yeah, i meant recent interviewees. i counted the number of people who joined the admitted students panlist in the past few days.
2009-2010 Stanford Application Thread
- Thread starter shemarty
- Start date
- Status
yeah, i meant recent interviewees. i counted the number of people who joined the admitted students panlist in the past few days.
- Joined
- May 14, 2009
- Messages
- 319
- Reaction score
- 0
clutch. insider information.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2008
- Messages
- 527
- Reaction score
- 1
yeah - and I guess that means they're done giving out straight-up acceptances.
damn, I really wish I could flash forward a month right now.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
I'm still somewhat confused as to how this is better, I think I'm misunderstanding something.
Before... you'd reap the benefits by only having to pay for 12 quarters full tuition. Suppose you do M1 to M2 research. You pay 3k for that summer (unless you have grants, in which case you net money). Then, once you reach 13 quarters (that summer counts as a quarter now...a less expensive quarter), your tuition is later cheaper (3k vs. 15k) for your last quarter at Stanford assuming you're on a four year plan. So you save 12k now on a quarter, so that that you can also save 12k later on a quarter.
Now the system works so that you still pay tuition over the summer (this is still a little ridiculous to me, you're doing research, you're not in school), but it's covered by MedScholars. The first quarter of Med Scholars (on the new system) only gets you tuition, not living expenses. So essentially, the M1 summer doesn't give you a stipend. You make no money, and reap no benefit of a 13 quarter maximum.
If you do a 5th year and a M1 summer, your tuition and living expenses are covered, but you lose the benefit of cheaper tuition afterwards. I just don't get how this is advantageous.
I think this is the key difference.
I think in the previous system, you didn't pay 3k to do research for the summer quarter -- you had to pay full tuition. Which was ridiculous.
Then again, I'm very fuzzy on details from interview day and might have it completely wrong. But I do remember the financial aid guy saying that the now-old system of Med Scholars didn't make sense financially.
edit: wait nvm, are you saying you paid 3k to do research for the summer quarter because you paid full tuition and then got 12k in med scholars? i guess that makes sense then. but where did you get this info that med scholars only covers tuition for the first quarter now?
Last edited:
Whoops, I guess I should read more carefully next time 😳
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
It just doesn't make sense to me why students should pay tuition doing research (especially over the summer...and now that extra quarters mean nothing in reducing tuition in later quarters). Almost every other school I know just has you leave campus technically, with outside funding from the lab or from a grant/scholarship/etc..
To me...it just sounds easier to not charge tuition during research periods (like the M1 summer, when people aren't necessarily even supposed to be enrolled at Stanford)...and give students a living stipend. I'd much prefer this to the complicated system they seem to have established. I just don't get the point.
To me...it just sounds easier to not charge tuition during research periods (like the M1 summer, when people aren't necessarily even supposed to be enrolled at Stanford)...and give students a living stipend. I'd much prefer this to the complicated system they seem to have established. I just don't get the point.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,060
- Reaction score
- 118
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
I'm sure they'll be happy to explain it fully...once we're accepted.
Good point. Haha.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
why hello there little fella.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
New Article #1 on the Stanford Website: Admit Weekend
On April 9-10 some 72 students admitted to the School of Medicine returned to campus for Admit Weekend 2010. In addition to meeting each other and current students and faculty, this highly talented group of students received updates on the curriculum and scholarly concentrations opportunities as well advising and support services, including financial aid. They had a chance to tour the medical school (including the new Li Ka Shing Center for Learning and Knowledge) as well as the hospitals and university. Where to attend medical school is a life changing decision and, while our admitted students have a number of choices, I would hope that the distinctive characteristics of Stanford are readily apparent. Our exceptional excellence in research, unique interactions with the other schools at Stanford and close partnerships with our affiliated teaching hospitals and community are complemented by the commitment of our faculty, students and trainees to our tripartite missions in education, research and patient care. I can certainly say that whenever I have the opportunity to view the breadth and depth of excellence at Stanford, I am deeply impressed and very grateful to be a member of our Stanford community.
