What is the big deal about the UCD Premed conference?

[Sgucci]

I'm proud to say I've been accepted to medical school and that I never went to that thing because honestly it seemed like a giant waste of time, even with all these big wigs admissions there. I watched a lot of the videos online, and there was a lot of peddling idealism about how admissions works like "we're really holistic and examine every detail of your application", "we care about who you are, and you can say anything as long as you justify it well in interviews". As someone who has been through the medical school admissions process it is very evident this isn't the case.

Holistic review boils down to metrics a lot of the time, and just seems like a remark to pander to idealists to get their money when they have no business applying to some of these schools. Medical schools admissions don't seem to care who you are, and the "you can say anything as long as you justify it well in interviews" just isn't true. The interview process is more about connecting with an individual, literally anything can sink you, and interviewers make a lot of preconceived notions that can easily lead to your downfall.

It's a step better than the horrific premed advisors, but I just don't see any reason why anyone would spend a day being fed inaccurate idealism from admissions people when far more realistic advice is available online here at sdn, and it just seems like an overhyped waste of time. As for making impressions on adcoms, they see and talk to so many damn people that's highly unlikely at best.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[whatever5]

I've never even heard of this, so it can't be that big of a deal.

 

[Sgucci]

I've never even heard of this, so it can't be that big of a deal.

It's hyped as the "biggest premed conference ever", and some of the adcoms I talked to including the director of admissions at WMU hailed it as the greatest thing ever. Honestly it seemed like a load of crap to me.

 

[ndafife]

Cool story. You sound like a ton of fun at parties.

 

[Sgucci]

Cool story. You sound like a ton of fun at parties.

Yea, i am because I actually can party instead of wasting my time at premed conferences that would seem to bring nothing to the table for me.

 

[Officer Farva]

I'm proud to say I've been accepted to medical school and that I never went to that thing because honestly it seemed like a giant waste of time, even with all these big wigs admissions there. I watched a lot of the videos online, and there was a lot of peddling idealism about how admissions works like "we're really holistic and examine every detail of your application", "we care about who you are, and you can say anything as long as you justify it well in interviews". As someone who has been through the medical school admissions process it is very evident this isn't the case.

Holistic review boils down to metrics a lot of the time, and just seems like a remark to pander to idealists to get their money when they have no business applying to some of these schools. Medical schools admissions don't seem to care who you are, and the "you can say anything as long as you justify it well in interviews" just isn't true. The interview process is more about connecting with an individual, literally anything can sink you, and interviewers make a lot of preconceived notions that can easily lead to your downfall.

It's a step better than the horrific premed advisors, but I just don't see any reason why anyone would spend a day being fed inaccurate idealism from admissions people when far more realistic advice is available online here at sdn, and it just seems like an overhyped waste of time. As for making impressions on adcoms, they see and talk to so many damn people that's highly unlikely at best.

"We are interested in evaluating the whole applicant. We don't care about your GPA or MCAT. We just want to see that you fit into our collaborative community of learners. We want to see you have a passion towards all of your endeavors. Don't think of our interviews as interviews, but as conversations."

LOLOLOLOLOL admissions buzzwords. I bolded the most important part of your last comment.

 

[Sgucci]

"We are interested in evaluating the whole applicant. We don't care about your GPA or MCAT. We just want to see that you fit into our collaborative community of learners. We want to see you have a passion towards all of your endeavors. Don't think of our interviews as interviews, but as conversations."

LOLOLOLOLOL admissions buzzwords. I bolded the most important part of your last comment.

Yep, a whole day of having buzzwords and raw idealism spewed at me by admissions who are basically lying to our faces doesn't bode well. I'd honestly call them out on their BS but that'd go nowhere. these people are like politicians and their words are empty.

 

[Officer Farva]

Yep, a whole day of having buzzwords and raw idealism spewed at me by admissions who are basically lying to our faces doesn't bode well. I'd honestly call them out on their BS but that'd go nowhere. these people are like politicians and their words are empty.

I do not like admissions. I have had the worst interview experiences, I am a magnet for that. Like the interviewer who wanted to know my gap year income. Or the interviewer who called me spoiled for scoring above a 35 on the MCAT (he said I spent a fortune on tutoring, while I actually am some normal middle class dude who self-studied). Or the interviewer who kept on insisting I look like one ethnic group when in fact I am another (cultural competency my ***). Or the same interviewer who talked condescendingly about my lack of faith in religion. Or the interviewer who went on a tirade against scientists and PhDs and said I didn't care about the community because I spend 40 hours a week in a lab. Or the interviewer who inquired about personal details of my family life, and I mean truly PERSONAL.

I cannot look at doctors the same way again, thank you interviewers!!!!

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I'm thinking this is mrh account #57.

 

[Sgucci]

I'm thinking this is mrh account #57.

