Comments about Imbalance - Page 6

The process has been stressful, but I am not entirely sure what can be done aside from sites being able to make room for additional spaces. In the APPIC Directory online, it would be nice to have programs be more specific about what qualifications they are looking for in applicants (e.g., the importance of publications, diverse practicum experiences, etc.). Additionally, because fit is such a big factor with regard to matching, all sites need to have specific information ahead of time detailing rotations, didactic experiences, etc., and I believe that it would be helpful if sites were more specific about what type of interns they are looking for.

I know I was more incredibly nervous than ever to match because I am quitting my full time job and taking a major pay cut to finish my doctoral program and take this internship. It was just emotionally trying at times.

This imbalance between the number of applicants and the number of positions has led to me not matching to a program. There is only one APA-accredited Neuropsychology position left in Phase 2 of the match. Thus, I am likely going to have to spend another year in my graduate program. My husband and I will be living on one income for an extra year, and he will be putting off changing jobs. I am from a small APA-Accredited Clinical PsyD program in which the only difference between my program and a PhD program is that, instead of a Master's thesis, we have a Clinical Proficiency. We have research assistantships, research comprehensive exams, and a dissertation project. I am a well-qualified applicant who did not match because of how competitive it is. APA should not accredit these programs that are admitting hundreds of students per year. Or, programs that admit more than a certain number of applicants (e.g., 25) should be required to create a certain number of internship positions, as well.

I think it is due to the sheer number of students that go through professional psychology programs vs. other types of programs. I also think that it absolutely IS fair that some people don't match if they are less qualified. I just wish there was a better way of figuring out who should or should not be a psychologist or who should or should not match for an internship.

The mismatch in sites has created a serious amount of stress in my life as a wife and mother. It is the only part of my professional degree that I feel is truly out of my control and where hard work may not equal the reward. If I fail comps or my dissertation defense that is on me. If I fail to get matched (as I did last year) that is misfortune that I cannot control. Last year when I failed to match I received 12 job offers within 11 days from people who learned of my situation - not one of those was a job I actively sought out. Rather, I believe it speaks to my hard work and the respect I earned in practica and within my community - indicating that I should have been qualified enough to match. For two years I have traveled across the country and spent more that $8000 trying to secure an internship. I cannot describe the disruption not matching created in my personal and professional life last year. It was tremendous and I am truly sorry for every person in that situation today. Additionally, I am strongly disappointed in the profession of psychology. When I began my graduate degree I had no idea this field was becoming so saturated. APA appears to sit on its hands while many for-profit, mostly PsyD programs (not that some Psy D programs are not quality) flood the market. I personally believe that APA accredited university training programs should have to have a certain faculty to student ratio, and I mean full time tenured faculty. This would be one way to reduce the number of doctoral level psychology students in APA accredited programs. In addition, I do not believe that APA accredited internships should be allowed to take applications from students in programs that are NOT accredited by APA. If the accreditation process is meaningful then the meaning should transcend all levels of training. If these types of changes are not going to be considered the only real option is to get rid of the internship all together. The original reason for internships was to have students undergo intense clinical training. Now, you can't be competitive for an internship unless you have serious levels of training. So, you really need to be trained in order to get trained. This process has gotten completely out of hand. Because of the match, and the swarms of doctoral level psychologists graduating each year, I strongly discourage anyone who asks me about a PhD in Psychology from considering this field. If we care to protect the profession and the public something needs to drastically change.

It created much anxiety, and often left me feeling certain that I would not obtain a position and that my future career would forever be affected by this.

This feels like an enormous problem for the field that has had a deep impact on me in the process. The current imbalance adds significant pressure and anxiety. To a degree, it feels like a loss of control.

The imbalance is horrific. The insufficient number of spots has affected those close to me, incurring psychological and financial cost.

I was fortunate to have matched with an internship program, so the only area of life impacted by the imbalance was my stress level throughout the interview process. Even though students from my program have a strong track record with matching for internships, it was incredibly stressful to know that there was a possibility that I would not match and, consequently, spend an additional year in graduate school. Students must be certified as ready for internship by their training directors prior to applying. Thus, all applicants are qualified for an internship. I don't pretend to know what the solution might be to this issue. I do find it somewhat unnecessary that sites should go unmatched in the first round. If training sites were required to rank more applicants (e.g., all applicants to their program), fewer students should go unmatched after the first round.

I did not match to a site last year. This meant finding a job and continued practicum site to increase my clinical experience for another year while reapplying. I have been delayed in "moving on" with my personal and professional plans and most significantly took on another year of student loans to supplement my income. Emotionally and psychology I was doing well for a quite a while after the non-match (though the Clearinghouse was a very stressful and disappointing time). Later as I got into the middle of re-applying, involving interviews and waiting to hear about the Match again - I went through a period of moderate depression and anxiety. I found much support and sought mental health services-- but this undue stress was caused by a broken system. I was repeatedly told throughout my first application process that a non-match was NOT a reflection of my qualifications to be an intern, but rather the result of a deficit of sites and the odd nature of the match process (versus a traditional interview and selection process). While waiting for my match results during this second time around, I seriously considered leaving the field to pursue more justly distributed resource and a way to provide mental health services in a more affirming system. I told myself that if I did not match during the second round that I may not reapply and just not finish my PhD program. While this was an impulsive thought process as a function of my anxiety and depression, it caused the last many months of my life to be very difficult. My quality and quantity of work suffered, as did my professional relationships in my assistantship on my campus.

There is clearly a need for more sites. Many of the students who do not match in Phase I are more than capable of succeeding at most sites, but due to limited positions and extreme competition many good candidates are left unmatched. In addition, a general bias towards certain programs is evident in the matching process. Programs need to be open to all qualified candidates not just those that they choose based upon the program that they come from and a relationship with the site.

It would be helpful if the APA actually did something about the problems regarding the matching process instead of just reaffirming that they are aware of the issue. Perhaps limiting the amount of students that programs are allowed to enroll? Or maybe combining efforts with APPIC in order to limit the amount of students who apply for internship per year based on experience/seniority/fit?

