when

Exactly. Stay positive - SOMEONE'S got to get in, right? Anyone applying to Ryerson, feel free to send me a PM. Like toastytoast, I may be able to offer some insider info.

As far as I know, though I could be wrong, if they have any kind of funding, it counts (I'm not sure the university even provides any in-house funding to faculty, actually). In order to get any type of funding, the faculty member must apply, which is obviously onerous and time consuming. The ones who take the time to do this and manage to secure the most money for their own research (and, by extension, that of their students) are the ones who are generally given new students, and are also generally the ones who raise the university's profile the most.

As someone else said, this is absolutely true, and unfortunately funding is just one of several factors outside of your control. However, it's also true that if your POI hasn't had a new student in a few years or has few grad students currently in their lab, they may be a little higher on the list, but certainly funding is a big factor.

I'm definitely feeling this. First semester was an emotional roller coaster, but I made great friends and did well in my courses. Then the Winter break came and I realized what not being drowned in work feels like, and now I've spent the past two weeks staring at my thesis proposal and writing about one word a day before getting distracted. I have NO idea how it will get done at this point...

I love that! Synchronicity!

For those applying to Clinical, I've heard time and time again from faculty members that they don't want to hear that the reason an applicant wants to be in Clinical is because of his/her own psychological issues, as harsh as that sounds. I guess if someone ends up saying that, chances are they said it in their statement of interest already, but just throwing that out there...

I'd say it's definitely a good sign. I don't know whether it changes between faculty members, but my belief is that they shortlist a number of candidates they're interested in and interview them all.

In case this brings you a bit of encouragement, I didn't get invited for Ryerson interviews last year till the very end of Jan and early Feb. POIs do their interviews on different timelines, so just because some have started interviewing doesn't mean they all have. stay positive!

I think previous posters have given some very valuable advice, so I will only echo that I think your application is very, very strong, and also add that the feedback I've personally received about GREs is that they generally work to boost a poorer application, so are not weighed too heavily for strong applications (notwithstanding rigid, formal cutoffs). Especially if you have good grades in statistics courses, which it seems likely you do, GRE quant is less important given that stats courses cover the quantitative skills that you will actually be putting into practice. Still, if you have the time, motivation and funds, re-sitting the GRE cannot hurt. As for fit, I am also a little older and married, and I applied to only two schools because I was limited geographically, therefore fit was a little less important to me. My rationalization is that as long as I end up doing something that I think I will enjoy in some way and get on with my supervisor, I'm happy, and it's only for a limited period of time - I am not looking for a life partner! I also believe that there is a lot of flexibility in terms of shaping research directions, and I think at least my faculty are supportive of that. Good luck, stay positive (because you have reason to be), and let that come through in your interviews.

Ah, that sucks. I had a stupid site I created when I was really young and the internet first became popular - it had some very embarrassing content literally from my 12-year-old self, and then of course I forgot about it, the host site changed ownership, I long forgot my logins and passwords, and it was all Googleable for the longest time. I eventually wrote to them again and again, explaining my situation, and after a while it disappeared. But this IS a huge issue - there are lots of people who have info out about them that they have absolutely no control over. I think that if it's a real problem, the options are to contact the host of the site and explain the problem, or invest in some search engine optimization tools that help bury that site in search results.

If someone has a pretty common name and it's fairly clear that a lot of search results are not about them, then I'm sure that's okay. The prof did talk about a student she had who shared a fairly uncommon name with someone who had started posting all sorts of weird stuff on the internet, and her advice (for professional purposes) was to create a LinkedIn profile that made clear who the student was (professionally speaking, of course) as well other profiles that this other person had but that were professional and/or neutral so that it was easy to identify which was the trainee psychologist and which was the political propaganda espouser. From what I can remember, these are things like having a wedding photo or children as a profile picture (think of clients struggling with relationships/parenthood seeing their would-be therapist happily married/parenting), photos of luxurious excursions (think of clients from lower socio-economic backgrounds who may presume you can't possibly relate to them) etc. These are not necessarily bad things, apparently, just things we should be aware of as clinicians and when thinking about how we wish to present ourselves. There are similar issues with what kind of things to furnish your office with, e.g. family photos. And other than the example of the shared name with another person who posts questionable things online, the prof's advice was to have as little personal information available about yourself as possible (with the exception of professional sites such as LinkedIn, as long as their content works in your favour).

I am already in grad school, but this issue just popped into my mind so I thought I'd share it as a thread in case it helps others or is something that not everyone has thought about. I've always been quite conscious of and conservative with what I put "out there" about myself on the internet and I always suspected that POIs might look for information about me online, but I was still surprised when our program head explicitly raised this exact issue with us at the beginning of term. The point was to draw our attention to how we present ourselves publicly when we are clinicians, and to be aware that this includes our online presence. She had thoroughly Googled each of us prior to class, and found that most of us had some information about us online that a potential client may be wary of (nothing scandalous or worthy of compromising our position in grad school, but simply information that some clients may be sensitive to or that presents a less professional side). She also told us that she and pretty much every other faculty member she knows Googles applicants and uses the information gleaned to make judgments that are otherwise difficult to make when so many applicants seem great on paper. There were many stories about students whose Twitter feeds were combative or whose Facebook posts complaining about their undergrad institution or former professors were public. I'm sure most people here have thought about this, but in case it helps a few of you, be aware of what's out there about you online!

