APPIC Internship Interview Invitation Thread (2020)

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members don't see this ad.
lookingtogetoutofhere said:
Hope you're doing okay! I fully understand how defeating this process can be. I am in a similar boat. Applied to 21 sites, was offered two interviews and waiting on two more interview notifications (which will most likely be rejections). I hope you can find solace and lightness during this crazy time. I'm trying to remain hopeful, but it's sooo hard.
Click to expand...

Hang in there my friend! <3
 
LadyEmmaPeel said:
That's amazing! Good on you! I did not even consider red, but I like it. 😍 Don't get me wrong, I love traditional black and white, but if they're going to remember me, I would also like to be spoken of in conversation as the "girl with the funny accent and that killer suit!"

Thinking about red though...
View attachment 289667
Click to expand...

Remember tho...they don't want individuality, you need to comply with expectations 😛 If reminds me of the American Dad episode where Roger dresses up as a Victorian nanny and tells Steve's daughter, "a literate girl is a lonely girl."

getyarn.io

A literate girl is a lonely girl.

American Dad! (2005) - S09E01 Comedy clip with quote A literate girl is a lonely girl. Yarn is the best search for video clips by quote. Find the exact moment in a TV show, movie, or music video you want to share. Easily move forward or backward to get to the perfect clip.
getyarn.io getyarn.io
 
is anyone else waiting for adult track at mount sinai west/st lukes? i know people have gotten rejections and interviews, but anyone else hear nothing at all?
 
psydstud0127 said:
First time posting because I was too afraid to post earlier. I applied to 23 sites and was only offered one interview. I'm still waiting for 3 others whose notification dates are on the 21st. 2 Anyone else feeling deeply rejected and like they wasted around $1K on applications?
Click to expand...
I had 2 interview invites as of Sunday (2 days ago). Yesterday were the last 2 sites I was waiting for and I got 2 more invites. You never know.

But yes, this process has been demoralizing.
 
LadyEmmaPeel said:
Alright, I have to ask...since we're all friends here...

One of my best friends is from another program in the city, but she is a PhD student. We had similar practicum experiences, but I have over 1,000 more clinical hours than her, yet she got interviews at schools where I was rejected outright. I have also done plenty of research. Are some sites more likely to embrace a PhD student over a PsyD student? I noticed on the APPIC website that some sites seem to ONLY take PhD students, or there is an imbalance in who they seem to be interested in. If we're all clinical psychology...does the PhD/PsyD thing matter?

(The thing that REALLY gets me is the TD at these schools are PsyD's.)

We are equally awesome...why not split the pile between us? 😛
Click to expand...

I felt the same way when a colleague was rejected outright for being in a counseling psychology Ph.D. Program (the program wrote that it preferred/required clinical doctorates, if I recall). Her experiences lined up with the training at their site, so she emailed them and the response was that they wouldn’t bother looking at her application if she came from a counseling psychology program, regardless of experience. It was the first time I’d ever heard of a “clinical vs. counseling” bias/elitism in real life playing out professionally. It was really eye-opening and upsetting.

I’m surprised they’d go farther to use PC language with PsyD applicants because they didn’t have to come up with any reason with counseling psychology applicants when I applied; they could just reject us outright by saying they required a clinical psychology doctorate, if I recall correctly.

Now I’m curious—for current applicants, Is that still a designation sites can require (clinical doctorate only)? Have they changed it?
 
foreverbull said:
I felt the same way when a colleague was rejected outright for being in a counseling psychology Ph.D. Program (the program wrote that it preferred/required clinical doctorates, if I recall). Her experiences lined up with the training at their site, so she emailed them and the response was that they wouldn’t bother looking at her application if she came from a counseling psychology program, regardless of experience. It was the first time I’d ever heard of a “clinical vs. counseling” bias/elitism in real life playing out professionally. It was really eye-opening and upsetting.

I’m surprised they’d go farther to use PC language with PsyD applicants because they didn’t have to come up with any reason with counseling psychology applicants when I applied; they could just reject us outright by saying they required a clinical psychology doctorate, if I recall correctly.

Now I’m curious—for current applicants, Is that still a designation sites can require (clinical doctorate only)? Have they changed it?
Click to expand...

We can still delineate, though most accept both.
 
foreverbull said:
Can sites delineate whether they prefer Psy.D. or Ph.D.?
Click to expand...