I'm thinking that if you have anything to actually say about the UCD premed conference you should try actually contributing to the thread rather than channeling your inner Mccarthyism.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I'm thinking that if you have anything to actually say about the UCD premed conference you should try actually contributing to the thread rather than channeling your inner Mccarthyism.

#confirmed

But yeah, a med school conference in Cali sounds awesome!

 

[Sgucci]

#confirmed

But yeah, a med school conference in Cali sounds awesome!

Sweet confirmation bias. Why don't you actually read the thread and look at by aforementioned issues because I can easily point fingers and call you the reincarnation of L. Ron Hubbard and act like it confirms anything when it doesnt and it contributes nothing to thread.

 

[NotWayneBrady]

:troll:

 

[Sgucci]

:troll:

Not trolling, but if you do feel contrary to how I feel about this event I'd really like to hear your thoughts and reasoning.

 

[NotWayneBrady]

Not trolling, but if you do feel contrary to how I feel about this event I'd really like to hear your thoughts and reasoning.

I have 0 thoughts about the event, or the original post at all. It's a pretty inconsequential thing to get up in arms about in my opinion.

I'm thinking that if you have anything to actually say about the UCD premed conference you should try actually contributing to the thread rather than channeling your inner Mccarthyism.

Sweet confirmation bias. Why don't you actually read the thread and look at by aforementioned issues because I can easily point fingers and call you the reincarnation of L. Ron Hubbard and act like it confirms anything when it doesnt and it contributes nothing to thread.

These reek of troll. Both are overly argumentative and about a subject that really shouldn't elicit any sort of strong feelings at all... yet you seem rather heated at anonymous posters on the internet about it.

I'm checking out of the thread though, so best of luck at future conferences! <- Woops. I lied a bit, couldn't resist.

 

[Sgucci]

I have 0 thoughts about the event, or the original post at all. It's a pretty inconsequential thing to get up in arms about in my opinion.





These reek of troll. Both are overly argumentative and about a subject that really shouldn't elicit any sort of strong feelings at all... yet you seem rather heated at anonymous posters on the internet about it.

I'm checking out of the thread though, so best of luck at future conferences!

What irritates me so much about the event is the false hope it provides and how even though so many influential parties are there they're more about saving face than offering anything in consequence. It feels like a betrayal and waste of time just like bad premed advising, except almost everyone on admissions is present so they should have every opportunity to be realistic about the true nature of this process. it's reminiscent of presidential candidates who will lie and say anything to get approval and elected then do the exact opposite when they get elected.

 

[gyngyn]

What irritates me so much about the event is the false hope it provides and how even though so many influential parties are there they're more about saving face than offering anything in consequence. It feels like a betrayal and waste of time just like bad premed advising, except almost everyone on admissions is present so they should have every opportunity to be realistic about the true nature of this process. it's reminiscent of presidential candidates who will lie and say anything to get approval and elected then do the exact opposite when they get elected.

Strong wording for someone who never attended the event.

 

[Dr.Smexy]

Dude go read a book or something...

 

[Sgucci]

Strong wording for someone who never attended the event.

I watched the stream of it. What am I missing by not attending that event? What's present there that would drastically alter my perception?

 

[gyngyn]

Yep, a whole day of having buzzwords and raw idealism spewed at me by admissions who are basically lying to our faces doesn't bode well. I'd honestly call them out on their BS but that'd go nowhere. these people are like politicians and their words are empty.

Are you sure that you aren't bitter?

 

[gyngyn]

I watched the stream of it. What am I missing by not attending that event? What's present there that would drastically alter my perception?

You could have stopped streaming when you started getting bitter.

 

[Sgucci]

Are you sure that you aren't bitter?

I am bitter. Going through this process and facing the reality makes me very frustrated to hearing stuff that is totally incongruent with the experiences of myself and others. I believe premeds should know the realities, not lofty idealism where everyone is accepted and looked at and understood.

 

[gyngyn]

I am bitter. Going through this process and facing the reality makes me very frustrated to hearing stuff that is totally incongruent with the experiences of myself and others. I believe premeds should know the realities, not lofty idealism where everyone is accepted and looked at and understood.

Bitterness at the beginning of a long difficult journey is toxic for everyone who shares it.

 

[NotWayneBrady]

I am bitter. Going through this process and facing the reality makes me very frustrated to hearing stuff that is totally incongruent with the experiences of myself and others. I believe premeds should know the realities, not lofty idealism where everyone is accepted and looked at and understood.

Bro, eat a snickers.

 

[Sgucci]

Bitterness at the beginning of a long difficult journey is toxic for everyone who shares it.

It is, but so is lying to people about the realities of the beginning of pre-a long difficult journey, so they have false expectations. This process is so hard, so time consuming, and so extraordinarily expensive it's a slap in the face to be lied to about it by those in charge of admissions at schools.

