Why didn't you match for Texas Schools

BU Medical Sciences
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
T

therealadvisor

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2007
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
TMDSAS Match
Applications Offers
African Americans ↑5% N/A
Hispanic ↑7% ↓4%
Asian ↑2% ↓4%
Caucasian ↑4% ↓13%
For the match
4083 applicants ↑3.9% from last year
2222 interviews (54%)
1062 matches (does not include out of state, joint degree programs, or special programs)
Accepted with match 183 (17%)
Pre match offers 879 (83%)
477 with multiple offers (54%)
402 with only one offer (46%)
600 ranked offer school number 1 (68%)
279 ranked another school higher (32%)
21 matched to higher ranked school (7.5%)

Why did so few people match?
The Texas medical schools stupidly assumed that some students would turn down offers. What student in their right mind would turn down a medical school offer? However, because a lot of students did apply to out of state medical schools, do expect to see some movement off of wait lists (must be done by June 15).



Technically, if you interviewed at a school you ARE on the waitlist. Each medical school has an approximation of how many student could clear and WILL narrow down the waitlist and notify all students who interviewed. DO NOT bother the medical schools by constantly calling. TMDSAS is regulating this matter and all schools will have the narrowed down wait lists by mid march.

It sucks the way things went down! Good luck to all.
Members don't see this ad.
 
Thanks for posting this. What is your source?

Also, what are the first and second arrows with relation to race at the beginning?
 
One more thing. Are you sure about this stat:

4083 applicants ↑3.9% from last year
Click to expand...

It implies that there were about 3900 applicants last year which is a lot different everything else I have seen.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Ok, the formating did not hold. The arrows indicate an increase or decrease in the percentage of applicants and offers.

I am the source....
 
HOLDENc said:
Thanks for posting this. What is your source?

Also, what are the first and second arrows with relation to race at the beginning?
Click to expand...

I assume it is the percentage increase/decrease compared to last year.
 
Yes its the percentage change from the previous year. I assure you everything is correct. If you don't believe me, there is nothing I can do about it.
 
Why wouldn't I believe you? You're the source.
 
that explains a lot. thanks. its sad that i have to find out what happened by an anonymous poster on sdn and not from TMDSAS or the schools themselves.
 
wow i am 1 of 21 who matched higher than a prematch acceptance
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Did the schools seriously think that people with offers from their #3, #4, and #5 schools, for example, would decline all those and hold out hope for #1 and #2 in the match? That seems like some incredible stupidity on the part of the system designers. I agree with the OP; people are gonna hold on to a sure thing.

With that being the case, it looks like there was just NOTHING left for match-only students and for those hoping to move up their ranking ladders in the match. Damn.

On the other side, I wonder how the 600 students ranking their offer school #1 compares with previous years. That seems extremely high. And if that's the case, then the schools must be pleased on that account—cause they got the students they wanted and those students really wanted to go there.
 
drchekhov said:
Did the schools seriously think that people with offers from their #3, #4, and #5 schools, for example, would decline all those and hold out hope for #1 and #2 in the match? That seems like some incredible stupidity on the part of the system designers. I agree with the OP; people are gonna hold on to a sure thing.

With that being the case, it looks like there was just NOTHING left for match-only students and for those hoping to move up their ranking ladders in the match. Damn.

On the other side, I wonder how the 600 students ranking their offer school #1 compares with previous years. That seems extremely high. And if that's the case, then the schools must be pleased on that account—cause they got the students they wanted and those students really wanted to go there.
Click to expand...


Ranking a school that didn't offer you an acceptance pre-match higher than one you had wouldn't withdraw you from your "sure thing" if you didn't happen to match higher.
In other words, no one was refusing anything by ranking another school higher, and everyone was going to end up with 1 TX school at the end of all of this.

The only problem was that people didn't expect that there would be so few places available during the match, that's all.
 
83% pre-match offers? Pffft!

It they are goona keep this "double-match system", they need to keep pre-match numbers under 20 %.
 
therealadvisor said:
TMDSAS Match
Applications Offers
African Americans ↑5% N/A
Hispanic ↑7% ↓4%
Asian ↑2% ↓4%
Caucasian ↑4% ↓13%
For the match
4083 applicants ↑3.9% from last year
2222 interviews (54%)
1062 matches (does not include out of state, joint degree programs, or special programs)
Accepted with match 183 (17%)
Pre match offers 879 (83%)
477 with multiple offers (54%)
402 with only one offer (46%)
600 ranked offer school number 1 (68%)
279 ranked another school higher (32%)
21 matched to higher ranked school (7.5%)

Why did so few people match?
The Texas medical schools stupidly assumed that some students would turn down offers. What student in their right mind would turn down a medical school offer? However, because a lot of students did apply to out of state medical schools, do expect to see some movement off of wait lists (must be done by June 15).



