2023-2024 APPIC Internship Interview Invitation Thread

[PsychGrad24]

Any other Elyse Myers fans tempted to start every answer to interview questions by repeating the question and saying "Great question. I would love to tell you..." (I won't, but it's always in the back of my mind. Why is my brain like this?!)

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[BippityBoppityBoo]

Does anyone have any insight into what it means if you receive neither an invitation nor a rejection?

 

[summerbabe]

Does anyone have any insight into what it means if you receive neither an invitation nor a rejection?

Some sites don't send out formal rejections, which is not great for applicants. Admin tasks largely fall on a single DCT who has other responsibilities. Sites with strong admin support (or an assistant/co-training directors) where invites/rejections and coordinating interview schedules can be delegated/split are more likely to be especially conscientious in this respect.

Maybe a quarter of the sites that I applied to during my year never sent any type of notification. Maybe 1 or 2 sent a late rejection during the post-interview/pre-rank period.

Beyond that, it might be an informal waitlist situation or oversight/user error (like forgetting to include you on a mass email).

 

[BippityBoppityBoo]

Some sites don't send out formal rejections, which is not great for applicants. Admin tasks largely fall on a single DCT who has other responsibilities. Sites with strong admin support (or an assistant/co-training directors) where invites/rejections and coordinating interview schedules can be delegated/split are more likely to be especially conscientious in this respect.

Maybe a quarter of the sites that I applied to during my year never sent any type of notification. Maybe 1 or 2 sent a late rejection during the post-interview/pre-rank period.

Beyond that, it might be an informal waitlist situation or oversight/user error (like forgetting to include you on a mass email).

Is there any reasonable way to reach out to the DCT or should I leave well alone?

 

[PsychGrad24]

Does anyone have any insight into what it means if you receive neither an invitation nor a rejection?

A couple of my sites have stated in their interview invitation to let them know ASAP if you don't wish to attend their interview day so they can invite another qualified candidate. I'm wondering if some sites dont send out rejections because they keep a "reserve" list of candidates that could get an interview if others turn it down?

 

[Lainey'sMom2020]

Is there any reasonable way to reach out to the DCT or should I leave well alone?

As someone who was in this process 2 years ago and now on the interviewing side, I would say it probably wouldn't hurt to send an email. Worst case they never respond. Best case scenario, they have a waitlist in case an interviewee has to cancel or rejects their invitation to interview. If you reach out and show interest it could mean the difference of you getting pulled from that waitlist. However, the most likely is that it is a site that just does not send out rejection emails. For reference I am at an academic medical center, family medicine residency. We do take the time to send out rejection emails but only after all interview positions are filled. Hope this helps! And good luck!!

 

[BippityBoppityBoo]

I have some good news! I emailed the site and the DCT replied that she was so sorry I never received the email and sent me my invite! Another site simply hasn't responded so I am assuming rejection.

Thank you for everyone's input!

 

[psychintmatch23]

A couple of my sites have stated in their interview invitation to let them know ASAP if you don't wish to attend their interview day so they can invite another qualified candidate. I'm wondering if some sites dont send out rejections because they keep a "reserve" list of candidates that could get an interview if others turn it down?

I heard that we shouldn't reject interview offers because we could burn bridges. But would it actually be ok to reject an offer if you really don't see yourself wanting to go there or rank them that highly? If so, what would be a respectable way to reject an interview offer?

 

[WisNeuro]

I heard that we shouldn't reject interview offers because we could burn bridges. But would it actually be ok to reject an offer if you really don't see yourself wanting to go there or rank them that highly? If so, what would be a respectable way to reject an interview offer?

If you do not want to go to a site at all, simply decline the offer. Though, one would question why you applied in the first place. Any site that you could see yourself possibly going, do the interview if you can and rank accordingly.

 

[PsychGrad24]

I heard that we shouldn't reject interview offers because we could burn bridges. But would it actually be ok to reject an offer if you really don't see yourself wanting to go there or rank them that highly? If so, what would be a respectable way to reject an interview offer?

It is ok to respectfully reject an offer. I got far more interviews than I expected, to the point where it would be unproductive for myself and the sites to attend all of them, so I turned down 2 that I was not likely to rank high. I was just honest with them and said I got a lot of invitations and wanted to be sure to maintain a manageable schedule. I think the sites appreciated me not taking more of their time and allowing them to invite other qualified candidates. I feel that I was respectful in turning down the interviews early enough that it wouldn't reflect poorly on myself or my grad school program. I think it would be rude to hold onto an interview invite and turn it down like the day before (unless an emergency or illness came up of course).

