What is the biggest flaw in med admissions process, and how would you change it?

[hubriz]

Seriously. You work hard on your ECs/applications- the least they could do was read 'em.

It's fine not to remember every detail (who would?), but at least have a superficial understanding of an applicants story.

I don't have thin-skin or anything, but once an interviewer asked me if I had any experience in research. I was like, yeah, 10 of my ECs were all research... I'm a non-trad postdoc. It's all I've done for the past decade.

Ha-

I had an interviewer ask me primarily trivial questions related to my high school years and family. I'm a 31-year old war veteran with a PhD 13 years removed from highschool and my family- I still don't know what she was looking for. It was a strange interview and the only one I had at this school.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Ismet]

I was under the impression that the poster you quoted was referring to cadavers and one specifically designated for use in an academic environment. If so, why would HIPAA apply? Even if HIPAA did apply, wouldn't there be waiver issues that would preclude litigation against the school?

HIPAA still applies to deceased individuals. We're not told their names, but we are told their gender (obv), age, and cause of death.

 

[mcloaf]

Seriously, wtf is with that? Do all the schools think that we idiotic premeds will somehow break their nifty contraptions?

And not even allowing you to WALK THROUGH the anatomy labs? Oh, sorry. I forgot we might break the sterile field.

Those dummies can be pretty damn expensive. While you might not be the guy to break one, considering the number of terrified, stressed out, and possibly already clumsy premeds I have no doubt that they would get broken eventually. I'm not sure the sim center budget includes a line for "stuff broken while impressing premeds, half of whom were later rejected anyway." I heard one story last year about a girl who fainted during an interview day tour and fell on a Da Vinci.

As for the anatomy labs, I wouldn't worry about it too much. I know it seems like a cool thing to see, but most of them look the same anyway, and I doubt (?) you're going to make a decision about which school you like more based on what the lab looks like. If there's nothing going on in there, it's just going to be a boring, cold room with a bunch of tables covered in sheets/plastic. Schools take professionalism with their body donors very seriously, and having that many relatively unvetted people wander through gawking at the cadavers probably makes a lot of anatomy lab faculty pretty uncomfortable. Again, you probably wouldn't do anything wrong, but you have to plan for the lowest common denominator and the worst case scenario. All that said, there definitely are some schools that let you go through the anatomy labs and watch the students at work, which I thought was pretty fun when I was interviewing.

 

[circulus vitios]

Make the admissions process more upfront: extracurricular activities are clearly a check box activity, so all schools should list which ECs they want, with exact hour requirements. More hours does not equal a better chance of admission. Remove the psych/soc section from the 2015 MCAT and fire everyone behind its creation. MSAR should be free, bundled with your first AAMC primary application. AAMC should disallow schools from silently rejecting applicants.

 

[nemo123]

The opaqueness of the process.

 

[circulus vitios]

It's technically against HIPAA for non-students to be in there. But tours are allowed to go through ours except on days where they're doing the more...gruesome...procedures.

And honestly, the anatomy lab isn't a big deal. When I was interviewing, I thought the same thing, that I was disappointed in schools that didn't show the anatomy lab. But we spent 7 weeks in the lab at the beginning of 1st year and never set foot in it again, so it's not really a priority in choosing a school.

Are you sure it's not a school-specific policy? A few schools did anatomy lab tours with the cadavers on the dissection table, uncovered.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

For most schools I interviewed at, we walked through the anatomy lab during the tour regardless of what was going on there at the time. I saw exposed cadavers being dissected during multiple tours.

Wow. That is horrible. I guess it was just my interview dates.

 

[Patassa]

I wasn't trying to, I thought I brought up a great point.

Unless you're ready to challenge affirmative action at the supreme court level, this isn't going to go anywhere.

 

[Patassa]

Wow. That is horrible. I guess it was just my interview dates.

What's horrible about it?

 

[LizzyM]

I would love to see application fees raised to something ridiculous like $500 with a generous "free" secondary to any 4 schools. I'd love to see applications to my school cut to 700 from 7,000. I'd love to interview everyone who applies and make offers to more than half of them (maybe even 90%). If everyone could be more mindful of where they direct their applications, and if you knew that the pool of applicants was relatively small meaning that you were likely to get an interview and if you knew that if you attended an interview your likelihood of getting admitted was greater than 50-50, then this whole process would be much more manageable.

