Love3

Verbal: 148 (32nd)
Quantitative: 152 (48th)
Writing: 4.0 (56th)
I am horrible standardized test taker but I'm an excellent student. I was nervous about applying to PhD programs but I went for it anyway because I have a lot of hands-on experience and research experience. I also recieved excellent letters of recommendations and was told my statement of purpose was really good. I don't know how bad you did but I would just make sure (1) the scores are above the cut-off because even if the rest of your application is great, they will not look at it. (2) the rest of your application is amazing. The program may look past your scores if they can see that you have potential from all of your experiences and recommendations. (3) It also depends on the type of PhD program you are applying to. Some are more competitive than others. 
I performed horribly on the GREs. I applied to 9 schools. I received 6 interviews and 2 acceptances so far. 
 
 
 

Verbal: 148 (32nd)
Quantitative: 152 (48th)
Writing: 4.0 (56th)
I am horrible standardized test taker but I'm an excellent student. I was nervous about applying to PhD programs but I went for it anyway because I have a lot of hands-on experience and research experience. I also recieved excellent letters of recommendations and was told my statement of purpose was really good. I don't know how bad you did but I would just make sure (1) the scores are above the cut-off because even if the rest of your application is great, they will not look at it. (2) the rest of your application is amazing. The program may look past your scores if they can see that you have potential from all of your experiences and recommendations. (3) It also depends on the type of PhD program you are applying to. Some are more competitive than others. 
I performed horribly on the GREs. I applied to 9 schools. I received 6 interviews and 2 acceptances so far. 
 
 
 

Verbal: 148 (32nd)
Quantitative: 152 (48th)
Writing: 4.0 (56th)
I am horrible standardized test taker but I'm an excellent student. I was nervous about applying to PhD programs but I went for it anyway because I have a lot of hands-on experience and research experience. I also recieved excellent letters of recommendations and was told my statement of purpose was really good. I don't know how bad you did but I would just make sure (1) the scores are above the cut-off because even if the rest of your application is great, they will not look at it. (2) the rest of your application is amazing. The program may look past your scores if they can see that you have potential from all of your experiences and recommendations. (3) It also depends on the type of PhD program you are applying to. Some are more competitive than others. 
I performed horribly on the GREs. I applied to 9 schools. I received 6 interviews and 2 acceptances so far. 
 
 
 

Verbal: 148 (32nd)
Quantitative: 152 (48th)
Writing: 4.0 (56th)
I am horrible standardized test taker but I'm an excellent student. I was nervous about applying to PhD programs but I went for it anyway because I have a lot of hands-on experience and research experience. I also recieved excellent letters of recommendations and was told my statement of purpose was really good. I don't know how bad you did but I would just make sure (1) the scores are above the cut-off because even if the rest of your application is great, they will not look at it. (2) the rest of your application is amazing. The program may look past your scores if they can see that you have potential from all of your experiences and recommendations. (3) It also depends on the type of PhD program you are applying to. Some are more competitive than others. 
I performed horribly on the GREs. I applied to 9 schools. I received 6 interviews and 2 acceptances so far. 
 
 
 

Did you end up going to Lehigh? If so please PM me. 
 
I applied to clinical and school PhD programs. For school psych I have interviews at Tulane and Lehigh 
 
 

This is likely your problem. No matter how competitive of an applicant you are, your best shot for clinical PhD acceptances is applying to at least 12-15 schools with no geographic limitations. All of the traditional advice regarding ways to improve your application may not be enough to overcome this hurdle, unfortunately. Your reasons for limiting yourself this way are certainly understandable, but I haven't seen anyone who limited their applications like this have success. Best of luck in whatever you decide to do.

School Psychology

Just received an invite to interview at LSU!!!!!!

Congratulations! You can look at school psych posts in previous years. Some students shared the questions you may encounter at interviews. They are pretty comprehensive, covering different areas.
The interviews may include a combination of an informal social event the night before the interview, introduction to the program, individual/group interviews with multiple professors, interviews with current grad students and/or a school tour. It should give you not only what your POI is like but also a sense of the whole community. 

Just be honest in the most sincere way possible. If the program's intentions are pure and they really want your opinion to improve their program, then your honesty shouldn't burn any bridges.
I recently had a university ask me why I didn't chose to attend their program. I was honest yet respectful. The program director actually asked me to go in-depth with one of the reason, we talked about it and she said thank you and wished me luck on my future endeavors. 
Take the politics out of it and be honest. If your sincere honesty burns a bridge, then the program probably isn't a program that you want to have connections with anyway. 

