PhD/PsyD Ask A Recent Graduate of a Professional School Anything

[erg923]

And there's the CA zing...erg, get over it. Yes this state is pretty saturated...it's also very population dense. More importantly, if you specialize in a niche you can do quite well here, particularly if you have trained in the good programs.

But seriously, I've been to the south...nothing but chain stores and humidity. And juggalos. I did see a few juggalos.

Im sorry I hurt your state's feelings...I guess it will just smoke some weed and eat granola to get over the emotional pain.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[NeuroTrope]

Im sorry I hurt your state's feelings...I guess it will just smoke some weed and eat granola to get over the emotional pain.

Hey, at least that's healthier than eating a tub of fried pickles before going to the local greasy spoon and shoveling down fried chicken and grits while complaining that if only those damn liberals would embrace Jesus and refute global warming then maybe God will let me win the PowerBall so I could buy a tank and roll it down main street (you know, that one street with TWO taco bells, not just one!) to show how much 'Murica rocks!

I kid I kid...but not really...

 

[erg923]

I embrace Jesus AND global warming. I'm neutral on fried pickles. I had Taco bell for dinner last night.

 

[psych84]

I had some great fried chicken on my trip to NYC few years back. (upper east manhattan)

 

[NeuroTrope]

I embrace Jesus AND global warming. I'm neutral on fried pickles. I had Taco bell for dinner last night.

I did have granola this morning...but passed on the ganja yesterday. Too much at stake now...

 

[LupaCupcake]

 

[Rivi]

Hey, at least that's healthier than eating a tub of fried pickles before going to the local greasy spoon and shoveling down fried chicken and grits while complaining that if only those damn liberals would embrace Jesus and refute global warming then maybe God will let me win the PowerBall so I could buy a tank and roll it down main street (you know, that one street with TWO taco bells, not just one!) to show how much 'Murica rocks!

I kid I kid...but not really...

I'll take "elitism and bias from people who have no idea what they are talking about" for 1000 Alex.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

So, this "play nice" silliness, which is APA's go-to strategy, is akin to playing a prisoner's dilemma against an opponent who consistently and reliably acts in their own self-interest. THIS is the problem--NOT individual students. It's NEVER students.

In most cases I'd agree, but there are a subset of students that do contribute to the problem: "I don't care if I don't have [the grades, research experience, background, time, ability, etc] to be a psychologist…because I'm going to be a psychologist because that. is. what. I.want!" It is a small minority of applicants, but I'd be remiss to not mention this exception. Walden, Capella, Cal Southern, Saybrook, and the like will all gladly take their money to meet that demand.

I'm sure I'll be stuck with the "elitist" label…but that's fine because it isn't really about that, but it is an easy straw man to offer.

 

[MCParent]

In most cases I'd agree, but there are a subset of students that do contribute to the problem: "I don't care if I don't have [the grades, research experience, background, time, ability, etc] to be a psychologist…because I'm going to be a psychologist because that. is. what. I.want!" It is a small minority of applicants, but I'd be remiss to not mention this exception.

I'm sure I'll be stuck with the "elitist" label…but that's fine because it isn't really about that, but it is an easy straw man to offer.

I get that; I still see this as a problem with the field though (that those persons CAN apply to and even get into a program).

 

[Ollie123]

I get that; I still see this as a problem with the field though (that those persons CAN apply to and even get into a program).

I agree. I do think that behavior on behalf of the students is problematic, but I also think its expected. I find it much less acceptable that the field has basically said "Okay, why not. Doctorates for everybody!" and opened the floodgates.

 

[LETSGONYR]

It's difficult in conceptualizing "unbiased" perspectives/ professional opinions on this forum when as erg pointed out, 30 regular posters essentially post within the scope of this profession and a good chunk of them typically hold the same perspectives on many topics. After speaking to a good deal of other forum posters here in private, speaking in private with these people has yielded a more diverse crowd in terms of countering the contended arguments that are inherently anti Psy.D. I think this board would do well/develop into a more well-rounded source of information if in fact people felt safe in posting their opposing or differing arguments to those who oppose the Psy.D, otherwise, we are getting a highly clustered sample of similar perspectives on varying subjects, and that counters the idea of being a true academic. This board in and of itself is not the most representative of our profession, yet the "regulars" typically frame this to be as such, directly or indirectly.

I rarely post, but it's not because I am afraid of sharing my opinion. I only check the board every few days, and often, what I'd want to say has already been said, so I don't post it. Or, the issue is no longer relevant. case in point.... This post, where there are > 100 unread replies left for me to read. .

