quick1

I'm a bit confused. They accepted you without an interview? Did they require an interivew for the admissions process? I know most programs in Psych do but it's not clear whether or not yours does from what you are saying. As far as I know students have until April 15th to submit their letters of intent and deposits accepting or declining a spot.

Many of these programs offer assistantships that pay for say one class a semester (which hey is better than nothing!) but a few I've noticed are offering "directed teaching" and teaching undergraduate courses in exchange for a small stipend and a "credit". Obviously this is a bit vague and too early to know what it fully means. I do know I'm eligible for low interest fed loans but obviously I want to decrease loan amount taking as much as possible. Does anyone teach or TA and are a grad student in a Psy.D. program? And if so what kind of stipend do you get? And more broadly, does anyone in a Psy.D. currently get funding whether it's through assistantships, stipends, work study, fellowships, grants, scholarships? And if so what's it like?

I have an MA in Clinical/Counseling Psych and the expectation was you were to share and disclose as needed IF supervisors or professors felt it was beneficial to your professional development. Obviously you don't want to spill all the beans when applying and you don't want to seem unfit for a professional career. But there will be opportunties in your program to privately self disclose.

Not at all. I have a friend from undergrad who went right into a Ph.D. after graduation and lived at home. He did live at school in undergrad though. He recently finished his doctorate and works in his field and still lives home.

This morning. Ended up in my spam email! Unofficial one came about 2 days ago over phone for another program.

You have the right to contemplate until April 15th to make your decision. They know this. They know you may be fielding other offers so take your time. Still remain interested and show passion and excitement for their program. Also it's considered good taste to politely decline programs and notify them if you won't be attending as soon as you've decided to go elsewhere.

Good to hear. I ask because I know someone this happened to and they ended up not accepting her. Although it was an issue of her not having the full requirements in coursework needed and someone put her file in the wrong pile.

I'm wondering if this is fairly common. I know sometimes I see in Results Search posts about being accepted by phone either told by an admissions staff person, POI, or professor and this date is often before the date when official notifications seem to go out. I know a few people who have experienced this as well. If one recieves a phone call stating one is accepted and that the official notices still have to go out, is this as good as an acceptance or should it be viewed speculatively until confirmed?

I would imagine that they mean the graduate school as a whole has it's own admission requirements and thus if you meet those then sounds like the department wants to accept you. I've heard of schools doing it this way before but seems odd to me. Many schools do the "overall graduate school reviews application to ensure applicant meets minimum school requirements" then submit apps that "pass requirements" to the individual departments for review. To me that makes more sense than allowing a department to select applicants than having to wait on approval from the school to see if requirements are met. I do know many schools who use this ideal process still have the department needing to get final approval from the graduate school itself even after deciding who they want but usuallt that involves someone signing off on it and making it official.

I see your frustration but you'll have to take a step back and not only look at yourself and your goals but also possible alternatives. Like others here I got rejected from every Ph.D. (in clinical psych) program I applied to last season (all 15 of them) without so much as an interview. So congrats on at least getting interviewed. I had recently finished a masters, done research, and worked in the field and still got rejected without even a chance to interview. i took a step back, assessed my situation and my interests and applied again this time to a mix of Psy,D, and Ph.D. programs. Got two Psy.D. interviews and feel pretty good about the outcome, still waiting on other schools but I feel I have a good shot this time of getting something rather than nothing. Consider going for a masters, doing a research thesis, working in the field some more. Look at what you really want out of the field and in your own professional goals.

While I'm confident it'll turn out well for you all I did have a colleague last year who got the same from a POI only to have them call a week later apologizing for a terrible error (my colleagues file was mistakenly placed on the POI's desk and they took that as the school accepted her and so called her).