 

[gyngyn]

It is, but so is lying to people about the realities of the beginning of pre-a long difficult journey, so they have false expectations. This process is so hard, so time consuming, and so extraordinarily expensive it's a slap in the face to be lied to about it by those in charge of admissions at schools.

Who lied to you?
What did they promise?

 

[Sgucci]

Who lied to you?

Individuals in admissions who say "we're really holistic and examine every detail of your application", "we care about who you are, and you can say anything as long as you justify it well in interviews". As someone who has been through the medical school admissions process it is very evident this isn't the case. This is what I've heard from conferences such as the UCD premed conferences. You have individuals like the dean of admissions at Duke saying stuff like this, and it just isn't the case. There's a lot of nuance and a lot of fitting into a box.

 

[gyngyn]

Individuals in admissions who say "we're really holistic and examine every detail of your application", "we care about who you are, and you can say anything as long as you justify it well in interviews". As someone who has been through the medical school admissions process it is very evident this isn't the case. This is what I've heard from conferences such as the UCD premed conferences. You have individuals like the dean of admissions at Duke saying stuff like this, and it just isn't the case. There's a lot of nuance and a lot of fitting into a box.

Not accepting you is not proof that they lied.
Holistic doesn't mean you will be accepted.

 

[GrapesofRath]

Individuals in admissions who say "we're really holistic and examine every detail of your application", "we care about who you are, and you can say anything as long as you justify it well in interviews". As someone who has been through the medical school admissions process it is very evident this isn't the case. This is what I've heard from conferences such as the UCD premed conferences. You have individuals like the dean of admissions at Duke saying stuff like this, and it just isn't the case. There's a lot of nuance and a lot of fitting into a box.

I'm not sure what you expect. Just like applicants have a vested interest in attending these events, so do schools. Nothing you were told isnt true; examining every detail of an application is how you narrow down a pool of 1000+ 3.8/35+ applicants into a class of them. The only statement youll find disagreement with any other admissions committee members is in the bolded, and even for the bolded, there are many who will really believe this based off their experiences admitting a wide variety of applicants with all kinds of histories or events that occured in their interviews.

As for Duke, in particular, that is one school with a "holistic" view of admission with their series of grueling secondary essays they spend significant time reading and place significant weight in. They go beyond measures many schools do to get to understand their applicants. Dukes 10th percentile GPA in the previous MSAR before this one was 3.49; we're talking about a top 10 school with a lower 10th percentile GPA than a number of lower tiers. If that's not "hollistic" I dont know what is. Basically, you were told exactly what somebody in admission believes above all else; that's something many dont get to experience or benefit from.

 

[Sgucci]

.

 

[p0gono]

I watched the stream of it. What am I missing by not attending that event? What's present there that would drastically alter my perception?

Wait, in that case you missed the (by far) most useful parts of the conference -- which are the small group workshops / discussions and the fair where you can get significant face time with people who may be reading your applications.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

It's funny, because we can actually use the California schools as evidence for a holistic admissions process.
The 10th percentile gpas at UCD, UCLA, and UCSD are 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5, respectively. UCLA and UCSD are both top 20 schools.
While the 10th percentile gpa is a bit higher at UCSF (a 3.6), its median MCAT is only a 35. As is often mentioned in this forum, UCSF could easily raise its medians to Penn's level if it wanted to. The same would likely apply to UCLA and UCSD.

 

[Sgucci]

It's funny, because we can actually use the California schools as evidence for a holistic admissions process.
The 10th percentile gpas at UCD, UCLA, and UCSD are 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5, respectively. UCLA and UCSD are both top 20 schools.
While the 10th percentile gpa is a bit higher at UCSF (a 3.6), its median MCAT is only a 35. As is often mentioned in this forum, UCSF could easily raise its medians to Penn's level if it wanted to. The same would likely apply to UCLA and UCSD.

Apply to these schools and then try saying that. The gpa and mcat discrepancies could easily just have to do with ethnicity/urm advantage rather than holistic review.

 

[gyngyn]

Apply to these schools and then try saying that. The gpa and mcat discrepancies could easily just have to do with ethnicity/urm advantage rather than holistic review.

Didn't you apply as UIM, given the diversity you would add to a class?

 

[p0gono]

Apply to these schools and then try saying that. The gpa and mcat discrepancies could easily just have to do with ethnicity/urm advantage rather than holistic review.

But the perceived advantage that URiM have is the result of holistic review. Not all black folks are URiM, not all latin@s are URiM, not all east asian folks are ORM, and a minority of people who are caucasian are, in fact, URiM according to some medical schools. Human being adcoms often have to read the words written in applications in order to make this "URiM" designation.

