APPIC 2021-2022

[TCT2018]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

It has begun...
The AAPI is open and sites are uploading their new (2022-2023) Internship year information, deadliness etc.

 

[jdawg2017]

It has begun...
The AAPI is open and sites are uploading their new (2022-2023) Internship year information, deadliness etc.

Where you have seen this? I have not seen any sites up on AAPI yet? It says the info will be up by 9/15/21.

Of higher importance to me (personally): I am wondering how sites will go for internship interviews. The APPIC guidance recently suggested things may stay virtual, but seemed to leave room for a lot of variability with some sites possibly asking for people to come interview in person.

 

[WisNeuro]

Where you have seen this? I have not seen any sites up on AAPI yet? It says the info will be up by 9/15/21.

Of higher importance to me (personally): I am wondering how sites will go for internship interviews. The APPIC guidance recently suggested things may stay virtual, but seemed to leave room for a lot of variability with some sites possibly asking for people to come interview in person.

Sites get earlier access to update their training materials. In most years they start contacting us mid-August.

 

[PsyDuck90]

Where you have seen this? I have not seen any sites up on AAPI yet? It says the info will be up by 9/15/21.

Of higher importance to me (personally): I am wondering how sites will go for internship interviews. The APPIC guidance recently suggested things may stay virtual, but seemed to leave room for a lot of variability with some sites possibly asking for people to come interview in person.

A lot of sites (that I've looked at anyway) have updated their directory listings and brochures. It looks like a mix, but in the list of VAs and AMCs I've narrowed down thus far, a majority are sticking with virtual. So yeah, it seems to be site specific.

 

[jdawg2017]

A lot of sites (that I've looked at anyway) have updated their directory listings and brochures. It looks like a mix, but in the list of VAs and AMCs I've narrowed down thus far, a majority are sticking with virtual. So yeah, it seems to be site specific.

That's reassuring! 🙂

Having known MANY students in my program take on significant credit card debt for internship over the years, I am really hoping that moving forward the practice stays virtual. It is a significant hardship and when I have done some outreach about clin psych to college students in my community, often times it seems that the app costs for grad school, followed by low earnings (even at fully-funded programs), followed by internship costs, and then post-doc costs really hamper a lot of people's interests. Virtual internship interviews are definitely a step in the correct direction.

 

[WisNeuro]

I know people love the virtual options, and depending on pandemic stuff, I agree with the safety aspect. But, not seeing a site physically only really hurts decision making on the applicants side. On the site side, pre-rankings generally did not change much after interviews. But, from myself and many of my close friends and colleagues, our rankings changed dramatically after seeing a site and city in person. My advice, if it's safe enough and the option is available, I'd go for the onsite interview.

 

[PsyDuck90]

That's reassuring! 🙂

Having known MANY students in my program take on significant credit card debt for internship over the years, I am really hoping that moving forward the practice stays virtual. It is a significant hardship and when I have done some outreach about clin psych to college students in my community, often times it seems that the app costs for grad school, followed by low earnings (even at fully-funded programs), followed by internship costs, and then post-doc costs really hamper a lot of people's interests. Virtual internship interviews are definitely a step in the correct direction.

Agreed. From what I've seen, a number of sites specifically cited the financial constraints to students as the reason for staying virtual, which I greatly appreciate. The apps alone are expensive enough, and the process is stressful enough. Adding in all the travel costs/stress just sounds like a nightmare.

 

[PsyDuck90]

I know people love the virtual options, and depending on pandemic stuff, I agree with the safety aspect. But, not seeing a site physically only really hurts decision making on the applicants side. On the site side, pre-rankings generally did not change much after interviews. But, from myself and many of my close friends and colleagues, our rankings changed dramatically after seeing a site and city in person. My advice, if it's safe enough and the option is available, I'd go for the onsite interview.

I'm in a large metro area that uses a match system for externship placements, and last year we did virtual instead of in-person interviews. The sites really made an effort to provide pictures/video of the facilities and having opportunities for the applicants to speak with current trainees about the experience (without the supervisors on the Zoom). I know it isn't the same, but I feel like every site I interviewed with gave a pretty holistic picture of what being at the site would be like, similar to when I interviewed in person in previous years. I know it isn't a perfect 1 to 1 comparison, but I think it did the job. I felt confident with my rankings and wasn't surprised by the site I am currently at based on the virtual interviews/tours.