This is a tricky one. I'm in psych and graduated undergrad with a biotech degree, shifted to psych and got an M.A. in it. Now I'm 2 interviews already finished for the doctoral clinical psychology programs. What's interesting is that for my Masters interview there was a lot of questioning about why the switch, why I did bad in certain subjects, why this field now, why not the other field. It was part genuine interest and part stress testing I think. Last year i applied to all research PhDs and got rejections without interviews across the board. In my SOPs I focused on my shift from biotech education to the field of psychology and reasons why. This time I shifted focus away from that switch and focused more on the past 2-3 years of experience in the psych field and how I've honed my interests. That garnered at least 2 interviews with PsyD programs and possibly more waitlisted. The interviews entailed pretty much no questioning about my past differing education or shift to the field.

I'm 29 and applying to doctoral programs in Clinical Psychology (both PhD and Psy.D.) I had two Psy.D interviews this week and I was one of the older applicants present although some of the current students present for questions/social interaction were older than me. I also know someone at a program I applied to that is about 7 years older than me and started the program at around 35-36. I was 22 graduating from undergrad, spent 2 years taking extra course for psych, started a M.A. program at 25.

I think I prepared myself for the very real possibility of getting rejected from every single program I applied to and so it doesn't really seem as upsetting as one would expect. I think I'm more pissed that the process cost around a grand and I have squat to show for it. While I haven't heard official notification from every school, from the forums and results surveys its pretty much set that I didn't get even so much as an interview. I applied to 16 schools (and while I could have cut maybe 4 off that list) I don't regret applying to them. At least two were rejections because recommenders never sent letters. Most were out right rejections and the rest are assumed rejections based on timelines. In a way I'm happy. I can maintain my life as it is now for at least another year and have ample time to plan my next move. But in a way I'm lost. I have to decide whether to include Psy.D programs in my next attempt (maybe apply to the school where I got my M.A.), settle for using my M.A. only, or just do something completely different. I've learned a few things in this process: - The process is pretty broken these days. Sure schools need to use numbers, scores, and grades to make some decisions but it seems like it's become a pure numbers game. The highest math scores, the highest undergrad GPA, and the most times your name is a footnote on a publication's list of authors wins the prize. And in a way that's ok. Schools are welcome to spend their funding however they want and dictate how they choose who gets that funding. - My main goal for a Ph.D. program was to not have to take out more student loans. I'm drowning in student loan debt as it is and if I could get a Ph.D. for free I had to take the shot. I love research but for me it doesn't have the feel of making a direct impact and so maybe it's the way it is that I didn't get in...because now someone who wants to go deep into research for life has the chance. But I'm still a little bitter knowing some just gamed the system and will just leave with a shiny free Ph.D. and never look back to academia or research. - My research interests and goals have a very direct and applied impact on the field of psychology as it relates to working directly with clients. And that probably isn't very appealing to research programs. To Psy.D. programs it probably is. But I can't change my interests to save a buck, I'd be selling myself and the field short. - I didn't listen to a few mentors who strongly recommended I either apply to schools further away or apply to a few Psy.D. programs and now I'm waiting another year to try because of not taking that advice. - If I use my time wisely in this extra year I have I'll be able to work on some side projects and other things outside the field. So it goes I suppose...

This just happened to a colleague of mine and it was heartbreaking to hear. In fact it sounds worse to experience than my latest application season which is mostly (and likely all) rejections. Her situation wasn't a funding issue however it was either a clerical error or something fishy: She got an email from her POI congratulating her and basically saying you're in. The email apparently included funding information about how much she'd get, when she'd start, and when to expect more details. Somehow her application wound up on the desk of this POI which meant her application got through the initial screening process that should have detected she lacked the needed coursework for admission. A few days later the POI emailed her to say the school had never officially accepted her and was revoking any statement of acceptance. The reason: She didn't have enough of the required undergraduate psych courses. The POI claimed they sought out the grad school's permission to make a provisional acceptance if my colleague took the courses required over summer OR deferred acceptance and took them over the next year. The school apparently said no exceptions and it was 8 courses she needed (if it was 3 or 4 they may have reconsidered). The only consolation to my colleague was that "at least I knew my top pick at my top choice school wanted to work with me and saw something in me." The POI apologized and told my colleague she'd put in another request for a provisional acceptance but it was highly unlikely. Apparently the POI went as far as to offer my colleague her support as a mentor, willing to engage in a research project with her on the side, and asked her if she'd consider waiting a year and reapplying (with no sure fire chance of acceptance) to work with her as a student if accepted. I think it is a load of bull what these schools are doing. In my colleague's case, someone in admissions didn't do their job, it should have been a rejection based on lacking multiple required courses and instead it was an acceptance with full funding only to be revoked days later. In the OP's case someone again screwed up, how can you not know if the funding is secured before making an offer? I mean really, they can't pull a couple grand a year out of their massive tuition collections to fund a qualified student that they just screwed over?

