Less competitive / second tier programs?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
cara susanna

cara susanna

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
8,588
Reaction score
9,411
Points
6,441
Location
Midwest
  1. Psychologist
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Hi everyone,

My professor told me that I should add some less competitive Clinical PhD programs to my list of programs to which I will be applying. Any suggestions? I know that there is no real program ranking, and I have no idea what's competitive or not. I mean, I thought that one of my programs was not that competitive because it had a fairly low amount of applicants and a fairly high acceptance rate, but then I was told that it was a top program, so I'm just confused now.

So, any help would be appreciated. :/ I've just gone through about fifteen program websites on the Insider's Guide that seemed second tier, but most of them still had what seemed to be a high amount of applicants vs number accepted. How do you tell if a program is really competitive/top tier or not?
 
Last edited:
I don't know much about the rankings but Kent University has a high acceptance rate. My professor and a few of his students went there and he basically told me that he didn't do anything his first 2 years except party, then decided to be serious towards the end, he did some research and got like the minimum 1200 on GRE and he was accepted.
Thats just hear-say but that reminded me.

I guess you could look up Top Grad Schools and check the lists and maybe apply to schools that just barely made the list?
 
lesleeannc said:
I don't know much about the rankings but Kent University has a high acceptance rate. My professor and a few of his students went there and he basically told me that he didn't do anything his first 2 years except party, then decided to be serious towards the end, he did some research and got like the minimum 1200 on GRE and he was accepted.
Thats just hear-say but that reminded me.

I guess you could look up Top Grad Schools and check the lists and maybe apply to schools that just barely made the list?
Click to expand...

My way of looking for lower prestige program was primarily done by GPA/GRE and the number of students accepted. This isn't foolproof but it's one way to do it.

Before you interview there are 4 things that really figure into your chance to get an interview.

1. GPA/GRE
2. Research/Clinical Experience
3. Letters of Recommendation
4. Personal Statement

So what can you objectively compare for competitiveness of a program?

The only things that are easy to compare are GPA/GRE, number of students accepted/applied, the prestige of the university, and the prestige of the faculty. You'll have to guess a little at the prestige once you get past the top 50 schools in the list provided by US News, as most (if not all) in that top 50 list are very competitive.

Mark
 
Thanks. What would you say is a non-competitive GRE? 1200? 1100? Also, ratio of accepted students vs. number applied? I thought that maybe under 1/10 was good, what do you think?
 
Last edited:
The Insider's Guide has a worksheet at the end intended to help you figure this out.
 
That's in comparison with my own stats, though, isn't it?
 
This may or may not be helpful, but I personally don't believe there is such a thing as a second tier or less selective program in Clinical unless you go for one of the ones which are not funded. It doesn't matter if it is ranked toward the top or the bottom, it is all going to be about who you are applying to work with and your match. There are some very well-known professors at "lower tier" schools and since they accept so few it is just as hard if not harder to get in and work with that professor than many of the "top-tier" schools.

Additionally, it all comes down to match. At my program, once you meet the cutoffs no one really pays attention to your stats, it is solely match. I don't know if it is the same everywhere, but what I do know is you can have a perfect 4.0 and also have 1600 GREs and be rejected quite easily from ANY program if you don't have the match.

Match is everything. Do your research, find the professors you match best with, and apply to those schools. That will give you a much better shot IMHO than trying to figure out what is and is not a lower-tier school (plus you may end up at a higher-tier school as well).
 
Yeah, that's exactly what I thought and was planning on doing, but then my professor told me that I was living dangerously. So I'm not sure now.
 
irish80122 said:
This may or may not be helpful, but I personally don't believe there is such a thing as a second tier or less selective program in Clinical unless you go for one of the ones which are not funded. It doesn't matter if it is ranked toward the top or the bottom, it is all going to be about who you are applying to work with and your match. There are some very well-known professors at "lower tier" schools and since they accept so few it is just as hard if not harder to get in and work with that professor than many of the "top-tier" schools.

Additionally, it all comes down to match. At my program, once you meet the cutoffs no one really pays attention to your stats, it is solely match. I don't know if it is the same everywhere, but what I do know is you can have a perfect 4.0 and also have 1600 GREs and be rejected quite easily from ANY program if you don't have the match.

Match is everything. Do your research, find the professors you match best with, and apply to those schools. That will give you a much better shot IMHO than trying to figure out what is and is not a lower-tier school (plus you may end up at a higher-tier school as well).
Click to expand...