I don't understand what you're trying to argue. I get the sense that maybe holistic review didn't benefit you, and I'm sorry for that. It is a tough, selective process for everyone.

 

[Sgucci]

Didn't you apply as UIM, given the diversity you would add to a class?

that's not even relevant.

But the perceived advantage that URiM have is the result of holistic review. Not all black folks are URiM, not all latin@s are URiM, not all east asian folks are ORM, and a minority of people who are caucasian are, in fact, URiM according to some medical schools. Human being adcoms often have to read the words written in applications in order to make this "URiM" designation.

I don't understand what you're trying to argue. I get the sense that maybe holistic review didn't benefit you, and I'm sorry for that. It is a tough, selective process for everyone.

race is just another category and metric to look at, that's not holistic review. Holistic review is looking at the whole application and considering each aspect. You can't say that the CA med school system is a stunning example of holistic review if it's just about race and the lower metrics are just people of certain races. That's bias sampling.

 

[gyngyn]

that's not even relevant.

Interesting that you included it in your girlfriend's description on the other thread, then.
https://forums.studentdoctor.net/th...l-school-acceptance-and-consider-dos.1183044/

 

[gyngyn]

race is just another category and metric to look at, that's not holistic review. Holistic review is looking at the whole application and considering each aspect. You can't say that the CA med school system is a stunning example of holistic review if it's just about race and the lower metrics are just people of certain races. That's bias sampling.

How do you know that race explains the extraordinary people who got into UC's?

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

that's not even relevant.



race is just another category and metric to look at, that's not holistic review. Holistic review is looking at the whole application and considering each aspect. You can't say that the CA med school system is a stunning example of holistic review if it's just about race and the lower metrics are just people of certain races. That's bias sampling.

Didn't you get a ton of interviews your first cycle with an mcat retake that was lower than your original score? Sounds pretty forgiving/holistic to me.

 

[Sgucci]

How do you know that race explains the extraordinary people who got into UC's?

It's a more often than not trend. Do you really think that majority of them are extraordinary applicants rather than URMs hand-picked for their race in the name of equal representation? Look at the african-american vs caucasian applicants AA applicants with way lower stats have way higher acceptance chances. That's way more likely than extraordinary applicants.

Didn't you get a ton of interviews your first cycle with an mcat retake that was lower than your original score? Sounds pretty forgiving/holistic to me.

LOL NO. you got the wrong person.

Interesting that you included it in your girlfriend's description on the other thread, then.
https://forums.studentdoctor.net/th...l-school-acceptance-and-consider-dos.1183044/

it's relevant in that discussion bc it affects the chances of acceptance/interviews significantly and i'd be foolish to pretend otherwise. In my case, the answer to your question has no purpose in this discussion.

 

[gyngyn]

It's a more often than not trend. Do you really think that majority of them are extraordinary applicants rather than URMs hand-picked for their race in the name of equal representation? Look at the african-american vs caucasian applicants AA applicants with way lower stats have way higher acceptance chances. That's way more likely than extraordinary applicants.


it's relevant in that discussion bc it affects the chances of acceptance/interviews significantly and i'd be foolish to pretend otherwise. In my case, the answer to your question has no purpose in this discussion.

It seems that you are quite bitter.
Having seen the CA applicant pool in the years that you applied, I can assure you that those accepted were extraordinary whether or not they they came from under-represented groups. Most of California's applicants of any stripe have to leave the state to go to medical school. It doesn't mean that they are unworthy, just that there were insufficient IS spots.

Blaming the relatively few UiM matriculants for your lack of success is not justifiable, especially when you applied as UiM yourself.

 

[Aggie95]

I'm a third year at UCD and although I interned at the conference last year, I've never actually attended besides that lol.

Sent from my XT1063 using SDN mobile app

 

[GrapesofRath]

It's a more often than not trend. Do you really think that majority of them are extraordinary applicants rather than URMs hand-picked for their race in the name of equal representation? Look at the african-american vs caucasian applicants AA applicants with way lower stats have way higher acceptance chances. That's way more likely than extraordinary applicants.

.

I am not a supporter of affirmative action and how race is used in admission and even having said that I'll be the first person to tell you the idea that "URMs are the only ones occupying the acceptances with lower stats" is laughable to the point of absurdity.

Spend some time educating yourself; Mdapplicants has hundreds of successful applicants to UC schools with <3.5-3.6 GPAs and/or <32 MCAT scores white as chalk. Likewise, there are URMs with 3.8/34+s from CA every year applying. I suggest you spend sometime looking at them and realizing the types of applicants California has to choose from at all stat ranges and how theyre willingness to take "chances" on lower stat applicants exceeds many many higher end schools in the US.

 

[Goro]

Yup, I'm getting a massive whiff of:

I'm thinking this is mrh account #57.