On April 9-10 some 72 students admitted to the School of Medicine returned to campus for Admit Weekend 2010. In addition to meeting each other and current students and faculty, this highly talented group of students received updates on the curriculum and scholarly concentrations opportunities as well advising and support services, including financial aid. They had a chance to tour the medical school (including the new Li Ka Shing Center for Learning and Knowledge) as well as the hospitals and university. Where to attend medical school is a life changing decision and, while our admitted students have a number of choices, I would hope that the distinctive characteristics of Stanford are readily apparent. Our exceptional excellence in research, unique interactions with the other schools at Stanford and close partnerships with our affiliated teaching hospitals and community are complemented by the commitment of our faculty, students and trainees to our tripartite missions in education, research and patient care. I can certainly say that whenever I have the opportunity to view the breadth and depth of excellence at Stanford, I am deeply impressed and very grateful to be a member of our Stanford community.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
New Article #2 on Stanford Website: US News Rankings
Let's face it - I truly dislike the annual exercise of the US News & World Report (USNWR) ranking of medical schools. My major issue with these annual rankings is that some of the metrics are misguided and can foster perverse incentives. Since coming to my role at Stanford I have regularly expressed my concerns to the editors of USNWR in person and in writing. Among my messages is that they are too focused on the size of the medical school and not enough on quality. Specifically, a number of the more heavily weighted metrics do not adequately or appropriately measure the true excellence of research and education programs. For example, 20% of the weighted score is based on total NIH grants dollars at the institution, which reflects more the size of the research enterprise than its quality. Indeed, given the small size of the research faculty at Stanford compared to peer "research intensive" intensive medical schools, it is not a surprise that we do not compete in this area compared to medical schools that have twice to ten times the number of faculty. In fact we are 12th in total NIH grants. On the other hand, NIH dollars per faculty member is a better measure of the success of faculty, and on this measure we are #1 in the nation.
While I was successful in persuading the USNWR editors to blend total funding with funding per faculty member, USNWR still chose to weigh the score 2:1 in favor of total funding, so the impact of size is more powerful than quality. Even more importantly, other important measures of research success and quality are not included at all, many of which would help students to assess the research faculty. For example, it would help to know the number or proportion of faculty at a medical school who were members of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute program or who had been elected to organizations like the Institute of Medicine and National Academy of Sciences or other prestigious organizations. Of course there are other examples of excellence beyond research funding. Further, too much emphasis is placed on the size of the faculty in the faculty/student ratio metric. It would be more useful to provide the success of faculty in mentoring and advising students or the number of students engaged in research with the faculty or who had scientific publications during medical school.
What is really concerning in the USNWR ranking is the emphasis on GPA and MCAT score as a measure of student excellence at the exclusion of any metrics that address other measures of student success along with the diversity of the students, the institutional support for their education or amount of indebtedness on graduation. From my point of view, having schools compete on size and MCAT scores is simply too narrow and poorly focused.
Of course, I had all these same concerns a year ago and have communicated them to USNWR over the years. But despite these concerns and convictions, Stanford was ranked #6 last year -- although in reality we were tied with three other schools (Yale, Duke and U. Washington for that slot). So, relatively speaking we were somewhere between number 6 to nine. In the USNWR issue on April 15th, Stanford's rank dropped to 11th -- which I obviously don't like. How could that happen in just one year -- especially since the ranking of Stanford by our peers place us fourth? In reality, given the impact of total NIH dollars, small changes in other metrics made all the difference. For example, our ranking on MCAT scores went from 7th (at 11.6) to 10th (at 11.3), and ranking in quality assessment by Residency Program Directors went from 4th to 5th place. These changes were enough to move us out of the group tied for 6th place to 11th place. But in reality this was due to only a 2 - point difference in the aggregate score, which makes all these comparisons really insignificant -- both statistically and in many other ways.
When all is said and done, I would like to think that thoughtful individuals would see through the ranking and not confuse them with quality. But I also recognize that the simple change from 6th to 11th elicits an emotional response. At the same time I am proud of the fact that our faculty are among the best in the world on the metrics that really count and that we are ready and willing to select outstanding students who come from diverse backgrounds and with amazing life experiences. And I am pleased that our peers rank us so highly. OK, I have shared my reactions -- now it is time to move on.