I am greatly disappointed in the vapid response that the APA has previously released about the imbalance of applicants to positions. The APA has failed to discuss WHY the applicant pool is growing (e.g., what does it mean for a graduate program to be APA accredited anymore?), what the pool for post-degree jobs looks like, or the ratio of people needing clinical postdocs for licensure compared to internship slots. It is disheartening and disappointing to be part of of field that has seen this imbalance increase over the years, and watch the APA do little to protect its emerging clinical and counseling psychologists from this problem.

The imbalance makes the entire process incredibly more stressful.

I think it is absolutely irresponsible and not good practice to have so many qualified graduate students go without an internship match; especially considering the cost of graduate school. Assuming that all who apply for internship are deemed ready by their programs, there should be a way to complete this requirement to receive your PhD.

This process was EXTREMELY stressful. I honestly felt like I have NO control over where I was going to be matched other than my initial application. Within school psychology, several school sites had 50 - 80 + applications for FOUR positions which is RIDICULOUS - so more than half of the qualified applicants did not even get an interview. It was frustrating because I feel like I have worked VERY hard these last four years for this ONE DAY - to get matched. A few students in my program from previous years worked harder than I did and didn't get match simply because there are not enough posiitons. I am so happy that I have supportive friends and family members who have helped me through this process. If someone were to ask me "how can we improve this problem?" I would have no answer. I have no idea. This is clearly a funding issue, but as psychologists retire or as the need for psychological services increases in the community and in schools - this becomes a community issue. Maybe we can recruit more internship programs to become APPIC members OR licensing boards need to be MORE open about having nonaccredited programs suffice for training or let students complete other training to obtain their license.

I am a 29 year old woman who has been working toward this degree for almost six years. I am in a strong, scientist-practitioner Clinical Ph.D. program in which training is of the highest caliber. I have followed all of the rules of my program over the six years. I have never complained. I have followed a clear line of programmatic research in the examination of children and adolescents. I am now published in two peer reviewed journals, one of which is a first author publication. I have assisted in writing many book chapters in my area of interest and have attended almost two conferences a year since beginning my program. I love my work with my clients and have received broad based training with children, adolescents, and adults. I am a student in good standing in my program. My faculty trusts me and respects me. In fact, I assist in the child practicum in the supervision of junior level students with their cases. I am a healthy, happy, emotionally stable, and well-balanced woman. I have accomplished much in my six years at my graduate program. However, after working for months to go through the internship match process, I have fallen short and did not match. This has affected me to my core and has thrown my entire career and self-worth into doubt. At this point in time, I am struggling with doubt, anger, depression, confusion, devastation, and hopelessness. My husband and I held each other and cried for a full hour at the news. It was one of the most difficult moments of my life. One particular faculty in my program feels that the imbalance is purposeful. He thinks it is a way to weed out those students who have no business in this sensitive and important field. I do not belong in that category and no single supervisor or student or client that I have ever crossed paths with would disagree. I have dedicated my life to this career. I have worked hard and have played by the rules. I have not hurt anyone to get where I am today. Yet I sit here, in my home alone, hurt, and filled with uncertainty.

There is no doubt that for me and most applicants I know, the main frustration in the predoctoral internship application process is the imbalance between number of applicants and sites. I personally find that the application and Match system itself is fair however the current circumstances makes the process much more stressful than it should be. Ultimately it is unfair that there are not enough sites for all qualified applicants. The way this affected me personally is that it forced me to prepare a Plan B in case I didn't match even though I felt qualified and ready to go on internship this year. This situation really needs to change.

This imbalance has affected me personally and professionally, and I have watched this problem affect many people in the field (or considering entering the field). It seems wholly illogical that students can spend 4-6 years in a graduate program earning a degree only to not have an opportunity to complete their training. This is an enormous source of anxiety for all graduate students in clinical psychology. We do not understand why PsyD progams do not have a separate internship match process, given that the two degrees work so hard to distinguish themselves from one another in so many other respects. Although this will not affect me personally, I look forward to a significant improvement in this imbalance in the next few years. This is an embarrassment to our profession.

It was frustrating to see so many applicants in the match process. The competition was very anxiety-provoking knowing that I could not match at all. It's a shame that there is such an imbalance. I am honored that I did match in Phase I.

For me it wasn't too big of a problem. It was stressful going in because I wasn't sure if I would match at all this year. However, I was prepared that I might not match and that I might need to take an additional year in order to finish my degree. I guess the imbalance affected me in that I had to be prepared that I might graduate a year later than I would like. I wasn't concerned that I wouldn't ever finish my degree because I was told that no one had ever heard of someone not finishing because of the imbalance (whereas instead people don't finish because they don't get their dissertation done). I think that applicants just need to be prepared for the possibility that they may not match the first time and that they need to therefore take that time to strengthen their application by getting their dissertation done and getting more and better experience if possible. I fully understand how difficult it is to create an internship and that it is very difficult to resolve this problem.

I believe that the match imbalance has negatively affected very well-prepred applicants as well as disadvantaged marginally prepared applicants. Last year, the top students in my program applied to 10 sites. This year our training director (anticipating the growing imbalance) suggested that we apply to at least 15 sites. For the well-prepred applicant, this means a large financial burden associated with interviewing. Statistically, well-prepared applicants match to one of their top three sites. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that one could interview at approximately 6-7 high fit sites and have a very good chance of obtaining a quality internship. Instead of this scenario, I went on 13 interviews at tremendous cost to myself and took the opportunity to interview away from other well-qualified applicants. On my travels, I met a medical resident who told me that their APPIC equivalent publishes a statistic that indicates that beyond 10 interviews the chances of obtaining an internship does not increase. APPIC should consider capping the number of interviews applicants go on to protect the well-qualified applicant from attending more interviews than necessary, and the less accomplished but better fit applicant from having their interview spot taken by someone who is not seriously considering a site now that they are interviewing at several sites ranked substantially higher. Because this is not part of the question, I will be brief. The need for internship to complete the Ph.D. is unnecessary. The education and training community should move to a residency model where students complete the Ph.D. by completing the dissertation and then opt into practice credentialing. Two models should be acceptable for licensure. One year of full-time clinical residency and two years of half-time clinical residency and half-time research fellowship.