 

[summerbabe]

I heard that we shouldn't reject interview offers because we could burn bridges. But would it actually be ok to reject an offer if you really don't see yourself wanting to go there or rank them that highly? If so, what would be a respectable way to reject an interview offer?

Don’t confuse a training program with the institution. If somebody rejected an interview with my VA and applied for a staff job a few years later, different people will be involved in the 2 processes. Or if there is overlap, they may not remember or care. I guess it could be different at a small site or if you've had an established relationship with this site (e.g., did lots of pracs) but I wouldn't let this govern my decisions.

If you've come to the conclusion that you absolutely wouldn't rank a site, it's in the site's best interest to know so they can offer your spot to somebody else. Or if they don't, that's still time saved coordinating your interview schedule, reviewing your materials again during selection meeting(s), and other tasks that take up valuable time. Send a prompt email where you're professional, to the point, and wish them luck on their selection process.

If you're still on the fence and your schedule allows you to interview and the interview confirms the site is a bad fit, just leave the site off your ranked list. Or you might be pleasantly surprised. My interview experiences (in-person pre-pandemic) played a large role in determining my ultimate ranks.

 

[BippityBoppityBoo]

Hi could you share the template of your email to the DCT? Thanks!

hello! it was a one liner- Dear X, I hope you are well. I have not received an invitation or a rejection from your site and am curious to know my application status. Warm regards, Y

 

[asukaran]

hello! it was a one liner- Dear X, I hope you are well. I have not received an invitation or a rejection from your site and am curious to know my application status. Warm regards, Y

Thank you!

 

[psychoticpsyduck]

Official Site Name: Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility
Speciality Track or Site (e.g., for consortiums):
Date Invitation Received: 12/16
Method of Invitation (Phone call, personal/mass email): Email
Interview Dates Offered: 1/26

 

[psychoticpsyduck]

Official Site Name: Department of State Hospitals-Metropolitan
Speciality Track or Site (e.g., for consortiums):
Date Invitation Received: 12/21/22
Method of Invitation (Phone call, personal/mass email): Personal email
Interview Dates Offered: January 17th, 18th, 19th and 20th

 

[psych.meout]

Now that people have had some interviews, has anyone had the experience where you interviewed at a site and were generally impressed by the brochure and what the faculty were discussing about the program, rotations, etc., but then had that excitement tempered by the current interns and other applicants?

I interviewed at one site that seemed good on paper and during faculty interviews, but when we had a group Q&A/discussion between all the applicants and interns the quality of discussion was shockingly poor, especially compared to other sites where I interviewed. The applicants asked the most superficial, anodyne questions, like what the parking situation was like and what the commute was like if they lived in a certain area. I get that some of these lifestyle and quality of life questions are important to ask to see what it's like from the intern perspective, but it was a bit surprising that this is nearly all they asked about. I wonder if these applicants didn't ask more critical questions because they felt that this discussion was evaluative and affected the site's rankings of them even though they explicitly said it doesn't. Most of these other applicants were from unfunded doctoral programs, many in the same metro area as the internship site, so I wonder if they were just set on this site because of geography and worried about rocking the boat.

Conversely, applicants in similar discussions at other sites asked more thought-provoking and critical questions. For example, they asked about how DEI and multicultural competence actually gets infused in the rotation (as opposed to just what is advertised in the brochure and what faculty claim); what the worst, more difficult, or less ideal parts of the program were; how the program and interns deal with potential secondary trauma from some of the more acute care rotations (e.g., ED and trauma medicine rotations), and so on. They also asked some of those aforementioned lifestyle questions, but they were the minority and didn't detract from more thoughtful and programmatic questions. The interns were honest and transparent in responding and often encouraged more critical questions or provided that information without prompting.

For this specific site, on the few occasions when one or two of applicants did ask better questions, the current interns didn't really answer them. For example, when asked what the worst or their "least favorite" part of the program was, they struggled to answer. Most interns said nothing and just moved on to the next question, though it was unclear why. Maybe they hadn't really thought about it before and couldn't think of a good answer on the spot? Maybe they didn't want to answer due to the peer pressure and groupthink amongst their cohort and the applicants to not criticize the program? Maybe they just don't have a good sense of what are some red flags at an internship site that they should be critical of, which would seem to be a whole different kind of red flag of poor insight? Most of the interns were also from the local unfunded doctoral programs in that same metro area...