A few comments on others' wish lists:

I love the idea of providing the MSAR bundled with the first MCAT. Might be "too late" for some people but it is a start.

The closed file application spares you a bias based on your grades, scores, and experiences that might introduce a bias such as involvement in a political or religious cause. It also measures how well you can develop a rapport with someone who is a relative stranger.

Depending on where you are located, it is possible to apply only to schools where you are within driving (or bus/Amtrak) distance as a way to save money. I recall some years ago that was the strategy of a former hairdresser in Philly (great location for this strategy) who ended up in New Haven.

 

[C.glabrata123]

The closed file application spares you a bias based on your grades, scores, and experiences that might introduce a bias such as involvement in a political or religious cause. It also measures how well you can develop a rapport with someone who is a relative stranger.

This. One of my interviews was pointless because of its open-file nature. My interviewer, having looked at my application, told me he assumed I'd already been accepted elsewhere and continued to wonder the entire interview why I was still interviewing. Nothing I said could sway him because he'd already made up his mind about me. It seems preferable for most of us to be able to lead more of the conversation without any predetermined bias.

 

[Ismet]

Are you sure it's not a school-specific policy? A few schools did anatomy lab tours with the cadavers on the dissection table, uncovered.

Pretty sure the HIPAA thing covers cadavers everywhere, but I believe some schools are more lenient than others about who they include in the group of people using them for education. Applicants can see the cadavers on tours at my school as well, but I think the schools that don't allow applicants in do so under the premise of HIPAA.

 

[C.glabrata123]

Pretty sure the HIPAA thing covers cadavers everywhere, but I believe some schools are more lenient than others about who they include in the group of people using them for education. Applicants can see the cadavers on tours at my school as well, but I think the schools that don't allow applicants in do so under the premise of HIPAA.

On my first interview/tour we went into the anatomy lab where 18 cadavers were being actively dissected. On another tour we weren't even allowed to go into the anatomy lab.

 

[BlackBox]

Many schools have a process where interviewers are not given ANY information about the candidate prior to the interview. This is down under the philosophy that an interviewer should not have any preconceived notions about a candidate prior to the meeting. In many schools these interviewers are not members of the adcom and simply write a report that is added to your file.

Most premeds are very surprised to hear of the huge variation across adcoms of how applicants are reviewed and decided. The process and workflow of applications is still very much a different "black box" within each school.

I see what ya did there!

I completely agree on the idea of an interviewer coming in without a bias (closed file kinda thing), but to openly announce that they didn't read my application due to time is a bit different. This leaves me with the impression that they were meant to read it, but didn't. If time is this short, then I would concur with the posters above that ADCOMS should be more selective on who they interview, thereby increasing the time per applicant.

In the end, I suppose that the ADCOMS do their best to adjust the process to select those students they think will best enhance the program/field.

 

[BlackBox]

Depending on where you are located, it is possible to apply only to schools where you are within driving (or bus/Amtrak) distance as a way to save money. I recall some years ago that was the strategy of a former hairdresser in Philly (great location for this strategy) who ended up in New Haven.

Funny you should mention this. I thought that as a Philly resident I would have the upper hand with these Philadelphia schools- there's so many, right? Wrong (at least in my case).

Nearly every ii came from out of state. Go figure.

 

[baconshrimps]

I would love to see application fees raised to something ridiculous like $500 with a generous "free" secondary to any 4 schools. I'd love to see applications to my school cut to 700 from 7,000. I'd love to interview everyone who applies and make offers to more than half of them (maybe even 90%). If everyone could be more mindful of where they direct their applications, and if you knew that the pool of applicants was relatively small meaning that you were likely to get an interview and if you knew that if you attended an interview your likelihood of getting admitted was greater than 50-50, then this whole process would be much more manageable.

A few comments on others' wish lists:

I love the idea of providing the MSAR bundled with the first MCAT. Might be "too late" for some people but it is a start.

The closed file application spares you a bias based on your grades, scores, and experiences that might introduce a bias such as involvement in a political or religious cause. It also measures how well you can develop a rapport with someone who is a relative stranger.

Depending on where you are located, it is possible to apply only to schools where you are within driving (or bus/Amtrak) distance as a way to save money. I recall some years ago that was the strategy of a former hairdresser in Philly (great location for this strategy) who ended up in New Haven.

