2013 APPIC Internship Application Thread

[ilikepsych]

Hi all,
Question about counting the number of times assessement reports were used to write a clinical report--

I wrote many intake repors that included symptom inventories (i.e., BDI, PCL, etc). My understanding is that these DO NOT count as "integrated psychological reports" due to the instruction ""This section should NOT include reports written from an interview that is only history-taking, a clinical interview, and/or only the completion of behavioral rating forms, where no additional psychological tests are administered."

However, when you enter the individual psychological assessments, there is a space for "# clinical reports used with this measure." I am wondering if I should count the intake reports that I wrote using symptom inventories. I am afraid it might look confusing to list, for example, 33 clinical reports written using the BDI, when the total number of "integrated psychological reports" is only about 12.

What do you all think?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Hi all,
Question about counting the number of times assessement reports were used to write a clinical report--

I wrote many intake repors that included symptom inventories (i.e., BDI, PCL, etc). My understanding is that these DO NOT count as "integrated psychological reports" due to the instruction ""This section should NOT include reports written from an interview that is only history-taking, a clinical interview, and/or only the completion of behavioral rating forms, where no additional psychological tests are administered."

However, when you enter the individual psychological assessments, there is a space for "# clinical reports used with this measure." I am wondering if I should count the intake reports that I wrote using symptom inventories. I am afraid it might look confusing to list, for example, 33 clinical reports written using the BDI, when the total number of "integrated psychological reports" is only about 12.

What do you all think?

everything you said is right on. Those are not integrated reports but you did indeed write reports using them. Its seems completely typical to have a lot more non-integrated reports than integrated reports.

 

[LETSGONYR]

Hi all,
Question about counting the number of times assessement reports were used to write a clinical report--

I wrote many intake repors that included symptom inventories (i.e., BDI, PCL, etc). My understanding is that these DO NOT count as "integrated psychological reports" due to the instruction ""This section should NOT include reports written from an interview that is only history-taking, a clinical interview, and/or only the completion of behavioral rating forms, where no additional psychological tests are administered."

However, when you enter the individual psychological assessments, there is a space for "# clinical reports used with this measure." I am wondering if I should count the intake reports that I wrote using symptom inventories. I am afraid it might look confusing to list, for example, 33 clinical reports written using the BDI, when the total number of "integrated psychological reports" is only about 12.

What do you all think?

When in doubt... ask your DCT.

Personally, I wouldn't think those count as reports... I'd maybe add that I wrote intake summaries using these measures in the additional info section.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using SDN Mobile

 

[eudaimonPsyD]

Hi all,
Question about counting the number of times assessement reports were used to write a clinical report--

I wrote many intake repors that included symptom inventories (i.e., BDI, PCL, etc). My understanding is that these DO NOT count as "integrated psychological reports" due to the instruction ""This section should NOT include reports written from an interview that is only history-taking, a clinical interview, and/or only the completion of behavioral rating forms, where no additional psychological tests are administered."

However, when you enter the individual psychological assessments, there is a space for "# clinical reports used with this measure." I am wondering if I should count the intake reports that I wrote using symptom inventories. I am afraid it might look confusing to list, for example, 33 clinical reports written using the BDI, when the total number of "integrated psychological reports" is only about 12.

What do you all think?

Asking your DCT would be a good idea and first resource. Another option is to contact Dr. Jason Williams, either by his personal email or through the intern network. We were able to do this last year. But I would save that only if you/your DCT are unsure.

 

[eudaimonPsyD]

I am kind of surprised at how quiet this thread is with only a month-ish left before applications are starting to be due. I hope everyone's experience is going well! I am going through for the second time. I've got my site list narrowed down (much broader than last round) and letters of rec are starting to come in. Getting transcripts ordered tomorrow. CV done and polished.

As a general question, but especially to 2timers, how much adjustment do I really need to make to my essays? I had some interviews last year, and they have been reviewed numerous times with a thumbs up. Should I address the 2time issue directly? Or just incorporate the experiences I have gained since the last time I did this, without explicitly saying "I did this during the time I did not match"?

 

[LETSGONYR]

I am kind of surprised at how quiet this thread is with only a month-ish left before applications are starting to be due. I hope everyone's experience is going well! I am going through for the second time. I've got my site list narrowed down (much broader than last round) and letters of rec are starting to come in. Getting transcripts ordered tomorrow. CV done and polished.