I guess my point in asking about this is that I'm unsure how to reconcile these conflicting perceptions between the program seeming good but then the current and prospective interns seeming so subpar. I also don't know how I should incorporate this into my rankings. I don't know if I just ended up on a bad interview day with less competitive applicants and the interns were off their game (and therefore would have had a different experience had I chosen another interview day) or if there is something I'm missing and the program isn't as good as it seems. That the interns were unable or unwilling to talk about any negatives or less than ideal aspects of the program would seem to favor the latter explanation, as no site is perfect and should have some areas of growth or improvement. All the other sites where I have interviewed have been transparent about this and committed to improvement with tangible plans of how to do so.

My gut reaction is to rank it lower than I otherwise would sans this experience with the interns and applicants. I wonder if it's a good fit and if it would be challenging enough to foster sufficient growth commensurate with internship if this is the caliber of people whom not only get interviewed for the site but match there and are seemingly thriving. I.e., I want to be challenged and grow from it during internship, not just be a big fish in a little pond and not get as much out of it, but this program kind of seems like the latter.

Thoughts?

 

[WisNeuro]

Now that people have had some interviews, has anyone had the experience where you interviewed at a site and were generally impressed by the brochure and what the faculty were discussing about the program, rotations, etc., but then had that excitement tempered by the current interns and other applicants?

I interviewed at one site that seemed good on paper and during faculty interviews, but when we had a group Q&A/discussion between all the applicants and interns the quality of discussion was shockingly poor, especially compared to other sites where I interviewed. The applicants asked the most superficial, anodyne questions, like what the parking situation was like and what the commute was like if they lived in a certain area. I get that some of these lifestyle and quality of life questions are important to ask to see what it's like from the intern perspective, but it was a bit surprising that this is nearly all they asked about. I wonder if these applicants didn't ask more critical questions because they felt that this discussion was evaluative and affected the site's rankings of them even though they explicitly said it doesn't. Most of these other applicants were from unfunded doctoral programs, many in the same metro area as the internship site, so I wonder if they were just set on this site because of geography and worried about rocking the boat.

Conversely, applicants in similar discussions at other sites asked more thought-provoking and critical questions. For example, they asked about how DEI and multicultural competence actually gets infused in the rotation (as opposed to just what is advertised in the brochure and what faculty claim); what the worst, more difficult, or less ideal parts of the program were; how the program and interns deal with potential secondary trauma from some of the more acute care rotations (e.g., ED and trauma medicine rotations), and so on. They also asked some of those aforementioned lifestyle questions, but they were the minority and didn't detract from more thoughtful and programmatic questions. The interns were honest and transparent in responding and often encouraged more critical questions or provided that information without prompting.

For this specific site, on the few occasions when one or two of applicants did ask better questions, the current interns didn't really answer them. For example, when asked what the worst or their "least favorite" part of the program was, they struggled to answer. Most interns said nothing and just moved on to the next question, though it was unclear why. Maybe they hadn't really thought about it before and couldn't think of a good answer on the spot? Maybe they didn't want to answer due to the peer pressure and groupthink amongst their cohort and the applicants to not criticize the program? Maybe they just don't have a good sense of what are some red flags at an internship site that they should be critical of, which would seem to be a whole different kind of red flag of poor insight? Most of the interns were also from the local unfunded doctoral programs in that same metro area...

I guess my point in asking about this is that I'm unsure how to reconcile these conflicting perceptions between the program seeming good but then the current and prospective interns seeming so subpar. I also don't know how I should incorporate this into my rankings. I don't know if I just ended up on a bad interview day with less competitive applicants and the interns were off their game (and therefore would have had a different experience had I chosen another interview day) or if there is something I'm missing and the program isn't as good as it seems. That the interns were unable or unwilling to talk about any negatives or less than ideal aspects of the program would seem to favor the latter explanation, as no site is perfect and should have some areas of growth or improvement. All the other sites where I have interviewed have been transparent about this and committed to improvement with tangible plans of how to do so.

My gut reaction is to rank it lower than I otherwise would sans this experience with the interns and applicants. I wonder if it's a good fit and if it would be challenging enough to foster sufficient growth commensurate with internship if this is the caliber of people whom not only get interviewed for the site but match there and are seemingly thriving. I.e., I want to be challenged and grow from it during internship, not just be a big fish in a little pond and not get as much out of it, but this program kind of seems like the latter.

Thoughts?

Got to figure out what is important to you and rank according to that. Personally, I gave zero ****s about much else at a site besides what training experiences I could get, what networking I could do and what letters I could get for the next steps of my career (postdoc and jobs). Worked out well, as I also liked those sites in other domains. But, those were limited experiences, so I was willing to bite the bullet on other areas to set myself up for decades. Now, you may prioritize some other aspects of sites, and that's fine. I'd wait until after ALL of your interviews, then decide what's important in terms of your rankings and go with that. I wouldn't make any ranking decisions until it's all said and done.