I think the reasons people visit this board vary widely. I started visiting when I applied for internship, but now I check occasionally to see if there are threads I'd find interesting. If I was on here to make friends or professional connections or even to advocate for my sub-field, I'd post more often, but I'm not. In other words... i'm not a lurker because I'm afraid of sharing my opinion or anything, but rather because I rarely feel I have much to add and I'm more interested in getting a feel of some issues facing young professionals. For my purposes, lurking fits.

 

[LETSGONYR]

I did specify "some Psy.D's" if you choose to conflate that to "all PsyD's" that's your own problem. Deal with it. I also think some PhD's offer subpar training. They just happen to be much smaller in number, and the class size of 5 is far less harmful to the field than the class of 100 poorly trained clinicians. But, by all means, confirmatory bias away.

Honestly... when you (general you) are at a conference and see someone's badge with the name, "Joe/Jane Schmo, Psy.D.," do you not judge them? What are they chances that they come from an Argosy vs. a Baylor or Rutgers? Overall, there is an anti-PsyD feeling on this board, and I think it exists outside of this board, too. My initial reaction to seeing "Psy.D." is "...oh." I recognize that and try to check that bias, but it does exist. I don't think it's fair to discount offense taken to your comment, when I think it's perfectly reasonable to assume that you are one of the many (myself included) who look down, even for a second, when they see "Psy.D."

As an aside, I think a lot of my education during grad school came from my externships/practica, and at one, I did work with an Argosy student. So, I think that Argosy students can get strong educations, even if their in-classroom education is subpar (which I am not saying it is- I don't actually know anything about their non-dissertation courses or requirements). The road is certainly harder, as many strong training sites don't accept FSPS trainees, but there are ways for people to ensure quality clinical training, even if they went to Argosy.

Of course, I had a big falling out with a former friend who got a Psy.D. at a very well respected school, so I hold an irrational grudge against the Baylor/Rutgers's too. .

 

[WisNeuro]

Honestly... when you (general you) are at a conference and see someone's badge with the name, "Joe/Jane Schmo, Psy.D.," do you not judge them? .

Of course I judge them. We are human after all, our cognitive world is built on heuristics. From base rate alone, it is most likely that they came from the Argosy/Alliant/Fielding type of track, which I view as a vastly inferior training experience. Just a numbers game. I have had little, if any, experience to disavow me of that bias. The only neuropsych reports I have seen from individuals from these institutions have been incompetent at best, and the internship/postdoc applications I have received have consistently been in the bottom 10% with regards to qualifications.

Can a small number of individuals from these places become competent clinicians? Sure. Do they have to go above and beyond what is reasonably expected? Yes. It's a broken model that is hurting the field, and the students who choose to go that route. Some can call it an anti-Argosy/Alliant/Fielding bias if they want, I see it as advocating for the field and our future patients.

 

[LETSGONYR]

Of course I judge them. We are human after all, our cognitive world is built on heuristics. From base rate alone, it is most likely that they came from the Argosy/Alliant/Fielding type of track, which I view as a vastly inferior training experience. Just a numbers game. I have had little, if any, experience to disavow me of that bias. The only neuropsych reports I have seen from individuals from these institutions have been incompetent at best, and the internship/postdoc applications I have received have consistently been in the bottom 10% with regards to qualifications.

Can a small number of individuals from these places become competent clinicians? Sure. Do they have to go above and beyond what is reasonably expected? Yes. It's a broken model that is hurting the field, and the students who choose to go that route. Some can call it an anti-Argosy/Alliant/Fielding bias if they want, I see it as advocating for the field and our future patients.

Right. And I think you're totally justified in feeling that way... like you said, that's your experience.

But as a consequence, when you say "Some Psy.D.'s..." people can read between the lines and know that you mean (and again, I mean the general 'you,'), "this is what I think when I see 'Psy.D.,' even if cognitively I know there are exceptions." So yeah, I do understand being offended by things people here have said, even when they use qualifiers like "some."

As an aside (very much not directed at any one person, especially WisNeuro)... one of the reasons I don't check this board or post regularly is the tone used by some people. I agree with a lot of the things people say- as a young professional, I want to be able to protect this field and help it grow as much as the next person. I'm not a fan of the FSPS model. I just disagree with the approach some posters use. So... I don't emotionally connect with the board, judge and laugh at the people I think are being ridiculous, and then go about my merry way. I'd love to have a place to regularly discuss early career issues, but at this point, SDN is not that place.