I'm also surprised it's quiet... but I don't have too much to say. Still putting off working on essays and cover letters. . Transcripts have been received by APPIC, two letters are already uploaded, CV is current, proposal defense date is set, list is pretty much finalized, sample reports deidentified... not much to do besides work on cover letters and essays now. Best of luck to everyone else going through this.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using SDN Mobile

 

[ilikepsych]

Ok-- now a question about counting hours. Throughout graduate school, I have always counted a 1.5 hour long group at 1.5 hours. Now, when looking at the APPI, I see the instruction to count a 45-50 minute long hour as a therapy hour, and to round up to the nearest whole number when logging hours. This would imply that all the 1.5 hour long group sessions I've done would count as two hours. Over time, this would make quite a difference for me. For instance, 10 sessions of a 1.5 hour long group would be counted as 20 hours rather than 15. Despite the APPI instructions, is still somehow strikes me as "wrong." What do you all think? How do you count 90 minutes of clinical work-- 1.5 hours, or 2 hours?

 

[Psych317]

This question may have come up already, but I wasn't able to find it after a quick search. I wanted to get some thoughts/clarification on the integrated reports question for the APPI...

I've done several assessments at a inpatient unit for children and another for adolescents where due to their cogitive limitations or shorter admissions, I was only able to do a WASI and 1-2 projectives. Do those reports count as integrated reports?

Also, if I only administered cognitive test(s) or only administered projectives, do they not count as integrated reports, even if I summarized and weaved in findings from other recent testing?

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Ok-- now a question about counting hours. Throughout graduate school, I have always counted a 1.5 hour long group at 1.5 hours. Now, when looking at the APPI, I see the instruction to count a 45-50 minute long hour as a therapy hour, and to round up to the nearest whole number when logging hours. This would imply that all the 1.5 hour long group sessions I've done would count as two hours. Over time, this would make quite a difference for me. For instance, 10 sessions of a 1.5 hour long group would be counted as 20 hours rather than 15. Despite the APPI instructions, is still somehow strikes me as "wrong." What do you all think? How do you count 90 minutes of clinical work-- 1.5 hours, or 2 hours?

Based on what you've posted, it sounds like APPIC is telling you to do what you've proposed--round the 1.5 hours up to 2. Assuming this is how everyone else handles that situation, I don't think you should view it as wrong; it's just APPIC's way of standardizing things.

 

[paramour]

Ok-- now a question about counting hours. Throughout graduate school, I have always counted a 1.5 hour long group at 1.5 hours. Now, when looking at the APPI, I see the instruction to count a 45-50 minute long hour as a therapy hour, and to round up to the nearest whole number when logging hours. This would imply that all the 1.5 hour long group sessions I've done would count as two hours. Over time, this would make quite a difference for me. For instance, 10 sessions of a 1.5 hour long group would be counted as 20 hours rather than 15. Despite the APPI instructions, is still somehow strikes me as "wrong." What do you all think? How do you count 90 minutes of clinical work-- 1.5 hours, or 2 hours?

Based on what you've posted, it sounds like APPIC is telling you to do what you've proposed--round the 1.5 hours up to 2. Assuming this is how everyone else handles that situation, I don't think you should view it as wrong; it's just APPIC's way of standardizing things.

D'oh! I've always rounded to the nearest quarter hour. I've really been screwing myself over.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

D'oh! I've always rounded to the nearest quarter hour. I've really been screwing myself over.

Don't feel too bad--as best I can remember, I summed everything first, and only then did I actually round up. So for example, if I had five 6.5-hour neuropsych evals, I would've ended up with 33 total contact hours (i.e., 5 x 6.5 = 32.5, rounded up to 33).

Perhaps that might be the most accurate way of handling things? I've blocked all that from memory, so I have no idea if APPIC makes any specific recommendations regarding this sort of thing.

 

[paramour]

Don't feel too bad--as best I can remember, I summed everything first, and only then did I actually round up. So for example, if I had five 6.5-hour neuropsych evals, I would've ended up with 33 total contact hours (i.e., 5 x 6.5 = 32.5, rounded up to 33).

Perhaps that might be the most accurate way of handling things? I've blocked all that from memory, so I have no idea if APPIC makes any specific recommendations regarding this sort of thing.

Sounds good to me.