Not sure, but the APPIC directory still lists whether or not PhD, PsyD, or EdD are accepted. We don't accept EdD at our site, or school psychology. As for the PsyD/PhD thing. We haven't accepted a PsyD in a few years, but we're a small-ish program, and the local PsyD program was a mill that we would not take students from, so those applications were generally canned.
 
WisNeuro said:
Not sure, but the APPIC directory still lists whether or not PhD, PsyD, or EdD are accepted. We don't accept EdD at our site, or school psychology. As for the PsyD/PhD thing. We haven't accepted a PsyD in a few years, but we're a small-ish program, and the local PsyD program was a mill that we would not take students from, so those applications were generally canned.
Click to expand...

...but, but, some of us are SO great! Maybe someday they'll look at PsyD's from out of state?
 
LadyEmmaPeel said:
...but, but, some of us are SO great! Maybe someday they'll look at PsyD's from out of state?
Click to expand...

We don't prioritize in state students. If anything, in state students are probably at a disadvantage. Far too many apply who are a bad fit simply because they want to stay in state that they apply to all internships in state. Like people with primarily a child background even though we are an adult only site.
 
I'm honestly confused as to why APPIC wouldn't allow a Psy.D. vs. Ph.D. distinction but yet still allows internship sites to specify clinical preferred (vs. counseling) and this isn't seen as inappropriate.

I can understand the need to designate clinical/counseling vs. school/educational doctorates given the differences in training, but not something as nuanced as clinical vs. counseling, which have equivalent training and coursework. This seems very arbitrary. Why wouldn't APPIC just combine the preference so it's "counseling & clinical" as one designation since they are so similar?
 
Toulouse said:
Finally got rejections from the last two sites I was waiting on: Salem VAMC and Charleston Consortium today.

Glad my waiting game's over so I can focus on other things and interviews now!
Click to expand...

Boooooo to those rejections, but YAY to interview prep! :joyful:
 
foreverbull said:
I'm honestly confused as to why APPIC wouldn't allow a Psy.D. vs. Ph.D. distinction but yet still allows internship sites to specify clinical preferred (vs. counseling) and this isn't seen as inappropriate.

I can understand the need to designate clinical/counseling vs. school/educational doctorates given the differences in training, but not something as nuanced as clinical vs. counseling, which have equivalent training and coursework. This seems very arbitrary. Why wouldn't APPIC just combine the preference so it's "counseling & clinical" as one designation since they are so similar?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm not sure that they don't allow the PsyD/PhD distinction. We've just never altered ours. They still may.

As for what sites will and will not accept, I'm pretty ok with whatever distinctions sites want to make. Theoretically, there are different foci and training goals in these settings, so training sites should also be able to decide which orientations that they wish to train further. I haven't seen a huge discrepancy between counseling and clinical in match rates, so I'm not sure I see the problem.
 
poodles4life said:
Has anyone heard from St. Louis Internship Consortium?
Click to expand...

I got an email from them on 11/20! I would reach out to the TD if you still haven't heard anything. I believe their notification date has passed.
 
Has anyone heard from Children’s institute inc? Today is their notification date but haven’t heard anything
 
foreverbull said:
I'm honestly confused as to why APPIC wouldn't allow a Psy.D. vs. Ph.D. distinction but yet still allows internship sites to specify clinical preferred (vs. counseling) and this isn't seen as inappropriate.

I can understand the need to designate clinical/counseling vs. school/educational doctorates given the differences in training, but not something as nuanced as clinical vs. counseling, which have equivalent training and coursework. This seems very arbitrary. Why wouldn't APPIC just combine the preference so it's "counseling & clinical" as one designation since they are so similar?
Click to expand...

I believe some internship programs do specify on the APPIC website that they don't accept applications from PsyD applicants. Duke University Medical Center is just one that comes to mind, and I'm sure there are others, though maybe not very many.
 
There have been some sites I've come across that also state that Psy.D. is not accepted. I remember last year they would say "preferred" or "acceptable," however, I've noticed many sites who only accept Ph.D.s will just put "not accepted" next to Psy.D. or leave it blank.
 
Has anyone received their “official rejection” from the Brooklyn VA? I’m with some of you guys in that at this point I’m just emailing the TD and calling to get the actual No, but it is a bit annoying given that the notification date was the 13th, interviews have already been sent per this thread, and I have to offer an additional day to another site. On the off chance they are waiting for interviewees to respond or something, I don’t want to schedule other things at a time when I’m already booked up pretty good!
 
