Clinapp2017

Pros and cons both to both. Early = more productive and ambitious because they need to secure tenure, but less known in the field. Late = more well known, but may be less intrinsically productive because they’ve been tenured for a while. 

In my experience, cost/fit should pretty much be a statistical tie. Looks like the n=25 data so far is supporting that. You don't want to be in absolute poverty or massive debt for 5+ years. However, you also don't want an advisor who will make your life a living hell for grad school and beyond (and hopefully you want/get an amazing advisor). 
 
It'll vary from person to person, but it makes sense that these two responses so far encapsulate 80% of the total responses for the top choice. The differences in curriculum between the top 50 programs in each discipline is frankly negligible because of APA restrictions (at least for clinical, in my opinion). Location/culture really come into play when strong personal variables need to be account for (e.g., geographic restriction b/c of partner with a job, wanting to live in a more libral/progressive area if LGBTQIA+, etc.).

By definition, 400 of the internships that students “matched to” aren’t accredited. Given that going to un accredited internship is a huge barrier to licensure and job prospects, I wouldn’t be as far sweeping by saying the number of spots exceeds the demand. This is extremely misleading. 

By definition, 400 of the internships that students “matched to” aren’t accredited. Given that going to un accredited internship is a huge barrier to licensure and job prospects, I wouldn’t be as far sweeping by saying the number of spots exceeds the demand. This is extremely misleading. 

I’d email someone at Clemson or their grad office to ask about it. 

Hmmmm... that is tough. I would maybe hold off until early-to-mid March. It sounds like you are in a good place with some good acceptances already on the table, but it is challenging to navigate the situation you are in. I would not show your cards just yet, to use a poker term.  

How exactly is a developmental program granting licensure?

Pros and cons both to both. Early = more productive and ambitious because they need to secure tenure, but less known in the field. Late = more well known, but may be less intrinsically productive because they’ve been tenured for a while. 

Classism in graduate school is a topic that has been discussed ad-noseum. It sucks, but being from higher SES probably helps you get in to grad school and stay there (not just in psychology). 
 
Honestly,  if an applicant showed up to the program I presently attend for an interview wearing anything less than business casual, that is a HUGE red flag. Interviews are professional, and you should dress accordingly. It's not going to get any easier (at least in clinical)... wearing nothing less than business casual is an expectation of our year 2 practicum and many external practicums in our area. If you can't put on something professional to dazzle on interview day, I think that also has broader implications about how you may dress around patients. 
 
Not exactly sure why OP felt called to post this as a current applicant, but the point is nonetheless valid. 

Classism in graduate school is a topic that has been discussed ad-noseum. It sucks, but being from higher SES probably helps you get in to grad school and stay there (not just in psychology). 
 
Honestly,  if an applicant showed up to the program I presently attend for an interview wearing anything less than business casual, that is a HUGE red flag. Interviews are professional, and you should dress accordingly. It's not going to get any easier (at least in clinical)... wearing nothing less than business casual is an expectation of our year 2 practicum and many external practicums in our area. If you can't put on something professional to dazzle on interview day, I think that also has broader implications about how you may dress around patients. 
 
Not exactly sure why OP felt called to post this as a current applicant, but the point is nonetheless valid. 

My point was more that even for social psych I wouldn't go for a sweater and that there are a lot of choices between very formal and very casual (such as business casual). 

Classism in graduate school is a topic that has been discussed ad-noseum. It sucks, but being from higher SES probably helps you get in to grad school and stay there (not just in psychology). 
 
Honestly,  if an applicant showed up to the program I presently attend for an interview wearing anything less than business casual, that is a HUGE red flag. Interviews are professional, and you should dress accordingly. It's not going to get any easier (at least in clinical)... wearing nothing less than business casual is an expectation of our year 2 practicum and many external practicums in our area. If you can't put on something professional to dazzle on interview day, I think that also has broader implications about how you may dress around patients. 
 
Not exactly sure why OP felt called to post this as a current applicant, but the point is nonetheless valid. 

In my experience, cost/fit should pretty much be a statistical tie. Looks like the n=25 data so far is supporting that. You don't want to be in absolute poverty or massive debt for 5+ years. However, you also don't want an advisor who will make your life a living hell for grad school and beyond (and hopefully you want/get an amazing advisor). 
 
