Clinpsyc01

On top of Vanier, it’s also common for people to get the CGS, but downgrade to the fellowship because they’re in the US. In that case, someone with the fellowship is upgrade to CGS and someone on the waitlist will get the fellowship.

I have similar concerns. My topic is mostly social, but uses methods that are more common in health/science, and definitely has applications for these fields. Combined with publications and presentations that are obviously health-focused, I wonder if I came across as just applying to SSHRC because it’s easier than CIHR (even though I had SSHRC CGS-M). But oh well. I’ll try again in the fall with a stronger application.

I think NSERC and CIHR do it like that, or similarly. There’s absolutely no reason why SSHRC can’t do the same thing. It bothers me that they have so little consideration for applicants.

Great... my department had a very strong group of applicants this year so I really don’t know where I stand. I imagine it hurts your application to be lower ranked.

Do the reviewers see our internal ranking or is that just used to determine who is sent to the national competition?

I got a similar email from my grad awards officer about a week ago, but it looked like it was sent to all current SSHRC holders (I have an MA SSHRC this year).

Anything to avoid my thesis ?

They tweeted at 12:41pm EST last year. Not that I just combed through a years worth of tweets or anything...

I applied the fall after I finished undergrad. I was accepted at 22 and started soon after turning 23. I kind of wish I had waited longer, and my other classmates in the 22-24ish range felt similarly. Not to say that younger students are immature or unprepared, I just feel that I lack perspective and experience outside of academia compared to some.

I heard the same thing. The application packages were probably delayed in getting to Ottawa. If only SSHRC would switch to online applications/notification like CIHR and NSERC have been doing for years...

As long as your new research still falls under SSHRC’s mandate, you’re fine. I don’t think you even need to notify SSHRC. There’s no expectation that you’ll complete your proposed study since they know you likely applied to many schools. I know someone who wrote their SSHRC proposal on adult relationships but their MA thesis is on cognitive development and they haven’t had any issues.

I narrowed down my interests by doing research. I joined a lab that sounded interesting to me, and as I became more familiar with the topics and methodologies within that area, I was able to define my interests. That’s not to say that my particular research area is my only interest, or that I don’t find other topics equally interesting. But I find it harder to come up with research questions in other areas because I don’t know the theory or methods.

The clinical committee met last week, so I would expect offers to go out very soon (some offers may have been made already). I know a lot of grad students in that program and the time between their interviews and admission varied a lot, so don’t worry too much if you haven’t heard yet.

Normally that is how it works. There can also be outside factors involved that have nothing to do with you. Sometimes students are waitlisted depending on funding (maybe the program can only accept you if you get CGS-M, or if you supervisor gets a grant renewed, etc.). And sometimes students are waitlisted because their potential supervisor isn’t high on the list to accept students. For example, maybe a program can accept 7 students and your POI is #8 on the priority list, so their ability to take a student is dependent on someone else’s offer being rejected.

This is a late response, but I wanted to reply as someone working with an advisor who is widely descrived to be harsh and demanding. My experience has not matched others’ expectations, and I am happy with my choice. Sometimes these descriptions are true, and there certainly are too many bad grad advisors out there. But sometimes students have a bad experience and spread rumours that are not necessarily accurate. It’s important to listen to what others in the lab say about him/her, but also consider how your interactions with this advisor felt and what you need from an advisor. Did you feel comfortable when speaking with them? Can you handle honest and sometimes critical feedback? Do you prefer to have a warm, fuzzy relationship with your advisor?

I know many people who have gone into clinical programs after completing an experimental MA. It’s a great chance to get more research experience and show you can do grad coursework. However, you’d most likely have to apply to the clinical MA rather than PhD because of the clinical coursework and practicum (but you might get credit for stats courses, etc.). Most programs reserve PhD slots for their own MA students and don’t accept external applicants. There are a few exceptions, of course.

I wanted to second the advice about online vs. in-person programs. I’ve heard that many programs look down on online degrees (whether or not it’s deserved) and that MA program might actually hurt your chances for a PhD. Are there any other nearby MA programs in psychology? You might be able to do research that’s relevant and applicable to your interests even if not specifically forensic.

I don’t believe my departmen posts a list of faculty accepting students, but I was interviewed by a non-core member who didn’t mention to me that others had priority over him in accepting students. It was only after I started the program (with a different, core faculty supervisor) that I learned this. If the department in question includes adjunct faculty as accepting new students, I would guess they’re probably more open to them supervising students.

In my department, adjunct faculty normally follow the same interview process, but only get to accept students if there are spots available after the core faculty make their offers. It is a larger department though, and there are usually more than enough core faculty to fill the cohort- other departments likely differ.

I think the concern about “exploring other programs” is more relevant when undergrads in the lab want to continue there for grad school rather than considering other options. Some programs also have regulations about accepting their own former undergrads (e.g., prohibited completely, only accepting a limited number, etc.). However, I do know many labs that have accepted their former RA/coordinators, so working in the lab probably isn’t an issue for most programs.

I agree with the others that it might be best to start with the graduate admissions coordinators! If you didn’t interview, there’s a chance that the POIs may not have seen your application (e.g. some schools screen applications and only pass on a certain number to faculty) or may only have generic advice to give.

Don’t worry about asking her, it’s her job. I think it would be very unusual for a grad student to submit a paper without having their research advisor revise it.

I know a few people who did MSc in counselling at Canadian schools (McGill, Alberta, Western) and went on to do clinical PhDs. None of them applied to counselling with the intention of going into clinical psych, though. They all planned on doing counselling PhDs initially, but found it was not a good fit for them.

I agree that it’s probably the number of direct applicants (vs. those applying through a university). My institution alone forwarded has a quota of 50 to forward to the national competition (not even a major university), so there’s no way 236 is the total amount.

I had a couple of interviews like that. It’s intense, but at least there’s no time to be nervous!