                             Patients and Normal Comparison
                                                             Subjects: Subjective Reports and
96.005   2002 Brown University Consortium   Yes        Yes   Objective Findings                    Sonia Ancoli-Israel
                                                             A Proposed Psychosocial
              UCSD Consortium/VA Medical                     Consequences Model of Childhood
96.004   2002 Center                        Yes        Yes   Obesity                               Denise Wilfley
                                                             Physical Health of Maltreated
                                                             Children Shortly After Entry Into
                                                             Foster Care: Assessment and
                                                             Prediction of Documented Medical
                                                             Problems and Caregiver Reported
95.009   2002 Baylor College of Medicine    Yes        Yes   Health Status                         Alan Litrownik
                                                             Pupillary responses Test the time
                                                             Estimation Hypothesis of The
                                                             Crossover Effect in Schizotypal and
94.008   2002 VAMC, West Los Angeles        Yes        Yes   Nonschizotypal Students               Eric Granholm
                                                             Olfactory Psychophysics and
              Southwest                                      Electrophysiology in Huntington's
98.003   2003 Consortium/NMVAHC             Yes        Yes   Disease                               Claire Murphy
                                                             Rest/Activity Rhythms in Dementia
98.002   2003 VAMC, Durham, NC              Yes        Yes   and Their Relationship to Mortality   Sonia Ancoli-Israel

                                                              The Effects of a Physical Activity
              Duke University Medical                         and Nutrition intervention on Body
98.001   2003 Center – Psychiatry            Yes        Yes   Image in Pre-Adolescents               Melbourne Hovell
                                                              An Interactive Psychoeducational
                                                              Intervention for Women at-risk of
97.011   2003 Brown University Consortium    Yes        Yes   Developing an Eating Disorder          James Sallis
                                                              The Development of Visuospatial
                                                              Attentional Orienting: Evidence
                                                              from Normally Developing
                                                              Children, Children with Specific
              UCSD/VA Psychology                              Language Impairment, and Adults
97.010   2003 Internship                     Yes        Yes   with Williams Syndrome                 Joan Stiles
                                                              Regional Neuropathology and
97.009   2003 VAMC, West Los Angeles         Yes        Yes   Cognitive Abilities in HIV Infection   Igor Grant
              Southwest                                       Circadian Impact of Psychosocial
97.008   2003 Consortium/NMVAHC              Yes        Yes   Factors in Depression                  John McQuaid
                                                              A Randomized Controlled Trial
                                                              Comparing Internet and Video to
                                                              Facilitate Shared Decision-Making
              University of Washington-                       for Men Considering the Prostate
97.007   2003 Psychiatry                     Yes        Yes   Specific Antigen Test                  Robert Kaplan
                                                              Analysis of MMPI Scale-4 Response
                                                              Patterns in Recently Detoxified
                                                              Alcoholics: Neuropsychological and
96.006   2003 VAMC, Long Beach               Yes        Yes   Clinical Correlates                    Igor Grant
                                                              Relationships of positive and
                                                              negative affect to coping and
                                                              functional outcomes in systemic
95.010   2003 National Hospital of Iceland   No         Yes   sclerosis.                             Vanessa Malcarne
                                                              Adherence to Exercise Following
                                                              Pulmonary Rehabilitation of
                                                              Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary
99.004   2004 UCSD/VA Medical Center         Yes        Yes   Disease                                Robert Kaplan