 

[sopsyched11]

Now that people have had some interviews, has anyone had the experience where you interviewed at a site and were generally impressed by the brochure and what the faculty were discussing about the program, rotations, etc., but then had that excitement tempered by the current interns and other applicants?

I interviewed at one site that seemed good on paper and during faculty interviews, but when we had a group Q&A/discussion between all the applicants and interns the quality of discussion was shockingly poor, especially compared to other sites where I interviewed. The applicants asked the most superficial, anodyne questions, like what the parking situation was like and what the commute was like if they lived in a certain area. I get that some of these lifestyle and quality of life questions are important to ask to see what it's like from the intern perspective, but it was a bit surprising that this is nearly all they asked about. I wonder if these applicants didn't ask more critical questions because they felt that this discussion was evaluative and affected the site's rankings of them even though they explicitly said it doesn't. Most of these other applicants were from unfunded doctoral programs, many in the same metro area as the internship site, so I wonder if they were just set on this site because of geography and worried about rocking the boat.

Conversely, applicants in similar discussions at other sites asked more thought-provoking and critical questions. For example, they asked about how DEI and multicultural competence actually gets infused in the rotation (as opposed to just what is advertised in the brochure and what faculty claim); what the worst, more difficult, or less ideal parts of the program were; how the program and interns deal with potential secondary trauma from some of the more acute care rotations (e.g., ED and trauma medicine rotations), and so on. They also asked some of those aforementioned lifestyle questions, but they were the minority and didn't detract from more thoughtful and programmatic questions. The interns were honest and transparent in responding and often encouraged more critical questions or provided that information without prompting.

For this specific site, on the few occasions when one or two of applicants did ask better questions, the current interns didn't really answer them. For example, when asked what the worst or their "least favorite" part of the program was, they struggled to answer. Most interns said nothing and just moved on to the next question, though it was unclear why. Maybe they hadn't really thought about it before and couldn't think of a good answer on the spot? Maybe they didn't want to answer due to the peer pressure and groupthink amongst their cohort and the applicants to not criticize the program? Maybe they just don't have a good sense of what are some red flags at an internship site that they should be critical of, which would seem to be a whole different kind of red flag of poor insight? Most of the interns were also from the local unfunded doctoral programs in that same metro area...

I guess my point in asking about this is that I'm unsure how to reconcile these conflicting perceptions between the program seeming good but then the current and prospective interns seeming so subpar. I also don't know how I should incorporate this into my rankings. I don't know if I just ended up on a bad interview day with less competitive applicants and the interns were off their game (and therefore would have had a different experience had I chosen another interview day) or if there is something I'm missing and the program isn't as good as it seems. That the interns were unable or unwilling to talk about any negatives or less than ideal aspects of the program would seem to favor the latter explanation, as no site is perfect and should have some areas of growth or improvement. All the other sites where I have interviewed have been transparent about this and committed to improvement with tangible plans of how to do so.

My gut reaction is to rank it lower than I otherwise would sans this experience with the interns and applicants. I wonder if it's a good fit and if it would be challenging enough to foster sufficient growth commensurate with internship if this is the caliber of people whom not only get interviewed for the site but match there and are seemingly thriving. I.e., I want to be challenged and grow from it during internship, not just be a big fish in a little pond and not get as much out of it, but this program kind of seems like the latter.

Thoughts?

From my experience last year during interviews, I found it most helpful to go with my gut and training goals on rankings. While interviewing, I found the interns at many sites I applied to seemed unhappy with specific aspects of the program that I personally didn't feel should have held so much weight. I'm lucky I went with my gut on how the supervisors presented and the site overall as I am EXTREMELY happy with my placement. I also know from conversation that it was an experience similar to all of my cohort members here at internship. If we had all gone off the interns complaints, we might have missed out on an extremely supportive internship. Just my two cents on putting *too* much stock in the current interns when you're gut is giving you a different feeling

 

[Minus_The_Bear]

I have heard that if a site emails you after an interview to see if you have any further questions, is code for “we want you.”

Any input on the validity of this?

 

[WisNeuro]

I have heard that if a site emails you after an interview to see if you have any further questions, is code for “we want you.”

Any input on the validity of this?

I wouldn't read into this. We sent an e-mail like this to everyone who interviewed.

 

[PsychPhDone]

I have heard that if a site emails you after an interview to see if you have any further questions, is code for “we want you.”

Any input on the validity of this?

No and do not factor any of your guesses about what the site thought of you into your ranking. Rank in the order of your preferences.

 

[Unsalted Coast]

Does anyone know if you are able to write off internship expenses (ie. travel, hotel, etc.) on your taxes?

