I was rejected this year, what do I do now?

[Tuala]

I was rejected from 3 Clinical programs in Canada I don't know what to do now.

 

I have two honours undergraduate degrees, one in Arts and one in Psychology and my cumulative gpa is 3.94. For GRE I got 165 on Verbal, 160 on Quant and 5 on Writing and 86 on the Psych subject exam, scores which I thought were mildly competitive. I have one paper that I am presenting in April and will be published soon and 2 years of research experience and many years of experience with the population I wish to study. I had a good interview with one school and I visited the PI before applying at another and she seemed really positive but then I just get a bunch of rejection letters. I think my SOP was really good, I had 10+ people read it. My big fear is my references might not have been stellar as my research supervisors have always been really hard on me.

 

I have a summer NSERC grant and I am trying to get a research job for the year but if that doesn't work, what should I do? If it does work, what else can I do to increase my chances? I will do anything and everything, should I retake the exams, do more courses to boost my gpa etc??

 

Also, should I apply to schools in the US? I am totally confused because there are so many and I have no idea how funding works. Any help would be appreciated!

 

[BCB]

I can't help with funding or US schools questions, but my thoughts would be: 

• Working on your GRE scores from those baseline scores would be high effort with low payoff, so I would skip that option.
• Three schools is not that many to apply to, especially in clinical. I would apply to more next year.
• Having a publication on your CV will help next year, as will your summer grant. So those will make you more competitive without you having to do anything different than what you've already planned.
• Is your psychology GPA good?
• Is your SOP targeted enough to each school? Does it talk about your research and clinical experience in terms of your responsibilities and how they make you an excellent candidate for this school in particular?

Overall, I think the single biggest thing I would do is try to get at least one change in who is writing your recommendations, starting with the person you think is writing you the weakest letter.

[sumatracane]

I think what helped me most this year was having full-time research experience - working as a research coordinator/data manager/research assistant can be very valuable. I struggled to find a full-time position at first so I took a temporary part-time one, which I think helped me get the full-time position. Email POIs you're interested in working with and ask if they have research positions available. Sometimes labs don't post their full-time positions online, so it's good to email the professors directly.

Other than that, your GPA/GRE scores are fine. Definitely apply to more schools. I don't know how the schools in Canada work, but if you are to apply to US schools, make sure they are funded programs. Most schools will tell you on the website. Also, look at the other forum topic about funding packages - you can see what those schools offer and go from there. 

I met people at interviews that had applied to upwards of 19 schools - that's incredibly high and very expensive, but they had multiple offers and were able to choose what was best for them. 

[FacelessMage]

To be honest, from what I've been hearing from a bunch of my mentors, the process for getting into clinical programs in Canada is random and department politics play a huge role in who they can accept for a cycle (see: the discussion on Ryerson in the Canadian applicants thread). The only thing I would focus on is getting more publications and possibly finding better reference letters (although just because they're hard on you doesn't mean that they didn't write good letters). Applying to more schools, including those in the US, should help as well, especially if your research interests are more broad. Your GPA and GRE scores are competitive so I wouldn't worry about those. 

Edited March 15, 2015 by FacelessMage

[Tuala]

I can't help with funding or US schools questions, but my thoughts would be: 

• Working on your GRE scores from those baseline scores would be high effort with low payoff, so I would skip that option.
• Three schools is not that many to apply to, especially in clinical. I would apply to more next year.
• Having a publication on your CV will help next year, as will your summer grant. So those will make you more competitive without you having to do anything different than what you've already planned.
• Is your psychology GPA good?
• Is your SOP targeted enough to each school? Does it talk about your research and clinical experience in terms of your responsibilities and how they make you an excellent candidate for this school in particular?

Overall, I think the single biggest thing I would do is try to get at least one change in who is writing your recommendations, starting with the person you think is writing you the weakest letter.

Thank you for the advice.

I would have applied to more but there are only about 20 schools and 5 of them I can't attend as I don't speak french well enough.  Then when I looked through the profs, I found about 8 I was interested in and I wrote to them asking if they were taking students and only 3 were so there simply wasn't much choice.

I am glad to hear that my scores are okay.  I think my GPA psych is basically the same.  I have gotten two B+'s and the rest are A's which basically is the same as the rest of my GPA.