I dislike hours. I really don't pay attention to them 'til the end of a semester when I have to calculate them for my report. Pesky, evil things.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

The APPIC instructions

A practicum hour is defined as a clock hour, not a semester/quarter hour. A 45-50 minute client/patient hour may be counted as one practicum hour.

The APPIC states to round up a 45-50 minute therapy session to 1 hour. Nowhere does it say to round up a 30 minute therapy session to 1 hour. Nor does it say to round up 1.5 assessment hours per assessment to 2 hours.

APPIC states the following in a different area of the instructions

When calculating practicum hours, you should provide your best estimate of hours accrued or number of clients/patients seen. It is understood that you may not have the exact numbers available. Please round to the nearest whole number. Use your best judgment, in consultation with your academic training director, in quantifying your practicum experience.

To me this does not mean that somehow five 6.5 hour assessments should magically add up to 2.5 extra hours of assessment. On the other hand, when you have your total, feel free to round up.

But again, talk to your DCT.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Now, when looking at the APPI, I see the instruction to count a 45-50 minute long hour as a therapy hour, and to round up to the nearest whole number when logging hours. This would imply that all the 1.5 hour long group sessions I've done would count as two hours.

In case I was not clear, I do not think you can make that implication.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

I was only able to do a WASI and 1-2 projectives. Do those reports count as integrated reports?

As stated by APPIC

An integrated report includes a history, an interview, and at least two tests from one or more of the following categories: personality assessments (objective, self-report, and/or projective), intellectual assessment, cognitive assessment, and/or neuropsychological assessment. These are synthesized into a comprehensive report providing an overall picture of the patient/client.

so, if you completed a WASI and a projective for one client and wrote up a report, then it seems to fit the criteria

Also, if I only administered cognitive test(s) or only administered projectives, do they not count as integrated reports, even if I summarized and weaved in findings from other recent testing?

This is harder to answer. If you were not the one who administered the testing I would guess no. For example, you administered the WASI and someone else administered a projective before you and wrote up the results. Even if you write up the WASI results and weaved in the previous results I do not think that counts as an integrated report. But double check with your DCT.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

To me this does not mean that somehow five 6.5 hour assessments should magically add up to 2.5 extra hours of assessment. On the other hand, when you have your total, feel free to round up.

But again, talk to your DCT.

When I sat and thought about it for a minute (between my first and second posts above), this is what made more sense to me, and what seemed to be more consistent with the quoted APPIC guidelines. Thus, it's what I'd recommend.

In addition to asking your DCT, you can always email the folks at APPIC and check with them as well. They were generally very good about responding to questions in a timely manner when I applied a couple years back.

 

[The Hobgoblin]

I retyped both an old testing report and a case.
I felt that I needed to send my very best work and no site asked for the original, so I just did that. I did frint it on the letterhead of the site I worked in but they were fine with it.

 

[ClinPsychEnthus]

Ok-- now a question about counting hours. Throughout graduate school, I have always counted a 1.5 hour long group at 1.5 hours. Now, when looking at the APPI, I see the instruction to count a 45-50 minute long hour as a therapy hour, and to round up to the nearest whole number when logging hours. This would imply that all the 1.5 hour long group sessions I've done would count as two hours. Over time, this would make quite a difference for me. For instance, 10 sessions of a 1.5 hour long group would be counted as 20 hours rather than 15. Despite the APPI instructions, is still somehow strikes me as "wrong." What do you all think? How do you count 90 minutes of clinical work-- 1.5 hours, or 2 hours?

just to weigh in on this, I agree that rounding from 50 mins to an hour is more about being 'even' and making things easy, whereas rounding from a relatively easy to calculate number to another (1.5 to 2) could quickly compound your numbers. 10 groups going from 15 to 20 total hours absolutely seems wrong/inaccurate to me. I don't think that inflating one's amount of experience makes sense...

I will note though, that most people are really just trying to do the best they can with a tricky system... so good luck, all!

 

[Member878812]

I'm not applying this year, but I will in the future...If I work as a psychometrician can I count these hours when I apply for internship? Do I need to have my boss sign off on hours or anything?

 

[ilikepsych]

just to weigh in on this, I agree that rounding from 50 mins to an hour is more about being 'even' and making things easy, whereas rounding from a relatively easy to calculate number to another (1.5 to 2) could quickly compound your numbers. 10 groups going from 15 to 20 total hours absolutely seems wrong/inaccurate to me. I don't think that inflating one's amount of experience makes sense...