                                                                  Adolescent Alcohol Reduction and
99.003   2004 Brown University Consortium        Yes        Yes   Cessation Expectancies                Sandra A. Brown
                                                                  Parent and Family Outcomes of
              University of Alabama –                             Community-Based Mental Health
99.002   2004 Birmingham                         Yes        Yes   Treatment for Adolescents             Ann Garland
                                                                  Post-Treatment Fatigue in Breast
                                                                  Cancer Survivors: The Roll of Sleep
99.001   2004 VA-Palo Alto                       Yes        Yes   Quality and Depressed Mood            Vanessa Malcarne
                                                                  The Prediction of Everyday
                                                                  Functioning after Traumatic Brain
                                                                  Injury: The Utility of an Objective
                                                                  Functional Battery Relative to
              University of Washington-                           Neuropsychological and Traditional
98.008   2004 Psychiatry                         Yes        Yes   Clinical Measures                     Robert Heaton
                                                                  Neurochemical Correlates of Blood
                                                                  Oxygen Level Dependent Signal
98.007   2004 UCSD/VA Medical Center             Yes        Yes   Changes in Abstinent Alcoholics       Igor Grant
                                                                  Neural Substrates of Cognitive
98.006   2004 VA-Palo Alto                       Yes        Yes   Vulnerability to Depression           John McQuaid
                                                                  An examination of the correlates of
                                                                  physical activity among
98.005   2004 VA-Palo Alto                       Yes        Yes   people with fibromyalgia syndrome     Theresa Cronan
                                                                  The Paced Auditory Serial Addition
                                                                  Test (PASAT) as a Measure of
                                                                  Working Memory: Modified
              University of Illinois, Chicago-                    Scoring Guidelines, Normative
98.004   2004 Psychiatry                         Yes        Yes   Data, and Validation                  Robert Heaton
              Children's Hospital, Orange                         Fatigue and Sleep Complaints in
97.012   2004 County                             Yes        Yes   Women Treated for Breast Cancer       Joel Dimsdale
                                                                  Executive Functions and
96.007   2004 VAHCS, Long Beach                  Yes        Yes   Constructive Neural Networks          Greg Brown

                                                               Environmental Barriers, Self-
                                                               Efficacy and the Direct and Indirect
                                                               Effects of Diabetes-specific Cultural
                                                               Beliefs on Health Status in a
                                                               Community Sample of Diabetic
95.010   2004 VAMC, Long Beach                Yes        Yes   Patients                                Vanessa Malcarne
              UCSD/VA Psychology                               Neuropsychological Aspects of
99.007   2005 Internship                      Yes        Yes   Frontotemporal Dementia                 David Salmon
                                                               Cognitive Heterogeneity in Autism
                                                               Spectrum Disorders: Linking
                                                               Complex Behavior, Function, and
99.006   2005 Brown University Consortium     Yes        Yes   Neuronal Integrity                      Eric Courchesne
                                                               Body Image in Mexican American
              VA Palo Alto Healthcare                          and White College Women: The
99.005   2005 System                          Yes        Yes   Role of Individualism-Collectivism      Elizabeth Klonoff
                                                               Level of Response to Alcohol in
                                                               Daughters of Alcoholics and
98.010   2005 VAMC, Long Beach                Yes        Yes   Controls                                Marc Schuckit
                                                               Sleep and Circadian Rhythms in
                                                               Children with Attention Deficit-
                                                               Hyperactivity Disorder: Before and
98.009   2005 UCSD/VA Medical Center          Yes        Yes   After Stimulant Treatment               Sonia Ancoli-Israel
                                                               The Integrity of Hedonic Processes
96.008   2005 Brown University Consortium     Yes        Yes   in Alzheimer's Disease                  David Salmon
                                                               Examination of a Process Model of
                                                               Adolescent Smoking Self-Change
00.006   2005 Brown University Consortium     Yes        Yes   Efforts in Relation to Gender           Mark Myers
                                                               Early Intervention of Eating and
                                                               Weight Related Problems Via the
                                                               Internet in Overweight
              University of Chicago Medical                    Adolescents: A Randomized
00.003   2005 Center                          Yes        Yes   Controlled Trial                        James Sallis

