Average Application Amount

[psychauthor74]

---

Members don't see this ad.

What is a decent number of schools to apply to?

 

[Psych2011]

What is a decent number of schools to apply to?

I guess it depends on many different factors (whether you can find a good fit at a lot of schools, how much money you are able/willing to spend on the process etc) but I have heard that usually people apply to 10-20 schools.

 

[roubs]

What is a decent number of schools to apply to?

How competitive are you? Which degree do you want? What do you want in a program? All of these impact the # you should shoot for.

For example, if your dream is to go to Argosy, the # of schools you probably have to apply to is one.

 

[cara susanna]

I only applied to eight and I was okay. My thought was why would I want to apply somewhere I wouldn't want to go.

 

[PsychPhDone]

What is a decent number of schools to apply to?

Depends on the competitiveness of programs you're applying to, your stats, and your resources.

 

[G Costanza]

The best way I have heard it suggested is breaking it into 3 tiers. Apply to 3-4 schools that you really want but would be a long shot, 3-4 schools that you think you have a really good chance, and 3 that you are almost a shoe-in. That way you might be pleasently surprised, satisified, or at least have the option to go somewhere.

That's a lot of time and $$$ though. I spent all my energy on one school and got in. I would not recommend that route.

 

[FadedC]

I would think how many places are a good research fit would be the important thing. There were a bunch of places I applied to just because they were geographically close without worrying about fit, and I might as well have just not bothered.

 

[syzergy]

I think the 3 tier route is a good idea. I'm applying to 16 schools. Four are crazy competitive like UCLA, 5-6 are still really competitive, and the rest are mid to low range competitive. I think it's a good mix even though it is a lot of schools. I started my applications but I know it's going to take a loooong time.

 

[psychauthor74]

Thank you for your replies.

I am interested in the Clinical route. PhD or PsyD (prefer the PsyD). I've narrowed the list down to 15 schools, but the total for the application fees is almost 1,000$. I'm just wondering if I should cut the list again.

 

[wigflip]

I only applied to eight and I was okay. My thought was why would I want to apply somewhere I wouldn't want to go.

I don't know if this is
a) relevant to psych in particular and/or
b) relevant to today's economic environment,

but I do know that in some fields multiple acceptances may provide the prospective student with the opportunity to negotiate a better funding package. That's a possible reason to apply to a program you might not actually want to attend--if you get in and are offered an attractive funding package, another department may be inspired to woo you with a better offer. Again, I don't know to what degree this still happens with all the university budget cuts some states have endured recently.

I do know that the psych students at my school do not all get the same funding, despite the program's representation elsewhere on this forum as a "funded" program. One way one of my psych pals got a superior funding package was by killing the GRE.

 

[cara susanna]

It's relevant in today's economy because applications and interviews cost a lot of money. You're spending about $100 when you consider the application fee plus GRE submission costs plus official transcript costs plus possibly snail mail and subject GRE costs. If you add in interviews, that can get to over $500 if you have to fly there and they won't host you with a grad student.

 

[irishrose]

I understand the 3 tier route in theory, and I'd love to be able to come up with a list like that for myself, but in reality, I consider all of them "reaches." I have competitive grades, test scores and a good amt of research experience, but I am just having trouble formulating a tier system like the one that was easy to make for college apps, and I am by no means only looking at the UCLAs of the programs.

 

[syzergy]

I understand the 3 tier route in theory, and I'd love to be able to come up with a list like that for myself, but in reality, I consider all of them "reaches." I have competitive grades, test scores and a good amt of research experience, but I am just having trouble formulating a tier system like the one that was easy to make for college apps, and I am by no means only looking at the UCLAs of the programs.

I started by picking the faculty that were a research match. The schools just kind of fell into the tier system for me. I didn't go out looking to attend a school like UCLA.

 

[wigflip]

It's relevant in today's economy because applications and interviews cost a lot of money. You're spending about $100 when you consider the application fee plus GRE submission costs plus official transcript costs plus possibly snail mail and subject GRE costs. If you add in interviews, that can get to over $500 if you have to fly there and they won't host you with a grad student.