I will note though, that most people are really just trying to do the best they can with a tricky system... so good luck, all!

I've asked other students about this, and have been told something along the lines of "well, when you have a 1.5 hour group, you're always there 10 minutes early and there is always somebody that wants to chat afterwards for the next 15 minutes, so it really does come out to 2 hours of client contact." I have never counted those 15 minutes after group when clients want to talk to you about various concerns as client contact.

I thik that I am going to keep all my 1.5 hour groups as 1.5 hours (not 2), and agree that counting them as 2 would compound my numbers in a somewhat misleading/inaccurate way. However, I do think I will give myself a few bonus hours because it is indeed extremely true that I am often talking to clients for 15-20 minutes after group about various concerns that they have, and I never counted this time as contact time. heck, I usually try not to schedule anything immediately after group in order to allow for this sort of thing. I've always tried to be conservative in my counting of hours, so just adding a few extra for the time I spend with clients after group seems like a fair solution to me.

 

[eudaimonPsyD]

In a moment of confusion/panic/paranoia/exhaustion, I am posing this question to you guys. I feel like I should know this, given this is my second round, but I would still like to make sure. And given that my DCT is hard to reach at this point, thought I would try this first.

For one placement, we administered a variety of symptom inventories and other measures that were used to track progress during treatment and report numbers to the insurance company. These were administered face to face with the client, but was not used in any report. I know this obviously does not count toward the integrated report count, but can I still count those face to face administration hours as assessment? Last year I omitted these hours, thinking I couldn't count them because I thought assessment hours could only be counted if it resulted in an integrated report.

My brain is swimming and I've been up working since 4am. Little help friends??

 

[LETSGONYR]

For one placement, we administered a variety of symptom inventories and other measures that were used to track progress during treatment and report numbers to the insurance company. These were administered face to face with the client, but was not used in any report. I know this obviously does not count toward the integrated report count, but can I still count those face to face administration hours as assessment? Last year I omitted these hours, thinking I couldn't count them because I thought assessment hours could only be counted if it resulted in an integrated report.

I'd say that if you used a clinical assessment and were supervised, then you can use this time for clinical time. When I started my first neuropsych externship I administered tests and only wrote parts of reports (e.g., the behavioral obs, background info, etc.)... I still count that as clinical hours (but clearly not as a full integrated report). So, for example, I have 15 WAIS-IV administrations, but only 9 WAIS-IV included in a written integrated report.

 

[LETSGONYR]

I'm not applying this year, but I will in the future...If I work as a psychometrician can I count these hours when I apply for internship? Do I need to have my boss sign off on hours or anything?

My understanding is that no, you cannot. The only hours that you can count towards internship are program sanctioned (i.e., you receive course credit for them), so typically psych associate/psychometrician positions do not count as clinical hours (although you can still report this on your CV and internship sites can still know about your experiences).

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I'd say that if you used a clinical assessment and were supervised, then you can use this time for clinical time. When I started my first neuropsych externship I administered tests and only wrote parts of reports (e.g., the behavioral obs, background info, etc.)... I still count that as clinical hours (but clearly not as a full integrated report). So, for example, I have 15 WAIS-IV administrations, but only 9 WAIS-IV included in a written integrated report.

I would agree--it sounds quite reasonable to count them as assessment hours, even if you didn't actually write an assessment report afterward. Someone can correct me with a stipulation/quotation from APPIC, but my take is that the "assessment hours" category is just that--a category for you to indicate how much time you've spent directly administering assessment measures to pateints/clients in a clinical context.

 

[Dream Chaser]

I'm not applying this year, but I will in the future...If I work as a psychometrician can I count these hours when I apply for internship? Do I need to have my boss sign off on hours or anything?

My understanding is that no, you cannot. The only hours that you can count towards internship are program sanctioned (i.e., you receive course credit for them), so typically psych associate/psychometrician positions do not count as clinical hours (although you can still report this on your CV and internship sites can still know about your experiences).

Although it would be a good opportunity to increase the number of direct service and assessment hours for the internship application,outside work as a psychometrician cannot count towards the hours. Additionally,the number of batteries you completed as a psychometrician does not counteither. However, you can discuss the number of hours you worked/number ofbatteries in your CV if you feel that is necessary. If you plan on applying to assessment heavy internship sites, you could always highlight the work experienceyou have in the cover letter discussing your "fit" with the site. There is also a space in the APPI (approximately 500 characters) where you can explain non-practicum clinical work experiences.