I understand @Emely Moreta's point but I don't agree. I think it's based on your goals and the mission of the program. I would check to see if the program has a big emphasis on research. I think most schools that are research based are supposed to have the research-scientist model but I've came across some programs that have a scientist-practioner model and focus more on the scientist part. Like you said a scientist-practitioner model is supposed to be a balance of research and applied experiences so I don't think it's anything wrong with maintaining that balance if you want it.
Also, a PhD in clinical psych doesn't always lead to a research career. A good percentage of people with those degrees don't end up doing much research at all after graduation. Research is important so you should have the experience and know how to do it well but I think it's more important to tailor what you emphasize the most based on your future career. Your advisor should be supportive in helping you create the path that will best suite your needs while helping you fulfill the requirements of the program as well. I'm going into my PhD program hoping to get an even balance of research and clinical/school training as well but in school psych. My advisor is very supportive of this.
The PhD vs. PsyD comparison isn't always as clear cut as people make it. PhD's aren't just for research and you can have PhD and want a research or clinical career. That's the beauty of having a degree that'll train you for multiple careers vs. having a PsyD that mainly focus on the applied experiences. 

Hi I'm from Philadelphia so I wanted to give you some insight! $1400 is not the average price of apartments. Living around UPenn will definitely cost you.  You can find some for cheaper that are still in decent neighborhoods (Mt. Airy, West Oak Lane) as stated above. I just want to caution you about living in the suburbs for two reasons. Philadelphia has horrible traffic and you may have to pay double taxes (taxes for where you work-Philadelphia and taxes where you live. 
Let me know if you have any questions! 

Hi I'm from Philadelphia so I wanted to give you some insight! $1400 is not the average price of apartments. Living around UPenn will definitely cost you.  You can find some for cheaper that are still in decent neighborhoods (Mt. Airy, West Oak Lane) as stated above. I just want to caution you about living in the suburbs for two reasons. Philadelphia has horrible traffic and you may have to pay double taxes (taxes for where you work-Philadelphia and taxes where you live. 
Let me know if you have any questions! 

I'm technically first generation but not really. My mom started her associates a year after I started undergrad. My grandparents worked straight out of high school. My uncle just got his PhD two years ago and my aunt has her MBA. Although all of my family is extremely supportive, my aunt and uncle are my go-to for anything grad school related. My aunt didn't get me into school but she's expanded my network and connected me with other professionals who have gone through the school psychology phD process. In a way, I had assistance because I knew how to prepare for the process and have insight of the field and program but I still had to do most of the work and get myself into school. 

Just be honest in the most sincere way possible. If the program's intentions are pure and they really want your opinion to improve their program, then your honesty shouldn't burn any bridges.
I recently had a university ask me why I didn't chose to attend their program. I was honest yet respectful. The program director actually asked me to go in-depth with one of the reason, we talked about it and she said thank you and wished me luck on my future endeavors. 
Take the politics out of it and be honest. If your sincere honesty burns a bridge, then the program probably isn't a program that you want to have connections with anyway. 

Just be honest in the most sincere way possible. If the program's intentions are pure and they really want your opinion to improve their program, then your honesty shouldn't burn any bridges.
I recently had a university ask me why I didn't chose to attend their program. I was honest yet respectful. The program director actually asked me to go in-depth with one of the reason, we talked about it and she said thank you and wished me luck on my future endeavors. 
Take the politics out of it and be honest. If your sincere honesty burns a bridge, then the program probably isn't a program that you want to have connections with anyway. 

I understand @Emely Moreta's point but I don't agree. I think it's based on your goals and the mission of the program. I would check to see if the program has a big emphasis on research. I think most schools that are research based are supposed to have the research-scientist model but I've came across some programs that have a scientist-practioner model and focus more on the scientist part. Like you said a scientist-practitioner model is supposed to be a balance of research and applied experiences so I don't think it's anything wrong with maintaining that balance if you want it.
Also, a PhD in clinical psych doesn't always lead to a research career. A good percentage of people with those degrees don't end up doing much research at all after graduation. Research is important so you should have the experience and know how to do it well but I think it's more important to tailor what you emphasize the most based on your future career. Your advisor should be supportive in helping you create the path that will best suite your needs while helping you fulfill the requirements of the program as well. I'm going into my PhD program hoping to get an even balance of research and clinical/school training as well but in school psych. My advisor is very supportive of this.
The PhD vs. PsyD comparison isn't always as clear cut as people make it. PhD's aren't just for research and you can have PhD and want a research or clinical career. That's the beauty of having a degree that'll train you for multiple careers vs. having a PsyD that mainly focus on the applied experiences. 

Same.
There's no guarantee that you'll get into any program next year, even if you improve your application. Take the offer and run!

Imagine going on a first date and telling the person that you chose to date them over someone else that most people would consider more attractive. Is there any way that you can see that being interpreted positively? It's one thing if they ask, but I would not volunteer this information and I don't think it'll go over well if you do. 

I agree with number 4. Don't stress about the field so much. It's more about a person who can speak to your ability to succeed in school. I'm going for school psych: one of my recommenders was my psych thesis advisor, one of my recommenders was my supervisor when I worked in an autistic support classroom and my last was my sociology professor. Although sociology has little to do with school psych, I chose her because I took her for two classes in which I did extremely well in and I was actively involved in the classes. I trusted her to write a solid recommendation over other professors or supervisors that were closer to my field of choice. 