              Duke University Medical                        Prospective Memory in HIV-1
00.002   2005 Center – Psychiatry           Yes        Yes   Infection                             Igor Grant
                                                             Effect of Age on the Functional
              UCSD/VA Psychology                             Connectivity of Brain Regions
00.001   2005 Internship                    Yes        Yes   Involved in Ofaction                  Claire Murphy
                                                             Representing Facial Affect
              Southwest Consortium New                       Representations in the Brain and in
99.010   2006 Mexico VAHC                   Yes        Yes   Behavior                              Joan Stiles
                                                             An Examination of the
                                                             Relationships among Posttraumatic
                                                             Stress Disorder Symptoms, Anger,
              VA Palo Alto Healthcare                        Physical Health, and Medical
99.009   2006 System                        Yes        Yes   Utilization                           Murray Stein
                                                             The Impact of Intellectual
                                                             Functioning and Adverse Life
              University South Florida                       Events on the Psychosocial
99.008   2006 Mental Health Institute       Yes        Yes   Functioning of Maltreated Children    Alan Litrownik
                                                             Temperament Patterns in Families
              UCSD/VA Psychology                             of Individuals with Anorexia
01.008   2006 Internship                    Yes        Yes   Nervosa                               James Sallis
                                                             Mediators of Dietary Behavior
                                                             Change Among Overweight and
01.007   2006 VAMC, Long Beach              Yes        Yes   Obese Women                           Karen Calfas
                                                             Self-Reported and Performance-
                                                             Based Functioning in Middle-Aged
              Cornell U/Payne Whitney, NY                    and Older Outpatients with
00.008   2006 Hospital                      Yes        Yes   Schizophrenia                         Eric Granholm
                                                             Generalizability of the Cognitive
                                                             Diathesis-Stress Model of
              University of Washington –                     Depression to Depressive
00.007   2006 Psychiatry                    Yes        Yes   Symptoms in Schizophrenia             John McQuaid
                                                             Health Beliefs and Cancer
                                                             Prevention Practices of Filipino
00.005   2006 VAMC, Long Beach              Yes        Yes   American Women                        Vanessa Malcarne

                                                              Table 9

                                                Program Graduates: Employment

       employment                                Current employment                                    Licensure
ID#      setting        Initial job title              setting                 Current job title       and State    Other achievements
                                                                           Assistant Professor, Full
                                                                           Member of Graduate
                                                                           Faculty, Adjunct
93.001 16           Postdoctoral Resident   3, 16                          Assistant Professor                     Grant recipient

                                                                           Staff Psychologist,         Licensed,
93.002 7            Psychologist            7, 15                          Psychologist                CA          Member APA
                                                                           Staff Psychologist,
                                                                           Assistant Clinical
                                                                           Professor, Clinical         Licensed,   Member-APA, SEPI,
93.003 16           PostDoc                 15, 13a, 14                    Psychologist                CA          OCF
                                                                                                       MO and
93.004 15           Postdoctoral Fellow     13a                            Assistant Professor         CA          Grant recipient

94.001 Unknown                              1                              Staff Psychologist
                                                                           Research Assistant
94.002 15           Postdoctoral Fellow     13a                            Professor
94.003 7            Postdoctoral Fellow     16                             Assistant Professor         CA          Grant recipient
                                                                                                                   Member APA,
                    Post-graduate                                                                                  Neuropsychological
                    Research                                                                                       Society; Grant
94.004 16           Neuroscientist          13c.                           Assistant Professor                     recipient

                                                          Assistant Director,
                                                          Research Health Science
                                                          Specialist, Assistant
94.005 16        Post-Doctoral Fellow    16, 7, 16        Adjunct Professor                     Membership APA
                                                                                                Grant recipient,
                                                                                                Member-APA, Society
                 Postdoctoral Research                    Assistant Professor,                  Psychophysiological
94.006 7         Fellow                  13a              Clinical Supervisor                   Research, Fellowship
                                                                                    Licensed,   Member APA, grant
94.007 15        Post-Doctoral Fellow    16               Assistant Professor       NY          recipient

                                                                                                Member-APA, Society
94.008 16        Program Manager         same             Same                                  of Bmed
                                                                                                Grant recipient,
                 Assistant Professor,                                                           Member of Minority
                 Associate Member,                                                              Health Advisory
95.001 13a.      Graduate Faculty        same             Same                                  Committee

                 Staff Clinic                                                       Licensed,
95.002 4         Psychologist            6                Staff Psychologist        CA          Member APA
                                                          Clinical                  DC and      APA Member, Grant
95.003 16        Post-Doctoral Fellow    6                Neuropsychologist         VA          recipient

95.004 Unknown                           16               Unknown

95.005 Unknown                           1                Clinical Psychologist

                                                          Program Co-Director and
95.006 15        Post-Doctoral Training 13a, 15           Assistant Professor                   Grant recipient

                                                               Consulting Psychologist
                                                               and Private Practice      Licensed,
95.007 15        Post-Doctoral Fellow    1, 3, 14              Clinician                 WY
                                                               Associate Director,
95.008 16        Post-Doctoral Fellow    16, 7                 Assistant Professor                   Grant recipient
                 Evaluation and
95.009 3         Research Manager        33. Consulting        Consultant
                 Clinical Research
95.010 1         Coordinator             13a                   Visiting Instructor