There is a lot of truth to what you say, BUT, getting an interview at University of Southern Mississippi is easier than getting an interview at University of Texas - Austin. While the granularity may be small it's there, there is no way that I would have ever heard from University of Michigan but Michigan State University (while certainly competitive, is not top tier.) invited me to interview twice. However, it is still critical to generate a solid match.

Just to re-iterate what you noted above: Match is EVERYTHING.

Mark
 
I found that geographically undesirable universities (midwest, places where it snows lots, that sort of thing) had comparatively fewer applicants. I'm unconvinced that competitiveness has a direct relationship with number of applicants. I'm quite certain that schools that are particularly desirable either because of their name or location get many more applicants who are not especially competitive, while many people wouldn't apply to geographically undesirable schools unless they were seeking a good match.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I agree -- if you're willing to live in arkansas or michigan you may have greater admission chances as opposed to a big popular city. and i'm not implying that these are awful places to live -- my pals in s. carolina are also psych phd student/librarian couples w/ no family $ and limited stipends, and we, in the e. coast are renting and paycheck to paycheck, they own a sweet house and have an amazing lifestyle and job opportunities.
 
JockNerd said:
I found that geographically undesirable universities (midwest, places where it snows lots, that sort of thing) had comparatively fewer applicants. I'm unconvinced that competitiveness has a direct relationship with number of applicants. I'm quite certain that schools that are particularly desirable either because of their name or location get many more applicants who are not especially competitive, while many people wouldn't apply to geographically undesirable schools unless they were seeking a good match.
Click to expand...

This is very true. I'm using this to my advantage when I apply this season. As long as they are APA accredited, it won't matter to me in the end.
 
I live in a very cold state, so cold isn't my problem. 😀

They have fewer applicants, but I guess that doesn't make them any less competitive. I'm beginning to think that I won't find any programs that aren't very competitive.
 
cara susanna said:
I live in a very cold state, so cold isn't my problem. 😀

They have fewer applicants, but I guess that doesn't make them any less competitive. I'm beginning to think that I won't find any programs that aren't very competitive.
Click to expand...

You may not be looking hard enough. Do you have the Graduate Study in Psychology book? I've found many programs that receive less than 100 applications per year and are APA accredited. Many I've contacted take a more personal approach to admissions where they will look at your application regardless of the strength of the application (i.e. no strict GRE/GPA cut-offs). They are not "top tier" schools, but they are accredited and will get you to where you eventually want to be.
 
The APA book? No, I don't have it. I take it that it's worth buying?

Mind giving me a short list via PM or something, btw?
 
One big caveat on the number accepted per year... it could fluctuate depending on who has grant money to spend, or if faculty has been added/dropped recently.

I'm in social psych (first year), which is a bit different, but I was expecting a cohort of four to six (typical, based on prior years), and it's two this year (not surprisingly, we're in different labs with different advisers). The other areas, especially clinical and behavioral neuroscience, dwarf us by comparison this year.
 
Thrak said:
One big caveat on the number accepted per year... it could fluctuate depending on who has grant money to spend, or if faculty has been added/dropped recently.

I'm in social psych (first year), which is a bit different, but I was expecting a cohort of four to six (typical, based on prior years), and it's two this year (not surprisingly, we're in different labs with different advisers). The other areas, especially clinical and behavioral neuroscience, dwarf us by comparison this year.
Click to expand...

Indeed. This is why it is always good to look at the disclosure data on the program's website. The APA book is good for knowing where APA accredited programs exist.
 
I just ordered the APA book, so hopefully that will help. Thanks again for the advice, everyone.

I've looked at the disclosure data on websites, but I don't know what good numbers are.
 
since most funded apa approved programs aren't going to have 50 folks in thier incoming class, programs with better numbers tend to be ones that ae less popular, as opposed to letting in more people -- they still have funding for 12, but it's arkansas, or a new program, etc., so only 85 people applied in the first place. you end up getting admissions info like 80 applied 20 accepted, 12 attended -- not too shabby. and for these new, inconvienently located, etc programs, you may not have the mass of 1400 + gre folks that you'll get applying to santa barbara, so it may be better that way too.
 
irish80122 said:
This may or may not be helpful, but I personally don't believe there is such a thing as a second tier or less selective program in Clinical
Click to expand...