LadyEmmaPeel said:
BFF (best friend forever): Any word from Ancora Psychiatric Hospital?
TD (training director): They won't be notifying students of their status until the new year.
ME (me): That's what I heard, because of all the applications they got.
BFF: Soooooo...I'm scheduling my interviews and buying plane tickets and making all these arrangements and I won't even know their status until a few days before my first interview? I feel like that's not going to work to their advantage and it's unfair to the students who applied.
ME: I hear you.
TD: I understand. It's not ideal. .::shrugs:::.

😱 ...but I need to know. I neeeeeeddddd to knowwwwww now!

View attachment 289768
Click to expand...

Yeah...that's pretty craptacular
 
Hey guys did anyone apply to the Northern California Department of Corrections Consortium and, if so, have you heard from either California State Prison – Sacramento or Valley State Prison? I heard from one other site in the consortium but not the others so just wanted to check and see what's up because scheduling these interviews is becoming a NIGHTMARE (and super expensive)
 
neurocog said:
There have been some sites I've come across that also state that Psy.D. is not accepted. I remember last year they would say "preferred" or "acceptable," however, I've noticed many sites who only accept Ph.D.s will just put "not accepted" next to Psy.D. or leave it blank.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I think there might be reason to question arbitrary exclusions, but some folks would also argue that they wouldn’t want to be at a site that believes that X degree automatically means inferior training without exception. Which makes a sense as well, but if the site’s belief is from hearsay rather than experience, that’s more of a problem, in my opinion.
 
foreverbull said:
Interesting. I think there might be reason to question arbitrary exclusions, but some folks would also argue that they wouldn’t want to be at a site that believes that X degree automatically means inferior training without exception. Which makes a sense as well, but if the site’s belief is from hearsay rather than experience, that’s more of a problem, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Yeah...I don't know, call me old fashion, but I would prefer to meet someone and make my decision regarding their character, work ethic, competence and intelligence on a case by case basis rather than arbitrarily dismiss someone based on an assumed characteristic in their application.
 
foreverbull said:
Interesting. I think there might be reason to question arbitrary exclusions, but some folks would also argue that they wouldn’t want to be at a site that believes that X degree automatically means inferior training without exception. Which makes a sense as well, but if the site’s belief is from hearsay rather than experience, that’s more of a problem, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I can understand why some internship sites that adhere to a scientist-practitioner or clinical science curriculum might require applicants to come from programs that offer similar curricula at the predoctoral level (e.g., practitioner-scholar training is not accepted).

However, given the heterogeneity within degree programs, I can also understand why some sites might be more flexible in establishing their inclusion criteria (e.g., practitioner-scholar training is accepted but not preferred).

I think truth in advertising is actually a good thing -- If a site isn't going to admit trainees with a particular educational background, then I'd rather know before, as opposed to after, spending the time and money associated with applying.
 
RyD said:
Has anyone received their “official rejection” from the Brooklyn VA? I’m with some of you guys in that at this point I’m just emailing the TD and calling to get the actual No, but it is a bit annoying given that the notification date was the 13th, interviews have already been sent per this thread, and I have to offer an additional day to another site. On the off chance they are waiting for interviewees to respond or something, I don’t want to schedule other things at a time when I’m already booked up pretty good!
Click to expand...

I am in the same boat. They are my last site to hear from. I emailed the TD and have not heard back yet. I'm assuming it's going to be a rejection, however I would like to know either way! Will you keep me updated if you hear anything? I am resisting reaching out a second time.
 
acclivity said:
I can understand why some internship sites that adhere to a scientist-practitioner or clinical science curriculum might require applicants to come from programs that offer similar curricula at the predoctoral level (e.g., practitioner-scholar training is not accepted).

However, given the heterogeneity within degree programs, I can also understand why some sites might be more flexible in establishing their inclusion criteria (e.g., practitioner-scholar training is accepted but not preferred).

I think truth in advertising is actually a good thing -- If a site isn't going to admit trainees with a particular educational background, then I'd rather know before, as opposed to after, spending the time and money associated with applying.
Click to expand...

I would agree that if a site is science-heavy and requires a more nuanced scientific understanding, a scientist-practitioner model would be preferred and could be stated as such (is that an option, though?), and it also doesn't actually exclude an entire type of degree across the board (there are a few PsyD programs with this model, and both clinical and counseling PhD programs have scientist-practitioner training). In my opinion, this seems more reasonable than excluding across the board by type of degree.

EDIT: I think it goes back to what @neurocog was saying about case-by-case basis. Some of us would argue that it's okay to state a clear requirement of X degree, and some of us would suggest that it seems like this is a sweeping generalization.