95.010 Unknown                           33.Corporate          Manager
                 Post-Doctoral                                 Assistant Professor of
96.001 13a.      Instructor              13a                   Psychology                            Grant recipient

                 Postdoctoral                                                            Licensed,
96.002 1         Psychology Resident     14                    Clinical Psychologist     FL
                                                               Assistant Professor,      Licensed,
96.003 16        Assistant Professor     16                    Research Associate        CA          Grant recipient
                 Post-Doctoral                                                           Licensed,
96.004 15        Research Coordinator    15                    Research Scientist        CA          Grant recipient
                                                               Research Health           Licensed,
96.005 16        Post-Doctoral Fellow    7                     Scientist                 CA          Grant recipient
                                                               Assistant Adjunct         Licensed,   Fellows, Grant
96.006 16        Fellow                  13a                   Professor                 CA          recipient
                 Assistant Project
96.006 16        Scientist               13d                   Adjunct Faculty                       Honor recipient
                 Mirecc Psychology
96.007 15        Fellow                  same                  Same                                  Fellowship
96.008 16        Post-Doctoral Scholar   14                                              CA
                                                         Assistant Professor
                                                        (Research) of Psychiatry
                                                        and Human Behavior and                 Grant recipient, APA
97.001 15   Fellowship             16, 6                Research Psychologist                  Member

97.002 16   Assistant Professor    16                   Assistant Professor                    Grant recipient
97.003 15   Postdoctoral Fellow    15                   Project Coordinator        CA
                                                        Behavioral Medicine        Licensed,
97.004 16   Post-Doctoral Fellow   6                    Specialist                 CA          APA, Society of Bmed
                                                        Faculty, Part-time
                                                        Lecturer, Assistant
97.005 15   Research Associate     13a, 13a, 16         Project Neuroscientist                 Member-APA, INS
            Postdoctoral                                                           Licensed,
97.006 16   Fellowship             99                   Stay-at-home Mother        CA          Member-APA
                                                        Assistant Professor in
97.007 15   Senior Fellow          13                   Residence                              Grant recipient

                                                        Psychological Consultant
            Post-Doctoral                               and Research Assistant
97.008 15   Research Associate     1, 15                Professor

                                                        Assistant Adjunct          Licensed,
97.009 7    Fellow                 16                   Professor                  CA          Grant recipient
97.010 15   Post-Doctoral Fellow   same                 Psychologist               CA

                                                                                               Member APA, Society
            Staff Research                                                                     of Behavioral
97.011 16   Associate              33. Corporate        Vice President                         Medicine

                                                             Scientific Affairs
                                                             Liaison, Clinical
                                                             Psychologist, Associate   Licensed,
97.012 13e   Adjunct Professor      33. Corporate, 15        Research Specialist       CA          APA

98.001 15    Research Associate     same                     Same

                                                                                                   Certified in
                                                                                       Licensed,   Behavioral Sleep
98.002 6     Post-Doctoral Fellow   13a                      Assistant Professor       PA          Medicine

98.003 7     Post-Doc               13a                      Professor

             Post-Doctoral                                                             Licensed,
98.004 16    Research Fellow        16                       Assistant Professor       IL          Grant Recipient
                                                             Clinical Assistant
                                                             Professor, Staff
                                                             Psychologist, Staff
                                                             Psychologist/Adjunct      Licensed,
98.005 7     Post-Doctoral Fellow   16, 6                    Staff                     RI
                                                                                                   Grant recipient,
                                                                                                   for Behavioral and
                                                                                                   Cognitive Therapies,
                                                                                                   for Contextual
                                                                                                   Behavioral Sciences,
98.006 16    Post-Doctoral Fellow   same                     Same                                  ACT
                                                                                                   Grant recipient,
                                                                                                   Member-Society for
                                                                                                   International Society
                                                                                                   for Magnetic
             Assistant Adjunct                                                                     Resonance in
98.007 16    Professor              same                     Same                                  Medicine, INS