I tried to target my SOP, I talked about why I thought the POI would be a good fit for my project idea and I picked something about each program to talk about that I thought was interesting.  But here we only get one page so there isn't much space and honestly all the school websites say the same stuff so I can't really figure out how I would tailor to the program any more. I don't really think I would be the excellent candidate for one school over another, does that make sense?

 

I definitely agree about the recommendations, I am going to try and get someone else.

[Tuala]

To be honest, from what I've been hearing from a bunch of my mentors, the process for getting into clinical programs in Canada is random and department politics play a huge role in who they can accept for a cycle (see: the discussion on Ryerson in the Canadian applicants thread). The only thing I would focus on is getting more publications and possibly finding better reference letters (although just because they're hard on you doesn't mean that they didn't write good letters). Applying to more schools, including those in the US, should help as well, especially if your research interests are more broad. Your GPA and GRE scores are competitive so I wouldn't worry about those. 

 

Okay thanks for the advice!!! I will take a look at that discussion as I was considering Ryerson for my next application cycle.

[Tuala]

I think what helped me most this year was having full-time research experience - working as a research coordinator/data manager/research assistant can be very valuable. I struggled to find a full-time position at first so I took a temporary part-time one, which I think helped me get the full-time position. Email POIs you're interested in working with and ask if they have research positions available. Sometimes labs don't post their full-time positions online, so it's good to email the professors directly.

Other than that, your GPA/GRE scores are fine. Definitely apply to more schools. I don't know how the schools in Canada work, but if you are to apply to US schools, make sure they are funded programs. Most schools will tell you on the website. Also, look at the other forum topic about funding packages - you can see what those schools offer and go from there. 

I met people at interviews that had applied to upwards of 19 schools - that's incredibly high and very expensive, but they had multiple offers and were able to choose what was best for them. 

 

That's a good idea, sort of get my foot in the door to try and get a full time position.  I am meeting with professors at my university to see if they have openings this week.  You pretty much get funding guarenteed in Canada, that's why I find looking at US schools daunting, it is just such a different system.  Plus we only have about 20 schools here!

[student896]

You need to apply to more schools. You should apply to at LEAST 8. Personally, I applied to every school I could possibly tolerate being at for 5 years (schools with profs who had research somewhat related to what I wanted to do and were not more than 6 hours from home). If you had one shot at winning the lottery for the year, would you buy only one ticket? No, you'd buy as many as possible. You cannot be choosy. Getting an offer from a clinical psyc program is akin to winning the lottery, no matter how strong your application is. A number of very random factors need to line up for you and the chances of it all are quite low. Every school you apply to is another chance to win the lottery. I don;t think strengthening your application will help. It's already very strong and the majority of people I know who got in this year had much weaker applications than you do. Focus instead on contacting profs EARLY (May is a good time to start), introduce yourself, write a personalized couple of sentences about why you are interested in them (and mean it!), attach your cv or better yet include a link to an online cv that includes a picture of you. Be persistent but not annoying. If they are even considering taking a student for next year, do everything you can to get a meeting with them before the end of the year. Find out if they are going to conference you can meet them at, or if the school is relatively close to you, go to their office hours. The vast majority of people I know who got offers this year met the prof personally before the formal interview process and made an impression, making the prof want to fight for them because they liked them and felt that "fit". Do not discount the importance of a good "gut feeling" in this process - profs are people too, and they can't help it if they get a good feeling about one applicant and think they may like to work with them closely for the next 5 years, even over a more qualified applicant. This is all stuff I wish I knew earlier, but throughout this process it has become loud and clear. Hope it helps you.

Edited March 17, 2015 by student896

[ammpie]

Hi Tuala,

 

Sorry to hear you didn't get any offers. I applied to just over a dozen clinical programs in the US last year and didn't get into any. It was devastating. I've read students have done this for years even. My GPA was ~3.7 with great research experience but I could maybe have used a bit more direct clinical experience. I think student896 is definitely right in that it is a lottery situation though. Apply to as much as you can provided the interests are not way off to increase your chances if it's what you want. Funding is available in the US as far as I know but you also do need to TA and having some money saved beforehand is good if you don't want to be struggling because it is tight on funding alone. I found this document earlier today regarding funding for a little more clear and up to date info but don't remember from which thread (sorry to not quote/credit the original poster!) https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1E9TbpYk16w8PIO1DfzPZwXKaSk0P2QQEhnAwS09HQB8/edit#gid=0

 