I decimated my credit by maxing out my credit cards in order to apply to medical school. If it meant $500/app, but being guaranteed an interview, I'd annihilate my credit all over again too. Can't put a price on your dreams.

 

[Planes2Doc]

As others have pointed out earlier in the thread, I think one of the biggest issues facing the medical school admissions process today is the massive EC arms race. Pre-meds are putting on a huge facade, which is usually not representative of their true selves to ADCOMs. I think that it has bred a type of pre-med that is achieving paradoxical effects in the admissions process.

This is the "ZERO to Mother Teresa" applicant. These are people who never volunteered before becoming pre-med, but once they are pre-med, they suddenly start doing a long laundry-list of EC activities. So when these people are being interviewed, they come off as these highly attractive altruistic pre-meds who will definitely end up serving the underserved. How can ADCOMs afford to not accept them?!

Well think about it, if you have a pre-med who volunteers at 6 different organizations, does research, has a 36+ MCAT score, and close to a 4.0 GPA, don't you think that they would also succeed in medical school? In fact, I think that these are the people who will end up gunning for the highly coveted ROAD specialties once they are in medical school. So, the bleeding heart applicant who you thought would go into primary care and help the underserved will be gunning for dermatology or radiology once they are able to drop the facade. They also likely will not end up ever helping the underserved as physicians.

Now I know @NickNaylor makes a good point that he started doing activities for the purpose of application padding, but ended up enjoying them later. That's a very valid point, and there are definitely some people who will go into an activity dreading it, but loving it later. This is what my Rabbi also said when I talked about how troubled I was regarding this whole dog and pony show. But at the same time, essentially forcing pre-meds to do activities they don't want might force them to never do these things again. Here's something many of you might not expect. I currently volunteer 2 hours per week at a medical related thing on weekends (when possible). There are no pre-meds there, and thus I am treated with lots of respect and am never expected to do scut work. I think that allowing people to get involved in volunteer work later on might be more beneficial, as they will likely do it because they want to, and enjoy it much more. There's a reason why pre-meds have such a horrific reputation in the volunteer world. You'd think that they'd be considered these amazing individuals, but it couldn't be further from the truth. So if ADCOMs want medical students to one day help the underserved and other needy populations, maybe they shouldn't force them to do something during a very stressful time, where they ended up getting treated by garbage at 9/10 volunteer sites (assuming these are places where pre-meds typically go to).

So how would I solve this? I would start by grilling "ZERO to Mother Teresa" applicants when they apply. Ask the tough questions, particularly why they went into such and such activities. I mean if they are devoting pretty much their entire undergrad to doing these things, there's obviously a good reason (that doesn't involve box-checking) as to why they are doing them.

Another way to solve the EC arms race is posing an interesting challenge for ADCOMs. What I want you to do is pick 20 applicants who have what you think are the most "amazing" ECs, and already committed to your school. After one month of committing, I want you to call their volunteer sites, and see if they are either still volunteering, or have an upcoming quit date. I'm guessing that people who were doing these things because they wanted to would continue to do the activities up until matriculation. Another fun thing to do is pick the applicants from a given year who had the most "amazing" ECs, and see where they end up matching four years later. See who ended up helping the underserved like they promised, and who ended up going into ROAD specialties.

Finally, if there was some oversight over volunteering and other ECs, you would have many changes take place. Currently, volunteering is like Vegas, minus the fun. What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, and the same with volunteering. ADCOMs will never know what actually happened (unless they personally know the volunteer coordinator or other staff person). Thus, a pre-med who was an honorary part of the hospital team can have the same story as someone who spent their volunteer shifts studying or playing with their phones. If volunteering was finally made a real requirement, then hours and perhaps the quality of work can be tracked. Since embellishing and faking hours would become difficult, we'd see a huge decline in the number of activities being undertaken and hours being done. Maybe at this point we can see peoples' true intentions.