                                                                            Society, National
                                                                            Academy of
98.008 16     Postdoctoral Fellow     3           Staff Neuropsychologist   Neuropsychology

98.009 16     Fellowship              same        Same                      Grant recipient

                                                                            Member Research
                                                                            Society on
              Postdoctoral                                                  Alcoholism, APA,
98.010 15     Fellowship              same        Same                      APS

                                                  Health Program            Society of Behavioral
99.001 15     Post-Doctoral Fellow    2           Associate                 Medicine

                                                  Psychologist, Research    APA Member, Grant
99.002 13a.   Post-Doctoral Fellow    13a         Scientist                 recipient
                                                                            College on Problems
                                                                            of Drug Dependence,
                                                                            Research Society on
              Post-Doctoral                                                 Alcoholism; Licensed,
99.003 16     Fellowship              same        Same                      Grant recipient

                                                  Associate Investigator
99.004 7      Postdoctoral Research   7           Research                  Grant recipient
                                                                            Grant Recipient,
                                                                            Awardee-NIH Health
                                                                            Disparities Research
                                                                            Loan Repayment
99.005 15     Postdoctoral            same        Same                      Program

99.006 15     Senior Fellow           same        Same

99.007 16     Postdoctoral Fellow     same        Same

99.008 15     Assistant in Research   1           Program Evaluator               Grant recipient
                                                                                  for Behavioral and
                                                                                  Cognitive Therapies,
                                                                                  Anxiety Disorders
              Postdoctoral                                                        Association of
99.009 7      Fellowship              same        Same                            America

99.010 7      Post-Doctoral Fellow    same        Same

00.001 15     Postdoctoral Fellow     same        Same
                                                                                  Member APA,
                                                                                  Society, National
              Postdoctoral                                                        Academy of
00.002 16     Fellowship              same        Same                            Neuropsychology
              Post-Doctoral                                           Licensed,   Career Investigator
00.003 15     Associate               same        Same                IL          Fellowship

00.005 13a.   Post-Doctoral Fellow    Same        Same                            SBM, WPA, AAPA

00.006 16     Postdoctoral Fellow     same        Same                            Grant recipient

                                                                                  Grant recipient,
              Post-Doctoral                                                       for Behavioral and
00.007 16     Fellowship              same        Same                            Cognitive Therapies
00.008 15     Fellowship              same        Same
            Post-Doctoral                            Fellowship, Grant
01.007 16   Research Fellow       same        Same   recipient

01.008 15   Postdoctoral Fellow   same        Same

                                                                 Table 10
                                                              Student Attrition
                     2007-      2006-      2005-     2004-      2003-        2002-   2001-      Total
                     2008       2007       2006      2005       2004         2003    2002
Total number of       10         11         14        13         11           14      13          86
entering students
Program by year
# of students
withdrawing in:
2006-2007                                                                                         0
2005-2006                                                                                         0
2004-2005                                                                                         0
2003-2004                                                                                         0
2002-2003                                                                                         0
2001-2002                                                                                         0
2000-2001                                                                                         0
Total                                                                                             0

Provide the number of students from each cohort withdrawing from the program for any reason during the past 7 academic years. Please provide the
total actual number of students withdrawing at the end of each row and column.

Please add columns and rows, as necessary, to include data for the entering cohorts of any students matriculating beyond the 7th year in the

                                                                  Table 11
                                                       Student Degree Completion
                     2007-      2006-      2005-      2004-     2003-        2002-    2001-      Total
                     2008       2007       2006       2005      2004         2003     2002
Total number of       10         11         14         13        11           14       13         86
entering students
Program by year
# of students
graduating in:
2006-2007               0         0          0          0         0           4         6         10
2005-2006               0         0          0          0         0           0         2          2
2004-2005               0         0          0          0         0           0         0          0
2003-2004               0         0          0          0         0           0         0          0
2002-2003               0         0          0          0         0           0         0          0
2001-2002               0         0          0          0         0           0         0          0
2000-2001               0         0          0          0         0           0         0          0
Total                   0         0          0          0         0           0         0          0

Provide the number of students from each cohort graduating from the program during the past 7 academic years. Please provide the total number of
students graduating at the end of each row and column.

Please add columns and rows, as necessary, to include data for the entering cohorts of any students matriculating beyond the 7th year in the


To top