Clinical Experience:

[psydd]

I have two potential ways of gaining clinical experience before I graduate, and I was wondering which scenario might be favored more by doctoral programs.

1. Secure a half-year internship with a substance abuse counseling service where I will co-lead groups and eventually lead them myself. This is likely to turn into a paid part-time position and last for a minimum of 1 additional year beyond my "internship" period if I so choose.

2. Secure the half-year internship with a substance abuse counseling service, however, do not take the paid position thereafter. Instead, I register for a course which allows for me to mentor adolescent girls in a juvenile detention facility for a separate half-year.

Option #1 allows me a longer period of time in which to gain experience, plus part-time pay.

Option #2 allows me experience with two different populations, albeit collectively, my experience will be lesser in time; Non-paid.

I would love to go with Option #1, but I don't know how doctoral programs think in regard to this matter.

Any thoughts appreciated.

Thanks.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[psychmama]

This is just my opinion, but I think many programs would prefer Option #1, as it shows a stronger, more in-depth commitment to working with a particular population. You haven't mentioned if you're looking to apply to Phd or Psyd programs. At Phd programs, especially those emphasizing research, clinical experience ideally should support an applicant's research interest. So -- if you are interested in Phd programs, option #1 looks good, especially if you have research interests involved with substance use/addictions.

On the other hand, at a Psyd program (which cares less about research fit) I think either option #1 or #2 would be fine. If you like option #1 better, I'd go for it. Ultimately, doctoral programs will want students who are passionate and enthusiastic about what they're doing, and who can articulate how their predoctoral experiences fit with their career goals.

 

[apumic]

I'd agree with psychmama. Stick with whatever clinical experience is going to fit with your research interests. If you want to work with substance abusers and have a research interest along those lines, then that's your best. On the other hand, if your research interest is something like conduct disorder in females, early onset, then you might want to take a residential treatment position working with adolescent (or younger) girls. It all depends what you hope to do in the future.

 

[twilson]

I have a question in regards to clinical experience.
Does your experience HAVE to match research interests? I am interested in anxiety disorders in older adults and also chronic pain and anxiety, since I couldn't find any clinical experience exactly fitting these I settled for a volunteer position being a co-facilitator at a Grief Center.. will this hurt my chances with PhD programs?

 

[apumic]

I don't think it will necessarily hurt, but it probably won't help much either unless there is some crossover -- at least in terms of population (i.e., your grief center specializes in older adults and you have some clients who experience anxiety related to their grief and there is some sort of treatment going on for that anxiety or what-not). Basically, I doubt it would hurt you (unless you present it badly in your personal statement and make yourself look scattered) but it will probably be harder to use in your P.S. and interviews as evidence of a fit for programs in your area of interest. I think it really comes down to how well you can fit each of your experiences into your P.S. and interview. If you can make that grief ctr experience work for you, then it works for you, but if you can't persuasively use it as evidence of your preparedness, it's probably not going to be of much value and if you are REALLY "un-persuasive" in using it in your P.S., it could (I suppose) hurt you (but that seems pretty unlikely).

 

[psydd]

Same for me, really. My research interests don't relate to substance abuse/addictions or the forensic side of things. The way I would tie it in, I guess, is that with either of the two, I would be working with the adolescent population in general. And that does interest me, but still doesn't translate to research interests, specifically. It's more my practicing interest.

I'm going to be applying to a good mix of different programs, so we'll see what happens, I guess.

 

[twilson]

I am going to try to tie it in somehow but the closest I can seem to find is that I can work with certain age groups, so I can work with adults and older adults but thats about it. I am getting research experience and doing an independent study in my interests so maybe that will help

 

[kapinkkidowski]

Your research interests do NOT have to match your clinical interests, and honestly, getting some clinical experience is good, even if it doesnt even have much to do with the population you want to work with eventually. You'll be in a doctoral program for many years and have a lot of opportunity to get experience with many populations, and there aren't many clinical opportunities for people who don't already have a degree or who are in some sort of clinical program.

I have also been told that as long as you have some experience, at 50-50 and more research slanted programs, it doesnt make much of a difference. If you're going for a Psy.D. or a more practice based program, then it might be a whole different story...

Edit: Option #1 sounds better across the board - you will have longer to become more comfortable with that population and probably hone your skills instead of starting off twice just getting the basic feel of it, and getting paid is always good...