 

[ClinPsychEnthus]

I'm not applying this year, but I will in the future...If I work as a psychometrician can I count these hours when I apply for internship? Do I need to have my boss sign off on hours or anything?

I work as a psychometrician, and as much as it PAINS me to say, everyone I consulted with gave me a resounding and emphatic NO- paid work experience may not be counted on the APPI. They suggested that I have my supervising psychologist be one of my letters of rec, so that my experience can be directly spoken to in a legitimate way.

 

[psych510]

I work as a psychometrician, and as much as it PAINS me to say, everyone I consulted with gave me a resounding and emphatic NO- paid work experience may not be counted on the APPI. They suggested that I have my supervising psychologist be one of my letters of rec, so that my experience can be directly spoken to in a legitimate way.

Actually, I think it depends. I know a few students in my program who had a paid practicum. So being paid is not a absolute no. The program still had to sanction the site. The stipend was very small which barely covered gas money and a Burger King combo meal.

 

[Psych317]

As stated by APPIC
so, if you completed a WASI and a projective for one client and wrote up a report, then it seems to fit the criteria

Thanks for the APPIC reference & I agree, it sounds like it could count as an integrated report. I will double check with my DCT.


This is harder to answer. If you were not the one who administered the testing I would guess no. For example, you administered the WASI and someone else administered a projective before you and wrote up the results. Even if you write up the WASI results and weaved in the previous results I do not think that counts as an integrated report. But double check with your DCT.

Makes sense and will check with my DCT to confirm, thanks!!

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Actually, I think it depends. I know a few students in my program who had a paid practicum. So being paid is not a absolute no. The program still had to sanction the site. The stipend was very small which barely covered gas money and a Burger King combo meal.

I do not think it can be any clearer than the instructions directly from APPIC

Testing experience accrued while employed should not be included in this section and may instead be listed on a curriculum vita.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The hours "counted" for APPIC need to be program sanctioned, which requires the student's hours to be part of a formal training experience, supervised, and ultimately signed off by their DCT. Working at a private practice for additional experience (paid or not) or volunteering on a research project where you do some assessment work or work as a counselor in the vast majority of cases will not count. The general rule of thumb is to always check with your DCT if you are not sure, but the vast majority of cases have been covered before on the APPIC listserv and/or in their FAQ.

Be careful about fudging numbers because you believe other students are doing the same. Inflated numbers are problematic to all involved.

 

[DynamicDidactic]

Be careful about fudging numbers because you believe other students are doing the same. Inflated numbers are problematic to all involved.

not to mention that in case one does get "caught" that all of your training was wasted just b/c you wanted to add 10% more hours.

 

[Member878812]

Thanks for the information. It's good to know for the future.

 

[Psychadelic2012]

Actually, I think it depends. I know a few students in my program who had a paid practicum. So being paid is not a absolute no. The program still had to sanction the site. The stipend was very small which barely covered gas money and a Burger King combo meal.

The hours "counted" for APPIC need to be program sanctioned, which requires the student's hours to be part of a formal training experience, supervised, and ultimately signed off by their DCT. Working at a private practice for additional experience (paid or not) or volunteering on a research project where you do some assessment work or work as a counselor in the vast majority of cases will not count. The general rule of thumb is to always check with your DCT if you are not sure, but the vast majority of cases have been covered before on the APPIC listserv and/or in their FAQ.

In my program, working for a private practice LP doing testing (and, yes, getting paid) counts toward hours on the APPI if you register for course credit. It's program sanctioned by the DCT, paid, and formal training, all in one--mostly because there are little to no opportunities for training in assessment at local sites. I don't think it's always clear-cut.

 

[psychRA]

Is there a mechanism in place for "catching" people who inflate their hours?

Of course, your TD has to sign off on your hours. Coming from a small PhD program, our TD didn't have that many students to manage, and if he had questions about anything on our application, he would ask us directly. But in larger programs, unless someone has an unusually high total, is the TD going to be in a position to notice that someone's fudged their hours? I don't know about others, but we tallied our hours ourselves, and didn't have to get any kind of supervisor input.