Let's face it - I truly dislike the annual exercise of the US News & World Report (USNWR) ranking of medical schools. My major issue with these annual rankings is that some of the metrics are misguided and can foster perverse incentives. Since coming to my role at Stanford I have regularly expressed my concerns to the editors of USNWR in person and in writing. Among my messages is that they are too focused on the size of the medical school and not enough on quality. Specifically, a number of the more heavily weighted metrics do not adequately or appropriately measure the true excellence of research and education programs. For example, 20% of the weighted score is based on total NIH grants dollars at the institution, which reflects more the size of the research enterprise than its quality. Indeed, given the small size of the research faculty at Stanford compared to peer "research intensive" intensive medical schools, it is not a surprise that we do not compete in this area compared to medical schools that have twice to ten times the number of faculty. In fact we are 12th in total NIH grants. On the other hand, NIH dollars per faculty member is a better measure of the success of faculty, and on this measure we are #1 in the nation.
While I was successful in persuading the USNWR editors to blend total funding with funding per faculty member, USNWR still chose to weigh the score 2:1 in favor of total funding, so the impact of size is more powerful than quality. Even more importantly, other important measures of research success and quality are not included at all, many of which would help students to assess the research faculty. For example, it would help to know the number or proportion of faculty at a medical school who were members of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute program or who had been elected to organizations like the Institute of Medicine and National Academy of Sciences or other prestigious organizations. Of course there are other examples of excellence beyond research funding. Further, too much emphasis is placed on the size of the faculty in the faculty/student ratio metric. It would be more useful to provide the success of faculty in mentoring and advising students or the number of students engaged in research with the faculty or who had scientific publications during medical school.
What is really concerning in the USNWR ranking is the emphasis on GPA and MCAT score as a measure of student excellence at the exclusion of any metrics that address other measures of student success along with the diversity of the students, the institutional support for their education or amount of indebtedness on graduation. From my point of view, having schools compete on size and MCAT scores is simply too narrow and poorly focused.
Of course, I had all these same concerns a year ago and have communicated them to USNWR over the years. But despite these concerns and convictions, Stanford was ranked #6 last year -- although in reality we were tied with three other schools (Yale, Duke and U. Washington for that slot). So, relatively speaking we were somewhere between number 6 to nine. In the USNWR issue on April 15th, Stanford's rank dropped to 11th -- which I obviously don't like. How could that happen in just one year -- especially since the ranking of Stanford by our peers place us fourth? In reality, given the impact of total NIH dollars, small changes in other metrics made all the difference. For example, our ranking on MCAT scores went from 7th (at 11.6) to 10th (at 11.3), and ranking in quality assessment by Residency Program Directors went from 4th to 5th place. These changes were enough to move us out of the group tied for 6th place to 11th place. But in reality this was due to only a 2 - point difference in the aggregate score, which makes all these comparisons really insignificant -- both statistically and in many other ways.
When all is said and done, I would like to think that thoughtful individuals would see through the ranking and not confuse them with quality. But I also recognize that the simple change from 6th to 11th elicits an emotional response. At the same time I am proud of the fact that our faculty are among the best in the world on the metrics that really count and that we are ready and willing to select outstanding students who come from diverse backgrounds and with amazing life experiences. And I am pleased that our peers rank us so highly. OK, I have shared my reactions -- now it is time to move on.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,060
- Reaction score
- 118
I wholeheartedly agree with this part. I even mentioned it less than a week ago in response to an SDN post about USNews Rankings. The metric of "total NIH awards given to medical school and all affiliated institutions" guarantees Harvard the #1 spot, hands down.
I also agree with the assessment that GPA shouldn't matter *too* much because schools and majors vary significantly. However, I DO think that MCAT scores are an acceptable benchmarks for school ranking, because it is the only standard that uniformly compares 'what it takes' to get into the school number-wise. It may not say anything about the school atmosphere/research offerings/lifestyle, but it DOES say a huge amount about the level of preparedness of your peers.
I just think there's no great way to standardize rankings so that everyone is happy. I agree that NIH funding/faculty is important, but I still think total NIH funding is important too. Hypothetically, if there's an extremely small school of 10 faculty who pull in 5 million a year vs. a larger school of 50 faculty who pull in 2 million a year, which would be more well known and which is contributing more research? I can't really answer which would be more well known, but I would say the latter contributes more research since they have more total funding, even if they have a larger faculty base. NIH/faculty may be a better measure of faculty success, but not necessarily institutional success. I understand Stanford's gripes, but the rankings are research rankings and not "medical school" or "faculty" rankings.