::bump::

Like many I have massive student loan debts and need to defer them until I get a little more financially stable. I recently got my M.A. and since have been in a post masters certificate program (two classes a semester). The lender says it doesn't matter what type of program it is as long as the program can vouch for the fact I'm there taking at least half time coursework (this program defines full time as 3 courses and part time as 2 courses). Is this true?

anyone at all?

Anyone here anything from the Seton Hall Counseling PhD program yet? I know they had one of the latest deadlines in mid-January but I haven't heard anything and I haven't seen any Results Survey postings this year. (According to last year's survey it seems like late February was when some information started coming out). On the program's website it just says "review of applications and decisions are made after January 15th and 20-25 students are invited for an on campus interview."

Thanks for the feedback. Looks like he's ok with my offer of 22/hr. In hindsight I probably could have gone a little higher but I'm hoping he approves of my work and this can last a little while with perhaps a bump in pay. For now just a few hours a week, but an extra 130 or so a week to start isn't bad at all. He's quite the workhorse, my first "shift" is 8am monday and he'll "already be booked in sessions" by 7am. Time to gear up the 6am wake up calls!

I'm waiting to hear back from a few schools and already have a number of flat out rejections. My undergraduate GPA isn't as strong as it should be but I retook the new GREs and did better than first time and have a high Masters GPA in Clinical Psych with thesis research experience and clinical practice experience. I hate to be a downer but I expect all rejections for me this time around at this point. Sure I have a great MA GPA but many schools seems to gloss over that and look back years to undergrad. However you have a decently strong application so you might fare better. You have some research and clinical experience. Good start for sure. Also make sure you look for great fits with professors/researchers at schools. Some say fit is one of THE MOST important parts of finding an offer in your mailbox. You could have perfect grades, perfect GREs, years of research experience with top psychologists, and years of clinical work and get rejected because you don't fit with anyone at a school. So good luck to you and don't get too down if you get rejected outright first time around, I may be trying again in a few years if this time doesn't work. A few words of advice from what I'm learning from this experience: Do NOT talk in your application, statement, essay, interviews, or emails to any Clinical PhD programs about wanting to "help people," "work with people," "practice psychology," or any variation of this. They want academics and researchers. Don't be mislead how they show the numbers of people who graduate, get licensed and practice. They do show that because they likely have to but they generally want researchers at heart. If you hate research do not even apply. If you love, like, or can tolerate it then go for it...a chance at funding to be a research lab monkey/TA to get your Phd is a great thing to pass up if offered. Apply to a wide range of schools and programs in both Clinical and Counseling Psychology. Do not limit yourself to one small geographic area when applying...especially in the Northeast. I made the mistake of applying to a moderately wide geographic range (most of Northeast and edges of Mid-west, South) but regret already not applying in the South and in the Mid-West. A colleague of mine already has an offer and had multiple interviews at schools in the mid-west and she had less research experience than me, same grades, and same GREs. It was a big error on my part to not put a few application out West and down South.

I agree. I don't want to scare him off with a high offer and while 23 seems comfortably in between it seems like an odd number haha. Thanks yeah this thought keeps coming to mind , I may go with this.