It'll vary from person to person, but it makes sense that these two responses so far encapsulate 80% of the total responses for the top choice. The differences in curriculum between the top 50 programs in each discipline is frankly negligible because of APA restrictions (at least for clinical, in my opinion). Location/culture really come into play when strong personal variables need to be account for (e.g., geographic restriction b/c of partner with a job, wanting to live in a more libral/progressive area if LGBTQIA+, etc.).

So last season I applied to 10 clinical programs and was extremely fortunate to interview at 7 of them. I presumed I was waitlisted at 5 of the 7, although I got offers from 2 of my top programs (and took the very generous offer from the top program - a very prestigious/competitive program). Like 8BitJourney, I noticed that after attending 2 of the interviews my anxiety went down immensely. Not everyone has the luxury/luck I might have had last season, but here's my general advice:
 
1) Like everyone says, do your homework about your POI. Be familiar with your POIs works from the last 5ish years, and any major pubs in the last decade. If your POI has grant funding, look up the grant on the NIH grant website and read the brief description to think about how your potential dissertation work can fit under your POI's work while being unique enough. If the POI has a good lab website, look over it carefully... from this you can get good information about what other grad students in the lab may be doing, as well as what the lab may like to do socially. (My POI actually mentioned to me a few weeks ago that she still remembers how excited I was about the lab culture and the things that they do -- information I gathered from the website.) 
 
2) Do your homework about the program as a whole. What is the training model like? What can you expect in practicum? If these things aren't clear, ask during the interview to show that you care about your training! Some programs have some kind of weird stuff going on that have pros/cons (like an in-house guaranteed internship: rare), so asking about things like that without sounding presumptuous is important. 
 
3) Re-read your personal statement. People will mention it to you and ask you to tell you your "story." They'll also ask you "why clinical psych (or insert XXXX program here)." This should hopefully be spelled out in your SOP if you wrote a good one, so re-reading it once or twice before an interview (perhaps on the plane ride before or something) is a good idea. 
 
4) The 2 days before you leave for an interview, pack your bag. As silly as it sounds, I almost forgot to do this once between the stress of back-to-back interviews and my undergrad classes and other commitments. Make sure you have a suit ready and some more nice casual attire for the informal dinners/parties. I'd also REALLY recommend getting a thank you card and a small trinket from where you are from for your grad student host (if you are staying with a grad student). The personalized touch can really go a far way in showing you are thankful to them for going out of their way to let you stay in their home. 
 
5) On interview day: don't get into a competition with other applicants, but do be social with them. There is no need to compare experiences. Even if someone appears to be far more qualified, they are not. You are all there for the same reason and on an equal playing field. The important thing is that you focus on doing your best and being yourself around the POI and the program.  
 
6) To your main question: just be ready to have a conversation about their work and be excited about it! Talk about how your interests align with what you've read. Usually nobody is going to ask intense method details unless a background in the methods (e.g., neuroimaging) is essential to the work they do. 
 
Anyways, I hope this helps! Always willing to talk over PM too if you have any questions.
 
Best of luck!
 
-J

I'm just going to put this here

For manuscript advancement, the only advancement that matters is in-revision to accepted. in-prep to submitted is nice, but it's no guarantee that it will become a paper. Accepted to published is usually just a formality. However, while I would certainly advise students to let the admissions committee know about this change if decisions have not yet been made, if you already received a decision (either a rejection or a waitlist) then I do not think this is not enough to make a difference.
The significance of an abstracted accepted for a presentation at a big conference depends on how conference abstracts are valued in your field. In my field, they don't have much value, so this is not worth notifying the admissions committee even prior to decisions. But I know that in some fields, conference presentations instead of publications are the valuable thing, so then the above advice applies.
Maybe. I have two thoughts about this. 1) It is not in the student's best interest to simply be a workhorse to boost the PI's reputation. Grad school is about training to become an independent scholar, not another "worker bee" in the PI's research hive. 2) I know many profs are reluctant to take on volunteers because of ethical reasons but also that many profs think of students as trainees that are a time demand rather than a time-saver due to the training and mentorship they would provide. Sometimes the limit is not that they don't have money to fund a student but they don't have time to mentor another student.
---
Ultimately, I think if you already received a negative decision from a particular school, the mature thing to do is to accept it and move on to another opportunity. Dealing with rejection sucks but it's a part of being in academia. It's especially sucky because most people only focus on their successes (see also: the "CV of failures"). But many very successful people now have dealt with rejection in the past (and probably even in the present). You may wish to apply to this school again in a future cycle (or for a future position) so demonstrating maturity and the ability to accept rejection is a good idea; trying to find a way to get in despite their decision will look desperate and reflect poorly on you.
Also, if a school does let someone have another shot because they pestered the profs enough, that wouldn't really be fair. As such, I doubt very many schools would be interested in reconsidering applications once they have made their decisions, barring extraordinary circumstances.

