Objective Training in broad‐based objective and projective personality assessments has been a mainstay of applied psychology. Stedman (2007) and Piotrowski (2015) have documented a decline in projective training during internship. This study investigated internship directors’ current expectations regarding graduate school training with objective and projective instruments, their ratings of the importance of that training, and current training patterns with objective and projective instruments during internship. Method Participants were 355 psychology internship programs, representing 46.1% of the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers. Results Results indicated the following current internship training patterns: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (68% to 51%), Personality Assessment Inventory (59% to 25%), Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (51% to 34%), Rorschach (35 to 26%), story telling (41% to 19%), sentence completion (41% to 18%), and drawings (36% to 9%). Adult program directors reported higher percentages for objective tests; child program directors reported higher percentages for projective tests. Conclusion A decreased valuation of projective techniques is now typical of current internship training programs.