Applying to your undergrad's med school?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

GELIMD

New Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2014
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Would applying to your undergrad's med school generally give you a leg up than other pre-med students applying from other universities? Does it significantly raise your chances of getting in?

Members don't see this ad.
 
It varies greatly from school to school but generally yes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
For example, 21% of WUSTL med students are from their undergrad, 19% for Northwestern, 16% for Vandy, 12% for UPenn and 8% for UChicago. There's a big range.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
In general it does because the members of the admissions committee are familiar with both the students that come from the associated undergrad as well as many of the faculty that you'll likely work with in clinical, research, etc. settings. However, if by "leg up" you mean "get an interview or acceptance when you otherwise wouldn't," then no. In some cases this can hurt you for exactly the same reason as the above: the admissions committee is typically familiar with what your previous colleagues have done, thus if you're a weaker applicant, they have a better baseline with which to compare you with.

At the end of the day, a strong applicant will get in regardless. But don't expect any special treatment simply because of your association.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I go to one of the schools efle mentioned. Nick's statement that it doesn't get you an interview or acceptance when you otherwise wouldn't is mostly true, but you have to remember that most applicants don't get interviews anyway. Faculty members can definitely suggest to their collaborators on the admissions committee to put your app on the top of the pile, if they have such connections- and if they like you enough.

It can make you stand out in a sea of applicants with median stats.
 
@Goro, any idea why there is so much variation between top universities, such as WUSTL taking nearly 4x as many of its own as UChicago? I would have thought most places attached to top undergrads would want to take advantage of already feeling like home to scoop up all their best students, but some schools seem to really like fresh faces.
 
Something else to consider is what percent of students from your school apply to the medical school every year. It may be that certain schools receive a disproportionately high number of applications from their undergrad institution, making the acceptance rate from that pool comparable with that of the general pool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I can only guess that some med schools have more faith in their own UG programs than others. Perhaps schools want more diversity as well.


@Goro, any idea why there is so much variation between top universities, such as WUSTL taking nearly 4x as many of its own as UChicago? I would have thought most places attached to top undergrads would want to take advantage of already feeling like home to scoop up all their best students, but some schools seem to really like fresh faces.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
University of Michigan LOVES its own undergrads (required as a state school to take around 50% instate): From 2014. My class of 177 has more than 1/4 from U of M undergrad that matriculated.


Process U of M % of U of M
Applications Rec'd 580 10.0%
Interview Offers 97 16.6%
Admissions Offers 64 16.9%
Matriculants 48 27.1%

Can't get to format, but you get the idea
 
Last edited:
For example, 21% of WUSTL med students are from their undergrad, 19% for Northwestern, 16% for Vandy, 12% for UPenn and 8% for UChicago. There's a big range.

Does this account for accelerated BS/MD programs? Northwestern and Brown have large 7 year MD programs so many(/most?) of the matriculants from their respective UG institutions may not go through the regular admissions process.
 
Does this account for accelerated BS/MD programs? Northwestern and Brown have large 7 year MD programs so many(/most?) of the matriculants from their respective UG institutions may not go through the regular admissions process.

Brown, iirc, is almost entirely PLME. There are definitely some places without BS/MD that hugely favor their undergrad still though, like Duke (20%). Not sure how much of Northwest or Boston Uni etc is composed of their BS/MD programs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
@Goro, any idea why there is so much variation between top universities, such as WUSTL taking nearly 4x as many of its own as UChicago? I would have thought most places attached to top undergrads would want to take advantage of already feeling like home to scoop up all their best students, but some schools seem to really like fresh faces.

Part of it is that WashU has a lot, a lot of premeds in their undergrad, many of whom choose WUSTL SOM as their first choice.

My impression is that UChicago has a more diverse student population in terms of career choice.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
The schools that draw from their undergrad institutions have some of the best undergrad schools in the country. You're already selecting for some of the brightest people in undergrad and it's not too big of a stretch to say that they're competitive for the best med schools in the country if their trajectory continued.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
The schools that draw from their undergrad institutions have some of the best undergrad schools in the country. You're already selecting for some of the brightest people in undergrad and it's not too big of a stretch to say that they're competitive for the best med schools in the country if their trajectory continued.

I concur.

I believe that my alma mater has both a top 10 undergrad and a top 10 medical school. I believe that each year, >20% of the medical school class went to the same school for undergrad. Almost all of them share the following traits: 3.8+ GPA, 36+ MCAT, strong clinical ECs, leadership, and most importantly, strong research experiences with professors and medical school faculty affiliated with the university.