@21ny14 - this is a thing basically said by direct comments with the old DCT mentor when we talked about dos/don’ts when i applied. Current mentor and other faculty have made similar comments. The goal is to have applicants diversify training. Working with the same mentor for a very long time only narrows your perspective. Faculty want someone who will work hard, but also ultimately become their own researcher who the faculty can be proud about training. You also don’t want a trainee clone bc then said clone will compete with you for the same grants and stuff...

This is definitely not a good idea. Like @Timemachines said, doing this probaly makes you look desperate. 
 
From my experience, here’s three good times to email POIs:
1) pre Application: introduce yourself and see if they plan to take a student (if this info isn’t readily available online)
2) after receiving an interview invite: express your grattitude and share that you are excited to attend the interview (if you are going)
3) post-interview thank you: 1 day after your interview, send a kind thank you email specifying what you enjoyed about your visit and your conversations.
 
Other then that, I’d advise against. Profs get literally hundreds to thousands emails daily, so if you aren’t already on their radar, you doing this isn’t going to help and could hurt chances with them if you reapply in a later cycle. From my experience, POIs have strong memory for candidates they find particularly annoying  
 
 

So last season I applied to 10 clinical programs and was extremely fortunate to interview at 7 of them. I presumed I was waitlisted at 5 of the 7, although I got offers from 2 of my top programs (and took the very generous offer from the top program - a very prestigious/competitive program). Like 8BitJourney, I noticed that after attending 2 of the interviews my anxiety went down immensely. Not everyone has the luxury/luck I might have had last season, but here's my general advice:
 
1) Like everyone says, do your homework about your POI. Be familiar with your POIs works from the last 5ish years, and any major pubs in the last decade. If your POI has grant funding, look up the grant on the NIH grant website and read the brief description to think about how your potential dissertation work can fit under your POI's work while being unique enough. If the POI has a good lab website, look over it carefully... from this you can get good information about what other grad students in the lab may be doing, as well as what the lab may like to do socially. (My POI actually mentioned to me a few weeks ago that she still remembers how excited I was about the lab culture and the things that they do -- information I gathered from the website.) 
 
2) Do your homework about the program as a whole. What is the training model like? What can you expect in practicum? If these things aren't clear, ask during the interview to show that you care about your training! Some programs have some kind of weird stuff going on that have pros/cons (like an in-house guaranteed internship: rare), so asking about things like that without sounding presumptuous is important. 
 
3) Re-read your personal statement. People will mention it to you and ask you to tell you your "story." They'll also ask you "why clinical psych (or insert XXXX program here)." This should hopefully be spelled out in your SOP if you wrote a good one, so re-reading it once or twice before an interview (perhaps on the plane ride before or something) is a good idea. 
 
4) The 2 days before you leave for an interview, pack your bag. As silly as it sounds, I almost forgot to do this once between the stress of back-to-back interviews and my undergrad classes and other commitments. Make sure you have a suit ready and some more nice casual attire for the informal dinners/parties. I'd also REALLY recommend getting a thank you card and a small trinket from where you are from for your grad student host (if you are staying with a grad student). The personalized touch can really go a far way in showing you are thankful to them for going out of their way to let you stay in their home. 
 
