Reapplying after acceptance

[hopefulscientist]

I understand this type of thread has been beaten to death and that many people will have strong opinions about this matter, though I ask that all please provide objective answers and understanding. I have an acceptance to a school I feel that I could enjoy, though recently I have realized how passionate I am about wanting to do global medicine work. Consequently, however, I have not taken any appropriate language classes or gotten greater exposure to this field to better understand if this would be right for me. I know I want to go to Medical School, though I see it being exceedingly challenging to gain fluency in the language during school and afterwards so I am debating deferring/rejecting my acceptance so I can spend a year or two to gain greater exposure. Of course things are also more complicated than just this. I interviewed at and was rejected by Duke and Harvard Med, both of which were my top choices because they were better suited for the Global Health work that I want to do (the place I was accepted at has global health programs, but not in the region that I am interested in and I have no assurance that I could establish a group that focused on that region in the first two years of the program). I also would like to have reserved time for earning an MPH and doing research, which is provided by both Harvard and Duke. I was hoping to get other peoples' opinions on this so I can make as educated a decision as possible. I am a competitive applicant (good scores, activities, lor)

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Optimus-Prime]

take the acceptance, 3-6 month global health elective isn't worth blowing off school

You will have much better opportunities in practice, and maybe perhaps in residency,

you could perhaps defer for a year and do an accelerated MPH or global experience

 

[JustAPhD]

You could reapply every year of your life and still not be guaranteed a spot at Harvard or Duke. Take your acceptance.

 

[hopefulscientist]

That's what I'm going to do, glad to hear the bigger picture about things. Thanks!

 

[JustAPhD]

That's what I'm going to do, glad to hear the bigger picture about things. Thanks!

Good choice. If you got IIs at Duke and Harvard I'm sure your acceptance is at a good school. Best of luck to you!

 

[gyngyn]

I am a competitive applicant (good scores, activities, lor)

A re-applicant with very good scores is at a significant disadvantage compared to other re-applicants (even if we didn't know about turning down an acceptance!).
Ask for a deferral, if you must.

 

[Lucca]

Deferring is a good option here if one thing you want to do is to gain exposure to foreign language. Reapplying is a poor option. The best opportunities for learning about and participating in global health will probably come in practice.

 

[piii]

Right now it's global health, two years later it's something else. But all the while the bigger picture is to be a doctor, which could slip right through your fingers if you don't take this acceptance. You can ask them if they'll let you defer, but if they don't, take it and run.

 

[bunnyg]

A re-applicant with very good scores is at a significant disadvantage compared to other re-applicants (even if we didn't know about turning down an acceptance!).
Ask for a deferral, if you must.

Why is this? :/ And what are considered very good scores (GPA/MCAT)?

 

[njtrimed]

Why is this? :/ And what are considered very good scores (GPA/MCAT)?

My guess is that it's not surprising when an applicant with poor numbers has to reapply, whereas an applicant with good scores must have some red flags if they have to reapply, whether that means lapses in judgement in how and where to apply, actual red flags in terms of character, or really terrible interview skills. If I was an ADCOM, I would assume that person had several chances and blew it, whereas the reapplicant with lower scores who improved likely wasn't taken seriously the first time around, and thus has a better chance of proving to be a good candidate.

 

[bunnyg]

My guess is that it's not surprising when an applicant with poor numbers has to reapply, whereas an applicant with good scores must have some red flags if they have to reapply, whether that means lapses in judgement in how and where to apply, actual red flags in terms of character, or really terrible interview skills. If I was an ADCOM, I would assume that person had several chances and blew it, whereas the reapplicant with lower scores who improved likely wasn't taken seriously the first time around, and thus has a better chance of proving to be a good candidate.

Shucks, I may be in this position next cycle. My MCAT isn't amazing (34), but my GPA is near a 4.0.
I got 5 II which ended in 4 WL and 1 rejection. It sucks because it feels like I am getting rejected based on my personality!!

 

[bananafish94]

Shucks, I may be in this position next cycle. My MCAT isn't amazing (34), but my GPA is near a 4.0.
I got 5 II which ended in 4 WL and 1 rejection. It sucks because it feels like I am getting rejected based on my personality!!

