-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
I'm not sure why they'd look at the old primaries and secondaries. They would look at your new application, so be sure to show growth since your last cycle.
Growth would be things like:
-Additional shadowing if your # of hours were low (~80 is probably about the max you need for most programs, although there are some programs out there like KCUMB that say "80 hours shadowing minimum")
-Volunteering (clinical + nonclinical, although having only one "type" of volunteering isn't an app-killer as long as your other extracurriculars are really good, but volunteering is extremely important)
-Healthcare experience (can include stuff like shadowing and clinical volunteering, although this can vary from across programs; scribe work would be a way to make money and get healthcare experience hours so highly recommend it if you can get such a position during COVID)
-Research (I've seen students with lower GPA/MCAT do this during a gap year and greatly improve their application IMO... publication not required but is always a plus)
-Retake MCAT if your score was low for target schools
-Take additional upper-level science classes at your college
You should also adjust your personal statement to show how you have grown as an applicant. Get some professors/mentor to proofread it and give you feedback. Sometimes people get denied an acceptance because they wrote a personal statement, had a friend read over it, and thought it was okay when really it sucked.
Interviews are going to be very important for you. If possible, have your undergrad institution do a mock interview if they offer those to pre-meds. Coming across as an arrogant prat during your interviews can result in a flat-out rejection despite superior stats and ECs.
By the way, some schools will review your application with you after you get rejected in order to tell you relative strengths/weaknesses of your application in order to help guide you when you prepare for reapplying in the future. This can be very helpful.
Growth would be things like:
-Additional shadowing if your # of hours were low (~80 is probably about the max you need for most programs, although there are some programs out there like KCUMB that say "80 hours shadowing minimum")
-Volunteering (clinical + nonclinical, although having only one "type" of volunteering isn't an app-killer as long as your other extracurriculars are really good, but volunteering is extremely important)
-Healthcare experience (can include stuff like shadowing and clinical volunteering, although this can vary from across programs; scribe work would be a way to make money and get healthcare experience hours so highly recommend it if you can get such a position during COVID)
-Research (I've seen students with lower GPA/MCAT do this during a gap year and greatly improve their application IMO... publication not required but is always a plus)
-Retake MCAT if your score was low for target schools
-Take additional upper-level science classes at your college
You should also adjust your personal statement to show how you have grown as an applicant. Get some professors/mentor to proofread it and give you feedback. Sometimes people get denied an acceptance because they wrote a personal statement, had a friend read over it, and thought it was okay when really it sucked.
Interviews are going to be very important for you. If possible, have your undergrad institution do a mock interview if they offer those to pre-meds. Coming across as an arrogant prat during your interviews can result in a flat-out rejection despite superior stats and ECs.
By the way, some schools will review your application with you after you get rejected in order to tell you relative strengths/weaknesses of your application in order to help guide you when you prepare for reapplying in the future. This can be very helpful.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
They make time for what's important. As implied by your post, yes, they consider their time to be very valuable. As a result, it's probably very safe to assume that someone on the adcom or the staff performs at least a cursory comparison of a reapplicant's new and old applications to see if there is a reason to seriously consider someone who has already been rejected in the past. If they didn't have time for this, it wouldn't be the case that reapplicants are at a disadvantage going in.
Like has been said--it's a computer system. When you apply to a school, first thing they do is run your app through the system to see if you've applied before. It's like a background check at a job that mandates this for new hirees. And all schools DO do a background check also, in case you're wondering, so you can't, like, change your name and expect a different outcome under a whole new name. PERIOD. Point blank. End of story. Capeach?
If an application might be good enough for an interview, you can bet that the screener will review the old application.
If it is nowhere near good enough, then we won't go through the trouble.
If it is nowhere near good enough, then we won't go through the trouble.
Last edited:
@gyngyn can certainly answer this question from the "inside," but my guess would be that they'd want to see that the deficiencies noted in the old application have been addressed (i.e., it could be that the new application on its own looks fine, but, when looking back at the old application, they will see a problem from last time wasn't addressed).
Worst case, if there was an inconsistency in your last application, or you pissed off or annoyed someone on your interview, then that would probably change your new application being "interview worthy." Quite frankly, those are things that can probably never be fixed, and, under those circumstances, it's probably a waste of time and money reapplying to those schools.
Of course the old application can change that but it depends on what is in the previous file. Things like low volunteer hours or a low score on a PS would be unlikely to impact the interview decision. But being rude or argumentative on interview day would certainly be considered before extending a new interview.
This is an extremely dangerous mindset to have.
It's the job of the admissions Deans and their staff to engage in due diligence.
Fundamental changes that are not consistent with the truth would change that decision.
If they are suddenly "disadvantaged" or a different race or ethnicity, one would begin to think they are gaming us.
There are plenty more but you get the idea.
