Evaluating the Advice from this neuropsych internship guide?

[psych.meout]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I recently found this guide to getting neuropsych internships while doing some research about internships and practica.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwiYu8WD_dXYAhVK3IMKHTWvAAsQFggpMAA&url=http://www.div40-anst.com/uploads/5/6/0/1/5601196/anst-eac-aitcn_internship_webinar_final.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3ESrQwbhRu6wHrGfDEXhd1

[It's a fairly large PDF, so I had to link it instead of uploading it here directly]

What do all of you, especially those who are neuropsychologists, think of it?

One specific question I had was about the notes on the breadth of training. If someone is peds- or adult-focused, how important is it to have practicum experience with the other population, i.e., adult-focused person having peds experience or peds person having adult experience? And would this need to be explicitly neuropsych experience or would just having any practica with that population (e.g., a therapy-based site) be sufficient?

Also, how important are the "leadership activities" and other extracurriculars they reference on page 21?

 

[Kadhir]

No time to read in terrible detail, but I would generally agree with the content. I believe this was a webinar a couple years ago. The tip to wear a suit while doing a phone interview gave me a chuckle. I'm pretty sure I was in bed, in my fave jammies, eating a Chobani Flip.

Everyone asks this adults/peds question. VAs shouldn't care if you're exclusively adult. Most of the "lifespan" sites interview adult-focused or people with only adult experience, and try to suss out willingness to work with other ages. I can't speak to much from the peds side. It does seem that it's more problematic to have no adult experience than no peds experience. Ultimately it depends on the site- what they expect you to do and what level of supervision is available.

Leadership is good, but won't make or break you. Note that just about all those folks in that document are involved in leadership/governance, so naturally it is salient to them. But you should certainly be attending conferences, presenting, networking, etc.

 

[erg923]

No time to read in terrible detail, but I would generally agree with the content. I believe this was a webinar a couple years ago. The tip to wear a suit while doing a phone interview gave me a chuckle. I'm pretty sure I was in bed, in my fave jammies, eating a Chobani Flip.

Everyone asks this adults/peds question. VAs shouldn't care if you're exclusively adult. Most of the "lifespan" sites interview adult-focused or people with only adult experience, and try to suss out willingness to work with other ages. I can't speak to much from the peds side. It does seem that it's more problematic to have no adult experience than no peds experience. Ultimately it depends on the site- what they expect you to do and what level of supervision is available.

Leadership is good, but won't make or break you. Note that just about all those folks in that document are involved in leadership/governance, so naturally it is salient to them. But you should certainly be attending conferences, presenting, networking, etc.

"Rounded" is the name of the game in order to maximally competitive in neuropsych.

It may be easier to move forward in training (internship and post doci) if you are exclusivity adult vs exclusively peds, although their is probably more demand (in terms of people really seeking you out) for formally trained peds neuropsychs.

In my current role, I see alot of peds evals that should probably be done by a neuropsych, but aren't.

 

[Kadhir]

"Rounded" is the name of the game in order to maximally competitive in neuropsych.

Likely why I have an almost visceral reaction to the applicant favorite, "round out my training."

 

[AcronymAllergy]

As mentioned above, I remember scanning through the presentation around the time it was initially put up and thinking it was well done.

It's helpful, but not necessary, to have experience with "the other" population (e.g., kiddos if you're an adult person and vice-versa). I had hardly any child experience, for example, but it didn't seem to hinder me. I'd say it's more for your own growth as a clinician than anything else, much of the time. Could possibly also make it a bit easier to "re-train" if you decide to swap or expand your population(s) of interest during your career, perhaps.

Leadership activities are great, but again, not necessary. I'd encourage folks to get involved in professional organizations, but more for the experience and for building networks than for resume boosting. It's still the case that a handful of good publications (mixed with a decent breadth of clinical practicum sites) can go a long way toward making a very competitive application.

 

[ilovedance1]

I have exclusively pediatrics experience. I do not think that it has hurt my chances for getting an internship or postdoc. I also think that I am competitive for jobs. Although this hasn't hurt me directly, I think that it would have been helpful to have more experience with adults. You do not typically see clear examples of certain impairments in the pediatrics world (e.g., certain types of aphasia). You are also required to know a lot about adult neuropsych for things like board certification. So I don't think that it is critical, but it would probably be helpful.

 

[psych.meout]

Would any of the neuropsychologists here be willing to address some questions I have over PM?

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Sure thing.

 

[WisNeuro]

I'm game, too.