Hello everyone,
First of all, congratulations to all those who matched and my sincere regrets to those who did not. I have also been on this listserv without posting, but really feel compelled to post something now on this topic since I have a lot of experience in this process and want to offer a unique and more global perspective. AND...since others are disclosing up front, in the interest of full disclosure, I will do the same--for several years now I have been providing very specialized consulting to internship applicants with a great deal of success. I am NOT soliciting and I will NOT mention my business or website. I want to offer some sincere observations from someone who has been in the training community a long time. I am not an internship director (though I do supervise practicum students), but for many years now, through my state-wide and national leadership positions since year 1 in grad school (yikes! over 10 years ago), I have been very involved in internship training issues at just about every level, from micro to macro.
The system is indeed broken and it needs fixing. Many professional groups involved in this process are trying to fix it, but that will take time. For now, the imbalance is not going to go away anytime soon and will only get worse as greater numbers of students apply to internships (in addition to many of those who didn't match the year before), while the number of internships can never keep up the growth pace. The no match/match ratio continues to hover around 1 out of 4 NOT matching, and I don't see that changing; this year it was 23% that did not match. Does that mean it's hopeless? No. Keep in mind that 75% of applicants (77% this year) get matched, and over 80% of those matching get 1 of their top 3 sites--that has been pretty steady for the last several years. Therefore, it's not as bleak a picture as we think; remember, most people match and most match well. That said, will there still be some exceptional students who do NOT get matched? Yes, that also seems to happen every year (but it's a far smaller percentage than you think). So, is there some luck factor at play here? I don't think so. What accounts for that seemingly strange phenomena is indeed intangible and difficult to understand, but it relates more to issues of "fit" than luck. Furthermore, I don't see how we can even begin to assign a percentage to it (where did 50% come from?), whatever individuals think the "luck" phenomena is.
"Hewhoforgets" made some very excellent points about some of the things that applicants can do to improve their materials. Does putting a lot of hard work into the process pay off? Yes. Will that absolutely guarantee you success? Not necessarily. It depends on what you're doing and where you are getting direction from--it's all about knowing STRATEGY. That's why it DOES pay to have a lot of different sources review materials and give feedback--sometimes even DCTs who you think should be the most informed and expert in this area are not giving the best advice. My point here is that there is A LOT an applicant can do to ensure a match and a great deal that they can control. My experience is, if they do that, AND they do it right (again, strategically) they can and do absolutely increase their chances of matching. Does effort alone ensure that you get matched? Not exactly, because I've seen many students who do a lot but are misdirected or misinformed about good strategies and sometimes their efforts are unsuccessful despite feleing like they did everything they could.
So here's what I see when some of those "exceptional" unmatched candidates come my way for help: many ARE indeed great candidates, BUT sometimes they haven't "packaged" themselves well, meaning their materials just don't capture or illustrate their experiences, strengths and interests. Other times they just haven't given themselves credit (on paper) for all their experiences, which means not calculating hours well or leaving things out of their application because they simply didn't know or were misinformed. And still other times, the problem stems from a very basic misstep--not properly defining training goals. This is an ESSENTIAL first step in this process. If you do not really know what YOU want from an internship site, how do you expect to find the best MATCH? Playing the "numbers game" as I call it, by applying to a lot of sites just to increase your chances is an ILLUSION, and NOT a good strategy. It's like closing your eyes and trying to hit a dart board from a certain distance--will you hit the board sometimes? Yes. Will you hit the best target, probably not. And is that really the best way to "play" for a win? I think just about everyone would say NO.
What about those who got a good number of interviews but didn't match you ask? Well, even there, as some have said, there usually is some kind of weakness. As an anecdote, I'll share that someone came to me for help after submitting applications, not having known about me earlier. She still wanted me to review the materials post-hoc just to get a sense of how strong I felt they were, and to reassure her. I have to say, and I told her this also, they were "hands down" the BEST essays and materials I had EVER seen, and that's saying A LOT--she didn't need my help. So she was relieved but still wanted to do some interview coaching to make herself feel like she did everything she could. So I agreed, and had high expectations, believing we would meet once, she'd probably do very well and be reassured, and that would be that. Well guess what? Despite truly being an exceptional candidate, she had some significant performance issues when interviewing, and as an interviewer, I would very likely NOT have ranked her highly. Some of it was confidence, some was being too self-effacing (which I find a lot in good candidates), and some of it was, surprisingly, poorly articulating her responses, despite how incredible a writer she was. Soooo...she did get A LOT of interviews, as I suspected, because of the great materials and ultimately she matched to one of her top choices. HOWEVER, we actually had to work very hard to improve and polish those interview skills. I am quite confident that if we hadn't, she very likely would have been one of those "mysterious" exceptional candidates who didn't match. And that's just one example of the more explicit issues. Other times, it's the more subtle stuff that few people can pick up on unless you really get some good thorough feedback in as simulated a situation as possible, like a mock interview with an experienced interviewer.
And still other times, materials are great, interview skills are good--overall a great candidate--but they choose sites that actually are not such a good fit. So they DO get interviews because generally they come across well on paper, and the interviews go ok, but they are just not a TOP match for the site. I cannot tell you how many times I've heard internship directors through the years (and I know A LOT of them) say how they will review/interview someone who is a great applicant, but just NOT great for them! So will they agree the person is a great candidate in general? Yes, but they won't rank them highly. And that DOES happen more times than you think.
What else? Well sometimes applicants have restrictions related to geography, life circumstances/quality of life issues or very narrow goals/interests, and this does contribute to the problem, resulting in the "poor match" scenario I just mentioned above. In these cases, applicants need to make some tough choices. It really isn't just a question of effort or applying to as many sites as you can--what's the point if you really won't be able to go, or just aren't a good match--it's a futile effort. I've worked a lot with these kinds of applicants also, and it requires that we frequently do a reality check of how well aligned we are with training goals, available options, and realistic expectations of outcome. Many times, we weigh the priorities of needing to stick to the restrictions (geographic or otherwise) VS. not getting matched or re-applying next year when circumstances are different. Applying to internships doesn't happen in a vaccuum, and in the middle of all this, life happens, and that can impact the outcome also.
So what are the TAKE HOME points of all of this?:
--Most people DO match, and match well
--Most of it IS in your control
--There is A LOT you can do to improve your materials/interview skills (and your chances!)
--Not every weakness is obvious; in fact many are more subtle
--Extra effort DOES make the difference, but those efforts need to be strategic and informed
--If you aren't sure about something go to an expert source, and ASK where that information is coming from! (You'd be surprised what people say; even some presumed experts are giving advice based on subjective experiences from when THEY applied, or rumors they've heard, or on uncommon isolated incidents that really don't generalize)
--Ultimately, it IS all about the MATCH, so know your training goals and choose your sites well
--More isn't always better
--Sometimes you need to make some tough choices, so prioritize well
--There is always going to be some unxplained factor and trying to figure it out is NOT the best use of efforts
--There IS a STRATEGY to applying!
I hope this helps...
Best,
JM
I am so glad to hear you say this 