I think that's what bothers me about social psych and even other academic disciplines. It's a lot of research and publishing but only within the community of fellow researchers and publishers. That's awesome you want to push more of the social psych research into applied settings because it can be helpful. I do some clinical therapy work now at the MA level and think it's really great. I hope to be able to do research that benefits the practice of psychology. I didn't think I'd like the front line work with clients but it's been a great experience and really helped to shape some of my interests. That said I tend to look up to those professors who do what I call the trifecta of work: teach, counsel, research. All three interact with one another and working in one informs the other two areas I think. You're correct though, I am limited in my experience with social psych and research in that area. I'd love to see more of the work like you are doing get applied to policy, theory, and so forth. I realize it can be broadly applied and I appreciate you shedding some light on what goes on behind the scenes in these programs, esp a top program like Northwestern. I think there is a lot of misconception about what goes on and where the real world impact of the research is felt. It's good to know more researchers are working to take what they've studied and put it to applications. I totally agree that marketing and consumer behavior psychology wouldn't exist without social psych. I hadn't considered that! I'm not sure so much that social psychology led to clinical psychology and I wonder if cognitive psychology grew out of social psychology. After all social behavior, social views, etc were studied and able to be studied without a complete understanding of the cognitive processes and brain itself. As technology progressed it seemed cognitive psychology could develop to explain the cognitive processes and chemical reactions in the brain as they related to the results found from social psych research.

I know a psychiatrist who is looking for some help running his private office, mostly filing, making phone calls, keeping his paperwork organized. He's a real straight shooter and I was told by his previous assistant to contact him regarding helping him out. He's interested and wants to know how many hours a week I can do and what my hourly rate should be. But I really have no idea. I need the extra money, I have a Masters in the field, but at same time working for him will be a good experience in general and I don't want to shoot too high. Same time I don't want to shoot too low. I know the previous assistant only worked maybe 5 hours a week for him and got about 18 an hour about 3-4 years ago and the person didn't have any degree. His workload has since increased with no assistant so I'm thinking he may want more hours. I'm thinking of saying 20 an hour but part of me feels like I could reasonably ask for more. Then again I have no idea what he is thinking of offering back, he might think I'll be cool with $15 or something or he might be cool with something much higher and I could undershoot. What would you do?

I've noticed that this forum seems to have a large number of Social Psychology students (and hopeful students). It always seemed to me that Social Psych programs were some of the smallest programs, I expected to see far more Clinical Psych people floating around this forum as it is often touted as the "most competitive" and "most applicants applying in a given year" section of psychology. I remember I initially wanted to get involved in Social Psych but started drifting more towards Clinical/Counseling Psych. As I moved more towards these areas I began to feel like I wanted to make a direct impact on clinicians practicing in the field (if not practice myself at times) and it seemed like these two areas of Psych help one do that. Many of my professors in my Masters program are PhDs in Clinical or Counseling Psych and always talk (and through their actions) about how they teach, practice, and supervise in addition to sometimes writing professionally on the subject of practice. Don't get me wrong, people are fascinating and human behavior is amazing to learn more about but I've always wondered what the drive was to get into Social Psych as it seems limited to teaching or researching (both fun) but seems distant from impacting the direct practice of psychology. It's kind of like how chemists and biologists research medications, make them, and educate pharmacists on how to dispense and explain them...the pharmacists are consumers of these researchers' work. Or medical doctors who gain knowledge through researchers and educators. Practicing psychologists are often the consumers of Clinical/Counseling researchers (and many do both) like how to deal with this disorder or that pathology, new techniques, etc. I suppose Social Psych research work could inspire new interventions, theories, and so forth but then you see so many studies that are things like "Having sex reduces stress," "Studies show that studying before a test improves test taker's ability to get higher grades," or " People who have jobs are less likely to be depressed than those without jobs." I guess I mean there seems to be a lot of "no duh" studies out there among the nuggets of really groundbreaking stuff. But who are the consumers of Social Psych work? ( I don't mean to offend or anything, I'm just extremely curious how Social Psych plays a role in the application of Psychology. I'm very practical application oriented, I want to do work and research where a direct impact on the field is realized, especially on the clinical practitioner level.)