As you can see, the big dog and pony show has gotten a little out of hand. It's gotten to the point where it has paradoxical effects. ADCOMs are getting wowed by pre-meds with long laundry-lists of ECs, yet these people never end up doing what they promised years later. It's gotten to the point where it's very difficult to fix, but I think that it will be possible. It will just take a lot of work, and a change of attitude admitting that this aspect of the process is very flawed. I think it definitely needs to be fixed, since you have people spending so much of what's supposed to be the best time of their lives doing things they don't want to do. I think that this can ultimately lead to burnout once they become medical students. As I mentioned before, people don't like being forced to do things you don't want to do. Unless you're one of the people who had the @NickNaylor mentality with ECs, then I don't think that they would ever want to pursue them again once they drop the whole facade. I think that @circulus vitios and @notbobtrustme can agree with these sentiments.

Another thing I want to add is what's the whole obsession with showing the anatomy lab? Anatomy was HELL. It was the worst class imaginable. I think that 95% of medical students will dread it. So what does it matter what the room looks like? You'll force yourself to be there, but never come back once anatomy is over.

 

[Patros]

I would love to see application fees raised to something ridiculous like $500 with a generous "free" secondary to any 4 schools. I'd love to see applications to my school cut to 700 from 7,000. I'd love to interview everyone who applies and make offers to more than half of them (maybe even 90%). If everyone could be more mindful of where they direct their applications, and if you knew that the pool of applicants was relatively small meaning that you were likely to get an interview and if you knew that if you attended an interview your likelihood of getting admitted was greater than 50-50, then this whole process would be much more manageable.

I really like this idea and I was musing over something similar myself. Instead of Paying a flat $135 and $35 for each additional school (I might have forgotten the exact numbers), just pay a small price for a few applications and a massive fee for additional ones. So let's say, pay $300 for 6, maybe 7 schools, then $200 for each additional school. Few people would bother submitting more than 10 primaries, and people would think very carefully about which schools they value the most. This would drastically lower the total applications to places like Hopkins and WashU to about 2000-3000. Places like Georgetown and BU should also drop drastically from 10k+ to maybe 3-4k. If each school receives only 2000-3000 applications, then the average applicant will have a 25-40% chance at an interview.

But let's face it, this will never happen. I am sure the AMCAS is making fat stacks from desperate premeds submitting dozens of apps, and admissions offices are also making boat-loads from charging $100-a-pop to 5000+ applicants. Those marble floors don't pay for themselves.

 

[gobears2009]

I really like this idea and I was musing over something similar myself. Instead of Paying a flat $135 and $35 for each additional school (I might have forgotten the exact numbers), just pay a small price for a few applications and a massive fee for additional ones. So let's say, pay $300 for 6, maybe 7 schools, then $200 for each additional school. Few people would bother submitting more than 10 primaries, and people would think very carefully about which schools they value the most. This would drastically lower the total applications to places like Hopkins and WashU to about 2000-3000. Places like Georgetown and BU should also drop drastically from 10k+ to maybe 3-4k. If each school receives only 2000-3000 applications, then the average applicant will have a 25-40% chance at an interview.

But let's face it, this will never happen. I am sure the AMCAS is making fat stacks from desperate premeds submitting dozens of apps, and admissions offices are also making boat-loads from charging $100-a-pop to 5000+ applicants. Those marble floors don't pay for themselves.

Wouldn't this benefit the rich and privileged, who may have parents willing to pay anything to get their kids into med school? Sure, it may price out the middle class, but it would disproportionately reward the well-off. There would need to be a hard limit of some kind.

 

[Chipster.]

Ha-

I had an interviewer ask me primarily trivial questions related to my high school years and family. I'm a 31-year old war veteran with a PhD 13 years removed from highschool and my family- I still don't know what she was looking for. It was a strange interview and the only one I had at this school.

Based on your description I think we interviewed together at BU...

 

[masaraksh]

Wouldn't this benefit the rich and privileged, who may have parents willing to pay anything to get their kids into med school? Sure, it may price out the middle class, but it would disproportionately reward the well-off. There would need to be a hard limit of some kind.

Agreed. The applicants coming from wealthy families will still be able to just pay for however many applications. Hell, I would probably save as much as I could and sell things to be able to send in a couple more apps.

A hard limit is good. Maybe, this idea could be over-engineered in a way so that the number of schools you can apply to depends on your MCAT/GPA. So like, if you have 3.95+,38+ you're limited to 6 schools. If you have more middling stats, you can apply to more (since presumably it may be harder for you to get in). Just a crazy thought.