I also know of the PhD students I knew through working in research at on-campus labs, that they received admissions even having GPA's between 3.2-3.4. Your GRE scores are also pretty good relative to others you will be competing with, and a good amount of professors in the field of psychology who had their own grad students said they didn't even care about them that much if at all (same with GPA) as long as they were okay because they don't believe them to be great indicators for success or who you truly are as a person. They gave the benefit of the doubt to poor test takers and the like more easily than others in different fields. I think this is a mentality within psychology that some people can luck out with. These same professors often said the biggest factor provided your SOP was good was what recommendations said of a person. I was also in the place of not quite having something published yet which is something I felt many typically did when applying and from those who were accepted, so I would really work on completing that to help you.

 

I would try to get a new reference or two if you can or reassess the ones you have. I feel like when asking someone to write for you, you should ask if they feel comfortable writing for you so you can somewhat assess their feelings about it. They may not be honest so that may not be helpful, but maybe they will be and that is helpful! Better to at least try. I know at least in the places I went to school/in the US, professors felt and knew it was part of their duty as a university professor to write students letters of rec, and many did so happily as they had generic templates already ready to go as they are asked so often to. To make this easier, and which I got amazing feedback for was to really make the process of writing for you as easy and wonderful as possible. I created binders first with a one sheet page containing a breakdown of how I knew them and for how long, my responsibilities when working for them, my achievements, academic, and work history, what degree I was pursuing, and some blurbs with kind adjectives describing my skills and attributes especially if you can tie them into your experience with them (Did you work in their lab and always told how organized you were or that you were a team player? Were you a dedicated student of theirs who showed their interests in the subject through projects the class may have inspired you in one way or another? Or an anecdote about your great interest in the subject after having met them at their office hours and what that led to). You can add in your personal statement as well if you're comfortable with that. Next I had a printed spreadsheet organized by due dates and the method letters were due (mail or online). Each line had a box for them to check off as they went so it was easy on them to stay organized. Then was a sheet for every school I was interested in organized by date as the check off sheet was which provided the school's name, the specific program I was applying to, the letters due date, and instructions on how to submit that letter. If it was by mail and required forms, they were attached right behind with a pre-addressed and stamped envelope. Online submissions had the email address they should be expecting in their inbox for a link. And the part that my writers really loved and I think could hugely benefit you if you get lucky is to bulletpoint the topics you are interested in at the school, and which professors are connected to those areas/interests (you usually need to pick a few in your application). My writers recognized a few schools and professors this way and actually said they were good friends them, used to go to school with them, or were old colleagues with the person and would put in a word for me when they next spoke with them or that they would soon be meeting them at a conference and would mention my name then. I would have never known about the chance of these relationships if it had not been for this and was so thrilled my writers did this for me. At the end you can add in a thank you note, extra supplies (a few envelopes and stamps), and ways to reach you if they needed anything else to ease the process. It may be a bit excessive and it was a lot of work to prepare but I am so happy I did it and my writers told me they were saving my binder to show future students. It was also a good demonstration that I was organized, prepared, and detail orientated which are definite positive qualities that schools look for in their future grad students. 

 

I ultimately decided I wasn't going to reapply for PhD programs for many reasons but reapplied for masters program's this year and am so happy about it and the field I will be in. Definitely continue to pursue it if you are set on it and I'm sure you can open up some more opportunities for yourself before applying again. Best of luck!!

[TenaciousBushLeaper]

As others have already mentioned, make sure to apply to more programs the next go around, like, a lot more. Your stats seem to be pretty good(at least in my opinion, with my limited knowledge). 

I'm not from Canada so I would caution my and any other advise you get from someone who isn't a Canadian student who has successfully entered into a PhD program in the US.  That being said, I'd say yes apply to programs in the US, given you're able to find a place or places where your research fit is really really "good". 

[DrClinPsyAdvice]

get a postbacc RA position and try again!

http://clinicalpsychgradschool.org/pbacc.php

[_kita]

Your scores are fine for clinical programs. No doubt about it. Simply, you were not the 'best fit' for the programs you were applying to at the time. With how competitive clinical is, it's not surprising. The school can afford to be picky for the students who are the best fit each year.

 

However, if you add more to your resume such as work experience, more research experience, and use the next year to strengthen your letters/personal statement/etc, you'll have an even better application next year. Try to rework your search to add more programs into it; see how flexible you can be.