Schools need to be more strict around their acceptance rates and need to respond to this as a crisis that they are partially responsible for. If institutions did not graduate hundreds of applicants, the pools would be smaller and the field would be better served because the quality of applicants would improve.

I addressed this imbalance in my response about the match process, but to add something more personal, I can talk about what it's like going through the application and match process. In short, it is a lot of work. It takes a lot of time, attention to details, and personal dedication. When applying, I really felt like I was putting everything on the table for the internship sites to see. The idea was to present myself to these sites in hopes of convincing them that I'd be a good trainee and good fit for their community. That's exactly what I felt I did. Despite all my hard work, I only received 6 interview offers from a total of 21 sites. I even got turned down from sites who I felt I was a really good fit for. They all sent the same form letter: "Sorry we can't interview you. There are too many qualified applicants this year, etc etc." Despite the fact that a couple more interviews would have made me more comfortable about matching, I went into my 6 with sheer determination to make them spectacular. My interviews went really well. I was fortunate enough to meet with some really great training directors, faculty, and current interns. I felt welcomed and comfortable at every site I visited. So when I ranked my sites, I felt confident about the impressions I had left on each one. With that hope, confidence, and excitement, match day came and I received an email saying that I didn't match to a position. Throughout the morning, numerous emails came in revealing statistics related to Phase I. I was one of 937 people who did not match. Further, only 256 of us would have a position after Phase II. As I said above, this effectively turns the match process into a lottery process where you have to cross your fingers to get picked. In the years leading up to applying for internship, I've done everything my doctoral program has asked of me. I've gotten almost all A's in my classes, I've done really educational externships (including taking on a 3rd externship that my program didn't require), and I'm fulfilling my research requirements as well. After working very hard and dedicating myself to my career for 4 straight years, it was very hard to get an impersonal email saying that I didn't match. I'm sure many of the unmatched applicants feel similarly. In those moments surrounding the receipt of the rejection email, it felt as though I failed myself, my program, my professors, and my family. I wish I knew how to fix this situation, but any suggestion I could possibly come up with would simply be a temporary band-aid on a problem that requires a cure. What I do know is that some new ideas have to be tested out otherwise we can't make progress towards fixing this severe imbalance. I am willing to be a part of the brainstorming process and do whatever is within my means to help. We just cannot let this problem worsen.

It was a very stressful process prior to having my first interview, because of the stats about the imbalance! Either programs need more stringent criteria about which students they enroll and put out or there needs to be more internship positions. It is unfair for individuals to go through years of graduate schooling only to find themselves unable to "finish."

I worry about the future of our profession if the number of psychologists entering the field is left unregulated. I believe at least partial responsibility for this imbalance rests on the number of professional schools treating education in psychology like a business rather than a vocation/calling

The imbalance creates an atmosphere of competition around the entire process, which makes many people tense and reluctant to share information about their applications. Although this is a difficult process, it would be much less so if there were not such a shortage of positions.

The imbalance number created a lot of personal anxiety during the whole matching process. I felt very insecure about my qualifications. If I had not been matched I would have had to extend my degree another year which would have increased my loan indebtedness.

I was well-prepared by my graduate program, so I was confident, but the distinct possibility of spending $3000 on the process and still not matching was VERY anxiety-provoking! However, I mostly felt bad for the tons of students who had paid so much for their education (mine was free) and had a poor chance of matching, potentially for a variety of reasons.

One of my best friends and colleagues did not match, although her qualifications were at least as good as mine (I matched) and she applied to fitting and appropriate places. Hearing this in the context of some top program which did not fill their classes, I am confused and saddened for her experience (and others like her). Although I do not understand exactly how, I do believe that the imbalance of PsyD to PhD candidates may contribute to the imbalance in applicants matched to program's availabilities.

I think academic programs need to consider the imbalance when admitting students to their programs. If we continue to admit more and more students to graduate programs without increased funding for internship positions, the gap will only grow, not shrink. Graduate programs need to be more responsible about this.

It seems that either more sites should be accredited or less schools should be accredited to create psychologists. I understand this is a complicated issue, on both ends, but there is clearly a gap here that affects many lives and our profession, on many levels.

The issue of the imbalance between applicants and positions is a very serious one. Personally, I felt anxious about the possibility of not being placed simply due to lack of spaces and not necessarily due to my credentials or fit with sites. I understand that we are still in recession, but I wish APA and everyone else involved would make this issue a more important concern to act upon. Current sites should fight for more internship positions in their budgets, prospective sites should fight to attain appic and/or apa approved internship positions. I think that this issue may discourage future psychology students who are thinking about entering a doctoral program. Also, I think current doctoral programs need to do a better job of "weeding out" students who are not qualified or have enough clinical skills from their programs. I am aware that there are no easy solutions, but something must be done in order for everyone to have a fair chance of being matched.

The reality of the difference prevented me from applying one year earlier as I was concerned about how not matching one year could negatively impact my chances at matching at the same site were I to have to apply again the following year. For many of my cohort, this imbalance also was a discouraging factor for them in their application timeline.

I have been directly pursuing my dream of becoming a clinical psychologist for over 9 years. I feel that I have given everything of myself to make this dream a reality. I spent my undergraduate years doing unpaid research and clinical work. I tried to go above and beyond the requirements of my graduate program in earning twice the recommended clinical hours, publishing throughout grad school, writing grants, taking extra coursework, teaching. I sought practicum placements in numerous settings including a hospital, additional assessment training beyond the offerings of my program, and additional training experiences that would make me a better applicant for internship. I received 8 interview invitations from top sites and was told by all that I had nothing to worry about. When I found out that I didn't match on Friday, I felt as though the lesson for me was that no matter how hard you work, it can never be enough. I am absolutely heartbroken. I feel that my passion for all that I have been doing has died. The thought of having to go through this process -- the program research, the application preparation, the agonizing waits, spending over $3000 on interview travel, losing a month of sleep in anticipation of finding out my match results -- is unbearable. As students, we give of ourselves endlessly believing that the contract will someday be fulfilled when we receive our final training opportunity. I feel betrayed and deceived.

