APA internship site rankings

[FreddyPhD]

Hello! I'm a psych phd student and I am going to be applying for internship this coming fall. I am really looking for a site that people tend to like and don't get too burnt out from. I was hoping to find a spreadsheet or thread somewhere that lists people's genuine thoughts/ratings of their experiences at various sites (as in, people who are currently or were previously interning at various sites writing about their experiences, or giving their site an informal rating). I think it would be really helpful for me to read people's thoughts about how the site actually is, in addition to the site brochures.

I'm aware I can be put in touch with current and past interns by reaching out to the site myself, but I was hoping for a one-stop-shop kind of thing, where all the ratings are compiled together. I'm just not coming across anything when I search around -- unless I'm missing it! (and if it doesn't exist - any thoughts on why it doesn't? Given all the other spreadsheets and resources that exist for psych grad students and the internship process, I find this a little surprising)

also - I know that just because someone else liked/didn't like a site doesn't mean I will/won't and it's a personal thing yada yada but I still want to know if interns were treated well, if the training was as advertised, if the internship ran smoothly or was a complete disorganized **** show, etc!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[futureapppsy2]

I think people will always be hesitant to give this information, even anonymously, because they can often be identified pretty quickly. Really, asking the site and/or your DCT to put you touch with current or former interns is probably the best bet.

 

[PsyDuck90]

If you look at the APPIC match thread, there’s a google sheet that has floated around for the last 2 years. Otherwise, you just try to get the vibe of the site from the interview day. Every internship interview day should have a time set aside to talk to the current interns or some way for you to get in touch with them. Also, ask you DCT about which sites students have matched to in the past and what feedback you’ve heard. You can even try to get the contact info for those folks and see if you can get in touch.

 

[psych.meout]

The Google Doc can be helpful and talking to the interns can be as well, though I'd suggest talking to the interns on the specific track in which you are applying. There can be some fairly disparate experiences depending on track, supervisors, etc., so you might get a rosier or cloudier impression of a site if you talk to interns from other tracks compared to the ones you are actually interested in.

 

[GregK]

The following comments are my own and don't necessarily represent the views of any organization with which I am affiliated.

I have watched this spreadsheet be passed around over the past few years and I continue to be deeply concerned over its use.

I recognize that there is a significant power imbalance between sites and students, and that there is a genuine desire for accurate feedback about interns' experiences in their programs. However, in my view, this spreadsheet perpetuates the very worst part of the internet and social media -- which is the ability to make completely unverifiable allegations, even slanderous comments, while remaining completely anonymous. It is a process that invites the worst kind of retaliation, and is sometimes used to abuse and harass other people. We have had several situations in recent years (and these are just the ones I know about) where students who have had grievances against supervisors, fellow interns, or others have retaliated by anonymously posting completely false information and allegations in this spreadsheet. And that has caused a lot of hurt and damage to individuals and programs that didn't deserve it.

I also believe that the existence of this spreadsheet contradicts the ethics and values of our profession in terms of how feedback should be provided to others (see, for example, APA ethical principles 1.04, 1.05, 1.07, 1.08). I simply don't understand why it's OK for this forum to host such a document, and I wish someone would take charge and get rid of it.

Imagine if doctoral and internship faculty decided to maintain an anonymous spreadsheet talking about their students and allowing them to provide anonymous comments, criticisms, allegations which anyone in the world could view. Or allowed them to retaliate against a student that they didn't like. That would be awful, yet no different than what is happening now.

As others have mentioned, most sites make their interns available during the application process to provide feedback to applicants, and I encourage you to take advantage of that at all places to which you are applying.

Greg Keilin

 

[WisNeuro]

Agree with Greg here, that spreadsheet is a huge buyer beware issue. Last time I looked through it, I found several verifiably false things posted about some sites. Also surprised SDN isn't concerned about posting it considering potential liability concerns.

 

[PsyDr]

It's disingenuous to say that professors do not privately communicate about students, and do not retaliate against students they don't like.

 

[Sanman]

Agree with Greg here, that spreadsheet is a huge buyer beware issue. Last time I looked through it, I found several verifiably false things posted about some sites. Also surprised SDN isn't concerned about posting it considering potential liability concerns.

It's disingenuous to say that professors do not privately communicate about students, and do not retaliate against students they don't like.

Now, I have not seen this google spreadsheet. However, everything with unverifiable advice is a buyer beware and certainly may not be up to date either. However, I agree with @PsyDr to not pretend that faculty don't discuss students, interns, and post-docs behind closed doors without their knowledge or consent. It happened to me plenty as a student and intern (and I received the feedback afterward during my evaluation periods, both good and bad). I have also been retaliated against by a clinical supervisor. I have certainly discussed intern and post-doc performance with others as a member of a clinical rotation. This has been going on forever. Now, SDN can choose to delete from their site and it is within their rights.

