SoundofSilence

Thank you for sharing.

Congrats on the interview!! You seem to have a pretty good list of questions going. I would also have prepared an example of a challenging interpersonal situation - a conflict or something similar and how you resolved it. Also, I cannot stress this enough - make sure you have a good amount of your own questions! This serves two purposes: shows enthusiasm and that you really did your research on the program and also helps you figure out if the lab/program is a good match for you. Best of luck!

Honestly you wouldn't want to work with a person that does that anyway. I know many of us sometimes say we would do almost anything to get into a program, but spending the next 5-6-whatever years working and depending on someone like that is a nightmare, and not worth it.

Sorry about the derailment of the thread. To be on-topic: I forgot to post I got a rejection from Ottawa last Friday. It was an email to check the portal with the decision there.

I just told this to another poster on here, who is more mature and has more experience - sometimes having more experience and/or another grad degree is seen as getting in the way of how "trainable" you are. Also - the exploitation of grad students happens all over the planet in many fields. Not that it's right, but we definitely need some different form of accountability for faculty, especially since very few of us now can follow the academic path. By the time many of us get our PhD, there will be very few tenure-track places as it is, so the current system is basically training PhDs for jobs that won't really exist in the future (except for a lucky few). It's not just about the funding. Although the funding is also a burden on students. It's the whole "apprenticeship-model". Sure, you get some benefits from being mentored one-on-one, but only if you have a good PI, if they have the time and if they have the resources to support your work. So many ifs. The reality is most clinical students will be in mostly clinical roles, and even the clinical researchers could benefit from other types of mentorship. How about having a group of faculty mentor in rotation multiple students, so that we can increase a little class size? Or dedicated clinical mentors that can supervise more people, with less research expected of that faculty member? I realize practicums are limited in how many people they can train, but having increased class sizes would alleviate the problem in time and also bring more services to the people that need them. Also, the availability of a different type of doctoral degree (such as a PsyD) might be more in line with the training needed to obtain good clinical psychologists and free up the strain on PhD programs.

It IS ridiculous and your "rant" is totally justified. As it stands right now, there are many MANY applicants that already have the skills and experience to hit the ground running in grad school and so very few places. I am aware that there are a few that just apply to give it a try, but my own personal experience tells me there are few and far between, because the reputation of competitiveness has reached most psych students. It doesn't help that in many cases it's up to the very specific whims of faculty members who may have other priorities when picking students. I realize that there are many great POIs there, I am not talking about them. But I've met quite a few who prioritize taking only students that want to follow their specific niche academic path, or who bring specific skills in their lab because they are chasing some grants, or some other self-serving goal. And in turn, our profession loses out on many qualified candidates that could have done the research and clinical work much needed by under-served communities and improved the mental health for so many people in the country... I've been thinking what could be done to change this and to be honest I haven't come up with anything. But something has to change. I am committed to giving my feedback and putting effort into changing the admissions process but I have yet to come up with other more specific ways to help. What do you think?

If it shows as complete on the portal or you have other proof that they got the transcripts, you should email them. As long as you're polite it should be fine - try to include screenshots or anything that could help the admin person solve this issue. Try not to panic, sometimes technical glitches happen, sorry it happened to you.

The thing is, when they ask for a writing sample, they want to see how you write, not how you co-write with others in a group; because even if you are the first author, others revise and edit what you wrote. So that is why it's a good idea to check. POIs sometimes get students that are really bad writers/ or writers that need a lot of training, so they want to see what your level is - and a publication might not show your true level. I see it kind of the same with English level (I'm an international student). Many POIs told me they were unpleasantly surprised by a grad student's ability in English, so they had to make extra effort to get them up to speed. And I get it - even if it's not my first language, I need to be able to communicate in it fluently because grad school is clearly at a different level than general undergrad courses. So making sure the student you pick has the necessary abilities to succeed becomes important, hence the request for a writing sample.

I submitted a master's thesis once (since they had that as an example of things we can send) and a second time I did a larger lit review that I had for an assignment that got very good feedback. If you have a publication that's even better, but some may ask that you are the sole author - just make sure you check the guidelines or ask the grad admin.

I think this strategy is very smart. I don't know whether I would explain it in detail, but if you are asked, maybe say something like "your program is highly ranked in my options and I have applied for funding at X". I did get this question under the form "are you considering this program in your top options" or something like that, and I think that it's fair, POIs also want to know if you want to go there or if you're kind of lukewarm. Honestly, I think most programs are highly ranked for us since few people apply to places where they don't really want to go, and it's so competitive that few programs can be considered "safeties".

I just got another interview so yes, at least this one. There is no magic secret - I just got more research experience, some more conference posters and submitted manuscripts, better letters. I also spent more time figuring out which POIs were really a match to me and not just on the surface. As a consequence, I think my research interests are more defined and it was slightly easier this time around to articulate what work I'd like to do in the future. I also think there was a dose of luck involved too. Difficult to pinpoint something specific.

Funny you should ask this! I recently got an interview invite from a place I applied to and interviewed during my last application cycle, two years ago. I got rejected then, but they seemed to remember me positively so I guess the persistence did pay off. They did give me good feedback on what I can improve after the rejection and I appreciated that. I also applied to a couple of other places twice, but never got an interview. So your experience may vary as well. It might really depend on the person and how they view this. My personal take on this - if you like the program and the person, and you had a good experience interacting with them, why not re-apply? However, if you think a lab is way too competitive and you might want to give other POIs a try, you can always do that. Most reasonable POIs will understand that interests change and some might be flattered that you're so interested in their lab that you keep re-applying. I doubt there's a general consensus on this.