100% Agree.
 
Last edited:
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
JockNerd said:
I found that geographically undesirable universities (midwest, places where it snows lots, that sort of thing) had comparatively fewer applicants
Click to expand...


Some of the best clinical psych programs are in the midwest, Minn, Iowa, U of M, etc. Therefore, the may have low numbers not because of the weather but because people may think, I won't get in there so why apply.
 
Anon15 said:
Some of the best clinical psych programs are in the midwest, Minn, Iowa, U of M, etc. Therefore, the may have low numbers not because of the weather but because people may think, I won't get in there so why apply.
Click to expand...

You don't consider 425 people for Fall 2008 and only 42 were accepted at the University of Minnesota a lot? I think that number is scary as hell!
 
Anon15 said:
Some of the best clinical psych programs are in the midwest, Minn, Iowa, U of M, etc. Therefore, the may have low numbers not because of the weather but because people may think, I won't get in there so why apply.
Click to expand...

Desirable programs have fewer applicants because they're desirable? Naw, I don't think this is a good representation of the thoughts of most applicants. If students are scared off by top schools, why do other top-ranked programs in Florida and Cali get 400 applicants?

lesleeannc said:
You don't consider 425 people for Fall 2008 and only 42 were accepted at the University of Minnesota a lot? I think that number is scary as hell!
Click to expand...

42 funded people? Wow, that's huge. And 1/10 for a funded program is awesome odds.
 
JockNerd said:
Desirable programs have fewer applicants because they're desirable? Naw, I don't think this is a good representation of the thoughts of most applicants. If students are scared off by top schools, why do other top-ranked programs in Florida and Cali get 400 applicants?



42 funded people? Wow, that's huge. And 1/10 for a funded program is awesome odds.
Click to expand...

42 accepted, not 42 matriculated. I don't know what their actual matriculation is, though it may speak to your mention of geographic desirability that they can't get away with accepting fewer.

Its a pretty massive department, but yeah, those odds actually don't sound bad at all. They're almost double what you see at many places. That said, its still ridiculously competitive and they are probably all some of the best young researchers in the US given the grad student projects I see coming out of Minnesota.
 
Last edited:
Ollie123 said:
42 accepted, not 42 matriculated. I don't know what their actual matriculation is, though it may speak to your mention of geographic desirability that they can't get away with accepting fewer.

Its a pretty massive department, but yeah, those odds actually don't sound bad at all. They're almost double what you see at many places. That said, its still ridiculously competitive and they are probably all some of the best young researchers in the US given the grad student projects I see coming out of Minnesota.
Click to expand...

I think I read that 18 were actually matriculated.
I definitely thought that only 42 accepted was low and scary.

I also took your advice and looking up their professors to see what research they were doing and I actually found 2 that I got really excited about and their research sounds amazing! Its definitely something I'm interested in. Needless to say I am looking at schools that go to the Boulder Model side more.
So thanks... 🙂
 
myelin said:
7% is about right when compared to other top programs. Welcome to the jungle.
Click to expand...


😱
I mean, I knew it was competitive but to put it like that is just down right terrifying!
 
Yeah, that's why finding less competitive numbers is difficult. They're ALL competitive. 😀
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
7 percent is probably the median number for the acceptance rates across university based Ph.D programs actually. BUT, the 7% that got accepted at UM probably have stats way above the average Ph.D. applicant. So yea, thats not too bad a number, but to even be competitive there requires that you are already way ahead of the game (in terms of research productivity) in comparison to most other clinical applicants. I would think that you would just have to have been an RA for a couple years and have some pubs to get into the UM clinical program. That program really requires a differnt level of accomplishment and ambition for its potential applicants. My admittedly limited exposure to its graduates and their talk of their experiences there leads me to believe that its just a totaly different breed of grad students there, IMHO. And a very different atmosphere compared to my Ph.D. program.
 
Last edited:
lesleeannc said:
Ugh. This sounds so low to me 😕
Click to expand...

If you look at the break out more than 50% of the accepted students had >1400 GRE scores and 75% of them had GPA's > 3.75.

Now lets compare that with a programs like U of Alabama and U of Southern Mississippi (Mind you there is nothing wrong with USM, it's just a little easier to get in than the hardest programs.)