I agree with you about GPA and MCAT - MCAT should count more than GPA since it's more standardized. This brings up the age-old argument on SDN though about how numbers aren't everything and ECs, research, etc. are just as important but cannot be measured. Also, if these rankings are such a competition between schools (which maybe they're not, but it seems like it is sometimes), then will schools start to only use GPA and MCAT to inflate their rankings and ignore the other factors?
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
Personally...I have noticed a trend in how schools respond to US New Rankings.
1. Your ranking goes up: Press release about how awesome your medical school is and it's becoming more prestigious, recognized for all of it's amazing efforts
2. Your ranking goes down: Press release explaining why rankings are meaningless and an explanation on how they should change the ranking scheme to ensure your school is higher ranked.
I still agree with him on most issues, but if you claim to be so confident in the quality of education you offer I just don't feel the need to point this out either way (if your score goes up or down). Clearly, schools do care.
And Stanford, you don't need to justify your awesomeness. We all know your awesome and would accept a position in a heartbeat. See...we'll help your ranking go up because clearly we'll reduce your acceptance rate by being low-risks for backing out. So, clearly you should just accept all of us SDNers.
1. Your ranking goes up: Press release about how awesome your medical school is and it's becoming more prestigious, recognized for all of it's amazing efforts
2. Your ranking goes down: Press release explaining why rankings are meaningless and an explanation on how they should change the ranking scheme to ensure your school is higher ranked.
I still agree with him on most issues, but if you claim to be so confident in the quality of education you offer I just don't feel the need to point this out either way (if your score goes up or down). Clearly, schools do care.
And Stanford, you don't need to justify your awesomeness. We all know your awesome and would accept a position in a heartbeat. See...we'll help your ranking go up because clearly we'll reduce your acceptance rate by being low-risks for backing out. So, clearly you should just accept all of us SDNers.
Wow I have not been on these threads for over a year, but I was curious on what people had to say about admit weekend. Not much has been written though...
Congrats to admitted, best of luck to people on the waitlist, and to those not accepted no worries you will go somewhere great i am sure.
I love love love love Stanford! best decision ever made!
I am also from a small liberal arts school for those doubting your undergrad institutions
...and to just bust some myths:
-still on a 4 year plan and would only take a year off if I decide to go abroad on a fellowship or something.
-I am not doing basic science research. I am actually really interested in public policy and community health.
I hope you all get to experience the awesomeness that is Stanford!😍
Congrats to admitted, best of luck to people on the waitlist, and to those not accepted no worries you will go somewhere great i am sure.
I love love love love Stanford! best decision ever made!
I am also from a small liberal arts school for those doubting your undergrad institutions
...and to just bust some myths:
-still on a 4 year plan and would only take a year off if I decide to go abroad on a fellowship or something.
-I am not doing basic science research. I am actually really interested in public policy and community health.
I hope you all get to experience the awesomeness that is Stanford!😍
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
Wow I have not been on these threads for over a year, but I was curious on what people had to say about admit weekend. Not much has been written though...
Congrats to admitted, best of luck to people on the waitlist, and to those not accepted no worries you will go somewhere great i am sure.
I love love love love Stanford! best decision ever made!
I am also from a small liberal arts school for those doubting your undergrad institutions
...and to just bust some myths:
-still on a 4 year plan and would only take a year off if I decide to go abroad on a fellowship or something.
-I am not doing basic science research. I am actually really interested in public policy and community health.
I hope you all get to experience the awesomeness that is Stanford!😍
Woot! Another Stanford med student. I PMed you with a funny "Stanford liberal arts" story.
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,060
- Reaction score
- 118
I was just about to say the same thing! I think that if a school participates in USNews rankings by giving it data, it is somewhat agreeing to the legitimacy of the ranking system. Perhaps schools are just too afraid to not be ranked at all, because maybe they feel they won't get any of the best applicants.
