Hi guys! So, I got 40 on the MCAT, will have a Masters in Biochemistry and a couple peer-reviewed publications within the next year, and come from a somewhat economically-disadvantaged background (long story). My question is, what EC should I add to my resume within the next 2 months (I want to apply in early June!) to make me a competitive applicant?
Thanks!
[/not srs]
I realize you weren't being serious with this post, but sadly, this is what people on SDN and other pre-meds say. No one puts it so directly though like you wrote out. But sadly, you hit the nail on the head.
You never hear of someone just doing something they want or trying to find an activity that will make a genuine difference in peoples' lives. It's all about going on SDN, and starting a thread trying to find the best EC that would help boost their application.
This fake charity nonsense has to stop. At my high school alone, people started 3 nonsense charities that did absolutely nothing, and existed just to give a small group of people an extra "leadership" thing on their college apps. If I remember correctly, there was a 4th charity that ran one Bingo Night for Kenya or something, but the President (a friend of mine) pocketed the money and used it to buy liquor for a party through an older brother.
I swear I didn't make that up.
I think the reason people do it is because activities in the established high school clubs like MUN/NHS/Keyclub/etc are a dime a dozen among college applicants, so they need some way to distinguish themselves without doing any work. Making up a charity is a pretty good way to do so.
Wow, the bolded part is pretty disgusting, but it's not surprising, since what can you honestly expect from people that start stuff they don't care about whatsoever? I know people who became entrepreneurs from my college class, and you know what? Every single person that started a company was passionate about what they were doing, and the only thing that they were concerned about was
that company. They would stay with it either indefinitely, or hand it over once it became profitable so they can make money.
I don't understand why someone would start a company or charity before going to medical school. What's supposed to happen once you get into medical school? The other problem is that people have a huge misconception of non-profit corporations.
NON-PROFIT
CHARITY
People need to get this out of their heads! A for-profit company means that all profits go to shareholders, while a non-profit gets reinvested. However, a non-profit is re-invested usually has a board of extremely well-paid board of directors. And trust me, they make good money. Just because a non-profit doesn't answer the shareholders does not mean that is suddenly has a noble mission and everyone is working for free to help everyone.
Therefore, any intelligent pre-med that is trying to boost their application with a non-profit can make things look very good, while not giving a ****. If you know how to run a business, you'll realize that a non-profit only needs a small amount of proceeds to be given to the actual cause. A majority of that money can go back as "administrative" costs. Such a charity would have a poor rating on a site like charity navigator, but if you're keeping it on the down-low for medical school admissions, why would you even care about it? In fact, I doubt ADCOMs will scrutinize the financial statements of your company in the first place!
Therefore, if your parents donate a ton of money, they can write that off while you give the minimum amount to whatever cause. You take that money and give it back to your parents. So then what happens? Your parents or whoever end up donating very little while you look like a saint! It's extremely deceiving, but entirely within the legal boundaries of running a non-profit.
Now before you go hating on every pre-med that starts a sham non-profit, keep reading what I wrote below...
This is why I hate it when people volunteer for standard non-profit hospitals. They take advantage of volunteers to do the work of the orderly. None of that money is technically thrown at patients. It can go to line to pockets of the well-paid board of directors. Hospitals keep a non-profit status by providing a certain amount of charity care each year. So what better way to spend that charity care on emergency room patients that are either illegal immigrants, vagrants, or people with no insurance that are living in such poverty that you will never collect on them? You're legally required to treat them by law, so why not use this as your charity care? It's also a good thing to do charity care for the people who might make the news, so your hospital looks good.
This is a far cry from institutions like Shriners or free clinics that actually provide care at no cost. These are the places where people should be volunteering. So in the end, I don't quite see why people should vilify a pre-med starting a sham non-profit versus a standard run-of-the-mill non-profit hospital. They both try to look like saints, even though they couldn't be further away from it.
I honestly hope ADCOMs catch onto the non-profit thing fast... They should realize that anyone who starts a company is doing it as a big sacrifice. They devote
everything to starting this organization. It's not something anyone does as part of a large check-list.
But I think what schools really need to do is stop putting weight on things which can be easily manipulated or fabricated.
Let's say, for example, that I volunteered at a no-kill animal shelter for 100 hours during my freshman and sophomore years. 100 hours--it's something, but not nearly as amazing as some people have. To make myself more appealing, I write 500 hours on my med school ap.... HOW ON EARTH can the interested schools verify that? Call my previous supervisor? Do you really think that person would remember me? And assuming they do, how many of you actually think that this supervisor would correct the school and say "Oh, but you're incorrect. He only volunteered here for 100 hours."
