We surveyed the graduate training and employment experiences of 177 current students and 152 recent graduates from 39 psychology programs. Of interest were differences among applied social, community and community-clinical programs. Results suggested that these training programs represented a continuum of research, community, and clinical interests. Applied social and community programs had a stronger community and research emphasis, whereas community-clinical programs had a stronger orientation toward clinical skills. Similarly, the job skills used by recent graduates suggested that persons from applied social programs went into administrative and organizational consulting jobs, graduates of community-clinical programs were employed in areas demanding more human services skills, and community graduates found jobs requiring the use of research skills.To understand the breadth of community psychology, one needs to consider its history and examine both the education of its future scholars and their subsequent employment experiences. The roles and functions of community psychologists have evolved continuously since the historic Swampscott Conference of 1965 (Bennett et al, 1966) and the formation of the Division of Community Psychology within the American Psychological Association (APA; Barton, Andrulis, Grove, & Aponte, 1976). Subsequent conferences in Austin (Iscoe & Spielberger, 1970), Vail (Korman, 1974), and Tampa (Stenmark, 1977 have each resulted in a position paper reformulating the mission of community psychology. Most recently, in South Carolina, a conference was held to discuss graduate training in community psychology (Elias, Godin, & Dalton, 1987;Mavis, Feis, Davidson, & Weth, 1988). CAROLYN L. FEIS received her PhD in ecological psychology from Michigan State University in 1990. She is currently a social science analyst in the Program Evaluation and Methodology Division of the U.S. General Accounting Office. The views and opinions expressed herein do not reflect the position of the General Accounting Office. BRIAN E. MAVIS received his PhD in ecological psychology from Michigan State University in 1988. He is currently with the Department of Psychiatry at Michigan State University in the evaluation of substance abuse treatment programs and health promotion programs. Jo E. WETH received her MA in ecological psychology from Michigan State University in 1987. She is currently the assistant director of the Native American Fellows Program at Michigan State University and a doctoral student in ecological psychology and urban studies at Michigan State University. WILLIAM S. DAVIDSON II received his PhD in psychology from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, in 1976. He is a professor of psychology and the chair of the Ecological Psychology Program at Michigan State University. THE AUTHORS ACKNOWLEDGE the support of the Council of Community Psychology Program Directors in completing this research.

No abstract