I think the professional schools need to take some responsibility for this matter. There is a common opinion among my peers that these schools simply take too many students and their money, and then can't guarantee them an internship. In my program, you have to remain enrolled as a student until you complete internship. If you do not obtain a spot, you have to continue paying tuition and can't obtain a decent job. You're life is essentially on hold. This is financially a burden, but more so an emotional and stressful position to be in. Grad school is long and hard enough.

n/a

It affects me personally seeing that my close friends did not get a match, although they are very competent therapists as well. Some of my colleagues applied to APPI internship twice and still did not get a match, which was very upsetting. I wish there are more internship sites available.

I have seen several wonderful and brilliant clinicians not match and the heartache that followed. I believe this imbalance is definitely due in part to the influx of professional, for-profit institutions bombarding the field with individuals for whom there is no place. Unfortunately, these institutions often have working relationships with APA-accredited internship sites, and consequently their students have a "familiarity" edge over other qualified applicants. It is time that more is done to regulate the professional mills so that this imbalance does not continue.

The number 1 issue this brings up is that programs need to start accepting less people. This is never going to get better unless the amount of students looking for an internship starts decreasing instead of increasing every year. Secondly, as a result of the imbalance between sites and applicants AND APA accredited sites and non-accredited sites, applicants are having to forgo career goals and plans because of the unavailability of accredited internships. I was matched to a non accredited site which means that my goal of working in a VA is very slim. It has to become either a) easier for sites to become accredited or b)there must be a way for applicants who go to non-accredited sites to makeup that fact and not have it held against them in their career. The imbalance says that the majority of applicants are going to a non-accredited site. The system is set-up so that people end up getting screwed somehow.

held up my career. I had to apply multiple times because there is no way I could move.

There are simply not enough sites. This process is more stressful than it has to be.

Going through an internship process is rough but know that you depend on an APA accredited internship to keep your job is worst. APPIC needs to have more APA accredited internship sites.

I think that the imbalance between applicants and positions is a serious embarrassment to our profession. It is embarrassing to know that our training institutions are taking in a substantial number of more students than they can fully train. Although I was matched, I find it incredible that almost one fifth of my fellow students across the country did not match. Given that every year the problem seems to be the same or worsen, it appears to applicants that this is not a serious problem to APA leadership. Although applicants read about things that are being done to address the imbalance, I think most applicants see these as surface-level changes. For example, one step I read about was requiring doctoral programs to report their internship match data on their websites. However, I don't think those numbers will matter for a student at the doctoral application stage. I believe the data may push students to apply to schools with better match rates, but in the end many student will go to programs where they can get or were accepted. The significance of the match imbalance and the low match rate is not something the doctoral applicant is worrying about; they are focused more on getting into a doctoral program and will worry about internship later.

-Something I learned early was the flooding of the market from online programs and schools like Pheonix. Many of us from accredited universities were furious to be competing with these programs. I noticed that partway through the interview process students from those programs stopped sharing what school there were from and just said their city, for example. Can we get some accurate information about those sites and their impact on the availability to those of us in accredated programs? Honestly though, I was never worried that I would match which was different from most of my peers and mostly because I racked up a ridiculous amount of therapy hours and am a 5th year, am a minority, and very outgoing. This brings me to another point, I recently realized that at least in my program there is a history of asians and more quiet types not matching. I think this is a problem because it is not indicative of how competant they are as therapists but of how outgoing they are in interviews. I don't really know how we could address this issue but I think its an important one. Also, at my school there is a quiet woman who is so sweet that hasn't matched 2 years in a row, I think somehow there should be a benefit to those students who have already not matched the year prior.

The imbalance between applicants and positions certainly did create anxiety. In past years, I have seen very qualified friends and collegues apply, interview, and receive no match. This year, it seemed to be on the forefront of all of our minds. We all seek reasons that certain applicants didn't match, but it seems that it could truely happen to anyone, regardless of the individual's qualifications. While I am only one participant in this system, and I may have a very limited scope of information, it seems that there are few solutions. It appears that graduate programs are taking more applicants due to the need for funding, and there are fewer internship programs available also due to lack of funding. The system seems to be engaged in a cyclical catch-22.

I think one of two things needs to happen. 1) More sites are found and accredited. 2) You divide the process by programs. I believe a lot of sites use number of hours to determine who they will evaluate and the Psy D. programs are going to have many more clinical hours compared to the Ph D. programs.

I appreciate the inbalance between applicants and available positions as I believe that it may help to eliminate applicants who are not prepared for internship or for a profession in psychology. It is sad to think that some programs would not catch these applicants before they apply, but this was the case in our program. There needs to be gatekeeping at every stage of the process to becoming a psychologist. I just wish that there was a limit for how many times someone could participate in the match (e.g., 2 years than no more). I don't care how much schooling an applicant has had - some people should be kept from entering a profession in mental health; allowing applicants unlimited access to the matching process helps increase the chance of having someone become a psychologist who just should not be one.

Departments and schools need to partner with local providers of mental health care to develop accredited internships.

This is my second time going through the internship application process. Last year I was limited to the northeast region of the United States. Having to go through the process again a year later meant that both my own life, and that of my husband, have been on hold. Thankfully, this year I was able to apply nationally and matched to an APA-accredited site. I think the fact that there are programs that only accept students from specific schools and then those sites may remain unfilled is unfortunate. Also, the fact that when medical doctors complete residencies the hospitals receive funding for their education. The fact that this does not occur for psychology interns limits the amount of sites that offer internships.