Your application definitely looks strong! I wonder about GREs, but assuming those are good too, I'd say you have a very good chance. Good luck!

Just wanted to echo the previous posts. Sounds like a strong app to me. Good luck!

I applied to two last year and thank goodness I got admitted because it was enough hard work applying for two! I admire those who apply to many more. And the reason it was so limited was because I'm tethered to one city.

I'm not sure this is as common as is suggested. In any case, it wouldn't really bother me. I'm sure only trusted, senior students are given such a responsibility. I know one faculty member at my school who asks one of her upper year PhD students to also interview candidates, and I know that student is definitely professional and capable enough to provide a fair and useful evaluation from her own perspective.

Agreed - I got in during first application season and having applied to only two schools. I feel extremely lucky, though.

I am taking the hardest psychopathology course known to man. We've had to memorize diagnostic criteria for 24 DSM-5 disorders, the changes from DSM-IV for each, the reasons for the changes, the reasons for the non-changes, and theories underlying the disorders. And this is just one of the many equally burdensome and anxiety-inducing parts of the course. All the other courses are fine, however, and the good thing is that all upper year students say that things can only get better from now on. Sigh.

If it makes you feel better, last year I took the GRE one day closer to the deadline than you, and everything was fine. I did call the departments just in case, and they all said it would be no problem at all even if they get the scores a few days late. Good luck!

I know a place if you're willing to come to Canada

I would give it a few days into the next week and then give him/her a call. Someone in the department may be able to reveal what's going on. If all else fails, find the next person who knows you best and explain your situation. They might be able to embellish a little bit if you convince them of your plight and provide them with lots of information about you that they can at least talk about. Is/are your other LOR/s strong?

My understanding is that every student receives around $20k in funding.

Just echoing what the other posters said - your chances look good and maybe focus more on fit rather than tier. In my opinion the most important things about a program are whether they have supervisors with complementary research interests, decent funding (both what the school offers you and what your supervisor gets, as it can affect the research resources you have access to) and matching statistics for internship. By the way, I see you're applying to some schools in Toronto. Maybe I ask why you're not also considering Ryerson?

I can't speak to the MA first vs. PhD route, as I'm in Canada and here almost all clinical programs have the MA built into the PhD, but maybe a US poster can better advise. As for your GPA, I personally think you could still stand a good chance if you do extremely well in your courses from now on. I don't know how realistic it would be to bring your GPA up to the minimum admission level, but if you could do that, then I don't think your past will be a complete deal-breaker. I say this because, although schools will look at your entire transcript, most of them generally care most about your cumulative GPA and past 2 years of study. If both of these look good, you're still in for a chance. Of course, I would boost the rest of your application in any other way possible, meaning great letters of recommendation, a strong personal statement/statement of purpose, good GREs and decent research experience (with clinical experience in the form of volunteering also being an asset). One word of caution I would give you (based solely on the number one thing that our graduate program administrator said an application should never do, and not my personal opinion) is to not give your own psychological troubles as the reason for your interest in clinical psychology.

1. In your statement of interest, I would make clear that you know the POI's research well, articulate why you are interested in it and what exactly you would be interested in researching further (and why). Even without research experience, this should show that you are knowledgable and interested beyond just a superficial level. 2. I think you definitely have a chance. Not all successful applicants have clinical research experience, and a lot have even less actual clinical experience than you. My only concern is that you didn't write an undergraduate thesis (from what I can gather), whereas most applicants will have, but that does not put you out of the running by any means. The rest of your assets are good. Again, study your areas of interest well (especially your POI's work, but definitely other research in the area in order to gain a greater depth of knowledge) and convey this knowledge in your statement of interest and potential interviews. Also make sure that the LORs you have are the strongest they can possibly be i.e. tactfully ask them if they are able to give you a STRONG letter (most people will be honest here), and if not, try to find others. 3. Sure, send me your materials and I can try to take a look at them. Other than all this, keep a lookout for labs that are more in line with your interests. The experience you are getting in your current lab is not bad at all - even if you're not actually doing anything yet, it's more experience on your CV visually, though obviously try to get as involved as possible. Wherever you are, push your involvement and if you're involved enough and get to know your lab director and colleagues, you can broach the subject of being an author on a paper or poster. Should you not get into a clinical program this year, it would be a great thing to have your name on any kind of paper or poster. I've seen many RAs come and go from labs, but the ones that end up making the most of their experience in terms of helping them in the future are the ones that are always visible and reliable, take time to get to know the lab director/grad students and their work, and express their interests in involvement with more than just a "use me for anything" attitude. There is a LOT of advantage in getting to know people and making connections, so do your best to get your name out there in a good way. Connections make an enormous difference, in my opinion, and sometimes get overlooked because it's not one of these things that can be created out of nowhere according to some hard and fast rules.