 

[WisNeuro]

I'm in a large metro area that uses a match system for externship placements, and last year we did virtual instead of in-person interviews. The sites really made an effort to provide pictures/video of the facilities and having opportunities for the applicants to speak with current trainees about the experience (without the supervisors on the Zoom). I know it isn't the same, but I feel like every site I interviewed with gave a pretty holistic picture of what being at the site would be like, similar to when I interviewed in person in previous years. I know it isn't a perfect 1 to 1 comparison, but I think it did the job. I felt confident with my rankings and wasn't surprised by the site I am currently at based on the virtual interviews/tours.

You have to do with what works for you. But, especially for being in cities that I had never been in, or not really stopped in, being there was huge. If I had to do it over again and had the choice, I would have picked in-person for all but one site, and that's only because I had previously lived in the city of that site.

 

[TCT2018]

Virtual or In person-we got this y'all! Everyone will be so impressed that we've made it this far through a global pandemic, social justice movements in America, financial/employment crisis, the APPI application, tracking hours, researching and writing, etc... that they will be compelled to accept us....right?😅 LOL.

Does anyone know where I can find info on the number of 2021-2022 sites vs the number of anticipated applicants? I know many years ago, there was a shortage of sites to applicants. I'm wondering how Covid may have affected this.

 

[WisNeuro]

Virtual or In person-we got this y'all! Everyone will be so impressed that we've made it this far through a global pandemic, social justice movements in America, financial/employment crisis, the APPI application, tracking hours, researching and writing, etc... that they will be compelled to accept us....right?😅 LOL.

Does anyone know where I can find info on the number of 2021-2022 sites vs the number of anticipated applicants? I know many years ago, there was a shortage of sites to applicants. I'm wondering how Covid may have affected this.

In the past several years, positions have outpaced applicants. The fake internship crisis has been long past by this point. Official number if sites/positions for this cycle is not yet known as the deadline for programs has not yet passed. I'd check APPIC for past cyucle numbers as these tend not to change dramatically year to year, but rather trend relatively slowly. There may be an anomalous blip this year from issues related to COVID, but I can't imagine it'll be all that much variance.

 

[PsyDuck90]

Does anyone know where I can find info on the number of 2021-2022 sites vs the number of anticipated applicants? I know many years ago, there was a shortage of sites to applicants. I'm wondering how Covid may have affected this.

The match statistics are here: Match Statistics

 

[roryportman]

Is there a "go-to" document that site reviewers tend to look at first? Like the cover letter, # of hours or pubs, essays, etc.? I'm guessing it depends on the site/person. I have heard cover letter is the first thing read, was wondering if this is common.

 

[WisNeuro]

Is there a "go-to" document that site reviewers tend to look at first? Like the cover letter, # of hours or pubs, essays, etc.? I'm guessing it depends on the site/person. I have heard cover letter is the first thing read, was wondering if this is common.

I go straight to the CV. That is by far the largest weight to my overall ranking. After that I see if the letter writers are people I know personally and can talk to for more info.

 

[andriaphd]

Hello everyone! This might be a silly/impossible scenario but has anyone had two supervisors contribute to a recommendation letter and then have both supervisors sign it? I'm not sure if this is even practical with the standardized reference form, but as someone who is receiving dual training it would be helpful to have more than one supervisor from a single site speak to my strengths and areas of development in their respective field/specialty. TIA 🙂

 

[pawsandneuro]

For applying for a 2nd time to many sites - any tips/advice on how much I should change my materials or if I need to/how to mention it in my cover letters?

 

[beantownpsych]

Is there a "go-to" document that site reviewers tend to look at first? Like the cover letter, # of hours or pubs, essays, etc.? I'm guessing it depends on the site/person. I have heard cover letter is the first thing read, was wondering if this is common.

cover letter then CV.