I feel that there are still well-qualified applicants who cannot get positions, and I have heard that this imbalance is contributed by PsyD programs participating in the match process. I have friend who have suggested that there be a separate match for those folks, but I'm not entirely sure if that would help. It's a competitive environment at this level, which is unfortunate given the caliber of many applicants.

First, I think the imbalance is completely unnecessary. I think there are several options that could work as possibilities for solving this HUGE problem. One option would be to model the admission process to the academic doctoral programs after the Physical Therapy (PT)graduate programs...For example, there is a set number of spots available in the country (USA)for admission to a physical therapy program. The number of students entering a PT program in one year across the country cannot exceed that number. That number is reflective of the amount of positions available to provide every student with a Clinical (akin to our practicum experiences). By limiting the program in a year, they are securing the ability for each of those students to finish their program in an expected amount of time. I think if Psychology doctoral programs followed a similar model, it could eventually eliminate, or significantly reduce the imbalance. Another thought would be more limiting to students, however, would provide them with the ability to complete their programs on time with confidence. If each program were affiliated with a certain amount of internship sites, and that affiliation with sites meant that their students would have a designated site (or choice of a few sites, depending on the number of affiliations) for their internship at the start of their program, I think that could also eliminate some of the imbalance. Third, I think that the development of the PsyD and the large numbers of students admitted to those programs each year has resulted in the huge disparity between applicants and internship positions. I think that having either a national cap on the number of students admitted each year or having separate tracks for PsyD and PhD students for internships would be beneficial. Or, perhaps another suggestion would be for a certain amount of money either added to or taken from student fees or APA memberships or tuition to be funneled to the funding of an internship position for each student. The imbalance of positions available for students applying is just not right. If a student has gotten to the point in their program where they have been deemed "qualified for internship" by their training director, then they should be able to finish their program. If a student has successfully passed and completed all of the required coursework, practicum experiences, exams, research, etc. then it is completely unacceptable to have the final step of their degree be left to luck or fate or some other abstract notion. If they are capable based on their history of academic success, they should not be restrained in completing the final step to earning their degree; not to mention, all of the additional burdens that they will assume as a result of not matching for internship (financial, psychological, health,time, familial, etc.) for an additional year. The system is flawed and it does not need to be.

Perhaps we should have fewer diploma mills clogging up the works.

Many students, such as myself, did not know about the possibility of not matching prior to applying for graduate school. Last year, when I did not match, was the most difficult year of my professional career. The short time between discovering that I didn't match and the end of my previous paid placement meant that I had spent ALL of my loan money on applying and traveling and had no options for employment. For several months, I had to live off of the support of my parents. I contemplated finding another career, but with 6 years and $40,000 invested I didn't feel as though I had a choice. I believe that the current system places undue financial and psychological burden upon students.

I think the combination of the imbalance of positions/applicants, combined with the online system, has led to applicants applying to MANY MORE sites than they normally would or than is suggested. I almost think if it went back to paper that this would be ameliorated, because people aren't going to personally put together that many applications. Given my experience of not matching last year (despite being told by a program that I was one of their top choices) and having to go through this again this year - it was very discouraging to feel (and I truly believe this) like so much of this is simply out of my control. No matter what I did to get more experience/improve my CV, in the end I really believe that this system is so broken that it comes down to a crapshoot. This is not how my professional career should begin. Lastly, because I did not match last year, am done with classes, and have finished my dissertation - I could not qualify as a full-time student (despite having 2 externships, a testing position, and doing research all of which add up to well over 40 hrs/week and for which I am not PAID) which means that all of my undergrad AND grad school loans kicked back in within the past few months. I am having to come up with $1300 A MONTH, despite the fact that I am not paid for any of the work I do (small stipend from the school that is laughable). Luckily, I have a husband who has a good salary that can cover this for a bit - but, regardless, it is simply not fair. Something needs to be done about this.

My colleague was unmatched in phase I despite being a strong applicant. Given that the internship is required as part of your degree requirements, it would be ideal if enough positions were available to fill the demand for positions.

The imbalance is completely unfair to applicants and students that put a lot of effort and work into their graduate work. There are plenty of my colleagues and classmates that did not match the first time around. I also went on interviews with a lot of other students that had not matched initially. It is very time and money consuming. APA should put a "cap" on the amount of students programs are allowed to accept knowing that there will not be enough sites, particularly, APA accredited sites available in the future.

the imbalance between applicants and available internship positions has affected me personally and professionally. I am at the last year of my program (if i don't get a placement this year then i will not be allowed to attend the program anymore), which created a tremendous stress on me (I had nightmares about it). Knowing that there is an imbalance between applicants and positions, I have to apply to other states to increase my chances of getting a placement. I have children and family living in the state where i live and now i have to relocated to another state just for the internship training. I will be moving hundreds of miles away from my supportive families and children, which created a lot of anxiety. I wish there is a guarantee position for each psychology student in his or her school state. I dont really care about paid or unpaid position, as long as there is a position available for me in my home state then i am satisfy.

I just wish the process was more affordable.

I am in an APA-accredited Ph.D. program that has a long track record of successfully matching its students for internship. This year was the first year in which we had two applicants that were in danger of not matching (ultimately 1 matched and 1 did not). From comments by previous cohorts of students, it seems like this process is increasingly competitive and unfair, not to mention, incredibly stressful and emotional. After spending years in a quality graduate program, students are still uncertain about whether they will match because of the imbalance in the process. It creates an incredibly stressful environment, particularly since students can not plan in advance if they eventually find out they did not match. This puts students in a difficult position for staying an extra year in their graduate program, particularly because funding opportunities are closed by the time they learn about the match results. Overall, the process feels frustrating and confusing. From my experience, I felt like I had little control over the outcome of the process. The match imbalance is a serious concern and should be address immediately.

It is upsetting that the ratio between available positions and applicants is so skewed. The fact that many programs require APPIC approved internships and that there are far less of these offered then the number of people applying is disappointing. While I matched, many people in my program were less fortunate and there is much added stress knowing that there are less then 250 positions open for over 900 people. I know the match process is competitive, but to think that some people who are highly qualified may not match is unbelievable.