 

[WisNeuro]

Now, I have not seen this google spreadsheet. However, everything with unverifiable advice is a buyer beware and certainly may not be up to date either. However, I agree with @PsyDr to not pretend that faculty don't discuss students, interns, and post-docs behind closed doors without their knowledge or consent. It happened to me plenty as a student and intern (and I received the feedback afterward during my evaluation periods, both good and bad). I have also been retaliated against by a clinical supervisor. I have certainly discussed intern and post-doc performance with others as a member of a clinical rotation. This has been going on forever. Now, SDN can choose to delete from their site and it is within their rights.

I think a more direct comparison would be if programs kept a national, publicly posted anonymous database about students/trainees here. Would that bother you at all, or is that perfectly within bounds?

 

[Sanman]

I think a more direct comparison would be if programs kept a national, publicly posted anonymous database about students/trainees here. Would that bother you at all, or is that perfectly within bounds?

I liken it to Rate My Professor, which I am also not a fan of, but this is not the official APPIC match site. As to your specific question, no it wouldn't bother me if it is was not an official database kept by APPIC. We cannot police the world. I would also not participate or look at it, but that it just me. Not sure it is any more damaging than a supervisor picking up a phone and badmouthing or not recommending a student behind closed doors.

 

[FreddyPhD]

I personally do not expect to find perfectly accurate information from a spreadsheet that relies on voluntary/anonymous contributions. I think of it as a place for aggregating opinions and then the reader can make an educated decision about what to believe based on all the info they read (kind of like the internet as a whole - I wouldn't trust every negative Google review I read, but also don't think reviews should be banned for not being accurate). Not to mention, I don't think making it less accessible would stop people from expressing their thoughts elsewhere.
I also think the profound imbalance of power between sites and students (for instance, sites that are notorious for treating interns terribly still manage to get interns every year) makes the harm that student reviews can do seem quite negligible... There is already a shortage of places for students to honestly express negative opinions about professors/supervisors/sites, and it leads to a total lack of accountability.

Guess the thing I asked about doesn't exist. Would be pretty cool if someone added a page to the existing spreadsheet about outgoing interns' feelings about the year they had...

 

[PsyDr]

I also believe that the existence of this spreadsheet contradicts the ethics and values of our profession in terms of how feedback should be provided to others (see, for example, APA ethical principles 1.04, 1.05, 1.07, 1.08). ....

1) I am EXTREMELY concerned about this equivalence. Are you are suggesting that informal communication between others creates an ethical mandate for feedback?

If so, then shouldn't every student that has gone through APPIC have the same ethical concerns about APPIC staff?

 

[cara susanna]

I read the spreadsheet (was really curious to see if my site came up!) and it seemed to really qualify that this was just stuff people had heard or personally experienced. The tab was even labelled "tea" which to me implies that everyone involved is aware it's essentially just gossip. That was just the one tab, the rest was objective information (like interview dates) or phrased more as discussion or questions. It just seemed like people were using the Excel sheet to converse and share info as opposed to, say, an SDN thread.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

The APPIC process can be anxiety provoking, so it's understandable that students are craving more info/opinions. Back in the day I made a spreadsheet with weighted scores to help me compare/contrast different sites. I'd fill it out after each interview while it was still fresh. I even had a text box for comments and thoughts for more subjective stuff. Was it psychometrically sound, likely not, but it helped me feel like I was using more than just my gut feeling and whatever few data points I could collect that mattered to me (e.g. Where do trainees go for fellowship? What kind of jobs do your trainees secure?).

I think the spreadsheet was started with good intentions, but there definitely is a risk that students will be too easily swayed (rightly or wrongly) by what some people write. I've never seen it, but there has always been informal exchange of information, whether it be at conferences or on the interview trail. Profs and supervisors definitely talk, and that own't change, same with students. I think a more helpful reference are the internal lists that most/all programs keep about where their students match. Even those are limited because trainees want different things, rotations change, DCT changes can massively impact a program, etc.

Definitely be skeptical of any opinions you read, whether it be on a spreadsheet or at happy hour of a conference.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I read the spreadsheet (was really curious to see if my site came up!) and it seemed to really qualify that this was just stuff people had heard or personally experienced. The tab was even labelled "tea" which to me implies that everyone involved is aware it's essentially just gossip.

Now I want to read it.

 

[cara susanna]

Now I want to read it.

The original was deleted (actually, I did read it back in the day) but you can find copies floating around 👀

 

[summerbabe]

A comment for the OP: training sites & trainee experiences can change very suddenly due to factors such as faculty departure/arrival and organizational shifts.