I hate to say this, but if you had 5 interviews and none of them materialized into an acceptance, the interviews likely play a pretty big part in the problem. When were your interviews?

By the way, I am in a similar position (although I don't have an awesome MCAT score like you). 4 interviews, two post-interview waitlists, two pending. After the first two waitlists, I seriously reevaluated the way I interview and had a lot of people listen to the answers I was giving to get constructive criticism. If I fail to get into these two, it will warrant a complete change in strategy for any interviews next year.

Good luck!

 

[bunnyg]

I hate to say this, but if you had 5 interviews and none of them materialized into an acceptance, the interviews likely play a pretty big part in the problem. When were your interviews?

By the way, I am in a similar position (although I don't have an awesome MCAT score like you). 4 interviews, two post-interview waitlists, two pending. After the first two waitlists, I seriously reevaluated the way I interview and had a lot of people listen to the answers I was giving to get constructive criticism. If I fail to get into these two, it will warrant a complete change in strategy for any interviews next year.

Good luck!

Two of my interviews were in October, and the rest were in the New Year (2x Jan/ 1 in Feb) . I know my first couple were a bit rough, but I thought I did better in the ones in the New Year.

Hopefully we will both have luck with our waitlists. I just am kind of nervous now that I know I will be "flagged" next year!!

 

[bananafish94]

Two of my interviews were in October, and the rest were in the New Year (2x Jan/ 1 in Feb) . I know my first couple were a bit rough, but I thought I did better in the ones in the New Year.

Hopefully we will both have luck with our waitlists. I just am kind of nervous now that I know I will be "flagged" next year!!

Bear in mind that interviews in the new year have a lower chance of yielding an acceptance in the first place because a lot of their class is already filled. It's not necessarily a poor that got you a waitlist, they could have just been extra picky at this point!

 

[gyngyn]

Why is this? :/ And what are considered very good scores (GPA/MCAT)?

If a re-applicant had scores consistent with several interviews, a reasonable person would deduce that the interviews did not go well. The reasons that multiple interviews go badly don't tend to improve in one application cycle.
If you have addressed the perceived flaws in your interaction, it would be wise to apply to enough schools where you are not a re-applicant to try them out next time.
Hopefully, you will see some waitlist action and have all of medical school to work on it!

 

[bc65]

the place I was accepted at has global health programs, but not in the region that I am interested in and I have no assurance that I could establish a group that focused on that region in the first two years of the program). I also would like to have reserved time for earning an MPH and doing research, which is provided by both Harvard and Duke.

This is just a variation on the more typical pre-med question: Which school should I go to in order to be a neurosurgeon/ dermatologist / pediatric cardiac surgeon ?

1. The field that you're interested in now is not likely to be the field that you're interested in later.
2. Almost any school will prepare you for almost any specialty. You don't learn your specialty in med school.
3. Whatever differences in the global health program you think you saw are likely not significant in the least in the larger scheme of things.
4. You can learn a language over the summer, or next summer, or during med school. ( I learned a language as a surgery resident. No, not Spanish )
5. Duke and Harvard will never take you. Never. ( Once she says it's over, it's over. Move on.)
6. You don't need Duke and Harvard. See above.
7. If you re-apply, schools will think that there's something seriously wrong with you because of your re-application with excellent credentials. They will be even more convinced of this if they realize that you turned down an acceptance. They will be even more convinced when they find out why. This assessment of you will be correct.
8. Whatever it is that you want to do in this gap year you can do during a research year in med school.
9. Losing a year now means one less year of peak income later. So, you will be losing between $150,000 and $500,000 to take this year off, not to mention the likelihood that you will end up in a less desirable school, or no school at all.

 

[bunnyg]

If a re-applicant had scores consistent with several interviews, a reasonable person would deduce that the interviews did not go well. The reasons that multiple interviews go badly don't tend to improve in one application cycle.
If you have addressed the perceived flaws in your interaction, it would be wise to apply to enough schools where you are not a re-applicant to try them out next time.
Hopefully, you will see some waitlist action and have all of medical school to work on it!

edit: nevermind