Looking at aggregate AMCAS data shows about 11% of those with both 3.8+ and 517+ do not get an acceptance and they make the same errors as applicants from all stats make. Applicants from all levels can suffer from little guidance or, worse, misinformation (sometimes I refer to myth information). And many do not or can not, apply critical evaluation to their application and apply appropriately. SImply many do not use their judgment or seek out advice but rely on the rumor, beliefs, third info among their network of premed friends. And often they view everything in the most possible optimistic light possible or in the most pessimistic possible. Lastly, they do not plan in detail this complicated project of actually applying, mostly because they do not have an accurate understanding of it the complete, end-to-end work this process entails, nor do they understand the sheer numbers and competitive nature of it all
1) You make the assumption that these high stat applicants create an appropriate school list by either the breadth or metrics, which is one of the major mistakes they make. have seen applicants make very short school lists of just Havard, Yale, JHU, Standford, and Mayo and wonder which of the several acceptances they will choose from. Just as common are those who feel that because they only have a 3.92 and 519 they arent perfect and do not apply to any high schools and lose to yield protection. Of course, the opposite is true with moderate DO candidates who apply only to Havard and Yale
2) They do not have sufficient W&A/EC either in-depth or breadth. Many high stat applicants have nothing but high stats. Or they have significant research hours, only campus academic-related experiences and their shadowing/clinical is with only academic medicine and subspecialties, spending little time outside of their bubble of comfort with underserved, marginalized, or stigmatized populations. Just on a personal pet peeve, I am not impressed with being a TA or tutoring. Any competent premed student should be able to TA a course or tutor a kid. It really isnt leaving your comfort zone
3) The W&A/EC are not well narrated. Often, they tell us what they did with either no coherent, concise message, theme, or point, such as what they learned, what characteristics it shows, etc. Or they write with either insincerely forcing it to relate directly to medicine or offering platitudes. Telling me that Organic Chemistry or a lab where you did nothing but run gels as the most meaningful, really is a stretch. Tell me the impact.
4) The PS is not well narrated. Again, no coherent, concise, theme, story or point. No structure, no idea what you are trying to say. Again, not explaining the why medicine and how it relates to the experiences you have.
5) The Secondaries are not well narrated. Often the question asked is not answered, a forced relationship to medicine, and frequently ill-structured writing that seems to be a jumble of cut and paste from somewhere else.
6) For items 3,4,5 of writing both insincerity and above all arrogance instead of confidence. Arrogance will be a rejection recommendation. BTW, remember that the adcom is only required to vote on your acceptance. Virtually anyone in the process can recommend rejection and that will be adhered to.
7) Sheer numbers. Each school gets roughly 5,000 applications and, at best, has slots for 1,000 interviews. This means that at least 80% of applicants must be rejected prior to II so in many admissions is a negative process looking for reasons to pass over the applicant. Even if a school simply throws out the "bottom" half of the 5,000 applicants, that still means 2,500 good to great candidates must be reduced by 1,500.
8) Interview skills. One of my earliest interviewees was a "Sheldon" level genius who had more arrogance and less empathy than our current president, assuming he was going to be accepted from the moment he sat down. As we were ending the interview he asked me when his acceptance would be sent. I spoke before thinking and told "he would probably get into medical school but it wasnt going to be here"
9) Chance. Call it luck of the draw, small group dynamics, or human behavior. Your good application happens to be reviewed in a pile of outstanding or compelling candidates, your reviewer was rushing, the presenter of you app at the subcommittee or committee was just a tad off, etc. This is an Olympic class event, where even the 20 finalists are all world class, only 3 will get medals.