5) On interview day: don't get into a competition with other applicants, but do be social with them. There is no need to compare experiences. Even if someone appears to be far more qualified, they are not. You are all there for the same reason and on an equal playing field. The important thing is that you focus on doing your best and being yourself around the POI and the program.  
 
6) To your main question: just be ready to have a conversation about their work and be excited about it! Talk about how your interests align with what you've read. Usually nobody is going to ask intense method details unless a background in the methods (e.g., neuroimaging) is essential to the work they do. 
 
Anyways, I hope this helps! Always willing to talk over PM too if you have any questions.
 
Best of luck!
 
-J

This is definitely not a good idea. Like @Timemachines said, doing this probaly makes you look desperate. 
 
From my experience, here’s three good times to email POIs:
1) pre Application: introduce yourself and see if they plan to take a student (if this info isn’t readily available online)
2) after receiving an interview invite: express your grattitude and share that you are excited to attend the interview (if you are going)
3) post-interview thank you: 1 day after your interview, send a kind thank you email specifying what you enjoyed about your visit and your conversations.
 
Other then that, I’d advise against. Profs get literally hundreds to thousands emails daily, so if you aren’t already on their radar, you doing this isn’t going to help and could hurt chances with them if you reapply in a later cycle. From my experience, POIs have strong memory for candidates they find particularly annoying  
 
 

When I first applied (first cycle) I emailed a professor a few days before invites were sent out and I believe it reflected poorly on me. I think it made me look desperate, which was then amplified by my lack of confidence throughout the interview, and then even more evident following the interview (tepid exchanges over email).
My thought on the matter these days is that you don't want to try to convince your way into a space where you were not necessarily wanted. It is not to say that you are not qualified! however, trying to find your way into an interview is rarely achieved gracefully and sets you up for a very uncomfortable foundation with a PI. Think of it as forming a close relationship with them for 5-6 years - this should be a mutual exchange based on fit and chemistry (communication)...this is hard to achieve with someone that would potentially choose you as a plan B, or didn't choose you at all.
What I do think is good practice is to email your PI of interest requesting some feedback on your application and how it can be improved. 

There's quite a few web resources on this topic and you can use Google to find them.
 
That being said, here's the common questions I ran into during my 7 interviews last cycle (I am now a 1st year at my top choice clinical program):
Why my lab/this program/this city/clinical psychology? If you had unlimited funding, what research topic would you want to explore?  Tell me about you/what you are passionate about. What is your long term career goal - academia, private practice, industry?  A note on this one - if you are interviewing at clinical PhD programs, most always want to hear "be an academic or work in practice ~25% of the time and be faculty 75% of the time so my research can be informed. Most clinical PhD programs, ironically, are aiming to create faculty and contributors to science, not  just clinicians. Saying you are just intereted in clinical practice can really be a bad thing to say... however, PsyDs and counseling psych programs tend (from my understanding) to appreciate this answer a bit more. All I can say, is if you are pursuing a clinical PhD, you should probably have at least a strong initial interest of going into the academy.  What are your strenghts? What are your weaknessess? Be genuine here. I told my POIs striaght up I over-committ myself (I'm a high achiever lol). I am aware of this though and didn't want it to be a problem in grad school, so in the same statement for weaknessess I talked about my reckoning with this being an issue and how I have been addressing it/plan to address it in grad school and beyond.  Tell me about your most recent research project? What are the main takeaways?  What's something interesting you just read (book or research)?   
Really there aren't too many odd-ball questions from my experience. Just be yourself, and the right program will accept you if it is where you are supposed to be. ALSO, this is supposed to be an opportunity for you to get to know the program and the current students as well, so ask lots of questions of them too! 

There's quite a few web resources on this topic and you can use Google to find them.
 