Ah--no I meant: I don't know if today's economy has quashed departments' recruiting/funding budgets such that accepted applicants can no longer effectively negotiate a better funding package if they are accepted to multiple, decent schools ("UCLA wants me too--what are you going to do to compete with their great funding package?"). In today's economy (or any time) $500 for one campus visit is certainly nothing to sniff at!

 

[cara susanna]

Oh, sorry, I misunderstood! Yeah, I don't think the trade-off of $100-$500 for a possibly better chance of acceptance at another program is worth it, personally.

 

[PsychPhDone]

I'll admit that I applied to a very high number of programs, but the multiple acceptances did lend itself to a strong financial negotiation. As has been discussed, that was a few years ago, but it wouldn't surprise me if there's still a little room for negotiation in a few places (e.g., choice of teaching assignments, nomination for university fellowships, etc)

 

[thepug]

I think the 3 tier route is a good idea. I'm applying to 16 schools. Four are crazy competitive like UCLA, 5-6 are still really competitive, and the rest are mid to low range competitive. I think it's a good mix even though it is a lot of schools. I started my applications but I know it's going to take a loooong time.

Sounds pretty tidy right? WRONG. Total amateur mistake...and we all made it. S*** makes me laugh when I look back at it.

You fit into a tier and you need to find what it is or you'll waste almost all your applications and trust me, it's a crap shoot so if you don't have at least 5 apps within your tier...your toast. I'm sorry, but HOPE to succeed, but EXPECT to fail your first time around because the vast majority do fail.

If your coming straight out of undergrad (*with a finger on the trigger*) you are third tier nuff said, unless you went to a top 30 institution and your mentor was a ghost of some big name. Rule of thumb, if your not at least 2 years out, having acquired research experience across that time, do not even bother with those top 50ish schools as they are all research intensive. Start at 60 and move back. If you get rejected from a tier without an interview, expect all schools from that tier will reject you.

A N Y professor will tell you that you gain entrance by tier. You will not get into a school in the 60-90 USnews rankings and then not get into all your 120+ programs...although you will get rejected from some. I would load over half your applications in 100+ institutions and backwoods places with 100 or less applicants per year. I go to a solid program (third tier - 80-120) and the average age is 26...think about that. Oh yeah, that GRE better be 1350 if you want to get into a top 30. And if you don't clear a 600 verbal... it sucks, but hey.

Do not assume tier denotes quality...it does not. Those rankings mean next to nothing, but that's another thread. What you need to worry about is apa match rate, location, and mentor. You might want to stay out of the woods or institutions that are "clinical based", especially the clinically based ones because they have great internship match rates, but certain post-docs can be harder to get due to a lack of research focus (go for 5 pubs by your 5th year, posters don't mean a thing...it's grad school not your 7th grade science fair. Posters are fine and show involvement in the field, but do not think they are going to supplement for something).

Commence the flaming.

 

[thepug]

Thank you for your replies.

I am interested in the Clinical route. PhD or PsyD (prefer the PsyD). I've narrowed the list down to 15 schools, but the total for the application fees is almost 1,000$. I'm just wondering if I should cut the list again.

16 programs, GRE fees, transcript fees, GRE report fees, applications fees, USPS fees (including second day air stuff), Psych GRE fees (yes, take the thing), nice threads, and, if your lucky, interview hotel/travel expenses...

$2,000 minimum if your not flying anywhere.

mwahahhahahah Double that all-together because, chances are, you may not get in the first time around.

 

[syzergy]

Sounds pretty tidy right? WRONG. Total amateur mistake...and we all made it. S*** makes me laugh when I look back at it.

You fit into a tier and you need to find what it is or you'll waste almost all your applications and trust me, it's a crap shoot so if you don't have at least 5 apps within your tier...your toast. I'm sorry, but HOPE to succeed, but EXPECT to fail your first time around because the vast majority do fail.

If your coming straight out of undergrad (*with a finger on the trigger*) you are third tier nuff said, unless you went to a top 30 institution and your mentor was a ghost of some big name. Rule of thumb, if your not at least 2 years out, having acquired research experience across that time, do not even bother with those top 50ish schools as they are all research intensive. Start at 60 and move back. If you get rejected from a tier without an interview, expect all schools from that tier will reject you.