So here it goes... School: Dalhousie University Type: Clinical Psychology PhD Acceptance/Waitlist/Rejection: Acceptance Type of Notification: Official Email Date Notified: 1/11/22 Gaaaaah... it's only been a decade of work to get here (no, I'm not kidding) and I was starting to feel really old. After receiving the email I was half numb and half freaking out and kept asking everyone if it's normal. It doesn't really feel real yet and I'm still in anxious/panicky mode somewhat. However, I do plan on taking the weekend off and just unwind. Get in touch if you're considering Dal or just have questions, I'm around.

Yes, definitely we need to advocate for more transparency in the process. I don't think it would compromise the general application process in any way, and it would provide some structure and peace of mind to applicants.

Hello there I can definitely relate, most of us are in the same boat. This is my third time, and I am still impatient and have days where I keep refreshing my email for too long. The thing is, programs like to keep applicants on hold because you never know what might happen. I just heard a story about this last week from a faculty member currently interviewing - they had a candidate that they felt were a great match, they interviewed them and then realized that it won't be working out after all. So now they have to do more interviews after the program's initial round of interviews. Some programs might do additional rounds of interviews to fill out more spots if they found more funding or if the applicants chose a different offer. There are quite a few people who get in from waitlists. You get the idea, the process is pretty unpredictable. However, you also must realize that usually these are more rare events. If you find out some of your programs already had several interviews with applicants, I would put that program on the backburner and focus on the rest of them. I agree with you that it would be better if we had more transparency in the process. A few programs give candidates at least an estimate of when they might hear back (the deadline is X and we interview initially in Y month) and I think all should follow this, like they do with the offer deadline. If I manage to get an acceptance this application season, I am definitely committed to advocating for more transparency and change as a grad student and beyond.

Thanks so much for the update

It's nice to see that things are starting to move. Congrats to everyone with an interview invite! ? Anyone hear anything from SFU? They had one of the (if not the) earliest deadlines and I haven't seen anyone with news from them.

Mitch's guide is a classic (https://mitch.web.unc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/4922/2017/02/MitchGradSchoolAdvice.pdf) and questions will probably be similar to the general psych PhD programs, with the only difference being the clinical relevant questions. So I would have a brief answer on "why do you want to be a clinical psychologist" and "why is clinical training important to your professional goals". Also "why clinical and not experimental". I would also have in mind some examples for interpersonal questions since those skills are relevant for future clinical work. You can never be 100% prepared for an interview, but having some idea of what they might ask can help. Also, most of us are probably quite anxious this time of the year, so remember you are not alone This thread can be a good source of support or just a safe place to vent if you need to. Best of luck and hope this helps!

You say persistence, I say stubbornness UofT wasn't taking internationals even before the pandemic, so it must be a funding or a different issue. I applied to 7 programs this year. Applied to 4 the first time and I think over 11 the second time. I already have a master's so I am aiming for some PhDs as well. This is the time of the year when things start moving regarding interviews, so fingers crossed! Best of luck!

Hi there! Quite a few international (non-US) students apply each year and you are right, it does make things difficult when it comes to funding and admissions. As long as you have a good application and relevant experience, it is still possible to get interviews. The process is very competitive for everyone, as you well know. I'm an international student, this is my third time applying and I received an interview this year and several during the previous application cycle. I received none my first time. As a quick note - there are programs where the tuition for international and Canadian PhD students is almost the same with the exception of some fees, so those programs are more able to fund internationals. Increasing the number of (well-matched) programs you apply to might also help. To how many programs did you apply?

I submitted my documents a few weeks ago and while it was difficult to locate where to upload them, the upload went just fine. Have you tried using a different browser or the Incognito/Private mode of your browser? My school also uses a microsoft account and the Ottawa one sometimes got mixed up. A private window should clear some of the cache/ cookies and avoid that. If it still doesn't work for you maybe consider reaching out to their IT support.

Dalhousie already had some interviews. There is a rumor that they have a waitlist of some sort, but it's not clear whether that's for interviews and/or offers. It seems we might hear more news at the beginning of January after the holidays. On that note, any news about SFU? They also had a really early deadline.

The fact that you are getting interviews means you are definitely doing something right Calgary has had the proposal for the application process for quite some time. The thing is, most research heavy programs would like you to be able to formulate proposals and bring some ideas and I think you also need a proposed research project to apply for funding. It doesn't mean you're only limited to that topic/methodology for your entire grad school, but I think most POIs do expect some initiative here. Maybe as a RA it's not as expected, but you still need to have some more specific ideas of what you'd like to study and how you'd (ideally) go about it. Most POIs that I've talked to want someone who can come up with their own original topics, even if they are still connected to the bigger work done in the lab. And it also shows your compatibility to what they want, or helps them see how you could take the lab work in a different direction and thus how you'd bring a lot of value that way. Also, if it's not too much trouble, would you be willing to share the UBC POI initials? Maybe by personal message if you don't want it public? Thanks so much!

I am going to echo everyone else and especially the above paragraph, since it has been true for me and other applicants I know. For this season I only got a few responses (mostly generic) from initial emails. It helps to check if some people are still taking on students, but overall that's about it. In the past, I got interviews from people that never saw/ replied to my initial email and then I had several email exchanges with POIs (including commenting on specific things from my CV) and then never got an interview with them. I know of only one case of a student who really hit it off with their POI and then they really supported him to get into the program, but my experience tells me that it was a (very rare) exception. Try not to stress too much about this. There are many things that go into whether someone invites you for an interview, but I doubt initial email communication is that high on the list.

Hi! The program is Dalhousie and it was a formal interview.