 

[erg923]

One poster recently said that he is "offended" that a certain poster is automatically suspect of his skills because of his Psy.D. degree. I asked him what about this "offends" him, but he chose not to respond. Being "offended" by things you simply "dont agree with" is not conducive to functioning in the real world, and its certainly not conducive to clinical practice of this profession. It also demonstrates an amazing amount of ignornace about the universaility of cognitive bias/heuristics.

From a more personal perspoective, why someone would care about this to the point of being "offended" seems silly. Im sure most all physicists look at me and laugh at the idea that I belive I am practicing a science. I dont agree with that perspective, but such is the world, right?

 

[WisNeuro]

I agree to a point, in this profession you will come across people who disagree with you all of the time. You will work with other providers who do not respect you, and who do not value what you do. Hopefully these are a minority of the multidisciplinary interactions you have. If you cannot deal with criticism/opposing views on an anonymous message board, you will not be able to deal with it in the real world.

 

[LETSGONYR]

One poster rcently said that he is "offended" that a certain poster is automatically suspect of his skills because of his Psy.D. degree. Being "offended" by things you simply "dont agree with" is not conducive to functioning in the real world, and its certainly not conducive to clinical practice of this profession. It also demonstrates an amazing amount of ignornace about the universaility of cognitive bias/heuristics.

Yes, definitely. And from my observations, no one is trying to be the thought police, and say people shouldn't have biases towards one sort of practitioner. But... another professional skill is learning to keep your mouth shut when what you think can be (mis)interpreted as offensive by someone else. . Just saying what's on your mind because it's on your mind and you can express that is not conducive to real world functioning, either.

From a more personal perspoective, why someone would care about this to the point of being offedned seems silly. Im sure most all physicists look at me and laugh at the idea that I belive I am practicing a science. I dont agree with that perspective, but such is the world, right?

I agree with that, as well. But to each his own...some people are more sensitive than others, particularly related to professional issues.

 

[erg923]

But... another professional skill is learning to keep your mouth shut when what you think can be (mis)interpreted as offensive by someone else. . Just saying what's on your mind because it's on your mind and you can express that is not conducive to real world functioning, either..

Saying things in an appopriate, non-personalizing manner is a professional skill. I realize full well that people can choose to be offended if they disagree with me. I see no reason to hold opinions if their are relevant to the conversation/topic at hand just because a person could mispercieve them or be offended.

Particularly in my work setting, if I do not push, things dont change. People dont always like this. But, changing the historic treatment paradigm is part of my job description here.

 

[WisNeuro]

I agree with that, as well. But to each his own...some people are more sensitive than others, particularly related to professional issues.

True, but we are not doing people favors if we lead them to believe that the professional world is this magical world of acceptance where you are loved and respected by all. Truth is, if you want respect, you have to earn it. Show people why you are valuable with your work and worth as a provider.

 

[MCParent]

Saying things in an appopriate, non-personalizing manner is a professional skill. I realize full well that people can choose to be offended if they disagree with me. I see no reason to hold opinions if their are relevant to the conversation/topic at hand just because a person could mispercieve them or be offended.

Particularly in my work setting, if I do not push, things dont change. People dont always like this. But, changing the historic treatment paradigm is part of my job description here.

I agree. How can I write a good review if I'm worried that my more critical feedback (i.e., usually the actually important feedback) "might be" interpreted as offensive? I've seen some people be offended at so little as correcting grammar, so I don't know how to avoid the overlap. I've also gotten some pretty rough peer reviews myself as well; the very least I have to say is, "this person completely misunderstood me, so I have to fix how I wrote that" or even "this person has an agenda and probably others do too, I better make a better case in the paper."

I get what you're saying, letsgonyr, I think; I just don't perceive the board to be such a briar patch as others do, nor do I think others have made a reasonable case that it is (e.g., citing one example of a new poster saying something offensive toward psyds that was immediately jumped on as being the zeitgeist of the board).

 

[convallion]

New psychologist here who graduated from a professional school within the past 5 years. Aside from revealing personally identifiable information, feel free to ask me anything about my experience attending a FSPP (e.g., training and research experience, internship, EPPP, employment, etc.). I will answer everything as unbiased as I possibly can. The primary purpose of this thread is to inform others who may be considering attending such schools as well as answering some questions current students and psychologists may have.