 

[WisNeuro]

Does anyone know if you are able to write off internship expenses (ie. travel, hotel, etc.) on your taxes?

I believe that it's similar to searching for a job, so probably, quick question to a CPA could help. However, for itemized deductions to count, you need to be above the standard deduction to mean much. Almost 13k single, 26k married filing jointly.

 

[psychologynbooks]

Is it true that most sites primarily rank you on your application materials and the re-rankings after interviews do not change your original ranking much? I heard that the interviews are just a formality/to show candidates the site from a few people. If so, what materials do sites tend to prioritize in rankings?

Another question I had is if there are any reasons a candidate with 9+ interviews would not match? I've heard a horror story from an acquaintance who did not match despite a high interview number and panicked a bit! I feel my materials are strong/I got many interviews but feel very insecure thinking how many equally qualified people I am competing with.

 

[Dazen]

Is it true that most sites primarily rank you on your application materials and the re-rankings after interviews do not change your original ranking much? I heard that the interviews are just a formality/to show candidates the site from a few people. If so, what materials do sites tend to prioritize in rankings?

Another question I had is if there are any reasons a candidate with 9+ interviews would not match? I've heard a horror story from an acquaintance who did not match despite a high interview number and panicked a bit! I feel my materials are strong/I got many interviews but feel very insecure thinking how many equally qualified people I am competing with.

I have nothing useful to contribute but wanted to say that I LOVE your profile picture and username. One of my fave games

 

[psychologynbooks]

I have nothing useful to contribute but wanted to say that I LOVE your profile picture and username. One of my fave games

Oh my gosh that’s amazing! When I’m not freaking out about appic and working I am replaying TW3 for the millionth time with the new upgrade 😂

Also I love your photo!! Arthur Morgan is one of my favorite characters

 

[summerbabe]

Is it true that most sites primarily rank you on your application materials and the re-rankings after interviews do not change your original ranking much? I heard that the interviews are just a formality/to show candidates the site from a few people. If so, what materials do sites tend to prioritize in rankings?

My site ranks all applicants according to a rubric that reflects our scientist-practitioner training philosophy to extend interview offers and figure out who doesn't make the initial cut. We evenly weigh factors such as intervention hours/types, assessment hours/types, strength of recs, research productivity, fit, writing style, and diversity/social justice. This will obviously vary site by site but the program brochure will likely give some hints (e.g., how much is research valued?)

Interviews are also graded on a rubric for us. If somebody's averaged pre-interview score and averaged interview scores are similar, they will likely stay put in the overall rankings. Other will move up and down some based on discrepancies (good app but poor interviews, OK app but great interviews) but short of major red flags, nobody will go from #1 to the bottom of the pile or vice versa. Other sites may not change much at all and I'm sure there are sites that place more emphasis on interviews.

Another question I had is if there are any reasons a candidate with 9+ interviews would not match?

My guess would be applying to/ranking very competitive sites while only being a decent candidate, combined with bad luck. For example, somebody could be on the cusp of getting/not getting a bunch of interviews, receive all of those interviews, do decent that their interviews, and be ranked low by all of those sites. Then bad luck would factor in with running out of match opportunities as other candidates who are more preferred by those sites snatch up all available spots. Especially if this person had a lot of interviews at sites with 3-5 spots versus sites with 6-10 spots.

 

[psychologynbooks]

My site ranks all applicants according to a rubric that reflects our scientist-practitioner training philosophy to extend interview offers and figure out who doesn't make the initial cut. We evenly weigh factors such as intervention hours/types, assessment hours/types, strength of recs, research productivity, fit, writing style, and diversity/social justice. This will obviously vary site by site but the program brochure will likely give some hints (e.g., how much is research valued?)

Interviews are also graded on a rubric for us. If somebody's averaged pre-interview score and averaged interview scores are similar, they will likely stay put in the overall rankings. Other will move up and down some based on discrepancies (good app but poor interviews, OK app but great interviews) but short of major red flags, nobody will go from #1 to the bottom of the pile or vice versa. Other sites may not change much at all and I'm sure there are sites that place more emphasis on interviews.

My guess would be applying to/ranking very competitive sites while only being a decent candidate, combined with bad luck. For example, somebody could be on the cusp of getting/not getting a bunch of interviews, receive all of those interviews, do decent that their interviews, and be ranked low by all of those sites. Then bad luck would factor in with running out of match opportunities as other candidates who are more preferred by those sites snatch up all available spots. Especially if this person had a lot of interviews at sites with 3-5 spots versus sites with 6-10 spots.