UM Average GRE score 1393
UA Average GRE score 1331
USM Average GRE score 1182

GPA
UM: 3.77
UA: 3.60
USM: 3.61

Admissions Rate
UM: 6.76%
UA: 8.99% (and although nearly 9% are selected only 5.3% of the original pool of 189 actually attend)
USM: 14.7%

You see, there is very competitive, competitive, and less competitive... Doesn't mean any are easy! And the differences are not all that tremendous, a few tenths of a GPA point and 100 points on the GRE is enough to make a serious difference. In reality, selection rates for clinical psych programs are really around 5% when all the fighting over top applicants is done. I saw some of the same applicants at multiple interviews suggesting that a small cohort may compete for the same slots at multiple schools.

Mark
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is a tip that I learned while completing my MA. You don't have to attend large schools/private schools to get training from them. I attend a state school in TN, but my practicum is at Vanderbilt Medical Center. I'm being trained by Vandy neurology faculty, but I'm not a student there. We also have access to grand rounds and possibly can sit-in on DBS surgeries (working on that one...). My point is that there are ways around the system. It's not a completely linear process and you don't always have to attend the big schools to get training from them.
 
JockNerd said:
Desirable programs have fewer applicants because they're desirable? Naw, I don't think this is a good representation of the thoughts of most applicants. If students are scared off by top schools, why do other top-ranked programs in Florida and Cali get 400 applicants?
Click to expand...

Simply offering a different example other than weather..
 
I've been looking for the hidden gems thread for a few ideas and I can't find it. Does anyone have a link, by any chance?

Thanks!

Btw, the APA book arrived today and it's quite daunting. Haha.
 
Psyched77 said:
Stop capping on Arkansas, or I'll have to whip out my ninja skills on you! 😉
Click to expand...

i'm sorry! i made fun of michigan too, if that helps!

i actually have great friends from arkansas and they tell great stories about growing up there. i feel similarly protective about wisconsin!

also, souther ninjas...there is a movie idea in there.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
psybee said:
i got engaged in spring green, at the house on the rock, and then we celebrated by going to waterparks in the dells!

'sconsin rocks.
Click to expand...

I went to the Dells this summer on my drive home to Minnesota! I love Wisconsin and miss being so close! 🙁
 
lesleeannc said:
I went to the Dells this summer on my drive home to Minnesota! I love Wisconsin and miss being so close! 🙁
Click to expand...

i love minnesota! the great lakes midwest is awesome (not knocking the rest of the midwest, just not as familiar with it).

the dells are the best, even w/o lake delton. the cheese factory, anyone?

wisconsin is seriously an internship consideration.
 
psybee said:
i love minnesota! the great lakes midwest is awesome (not knocking the rest of the midwest, just not as familiar with it).

the dells are the best, even w/o lake delton. the cheese factory, anyone?

wisconsin is seriously an internship consideration.
Click to expand...

I'm in Ohio right now. It's still the midwest but its not really my version of the midwest. Don't know when I'll be able to go back home, depends on where I get into grad school but I'm def. trying to get closer to MN so WI is def. on my list of looking at grad schools! 🙂

Glad to see another "northern" on the board!
 
Dug this thread up. It makes me smile because I've been going through the Insider's Guide and departmental websites looking for good matches. I've found I get in a state of mind where I'm thinking that 12 out of 60 applicants is a high acceptance rate and 14 out of 94 doesn't look too bad... and then reality hits, and I remember that a VAST majority of applicants still get rejected... and that I'm probably not getting in anywhere next year.

Try explaining this to my family, though... "Don't worry; you'll get in somewhere;" "I bet you get in everywhere! 🙂eek:😱😱 )" I try explaining to them that this is most competitive field in the country, most applicants DON'T get in anywhere, etc., but it doesn't seem to sink in!
 
biogirl215 said:
Dug this thread up. It makes me smile because I've been going through the Insider's Guide and departmental websites looking for good matches. I've found I get in a state of mind where I'm thinking that 12 out of 60 applicants is a high acceptance rate and 14 out of 94 doesn't look too bad... and then reality hits, and I remember that a VAST majority of applicants still get rejected... and that I'm probably not getting in anywhere next year.

Try explaining this to my family, though... "Don't worry; you'll get in somewhere;" "I bet you get in everywhere! 🙂eek:😱😱 )" I try explaining to them that this is most competitive field in the country, most applicants DON'T get in anywhere, etc., but it doesn't seem to sink in!
Click to expand...