I would also agree that I'd rather folks weren't wasting money on apps that will get thrown out, but I wonder about how the underlying beliefs about the training were formed for some of these sites. I think it's worth asking the question if these particular sites operate via bias based on hearsay or they had a reasonable sample size of folks from X type of program that didn't work out well. There's no way for us to know, unfortunately, which is part of the problem.

There's also a lot of within-program heterogeneity as you mention, which complicates the issue.
 
Last edited:
foreverbull said:
I would agree that if a site is science-heavy and requires a more nuanced scientific understanding, a scientist-practitioner model would be preferred and could be stated as such (is that an option, though?), and it also doesn't actually exclude an entire type of degree across the board (there are a few PsyD programs with this model, and both clinical and counseling PhD programs have scientist-practitioner training). In my opinion, this seems more reasonable than excluding across the board by type of degree.

EDIT: I think it goes back to what @neurocog was saying about case-by-case basis. Some of us would argue that it's okay to state a clear requirement of X degree, and some of us would suggest that it seems like this is a sweeping generalization.

I would also agree that I'd rather folks weren't wasting money on apps that will get thrown out, but I wonder about how the underlying beliefs about the training were formed for some of these sites. I think it's worth asking the question if these particular sites operate via bias based on hearsay or they had a reasonable sample size of folks from X type of program that didn't work out well. There's no way for us to know, unfortunately, which is part of the problem.

There's also a lot of within-program heterogeneity as you mention, which complicates the issue.
Click to expand...

To expand on that, I would even go further by asking, even if there was some type of objective evidence from the past to support suppositions about training quality between Ph.D. and Psy.D. students, aren't we in the business of constantly re-evaluating and modifying our "interventions" or in this case, assumptions about trainees based on newer evidence? Does that exist? If so, is it reasonable for training programs to integrate that so that we can try to minimize negative generalizations as much as possible? I am glad I didn't apply to the programs that blatantly stated they won't accept Psy.D. students, however, in the back of my mind I think "what a shame, they offer great experiences with great faculty; it would have been an honor to learn from them."
 
RainbowCat said:
I am in the same boat. They are my last site to hear from. I emailed the TD and have not heard back yet. I'm assuming it's going to be a rejection, however I would like to know either way! Will you keep me updated if you hear anything? I am resisting reaching out a second time.
Click to expand...

Of course! It’s definitely tough having one site left that’s probably a no...but just hearing nothing..I emailed the TD as well so I’ll let you know if you do the same 🙂 I’m sure she’s bombarded by now lol
 
neurocog said:
To expand on that, I would even go further by asking, even if there was some type of objective evidence from the past to support suppositions about training quality between Ph.D. and Psy.D. students, aren't we in the business of constantly re-evaluating and modifying our "interventions" or in this case, assumptions about trainees based on newer evidence? Does that exist? If so, is it reasonable for training programs to integrate that so that we can try to minimize negative generalizations as much as possible? I am glad I didn't apply to the programs that blatantly stated they won't accept Psy.D. students, however, in the back of my mind I think "what a shame, they offer great experiences with great faculty; it would have been an honor to learn from them."
Click to expand...

Like I said, because the curricula differ across degree programs, I can understand why some TDs might advocate for curricular-consistency across levels of training -- In my opinion, it's helpful when sites that hold this perspective are up front with trainees about it.
 
acclivity said:
Like I said, because the curricula differ across degree programs, I can understand why some TDs might advocate for curricular-consistency across levels of training -- In my opinion, it's helpful when sites that hold this perspective are up front with trainees about it.
Click to expand...

Sure, but even amongst Ph.D. programs, you also see variability in curricular sequence. It's understood that if one is APA-accredited that there are certain courses and content that must be covered regardless of degree type, however, most programs will vary their curriculum to an extent. I still don't see how arbitrarily dismissing Psy.D. students from a site will somehow ensure the quality of applicants for that site. I genuinely would like to know how some of these sites differ from those who do accept Psy.D.s, or even prefer Psy.D.s Do they spend more time crunching data, disseminating articles, etc.?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Has the child track for Rutgers Biomedical and Health Sciences notified yet as far as anyone knows? I’m so ready to have my schedule finalized and book flights.
 
After each interview, are you sending thank you notes to the TD? I know that in a standard job interview, we would be expected to but I am not sure if it is something I should consider doing or if it makes no difference.
 
Forensicologist said:
Hey guys did anyone apply to the Northern California Department of Corrections Consortium and, if so, have you heard from either California State Prison – Sacramento or Valley State Prison? I heard from one other site in the consortium but not the others so just wanted to check and see what's up because scheduling these interviews is becoming a NIGHTMARE (and super expensive)
Click to expand...

