While my experience does not represent every student's experience in PAU's Masters in Clinical…read moreMental Health Counseling program, I have no doubt it will resonate with many current students and graduates.
I chose PAU because it was an accredited program that offered a hybrid format with a cohort model. Unfortunately, for the high tuition it charges, PAU fell short in many important areas, particularly administrative, professor quality, advisor guidance, practicum and internship support, and post-graduate services.
It has been a year since I graduated, and I am still angry and deeply disappointed by the treatment I experienced from my advisor, as well as my negative experiences with my practicum instructor and internship site. I left feeling traumatized--not only by my own experiences but also by hearing what many other students had gone through. I had to seek counseling for a whole year afterwards.
I had a handful of instructors whom I genuinely believe were strong counseling educators. However, the majority were not supportive, lacked organization, and often brought their own unresolved trauma and countertransference into the classroom.
The administrative side of the program was equally frustrating. I found the workload to be unreasonable, and the lack of coordination only made it more difficult. Because the department heads created the syllabus for each course, instructors had little or no authority to modify it. Unfortunately, there were times when the syllabus contained errors, yet neither the instructors nor the department made any effort to notify students or correct them.
For example, in one of our group counseling classes, we were assigned a group presentation. The syllabus stated that the presentation should be approximately 80 minutes long. However, on the day the first group was scheduled to present, the instructor informed the class that the presentations were actually supposed to be only 40 minutes. The first group had no opportunity to adjust, despite having followed the written requirements. Even more frustrating, the following quarter the syllabus still listed the same incorrect 80-minute requirement.
This type of disorganization occurred repeatedly throughout the program. At the same time, students were constantly reminded of the importance of being accurate, organized, punctual, and accountable in our work. It was difficult not to see the irony.
Near the end of the program, one of the things that concerned me most about PAU was what I perceived to be a lack of integrity. One of the reasons I chose the program was its tuition guarantee, which promised that a student's tuition rate would remain the same throughout the program. At one point, however, PAU attempted to increase tuition despite that guarantee.
An entire cohort challenged the decision. It was not until students organized, sought legal counsel, and raised concerns about the potential implications for PAU's CACREP accreditation that the university ultimately reversed its decision.
For me, this experience reinforced the impression that protecting the school's image and financial interests took priority over honoring its commitments to students. It significantly eroded my trust in the institution and left me questioning its commitment to the ethical values it teaches future mental health professionals.
Overall, I believe the foundation of the program needs to be reassessed. There seems to be a great deal of politics at play, and when students raise legitimate concerns, the responsibility often gets shifted back onto them rather than being addressed by the school. Ultimately, I found the program to lack the student-centered approach I was looking for--something I believe every mental health training program should naturally embody.
If you are considering a master's program, I strongly encourage you to choose a school that prioritizes its character over its image. Look for a truly student-centered program--one that genuinely cares about its students and is invested in their success. Make sure the professors and advisors have a thorough understanding of California licensing requirements and clinical practice. When faculty and advisors are based in other states, as was the case in my program, they may not be familiar with California laws and regulations, which can lead to inaccurate or misleading guidance.
Finally, make sure the program has a competent, supportive, and resourceful career services department that continues to support students after graduation. In my experience, the director of career services always appeared overwhelmed & frazzled. And once I graduated, there was essentially no meaningful career support. I was simply directed to an alumni Facebook group that had very little activity or value.
I share this not out of bitterness, but in the hope that prospective students will ask the right questions before investing significant time, money, and energy into a graduate program.
