Are linkage programs fair to traditional applicants?

[Ox King]

Like the other recent post by @Officer Farva I am also curious about placement.

My undergrad, while considered pretty good in terms of rep, has been suffering from less successful placement in the past couple of years.

Although I applied and was accepted this year, I was shocked to hear about postbac linkage programs. What shocked me even more is that my undergrad has linkages with lower average GPAs and lower average MCATs than what the programs normally take. While traditional applicants from my school are lucky to get accepted to their state school or local DO school, I see linkages at amazing mid-tiers and even some top tiers. How is this fair to traditional applicants who knew earlier that they wanted medicine?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[musicalfeet]

Usually linkages are reserved for those students who have something unique to bring to the table as post-bacs. And at least for my post-bac, the students that opted for links usually didn't want to take a gap year, but were of a high enough caliber that they would have gotten into med school anyway without the link. I also knew of some students who were actually rejected from their linkages but got into even higher tier medical schools as well. I don't think it's unfair-- there would be a lot less diversity if schools didn't actively try to recruit students from various different backgrounds.

And I don't want to generalize, but post-bac students in general are a lot more focused and hard-working than your average undergrad (from my observations by being in class with a bunch of ugrad premeds). Yes, there are some superstar ugrads, but more often than not, many students slack.

And to echo @SweetFast , the post-bacs with linkages do tend to only pick students that would have succeeded at the application process even without the program. OP, here's some numbers for my program:
About 250 applied
50 interviewed
17-20 accepted
Avg uGPA: 3.7
Avg SAT (since they use this to evaluate your test-taking ability): 1450/1600

 

[Mansamusa]

Money talks.

 

[medic86]

Who said anything about this process was fair?

It is what it is. Why whine about it?

 

[Glandzburg]

Lol "fair"

 

[piii]

You aren't entitled to a spot, fairness has nothing to do with it.




Also, many SMP programs have strong linkages too. Tufts, BU, GT, temple, Tulane, EVMS all take like 15-30 students from their SMP classes a year. Want to complain about something else? How about BS/MD students who don't even take the MCAT.

 

[GrapesofRath]

The people who get in through these post-bacc programs are often some of the most qualified people from an academic perspective.

If it is an SMP, that means you routinely beat out at least half the people in an MS1 class on their tests. As you can guess, that puts you in a position that is better than at least half of the MS1's who matriculate. No "shortcuts" there; in fact there are plenty of people who get in without proving that kind of success per se.

If it is a formal post-bacc
a) Those programs are very very competitive to get into. They arent for people with no direction who just lackadasically went through college. They're often people who were very successful in college with other majors and had other accomplishments that make them candidates that are likely to do well in pre-med and medical curriculum.
b) The program itself is very rigorous. Competition for grades are fierce. Everybody is motivated and aiming for the same thing unlike your traditional college pre-med classes.
c) What these stats of "90% of our grads get into med school" dont tell you are the number of people who dropped out because they couldnt keep up with the program. Others who graduate wont be offered committee letters from the program in an attempt to discourage them from applying and hence the post-bacc program gets to keep bragging about their acceptance rates. Also these stats can be inflated by DO schools and international MD programs.
d) These programs are known products. Med schools know that hitting a certain GPA likely means a certain amount of success in medical school. Again, going back to the idea that doing well in this program proves your worth and ability in a way many pre-meds cant.

Bottom line is this isnt in anyway something like URMs/Affirmative action or BS/MD programs that dont require MCAT scores; the people who get in through these programs have proven themselves to handle med school in a way even many successful applicants havent. In many ways the "easier" way to get into medical school might be to avoid programs this rigorous and competitive.

 

[darkjedi]

The programs with good linkages are all very selective and generally pretty competitive to get in. You need a good GPA to start and a track record of doing well on standardized tests.

The reason adcoms love postbac applicants so much is because they bring something to the table that traditional applicants may not, whether it's alternative career experience or a different perspective.

It's not really unfair because linkage application process actually happens late in the application cycle, like in Jan-Mar. Traditional applicants already face similar competition from non-trads in the general application cycle anyway.

 

[darkjedi]

It should also be noted that their are no standards to define linkages so read what that means carefully. Some postbaccs it might require a 3.6 GPA for a II which would make you a good candidate for many schools without the postbacc

Yup, and those stats are just the minimum, the med schools still decide based on your application whether or not they will even consider you for linkage.

Funnily enough my ugrad GPA disqualified me from the linkage program to my med school, but I got in through the general cycle anyway.

 

[GrapesofRath]

I strongly concur with the above. Many programs have strict GPA for committee letters and earning a formal certificate. Applying without either from well known programs without either can raise red flags. Since there are no standards across programs nor central data collections, each program can compile their own success. So 90% of successful applicants may mean only those who graduated with a 3.7 who earned a certificate and who got accepted to any program that offers an MD or DO would count. What about the percent who never completed or the fraction that completed but didnt have high enough GPA for committee letter or earning a formal certificate? So take these success stats with 2 grains of salt and a shot of tequila

Yep this kind of gets at what I was saying above; formal post-bacc programs arent some "easy way out" in many ways they are a real gamble. High risk high reward, alot like SMPs.

Interestingly there is only one SMP/post-bacc program that I've seen definitely post how each one of their graduates do. Many will post a list of schools their grads get accepted into but that is largely misleading.

The only program though that will give you an exact picture of how their SMP/post bacc students do is Cincinnati. No manipulation of stats or anything like that. You know 32 people start out every year, you can count how many graduated and you can see how each of them end up doing. It adds a lot of credence and credibility to the program. I think historically about 75% of the people who enter from Day 1 will end up at a US MD program

https://med.uc.edu/msinphysiology/alumni/meet-the-class-of-2013

 

[Officer Farva]

Yep this kind of gets at what I was saying above; formal post-bacc programs arent some "easy way out" in many ways they are a real gamble. High risk high reward, alot like SMPs.

Interestingly there is only one SMP/post-bacc program that I've seen definitely post how each one of their graduates do. Many will post a list of schools their grads get accepted into but that is largely misleading.

The only program though that will give you an exact picture of how their SMP/post bacc students do is Cincinnati. No manipulation of stats or anything like that. You know 32 people start out every year, you can count how many graduated and you can see how each of them end up doing. It adds a lot of credence and credibility to the program. I think historically about 75% of the people who enter from Day 1 will end up at a US MD program

https://med.uc.edu/msinphysiology/alumni/meet-the-class-of-2013

That is actually a really good placement for a postbac program. I'm pretty surprised that all the UC/Stanford kids move all the way there for a postbac rather than go close to home, so the program must be pretty strong.