Technically, if you interviewed at a school you ARE on the waitlist. Each medical school has an approximation of how many student could clear and WILL narrow down the waitlist and notify all students who interviewed. DO NOT bother the medical schools by constantly calling. TMDSAS is regulating this matter and all schools will have the narrowed down wait lists by mid march.

It sucks the way things went down! Good luck to all.
Click to expand...

wondering...does the 183 accepted with match include the 21 who matched higher? In other words were there 162 new spots like a previous poster stated.
 
therealadvisor said:
TMDSAS Match
Applications Offers
African Americans ↑5% N/A
Hispanic ↑7% ↓4%
Asian ↑2% ↓4%
Caucasian ↑4% ↓13%
For the match
4083 applicants ↑3.9% from last year
2222 interviews (54%)
1062 matches (does not include out of state, joint degree programs, or special programs)
Accepted with match 183 (17%)
Pre match offers 879 (83%)
477 with multiple offers (54%)
402 with only one offer (46%)
600 ranked offer school number 1 (68%)
279 ranked another school higher (32%)
21 matched to higher ranked school (7.5%)

Why did so few people match?
The Texas medical schools stupidly assumed that some students would turn down offers. What student in their right mind would turn down a medical school offer? However, because a lot of students did apply to out of state medical schools, do expect to see some movement off of wait lists (must be done by June 15).



Technically, if you interviewed at a school you ARE on the waitlist. Each medical school has an approximation of how many student could clear and WILL narrow down the waitlist and notify all students who interviewed. DO NOT bother the medical schools by constantly calling. TMDSAS is regulating this matter and all schools will have the narrowed down wait lists by mid march.

It sucks the way things went down! Good luck to all.
Click to expand...

Also in the racial breakdowns which column is males/females?
 
Racial percentages include both male and female. 183 people had new matches... so the 21 is NOT included in that number
 
sunnyjohn said:
83% pre-match offers? Pffft!

It they are goona keep this "double-match system", they need to keep pre-match numbers under 20 %.
Click to expand...

That wouldn't have helped anybody, for the reason that baylormed stated below. It only would have kept more people in suspense for longer.

baylormed said:
Ranking a school that didn't offer you an acceptance pre-match higher than one you had wouldn't withdraw you from your "sure thing" if you didn't happen to match higher.
In other words, no one was refusing anything by ranking another school higher, and everyone was going to end up with 1 TX school at the end of all of this.

The only problem was that people didn't expect that there would be so few places available during the match, that's all.
Click to expand...
 
while i believe it as much as anything I read on here it seems strange that EVERY racial category had %offers go down. especially hard if you're white!
 
Didn't everyone with more than one pre-match offer drop down to one school at the match. So basically there isn't a difference in how it went down this year and last except they told a lot of people early if they wanted them. Didn't they fill up all their seats? Shouldn't wait lists move the same as last year?
 
TexasFool said:
Didn't everyone with more than one pre-match offer drop down to one school at the match. So basically there isn't a difference in how it went down this year and last except they told a lot of people early if they wanted them. Didn't they fill up all their seats? Shouldn't wait lists move the same as last year?
Click to expand...

The same or possibly better, with more people declining acceptances later due to Baylor slowness.

The only difference this year was the expectations:matchspots ratio.
 
Pemberley said:
The same or possibly better, with more people declining acceptances later due to Baylor slowness.

The only difference this year was the expectations:matchspots ratio.
Click to expand...

And the fact that many ppl interviewed FOR THE WAITLIST, which they were assured was not the case! :mad:
 
baylormed said:
Ranking a school that didn't offer you an acceptance pre-match higher than one you had wouldn't withdraw you from your "sure thing" if you didn't happen to match higher.
In other words, no one was refusing anything by ranking another school higher, and everyone was going to end up with 1 TX school at the end of all of this.

The only problem was that people didn't expect that there would be so few places available during the match, that's all.
Click to expand...

To clarify, that's not what I was implying. I was responding to the OP's statement that:

"The Texas medical schools stupidly assumed that some students would turn down offers. What student in their right mind would turn down a medical school offer?"

If I'm understaing TRA correctly, what the system-designers may have been thinking was that a student who pre-matched to only their #4 would have preferred to decline and hope for a match to #1, 2 or 3, or bank on OOS. (Which would have been lunacy on the part of an applicant, and thus ultimately proves the lunacy of the system-designers.) Since it seems like most people held onto one of/their only pre-match, this clogged up the whole system. This would have led to the in-demand schools (UTH and UTSW by most accounts) to have most of their classes filled before the match. Applicants who pre-matched into a lower choice then had very little chance to match into a higher ranking. And those lower-choice pre-matchers then effectively blocked out everyone else from the less in-demand schools. See where I'm going?