 

[LizzyM]

Wouldn't this benefit the rich and privileged, who may have parents willing to pay anything to get their kids into med school? Sure, it may price out the middle class, but it would disproportionately reward the well-off. There would need to be a hard limit of some kind.

If you really wanted to pay anything to get into a medical school, you'd be better off cutting a check for $10,000 to one medical school, as a donation, than to paying a $500 application fee to each of 20 schools.

 

[rainbow girl]

It's the huge amount of money applicants have to spend, from primary, secondary to interview. I would like to see schools publish a cut-off GPA and mcat for their schools, so less primary. More screening before secondary invitation.

Wouldn't this benefit the rich and privileged, who may have parents willing to pay anything to get their kids into med school? Sure, it may price out the middle class, but it would disproportionately reward the well-off. There would need to be a hard limit of some kind.

Agree with this. Increasing the fees will only hurt those without big money

 

[rainbow girl]

If you really wanted to pay anything to get into a medical school, you'd be better off cutting a check for $10,000 to one medical school, as a donation, than to paying a $500 application fee to each of 20 schools.

Honest and silly question, can that amount really work?

 

[LizzyM]

Honest and silly question, can that amount really work?

Yes, if made annually from the time the child begins pre-school.

 

[gumdrops]

As others have pointed out earlier in the thread, I think one of the biggest issues facing the medical school admissions process today is the massive EC arms race. Pre-meds are putting on a huge facade, which is usually not representative of their true selves to ADCOMs. I think that it has bred a type of pre-med that is achieving paradoxical effects in the admissions process.

This is the "ZERO to Mother Teresa" applicant. These are people who never volunteered before becoming pre-med, but once they are pre-med, they suddenly start doing a long laundry-list of EC activities. So when these people are being interviewed, they come off as these highly attractive altruistic pre-meds who will definitely end up serving the underserved. How can ADCOMs afford to not accept them?!

Well think about it, if you have a pre-med who volunteers at 6 different organizations, does research, has a 36+ MCAT score, and close to a 4.0 GPA, don't you think that they would also succeed in medical school? In fact, I think that these are the people who will end up gunning for the highly coveted ROAD specialties once they are in medical school. So, the bleeding heart applicant who you thought would go into primary care and help the underserved will be gunning for dermatology or radiology once they are able to drop the facade. They also likely will not end up ever helping the underserved as physicians.

Now I know @NickNaylor makes a good point that he started doing activities for the purpose of application padding, but ended up enjoying them later. That's a very valid point, and there are definitely some people who will go into an activity dreading it, but loving it later. This is what my Rabbi also said when I talked about how troubled I was regarding this whole dog and pony show. But at the same time, essentially forcing pre-meds to do activities they don't want might force them to never do these things again. Here's something many of you might not expect. I currently volunteer 2 hours per week at a medical related thing on weekends (when possible). There are no pre-meds there, and thus I am treated with lots of respect and am never expected to do scut work. I think that allowing people to get involved in volunteer work later on might be more beneficial, as they will likely do it because they want to, and enjoy it much more. There's a reason why pre-meds have such a horrific reputation in the volunteer world. You'd think that they'd be considered these amazing individuals, but it couldn't be further from the truth. So if ADCOMs want medical students to one day help the underserved and other needy populations, maybe they shouldn't force them to do something during a very stressful time, where they ended up getting treated by garbage at 9/10 volunteer sites (assuming these are places where pre-meds typically go to).

So how would I solve this? I would start by grilling "ZERO to Mother Teresa" applicants when they apply. Ask the tough questions, particularly why they went into such and such activities. I mean if they are devoting pretty much their entire undergrad to doing these things, there's obviously a good reason (that doesn't involve box-checking) as to why they are doing them.

Another way to solve the EC arms race is posing an interesting challenge for ADCOMs. What I want you to do is pick 20 applicants who have what you think are the most "amazing" ECs, and already committed to your school. After one month of committing, I want you to call their volunteer sites, and see if they are either still volunteering, or have an upcoming quit date. I'm guessing that people who were doing these things because they wanted to would continue to do the activities up until matriculation. Another fun thing to do is pick the applicants from a given year who had the most "amazing" ECs, and see where they end up matching four years later. See who ended up helping the underserved like they promised, and who ended up going into ROAD specialties.

