Psyche007

Gotcha, thank you.

Yeah, it's interesting that nobody has addressed this, despite being notified by @PsyDuck90. They can just change it back, no big deal. People forget that providing a service doesn't bestow ownership over a community. Unilateral change is this context is short-sighted, which is why I prefer to think of it as a goof and not a deliberate and indifferent modification.

Is this aggregate or a specific programme, and if so, which one? If a specific programme, did you end up attending?

I'm just bumping this for visibility AND to make the point that, at the moment, the top ten threads in this forum include Quantitative Psych, Clinical & Counseling Psych, Industrial Organizational Psych, Cognitive Psych/Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental Psych, and Social & Personality Psych. Sorry, School Psych. You just missed the top ten. ?

As an aside, if they intend to open new boards for different psych fields, that's a huge error in judgment. We need interdisciplinary contact, even if it's at the application stages. I think someone goofed. They leapt on an idea and didn't really think it through.

I'm a clinical psychology doctoral student and I approve this message.

I tried to get into Academic Twitter, but I found it very political. I follow a few people I have direct interest in, but I stopped following highly visible and popular networking accounts (such as AcademicChatter). Part of the issue is that these accounts don't consider themselves political and nor do many of the individuals who participate. I wasn't getting a variety of work from diverse viewpoints. It felt like a bubble. I'll follow some individuals for specific reasons but I steer clear of the larger hubs. YMMV.

How important is social media to academic networking? Any advantages to twitter over facebook or any of the others, like LinkedIn?

If your ultimate goal is to apply for a PsyD programme, can you hep me understand the benefit of spending two additional years on a Masters? Clinical experience is clinical experience. I don't think it would hurt you to get some more diverse work experience, if you are able. It's about you demonstrating interest in the field of clinical psychology. I was accepted to a PhD programme without a Master's, but I had worked for a psychologist in private practice, as an intake clinician in community mental health, as a discharge planner for a crisis unit, and as a substance abuse counselor. As an aside, anyone who wants to stand out as a candidate should be able to illustrate their maturity, be introspective, and see the 'big picture'. My experience of both interviewees and accepted candidates thus far suggests that the better students have spent some time in personal development, reading widely, developing their world view, and showing clinical or academic curiosity. Graduate school is an extremely poor substitute for direct experience. It's just not reality. Honestly, work on yourself, not just to look good on an application, but to be a fully realized, well-rounded, curious and competent individual. Those people are rare, and if you're able to get even close to it, you'll stand out, I promise. I'm a middle-aged 2nd year clinical psychology PhD student and I spend plenty of time talking to faculty about this subject, the quality of students, the importance of personal growth and self-exploration. Maturity is not lost on them.

The argument for meritocratic assessment was made and dismissed, as the GRE is seen as continuing privilege and inequity. It would be better to remake the test to assess the relevant qualities of successful candidates than remove it, but here we are. It's always going to be about fit. There are three questions, in my mind, that need answering: Are you capable of undertaking and completing the work? Does your acceptance benefit both you and the mentor/lab/field? Do your personalities 'jive'? If the answer to all three is 'Yes', then anything else is gravy. Lastly, there's not much you can do about the third question. Sure, you can work on yourself, or worse, misrepresent yourself, but the truth will out, so to speak.

As well as the economic downturn, waiving the GRE has probably encouraged more people to apply. I read something somewhere that the highly competitive nature of psych grad programs is in part related to an over-abundance of unqualified candidates applying. GRE waiver just encourages that. And no, I don't believe the GRE is the ultimate assessment of suitability. It's just that making programmes more accessible by removing the GRE helps both qualified and unqualified applicants, not just people with poor GRE scores that are otherwise excellent candidates. Your chances aren't necessarily affected. There is a possibility that you have the same amount of qualified applicants to compete against as before, because more applicants who aren't as qualified as you are are giving it a shot.

It seems as though this person hasn't been back since they joined and posted this.

Your statement isn't available for some reason. Send it via DM and I'll see if I can take a look this week.

Or third party if you think the Big Two are terrible.

That's all. Nothing more. Unless you had something specific to ask me?

You say that, but I suspect what you really mean is that everyone who agrees with you needs to vote.

If this PI is prepared to occasionally help review and edit your own independent work, you might be able to pull some posters and even a publication out of it that directly reflects your interests. If they're not willing or able to help in that manner, perhaps they can point you to a colleague who'd be willing to mentor you a little? In my experience, it's easier than you think to get posters accepted. My first poster was in my first semester of my programme and I wish I had known what was involved earlier. I could have done a lot more prior to entry. However, seasoned academics really know how to tidy things up and make them presentable. If you can get access to someone, all you need to do is put the work in. Also, see if you can get some part-time clinical experience. I worked clinically for about 8 years after undergrad (and I was already 30 when I started UG, lol) before going to grad school because I wanted to really know life on the frontlines. Obviously, I'm not suggesting you do that, but some clinical hours may help you, especially if you're looking at counseling psychology. Those are my thoughts. Do with them what you will. ?