The more I think about it, the system worked relatively well for what it was designed on the schools' side: to give them an eariler at top students and to entice them to stay in-state. Now the question is, will those students actually stay? I agree with other in thinking that the small silver lining to the system seems to be that there may be MORE waitllist movement this year. In previous years, a matched applicant was less likely to go OOS because many top-tier applicants already had OOS offers and had kicked Texas to the curb. (I had friends who did that.) This year, top-tier pre-matchers as a group seem more likely to go OOS; they're just sitting on a Texas acceptance as a back-up. And so more spots will open this year as these folks abdicate to go OOS; those decisions will then trickle down as other students move up their ranking ladders.

The big unknown, however is how waitlists are being handled this year as opposed to last—like whether schools are using one based off their own straight-ranking system of applicants, one that balances between their rankings and how an applicant ranked them, or via an open pool/spot-by-spot basis.

If the first case is the most common, a lot of students may get shut out completely, as those applicants buried on a school's list have no chance of getting in. But this would really play to every school's advantage: they got the applicants they most wanted pre-match, and now they're able to fill out the rest of the class on their terms. This would then be the net effect of the new system—because in the old match, schools would have had to take some students that they ranked in a lower tier, but who ranked them #1. Is this making sense to others?

I suppose the one thing that people who didn't match can do now is to press a school with a great LOI. Hopefully that will help you out when the school's adcom meets to compiles its waitlist or will force those schools that have already made their waitlists to improve upon your spot in the list. And then just buckle in for the long wait.
 
It seems this new system gave the schools a big upper hand when it came to getting the students they wanted, rather than a more balanced matching system as before.
 
drchekhov said:
To clarify, that's not what I was implying. I was responding to the OP's statement that:

"The Texas medical schools stupidly assumed that some students would turn down offers. What student in their right mind would turn down a medical school offer?"

If I'm understaing TRA correctly, what the system-designers may have been thinking was that a student who pre-matched to only their #4 would have preferred to decline and hope for a match to #1, 2 or 3, or bank on OOS. (Which would have been lunacy on the part of an applicant, and thus ultimately proves the lunacy of the system-designers.) Since it seems like most people held onto one of/their only pre-match, this clogged up the whole system. This would have led to the in-demand schools (UTH and UTSW by most accounts) to have most of their classes filled before the match. Applicants who pre-matched into a lower choice then had very little chance to match into a higher ranking. And those lower-choice pre-matchers then effectively blocked out everyone else from the less in-demand schools. See where I'm going?

The more I think about it, the system worked relatively well for what it was designed on the schools' side: to give them an eariler at top students and to entice them to stay in-state. Now the question is, will those students actually stay? I agree with other in thinking that the small silver lining to the system seems to be that there may be MORE waitllist movement this year. In previous years, a matched applicant was less likely to go OOS because many top-tier applicants already had OOS offers and had kicked Texas to the curb. (I had friends who did that.) This year, top-tier pre-matchers as a group seem more likely to go OOS; they're just sitting on a Texas acceptance as a back-up. And so more spots will open this year as these folks abdicate to go OOS; those decisions will then trickle down as other students move up their ranking ladders.

The big unknown, however is how waitlists are being handled this year as opposed to last—like whether schools are using one based off their own straight-ranking system of applicants, one that balances between their rankings and how an applicant ranked them, or via an open pool/spot-by-spot basis.

If the first case is the most common, a lot of students may get shut out completely, as those applicants buried on a school's list have no chance of getting in. But this would really play to every school's advantage: they got the applicants they most wanted pre-match, and now they're able to fill out the rest of the class on their terms. This would then be the net effect of the new system—because in the old match, schools would have had to take some students that they ranked in a lower tier, but who ranked them #1. Is this making sense to others?

I suppose the one thing that people who didn't match can do now is to press a school with a great LOI. Hopefully that will help you out when the school's adcom meets to compiles its waitlist or will force those schools that have already made their waitlists to improve upon your spot in the list. And then just buckle in for the long wait.
Click to expand...

yes. that's exactly what seems to have happened. youre smart.
 
I've heard many a school comment during interview day that the best applicants and applicants that apply early are one in the same. So, again, the schools definately got who they wanted. And I agree with whoever posted that long ass post 1000000%. Amazing, you need to be nominated for best post of the year or something! Getting into medical school is such a system and it's best to learn that system now, because they're just going to keep coming.
 
drchekhov said:
To clarify, that's not what I was implying. I was responding to the OP's statement that:

"The Texas medical schools stupidly assumed that some students would turn down offers. What student in their right mind would turn down a medical school offer?"

If I'm understaing TRA correctly, what the system-designers may have been thinking was that a student who pre-matched to only their #4 would have preferred to decline and hope for a match to #1, 2 or 3, or bank on OOS. (Which would have been lunacy on the part of an applicant, and thus ultimately proves the lunacy of the system-designers.) Since it seems like most people held onto one of/their only pre-match, this clogged up the whole system. This would have led to the in-demand schools (UTH and UTSW by most accounts) to have most of their classes filled before the match. Applicants who pre-matched into a lower choice then had very little chance to match into a higher ranking. And those lower-choice pre-matchers then effectively blocked out everyone else from the less in-demand schools. See where I'm going?