Finally, if there was some oversight over volunteering and other ECs, you would have many changes take place. Currently, volunteering is like Vegas, minus the fun. What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, and the same with volunteering. ADCOMs will never know what actually happened (unless they personally know the volunteer coordinator or other staff person). Thus, a pre-med who was an honorary part of the hospital team can have the same story as someone who spent their volunteer shifts studying or playing with their phones. If volunteering was finally made a real requirement, then hours and perhaps the quality of work can be tracked. Since embellishing and faking hours would become difficult, we'd see a huge decline in the number of activities being undertaken and hours being done. Maybe at this point we can see peoples' true intentions.

As you can see, the big dog and pony show has gotten a little out of hand. It's gotten to the point where it has paradoxical effects. ADCOMs are getting wowed by pre-meds with long laundry-lists of ECs, yet these people never end up doing what they promised years later. It's gotten to the point where it's very difficult to fix, but I think that it will be possible. It will just take a lot of work, and a change of attitude admitting that this aspect of the process is very flawed. I think it definitely needs to be fixed, since you have people spending so much of what's supposed to be the best time of their lives doing things they don't want to do. I think that this can ultimately lead to burnout once they become medical students. As I mentioned before, people don't like being forced to do things you don't want to do. Unless you're one of the people who had the @NickNaylor mentality with ECs, then I don't think that they would ever want to pursue them again once they drop the whole facade. I think that @circulus vitios and @notbobtrustme can agree with these sentiments.

Another thing I want to add is what's the whole obsession with showing the anatomy lab? Anatomy was HELL. It was the worst class imaginable. I think that 95% of medical students will dread it. So what does it matter what the room looks like? You'll force yourself to be there, but never come back once anatomy is over.

Wall. of. text. Saw "dog and pony show" and "EC arms race" and agree though.

 

[Patros]

Wouldn't this benefit the rich and privileged, who may have parents willing to pay anything to get their kids into med school? Sure, it may price out the middle class, but it would disproportionately reward the well-off. There would need to be a hard limit of some kind.

What you're saying is true, rich applicants will get an advantage. However, I am not sure if there is any fee-based system where having more money isn't going to help. This applies to the current system too; I broke my wallet applying to 16 schools and was forced to withdraw from some interviews for budget reasons. But if I could afford it, I would have applied to >30 and gone to every interview. Being rich means access to private tutoring through high school and college, going to elite private schools/colleges, having connections in high places, etc etc. I was hesitant to suggest a hard cap because it would hurt those whose stats were not as good and would need to apply to more schools. What I suggested helps those with high grades (>3.8, >34) because such folks wouldn't need to apply to more than 6.

If you really want to reduce the effect of money on applications, then perhaps you could make time the rate-limiting factor. So let's say you get 6 primary applications for a flat rate from June to October, then 2 more from October to January, then 2 more post-January. Of course, you would have to restructure the way waitlists and interview scheduling is handled.

 

[Mad Jack]

Every medical school should have a background check that ensures the applicant is not streampaw. Other than that I wouldn't change anything, the system is fair enough and any big changes would no doubt have unintended consequences.

 

[hubriz]

Based on your description I think we interviewed together at BU...

cool. I wonder if we shared the same interviewer.

 

[gobears2009]

If you really want to reduce the effect of money on applications, then perhaps you could make time the rate-limiting factor. So let's say you get 6 primary applications for a flat rate from June to October, then 2 more from October to January, then 2 more post-January. Of course, you would have to restructure the way waitlists and interview scheduling is handled.

You're right, that would require the most energy. pleasedonthurtme

 

[plumazul]

If you really wanted to pay anything to get into a medical school, you'd be better off cutting a check for $10,000 to one medical school, as a donation, than to paying a $500 application fee to each of 20 schools.

Any revisions to the current system that involves increasing fees would be a giant step backwards. You can certainly limit the number of schools without making the system even more unfair.

I would love to see application fees raised to something ridiculous like $500 with a generous "free" secondary to any 4 schools. I'd love to see applications to my school cut to 700 from 7,000. I'd love to interview everyone who applies and make offers to more than half of them (maybe even 90%).

For secondary applications, your school could do this any time they want. With only 700 sec. applications, you should also be able to interview them all. Your school is also free to increase seats.