I have 6 questions if you would please answer. 1) What do you enjoy most about your career? 2) what do you enjoy the least about your career? 3) What is a typical career path in this profession? 4) What do you believe it takes to be successful in this career? 5) What kind of person would find it difficult to succeed in this career? 6) Do you have advice that would help me be successful in this career field?

 

[erg923]

I have 6 questions if you would please answer. 1) What do you enjoy most about your career? 2) what do you enjoy the least about your career? 3) What is a typical career path in this profession? 4) What do you believe it takes to be successful in this career? 5) What kind of person would find it difficult to succeed in this career? 6) Do you have advice that would help me be successful in this career field?

I dont think that poster is returning anytime soon.

 

[convallion]

Also, if others would like to reply to these questions, feel free, I am trying to make sure I will do well and be able to help people.

 

[convallion]

I dont think that poster is returning anytime soon.

Oh, Ok. New here. Would you mind answering the questions? Please.

 

[erg923]

did you even attemt to read thru this thread?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Oh, Ok. New here. Would you mind answering the questions? Please.

There are a number of very useful threads that are 'pinned' to the top of the forum. The DOCTORAL APPLICANTS READ FIRST thread covers a lot of the basics, including:

Useful Career Threads:
Describe Your Typical Day in Practice
Would You Do It Over Again?
Do You Enjoy The Work That You Do?

 

[convallion]

Please let me explain, I am recently out of the Army. I am in the VA vocational rehab program. I need to collect data from individuals that is current and that I am interacting with, as part of an assignment. I don't wish to trouble anyone. I understand if you don't want to answer.

 

[erg923]

Please let me explain, I am recently out of the Army. I am in the VA vocational rehab program. I need to collect data from individuals that is current and that I am interacting with, as part of an assignment. I don't wish to trouble anyone. I understand if you don't want to answer.

If this is a research project, there is thread for that at the top for that too.

This thread is only 2 months old, im not sure why you wouldn't consider that "current?" Its not layed out on silver platter for you, but its there.

 

[convallion]

I am supposed to be interviewing. I can scour the threads but that would be cheating.

 

[erg923]

Then you should interview someone. Posting on an anonomous interent forum in not interviewing either.

 

[haRtwin]

I agree. How can I write a good review if I'm worried that my more critical feedback (i.e., usually the actually important feedback) "might be" interpreted as offensive? I've seen some people be offended at so little as correcting grammar, so I don't know how to avoid the overlap. I've also gotten some pretty rough peer reviews myself as well; the very least I have to say is, "this person completely misunderstood me, so I have to fix how I wrote that" or even "this person has an agenda and probably others do too, I better make a better case in the paper."

I get what you're saying, letsgonyr, I think; I just don't perceive the board to be such a briar patch as others do, nor do I think others have made a reasonable case that it is (e.g., citing one example of a new poster saying something offensive toward psyds that was immediately jumped on as being the zeitgeist of the board).

Your bit here about peer reviews is an important one.

From what I've read, these offensive comments have done nothing more than present, compare, and evaluate data. Isn't this science? The thing that's
dependent on peer review with intentional emphasis placed on evaluation and refutation, not confirmation. My perception has been nothing different than watching a few skeptics (not cynics) raise legitimate questions.

If you (no one in specific) interpret this as offensive, there will be serious problems for you (again, no one specific) down the road in this or any other field of science. Will you (again, no one in specific) never submit an article to a peer reviewed journal because the editor and reviewers might hurt your feelings? If there's that much sensitivity, a field of science is the wrong place to be.

 

[LETSGONYR]

Saying things in an appopriate, non-personalizing manner is a professional skill. I realize full well that people can choose to be offended if they disagree with me. I see no reason to hold opinions if their are relevant to the conversation/topic at hand just because a person could mispercieve them or be offended.

Particularly in my work setting, if I do not push, things dont change. People dont always like this. But, changing the historic treatment paradigm is part of my job description here.

True, but we are not doing people favors if we lead them to believe that the professional world is this magical world of acceptance where you are loved and respected by all. Truth is, if you want respect, you have to earn it. Show people why you are valuable with your work and worth as a provider.

I get what you're saying, letsgonyr, I think; I just don't perceive the board to be such a briar patch as others do, nor do I think others have made a reasonable case that it is (e.g., citing one example of a new poster saying something offensive toward psyds that was immediately jumped on as being the zeitgeist of the board).[/QUOTE]

I agree. How can I write a good review if I'm worried that my more critical feedback (i.e., usually the actually important feedback) "might be" interpreted as offensive? I've seen some people be offended at so little as correcting grammar, so I don't know how to avoid the overlap. I've also gotten some pretty rough peer reviews myself as well; the very least I have to say is, "this person completely misunderstood me, so I have to fix how I wrote that" or even "this person has an agenda and probably others do too, I better make a better case in the paper."