The more I think about it, the system worked relatively well for what it was designed on the schools' side: to give them an eariler at top students and to entice them to stay in-state. Now the question is, will those students actually stay? I agree with other in thinking that the small silver lining to the system seems to be that there may be MORE waitllist movement this year. In previous years, a matched applicant was less likely to go OOS because many top-tier applicants already had OOS offers and had kicked Texas to the curb. (I had friends who did that.) This year, top-tier pre-matchers as a group seem more likely to go OOS; they're just sitting on a Texas acceptance as a back-up. And so more spots will open this year as these folks abdicate to go OOS; those decisions will then trickle down as other students move up their ranking ladders.

The big unknown, however is how waitlists are being handled this year as opposed to last—like whether schools are using one based off their own straight-ranking system of applicants, one that balances between their rankings and how an applicant ranked them, or via an open pool/spot-by-spot basis.

If the first case is the most common, a lot of students may get shut out completely, as those applicants buried on a school's list have no chance of getting in. But this would really play to every school's advantage: they got the applicants they most wanted pre-match, and now they're able to fill out the rest of the class on their terms. This would then be the net effect of the new system—because in the old match, schools would have had to take some students that they ranked in a lower tier, but who ranked them #1. Is this making sense to others?

I suppose the one thing that people who didn't match can do now is to press a school with a great LOI. Hopefully that will help you out when the school's adcom meets to compiles its waitlist or will force those schools that have already made their waitlists to improve upon your spot in the list. And then just buckle in for the long wait.
Click to expand...

Sorry, it's Friday and I'm overloaded with sugar at the moment, it took me a while to process this post. :laugh:

So what you are saying is that the system designers THOUGHT that applicants would have to decline their one acceptance in order to rank others higher if they so wanted, when IN REALITY, applicants didn't have to decline the offer in order to rank others higher.

So the designers thought wrong and therefore the whole system was flawed.

(Who are the designers on this case?)

However, for those of us with pre-match acceptances, we couldn't hold on to our 2 or 3 or 4 or however many we had until the match, we had to decline all but one by January 15th. So technically, pre-match people could only hold 1 school in the match, but they didn't have to decline it in order to rank another school higher.

If they did rank another school higher and didn't match, their acceptance still stands. If they did match to the higher school, then their other acceptance would be withdrawn.

Everybody who matched or pre-matched ended up with only 1 school.


The only problem I see here is that people were under the impression (with help from some schools) that there were plenty of seats left for the match, when they really weren't, giving them a false sense of hope.

Am I making sense and did I understand your post correctly?
 
I don't think the designers ever thought that anyone would decline their prematch #3 favorite school (example) in the hope to rank at their #1. If that's what he was saying than I have to disagree with that part. That is probably what happened in the past years after the match because people already had out of state offers that they preferred over their third favorite TX school, but this year I think all the schools knew people would hold on to their favorite prematch... even if it was only their third favorite TX school. And that is their whole strategy!

To get overqualified applicants that previously would have gone out of state (or matched higher due to other applicants going out of state) excited about an early offer
To get people to focus on that early offer and how their lives would fit there
To get people to return to the schools for second looks (to decide on a prematch if they got more than one) and then get even more excited about the school
To allow people to get lazy about pushing to get in out of state (LOIs)
To convince people to decline out of state interviews to save money and time if they weren't sure about the school and therefore not give the school a chance
Etc.

A match system always favors the applicants. A rolling system always favors the schools. And maybe those interviewing in November and December were interviewing for the waitlist, but because we have so many overqualified applicants sitting in each school waiting for a better out of state offer we're going to have a ton of waitlist movement. This is why people have been saying UTH has such great scores compared to other years. If the schools really did do a good job of keeping people who would have previously gone out of state, in state, then there will be little waitlist movement and every school will have a more qualified pool of students... which has obviously made it harder for a lot of people to get in.

I'm assuming it's mostly the better applicants that go out of state (we're not talking about those forced to), because I don't think most people would pay more to go to a crappy school. People will only pay more to go to a better school and if they got into a better school, they're probably pretty damn good. Or they got a scholarship somewhere which is just as good.
 
sprinkibrio said:
I don't think the designers ever thought that anyone would decline their prematch #3 favorite school (example) in the hope to rank at their #1. If that's what he was saying than I have to disagree with that part. That is probably what happened in the past years after the match because people already had out of state offers that they preferred over their third favorite TX school, but this year I think all the schools knew people would hold on to their favorite prematch... even if it was only their third favorite TX school. And that is their whole strategy!

To get overqualified applicants that previously would have gone out of state (or matched higher due to other applicants going out of state) excited about an early offer
To get people to focus on that early offer and how their lives would fit there
To get people to return to the schools for second looks (to decide on a prematch if they got more than one) and then get even more excited about the school
To allow people to get lazy about pushing to get in out of state (LOIs)
To convince people to decline out of state interviews to save money and time if they weren't sure about the school and therefore not give the school a chance
Etc.