In your case, I would try to get two letters from professors and one from the speech language pathologist who you did your clinical hours with. You may be surprised by how well your professors remember them. Either way, you should offer to send them any materials they may need, including your letter of application, personal statement, CV, previous papers/assignments, etc. Good luck!

Verbal: 148 (32nd)
Quantitative: 152 (48th)
Writing: 4.0 (56th)
I am horrible standardized test taker but I'm an excellent student. I was nervous about applying to PhD programs but I went for it anyway because I have a lot of hands-on experience and research experience. I also recieved excellent letters of recommendations and was told my statement of purpose was really good. I don't know how bad you did but I would just make sure (1) the scores are above the cut-off because even if the rest of your application is great, they will not look at it. (2) the rest of your application is amazing. The program may look past your scores if they can see that you have potential from all of your experiences and recommendations. (3) It also depends on the type of PhD program you are applying to. Some are more competitive than others. 
I performed horribly on the GREs. I applied to 9 schools. I received 6 interviews and 2 acceptances so far. 
 
 
 

There are a lot of academics out there who don't have the best social skills. There are plenty professors who can diplomatically tell a prospective student that they don't have funding/space* and think you should join another research group. But to me this sounds like a professor who doesn't really want you to join their group but isn't managing to give you an outright rejection. He's stalling for time ("go away and think about this"), bringing up multiple concerns (funding, hobbies, do you know what you're getting in to). I mean, accepting someone into a research group isn't difficult ("You want to join our lab? Great! Let's meet next week to talk about projects."). 
It's like when someone is trying to dump you: "I don't know if I want a serious relationship," is a face-saving way of saying "I don't want a serious relationship with you." Except in this case "Are you sure you want to do a PhD in my lab?" could well be a way of saying "I'm not sure that I want you to do a PhD in my lab."
 
 
* Sometimes academics use a concern about funding as a way of rejecting someone they feel would be a bad fit personality for their group. Because you can't argue with a lack of funding in the same way you could argue about "motivation" and "fit", and it avoids hurting the grad student. 

@Love3 it really depends on funding. Right now it's between Arizona and USF, and I've already received a nice funding offer from Arizona. I haven't heard from USF yet. 

I want to add a few things:
1. Maybe it does vary from field to field, but when people in my field (whether it's grad students, postdocs, or faculty member) says that a person is "competitive" for something, it doesn't mean that they have a good chance of winning that thing. For most people, when we say "competitive", it means that it is worth your time and money to apply for it. I would say that if something has a 10% selection rate, I would call everyone in the top 30% "competitive". Note that this means a lot more "competitive" people get rejected than accepted. 
2. Grad school admissions are not just a function of how competitive you are or how qualified you are. They don't just set a qualification threshold and take people above that. They don't just rank people by competitiveness and take the top chunk. There are tons of unknown factors and factors you cannot control that goes into the decision making process. For example, there may be extra funding for subfield X in one year, so they take more students in subfield X. This means that if the top 5 students applying are in Subfield Y but they only have 2 spots for Subfield Y, then maybe only students ranked #1 and #2 would get in, students ranked #3-#5 would get rejected, but students ranked #6 or below might still get in because they are meeting other needs. Competitiveness is just one factor in admissions.
3. Profs tend to be encouraging and will generally overstate how good you are. Part of it is because a lot of people don't like saying bad things to their students. But another reason is that overstating your value does a lot less harm than understating your value. No professor wants to be the prof that said a negative thing and discouraged an otherwise good applicant from applying. If they say great things about you to you and you don't get in, well that sucks but it's not as bad as you passing up on an opportunity that would have been great for you had you not been discouraged. I do this too---for the undergrads I've supervised, if they ask if they have a chance at X, I always phrase it in the positive.
4. To the statements that "if you don't change your application, the results won't change", I have to both agree and disagree. I'll start with agreement here: Overall, the competitiveness of the applicant pool does not change very much from year to year. So, if you are approximately in the 80th percentile of applicants this year, you will probably be similarly ranked next year. In addition, if you reapply to the same school with the same profile, you will probably get a similar result.
5. However, I disagree that all your results will be the same if you reapplied with the same profile. Again, maybe this varies from field to field, but a lot of factors that you cannot control (see #2 above). I've noticed this with my program admissions as well. In some years, we make 8-10 offers. In other years, we've only made 4 offers (especially after a big government funding cut). This means it's likely that a student who got accepted in the year with 8-10 offers might not have been accepted in the year with 4 offers (or vice-versa, a student that got rejected in the year with 4 offers might get accepted if they reapplied in a year with 8-10 offers). Also, it feels like we tend to accept students with a certain goal each year (e.g. one prof needs more students, or we want to expand a subfield). So, if you happen to be applying in the subfield we're not looking for, you have to be extra good to be accepted.