On the other hand, Mayo just took a stand. What if Stanford joins it? I think USNews would be hard pressed to say it has ranked the "best" medical schools in the world if Mayo and Stanford refused to participate.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
True. But USNews ranks Mayo in the 20's/30's when it probably should be ranked higher. Stanford is usually ranked in the Top 10.
exactly. if every top school took a serious stand then us news would be out of business, but schools do this thing where they tout the rankings if they are high on the list and object to the rankings if they move down year to year. in fact, game theory suggests that most individual schools will continue to do this since they derive benefit from being ranked higher (ie better yield rates and public prestige). do you really think harvard would give up its #1 spot just to prove a point? would give mount sinai give up its #18 spot after jumping from #32 in just 5 years?
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,060
- Reaction score
- 118
Bump to keep the Harvard thread from taking us over in # of posts.
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2007
- Messages
- 1,625
- Reaction score
- 21
Haha obviously rejected (pre-interview) but still never received official word from Stanford. Anyone else here? Haha I didn't realize they did silent rejections until interview season was over a month or two ago 😉
They do send out rejections -- many people have reported and complained about the terse 3 sentences on it.
But I do think the last interviews were at the beginning of April. You probably should have heard something by now
But I do think the last interviews were at the beginning of April. You probably should have heard something by now
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2007
- Messages
- 189
- Reaction score
- 1
You are not alone. 😕
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2008
- Messages
- 105
- Reaction score
- 0
After quite a bit of flip-flopping between Stanford and UCSF, I've mailed out my withdrawals and committed to Stanford. Good luck to those of you waiting on a decision - I hope to see you all in the fall.
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
w00t!!!!!!!! 🙂 congrats on being done and making the right decision!!! Awesome!
I'm sure you have enough current students' infos, but if you have any questions about anything, let us know!!!! Excited for you to join us next year and everyone else who is coming, and fingers crossed for those still waiting, hope you guys join us too!!!
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
any inside info on the waitlist this year that you can obtain for us? haha.
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 16
- Reaction score
- 0
No clue, but if I do hear anything I'll pass it along, however, I'm not very close to admissions, so I doubt I'll hear anything, but who knows ;-).
Good luck though!!!!
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,060
- Reaction score
- 118
Dude it's only April 29th! I bet a few of those people are on other Facebook groups for other schools. Stay +!
Also, this year's Facebook group is for accepted applicants. The one last year appears to be for matriculants.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 154
- Reaction score
- 3
OH Stanford, I would have sucked your big red cock that is the Hoover Tower if only you accepted me. I will never get over you. You'll be like the first gf that dumped me, always a scorn
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,374
- Reaction score
- 62
Hehe, I'm trying Naijaba. Really trying. I just get this feeling that our chances aren't so good this year. I remember the student I talked to saying admit weekend is usually 50-60 students. It was 72 this year! It just seems like the waitlist movement might be in the realm of 10-15 rather than 40-50. Meaning, pretty slim chances for all of us 🙁
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2007
- Messages
- 1,060
- Reaction score
- 118
My dad really liked the Hoover Tower too...although not nearly as much as you.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2010
- Messages
- 154
- Reaction score
- 3
Lol, just sayin'
Several kids (about 12 at least) at HMS revisit were choosing between Stanford and Harvard. According to their facebook profiles, most of them will be coming to HMS. Only two so far have chosen Stanford and they were both not at HMS revisit. I hope this helps.
It is too early to extrapolate how much wait-list movement there will be this year. With the bad economy and glut of competitive applicants applying more broadly, it is possible that there are more cross admits this year. I swear, half of the students on the Yale admitted page on facebook are on Harvard's as well as Michigan's. At least 15 students at HMS revisit were at JHU's the prior and were visiting Penn and Chicago next. In fact this group made a pact to end up in the same place and I believe they have chosen HMS. Hopefully Penn waitlist movement opens up a spot for you.
I also imagine that Stanford's drop in rankings might swing in your favor.
Positivity mdeast 😉 Crossing my fingers for you and naijaba. I hope you both get in.
Last edited:
There is no correlation between the number of students attending the admit weekend, and the waiting list application acceptance rate. The data (2005 to 2009) presents the number of students attending the admit weekend. Draw your own conclusions. At the end of the day it is "FATE".
Your future might be better at some other school or may be they will call you from the wait list pool. Good luck to all of you, and may God Bless you all.