I think what you are feeling is pretty normal. Though, I think it's so much more than a numbers game. The personalized nature of this process means that we actually have more leeway than medicine or law. We have the chance to sell ourselves many times over with research, practical experience, personal statements, direct contact with the professors. I honestly believe that good candidates make it through even if their numbers don't line up according to the books.

Now, that's not to say that people who don't get in are bad candidates... I think a lot of them probably just didn't sell what they had very well or picked bad matches. If you did your very best to convey your goals in your packet... and you chose schools based on your area of passion/knowledge and didn't just shotgun applications around the country... then, I bet you will be ok in the end. If nothing else, you are making connections and people will remember you the next go around.

Good luck to you. Try not to let your family stress you out. I don't even tell my family stuff anymore... most of my friends don't either. We give them general statements about what's going on... but why trouble them with details of a process they don't understand? Even my friends' parents who are doctors/psychologists/researchers still don't fully "get" education in 2008...

Also, I don't know that "most applicants don't get in anywhere..." There are plenty of schools out there that won't even fill up, then, the APA puts out that list after the deadline and some folks scramble to get in apps to those locations. Maybe most applicants get rejected at one school... but they might be an exceptional match at another school... I don't know though, maybe that's just my rationalizing to make myself feel better!! Be well.
 
biogirl215 said:
Try explaining this to my family, though... "Don't worry; you'll get in somewhere;" "I bet you get in everywhere! 🙂eek:😱😱 )" I try explaining to them that this is most competitive field in the country, most applicants DON'T get in anywhere, etc., but it doesn't seem to sink in!
Click to expand...

This is an error. It's not that *most* applicants don't get in, it's just that applicants only get in at one place. If everyone were applying to only one school, then yes 95% of applicants would be rejected. But people apply to 5, 10, 15, or even more places. So, I got in to one grad program, but I still count toward the "not accepted" number at all the other 12 schools I applied to but was rejected from, or turned down myself.
 
IMHO, this is how I view schools with some variability within each of the tiers depending on a few factors (such as funding, internship placements, training opportunities, and publication trends).

Tier 1 = APA accredited
Tier 2 = Accreditation in the works (i.e., transition phase)
Tier 4 = Non-accredited
 
biogirl215 said:
Try explaining this to my family, though... "Don't worry; you'll get in somewhere;" "I bet you get in everywhere! 🙂eek:😱😱 )" I try explaining to them that this is most competitive field in the country, most applicants DON'T get in anywhere, etc., but it doesn't seem to sink in!
Click to expand...

I've totally been there! I think the only person that really "got it" in my life was my husband. Everyone else said stuff like yours did. My husband & I learned to just smile & nod about it. If you don't get in your first year, they might listen a little more! 😉 But like JockNerd said, it's not as bad as it sounds. I do understand, however, just how grim it looks when you are the applicant. (I just went through that last year.) Once you get in & are on the "other side" (even if that takes a couple of tries), you realize that it's not quite as grim as you once thought. (Most people I've known had more than one offer, which seems to suggest that if you have the the experience, the personal presence, & the "numbers" that you need, you're all set...as long as you apply to schools that really are good matches.)
 
If you don't get in your first year, they might listen a little more! 😉
Click to expand...

Yeah, this is one situation where I'd be *thrilled* to be wrong! 😉 I'm only applying to good research matches where I have a strong (or at least decent) background in the area. I feel like I've done a lot to try and make myself a good applicant (sought out lots of research, taught, gotten to know faculty, etc.), but still, the numbers are daunting. I hope geography works a bit in my favor, though--when I told my mom some of my potential schools, the response was almost universally "you want to go THERE?" ("there" being either very cold and rural, or in a couple of cases, very southern and rural). I think she may finally be understanding the concept of "research match," though. 🙂

Thanks for the encouragement, by the way! 🙂
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
EPPP - second attempt
Replies
3
Views
2K
Spydra
Spydra
C
  • Question Question
Question about Chicago psyd programs
Replies
16
Views
3K
cara susanna
cara susanna
T
How to be competitive for internship?
Replies
6
Views
3K
AcronymAllergy
AcronymAllergy
J
PhD/PsyD Is my Profile Competitive for PhD in clinical?
Replies
9
Views
2K
R. Matey
R. Matey
Markyzone
PSYD Programs to apply?
Replies
2
Views
2K
ForensicPsychFightClub
F
Top Bottom