The sites I applied to were more research-focused and had lower minimum hour requirements, so I wasn't worried about my hours. But it does seem interesting that there isn't a lot of "quality control" in place to assure the accuracy of hours, given that a lot of sites weight them pretty heavily.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The sites I applied to were more research-focused and had lower minimum hour requirements, so I wasn't worried about my hours. But it does seem interesting that there isn't a lot of "quality control" in place to assure the accuracy of hours, given that a lot of sites weight them pretty heavily.

I'm not sure this is true, at least from what I have seen from many of the more competitive sites (possibly a different approach to selection). Many sites appear to care more about meeting the minimum requirement of hours, though the total # of hours accrued appear to be an issue of diminishing returns. If an applicant has 2000 hr of F2F but no research, publications, or teaching...are they really going to be looked at more favorably than an applicant with 850 hr of F2F and a nice variety of productivity and teaching experience? What if the student had 1000 and 2000? I just don't think quantity is going to out-pace the quality of the applicant.

I have only been involved with one site for review, so YMMV. I can say that our rating system was weighted much more towards having a well-rounded app....and the criteria about "hours" involved: 1. Meeting the minimum requirement, 2. Having assessment experience, 3. Having applicable therapy experience.

One of the most important aspects of an applicants app (besides coming from an APA-acred. program, which was req.) was how far along they were on their dissertation. The faculty was very wary of interviewing/ranking applicants that didn't have a good shot at defending by the end of internship. No site wants to have trainees get stuck in limbo. I'd argue this question is becoming more and more relevant in the match.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Is there a mechanism in place for "catching" people who inflate their hours?

Of course, your TD has to sign off on your hours. Coming from a small PhD program, our TD didn't have that many students to manage, and if he had questions about anything on our application, he would ask us directly. But in larger programs, unless someone has an unusually high total, is the TD going to be in a position to notice that someone's fudged their hours? I don't know about others, but we tallied our hours ourselves, and didn't have to get any kind of supervisor input.

The sites I applied to were more research-focused and had lower minimum hour requirements, so I wasn't worried about my hours. But it does seem interesting that there isn't a lot of "quality control" in place to assure the accuracy of hours, given that a lot of sites weight them pretty heavily.

I'm actually not sure how heavily sites weight hours totals once you've made it past whatever minimum they set. It does seems like APPIC leaves much of this up to the individual student and program, yes. They may feel as though we (and our supervisors) should be ethical enough to largely police ourselves.

Beyond that, I would imagine internship TD's can look at applications and decide if a number seems as though it might be grossly inflated. Given how many applicants' CVs they sort through, they've probably developed some fairly well-attuned BS meters at this point.

Edit: Just noticed T4C said basically the same thing regarding hours. I also agree with what he mentioned in terms of the well-roundedness of the application. Like T4C, it was my experience that sites were much more interested in the quality, breadth/diversity, and general "completeness" of my clinical and research experiences than the quantity. They were also interested in hearing my insights as to what areas I felt I lacked sufficient training in, and what my plans were to remedy that.

 

[erg923]

Is there a mechanism in place for "catching" people who inflate their hours?

Of course, your TD has to sign off on your hours. Coming from a small PhD program, our TD didn't have that many students to manage, and if he had questions about anything on our application, he would ask us directly. But in larger programs, unless someone has an unusually high total, is the TD going to be in a position to notice that someone's fudged their hours? I don't know about others, but we tallied our hours ourselves, and didn't have to get any kind of supervisor input.

The sites I applied to were more research-focused and had lower minimum hour requirements, so I wasn't worried about my hours. But it does seem interesting that there isn't a lot of "quality control" in place to assure the accuracy of hours, given that a lot of sites weight them pretty heavily.

I don't think there need to be any policing, as I consistently think students over estimate the importance of the hours total.

DCTs were not born yesterday (many these days are less than a decade removed from going through the process themselves), and they are just as aware of the imbalance and student desperation as anyone else (certainly more than some of the upper echelon folks at APA appear to be). They see the list serve messages, and as I suspected when I was doing the process a few years ago, most indeed know that the hours are basically...fabrications.

First, they are inflated and fudged. No doubt about that. Second, the hours are deceptive because they represent hundreds of 45-50 minutes session rounded upwards. So even if no fudging is going on, they are still grossly inaccurate representations.

 

[psych510]

I do not think it can be any clearer than the instructions directly from APPIC

The students were not technically considered employees although they received a stipend. It is almost the same as those who receive graduate assistantships to work in a counseling center. They are paid a stipend as well. The site and training was program sanctioned which makes the difference. This is different than being paid to work at an office for a psychologist doing testing for extra income. There was an actual contract with the department outlining the training provided and supervision that would be provided. I think it really comes down to is the site and training approved by the DCT.