My undergrad is a major (possibly biggest) premed powerhouse in the country, and I am glad/thankful to be able to graduate from there and get into my top choice medical school.
 
I forgot about that. The state legislatures, as in TX and MI, mandate favoring IS applicants, so naturally, kids from a state school will get a leg up for their med school.


University of Michigan LOVES its own undergrads (required as a state school to take around 50% instate): From 2014. My class of 177 has more than 1/4 from U of M undergrad that matriculated.


Process U of M % of U of M
Applications Rec'd 580 10.0%
Interview Offers 97 16.6%
Admissions Offers 64 16.9%
Matriculants 48 27.1%

Can't get to format, but you get the idea
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Right, and schools like UMich are incredibly great academic institutions for undergrad which makes it harder for smart students to go elsewhere since they get an great education for a fraction of the cost. And since they're so huge it makes sense that a good chunk of qualified students from that state end up there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I concur.

I believe that my alma mater has both a top 10 undergrad and a top 10 medical school. I believe that each year, >20% of the medical school class went to the same school for undergrad. Almost all of them share the following traits: 3.8+ GPA, 36+ MCAT, strong clinical ECs, leadership, and most importantly, strong research experiences with professors and medical school faculty affiliated with the university.

My undergrad is a major (possibly biggest) premed powerhouse in the country, and I am glad/thankful to be able to graduate from there and get into my top choice medical school.

[rescinded] don't want to use my sneaky sleuthing for evil!


I forgot about that. The state legislatures, as in TX and MI, mandate favoring IS applicants, so naturally, kids from a state school will get a leg up for their med school.

I always hear how tough it is to be a California premed, but doesn't that mean you get boosted chances at some really great med schools like UCSF, UCSD, UCLA? Sounds like a sweet deal to me


Right, and schools like UMich are incredibly great academic institutions for undergrad which makes it harder for smart students to go elsewhere since they get an great education for a fraction of the cost. And since they're so huge it makes sense that a good chunk of qualified students from that state end up there.

Yeah, I guess even getting 27% of 170 spots isn't that great of an odds booster when your undergrad is a great state school with 30,000 undergrads!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I honestly don't know if there's an IS bias for the CA schools because it's mandated, or just that the UG schools in CA are so good, and have so many grads, that they readily fill up the UCs, Stanford and USC. I get the sense that that case applies for Western and TUCOM-CA. As the very wise gyngyn has pointed out, UCLA grads alone could fill every medical school seat in the Golden State.

I always hear how tough it is to be a California premed, but doesn't that mean you get boosted chances at some really great med schools like UCSF, UCSD, UCLA? Sounds like a sweet deal to me
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Good point, plus I'm sure California sends tons of premeds out to distant undergrads where they experience winter and decide to head home for med school
 
Right, and schools like UMich are incredibly great academic institutions for undergrad which makes it harder for smart students to go elsewhere since they get an great education for a fraction of the cost. And since they're so huge it makes sense that a good chunk of qualified students from that state end up there.

Yep. And UMich has a TON of qualified premeds in general, that end up at other schools. Look up the numbers, a lot of DO students come from there IIRC.
 
I honestly don't know if there's an IS bias for the CA schools because it's mandated, or just that the UG schools in CA are so good, and have so many grads, that they readily fill up the UCs, Stanford and USC. I get the sense that that case applies for Western and TUCOM-CA. As the very wise gyngyn has pointed out, UCLA grads alone could fill every medical school seat in the Golden State.

I always hear how tough it is to be a California premed, but doesn't that mean you get boosted chances at some really great med schools like UCSF, UCSD, UCLA? Sounds like a sweet deal to me

Do you count as in state in cali after doing 4 years of UG there? PA has a rule that you have to work and have a domicile and being a full time student doesn't count.
 
I didn't get an II from my alma mater at first. I wasn't exactly concerned about it since I am mostly wanting to get out and I already got offer at school around the same calibre. But my PI, who is an Med school faculty, found out that I didn't get an II, she felt rather strongly about it and said that was "unacceptable". She's the type of person who never fails to deliver. So I got an II. But be aware, a lot of time school will gave out II as courtesy to fellow faculties, but it doesn't help you with getting an offer.

Yeah, but it gives you the opportunity to do really well in an interview and prove them wrong. If you're already in through the door, you'll definitely have a harder time than someone they picked, but still a far better chance than if you never got a II.
 