 

[PsycIntern2021]

Hello everyone! This might be a silly/impossible scenario but has anyone had two supervisors contribute to a recommendation letter and then have both supervisors sign it? I'm not sure if this is even practical with the standardized reference form, but as someone who is receiving dual training it would be helpful to have more than one supervisor from a single site speak to my strengths and areas of development in their respective field/specialty. TIA 🙂

Hi! Yes, I had two supervisors write me a joint recommendation letter for last year's cycle. Both of them agreed and wrote their separate sections and then combined them into one letter from the practicum site and both signed it. One was an OCD supervisor and one was an eating disorder supervisor, so it was pretty clear cut as to who was speaking to different strengths and skills in the letter and was clearly warranted since one supervisor could not speak to my training on the other side, etc. etc.

EDIT: edited to add that one supervisor has to manage the upload and the APPIC reference form. I had one supervisor who volunteered to do this.

 

[bcliff]

Hi! Yes, I had two supervisors write me a joint recommendation letter for last year's cycle. Both of them agreed and wrote their separate sections and then combined them into one letter from the practicum site and both signed it. One was an OCD supervisor and one was an eating disorder supervisor, so it was pretty clear cut as to who was speaking to different strengths and skills in the letter and was clearly warranted since one supervisor could not speak to my training on the other side, etc. etc.

EDIT: edited to add that one supervisor has to manage the upload and the APPIC reference form. I had one supervisor who volunteered to do this.

+1 -- Did this in a recent cycle as well. Letter was co-written by the chair of my dissertation (whose interests don't align particularly closely with mine) and another faculty member with whom I've done a lot of clinical and research work, despite them not being my advisor/chair. Some sites specifically requested an advisor/chair letter, so this seemed like the best way to accommodate that requirement, while not short changing the thoroughness of my letters. IIRC, my chair volunteered to coordinate the upload, submission, etc.

 

[loveroflinehanandresick]

+1 -- Did this in a recent cycle as well. Letter was co-written by the chair of my dissertation (whose interests don't align particularly closely with mine) and another faculty member with whom I've done a lot of clinical and research work, despite them not being my advisor/chair. Some sites specifically requested an advisor/chair letter, so this seemed like the best way to accommodate that requirement, while not short changing the thoroughness of my letters. IIRC, my chair volunteered to coordinate the upload, submission, etc.

I'm doing that during this cycle and, though it seems rare, I've heard no one protest this type of letter!

 

[deleted1119819]

It has begun...
The AAPI is open and sites are uploading their new (2022-2023) Internship year information, deadliness etc.

Would applying to an internship site when you don't mean their hour requirement be a fool-hardy decision? I figure sites would give leniency in light of COVID but wasn't sure if its a lost cause.

 

[summerbabe]

Would applying to an internship site when you don't mean their hour requirement be a fool-hardy decision?

Potentially, especially if the site is competitive.

Let's say a desirable site gets 100 applications for 5 slots and they decide to invite 35 for interviews with maybe a small waitlist. That means 65 people have to be cut (including some solid candidates) so not meeting hour requirements is a really easy way for early cuts to happen without much review of your application beyond your cover sheet.

The dynamics would obviously be different if a site received 15 applicants for 3 slots as they likely would have the resources and the need to interview everybody who they believe could be successful. If you were still way off what that site believes is necessary for success, it still might not matter but at least your application would probably receive a very thorough review.

 

[WisNeuro]

There was more leniency given last cycle, at this point, most sites have protocols in place to deliver care through telehealth when need be and in person when appropriate, so hours are not as much of a concern. Also, most sites set their hours at a fairly low bar. Even last year, very few of our applicants were below our pre-COVID bar for hours.

 

[calimich]

As y'all are applying here is the 2021 National Latinx Psych Association Internship Directory. You can find info about specific training opportunities (i.e., bilingual supervision) and how sites are navigating the pandemic.
Happy searching!

 

[loveroflinehanandresick]

Hey everyone, here is the APPIC 2021-2022 Internship Interview Invitation Thread (https://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/appic-internship-interview-invitation-thread-2021-2022.1452650/) to complement this internship application thread! Please use it to share APPIC internship interviews!

 

[ClinPsych2]

Thank you to those who set up and are adding to the interview shared doc!

Is there any mega-thread where folks provide context about their current internships or applicants get feedback about current sites, the good the bad and the ugly? I'm starting to select sites I plan to apply to next year and have questions about sites that aren't really "brochure" type questions! (Like what is it like living there, what is the culture at the site, etc).

TIA!