Your best bet is to be put in touch with very recent trainees.

I completed internship in 2017 and postdoc in 2018. Both sites now have new training directors and a lot of staff who supervised me are no longer there. So while I hope my experiences are still generally relevant, the new culture can potentially be very different.

And the smaller and more autonomous (community site vs VA site that follows certain national guidelines), the more likely that whatever tidbits that has been accumulated may be less than relevant today (even if it was 100% true at the time).

 

[futureapppsy2]

Mod note: Just a note that the spreadsheet is not endorsed by or affiliated with SDN in any way, and SDN does not endorse or vouch for its content or the accuracy thereof. (@AcronymAllergy)

 

[futureapppsy2]

Another thing to keep in mind is that people can have malicious intent with these types of things—bashing a first choice program so that other people don’t apply, pushing someone to post something outing themselves to shame or tell on them later, etc (it’s why I hate the “name and shame” push with these things on anonymous or pseudo-anonymous social media).

 

[MCParent]

Internship interviews were 11 years ago for me now, but I don’t recall having any difficulty in telling who was happy and who was miserable during intern applicant talking time. And the people who were miserable were forthcoming with specifics.

 

[R. Matey]

Yeah, I don't get why this would be better than just asking the current year's interns about their experience. Like others, I did this and had no issue getting an honest vibe for the place (IME as a prospective trainee and psych intern it was in the programming for people to talk to each other without the adults around). Whatever benefit you get in aggregation is probably offset by accuracy given shifting site dynamics. Seems like it's more for venting/gossip than anything else.

 

[bcliff]

The following comments are my own and don't necessarily represent the views of any organization with which I am affiliated.

I have watched this spreadsheet be passed around over the past few years and I continue to be deeply concerned over its use.

I recognize that there is a significant power imbalance between sites and students, and that there is a genuine desire for accurate feedback about interns' experiences in their programs. However, in my view, this spreadsheet perpetuates the very worst part of the internet and social media -- which is the ability to make completely unverifiable allegations, even slanderous comments, while remaining completely anonymous. It is a process that invites the worst kind of retaliation, and is sometimes used to abuse and harass other people. We have had several situations in recent years (and these are just the ones I know about) where students who have had grievances against supervisors, fellow interns, or others have retaliated by anonymously posting completely false information and allegations in this spreadsheet. And that has caused a lot of hurt and damage to individuals and programs that didn't deserve it.

I also believe that the existence of this spreadsheet contradicts the ethics and values of our profession in terms of how feedback should be provided to others (see, for example, APA ethical principles 1.04, 1.05, 1.07, 1.08). I simply don't understand why it's OK for this forum to host such a document, and I wish someone would take charge and get rid of it.

Imagine if doctoral and internship faculty decided to maintain an anonymous spreadsheet talking about their students and allowing them to provide anonymous comments, criticisms, allegations which anyone in the world could view. Or allowed them to retaliate against a student that they didn't like. That would be awful, yet no different than what is happening now.

As others have mentioned, most sites make their interns available during the application process to provide feedback to applicants, and I encourage you to take advantage of that at all places to which you are applying.

Greg Keilin

I hadn't ever looked at this spreadsheet, but now I'm going to check it out.

Streisand effect - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Sanman]

Another thing to keep in mind is that people can have malicious intent with these types of things—bashing a first choice program so that other people don’t apply, pushing someone to post something outing themselves to shame or tell on them later, etc (it’s why I hate the “name and shame” push with these things on anonymous or pseudo-anonymous social media).

I definitely agree that this can happen. That said, my experience applying to internship in NYC (oh so many years ago) was that the applicants from the New York programs already had this going between themselves. As an outsider, it put me at a disadvantage not knowing this gossip (correct or not) when ranking programs. While my experiences were mixed at my internship, there were definitely problems I ran into on a specific rotation that the group of interns previous to us did as well and they did not disclose that during my time discussing it with them. I think there are both positives and negatives to having this information and it is likely to be biased in the same way that people with negative experiences disproportionately leave product reviews.

 

[Peacemaker36]

Is this spreadsheet open to all? How does one find it?

 

[cara susanna]

I guess I don't see the difference between this spreadsheet and, say, posting with a burner account on SDN.

I also think that asking current interns about their experiences could elicit similar information, but they also may be afraid to disclose negative things because it's associated with their name.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Is this spreadsheet open to all? How does one find it?

I found it on Reddit by googling APPIC spreadsheet I think.

 

[PsyDr]

@GregK whats the answer? If the spreadsheet implies feedback, how are your actions not subject to the same?