I'm not an expert at the med school admissions process, but I think that any school following up on an EC like this is highly unlikely.
However, I have a great deal of respect for those ECs that are 100% verifiable. Things like playing an instrument, speaking a second/third language, any research publications, double majors/extra minors, employment, etc. IMO, schools should focus on these things rather than the un-provable volunteering and nonsense like starting a charity. (And even if you can prove you started this charity; what of it? How much money did you raise and who did you give it to? How much of the money you raised came from your mom and dad? Let's see some proof.)
If you volunteer for any place that has a "volunteer coordinator," that means that it's a hotspot for fakers.
The only reason that the volunteer coordinator and her secretary knew me by name was because I volunteered at a smaller suburban hospital that was far from any Chicago college campus. Nonetheless, even if they don't know who you are, most places with a volunteer office will keep track of their volunteers. This is why when I called them to get my hours for my application, I was able to get the exact number of hours in less than two minutes. Therefore, if you volunteer at a regular pre-med hotspot, you won't have to worry, since it will be documented to the exact hour.
So unless your mom's friend is a volunteer coordinator, you are personally friends with the volunteer coordinator, or you bribed the volunteer coordinator, anyone will be able to find about your commitment with no problem. Now if you volunteered at a less commonly volunteered at place, you can probably get away with faking numbers. But generally, pre-meds gravitate towards the same places. Everyone always prioritizes clinical over non-clinical places anyhow, and those are usually filled with pre-med volunteers regardless.
I agree we should place a bit more emphasis on things that aren't necessarily verifiable. And as for your charity comment, I doubt that ADCOMs will have the time to scrutinize financial statements to make sure it's completely legitimate.
Thanks alot, Planes2Doc.
That was great! Every middle schooler should have to read this article. Because to make it really seem natural you should start joining activities for college admissions in sixth grade. That's what I did.
After spending four years surrounded by the type of people she describes in the article, I just have to say, the strategy they employ works wonders!
At our school, they basically give you a formula to replicate that process for med school admissions and if you follow it you are guaranteed to walk into ritzy schools for med school. It is literally a packet that plans your four years of college including when you should start doing certain activities and take the MCAT. (which seem to work too as the average MCAT is a 34)
As I am now writing my application, you better believe I am happy that I did a ton of things strategically solely for med school. It really helps to make all your activities look ''coherent';, which is important if you want them to appear organic.
It helps alot if you spend four years planning for one application.
Thanks! That's very interesting... I didn't realize that schools would start preparing you at a young age. Imagine that! In one of my proposals to fix the EC arms race, I proposed starting activities as early as high school, since this would give a better measure of who genuinely did the activities out of interest versus doing it as a "ZERO to Mother Teresa" padder. Well, if you're really serious about something, you'll be smart enough to do everything to give yourself an advantage. I guess people are already prepared to take things to next level when ADCOMs catch on to the "ZERO to Mother Teresa" applicant that started as a college freshman.
It's really sad how things are being pushed further and further. Before you know it, you'll be pushing kindergarteners to volunteer! But in regards to your last paragraph, you were definitely smart for making the activities seem more coherent. But rest assured, suddenly picking up an insane amount of activities as a college freshman still looks legit.
If you think 100 vs. 500 hours of something as unimportant as volunteering will make a huge difference in the outcome of your cycle, you do not understand medical admissions. Obviously people should be truthful in their app, and little lies sprinkled throughout a person's app can definitely give them an advantage, but a relatively small, isolated fabrication like that isn't even worth doing. It's just not going to make a difference.
If none of these things make a difference, then why does an applicant that starts a laundry-list of activities within a few months of applying look bad compared to an applicant who did the very
SAME ECs starting as a freshman?
Of course, 1 such lie is meaningless. But if someone repeats the same process of exaggeration for every single listed activity, they can turn a spotty, weak application into a much stronger one.
Anyway, my point was that there should be more focus on provable ECs such as playing an instrument or bilingualism, and less on those things which can only be verified by word-of-mouth such as working in a soup kitchen or volunteering at the local animal shelter.
Great point, and we can only wish. Right?
It just doesn't make economic sense for someone in their mid 40s to be starting in medical school. It's a very exhausting pathway and with the cost of medical school as it is, you'll probably break even from your medical school loans 10 years after you finish residency when you're around 65. That means that you'll have basically nothing saved up for retirement, never mind helping your kids pay for college or having time to go to their wedding. At least you can use those senior discounts.