If everyone could be more mindful of where they direct their applications,

The problem here is this sounds very much like "everyone should know their place". In some parts of the world this might seem reasonable, but that's not the tradition in America. We are a nation of dreamers. I personally think this is a good thing.

and if you knew that the pool of applicants was relatively small meaning that you were likely to get an interview and if you knew that if you attended an interview your likelihood of getting admitted was greater than 50-50, then this whole process would be much more manageable.

Yes. Limit your secondaries. This should accomplish your goal.

A few comments on others' wish lists:

I love the idea of providing the MSAR bundled with the first MCAT. Might be "too late" for some people but it is a start.

Don't know what you mean by "too late". The MSAR is only useful if you have a score, otherwise you're just dealing with hypotheticals. The MSAR should be included with the MCAT package.

The closed file application spares you a bias based on your grades, scores, and experiences that might introduce a bias such as involvement in a political or religious cause. It also measures how well you can develop a rapport with someone who is a relative stranger.

Depending on where you are located, it is possible to apply only to schools where you are within driving (or bus/Amtrak) distance as a way to save money. I recall some years ago that was the strategy of a former hairdresser in Philly (great location for this strategy) who ended up in New Haven.

Proximity works fine for some applicants in some parts of the country, but it's a big country.

 

[Aerus]

Make the admissions process more upfront: extracurricular activities are clearly a check box activity, so all schools should list which ECs they want, with exact hour requirements. More hours does not equal a better chance of admission. Remove the psych/soc section from the 2015 MCAT and fire everyone behind its creation. MSAR should be free, bundled with your first AAMC primary application. AAMC should disallow schools from silently rejecting applicants.

I like everything except removing sociology and psychology. It wouldn't hurt premeds to be less ignorant about society and people.

 

[487806]

I like everything except removing sociology and psychology. It wouldn't hurt premeds to be less ignorant about society and people.

There's no reason for that to be tested on the MCAT (and making it longer than needed). Make them as required prereqs? Fine. But extending the MCAT by adding more sections? No thanks.

 

[Aerus]

There's no reason for that to be tested on the MCAT (and making it longer than needed). Make them as required prereqs? Fine. But extending the MCAT by adding more sections? No thanks.

True understanding comes from thinking critically about a topic. Anyone can go through soc 1 and psych 1 without really learning anything. Although, I do see your point and I would be content with them just being prereqs rather than MCAT sections.

 

[487806]

True understanding comes from thinking critically about a topic. Anyone can go through soc 1 and psych 1 without really learning anything. Although, I do see your point and I would be content with them just being prereqs rather than MCAT sections.

To be fair, a large part of VR already contains social sciences. No reason to create a separate section exclusively for that. Or keep the new sections but get rid of VR. And yes, soc 101/psych 101 are joke classes: upper level social science classes are enough to verify/show comprehension on the material.

Back on topic: pre-secondary screening should be stricter. Why waste extra money for secondaries when you know the schools will reject you?

 

[infinitessimal]

About ECs - wouldn't it be more meaningful, and thus more preferable by adcoms, to see someone start out with some menial volunteer tasks at one hospital and expand the position over the years, develop relationships with a few of the physicians there, do research for one of them? I mean as opposed to having 6 "amazing" ECs with 500 hours each or however much you crazy kids here do, with not much to show for it other than the application? That way, even though people might start out there simply for the requirement, they will inevitably be exposed to the medical world, learn, and grow as a person. Or at least that would be the idea.

 

[circulus vitios]

What's wrong with a little psych? #socialsciencesmajor

Nothing at all, but I think its intended purpose -- to make pre-meds more socially conscious -- is completely ridiculous. If you're out of touch with reality, 6 credit hours of soc/psych and a multiple choice exam subsection aren't going to change your views.

 

[pyrrion89]

Perhaps not the biggest flaw, but I wish schools would release wait-list and rejection news at the same time they release acceptances. Many schools release acceptances before rejections and waitlists, while other schools stagger their acceptances, and so forth. This causes a lot of anxiety for people who do not get the acceptance news but hear from friends/online people who got accepted.

 

[TREDWISE]

Nothing at all, but I think its intended purpose -- to make pre-meds more socially conscious -- is completely ridiculous. If you're out of touch with reality, 6 credit hours of soc/psych and a multiple choice exam subsection aren't going to change your views.

I personally think that one class can change your perspective on social matters as long as you pick the right one.