Your breakdown above is very useful for helping me estimate if I am a strong candidate vs. a decent one! That’s smart to also check what the brochures prioritize. My interviews are so broad in terms of sites. I’d say I’m strongest fit wise for college counseling/CMHC/child focused sites, but my assessment hours are significantly lower than my clinical ones given COVID. I’m actually surprised I received interviews at hospitals given my lack of assessment experience, but perhaps my insane clinical hours compensated? I’ll have to see how it all plays out and do my best to use some cbt coping skills haha. It’s just so hard not to worry and to be in limbo until 2/17. I appreciate everyone’s advice

 

[summerbabe]

I’m actually surprised I received interviews at NYC hospitals given my lack of assessment experience, but perhaps my insane clinical hours compensated?

From my experience, a quality training site is not looking for a fully formed trainee since a major goal of internship is to help round out clinical skills before independent practice. It's not uncommon for interns to lack assessment, especially bedside/hospital types so interns who identify this as a growth spot and otherwise fit the program's training model will often be looked upon favorably for interview invites.

There's also a big difference between literally zero assessment hours versus lower hours but with good balance (e.g., cognitive + personality). And committees definitely look at what types of hours you have. I often see people report a crazy high amount of integrated reports but then list very little objective measure administration, which is a big red flag.

 

[psychologynbooks]

From my experience, a quality training site is not looking for a fully formed trainee since a major goal of internship is to help round out clinical skills before independent practice. It's not uncommon for interns to lack assessment, especially bedside/hospital types so interns who identify this as a growth spot and otherwise fit the program's training model will often be looked upon favorably for interview invites.

There's also a big difference between literally zero assessment hours versus lower hours but with good balance (e.g., cognitive + personality). And committees definitely look at what types of hours you have. I often see people report a crazy high amount of integrated reports but then list very little objective measure administration, which is a big red flag.

This was really great insight! I have experience conducting integrated assessments but very little (for context I have 990 clinical hours but only 89 assessment hours). At 2/3 of my interviews, the interviewers actually acknowledged that my testing was low but explicitly observed I took these classes when covid started and that this is happening to many candidates. Those 2 sites told me ways that I could grow in assessment and receive additional training if I attended their site. It was a really big relief to hear that it didn’t turn them off from ranking me and I could actually gain experience I lacked.

 

[psychguy158]

Has anyone else heard that the VAs are increasing their intern salary for next year by 27%?

 

[deleted1147464]

Has anyone else heard that the VAs are increasing their intern salary for next year by 27%?

Yes! Very exciting news!

 

[psych.meout]

Edit:
One VA where I interviewed already emailed me with their updated stipend, going from about $29,000 to $37,000.

 

[jdawg2017]

That is great news about VAs. Their sad stipends pushed them low on my rank list last year...

I may be remembering this correctly, but I think there were talks (or actual implementation?) of different insurance policies for VA interns because of their trainee status. I vaguely remember something like them not offering dental or some other benefits, but I might be remembering incorrectly. Does anyone remember anything like that? I also vaguely recall that being a deciding factor in rank ordering as well.

 

[PsyDuck90]

That is great news about VAs. Their sad stipends pushed them low on my rank list last year...

I may be remembering this correctly, but I think there were talks (or actual implementation?) of different insurance policies for VA interns because of their trainee status. I vaguely remember something like them not offering dental or some other benefits, but I might be remembering incorrectly. Does anyone remember anything like that? I also vaguely recall that being a deciding factor in rank ordering as well.

As of this current cohort, VA interns aren’t eligible for vision and dental or paid maternity leave. The medical is the same as all other VA employees. And interns aren’t eligible for any of the retirement stuff, but training years do count for your time in towards retirement if you do become staff.

 

[coffee&CBT]

As of this current cohort, VA interns aren’t eligible for vision and dental or paid maternity leave. The medical is the same as all other VA employees. And interns aren’t eligible for any of the retirement stuff, but training years do count for your time in towards retirement if you do become staff.

I'm an intern at a VA currently and we are able to get dental (and I think vision, but I only have dental).

 

[WisNeuro]

That is great news about VAs. Their sad stipends pushed them low on my rank list last year...

I may be remembering this correctly, but I think there were talks (or actual implementation?) of different insurance policies for VA interns because of their trainee status. I vaguely remember something like them not offering dental or some other benefits, but I might be remembering incorrectly. Does anyone remember anything like that? I also vaguely recall that being a deciding factor in rank ordering as well.

Have VA internship rates stagnated that much? They were generally higher than many non-VA places back when I was applying. Postdoc salaries were generally much higher, especially in my locality.

