UCSF Internship

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

ilikepsych

Full Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2006
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
I just saw that UCSF Department of Psychiatry updated their internship materials and it looks like they no longer offer the two year program with pre-doc internship and one year post-doc. Also, it looks like they no longer have two clusters-- they only have the public service and minority cluster. Does anyone have any insight about these changes??

Also, it also appears that they still require the rediculously long supplement in spite of the new APPIC regulation restricting supplemental materials: http://www.appic.org/AAPI/AAPI-Supplemental-Materials-Policy

I was thinking that they might be able to get away with that supplement given that they have the post-doc as part of the program (i.e., that the supplement is needed to evaluate one's suitability for post-doc), but it now seems rediculous for just the one year internship.

Does anyone have any thoughts about this progam? Is it worth all the extra time to complete the supplement? It is appealing to me because it is very research-focused, as well as its location. However, I think someone once told me that they have a reputation for having unhappy interns. I saw in their manual that they say interns typically work 50-60 hours a week...perhaps that is why they are unhappy. That's got to be a bad sign if an internship straight out says that. I can see working that much if you've already got a post-doc secured, which was previously the case, but now that interns will have to be on the hunt for a post-doc/job, that seems horrible. I am not afraid to work hard, but working 60+ hours while applying for post-docs and finishing dissertation-- all while living in the exorbitantly expensive SF area and getting paid $30,000-- seems awful. I guess that would be really good motivation to get the dissertation defended before internship though.

Members don't see this ad.
 
A lot of schools in California are facing significant financial challenges and with the ever tightening and uncertain climate for the acquisition of federal funding for research and training, its not a surprise to me that UCSF (and other programs more generally) are cutting back. My guess is that the elimination of the second year post-doc on paper means that they don't want to make a promise the might not be able to keep or the program is demonstrating (on paper) to the powers that be within their university/hospital system that they are cutting back. Just because the post-doc disappears on paper does not mean that there aren't other post-doctoral opportunities available or a solid pipeline in place to connect interns to great postdocs.

My gut says that if you're applying and your interests match up with some UCSF training faculty you will want to apply. I'm sure you'll get a better sense of the program upon interview. And finally, 50-60 hours a week for research/academic med centers didn't seem too uncommon to me while interviewing.
 
I wondered the same about potential financial issues. However, as it does not seem that they have eliminated their postdoc positions, I would presume that you would still be considered competitive for them if this was a position in which you were really interested.

It does sort of suck that they have reduced their tracks down to only the two (although many, if not all, of the same faculty still seem to be available to work with for research tracks?). I agree with the other poster that 50-60 hours (particularly for this type of site) doesn't seem like much to me, but I'm also used to working crazy hours.

I suppose it ultimately depends on how much you're interested in the site to invest the time and energy for a potential "maybe/maybe not." When I was creating my list (before it was determined that I would not be applying), those sort of sites were eventually removed unless there was something extremely spectacular that stood out about them--in which case surely it wouldn't be a maybe/maybe not. If I can find what they offer elsewhere in a site that I was particularly enthusiastic about and/or if I can live without it (especially as I have a list of umpteen other sites to whittle down), then it's being eliminated. Not to say that it wouldn't be a great opportunity, but I'm not made of money to apply to thirty sites.
 
Top