How weighted is an interview towards the acceptance?

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

The reason why I asked that is because at the end of November, adcoms will sit together and review the entire application to make their decisions. So how would interviews come into place? How is an applicant with perfect stats but forgettable interview compared with another applicant that has average stats but completely nailed their interview on all levels?

So in short, how important is the interview in making the decision of acceptance?

All thoughts welcomed.

Thanks.

How much the interview is weighted depends on the school. UNC for one ranks it highly and weights it at 40% of your total score. Often, schools rank your performance on an interview. Then, adcoms factor it into your total score as an applicant (and not in November... often soon after your interview when you're fresh on their minds). Then they give acceptances to the highest scoring applicants.

Numbers get you from the applicant pool (>thousands) into the interview pool (few hundred). Once you're in the interview pool, only your interview decides whether you get admitted or not (<100).

The general interview importance by school statistics is also shown in one of Doc Toothache's posts.

Originally Posted by Stacker

Numbers get you from the applicant pool (>thousands) into the interview pool (few hundred). Once you're in the interview pool, only your interview decides whether you get admitted or not (<100).

The general interview importance by school statistics is also shown in one of Doc Toothache's posts.

This. Your application gets you the interview. The interview gets you the acceptance.

So what you guys are saying is, it doesn't matter what amazing stats someone has, if he/she bombs the interview, his/her chance of getting into the school is over?

Originally Posted by mtinamer

So what you guys are saying is, it doesn't matter what amazing stats someone has, if he/she bombs the interview, his/her chance of getting into the school is over?

General sum-up/consensus: Is once you are invited to an interview, what ever previous score you had gets discounted greatly, and your interview now makes up 70% of your total grade for acceptance. So say someone with high stats comes in,and they have a pre-interview grade of 30/30 points, so say they only need a 70% total post-interview, well they just have to get a 40/70 on the interview to make that 70 point grade. Now lets think about someone with low stats that got an interview, their score coming in may have been a 15/30 points pre-interview, so now in order to get a 70 they need to score a 55/70 points on the interview in order to get that acceptance...so someone with higher stats may always be at a slight advantage, but they can't be a total dooface and not get those minimum points they need

Originally Posted by periopocket

General sum-up/consensus: Is once you are invited to an interview, what ever previous score you had gets discounted greatly, and your interview now makes up 70% of your total grade for acceptance. So say someone with high stats comes in,and they have a pre-interview grade of 30/30 points, so say they only need a 70% total post-interview, well they just have to get a 40/70 on the interview to make that 70 point grade. Now lets think about someone with low stats that got an interview, their score coming in may have been a 15/30 points pre-interview, so now in order to get a 70 they need to score a 55/70 points on the interview in order to get that acceptance...so someone with higher stats may always be at a slight advantage, but they can't be a total dooface and not get those minimum points they need

All cleared up. Thanks for such a good elaboration. How or where did you get the source of this scoring system?

There's no way to know how every school does it. You hear of some schools with these fixed scoring systems while others take your application completely off the table once invited to interview and place your interview as the only factor in acceptance at that point. No matter how you look at it, interviewing well is important. You can't roll in with a 4.0 thinking you can just give a so-so interview.

Originally Posted by jeffity

There's no way to know how every school does it. You hear of some schools with these fixed scoring systems while others take your application completely off the table once invited to interview and place your interview as the only factor in acceptance at that point. No matter how you look at it, interviewing well is important. You can't roll in with a 4.0 thinking you can just give a so-so interview.

jeffity is more correct than me. Everything varies with the school.

All I have seen in this thread is speculation. Nobody should take these opinions as facts unless they actually have someone in an adcom state their formula or how they determine acceptance rates.

+1...but some of the scenarios are really fun no?

Originally Posted by Pat Kelly

All I have seen in this thread is speculation. Nobody should take these opinions as facts unless they actually have someone in an adcom state their formula or how they determine acceptance rates.

That's all you've seen? Maybe you missed my post. That's basically what I said. There's a wide array of methods schools use for applicant review and considerations to your interview performance. It might be interesting to know how schools handle it, but it doesn't do an applicant any good to try to come up with any sort of game plan based on this. Just interview well. There's a reason why almost every single school wants to see you face-to-face.

As for the possibility of the two example methods I proposed (100% interview and formula schools), I'll provide support even though that was not the point. I don't just make stuff up for fun. My school is an example of a method that doesn't look back on the application once you are invited to interview (from the mouth of the dean) and that's why some post-Dec 1 acceptances can sometimes come within 24 hours of interviewing. If they like your app, they invite you. If they like you, they accept you. UNLV is an example of a formula school. If you want a look at their "evidence-based formula for admissions….most likely to predict dental school performance (NBDE1 & GPA)", have a look here:

http://faculty.unlv.edu/kkingsley/Re...0_Kingsley.pdf

Originally Posted by jeffity

That's all you've seen? Maybe you missed my post. That's basically what I said. There's a wide array of methods schools use for applicant review and considerations to your interview performance. It might be interesting to know how schools handle it, but it doesn't do an applicant any good to try to come up with any sort of game plan based on this. Just interview well. There's a reason why almost every single school wants to see you face-to-face.

As for the possibility of the two example methods I proposed (100% interview and formula schools), I'll provide support even though that was not the point. I don't just make stuff up for fun. My school is an example of a method that doesn't look back on the application once you are invited to interview (from the mouth of the dean) and that's why some post-Dec 1 acceptances can sometimes come within 24 hours of interviewing. If they like your app, they invite you. If they like you, they accept you. UNLV is an example of a formula school. If you want a look at their "evidence-based formula for admissions….most likely to predict dental school performance (NBDE1 & GPA)", have a look here:

http://faculty.unlv.edu/kkingsley/Re...0_Kingsley.pdf

Jeffity very interesting post, I have an interview there very soon so this is nice to know
I guess I can calculate my pre-interview score now...ty!