 

[thebalmofhurtminds]

Have VA internship rates stagnated that much? They were generally higher than many non-VA places back when I was applying. Postdoc salaries were generally much higher, especially in my locality.

Before this raise, the VA internship salaries were 3-5k behind the AMC ones here.

 

[WisNeuro]

Before this raise, the VA internship salaries were 3-5k behind the AMC ones here.

Glad to hear about the raise. I think I'd still prioritize the VA for the training quality even without it, but good that they've brought it up again.

 

[thebalmofhurtminds]

Glad to hear about the raise. I think I'd still prioritize the VA for the training quality even without it, but good that they've brought it up again.

Agreed. Although when I trained in VA, we did have dental and vision and that appears to be gone now.

 

[WisNeuro]

Agreed. Although when I trained in VA, we did have dental and vision and that appears to be gone now.

I don't remember having those, but it's been a while now, so I could be mistaken.

 

[psych.meout]

Have VA internship rates stagnated that much? They were generally higher than many non-VA places back when I was applying. Postdoc salaries were generally much higher, especially in my locality.

I applied and interviewed (and still have some scheduled in the coming weeks) at several VAs and AMCs in the same cities. Prior to the news of this increase, all the VAs were paying $8000 to $11000 less than their AMC counterparts.

 

[asukaran]

Which programs that you think may already rank their applicants before the interviews? I encountered a program in which the interviews were super unstructured, and the director basically asked you "Tell me what kind of training experiences that you want and we are very good at accommodating the intern's interests, including arranging training that we usually do not offer." (Not like the question "Tell me why you want to be here.") They did not ask me a single interview question to get to know my experience/ability. Thus, I am not sure whether they already had their ranking before the interviews...

 

[WisNeuro]

Which programs that you think may already rank their applicants before the interviews? I encountered a program in which the interviews were super unstructured, and the director basically asked you "Tell me what kind of training experiences that you want and we are very good at accommodating the intern's interests, including arranging training that we usually do not offer." (Not like the question "Tell me why you want to be here.") They did not ask me a single interview question to get to know my experience/ability. Thus, I am not sure whether they already had their ranking before the interviews...

Every place I've been has ranked applicants prior to interviews, and largely kept those same rankings after interviews.

 

[WisNeuro]

This seems silly to ask- but are there any tangible ways you can tell whether a site 'likes' you? If they do rank us before we meet with them, is it possible that the people interviewing us are not privy to those rankings? With some of the more competitive sites I am really struggling with believing I have a chance but also know I should not think about that when ranking... AAAAH the insanity continues!

I wouldn't try to guess whether they "like you" or not. It shouldn't impact your rankings either way.

 

[borne_before]

This seems silly to ask- but are there any tangible ways you can tell whether a site 'likes' you? If they do rank us before we meet with them, is it possible that the people interviewing us are not privy to those rankings? With some of the more competitive sites I am really struggling with believing I have a chance but also know I should not think about that when ranking... AAAAH the insanity continues!

Rank them in order of your preferences. Do not try to get into their heads. The goal isn't just matching. The goal is to find that correct fit and that is a mutual process. Don't be needy.

 

[NonTraditionPsychStudent]

Hello Everyone,

Congrats to you all!

I have recently become an official member of SDN (though I have periodically visited for years) and I find the forums so helpful. I am currently in a Clinical Psychology PhD Program, but I am a non-traditional student (i.e. much older than my cohort, a full-time working professional in the field, and full-time PhD Student). Though I have navigated this rather well, I do have a real concern regarding the APPIC internship required in order to graduate. As a person with a chronic health condition who needs to retain her current employer's benefits and the central financial contributor for my retired parent, I cannot realistically afford to quit my full time job to take on a full time internship which would result in a significant pay decrease. This would have major implications for mine and my family's well-being.

In relation to this, I know that APA has recently committed to taking steps to address barriers for marginalized communities in pursuing doctoral degrees, such as allowing for the required APPIC internship to be completed within 2 years as opposed to the typical 1 year standard. Though I have noted this on the APA website, this is not reflected on any of the internship sites that I have perused on the APPIC internship portal; most all still reflecting a full-time internship (whether they are accredited or not).

In thinking ahead, my question is 1) has anyone pursued or completed a part-time APPIC internship? If so, how do I initiate that process? Will I need to contact internship sites directly in advance of applying to request a consideration for special circumstance?

Any information you can provide to this non-traditional student would be helpful.

 

[bluecolourskies]

Hello Everyone,

Congrats to you all!