 

[Ollie123]

The students were not technically considered employees although they received a stipend. It is almost the same as those who receive graduate assistantships to work in a counseling center. They are paid a stipend as well. The site and training was program sanctioned which makes the difference. This is different than being paid to work at an office for a psychologist doing testing for extra income. There was an actual contract with the department outlining the training provided and supervision that would be provided. I think it really comes down to is the site and training approved by the DCT.

That's my understanding as well. Otherwise, I'm pretty sure everyone in the history of my program (and most other programs I know) has reported their hours wrong. Our DCT is pretty careful about this stuff, so I imagine this was checked on at some point in the past several decades.

Obviously a side job as a staff member somewhere that your program knows nothing and has no formal affiliation with does not count. However, if someone's waiver/stipend comes from, say, serving as a study therapist on a grant-funded study under the supervision of a licensed core faculty member who provides supervision, and the program "approves" it - than I've never heard of anyone who didn't count that experience (or similar ones). I can't come up with any possible reason why such a rule would exist, unless faculty from unfunded programs were pushing it to try and get students to serve as slave labor. Frankly, I'd switch to the experimental track out of protest if they tried to implement such a thing here. It would pretty much necessitate people severely sacrificing research training to get more "hours", and there is already too much of that being done.

 

[docma]

I can say that our rating system was weighted much more towards having a well-rounded app....and the criteria about "hours" involved: 1. Meeting the minimum requirement, 2. Having assessment experience, 3. Having applicable therapy experience.

One of the most important aspects of an applicants app (besides coming from an APA-acred. program, which was req.) was how far along they were on their dissertation. The faculty was very wary of interviewing/ranking applicants that didn't have a good shot at defending by the end of internship. No site wants to have trainees get stuck in limbo. I'd argue this question is becoming more and more relevant in the match.

I'd endorse this view. Do not obsess about hours totals. TDs are looking first for the items noted above. And sites will vary significantly on how much assessment experience they expect, based on what is required of interns at their site. Relevant experience for the target population (in clinical practicum and/or in prior employment) and progress on the dissertation are far more important to us than hours totals.

 

[coloradocutter]

I am an intern now - and yes, it's quite the nightmare to go through this process.

I would say I disagree with you, though. Maybe 3 years ago 15 applications were enough and I do not know where you're applying - but I applied to 21 last year and I do not regret it.

It is becoming more and more competitive, especially in urban places where there are a few psychology programs that compete with each other.

It's better to get too many interviews than too little. I think 10-15 interviews are manageable, especially if they are at a relatively contained area. I also feel like for some people, they improve from one interview to the next and kind of get into a pace where as in the first couple they are less confident…However, maybe if you apply in a few different locations you should make your list shorter. Traveling all over the palce is hard...

My 2 cents - between 18-22 places...

I am also a super stressed uber-nerd so I needed to feel that I covered al lmy bases

J

Ok, my DCT is saying we cannot apply to more than 15. Well, he is saying I do not recommend it and trying to beat me into submission with jedi mind tricks. However, I am seriously thinking about defying him. I have 3 sites that don't do interviews and do optional visits if you want. I am applying to BOP sites and they just don't interview you at all the sites, no matter how qualified you are. The DT of their program told me 3-4 interviews tops if you applied to all of them and were really qualified.

Anywho, I have pretty much decided to defy him by 2-3 applications.

Ok, I am not getting this. What is the big deal? Is turning down interviews if you get 10-14 a big deal? Someone in my program turned down 4 and he had 10. That seemed stupid, but what in the heck is my DCT worried about. I don't get this.

Also, once he signs off on my hours, how will he know what I did? Do I have to show him my rank list? I am actually not worried about his blow back at that point.

I feel like I am missing something here....

 

[psychRA]

Ok, I am not getting this. What is the big deal? Is turning down interviews if you get 10-14 a big deal? Someone in my program turned down 4 and he had 10. That seemed stupid, but what in the heck is my DCT worried about. I don't get this.

Our DCT let us know that we were expected to attend all interviews. Period. If we had 2 sites that interviewed on the same day, and were absolutely inflexible about rescheduling (which is rare), well, that was out of our control. But we were told that it reflected poorly on our program if applicants applied and then turned down an interview.