A match system always favors the applicants. A rolling system always favors the schools. And maybe those interviewing in November and December were interviewing for the waitlist, but because we have so many overqualified applicants sitting in each school waiting for a better out of state offer we're going to have a ton of waitlist movement. This is why people have been saying UTH has such great scores compared to other years. If the schools really did do a good job of keeping people who would have previously gone out of state, in state, then there will be little waitlist movement and every school will have a more qualified pool of students... which has obviously made it harder for a lot of people to get in.

I'm assuming it's mostly the better applicants that go out of state (we're not talking about those forced to), because I don't think most people would pay more to go to a crappy school. People will only pay more to go to a better school and if they got into a better school, they're probably pretty damn good. Or they got a scholarship somewhere which is just as good.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I believe what you said in your first paragraph is what he was trying to say, and I disagreed with that part as well (because we all knew we didn't have to give up our pre-match offer even if was our #(not 1) in order to rank another one higher).

I really agree with everything else you said. This system favored the schools because they get to hold on to the applicants they really want, and discourage them from going to interviews after they have that acceptance (I certainly didn't go on anymore interviews after my acceptances).

It also heavily favored early applicants, as those who interviewed before November 15 probably got more acceptances than those who did not.
 
baylormed said:
Sorry, it's Friday and I'm overloaded with sugar at the moment, it took me a while to process this post. :laugh:
Click to expand...

No problem. But after reading some other comments today, I'm beginning to think that the major problem was the "kid in the candy store" offer orgy. But I still think that the OP's comments have factored into the current catastrophe. Here's my current understanding of them:

Student A's are superstars, applying in-state and OOS.
Student B's are solid applicants; the bread and butter for all Texas schools.
Student C are middle-of-the-road applicants.
Student D are wayward souls who needs to improve their apps.

The way the designers saw it, schools would only offer to all the Student A's (10-20% of their class). In reality, they offered to a lot more, dipping down heavily into Student B's.

Now the A's got their offer(s), and by and large, were willing to accept, say UTH and UTSW, while they're awaiting OOS offers. And if by chance an A only got an offer from A&M, which they really don't like and is an uber-safety for them, they're nevertheless holding it. According to OP, the designers expected that in such cases, A's would decline that offer (knowing that they'd cast away a sure thing), and hold out for a #1 or an OOS. Obviously very few did that. However, because of over-offers, these students didn't match to their #1's, so they're essentially clogging up part of the system—they really don't want to go to A&M, but they're holding that offer until a fine OOS pulls through.

The B's got offers from schools. Looking at the pre-match numbers from TRA, however, only slightly more than half of all pre-matchers got multiple offers. So every B kept their offer (most of them only with single offers), even if it was a UTSA or UTMB (a #3 or #4 for a B, let's say), hoping that they'd get a UTSW or UTH (#1/#2). But again, because of over-offers, there was no movement. This is where I think there's a real log-jam in the system. These students want to be one rung higher on their rank ladders, and in previous years would have matched into them since more A's would have already committed to OOS.

C's are applicants who would normally match to their #3, #4, #5, or #6 choices in years past, but because of the blocks ahead of them by the A's and B's had no seats to take.

D's are just way out there; don't worry about them.

What I'm thinking/hoping for all those who had their hearts broken last night is that once the A's start becoming ex-pats, the B's will move up to their #1/#2's, and the C's will get offers from #3/#4/#5/'s from seats vacated by their OOS brethren.

So what you are saying is that the system designers THOUGHT that applicants would have to decline their one acceptance in order to rank others higher if they so wanted, when IN REALITY, applicants didn't have to decline the offer in order to rank others higher.
Click to expand...

Yes. Although it wasn't a problem so much in the execution of their plans as their predictions on how applicants would act (specifically, how arrogantly they thought that the A's and B's might act).

(Who are the designers on this case?)
Click to expand...

The collective adcoms? For this reason and to elucidate her original comments, I wish the OP would drop in again.

However, for those of us with pre-match acceptances, we couldn't hold on to our 2 or 3 or 4 or however many we had until the match, we had to decline all but one by January 15th. So technically, pre-match people could only hold 1 school in the match, but they didn't have to decline it in order to rank another school higher.

If they did rank another school higher and didn't match, their acceptance still stands. If they did match to the higher school, then their other acceptance would be withdrawn.

Everybody who matched or pre-matched ended up with only 1 school.
Click to expand...

Understood. I think what the OP's was alluding to was that A's who got offers from a #3/#4 would decline it and plan on a match to #1/#2 or rely on OOS. They didn't, so this is holding B's from moving on up to their #1/#2's, which is, in turn, locking out C's. There's a log-jam that wasn't expected on match night, and it's holding up the flow.