I don't know the residency requirements of the states. But I'm pretty sure some states are OK with wanting to come back or stay there after having gone to college there.


Do you count as in state in cali after doing 4 years of UG there? PA has a rule that you have to work and have a domicile and being a full time student doesn't count.
 
Anecdotal evidence, but I go to one of the schools efle mentioned, and my classmate (3.8, 38, all the ECs) didn't even get a secondary from our own school. He is a super great person too :/
 
Anecdotal evidence, but I go to one of the schools efle mentioned, and my classmate (3.8, 38, all the ECs) didn't even get a secondary from our own school. He is a super great person too :/

No secondary with those stats?

There's something about him you don't know (IA etc.)
 
My state's school will only take UG's from 3 different schools. So I can't speak on the behalf of mine. But I know Vandy is actually harder if you're a TN resident
 
No secondary with those stats?

There's something about him you don't know (IA etc.)

Isn't UCSF known for not giving secondaries to some people with super high stats? (because they are just really selective about giving secondaries in general)?
 
I honestly don't know if there's an IS bias for the CA schools because it's mandated, or just that the UG schools in CA are so good, and have so many grads, that they readily fill up the UCs, Stanford and USC. I get the sense that that case applies for Western and TUCOM-CA. As the very wise gyngyn has pointed out, UCLA grads alone could fill every medical school seat in the Golden State.
Only UCR has a strong regional (and thus, state) bias. Most of the CA schools even state on their websites that they have no preference for IS candidates. A few of the UC's would actually prefer OOS as long as they are better in some way than those that want to matriculate from here.
 
But the % interviewed is much higher for in state according to MSAR (like double or triple for some of them) at all the UCs?
 
Because the feeder schools turn out so many highly competitive candidates. It's not a mandated thing, as the learned gyngyn has pointed out; it's just sheer numbers.

But the % interviewed is much higher for in state according to MSAR (like double or triple for some of them) at all the UCs?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Because the feeder schools turn out so many highly competitive candidates. It's not a mandated thing, as the learned gyngyn has pointed out; it's just sheer numbers.


That explains why there are more in state applicants. But it doesn't explain why in state applicants are offered interviews in greater proportion. UCLA interviews 12% of in state apps and 4% of out of state. That's a preference for out of state?! And top private schools like Stanford do not show this pattern, so it isn't as if California produces a greatly superior body of premeds to the rest of the nation.
 
That explains why there are more in state applicants. But it doesn't explain why in state applicants are offered interviews in greater proportion. UCLA interviews 12% of in state apps and 4% of out of state. That's a preference for out of state?! And top private schools like Stanford do not show this pattern, so it isn't as if California produces a greatly superior body of premeds to the rest of the nation.
Maybe it's because the undergrads from top Cali school have higher MCATs relative to applicants from other states, since the kind of people who go to Stanford or Berkeley are more likely to kill the MCAT. ;) Most states have 1 or 2 well-regarded schools at most - Cali has several prestigious ones + solid ones like Davis.

That's just my guess though.
 
That explains why there are more in state applicants. But it doesn't explain why in state applicants are offered interviews in greater proportion. UCLA interviews 12% of in state apps and 4% of out of state. That's a preference for out of state?! And top private schools like Stanford do not show this pattern, so it isn't as if California produces a greatly superior body of premeds to the rest of the nation.
Almost twice as many CA applicants are admitted to schools outside of CA. No other state produces a surplus this large. The ones we don't choose are more than good enough to be accepted all over the nation.
It is not only the quality of the IS pool but the quality of the OOS pool that most significantly influences interview offers.
Many of the OOS applicants are throwing Hail Marys,unfortunately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Almost twice as many CA applicants are admitted to schools outside of CA. No other state produces a surplus this large. The ones we don't choose are more than good enough to be accepted all over the nation.
It is not only the quality of the IS pool but the quality of the OOS pool that most significantly influences interview offers.
Many of the OOS applicants are throwing Hail Marys,unfortunately.

Thanks for explaining that makes sense! Does this also mean that good private schools like USC and Stanford who maintain an even balance of instate and out of state are actually turning down more qualified Californians for the sake of state diversity?
 
Thanks for explaining that makes sense! Does this also mean that good private schools like USC and Stanford who maintain an even balance of instate and out of state are actually turning down more qualified Californians for the sake of state diversity?
You might be onto something there!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Wow, that makes zero sense to me. I thought the diversity they were after involved different cultures and socioeconomic histories, not states of origin. Turning down a stronger applicant for a weaker one born beyond an imaginary line in the dirt does not compute.
 