I am very upset and disappointed with the current imbalance between applicants and positions. This is something that was not communicated to me when I was applying to graduate school, so I felt as though it was hidden from me. Graduate students work so hard and take on so much debt, and it is unfair that so many strong applicants have to postpone their lives for a year before getting placed. I feel like the psychology community is not doing enough to fix this problem. Something must be done, like decreasing the amount of students admitted to programs until positions increase. It is such a heartbreaking thing on match day to be so excited for your own match but to mourn for your classmates who have worked just as hard as you did but did not match.

-created serious amounts of distress throughout process with several very qualified students from our program not matching -created an atmosphere of isolation and constant worry

As expected, knowing that there is an imbalance makes a stressful process all that much more pressured. Although I considered myself to be a strong applicant, I realized that there was always a possibility that I would not match and have to wait an additional year to complete my program. This uncertainty led me to apply to a wider range of programs and attend every interview, to avoid the risk of not matching. Additionally to increase the chances of matching, I decided to apply to a range of locations, requiring both myself and my husband to consider relocation. I am aware that there is work underway to correct this imbalance, and I hope that it someday is resolved, as it does seem unfair that students are forced to delay their career goals because of this problem.

I didn't match last year and had to spend more money and time in school which halted several aspects of my life

I, fortunately, was able to match with my first choice in spite of only getting 2 interviews. I suspect I would have had more interview if it weren't for the inflexibility described above regarding my "submitted" status. However, I think that some serious examination should be done with regard to the few internship sites that are currently available. Are potential training sites being actively recruited? Is there assistance or support readily available if a site is interested in become an accredited training facility. I live in Staten Island. There are three hospitals and I know of at least two that have emergency psychiatric care and outpatient/inpatient support to the community. I don't understand why these facilities are not accredited. There is a lot of talent out there and I think the profession, at large, needs to look at how we can train the future leaders, practicioners and researchers in this field.

I work professionally, so I will be working in the year that I am without an internship. However, it seems very unfair that my peers are able to go on and I am left to wait another year and go through the process again. My whole family was disappointed knowing that I did not get an internship and I feel like my life is now on hold for another year. I am getting married this year and wanted to move forward and start a family, but I do not want to do this until I have finished my internship. I think that everyone who applies for internship, should be guaranteed a spot.

It increased my stress level since I felt less certain that I would match. People like to blame this issue on PsyD programs but internship sites actively choose to select students from PsyD programs. More Ph.D programs should attempt to establish relationships with internship sites so they know that their students will be accepted for an internship and thus be able to complete their degrees.

A very close friend of mine did not match in Phase I this year despite being one of the most talented clinicians I know. In the past when people have been left unmatched, there was usually a clear reason I could discern (e.g. lack of variety in training, poor match with sites to which the person applied), but in her case, there is not a clear reason why she should be left unmatched. It seems as though the number of applicants is growing far more quickly than the number of programs, which makes the process even more stressful because you are left to wonder not only will I find a program where I will be happy, but will I find a program at all. This is unnecessary stress and angst added to graduate school, which is already very stressful.

Well, I can say that receiving the email regarding the imbalance in sites to students the day before my first internship interview definitely added to the pressure to preform. As we know, some level of stress and anxiety is good, but this is a factor which can cause some over-the-limit of healthy stress while interviewing because this thoguht is in the back of your mind. Students do not need to sit back and complain about this imbalance. If we as students are going to advocate for our own profession, we need to be going out into the communities, informing people about what we do and what types of benefits they can receive when they open a predoctoral internship, not that there would be any kind of agreement between student and site, but more options for those students and others. Of course, the graduate programs need to become involved in this advocacy program so that they can ensure the success of their graduates.

The fact that internship is a required part of our training, yet each year hundreds of students don't match to an internship is just simply unacceptable. It doesn't make any sense that a REQUIRED part of our training isn't available to everyone who needs to complete it. It seems like graduate training programs should have built-in internships to ensure that there are enough programs available for students. In addition, I find it very frustrating that there is no way to receive direct feedback about applications or interviews from the sites, particularly for those students who don't match. In general, I find it curious that there is such a huge investment required for this ONE year of training, out of the 5, 6, or 7 required to complete a PhD.

There was a lot of free-floating anxiety around the "match crisis" this year and this topic was a common subject of discussion for applicants, training programs, and internship staff. In my opinion, it is irresponsible of PsyD programs to accept tuition from candidates when they can not provide some assurance that their students will obtain APA accredited internships. In addition, please do not send emails about the "match crisis" on the morning that match results are expected!

If my response was going to remain anonymous 100%, then I would share with you my true feelings.

It is an archaic system where 30% of people will not get a slot. Soemthing needs to be done as people are unable to find jobs when they don't match and have to wait a whole year. This in unfair and is extremely stressful to students. They often feel forced to apply to sites where they gave little interest because they need to complete their degree.

The current imbalance between applicants and positions has greatly affected me in several ways. First, I was extremely disappointed that I did not get one interview proposition. I believe that this is in part because of the lack of internship positions. In my understanding, other contributing factors may have been the fact that I come from a Psy.D program, which means that I apply for an intership in my third year, as opposed to Ph.D students who apply in their fourth, fifth, or more. Also, coming from Quebec, the clinical training model is different, with a greater emphasis on in depth analysis of fewer cases, than the total number of clinical hours. I am especially disappointed, because I have worked for the last few years with an APPIC application in view. I have worked countless hours outside of my University program in order to amass the clinical hours necessary. The lack of positions has also affected my personal and financial situation. Personally, I will not be able to follow my significant other to Ontario, because I will have to complete my intership in Quebec. Financially, this means that I will have to complete an unpaid internship. Having to apply to internships in Quebec is especially unsettling this year, seeing as psychologists in the public sector are working to rule and threatening to refuse interns for 2011-2012. This means there are a handful of intership sites for the hundreds of applicants in Quebec, making these sites highly competitive. I hope that there will be greater efforts to augment the number of internship programs. A suggestion might be to use the untapped ressource of Quebec's public sector.

