Nationwide, the student debt crisis has been worsening, exacerbated by gradual changes to higher education funding since the 1980s. Recent studies (e.g., Kurz, Li, & Vine, 2018) have demonstrated that Millennials are the most educated, most student loan-indebted, and poorest (in income and wealth) generation to date. Doran, Kraha, Marks, Ameen, and El-Ghoroury (2016) similarly demonstrated that student loan debt in graduate psychology is substantial. However, Doran and colleagues' results diverged from the extant literature in observing no between-groups demographic differences in borrowing. Thus, first, the present study sought to provide an updated view of student loan debt in graduate psychology education, and to examine changes in student loan borrowing over time. Second, we sought to expand understanding from a focus solely on cumulative debt to include financial stressors. Finally, we sought to address the discrepancies between Doran and colleagues' study and the extant literature by examining whether psychology trainees and professionals from marginalized backgrounds are disproportionately affected by student loan debt and financial stressors. Consistent with most extant literature and contrary to Doran and colleagues, Black/African American participants and participants with lower socioeconomic status reported borrowing more, though no differences were observed by sex. Participants with lower socioeconomic status, as well as students and early career psychologists (those who received their doctorates within the last 10 years), also reported greater financial distress, and greater impacts on their personal and professional lives. Finally, student loan borrowing was shown to increase over time, even adjusting for inflation. Results and implications will be discussed.

Student loan debt associated with doctoral psychology education is a serious problem, and the recent study by Doran, Kraha, Marks, Ameen, and El-Ghoroury (2016) represents an important step in recognizing the significant student loan burden that professional psychology students and early career psychologists (ECPs) are facing. Although there were some differences by degree program and type, students across subfields and degrees were burdened with high levels of debt (Doran et al., 2016). Notably, significant dispersion was evidenced across subfields and degree types, making it difficult to generalize from the reported averages. Additionally, they did not collect data on socioeconomic status (SES), and while they noted observing no significant between-group differences by race and gender, we demonstrate how such between-group differences may have been obfuscated. Available data suggest that between-group differences do exist by race, gender, SES, and further by intersectional marginalized identities (e.g., higher borrowing by women of color than White women). We suggest that taking an equity, rather than equality, approach to student funding may ameliorate disparities in student loan borrowing. Through this commentary, we aim to (a) further clarify what student debt loads mean for individuals on a monthly basis; (b) use existing data to highlight disparities in student loan distribution, that is, that women, students of color, and students from lower SES backgrounds generally borrow more to finance their education; (c) address the implications of student loan disparities for the field of psychology; and (d) describe and recommend aspiring to an equity, rather than an equality, approach to distribution of resources.

College student activism has long been a staple of campus life, often driven by the sociopolitical issues of the time. In response to recent and continuous violent deaths of members of the Black community, rising instances of overt racism, and perceived silence among our institutes and professional groups, a multiinstitutional and diverse collective of psychology graduate student leaders, Grad Students Talk (GST) came together to engage psychology graduate students nationally in discussions related to these events. GST facilitated a series of teleconference calls, and one large in-person conference discussion, for psychology graduate students to discuss and process their reactions to acts of racial injustice. Additionally, GST headed "First, Do No Harm," an advocacy campaign against psychologists' involvement in torture, which received mention in national media. The purpose of the current paper is to describe the successes of our student collective, to understand the challenges GST faced in the context of activism within higher education, and to provide recommendations to professionals in higher education to support student activism initiatives. Data from a collaborative autoethnographic qualitative approach highlighted a number of important themes that emerged for researcher-participants, including lack of perceived safety, observed silence from institutions and professional groups, and the important roles of universality and instillation of hope. We conclude the present discourse with a synthesis of the systemic challenges student activists face, and recommendations for change.

No abstract

During early adolescence, individuals engage in exploring educational opportunities, beginning to develop a career identity, contemplate future careers, and make tentative career decisions. Choices made during this period may have a strong effect on one's academic and career future, and in many countries young adolescents must make important and sometimes final academic and career choices that impact the rest of their lives. Despite this, research on early adolescence is severely lacking. To address this gap, a validation study of the Childhood Career Development Scale was conducted with a young adolescent Italian sample. Consistent with previous research with younger samples, support was found for an eight factor structure of the CCDS. Convergent validity was supported by positive associations with exploration, students' ideas, attitudes and behaviors regarding their academic and career future, and career self-efficacy. These findings support Super's (1990) dimensional model of childhood career development through early adolescence as originally theorized.