Am I Screwing up my Interviews?

[Oink]

Hi everyone. I've had interviews at MCPHS, USC, UoP, WesternU, and Pacific Oregon. I've been accepted to MCPHS but put on hold for all of the other schools. I thought I did well on my interviews because the interviewers said they liked my answers or that my answers show that I will fit well with the program. Then when decision time comes, I get an email saying I'm put on hold. My GPA is a little below average (3.3 cumulative, 3.2 science) to the ones that I was put on hold. I thought I was well prepared for the interviews too (answered every SDN interview feedback question and practiced many times). I was able to answer every question the way I wanted to at the interviews.

So does it mean I did bad on my interviews if I am on hold? The speakers on interview day always said that GPA doesn't matter anymore if you're invited for an interview, so it sounds like the decision is based on the interview. I know I technically still have a chance at all of these schools, but I'm afraid they're going to forget who I am and just reject me because of my GPA. Is there anything I can do while I'm on hold or do I just play the waiting game?...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Pharm3110]

It is hard to tell but from what I know after the interview, many schools still look at everything including GPA, personal statement and what not. If your interviews went well then the possible reason you are on hold is that your GPA is not competitive enough with other candidates. In the school's perspective, I was told to think of them as businesses. They need to make sure you will pay them 3-or-4 years of tuition. They don't want someone who drops out after first or second year because of the heavy workload and they lose the money, plus their reputation is negatively affected. GPA tends to be an indicator for candidate's ability to handle stress and workload. I know it's not just GPA but CA schools and Pacific Oregon don't require PCAT, which is a great indicator.

At this moment, really the only thing we can do is wait. But look to the bright side, first you got in somewhere, second you are on hold, meaning they are still considering you. In a few months, things will change. People will withdraw and you will get offers. UCSD and UCSF will start sending out acceptance letters in April so the classes at USC, Western and UOP will change. Never lose hope. Good luck.

P.s. Western put me on hold as well.

 

[Oink]

Thanks for the response. Yeah that's what I hoped. However, it somewhat makes the interview feel a little pointless if GPA/application weighs that much more than the interview. From how I've been hearing from other people who are interviewing, it seems like everyone with a 3.4 or higher is going to have a better chance than me no matter what.

 

[Pharm3110]

I feel like GPA, as mentioned, is an assessment of your ability to handle heavy workload and stress. Interview is for your communication skills, both oral and written. In fact, the reason for the writing sample is to make sure you are actually the one who wrote your personal statement, not someone else. Also, the interview let them know who you are as a person, because ultimately, you will represent that school. They need to know if they can put their reputation on the right person. Older established schools have a certain reputation they need to at least maintain. Newer schools try and have to establish their reputation. So the interview is somewhat needed.

During my interview at Western, I heard from others that GPA played 50% on the decision and the interview was only around 20%. But don't quote me on it. I didn't fall into this scheme. My situation was completely opposite than yours (I have better stats but I did poorly in the interview). So they may weight everything equally then.

I met a lady from the admission of UCSF and she told me people with GPA of 3.6 have better chance. People with lower GPA need to demonstrate better in other criteria such as personal statement, extracurricular activities, leaderships, community service, research, publication, pharmacy related experience, interview and so on to compete with people with higher GPA.

But keep me update with your status though, because I applied to exact same 5 schools like you, plus UCSD.

 

[Oink]

Yeah that all makes sense. I should've just did no extracurriculars and tried to get a 3.5+ GPA lol. I know and met a lot of people with 3.5+ GPA and no experience and got into almost all the schools they wanted.

For Western, that somewhat makes me feel better if that's true. I actually did poorly in my interview for that school. Apparently I had an unfair interview after talking with my co-workers and friends about it.

 

[Pharm3110]

Yeah that all makes sense. I should've just did no extracurriculars and tried to get a 3.5+ GPA lol. I know and met a lot of people with 3.5+ GPA and no experience and got into almost all the schools they wanted.

For Western, that somewhat makes me feel better if that's true. I actually did poorly in my interview for that school. Apparently I had an unfair interview after talking with my co-workers and friends about it.

What do you mean by "unfair"? Oh, do you mind sharing what MCPHS campus you got accepted to?

 

[Oink]

Worcester. I am starting to think my interviews are bad now.. My friend has the same GPA as I do but he got into UCSF.

 

[Jesse4484]

Can you give me examples of the questions they asked on your MCPHS interview, please

 

[Oink]

From what I remember, they were really simple. Some were like why pharmacy or why the school. It was a long time ago so I don't remember anything but it was pretty easy going.