I'd really enjoy and appreciate a thread like this as well. It's quite validating and refreshing to have some of my experiences and reactions reflected. Often, I feel quite isolated and alone, at least in class. I've made friends with senior students who echo my sentiments and urge me to keep my head down and just get through it. I appreciate this advice and recognize the wisdom, but it gets old when you expect to be at a level where a deep and nuanced examination of the subject matter is vital both clinically and academically. I've added some colour below but made it small so you can TL;DR it. As for the middle ground, I made a point to WANT to be that bridge between research and practice on interview day. However, as some may point out, I didn't apply to an R1 school. Sometimes I wonder if my experiences are indicative of an R2, but we are community engaged, so the clinical opportunities aren't lacking. My frustration is really centered around the classes, arguably the least important but most expensive (for me) and taxing part of the process in getting credentialed. My mentor is really good and a great fit for me in so many ways, so I stand by my choice considering my geographical limitations, but I do wonder what other programmes are like. I know my mentor appreciates the real-world clinical experience I bring to the lab, as he's not practiced clinically since grad school. His focus on research methodology and statistical analysis is exactly what I wanted out of a mentor. He makes a point to bring together what he describes as "a diverse group of really smart people", so I'm very grateful and appreciative to have been brought on board. The lab and my practicum are saving me right now, haha. The politics I alluded to earlier are not in my lab, but I still bump into them. How do we create a more permanent thread? Do we need a 'Miscellaneous' board under 'Grad School Life"?

Extract the psychology from it. What did she learn about people? There are people who actively learn all kinds of lessons from life and those who just passively experience it.

Thank you for the kind words. I occasionally interact with Shedler on social media and he believes his article is as valid now as it was then. I would agree. The divide between research and practice is amazing. Generally, I’ve found academic instructors act like their classroom contributions are clinically valid but dislike being challenged with real-world examples or ethical considerations. I approach education as something of a skeptic. I don’t accept something just because some told me so. I have to examine it over time but courses don’t leave room for that. Goid luck with your SOPs and feel free to DM if you ever want some extra eyes on them.

Even if you don't spend your time wisely while waiting for admission, just living life leaves you seasoned you in a way that a 21-year-old fresh out of undergrad isn't able to be, but in some ways, the younger you are, the easier you time you might have of getting through a programme. I started my PhD after 40. Having a professional life outside of academia is both beneficial and harmful. I have more real world clinical experience without a Master's degree than the vast majority of my peers (even the licensed clinicians), as well as having other professional experience that gives me skills and abilities I might not otherwise have developed. I'm not worried about instructors. I treat them as equals, because they are. I'm not afraid to ask for what I need or be appropriately assertive. Some respond well and some don't, expecting everyone to passively accept being treated as a child. Having a life before academia helps keep me grounded. Academia moves slowly, and while there is sometimes reason for it, other times, there's not. Lots of talking and not enough doing. Vague communication. It's a weird world, full of hierarchies and politics and cults of personality. I don't buy into it, so perhaps I'm not destined to be successful in that area. I'm respectful but I don't 'play the game'. Perhaps the 20-something-year-old-me would be excited and eager to join, be seen as legitimate. Now, I see it as frustrating and posturing. Maybe I'm just deeply cynical about the field, haha. I spent a long time thinking, reading, and working before I set foot in a doctoral programme and I'm not here to join in, I'm here to try and change it. That puts me at odds with most other students. They might think I'm overly negative, but like some of you, I've seen some shit that tells me the way things are is not ok. People need real help and they're not getting it. Instead, they get told 'something is better than nothing'. I doubt that, because that 'something' is a big fat distraction for generations of young mental health professionals. It's easy to see why psychology has ended up where it is. This article makes some excellent points, regardless of what you may think about Jonathan Shedler. https://jonathanshedler.com/PDFs/Shedler (2006) Why the scientist-practitioner schism won't go away.pdf This issues run even deeper than this, but that's a conversation for another day.

Yeah, plenty of students I run across love assessment and aren't into psychotherapy at all. They present themselves as neutral arbiters of differential diagnosis or competency, which they are anything but. I can't stand most assessments. Yes, yes, for many psychologists they are their bread and butter, because they generate more revenue, but they're not my thing. Too many assessments are built on flawed psychological constructs, so I don't see much validity in implementing them. I realize that for some, it's the defining trait of a psychologist, the one thing they can do that others can't, so they're deeply defensive of it as it's tied to their professional identity. Those people take themselves far too seriously. The central message that Randi is giving you is right. The work should be first and foremost, the credentials are merely means to an end.

Was this work related to the field?

This is potentially a deep conversation. Generally, state licensure requirements dictate the qualifications required to work clinically with patients as a psychologist. Many, but not all, require a PsyD or PhD in clinical psychology from an APA accredited programme. In my experience, social psychologists are often purely academic, not clinicians, and not eligible for licensure. I'm not as familiar with educational psychologists. I would imagine they are focused on researching how people learn. That might be a specific protected title in some states. In Florida, we have School Psychologists who have a separate doctoral programme, but that's not the same as an educational psychologist. Have a look here: https://www.apa.org/careers/resources/guides/careers A licensed clinical psychologist can be a generalist or specialist, for example in child psychology, health psychology, neuropsychology, or forensic psychology. There are other specialities.

Plenty of my peers have some kind of counseling Master's degree. I don't think you need a strategic Master's as much as one that will achieve three things: Inform you on what it's like working in the field of mental health. Expose you to the academic side, research, posters, publications. Not be useless if you decide against a doctorate OR (heaven forbid) you're not accepted. I have an extensive clinical background when compared to my peers and NO formal research experience. I've learned that we can't rely on a programme to provide us with research opportunities. There is no reason that you can't foster relationships with faculty at the institution you're earning getting a Master's from and be part of a research team. My mentor invited a recent graduate of our counseling Master's to our team as she is thinking about applying to clinical psychology PsyD programmes.