Graduate Program perspective on Undergrad applicants

[ceruleania]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hello,

After talking to different people about this, I was wondering what opinions people/graduate programs have on students applying to Clinical PhD programs straight out of their undergrad? Do programs look unfavorably on this? And if so, does it make a difference if the student has research publications/presentations?

-C

 

[ResearchGirlie]

Hello,

After talking to different people about this, I was wondering what opinions people/graduate programs have on students applying to Clinical PhD programs straight out of their undergrad? Do programs look unfavorably on this? And if so, does it make a difference if the student has research publications/presentations?

-C

This likely varies by program and individual faculty within a program. The norm in my program is time off between school but it has happened that a few have been admitted straight out of undergrad. Those straight out of undergrad have all had 2-3 first author publications so it's definitely not easy.

 

[ndlek21]

Sorry, I misread the question initially.

I'm worried about this too, but I think that if the application looks strong, they probably will give us the chance to interview and prove our maturity/readiness...

 

[Jeina]

I applied straight out of undergrad two years ago (wow, time has flown by!). I was told ahead of time that I would be at a significant disadvantage; however, I didn't find that to be true, and this was at very highly regarded, research-intensive programs. If you have a stellar app and present yourself maturely at interviews, I really don't think this needs to be an issue. That's just my perspective though! Good luck!

 

[Pragma]

It varies by advisor. I have seen a preference for both.

Some might say that there are profs who prefer you to be right out of undergrad (makes for molding nice little minions ) while others say that they prefer additional experience.

In my program, I'd say about 1/3 were directly out of undergrad. About 1/3 were 1-3 years out, and about 1/3 were nontraditional (older and farther out from school).

I didn't apply right out of undergrad, but mostly because I graduated early, was getting married, etc. I also wanted to have a "real job" for a little bit. I took the 1 year and did a clinical job and pubished a paper I had worked on as an undergrad. I really recommend it as a mental health break - graduate school is intense. it was nice to live normally for a year first. But my friends who went directly through were just fine.

 

[futureapppsy2]

This likely varies by program and individual faculty within a program. The norm in my program is time off between school but it has happened that a few have been admitted straight out of undergrad. Those straight out of undergrad have all had 2-3 first author publications so it's definitely not easy.

Wow! Is 2-3 first author publications the norm for those *not* coming straight out of undergrad as well? I thought it was pretty rare for students to have 3 or publications period when starting grad school, much less all first author publications.

 

[wigflip]

Wow! Is 2-3 first author publications the norm for those *not* coming straight out of undergrad as well? I thought it was pretty rare for students to have 3 or publications period when starting grad school, much less all first author publications.

That was my reaction too--holy cats!

FYI: One of my pals got into an R1 psych program with terrific GRE scores, one presentation, and 0 pubs (not sure what the GPA, clinical experience, and LOR portion of the package was, but I'm guessing: pretty good). I'm not saying: "And YOU can do it too!" (peppy music and grinning emcee). Just that there's probably no need to break out the tissue box just yet if you're not a 2-3 First Authored Article gal or guy.

 

[newjerseypsyc32]

It varies by advisor. I have seen a preference for both.

Some might say that there are profs who prefer you to be right out of undergrad (makes for molding nice little minions ) while others say that they prefer additional experience.

In my program, I'd say about 1/3 were directly out of undergrad. About 1/3 were 1-3 years out, and about 1/3 were nontraditional (older and farther out from school).

I didn't apply right out of undergrad, but mostly because I graduated early, was getting married, etc. I also wanted to have a "real job" for a little bit. I took the 1 year and did a clinical job and pubished a paper I had worked on as an undergrad. I really recommend it as a mental health break - graduate school is intense. it was nice to live normally for a year first. But my friends who went directly through were just fine.

Im applying out of undergrad and this is a concern for me although I know there is always a chance. My question from everyone responses would be does it matter if you are applying to a more top teir or mid level program? My applications are split (I think) between these two types and Im wondering if the Mid-level have a lower expectation of full time post-bacc research experience

 

[Pragma]

Im applying out of undergrad and this is a concern for me although I know there is always a chance. My question from everyone responses would be does it matter if you are applying to a more top teir or mid level program? My applications are split (I think) between these two types and Im wondering if the Mid-level have a lower expectation of full time post-bacc research experience

I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think it matters what kind of program in most cases. I think it depends on who is responsible for selecting, particularly if the program follows a mentorship model.

 

[ResearchGirlie]

Wow! Is 2-3 first author publications the norm for those *not* coming straight out of undergrad as well? I thought it was pretty rare for students to have 3 or publications period when starting grad school, much less all first author publications.

Oh no, absolutely not! Sorry don't want to give the current group of applicants a collective heart attack. It just happens that most faculty at my program are anti-undergrad applicants (some bad experiences ruin it for others) so the few that have make it through during my time have been rather exceptional.

 

[Doctor Eliza]

Nothing to back this up, but I have always wondered if there is a difference between more research-oriented programs and more clinically-oriented programs. Just from anecdotal conversations, it seems that the more clinically-oriented programs place a premium on maturity (i.e. non-21 y.o.'s). You want your therapist to have life experience, right? On the other hand, research-oriented programs place more emphasis on the "school/career is my life, all I want to do is keep my nose in a book" kind of student. Over-simplification, but I think it may be a trend.

My program was 50-50 between directly from UG and 1-2 yrs off. There were also 2 students in their late 30's.

Best,
Dr. E

 

[Psychadelic2012]

I'm in a balanced (practice/research) program where most students have their masters degree before entering. I think it depends on the applicant's age. Older student who received an undergraduate degree and came straight to doc program? Not so bad. But I personally think a traditionally-aged, straight out of undergrad student doesn't belong in a doctoral program. Get some life experience first, especially in a balanced program. Sorry, but I'm biased. Don't flame me, because I'm open about this on this forum and you're free to disagree.

 

[Jeina]

I can't speak for everyone, but I don't think it matters what kind of program in most cases. I think it depends on who is responsible for selecting, particularly if the program follows a mentorship model.

I agree 🙂