A N Y professor will tell you that you gain entrance by tier. You will not get into a school in the 60-90 USnews rankings and then not get into all your 120+ programs...although you will get rejected from some. I would load over half your applications in 100+ institutions and backwoods places with 100 or less applicants per year. I go to a solid program (third tier - 80-120) and the average age is 26...think about that. Oh yeah, that GRE better be 1350 if you want to get into a top 30. And if you don't clear a 600 verbal... it sucks, but hey.

Do not assume tier denotes quality...it does not. Those rankings mean next to nothing, but that's another thread. What you need to worry about is apa match rate, location, and mentor. You might want to stay out of the woods or institutions that are "clinical based", especially the clinically based ones because they have great internship match rates, but certain post-docs can be harder to get due to a lack of research focus (go for 5 pubs by your 5th year, posters don't mean a thing...it's grad school not your 7th grade science fair. Posters are fine and show involvement in the field, but do not think they are going to supplement for something).

Commence the flaming.

Wow. ok. I appreciate the advice but don't assume that I haven't done a lot of preparation for this. I apologize because I didn't make myself clear earlier when I posted this, but I am a competitive applicant. My stats are all well within the ranges of the very competitive schools, I am two years out of undergrad with a lot of presentations and a couple of first-author publications. Even with all this, I fully understand the difficulty in getting into clinical programs and make no assumptions that I'll even get into a lower tier school. Like I said before, I picked the faculty first and the schools just happened to fall in these tiers.

I'm not in grad school so I'm really not in any place to give people advice. I was simply saying what I was doing with my apps.

 

[G Costanza]

Don't listen to Pug. It's tough to get into a school but he/she is making it sound like you have to be plucked from the gods. And whatever school pug goes to, I would avoid at all cost. Their screening process clearly has some kinks to be worked out 😉

 

[thepug]

Don't listen to Pug. It's tough to get into a school but he/she is making it sound like you have to be plucked from the gods. And whatever school pug goes to, I would avoid at all cost. Their screening process clearly has some kinks to be worked out 😉

Everything I said was viable advice.

I think Mr. G. is hoping I'm just nuts, because I just scared him. Soon to apply perhaps?

 

[FadedC]

I think pug's advice seems reasonable, maybe a slight exageration at parts but nothing too bad. I don't think things are quite as rigidly defined by tier, and sometimes a lower tier school can be much harder to get into because of something like location or funding level which massively boosts the number of applications. And sometimes your research background perfectly matches with what someone is looking for far more then other applicants with more publications. But it is good to be aware of how competitive you may or may not be.

It is important to note though that the OP is interested in PsyD programs, and while they can still be very competitive, they are also a very different world then PHD clinical programs. In my experience, high GREs and high GPA alone are often enough to get you an interview at a PsyD program, and this is definitely not remotely true for PhD.

 

[G Costanza]

Everything I said was viable advice.

I think Mr. G. is hoping I'm just nuts, because I just scared him. Soon to apply perhaps?

Wrong again pug. Assumptions like this and like you made about the OP don't help people on this forum.

 

[wigflip]

It is important to note though that the OP is interested in PsyD programs, and while they can still be very competitive, they are also a very different world then PHD clinical programs. In my experience, high GREs and high GPA alone are often enough to get you an interview at a PsyD program, and this is definitely not remotely true for PhD.

Very helpful post, Faded C.🙂

 

[wigflip]

certain post-docs can be harder to get due to a lack of research focus (go for 5 pubs by your 5th year).

Any non-pugs care to chime on the 1 pub/year suggestion? Seems reasonable if you are hoping to go for a T-T (where you'll need to produce >= 2/year), but I could swear I've heard people on this forum suggest that 2-3 pubs is competitive for folks hoping to go the clinical route.

 

[cara susanna]

I've heard five pubs in grad school in order to be competitive for research internships and post-docs.

 

[DrGachet]

If you got good grades and GRE, and have really put some thought into it and apply to "right" schools (where there is a real match between your interests and the professors there, where you have spent time communicating with people there), apply to just over ten. Anything less and you should apply to larger number of schools. Or else, work on improving your GPA and take GRE again, get publications, that sort of thing. Better to get accepted to a better school and a year or two later, than to some crappy school, the only one that was willing to give you an interview.