I think part of the issue is that some people don't think they're misinterpreting what is being said, but rather, that they are insulted by something they are correctly interpreting. Though... I will say that I don't think only people on "Team A" are rude at times, I think people on "Team FSPS" can be rude as well. And often, the tone of a reply is similar to the tone of the original post.

I think Erg said this, and I agree... a lot of our professional identities comes out in our posts. If someone is a big fan of Ellis and REBT and posts in that type of straightforward, no-BS manner, than someone who is not used to that style (or more Rogerian or whatever) might interpret that as rude or offensive, when it is not intended to be so.

I also think I wasn't clear before; I was not advocating not saying what is on one's mind or posting anything controversial. From my perspective, a lot of the issues arise because people say things repeatedly, and when they're saying the same thing over and over again, they get frustrated and snarky. So, in my view, there is room for restraint once a point has been made. Personal views don't need to be posted as often or as passionately.

Though, I will say, in the few times I've posted... I have never felt offended or disrespected by other members. So, I thank you all for that. I try to be respectful while sharing my opinions, and I hope you all feel that I have been, as well.

 

[edieb]

Here we are again, gathering our carriages around and firing inward at one another

 

[WisNeuro]

Meh, use whatever analogy you like. I see it as taking some antibiotics to take care of an internal infection

 

[LupaCupcake]

Please let me explain, I am recently out of the Army. I am in the VA vocational rehab program. I need to collect data from individuals that is current and that I am interacting with, as part of an assignment. I don't wish to trouble anyone. I understand if you don't want to answer.

Run.., run far from this thread before it sucks you in!

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I have 6 questions if you would please answer. 1) What do you enjoy most about your career? 2) what do you enjoy the least about your career? 3) What is a typical career path in this profession? 4) What do you believe it takes to be successful in this career? 5) What kind of person would find it difficult to succeed in this career? 6) Do you have advice that would help me be successful in this career field?

Mod Note: Please note that SDN is not the place for seeking assistance with school/work/research assignments. Thank you.

 

[LPPSYD]

Right. And I think you're totally justified in feeling that way... like you said, that's your experience.

But as a consequence, when you say "Some Psy.D.'s..." people can read between the lines and know that you mean (and again, I mean the general 'you,'), "this is what I think when I see 'Psy.D.,' even if cognitively I know there are exceptions." So yeah, I do understand being offended by things people here have said, even when they use qualifiers like "some."

As an aside (very much not directed at any one person, especially WisNeuro)... one of the reasons I don't check this board or post regularly is the tone used by some people. I agree with a lot of the things people say- as a young professional, I want to be able to protect this field and help it grow as much as the next person. I'm not a fan of the FSPS model. I just disagree with the approach some posters use. So... I don't emotionally connect with the board, judge and laugh at the people I think are being ridiculous, and then go about my merry way. I'd love to have a place to regularly discuss early career issues, but at this point, SDN is not that place.

I'm more of a lurker than a poster but I felt the need to add to this. There is definitely an arrogant tone I could do without at times, from a very small number of posters, BUT I get irritated when people don't take the time to appreciate the (sometimes brutally) honest advice and perspectives offered here (not directed at you, LETSGONYR). It's frustrating to read someone throw the baby out with the bathwater because they don't like the way the information is presented. Part of that is on the responsibility of the person sending the message, but I think it's more on the person receiving it. I'm finishing up a Psy.D. and this board has been really informative and eye-opening, and I wish I found it years ago. As much as it sucks to know I will likely be judged by my degree, that's the choice I made, and unfortunately I share it with students who come from programs that give everyone a bad name. There is a reason for some skepticism, and the onus is on me to prove myself. Back to lurking

 

[Peacemaker36]

I'm more of a lurker than a poster but I felt the need to add to this. There is definitely an arrogant tone I could do without at times, from a very small number of posters, BUT I get irritated when people don't take the time to appreciate the (sometimes brutally) honest advice and perspectives offered here (not directed at you, LETSGONYR). It's frustrating to read someone throw the baby out with the bathwater because they don't like the way the information is presented. Part of that is on the responsibility of the person sending the message, but I think it's more on the person receiving it. I'm finishing up a Psy.D. and this board has been really informative and eye-opening, and I wish I found it years ago. As much as it sucks to know I will likely be judged by my degree, that's the choice I made, and unfortunately I share it with students who come from programs that give everyone a bad name. There is a reason for some skepticism, and the onus is on me to prove myself. Back to lurking

I enjoy lurking on this site to see what other early career psychologists are thinking. I've been writing on this thread because I've been shocked at some of the content. But now I am thinking that there is just some good-natured trolling going on. If so, well done!