Most acutely, I felt the imbalance last year when I did not match. While I was considered by my program to be a top applicant, I was unable to retain a position through the match and through clearinghouse (despite several interviews and staying in the process until the end). Phase II has the potential to be quite helpful to applicants; however, they should be aware that the odds are significantly lower for a match in the second round. Emotionally, I felt a great deal of disappointment and shame when I did not match last year. I think that has impacted my life and relationships in a number of ways.

It is a problem. I don't know that there is necessarily a shortage of psyhcologist positions on a national scale, but there appears to be less incentive to train a psychologist. I was alarmed at the ratio of trained students seeking an internship site and available sites. I am hoping this is not a product of schools pushing more students into the system than they ethically should.

It has not affected me but it has affected some of my friends and it WILL continue to affect hundreds of budding professionals as long as there is an unequal amount of internship spots for students.

I feel that the idea of only allowing students from APA accredited programs to use the APPIC system is a good one.

I think the imbalance is unfair, especially when bright and capable students are not being matched. The system as a whole is unfair and, on many levels, is not based at all on aptitude or goodness of fit. In large part, this whole system is based on luck. It's like playing the lottery with our futures.

It affected me very negatively to know that so many students don't match each year. I was not only worried for myself and my career, but I worry for the students who put a lot of time and money into graduate training with not enough internship positions to go around. From reading articles, I know that the majority of these unmatched students come from PsyD programs, which is even more upsetting since they generally pay a LOT of money to private schools.

I matched, but I know it was extremely stressful thinking of the number of sites compared to applicants. Since this is a required internship for graduation, I think APA and APPIC as well as individual programs need to help more with getting more sites and making the process as smooth as possible for the sites that would like to become accredited. I also have friends who did not match for the second year in a row, but I think the second round will be more helpful this year in matching them.

This was, hands down, the worst experience in my training. The internship selection process is ridiculous and should be eliminated. It is discouraging to think that I invested six years and a lot of money into my education and training to find out that my future depends on a matching service. How does one explain this to family members? It is confusing and they should be confused. It does not make sense. School programs should inform potential doctoral students that there may not be an internship position available and their graduation may be delayed or may not ever happpen. The disparity between applicants and programs is going to increase, not decrease because approximately 800 non-matched students will apply next year. Each year there will be more and more applicants. I feel sorry for all future applicants as it is going to get harder to match. Graduation should not depend on an internship placement. If internship is necessary, it should come after graduation.

The current imbalance creates anxiety for everyone...applicants, signficant others of applicants, and training programs. This anxiety led me to apply to more sites than I'd wanted to and also had our DCT recommending a higher number of applications than myself and some of my fellow applicants wanted to submit. It also makes the process more stressful in general from start (meaning preparation of materials) to finish (match day). This stress wears on the applicants. Personally, I had a cold during January (interview period) and then became very ill with a cold/flu shortly after my interviews concluded. I don't believe I would've gotten sick the second time if I hadn't been as stressed during the process. I was hardly home during January so I could go to as many interviews as possible, which then meant I had a lot of other work to catch up on when interviews were over. No matter how hard you try to take care of yourself during the process, the stress and anxiety of such a high-stakes situation isn't healthy. I believe the imbalance also leads to higher application/interview costs for the applicants because we're applying to more sites than we might otherwise apply to and are going to as many interviews as we possibly can. With some places not being flexible in terms of interview dates, this can lead to higher travel expenses because it may not be possible to have interviews that are geographically close together be scheduled together resulting in more airfare.

I was unable to match this year, partly due to geographic region, and partly due to a lack of sites. I was applying in the Chicago area, and yet there were not a sufficiently high number of accredited sites.

I believe that I would encourage all the entities to work together to ensure that all suitable applicants find a match. It is terrfying to see fantastic people not match. It is painful - causing questioning about your abilities, your professional identity, and so on. While I am aware that there is no 1 easy answer - I hope that this process can become more one of fitting all people to sutiable sites.

The internship process has been extremely anxiety provoking and on a personal level has been a major distraction to my productivity and other professional responsibilities. Although some of this is to be expected, the probability of not matching (20%) and the fact that in the past I have known highly qualified applicants that did not match has greatly exacerbated my level of stress during this process. I think it is unaccepable to require an internship in order to get a PhD or PsyD in clinical pscyhology but not provide the opportunity for all students to obtain a position. I fear that this stressor (not to mention the finacial burden) is a major barrier to the effective training of professionals in our field.

It seems ridiculous that there is such an imbalance and it seems like it will only get worse. because of the numbers, our program encouraged us to wait an extra year to gain more hours and become competetive ( which i did not do) but i don't think that is a good solution. I don't know how possible it is, but programs need to reduce the number of students they admit since more schools have popped up inthe last few years. it is deceiving and devastation for those who commit 5 years to this career only to be left unmatched and unsure of their futures. I know someone who did not match twice and cannot imagine what her options are at this point.

At every interview I attended, the site interview approximately 15-20 people for each position. These odds favor the sites heavily and leave people like myself out to dry after we spent a significant amount of time and money to attend these interview in which we had very little chance of obtaining the position.

The imbalance has turned an already stressful process and time into an almost unbearable ordeal. The school that I am enrolled in is not well known and doesn’t carry the clout that many other schools have. The discrepancy in the match is affecting students from schools like mine that are less well known to have an almost impossible hurdle in achieving our goals. This discrepancy has created a process in which all APA accredited sites are now competitive sites and students feel forced to apply to dozens of sites in order to have a chance of matching.

It did not affect me, aside from making me more nervous that I would not match.