I have recently become an official member of SDN (though I have periodically visited for years) and I find the forums so helpful. I am currently in a Clinical Psychology PhD Program, but I am a non-traditional student (i.e. much older than my cohort, a full-time working professional in the field, and full-time PhD Student). Though I have navigated this rather well, I do have a real concern regarding the APPIC internship required in order to graduate. As a person with a chronic health condition who needs to retain her current employer's benefits and the central financial contributor for my retired parent, I cannot realistically afford to quit my full time job to take on a full time internship which would result in a significant pay decrease. This would have major implications for mine and my family's well-being.

In relation to this, I know that APA has recently committed to taking steps to address barriers for marginalized communities in pursuing doctoral degrees, such as allowing for the required APPIC internship to be completed within 2 years as opposed to the typical 1 year standard. Though I have noted this on the APA website, this is not reflected on any of the internship sites that I have perused on the APPIC internship portal; most all still reflecting a full-time internship (whether they are accredited or not).

In thinking ahead, my question is 1) has anyone pursued or completed a part-time APPIC internship? If so, how do I initiate that process? Will I need to contact internship sites directly in advance of applying to request a consideration for special circumstance?

Any information you can provide to this non-traditional student would be helpful.

Did you search here? There were part time positions listed in New York, Alabama and California.

 

[bluecolourskies]

Hello Everyone,

Congrats to you all!

I have recently become an official member of SDN (though I have periodically visited for years) and I find the forums so helpful. I am currently in a Clinical Psychology PhD Program, but I am a non-traditional student (i.e. much older than my cohort, a full-time working professional in the field, and full-time PhD Student). Though I have navigated this rather well, I do have a real concern regarding the APPIC internship required in order to graduate. As a person with a chronic health condition who needs to retain her current employer's benefits and the central financial contributor for my retired parent, I cannot realistically afford to quit my full time job to take on a full time internship which would result in a significant pay decrease. This would have major implications for mine and my family's well-being.

In relation to this, I know that APA has recently committed to taking steps to address barriers for marginalized communities in pursuing doctoral degrees, such as allowing for the required APPIC internship to be completed within 2 years as opposed to the typical 1 year standard. Though I have noted this on the APA website, this is not reflected on any of the internship sites that I have perused on the APPIC internship portal; most all still reflecting a full-time internship (whether they are accredited or not).

In thinking ahead, my question is 1) has anyone pursued or completed a part-time APPIC internship? If so, how do I initiate that process? Will I need to contact internship sites directly in advance of applying to request a consideration for special circumstance?

Any information you can provide to this non-traditional student would be helpful.

Also, you do not have “special circumstances.” EVERYONE has families and other obligations outside of their PhD program, whether they are are much older than the typical applicant or have full time jobs. People have even gotten pregnant right before or during their program.

My internship allowed only ten days off, which we could use to take holidays off, or for vacation or sick time. If we used up all 10 days in November then guess what- you would be working Christmas, all holidays from then on, and no sick time.
Lets say you were at such an internship, and needed more than ten days off because your parent or child got sick. Or kid has a day off from school. Or some other thing which you believe is exceptional and special for you.

Would you really go to your director and ask for additional days off because you have “special circumstances” and not being there to take care of them would have “major implications for yours and your family’s well being”?

 

[mindseye1210]

Also, you do not have “special circumstances.” EVERYONE has families and other obligations outside of their PhD program, whether they are are much older than the typical applicant or have full time jobs. People have even gotten pregnant right before or during their program.

My internship allowed only ten days off, which we could use to take holidays off, or for vacation or sick time. If we used up all 10 days in November then guess what- you would be working Christmas, all holidays from then on, and no sick time.
Lets say you were at such an internship, and needed more than ten days off because your parent or child got sick. Or kid has a day off from school. Or some other thing which you believe is exceptional and special for you.

Would you really go to your director and ask for additional days off because you have “special circumstances” and not being there to take care of them would have “major implications for yours and your family’s well being”?

I'm actually in one of the situations you described above. Found out my husband and I are expecting our second child mid August (our first pregnancy after a tough miscarriage this past summer and we also have a 1.5 year old). I've had several interviews go really well. I'm grateful for both the unexpected pregnancy and the unexpected opportunities I've receiving through the process. On the other hand, I'm feeling overwhelmed in the decision making process. Like you mentioned, I hate the thought of asking for additional time off especially at the start of a new internship. I don't want to let anyone down after a program has graciously offered me a wonderful opportunity to train at the site. However, the thought of delaying the process by a year after having gotten this far doesn't feel like an option either. I imagine that the best course of action is to take a short leave even if I'm spread thin for a year. Sigh.

Not sure if there is a question in there or if I'm just venting, haha. Definitely open to feedback, suggestions, or encouraging words