 

[AcronymAllergy]

"I am supposed to be interviewing. I can scour the threads but that would be cheating."

Hi there. Those are good questions. Since you are at a VA, probably the easiest, best route would be to find a VA psychologist and ask them for some time. I am sure they will be responsive. Have fun.

Very much agree. Nearly all of the psychologists at both of the VAs at which I've worked would seemingly be happy to set aside a few minutes to answer your questions and talk with you about what they do.

 

[LAPsyGuy]

I'm often amazed at how some of the more aggressive posters claim they are providing feedback in a nonpersonalizing manner while being degrading and insulting. I can only imagine how they function in the therapy room or with students. Frightening to say the least. Functionally, it's an advanced level of bullying. Your egos may not be hoisted up by your titles, but, perhaps they are by your abusive behavior. I guess being awful is ok as long as facts are on your side. Yes, being trained in evidence based Tx is key, but some of the personality impaired posters seem to be ignoring (or are incapable of using) the common factors shown to be so effective in helping to heal our clients/patients.

 

[WisNeuro]

Good thing this isn't an online therapy forum.

 

[erg923]

I'm often amazed at how some of the more aggressive posters claim they are providing feedback in a nonpersonalizing manner while being degrading and insulting. I can only imagine how they function in the therapy room or with students. Frightening to say the least. Functionally, it's an advanced level of bullying. Your egos may not be hoisted up by your titles, but, perhaps they are by your abusive behavior. I guess being awful is ok as long as facts are on your side. Yes, being trained in evidence based Tx is key, but some of the personality impaired posters seem to be ignoring (or are incapable of using) the common factors shown to be so effective in helping to heal our clients/patients.

Common factors?! This isnt a process group, this is anonymous internet forum where facts about the profession are shared and debated for good sakes! Get a grip!

 

[smalltownpsych]

I'm often amazed at how some of the more aggressive posters claim they are providing feedback in a nonpersonalizing manner while being degrading and insulting. I can only imagine how they function in the therapy room or with students. Frightening to say the least. Functionally, it's an advanced level of bullying. Your egos may not be hoisted up by your titles, but, perhaps they are by your abusive behavior. I guess being awful is ok as long as facts are on your side. Yes, being trained in evidence based Tx is key, but some of the personality impaired posters seem to be ignoring (or are incapable of using) the common factors shown to be so effective in helping to heal our clients/patients.

If you can't handle the disagreements on this forum, how are you going to deal with the real world of being a psychologist? We are not providing therapy here, this is for educational information and ideas to be exchanged. Even when I do provide therapy, I am not always nice because it is my job to comment on what I see and sometimes that is not nice.

Furthermore, to call anything on this forum bullying or abusive is discounting to all of those who have experienced real bullying and abuse. Many of those people are my patients and I would appreciate if you did not trivialize their experience. I agree that most of the posters here have strong negative feelings about large-cohort low-match rate professional schools and don't feel that people should attend them. Attacking the institutions is not the same as attacking the individuals who attended, but I see how those individuals would feel that way.

Finally, you criticize so-called personal attacks while using phrases that sound like personal attacks to me such as "aggressive posters", "egos hoisted up by titles", and "personality impaired". I find that pretty ironic.

 

[chai_latte]

Hi cab1234,
Thank you for offering your help! I would like to ask you for advice regarding how to get into a doctoral program. My situation is as follows: I completed my undergraduate degree last year and applied to doctoral programs in school psychology. I was invited for interviews for most but accepted to none. In the last minute I applied to a Master's in school psychology and got in, so now I am in my first year of the Master's. My goal, however, is a doctorate, and I am planning to reapply to doctoral programs this cycle. I have a high GPA, mediocre GREs, 2+ years research experience. No useful feedback from the schools but people in general have been telling me I messed up the interview. What advice can you give me? I am inclined to apply to doctoral programs now as opposed to waiting until I finish the Master's because I feel like some schools don't like accepting students with Master's credits and that it becomes even more competitive that way. Any input is greatly appreciated!