Hi Unfortunately, the person quoted in the piece appears to be the new guard, not the old. See
http://www.tc.columbia.edu/ccp/clinical/index.asp?Id=Faculty&Info=Full%2DTime+Faculty#Faculty Her brief bio indicates she was a student of Seligman and positive psychology. Here's a piece on an A&E program that asserts she does believe in the reality of psychic experiences. http://www.tc.columbia.edu/news.htm?articleId=6623 Perhaps we have to wait another generation or two? Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology and Chair 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [email protected] >>> Paul Brandon <[email protected]> 11-Aug-12 12:17 pm >>> Something about paradigm shifts requiring people to die. It may take a while for the 'old regime' to be replaced. On Aug 11, 2012, at 11:43 AM, Lilienfeld, Scott O wrote: > Annette et al.: > > From what I know of its history, the Columbia clinical psychology program has always been something of an anomaly. It's not in the psychology department (a rarity for clinical psychology programs, although not for counseling psychology programs), and has little or no formal affiliation with it (although there is certainly some collaboration here and there). Traditionally, the program has been very psychodynamic and not especially research-oriented. The contrast with the Columbia psychology department has been strark. > > In relatively recent years, however, the Columbia clinical program has racheted up its standards considerably and made some excellent hires, including my friend George Bonanno, and several other outstanding clinical scientists who value evidence-based practice and research. I gave a talk there several years ago, and was under the impression that the program was still struggling a bit with its identity, but that it was gradually moving more to a clinical scientist or at least a scientist-practitioner model of training. > > So I was surprised and disheartened by this news story, which seems to imply a major step backwards. I'm certainly not opposed to rigorous research on the efficacy of meditation or mindfulness in psychotherapy. But the comments of several of the participants imply a disconcerting elevation of clinical intuition as equal to controlled research as a source of evidence. Very troubling. I don't know more about this new emphasis within the clinical program, but it does make me wonder just how committed the program is to a scientific approach to clinical practice. > > ...Scott > > > ________________________________________ > From: Annette Taylor [[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, August 11, 2012 9:38 AM > To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) > Subject: Re:[tips] Another step forward / backward for Clinical Psychology Training? > > This quote makes it one step backwards: > *If you tell me you know something in your gut, I say that*s hard data,* said Dr. Miller, > > I call on clinical folks to inform me whether the Columbia program is generally well-respected. > > What I wonder is this, if it is well-respected then what does this say about the state of clinical training? > > Sigh. > > Annette > > Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph. D. > Professor, Psychological Sciences > University of San Diego > 5998 Alcala Park > San Diego, CA 92110 > [email protected] > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Subject: Another step forward / backward for Clinical Psychology Training? > From: "Jim Clark" <[email protected]> > Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 08:06:45 -0500 > X-Message-Number: 1 > Hi > A NY Times article on Columbia's clinical psychology program and its > addition of spirituality (mysticism?) to training. > http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/10/education/columbia-program-merges-therapy-and-spirituality.html?pagewanted=1&src=recg > I especially noted the following for several points: > --------------------------------------------- > Lisa J. Miller, the professor who leads the concentration, said she was > training *spiritual psychologists,* who put nonmaterial concepts > like love and connection at the core of their efforts to heal. > *If you tell me you know something in your gut, I say that*s hard > data,* said Dr. Miller, who co-hosted a cable television series on > psychic children in 2008. Science, like intuition, she said, is > *another arrow in our quiver.* > --------------------------------------------- > One is emphasis on intuition as "hard data" and the other is the link > in this person's background to "psychic children." And what sort of > psychologist thinks that "love and connection" are elements that have > been ignored by either academic or clinical psychologists, necessitating > the introduction of mysticism to take into account such "nonmaterial > concepts"? > Take care > Jim Paul Brandon Emeritus Professor of Psychology Minnesota State University, Mankato [email protected] --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a891720c9&n=T&l=tips&o=19664 or send a blank email to leave-19664-13251.645f86b5cec4da0a56ffea7a89172...@fsulist.frostburg.edu --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]. To unsubscribe click here: http://fsulist.frostburg.edu/u?id=13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df5d5&n=T&l=tips&o=19665 or send a blank email to leave-19665-13090.68da6e6e5325aa33287ff385b70df...@fsulist.frostburg.edu
