The gap between clinical research and practice is a major challenge facing marriage and family therapy (MFT) training programs. Until now, the answer to bridge this gap has primarily been the Boulder Scientist-Practitioner Model. Although realistic for doctoral students, it may not be a good fit for MFT master’s students who have primarily clinical career ambitions—which we believe is a legitimate and positive career choice. The following article articulates a “research informed” perspective as opposed to the scientist-practitioner framework as a research-training model for clinically oriented MFT master’s programs. After articulating the similarities and differences between these two approaches, the authors outline 10 practical ideas to integrate research into programs that desire to remain clinical in focus, but also research informed.