I have to say matching was a bitter sweet experience for me because as happy as I was I knew in the back of my mind that classmates of mine who stayed with me for 5 years and persevered were destroyed that day by news of them not matching. If there is no way to get more internship sites than I feel it is important for students to get feedback from the sites after the match (all students). This way they are better able to support each other and better their applications. No one knew if it was the hours, the essays, the letters, the writing, their presentations or what...that either got them the placement or did not. The general consensus was that everyone was going into this blind because even when we were given feedback it was often contradicted by the next person. The framework was very loose and to be honest I paniced at the thought that I might not place not because I would have to wait another year but because I would have to go through submitting applications all over again. Only because of my anxiety ridden, OCD type of personality did I make it through this process because I made sure to cover all my bases, go over things a million times, dot all my "i"s, and try things from different angles incessantly until I found what I thought was the best fit for both applications and interviews....I was willing to let this process almost kill me and I think that is why I was successful...but that shouldn't be something ingrained in students. I have very poor self-care and this process once again reinforced that when I obsess and run myself into the ground with work and anxiety, it will be worth it in the end. This is not a quality that should be encouraged in future therapists.

I believe it is completely unfair that there are not enough positions available to train all current graduate students. If this issue cannot changed by greatly increasing the number of internship positions available to applicants, then graduate and professional clinical psychology programs should seriously consider taking LESS students ever year to balance off the supply and demand. Usually PhD cohorts in clinical psychology are small, however, certain programs train too many applicants, thus the demand is greatly increased. This is a very important issue and it will need to be addressed sooner or later.

I did not match, which I'm sure was due in part to the imbalance between applicants and positions, especially in my field of interest (pediatric neuropsychology), which is particularly competitive. It is not only disheartening to do poorly in the internship application, but it is a huge financial and personal commitment to take an extra year to finish the doctorate. Personally, I plan to have children at some point in the next few years, but I had hoped to be able to complete my doctoral and licensing requirements before that. Given my age, however, I am loathe to do this - I don't want to put my family life on hold for something that feels so uncertain at this point. It has also been difficult in terms of coordinating geographically with my husband's ability to transfer his job to other cities (particularly as we think about needing to stay in places for more than just internship year, and about needing to figure out whether we would need to move again one year later for postdoc...). It just often seems like there are so many obstacles because SO MUCH is so uncertain. I truly love what I do and I am quite driven and, I believe, quite capable. It's incredibly frustrating that it sometimes feels like the uncertainty and variability of the process could be what derails my ability and desire to stick with it.

Even though I was successfully matched I felt that the imbalance did affect the process. There were a number of applicants I spoke with who had applied to 20-30 programs out of fear which may have flooded sites so that they did not have the opportunity to really look as closely at applications when choosing interviewees. While I would love to have more internship sites created to help deal with the problem I also think training programs should not be "pumping" out so many students. One option is that APPIC could limit the number of applicants from each training program so that programs are both choosing their applicants more carefully and genuinely making sure students are ready for internship before they apply. I beleive this could greatly reduce the imbalance, especailly since the data presented in the GRAD Psych magazing showed that there are a small number of programs that are leading to a large number of unmatched applicants.

My husband and I are miserable. After waiting 5 years and jumping through all the hoops- 1300 direct hours, a variety of settings, high gpa, apa-accredited program, 9 interviews- yet no match. I'm living across the country from my whole family and see no hope now for ever even being able to live on the same side of the country as them. I will not take another year, as I have already delayed a year. I think it's horrible that our field is being oversaturated with low quality programs which take on high class sizes, including many students who are unable to gain acceptance to APA programs. Class sizes should be capped. APA internships should ONLY accept students from APA programs. I may be forced to complete a local, non-APA, non-APPIC internship despite the fact that I come from a good program and am a good clinician and student. The is outrageous to me as I have done everything in my power to succeed. Perhaps pre-doc internships should be abolished altogether and we should shift to a residency model akin to medical students. Having done everything in my power to complete my degree requirements, it should be illegal that I be prevented from earning my degree, especially considering I'll be paying student loans for the rest of my life.

I personally found it to be added pressure and it also increased my anxiety during the whole experience. I believe that there needs to either be more of balance of students and open internships. I do understand that there we are in a time economic crisis however, students also are struggling financially. If students are not matched, we are incurring additional debt until the next application process. Additionally, it may be fair to look at the number of students being admitted to programs and the number of available internships.

I did not feel especially *personally* affected by this, because I felt very confident all along that I would match. Historically, students from our program match, and I felt I was a competitive applicant even compared to others in my program. However, I did feel irritated and offended on the occasions when I crossed paths with students from professional psychology programs who had 40 or more classmates, all of whom were currently applying for internship. It made me angry that students from programs like mine (a top-10 program), where faculty put a good deal of time, thought, effort, and personal attention into our training, had to compete with inferior, mill-like training programs. I also feel that such programs are strongly contributing to and some might even say causing the imbalance problem. A qualified student from our program did not match last year; I found myself wondering at that time if a student from one of these professional psychology schools did match, taking away a spot from a more qualified, better-trained applicant. Personally, I believe that programs who accept irresponsibly large cohorts (perhaps 15 or more) should be threatened with loss of accreditation if they do not reduce their class sizes.

It is frustrating and stressful to know that after years of graduate training, you may simply be stuck with nothing after the match. It is even more disheartening when you look up programs on the directory and then you get to their website and find they have discontinued their internship. Having the stress of the match, even in a program with a high match rate, can be enough to undermine professional confidence. The idea that it may not matter and you do not match is definitely an attack on professional and personal self-confidence. On the other hand, it made my match result more exciting when I got it.

Doctoral programs appear to be admitting a larger number of indivudals with each passing year. This creates a flodding of psychologists in an already overflodded era. This can be verified by the vast number of applicants that remain without an internship placement each year. Eventually, this will be refelected in the competitiveness of the internship process and drive down the annual salary of psychologists in general. School should take a greater look at this problem as it is always growing. Truly the view appears that school are not invested in indivudal educations but making sure the "powers that be" are making money and able to afford luxurious lifestyles while creating a devestating situation for those applying for internship and/or beginning their careers. In addiiton, the view from others is that there are so many people being admitted to doctoral programs that "everyone" must be able to get it. This diminishes the reputation of our schools and our own professionalism. Focus on making the programs better, not bettering your own pockets. Thank you for listening.