…Let me begin to tackle the second question I posed for you, which is about specialization in the areas you have interest in.  First of all, be clear up front that tackling disaster mental health and dealing with counter-terrorism issues are very different problems.  At first, I was hoping to be able to do both, and I think the faculty that I was working with were also hoping that the NCPT would be able to address both (in fact the original name of the center was NCDPT — with the “D” for disasters).  Over time, what we realized is that we could not really address both problems adequately.  Some of the faculty who were more interested in the psychology of terrorism and counter-terrorism formed a new center called CIPERT (www.cipert.org), while faculty and students interested in disater mental health and disaster management stayed with NCPT (even though the title of the center directly says “TERRORISM” and not disasters!).  For me, the relationship between treatment of PTSD and disaster related mental health problems made the most sense, and I was also interested in the logistical aspects of disasters, so staying with the NCPT made the most sense.
 
If I were you (or if I were to start the process all over again), I guess I would try to employ one of three overall strategies when searching for a clinical program that also supports disaster and/or terrorism as research areas:
 
Option 1
1. Look online and in the clinical psychology insider’s guide book for clinical psychology programs that offer a specialization in disaster psychology, military psychology, or terrorism (the program at University of South Dakota is a good example)
 
Option 2
 
1. The Department of Homeland Security has set up about 6 Centers of Excellence at various universities.  Two of these focus on the behavioral sciences (the primary one is at the University of Maryland – Baltimore).
2. See if these schools also offer a clinical degree
3. Talk to them about combining your clinical interests with the activities at the Centers
4.  A list of all of the DHS Centers of Excellence and a brief description of each can be found here: http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/editorial_0498.shtm
 
Option 3
1. Begin examining all of the universities that have some form of a disaster studies or terrorism studies program
2. See if these schools also offer a clinical psychology degree
3. Try to create a customized program that gets at your interests
4. A good example of this would be the University of Denver Graduate School of Professional Psychology, which offers both a PsyD in clinical psychology and an M.A. in International Disaster Psychology — you might be able to take some of the M.A. classes as part of the doctorate.  http://www.du.edu/gspp/about-gspp/what-is-gspp.html
 
Having said all of that, NCPT worked very well for me Palo Alto University is a small, private professional school that offers both a PhD in clinical psychology and a PsyD (the PsyD is offered in conjunction with Stanford University).  As I mentioned, PAU is a feeder school for one of the major VA run PTSD treatment centers, and gaining treatment in PTSD is central to being able to treat disaster related mental health problems — so for me this worked very well.  The NCPT runs the Palo Alto Medical Reserve Corps — a federally funded disaster mental health program, etc.  Also, note that for me the timing worked out well, but as someone just coming into a program, looking at who will likely serve on your dissertation committee and if they will retire before you complete your degree is of critical importance.
 
I hope this helps.  If you want to read more about my experiences trying to put together a customized training program for myself (in the days just after 9/11 when there wasn’t much available), take a look at this: http://www.metaversityproject.org/metaversity/disaster-psychology/.  If you have other questions, let me know and I will do my best to answer them.  It has been a difficult, sometimes lonely journey for me as there are not many people interested in this sub-specialization, so I am hoping to change that by encouraging those who are interested to enter the field.
 
Good luck.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/26/dark-side-internet-freenet

Read it.

As a result, the real science of the eighteenth century was practised by social oddities: by eccentrics like the Cavendish or the Oxford antiquaries, by Unitarians and Quakers from the midlands, and by untaught mechanics like James Brindley who designed the whole system of English waterways, but never leared to spell “navigation.”

Yesterday, I received an email from a German colleague, a PhD student from Berlin who I met at SIPP in 2005.  He noted that he was also nearing the end of his program, and that his dissertation was about to be reviewed by his committee.  He attached the manuscript to the email – all 118 pages of text.  In this moment – what my wife would call a liminal space – after years of journeying toward the end of the doctoral process, and after the stifling of our social being in order to produce research that is hopefully novel and interesting, I think there is a need for recognition and communion.  To share what we have produced.  And yet most people beyond the committee either do not have the time or interest to engage deeply with us in this final mile of the process.

I was flattered that my acquaintance from Europe felt strongly enough to send me his manuscript.  In a few years – with any luck – neither of us will have the time to spend reviewing a manuscript that doesn’t pertain directly to our own subdiscipline.  But at this moment, I find joy in walking with him toward his path of completion, honoring the document itself, and recognizing the sacrifices that each of us makes as part of this process — even though most remain unspoken.

UW Milwaukee Library

For me this was brought home as I inserted the final changes recommended by my committee — I was sitting in Roast Coffee Shop and then moved to the UWM libraries for the final details to work on some faster machines.  The last leg was actually completed in the halls of an entirely different institution.  This felt comforting to me in some ways as I listened to the chatter of undergraduates about their papers – arguing about the meaning of the word “plurality” – thinking about the last 10 years of higher education, the process of transformation into a scholar and (hopefully) a healer.  In spite of the 2,000 miles between me and my home institution and advisor, the work of the university was going on around me.

It is fairly typical for one member of the committee join during the defense by phone — particularly consulting faculty.  However, I am wondering if and when the day will come for virtual or  tele-presence dissertation defense proceedings?  It would be interesting to hear if anyone has done this yet.  I don’t think it would be for me, but particularly for highly specialized topics, I can imagine this becoming common place in the future.

There are clearly important academic reasons for this:  First, institutions have different entrance requirements and they may want to ensure that all students in a particular class meet that standard; second, classes are typically approved by faculty senate or other governing body to ensure that the syllabus meets acceptable standards within the institution — accepting an other institution’s classes means that the quality of the class must be taken on some level of faith; third, even if a student were able to easily take a graduate level course at another institution, there would have to be some grade reconciliation between the two schools.  There are also substantial financial disincentives to simplified articulation systems between institutions — and by preventing students from seeking extramural course work, universities are able to monopolistically control tuition fees.

At one end of the spectrum, loose articulation standards create one of the avenues for diploma mills to function.  However, at the other, the lack of efficient, flexible, yet academically rigorous articulation systems is one of the drags on innovation within the modern university system. 

While I do not fully agree with the sentiment offered by David Wiley that “Universities will be irelevant by 2020″,  the ability to rapidly integrate course work from multiple IHEs into a customized learning experience — that also meets home institution academic standards — seems like an achievable and necessary step.