The only problem I see here is that people were under the impression (with help from some schools) that there were plenty of seats left for the match, when they really weren't, giving them a false sense of hope.
Click to expand...

I understand everybody's frustration on this account, but I really don't think schools were sure of the log-jam until late December. I mean, how many people made all their acceptances/made their rank list before January? Last year, I didn't submit my final match list until the day before the deadline. In this case, schools couldn't have been blatently lying to interviewees until January dates—and even then, really only at ones pushing up to Jan. 15th.

Secondly, schools may have known that they were reaching capacity, but they don't know how the waitlist action is going to work this year. They still wanted to see all their invitees just in case. And at least y'all who may have been, in fact, just interviewing for waitlist seats still have a chance at getting in. (Hopefully a pretty good one, if my thoughts are on target.)

Lastly, I kinda can't blame any of the schools for not alerting everyone about the situation pre-match. Could you imagine the sustained deluge of of angry calls that each school and TMDSAS would have received had word been leaked? Remember, pre-meds and med students are beyond anal, so it would have been a mess. A nightmare, really. So it was better in many ways for them and you to let everybody find out at once.

But I still understand everyone's frustrations with hearing very little post-match on what happened.

Am I making sense and did I understand your post correctly?
Click to expand...

I think we're on the same page now.


My big question is whether schools are bound to consider student rankings in the waitlist process. Is there anything about that on the TMDSAS website? Last year I was under the impression that you could climb your way up your rank ladder as acceptances came in, but that every school kinda did their own thing, meaning that where you ranked a school had no bearing on your chances of getting offered a seat that just opened up. Hence the reason I think it might be in the best interests of those who didn't match to send an LOI to a school. But this means those applicants now have to choose in which basket they want to put all their eggs. :(
 
sprinkibrio said:
I don't think the designers ever thought that anyone would decline their prematch #3 favorite school (example) in the hope to rank at their #1. If that's what he was saying than I have to disagree with that part.
Click to expand...

I personally can't believe that the designers would have been that stupid, but I can't see any other way to interpret the OP's original statement other than that. You have any other thoughts?

Another option: perhaps the OP is a troll who just pulled those numbers and comments out to whip us into a frenzy? I kinda doubt it, given his other posts (though he is a new member).

That is probably what happened in the past years after the match because people already had out of state offers that they preferred over their third favorite TX school, but this year I think all the schools knew people would hold on to their favorite prematch... even if it was only their third favorite TX school. And that is their whole strategy!
Click to expand...

So you think that's how UTSW got all the other school's to go along with the pre-match idea? Essentially: "We'll hold in more overqualified's, and you'll get better students (who would have filled out our class in past year) to trickle down to you, too?"

I can agree with that.

To get overqualified applicants that previously would have gone out of state (or matched higher due to other applicants going out of state) excited about an early offer
To get people to focus on that early offer and how their lives would fit there
To get people to return to the schools for second looks (to decide on a prematch if they got more than one) and then get even more excited about the school
To allow people to get lazy about pushing to get in out of state (LOIs)
To convince people to decline out of state interviews to save money and time if they weren't sure about the school and therefore not give the school a chance
Etc.

A match system always favors the applicants. A rolling system always favors the schools. And maybe those interviewing in November and December were interviewing for the waitlist, but because we have so many overqualified applicants sitting in each school waiting for a better out of state offer we're going to have a ton of waitlist movement. This is why people have been saying UTH has such great scores compared to other years. If the schools really did do a good job of keeping people who would have previously gone out of state, in state, then there will be little waitlist movement and every school will have a more qualified pool of students... which has obviously made it harder for a lot of people to get in.

I'm assuming it's mostly the better applicants that go out of state (we're not talking about those forced to), because I don't think most people would pay more to go to a crappy school. People will only pay more to go to a better school and if they got into a better school, they're probably pretty damn good. Or they got a scholarship somewhere which is just as good.
Click to expand...

Agreed on most of your points. I will say, however, that I think a good part of my school's jump in scores also has something to do with our much-improved presentation this year. Trust me—it was terrible and really disorganized in past years! We totally redesigned the day for y'all, and it seemed to have been well-received.
 
You guys sure like to write... So, should the waitlist be something to get my hopes up for? Please give it to me straight. I'm tired of ad. com. lies.

Also, I've seen it mentioned that us Nov-Dec interviewees were applying for the waitlist. That's really depressing when you think about all the work it takes in preparing, driving/flying, and making hotel arrangements. I could've been spending that time publishing my manuscript. This sucks... Next year I'm applying the first day I can...
 
adamMD said:
You guys sure like to write... So, should the waitlist be something to get my hopes up for? Please give it to me straight. I'm tired of ad. com. lies.

Also, I've seen it mentioned that us Nov-Dec interviewees were applying for the waitlist. That's really depressing when you think about all the work it takes in preparing, driving/flying, and making hotel arrangements. I could've been spending that time publishing my manuscript. This sucks... Next year I'm applying the first day I can...
Click to expand...