 

[LizzyM]

Don't know what you mean by "too late". The MSAR is only useful if you have a score, otherwise you're just dealing with hypotheticals. The MSAR should be included with the MCAT package.

The MSAR also has valuable information about course requirements and other information that can be valuable starting in year one.

 

[touchpause13]

Every medical school should have a background check that ensures the applicant is not streampaw. Other than that I wouldn't change anything, the system is fair enough and any big changes would no doubt have unintended consequences.

Yessss

 

[chizledfrmstone]

If you really wanted to pay anything to get into a medical school, you'd be better off cutting a check for $10,000 to one medical school, as a donation, than to paying a $500 application fee to each of 20 schools.

Would a donation of this size even be noticed? With the amount of money most medical schools make I would think something like $100,000+ would be necessary (with grades around the avg).

 

[dbeast]

There was one school where we purposely not shown the anatomy lab. The way one student guide explained the decision (unsure if it was the school's decision or hers) was that it would be considered disrespectful to the cadavers. She said that the cadavers were donated for the medical students' education, not to be used as a selling point of the school to applicants. If dissections are going on during the time of the tour, I can understand and respect this logic.

That's nice. We don't let tours into ours because people were stealing kidneys.

[Granted, this was in the 1990's but security has been understandably tight ever since]

 

[baconshrimps]

That's nice. We don't let tours into ours because people were stealing kidneys.

[Granted, this was in the 1990's but security has been understandably tight ever since]

I interviewed at a program that doesn't actually have dissections.
They have pre-dissected cadavers and a faculty member just shows you (med student) the organs and their placement.
The students do not dissect their own cadavers.
They were somewhat hesistant to show us this. Against their better judgement, they did. I will not be matriculating.

 

[dbeast]

I interviewed at a program that doesn't actually have dissections.
They have pre-dissected cadavers and a faculty member just shows you (med student) the organs and their placement.
The students do not dissect their own cadavers.
They were somewhat hesistant to show us this. Against their better judgement, they did. I will not be matriculating.

This shouldn't be your deciding factor for selecting a medical school. Anatomy lab, while important, is a very small part of the big picture. I understand if there were other things you didn't like about that program though.

 

[Ismet]

I interviewed at a program that doesn't actually have dissections.
They have pre-dissected cadavers and a faculty member just shows you (med student) the organs and their placement.
The students do not dissect their own cadavers.
They were somewhat hesistant to show us this. Against their better judgement, they did. I will not be matriculating.

So much time is wasted in the actual dissection, plus there were so many instances where we dissected something incorrectly or cut a nerve or something that it would actually be nice to have faculty do the dissections. The majority of the learning is done once the dissection is complete and you're just looking at the structures. I don't see that much of a flaw in that school's system.

 

[baconshrimps]

So much time is wasted in the actual dissection, plus there were so many instances where we dissected something incorrectly or cut a nerve or something that it would actually be nice to have faculty do the dissections. The majority of the learning is done once the dissection is complete and you're just looking at the structures. I don't see that much of a flaw in that school's system.

I'm a very tactile learner, and the cadaver dissection is almost a rite of passage in medical education in America it seems. I would not want to miss out on that. I may want to go into surgery, and I'd prefer to be able to do a dissection. Otherwise I might as well be learning on models and not human bodies.

 

[Spinach Dip]

So much time is wasted in the actual dissection

And breathing those fumes. Whew!

With the possibilities today, why not just do it all on computer?

 

[seeinghowitgoes]

I'm a very tactile learner, and the cadaver dissection is almost a rite of passage in medical education in America it seems. I would not want to miss out on that. I may want to go into surgery, and I'd prefer to be able to do a dissection. Otherwise I might as well be learning on models and not human bodies.

At the school at which I'll be matriculating I know anybody who wants to do dissections can in addition to the required prosection-based class (somebody has to do the dissections at some point, after all). I also agree with @Ismet - at least in theory at this point, I think it has the potential to be a positive.

 

[Microglia]

If you really wanted to pay anything to get into a medical school, you'd be better off cutting a check for $10,000 to one medical school, as a donation, than to paying a $500 application fee to each of 20 schools.

Is $10,000 really enough to bribe a med school (given decent stats, ECs, etc)? I've always wondered how dirty this process could get. It makes me wonder what the prevalence is of this in the avg med school class.