Granted, he had no way to require us to do this, but I wouldn't have wanted to get on his bad side.

 

[coloradocutter]

Our DCT let us know that we were expected to attend all interviews. Period. If we had 2 sites that interviewed on the same day, and were absolutely inflexible about rescheduling (which is rare), well, that was out of our control. But we were told that it reflected poorly on our program if applicants applied and then turned down an interview.

Granted, he had no way to require us to do this, but I wouldn't have wanted to get on his bad side.

That makes sense and thank you for letting me know a rationale. I asked my MP and DCT this and they denied that. It was more like per my DCT - it will get crazy when you have interview notices come in.

I guess the problem is that if they require you to be more geographically diverse and then our DCT suggests at least 15, then if you got 13 interviews, it wouldn't even be ethical for them to enforce this no rejection policy. If you are trying to catch a multileg flight across country and back, it is beyond reach for some people financially.

But I get the rationale. Thanks!

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I guess the problem is that if they require you to be more geographically diverse and then our DCT suggests at least 15, then if you got 13 interviews, it wouldn't even be ethical for them to enforce this no rejection policy. If you are trying to catch a multileg flight across country and back, it is beyond reach for some people.

I remember flying city to city because it saved me money and that was the only way I could swing it logistically. I had M-W-F (or similar) for the entire month of Jan., so I paid more in lodging but I saved on wear and tear. Staying with my friends/family and using Priceline the rest of the time really saved me a lot of undue stress trying to get home and fly out a day later.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I remember flying city to city because it saved me money and that was the only way I could swing it logistically. I had M-W-F (or similar) for the entire month of Jan., so I paid more in lodging but I saved on wear and tear. Staying with my friends/family and using Priceline the rest of the time really saved me a lot of undue stress trying to get home and fly out a day later.

Flying leg-to-leg definitely helps. I ended up driving to most of my interviews, but of the few I flew to, at least a couple were from cities I'd just driven to the day before.

I think you mentioned it before, T4C, but using frequent flyer and hotel frequent stay programs (and/or rewards programs from your credit cards) can also help out. Heck, if nothing else, it'll make it much easier to get a free flight/room at some point in the future.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I think you mentioned it before, T4C, but using frequent flyer and hotel frequent stay programs (and/or rewards programs from your credit cards) can also help out. Heck, if nothing else, it'll make it much easier to get a free flight/room at some point in the future.

I wrote a post 2-3 years ago in the APPIC thread about how to use Priceline and leverage a few other things to help with travel costs. One of the less common options is to stay at a casino (cheap/free rooms) using their player's card. You don't even have to gamble to get the initial discounted rates, or you can get free nights if you do gamble.

 

[rilo]

I've been assisting my advisor with reviewing manuscripts and would like to include this info in my CV as I believe it is relevant. However, I was never formally asked/selected by the journal and am unsure how to list this experience- under Professional Service, "Manuscript Reviewer, Journal of XYZ"? "Assisted with Manuscript Reviewing"? I do not want to mislead or seem like I am padding my CV. Any input would be appreciated.

 

[paramour]

I've been assisting my advisor with reviewing manuscripts and would like to include this info in my CV as I believe it is relevant. However, I was never formally asked/selected by the journal and am unsure how to list this experience- under Professional Service, "Manuscript Reviewer, Journal of XYZ"? "Assisted with Manuscript Reviewing"? I do not want to mislead or seem like I am padding my CV. Any input would be appreciated.

I have a section for "Professional Service" and then one simple line that says something along the lines of:
- Student manuscript reviewer, Name of Journal, Date.

Or something like that to convey that I performed these services as a STUDENT rather than as an invited reviewer (as suggested by previous profs).

 

[rilo]

I have a section for "Professional Service" and then one simple line that says something along the lines of:
- Student manuscript reviewer, Name of Journal, Date.

Or something like that to convey that I performed these services as a STUDENT rather than as an invited reviewer (as suggested by previous profs).

Thanks!

 

[futureapppsy2]

I have a section for "Professional Service" and then one simple line that says something along the lines of:
- Student manuscript reviewer, Name of Journal, Date.

Or something like that to convey that I performed these services as a STUDENT rather than as an invited reviewer (as suggested by previous profs).

I listed these as "co-reviewer with Dr. ____"

When I've actually been the invited reviewer, though, I've obviously just listed it as is.