I personally am not getting my hopes up for anything. I'm making a backup plan just in case none of this crap works out.
 
drchekhov said:
No problem. But after reading some other comments today, I'm beginning to think that the major problem was the "kid in the candy store" offer orgy. But I still think that the OP's comments have factored into the current catastrophe. Here's my current understanding of them:

Student A's are superstars, applying in-state and OOS.
Student B's are solid applicants; the bread and butter for all Texas schools.
Student C are middle-of-the-road applicants.
Student D are wayward souls who needs to improve their apps.

The way the designers saw it, schools would only offer to all the Student A's (10-20% of their class). In reality, they offered to a lot more, dipping down heavily into Student B's.

Now the A's got their offer(s), and by and large, were willing to accept, say UTH and UTSW, while they're awaiting OOS offers. And if by chance an A only got an offer from A&M, which they really don't like and is an uber-safety for them, they're nevertheless holding it. According to OP, the designers expected that in such cases, A's would decline that offer (knowing that they'd cast away a sure thing), and hold out for a #1 or an OOS. Obviously very few did that. However, because of over-offers, these students didn't match to their #1's, so they're essentially clogging up part of the system—they really don't want to go to A&M, but they're holding that offer until a fine OOS pulls through.

The B's got offers from schools. Looking at the pre-match numbers from TRA, however, only slightly more than half of all pre-matchers got multiple offers. So every B kept their offer (most of them only with single offers), even if it was a UTSA or UTMB (a #3 or #4 for a B, let's say), hoping that they'd get a UTSW or UTH (#1/#2). But again, because of over-offers, there was no movement. This is where I think there's a real log-jam in the system. These students want to be one rung higher on their rank ladders, and in previous years would have matched into them since more A's would have already committed to OOS.

C's are applicants who would normally match to their #3, #4, #5, or #6 choices in years past, but because of the blocks ahead of them by the A's and B's had no seats to take.

D's are just way out there; don't worry about them.

What I'm thinking/hoping for all those who had their hearts broken last night is that once the A's start becoming ex-pats, the B's will move up to their #1/#2's, and the C's will get offers from #3/#4/#5/'s from seats vacated by their OOS brethren.



Yes. Although it wasn't a problem so much in the execution of their plans as their predictions on how applicants would act (specifically, how arrogantly they thought that the A's and B's might act).



The collective adcoms? For this reason and to elucidate her original comments, I wish the OP would drop in again.



Understood. I think what the OP's was alluding to was that A's who got offers from a #3/#4 would decline it and plan on a match to #1/#2 or rely on OOS. They didn't, so this is holding B's from moving on up to their #1/#2's, which is, in turn, locking out C's. There's a log-jam that wasn't expected on match night, and it's holding up the flow.



I understand everybody's frustration on this account, but I really don't think schools were sure of the log-jam until late December. I mean, how many people made all their acceptances/made their rank list before January? Last year, I didn't submit my final match list until the day before the deadline. In this case, schools couldn't have been blatently lying to interviewees until January dates—and even then, really only at ones pushing up to Jan. 15th.

Secondly, schools may have known that they were reaching capacity, but they don't know how the waitlist action is going to work this year. They still wanted to see all their invitees just in case. And at least y'all who may have been, in fact, just interviewing for waitlist seats still have a chance at getting in. (Hopefully a pretty good one, if my thoughts are on target.)

Lastly, I kinda can't blame any of the schools for not alerting everyone about the situation pre-match. Could you imagine the sustained deluge of of angry calls that each school and TMDSAS would have received had word been leaked? Remember, pre-meds and med students are beyond anal, so it would have been a mess. A nightmare, really. So it was better in many ways for them and you to let everybody find out at once.

But I still understand everyone's frustrations with hearing very little post-match on what happened.



I think we're on the same page now.


My big question is whether schools are bound to consider student rankings in the waitlist process. Is there anything about that on the TMDSAS website? Last year I was under the impression that you could climb your way up your rank ladder as acceptances came in, but that every school kinda did their own thing, meaning that where you ranked a school had no bearing on your chances of getting offered a seat that just opened up. Hence the reason I think it might be in the best interests of those who didn't match to send an LOI to a school. But this means those applicants now have to choose in which basket they want to put all their eggs. :(
Click to expand...


I really love this post b/c it makes the most sense to me out of anything that people have said about the match. This seems so reasonable it just might be true.
 
Brevity is not the word du jour.
 
Every time I read "log jam" I giggle like a ten year old.
 
Originally Posted by sprinkibrio View Post
"I don't think the designers ever thought that anyone would decline their prematch #3 favorite school (example) in the hope to rank at their #1. If that's what he was saying than I have to disagree with that part."

drchekhov said:
I personally can't believe that the designers would have been that stupid, but I can't see any other way to interpret the OP's original statement other than that. You have any other thoughts?
Click to expand...