 

[Ollie123]

Any non-pugs care to chime on the 1 pub/year suggestion? Seems reasonable if you are hoping to go for a T-T (where you'll need to produce >= 2/year), but I could swear I've heard people on this forum suggest that 2-3 pubs is competitive for folks hoping to go the clinical route.

I don't know that rigid "rules" are helpful. Last I checked the modal number of pubs was still zero, but that doesn't mean that's a good idea for anyone looking at some of the higher-paying/more competitive job sites. 5 is probably a decent number to be competitive at academic places (that's probably around the norm for our students, who pretty much all go to VAs or academic med centers), but you'll see anywhere from 2-20 pubs for people matching to the research internships. Again, the nature of the pubs matters too - if your goal is simply numbers it would actually be very, very easy to get 15+ pubs if you are willing to produce trash and don't care where you publish it. I've seen CVs like that...everything in virtually unknown journals, all piecemeal-publications from one survey study, etc. Its pretty obvious and while its better than no publications, I think someone with 3 publications in Abnormal/JCCP/etc. will do better than someone with 15 publications, only 2 of which will even pop up on Psycinfo. I'll probably have 10 or so when I graduate, most will be mid-tier (APA divisional journals, specialty journals with IF ~2-3) which I suspect will be fine. However, I'm also going to take forever to graduate so it probably won't look as good as someone with 5 publications who was in and out in 4 years - and certainly won't look as good as someone with 10 publications from studies that actually came out the way they were supposed to do🙂

 

[wigflip]

I don't know that rigid "rules" are helpful. Last I checked the modal number of pubs was still zero, but that doesn't mean that's a good idea for anyone looking at some of the higher-paying/more competitive job sites. 5 is probably a decent number to be competitive at academic places (that's probably around the norm for our students, who pretty much all go to VAs or academic med centers), but you'll see anywhere from 2-20 pubs for people matching to the research internships. Again, the nature of the pubs matters too - if your goal is simply numbers it would actually be very, very easy to get 15+ pubs if you are willing to produce trash and don't care where you publish it. I've seen CVs like that...everything in virtually unknown journals, all piecemeal-publications from one survey study, etc. Its pretty obvious and while its better than no publications, I think someone with 3 publications in Abnormal/JCCP/etc. will do better than someone with 15 publications, only 2 of which will even pop up on Psycinfo. I'll probably have 10 or so when I graduate, most will be mid-tier (APA divisional journals, specialty journals with IF ~2-3) which I suspect will be fine. However, I'm also going to take forever to graduate so it probably won't look as good as someone with 5 publications who was in and out in 4 years - and certainly won't look as good as someone with 10 publications from studies that actually came out the way they were supposed to do🙂

Wow--thanks Ollie (and cara susana).

you'll see anywhere from 2-20 pubs for people matching to the research internships.

Now, for anyone who was still unsure, I am going to admit to being a complete idiot (I said it here so no one else has to). It sounds like there are various categories of predoctoral internships (some which are research focused and some which are clinically focused)--is that right? Is research a part of any predoctoral internship? If I go the PsyD route (still undecided) I would definitely be shooting for university counseling centers, not VA or medical. What kind of research component do folks at university counseling centers typically do as part of their internship?

 

[thepug]

"Now, for anyone who was still unsure, I am going to admit to being a complete idiot"


There we go. j/k j/k

 

[G Costanza]

Wow--thanks Ollie (and cara susana).



Now, for anyone who was still unsure, I am going to admit to being a complete idiot (I said it here so no one else has to). It sounds like there are various categories of predoctoral internships (some which are research focused and some which are clinically focused)--is that right? Is research a part of any predoctoral internship? If I go the PsyD route (still undecided) I would definitely be shooting for university counseling centers, not VA or medical. What kind of research component do folks at university counseling centers typically do as part of their internship?

There certainly can be a research component at counseling centers but most students are still trying to finish their own research. Some of the more understanding sites allot time for you to work on your research/dissertation.