LLsApps

There wasn't too much variance in the schools where I interviewed, even among more competitive programs. I had professors from a number of schools compliment me on my CV, and the majority of experiences on it were from my masters. My research mentor also knew a number of my POIs personally, so a few of them made comments like, "Oh, I can't imagine there will be trouble accepting your masters thesis, I trust (current mentor) will have guided you to produce something excellent." I would assume the programs where masters degrees are not looked at favorably would not have extended interviews in the first place. However, I received a high number of interviews, and am accepting an offer at a competitive clinical science program, so I don't think I was in any way hindered by my degree.

As someone who has been accepted this round after a terminal masters (after applying in two previous rounds without it), I thought I'd contribute what I've found re: the value of a masters. First, my experience is similar to others in this thread - a masters is not going to shave off time in terms of years, but it may allow you to waive some requirements and thus have more time to research and do other things. I wouldn't say that the degree just by itself added value to my application, but rather what I did with it. I worked in an active lab (and my mentor's interests almost perfectly align with mine) and took on a number of independent projects for posters, symposia, papers, etc. Conversely, I wasn't able to be nearly so productive in such a short span of time at my previous job as an RA. I attended multiple conferences, made connections to researchers in my specific area of research, further honed my research interests, and did a lot of polishing of pieces of my application. Being older and more able to articulate exactly what I want out of a doctoral degree also helped, as some professors prefer to not take people directly out of undergrad. I also have a feeling my LOR were stronger, just because my writers had a lot more data points to reference re: my abilities. My program was partially funded (roughly half of tuition was covered, plus a stipend somewhere close to the low end of some of the PhD programs I've seen), and the debt I took on was pretty minimal. Frankly, I think it was really good for me to figure out how to live on a stipend. It was also an experimental MS program with a clinical concentration that required a thesis. I would be careful about the kind of programs you apply to, but if it doesn't cost you much, if you think you might be more productive with a clear structure in place to do so, and if you can find a mentor with similar interests so you can further develop your own, it might be something to consider.

There is no such thing as a reputable distance learning doctoral program. There may be some professors reaching out to their shortlists on a one-on-one basis if their offers and waitlists did not pan out, or a handful of professors may be looking for last minute new recruits for similar reasons. Reaching out to your network of people in the field with similar interests (professors, other grad students) and looking to listservs to see if there are any opportunities in that vein would be your best bet.

I was also first alternate

It's very, very doubtful that 80th percentile scores contributed in any way to not getting interviews. GRE scores are mainly a hoop to jump through - once you're past the cut-off for a program, they're really not considered much anymore, and 80th percentile is definitely past that cut-off for most if not all programs. I'm saying this as someone who agonized over whether I should retake the GRE because one of my subscores was below the 75th percentile (but the others and my subject score were all signficantly higher) - if you do reapply, do not focus your efforts on retaking the GRE. I think a lot of people tend to overestimate its importance in admissions decisions. My PI at a lab I worked at was considered a GRE stickler in that he gave it more weight than most, and he told me that my scores were great and it wasn't worth my time to retake them. This round, I received 9 interviews, after only getting 1 each of the previous rounds, and I'm so glad I didn't waste my time on retaking that test. As someone who has applied 3 times and now is finally done (currently deciding between offers that I'm very happy with), I would advise you to reapply next year - less because of the ranking issue, and more because of the funding. Receiving multiple acceptances the first time around after only applying to 6 schools indicates you'd probably be a competitive applicant in future cycles. Your overall GPA is a little low, but having a higher masters GPA should help to offset that. Next year, I would take the time to thoroughly research potential mentors, and apply to at least 12-15 fully funded programs that have a decent range of competitiveness (i.e. don't just apply to the top 15 programs, which it doesn't sound like you would do). As far as the family issue goes, that's certainly understandable, but I know a good number of women who started their families in graduate school and been quite successful. There's no perfect time to have a baby, and I don't want to minimize the difficulties of working around such a major life transition, but I don't think that's a good enough reason to take on debt for a clinical PhD.

The really strange part about the UConn post is that someone else already indicated they were accepting an offer from that same POI, which would be pretty weird and awkward if that POI had trashed all the other applicants during someone's interview... Several of the acceptances over the past day or so have named POIs that very recently accepted other posters, actually. How common actually is it to take multiple students?

That's awful! How did they communicate that to you? Was this the situation you mentioned in the other thread, where that POI ended up not being able to extend any offers, or did the POI extend an offer to someone else?

I've had this happen with two separate POIs so far this year; both were very positive and encouraging but it's definitely a frustrating situation to be in. I imagine it's frustrating for them, too - they go to all the work of selecting and interviewing candidates, make their choices, and then are told they don't have an open slot. In both situations, I made sure to thank them for the update (after all, they always could have waited until the funding came through to contact me, so easing my anxiety sooner was appreciated), communicate that I remain very interested in their program, and let them know that I look forward to hearing from them. I had already communicated any additional questions in my thank you emails, so I kept it short. You should also let them know if this is your first choice and you'll definitely accept the offer if you feel ready to make that decision. Also, there is hope in this situation - one of mine turned into an official offer fairly quickly! I hope everything works out for you, too.

I believe Houston is finished extending interviews; theirs is the 10th.

I definitely understand scheduling is rough, but I've never seen invitations go out this close to the date! I've had interviews scheduled for both of those dates since December, and I can imagine other people being in the same boat. Best of luck to everyone, regardless!

Oh wow, that is crazy last minute. Do they run into problems often with people already having interviews? Those are really popular dates.

Do you mean the 3rd and 6th of February?

I hope my comment didn't upset you; I just know that after I was unsuccessful after my first round, I wanted people to be honest rather than give false hope. It's frustrating for everyone to tell you that your application is perfect and they don't know why you didn't get in when you feel like you must be missing something. I hoped to help you avoid going through this again in a year with the same limitations and the same outcome. I would encourage you to browse Student Doctor Network; they come up against this issue a lot and people much more eloquent than me have explained the problem. Unfortunately, clinical psychology PhD programs generally require a degree of flexibility when it comes to location. Even if you were accepted to a school in Boston, you would likely have to move again for internship year, and possibly even again for a postdoc. The bottom line is that applying to a small number of clinical psych programs in a highly competitive geographic area is like a high-school student only applying to a single school - Harvard. As impressive as the student might be, no college counselor is going to advise that course of action, because the odds are just not in their favor. The college counselor could look at the student's application and tell them that there are no obvious reasons why Harvard wouldn't accept them, just as there seem to be no obvious reasons you wouldn't be accepted, but there is no guaranteed formula for admission to Harvard, or a clinical psychology PhD program. All of this only applies to clinical PhD programs, though. I have no experience with counseling programs and do not know anyone with experience with them, so I really can't speak to them.

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.

Thought I would throw out a recommendation for one of the other suicide/self-injury-focused master's labs that I know of - Dr. Brausch at the Psych Sciences M.S. program at Western Kentucky University.