That being said, here's the common questions I ran into during my 7 interviews last cycle (I am now a 1st year at my top choice clinical program):
Why my lab/this program/this city/clinical psychology? If you had unlimited funding, what research topic would you want to explore?  Tell me about you/what you are passionate about. What is your long term career goal - academia, private practice, industry?  A note on this one - if you are interviewing at clinical PhD programs, most always want to hear "be an academic or work in practice ~25% of the time and be faculty 75% of the time so my research can be informed. Most clinical PhD programs, ironically, are aiming to create faculty and contributors to science, not  just clinicians. Saying you are just intereted in clinical practice can really be a bad thing to say... however, PsyDs and counseling psych programs tend (from my understanding) to appreciate this answer a bit more. All I can say, is if you are pursuing a clinical PhD, you should probably have at least a strong initial interest of going into the academy.  What are your strenghts? What are your weaknessess? Be genuine here. I told my POIs striaght up I over-committ myself (I'm a high achiever lol). I am aware of this though and didn't want it to be a problem in grad school, so in the same statement for weaknessess I talked about my reckoning with this being an issue and how I have been addressing it/plan to address it in grad school and beyond.  Tell me about your most recent research project? What are the main takeaways?  What's something interesting you just read (book or research)?   
Really there aren't too many odd-ball questions from my experience. Just be yourself, and the right program will accept you if it is where you are supposed to be. ALSO, this is supposed to be an opportunity for you to get to know the program and the current students as well, so ask lots of questions of them too! 

There's quite a few web resources on this topic and you can use Google to find them.
 
That being said, here's the common questions I ran into during my 7 interviews last cycle (I am now a 1st year at my top choice clinical program):
Why my lab/this program/this city/clinical psychology? If you had unlimited funding, what research topic would you want to explore?  Tell me about you/what you are passionate about. What is your long term career goal - academia, private practice, industry?  A note on this one - if you are interviewing at clinical PhD programs, most always want to hear "be an academic or work in practice ~25% of the time and be faculty 75% of the time so my research can be informed. Most clinical PhD programs, ironically, are aiming to create faculty and contributors to science, not  just clinicians. Saying you are just intereted in clinical practice can really be a bad thing to say... however, PsyDs and counseling psych programs tend (from my understanding) to appreciate this answer a bit more. All I can say, is if you are pursuing a clinical PhD, you should probably have at least a strong initial interest of going into the academy.  What are your strenghts? What are your weaknessess? Be genuine here. I told my POIs striaght up I over-committ myself (I'm a high achiever lol). I am aware of this though and didn't want it to be a problem in grad school, so in the same statement for weaknessess I talked about my reckoning with this being an issue and how I have been addressing it/plan to address it in grad school and beyond.  Tell me about your most recent research project? What are the main takeaways?  What's something interesting you just read (book or research)?   
Really there aren't too many odd-ball questions from my experience. Just be yourself, and the right program will accept you if it is where you are supposed to be. ALSO, this is supposed to be an opportunity for you to get to know the program and the current students as well, so ask lots of questions of them too! 

There's quite a few web resources on this topic and you can use Google to find them.
 
That being said, here's the common questions I ran into during my 7 interviews last cycle (I am now a 1st year at my top choice clinical program):
Why my lab/this program/this city/clinical psychology? If you had unlimited funding, what research topic would you want to explore?  Tell me about you/what you are passionate about. What is your long term career goal - academia, private practice, industry?  A note on this one - if you are interviewing at clinical PhD programs, most always want to hear "be an academic or work in practice ~25% of the time and be faculty 75% of the time so my research can be informed. Most clinical PhD programs, ironically, are aiming to create faculty and contributors to science, not  just clinicians. Saying you are just intereted in clinical practice can really be a bad thing to say... however, PsyDs and counseling psych programs tend (from my understanding) to appreciate this answer a bit more. All I can say, is if you are pursuing a clinical PhD, you should probably have at least a strong initial interest of going into the academy.  What are your strenghts? What are your weaknessess? Be genuine here. I told my POIs striaght up I over-committ myself (I'm a high achiever lol). I am aware of this though and didn't want it to be a problem in grad school, so in the same statement for weaknessess I talked about my reckoning with this being an issue and how I have been addressing it/plan to address it in grad school and beyond.  Tell me about your most recent research project? What are the main takeaways?  What's something interesting you just read (book or research)?   
Really there aren't too many odd-ball questions from my experience. Just be yourself, and the right program will accept you if it is where you are supposed to be. ALSO, this is supposed to be an opportunity for you to get to know the program and the current students as well, so ask lots of questions of them too!