I really think the schools knew they would fill their class with mostly pre-offers. Except for maybe UTH, since like you said, they did an especially awesome job of presenting themselves this year and more people than they thought from past experience held onto them. They even sent us that email telling us not to worry, there will be many match spots. After listening to this UTMB video that someone posted on the TX thread I feel even more strongly that the other schools knew. The Dean says they gave out 400something prematch offers for 181 acceptances, a number close to that which they estimated.

http://www.som.utmb.edu/FOM2-13-07.ram (minutes 19-27)
 
adamMD said:
You guys sure like to write... So, should the waitlist be something to get my hopes up for? Please give it to me straight. I'm tired of ad. com. lies.

Also, I've seen it mentioned that us Nov-Dec interviewees were applying for the waitlist. That's really depressing when you think about all the work it takes in preparing, driving/flying, and making hotel arrangements. I could've been spending that time publishing my manuscript. This sucks... Next year I'm applying the first day I can...
Click to expand...

I take that back, not just applying for the waitlist, but also the ~15 spots/school they gave out after you interviewed :( I'm sure there will be some waitlist movement as everyone trickles up or out of state, but the thing is, that might not start happening for a while. People can hold onto multiple offers until May 15th.
 
sprinkibrio said:
I really think the schools knew they would fill their class with mostly pre-offers. Except for maybe UTH, since like you said, they did an especially awesome job of presenting themselves this year and more people than they thought from past experience held onto them. They even sent us that email telling us not to worry, there will be many match spots. After listening to this UTMB video that someone posted on the TX thread I feel even more strongly that the other schools knew. The Dean says they gave out 400something prematch offers for 181 acceptances, a number close to that which they estimated.

http://www.som.utmb.edu/FOM2-13-07.ram (minutes 19-27)
Click to expand...

Yeah, I watched the same part of that video. I'm now almost firmly agreed that the majority of the problem was with schools gorging themselves on pre-match offers. I think that the original tacit agreement amongst the Seven Sisters was to keep pre-match offers low (around 10%, like we've heard), but at some point between May and now, one or several of them decided to disregard that, and all the others had to follow suit. Really, it was like an arms race: if UTSW was offering way over 10%, UTH and UTMB couldn't just sit idly and have them poach half of the students that they wanted. And then all the other schools had to follow suit.

One question for you: when was that email from UTH dated?

A second, more general question: if the schools decide to go straight rolling, does that at least mean the probable death of TMDSAS? I mean, wouldn't it just be easier to run everything through AMCAS in that case.

As much as it sucks to say it for all those who didn't match, I think the schools are very happy with the way things worked out. I mean, if 60% of their students had them as first choice, I'm willing to wager that they have a much "better-matched" student body than in the past.

I take that back, not just applying for the waitlist, but also the ~15 spots/school they gave out after you interviewed I'm sure there will be some waitlist movement as everyone trickles up or out of state, but the thing is, that might not start happening for a while. People can hold onto multiple offers until May 15th.
Click to expand...

It will be a long wait for many, but do remember that there are people
who will just write off OOS before that in order to get on with their lives, because they need to commit to somewhere before they quit their jobs, because they need to plan to move their family, etc.
 
More numbers to come about all public Texas medical schools.
Can anyone tell me how I can post an excel document or word document without losing the formatting?
 
The email was sent 12/8.

therealadvisor said:
More numbers to come about all public Texas medical schools.
Can anyone tell me how I can post an excel document or word document without losing the formatting?
Click to expand...

There's a little paper clip up at the top of the typing box (next to where you control fonts, bold, italic, etc.) and you can upload documents.
 
Tip of the hat to the Texas med schools for the successful facilitation of the rolling admissions process. The process works in their favor: they gave offers to the students they really wanted, and the students who really wanted them got their seats.

Wag of the finger for not being more candid about the status of their classes filling. Even if it wasn't intended, it would have been considerate to applicants in the match to know that approximately 10% of the class seats would be offered through match.
 
Does UT-H have a specific date in mind for finishing their waitlist? I know that people rarely get chosen from it but it would be nice to know that I was wanted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

S
Interviewers didn't really ask me about why medicine. Is this a bad sign?
Replies
4
Views
837
Rachapkis
Rachapkis
velvetcoffee
Ranking of Texas Med Schools
Replies
8
Views
2K
IJUSTWANTOPARTYDOC
IJUSTWANTOPARTYDOC
wysdoc
The Republic of Texas XLII: You Don't Just Move Into Texas, It Moves Into You
38 39 40 41 42
Replies
2K
Views
190K
kcblazers19
K
peachesandoranges
Didn't enter titles for my LoR writers. How will schools differentiate which is science vs. non-science?
Replies
4
Views
542
peachesandoranges
peachesandoranges
T
What gpa would you say makes a URM competitive for Texas MD and top 25 schools ?
Replies
16
Views
2K
TxMed55
T
Top