Wow, that makes zero sense to me. I thought the diversity they were after involved different cultures and socioeconomic histories, not states of origin. Turning down a stronger applicant for a weaker one born beyond an imaginary line in the dirt does not compute.
They aren't weaker. They are just as strong, from another region and with a different life experience.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ah, so it's only at UCLA and others which admit 2-3x as many Californians that there is a significant difference in the quality of in vs out of state applicant pools? Stanford's approx equal interview rates actually reflect equally competitive apps?
 
Thanks for explaining that makes sense! Does this also mean that good private schools like USC and Stanford who maintain an even balance of instate and out of state are actually turning down more qualified Californians for the sake of state diversity?
I think this happens with top schools with top undergrads trying to preserve school diversity too. Seems like plenty of qualified applicants don't get into their own top 10 med school, but get into other top 10 programs. Private schools don't want to have like a third of their class from their own undergrad even if it's a very good undergrad, so I think this makes things more competitive in a sense.
 
I think this happens with top schools with top undergrads trying to preserve school diversity too. Seems like plenty of qualified applicants don't get into their own top 10 med school, but get into other top 10 programs. Private schools don't want to have like a third of their class from their own undergrad even if it's a very good undergrad, so I think this makes things more competitive in a sense.

I don't think they actively prefer people from other top undergrads though. More like they only take the top 10% of their college because they're also accepting the top 10% at all the other Ivy etc.
 
I don't think they actively prefer people from other top undergrads though. More like they only take the top 10% of their college because they're also accepting the top 10% at all the other Ivy etc.
a quick search on my username solely reveals my imgur account.
winning
 
Ah, so it's only at UCLA and others which admit 2-3x as many Californians that there is a significant difference in the quality of in vs out of state applicant pools? Stanford's approx equal interview rates actually reflect equally competitive apps?
The size of the class and the various programs at UCLA (Drew, Prime...) account for a very different type of diversity and mission compared to the class size and mission at Stanford. Both schools attract excellent candidates from IS and OOS.

Stanford only has to fill 80 spots from among the nation's top applicants. It's not too tough.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I don't think they actively prefer people from other top undergrads though. More like they only take the top 10% of their college because they're also accepting the top 10% at all the other Ivy etc.
Right so even if they take the top set of applicants from each college, you probably have a lot more applicants from your own college, so the accepted proportion is a smaller number. Seems like if you go to a school with a top med school, demand to stay there is pretty high relative to demand to go to an equally ranked med school somewhere else. Still overall a bit of a bump applying to your own undergrad's school, but less than some people think, I think.
 
Turns out I was mistaken, Stanford actually does interview more % of applying Californians than OOS and so does Keck at USC. Considering that the UC system has a lot higher average stats than most state school systems, and even in high school things like the National Merit program (which is percentile based per state) have much higher cutoffs in Cali than most other states, this all boils down to top California students being an extra-ordinarily qualified bunch

I wonder how much knowing they're a 1st choice really impacts odds of an admissions offer. Do schools care enough about their acceptance percentages to offer a slightly weaker person they know would matriculate a spot rather than have to offer to 2 or 3 people who may be looking at other very good schools? I know that kind of BS happens a ton in undergrad with early decision and whatnot, but for med schools acceptance rate seems a less important metric
 
\
Do schools care enough about their acceptance percentages to offer a slightly weaker person they know would matriculate a spot rather than have to offer to 2 or 3 people who may be looking at other very good schools? I know that kind of BS happens a ton in undergrad with early decision and whatnot, but for med schools acceptance rate seems a less important metric
Not much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
@Goro, any idea why there is so much variation between top universities, such as WUSTL taking nearly 4x as many of its own as UChicago? I would have thought most places attached to top undergrads would want to take advantage of already feeling like home to scoop up all their best students, but some schools seem to really like fresh faces.

Because UChicago ****s you over when it comes to GPA, and Pritzker (like most any other medical school) doesn't want to deflate its stats the way the college does. Oh, and their premedical advising office was downright terrible (basically they would tell you "you're hopeless, don't even bother applying") until very recently, when it was rebranded from CCIHP to UCIHP.

You can tell I'm not a bitter alumnus at all.
 
The size of the class and the various programs at UCLA (Drew, Prime...) account for a very different type of diversity and mission compared to the class size and mission at Stanford. Both schools attract excellent candidates from IS and OOS.

Stanford only has to fill 80 spots from among the nation's top applicants. It's not too tough.
90 ;)
 
Top