I received a phone call from Valley State Prison earlier this month to schedule an interview.
 
Futurephd101 said:
After each interview, are you sending thank you notes to the TD? I know that in a standard job interview, we would be expected to but I am not sure if it is something I should consider doing or if it makes no difference.
Click to expand...
I would also like to know the answer to this question.!!
 
predocinternhopeful said:
Has the child track for Rutgers Biomedical and Health Sciences notified yet as far as anyone knows? I’m so ready to have my schedule finalized and book flights.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat. I asked this recently- it does sound like at least some people have heard back about child track. I also haven't heard, so I'm guessing it's a no, but I am planning to wait until the official notification date (12/20) to book flights, etc., just to be sure since it's only 2 days away.
 
Futurephd101 said:
After each interview, are you sending thank you notes to the TD? I know that in a standard job interview, we would be expected to but I am not sure if it is something I should consider doing or if it makes no difference.
Click to expand...

It’s not needed and won’t impact ranking.
 
Shane559 said:
I received a phone call from Valley State Prison earlier this month to schedule an interview.
Click to expand...
Ugh I wonder if they are planning on sending out rejections. I emailed the main TD for the whole consortium but haven't heard back. Do you have the contact information for the site specific director? Maybe I can get an answer from him/her! Feel free to message me if you are comfortable sharing that information.
 
Dr.Chef said:
For those of you who got an invite (phone call) to: John L. Gildner Regional Institute for Children & Adolescents (Rockville, Maryland)... Have you gotten a confirmation email yet with details !? I cant seem to find it anywhere in my inbox and I want to email but dont want to look like an idiot!
Thanks!
Click to expand...


I have not received a follow-up email from them either. I don't think there is anything wrong with emailing to confirm! I have also considered reaching out to the TD, but planned to wait until after the holidays to do so (my interview is also on the 28th, so I figured they have plenty of time to get back to me before it really becomes a problem haha).
 
If you all are sending thank you emails, are you sending them to the training director only or to all faculty you interviewed with? I would have to write about 4-6 for each site, which seems excessive, but I also worry that it might come off negatively not to send them to everyone I spoke with.
 
So, now I've heard back from all 20 of my sites - 4 interviews. It makes me terribly nervous but hopefully it will work out in the end. I just have zero time to prep which is stressing me out. Not to mention being a single mom with 2 kids, a business AND a stressful job. Oh and I ran out of paid time off - bummer. How in the world will I pay rent LOL Sometimes I wish my co-workers understood what my experience was. They don't even understand why I say I am a PhD candidate but not in school 🤔. or "why you here then?" or "When you gonna be a docta?"
 
affectiveH3art said:
So, now I've heard back from all 20 of my sites - 4 interviews. It makes me terribly nervous but hopefully it will work out in the end. I just have zero time to prep which is stressing me out. Not to mention being a single mom with 2 kids, a business AND a stressful job. Oh and I ran out of paid time off - bummer. How in the world will I pay rent LOL Sometimes I wish my co-workers understood what my experience was. They don't even understand why I say I am a PhD candidate but not in school 🤔. or "why you here then?" or "When you gonna be a docta?"
Click to expand...
Did you hear back from IU Ball?
 
predocinternhopeful said:
Any word? I’m still waiting
Click to expand...
I emailed the TD on Monday morning to inquire about my application status. I still hadn’t heard from him but I know he got back to several other students same day so I called him and left a voicemail yesterday around 5pm. I received an email from him this morning stating he was glad I called him because he accidentally missed my email from Monday...unfortunately it was a rejection for me. But definitely worth reaching out!
 
If anyone is waiting to hear from KKI- Traumatic Stress Track then it means you were not offered an interview.
Called the TD and that’s what I was told- apparently they do not send out rejections.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
APPIC internship applications
Replies
5
Views
3K
R. Matey
R. Matey
abouttobeadoctor
APPIC Internship Phase II Interview & Support Thread (2024)
Replies
7
Views
4K
theSteppenwolf
theSteppenwolf
U
New APPIC Notification Sheet
Replies
0
Views
3K
ultra-rare-furby
U
A
APPIC 2025-2026 Interview Thread and Sheet
Replies
25
Views
15K
PsychPsychBaby
PsychPsychBaby
M
Anyone Matched at APPIC Internship Site with Criminal History?
Replies
9
Views
2K
tn15an
T
Top