Medical Student Admit Weekend
http://deansnewsletter.stanford.edu/archive/05_11_09.html#4By May 15th students admitted to medical schools across the USA will need to finalize their selection. To help with that process, the Stanford School of Medicine hosted its Admit Weekend 2009 on May 8-9th. Each year 86 students form the medical school's incoming class. They are selected from an applicant pool of over 6000. The students who have received formal acceptances to Stanford were invited to campus for a weekend of information exchange, meetings and social interactions. Over 55 students elected to participate in this year's Admit Weekend (this is similar to past years). I had the privilege of meeting most of the students at different events, and I continue to be in awe of the talent that each individual brings. We are so fortunate to have such outstanding students at Stanford and the class arriving in August will surely continue that great tradition
http://deansnewsletter.stanford.edu/archive/05_05_08.html#3
Just as alumni were returning to Stanford to renew friendships and share memories and experiences of years past, we also welcomed newly admitted students to the class that will enter this August during "Admit Weekend." More than 70 students met each other as well as current medical students, faculty and staff to learn more about the Stanford experience and determine whether this is the best place for their medical and scientific training. Naturally, I can't think of a better place to attend medical school -- especially for those seeking careers that will help them become leaders in medicine and the biosciences. With over 6500 applicants it is enormously challenging for the admissions committee to identify the students who are admitted to Stanford -- and more importantly, who will be successful and happy in this unique environment.
http://deansnewsletter.stanford.edu/archive/05_07_07.html#d
The sequential weekends of April 26-29th and May 4-6th brought admitted MD students who are deciding whether to matriculate at Stanford followed by returning MD and PhD alumni of Stanford University School of Medicine. Both weekends were characterized by enormous energy, excitement, pride and memories. Some 90 admitted MD students arrived on April 26th (one of the largest number of students to ever participate in admit weekend) and participated in an array of informational sessions as well as social functions that helped further acquaint them with the exciting programs taking place at Stanford. They met students, faculty and staff and learned about the opportunities here that are truly unique and exciting. They also attended dinners and the annual medical student talent show. According to Dr. Gabe Garcia, Professor of Medicine and Director of Admissions, more than 6500 applicants were received this year for our 86 places. The quality of the applicants and of course of the admitted students is extraordinary. They will be making their final decisions by May 15th. At the same time, the Bioscience PhD programs have also had an extraordinary group of students apply for matriculation and they too will finalize their decisions by May 15th. We are blessed by having a remarkable student body at Stanford and the class that will enter in the Fall of 2007 appears to destined to continue and even enhance that tradition.
http://deansnewsletter.stanford.edu/archive/05_01_06.html#7
Prospective students will be assessing whether the school's renewed commitment to scholarship and the training of leaders in medicine in bioscience and medicine resonates with their own career objectives. The more than 60 students who visited the campus this past weekend had the opportunity to meet with faculty and students and to learn more about the Medical School's new curriculum, as well as its core programs and initiatives. They also had the opportunity to tour the Medical Center and University campuses -- and to become as informed as possible about the future directions of Stanford and about whether it is the right institution to shape their careers in medicine.
http://deansnewsletter.stanford.edu/archive/05_02_05.html
On April 20 - 22nd the School hosted 77 outstanding students who have been admitted to the School of Medicine Class entering this August. This is the highest number in the past three years, since the school has been having combined Admit Weekends, rather than two separate events. Based on the reports from the Admissions Committee the students who have been admitted to date are truly outstanding. Special attention has been paid this year in assuring that applicants are cognizant of our new curriculum emphasizing scholarship and research in addition to excellence in clinical training and that they are committed to the goal of becoming both clinicians and scholars/investigators.
..
Thx for looking those up. Btw, do you have the waitlist percentages for those years too? Hard to draw conclusions based on one variable (# at admit). 
Approximate stats are as follows: Stanford accepted 130 to 140 students this year. Assume 135. Forty five percent will accept, based on the statistical acceptance rate. This equates to 60. They will have to select 26 from the waitlist, and will have to make an offer to 57 students to get 26 students.
130 to 140 students accepted: 60 will accept
57 students from the wait list : 26 will accept
Total students offered admission: 200
Accepted: 86
Approximate stats are as follows: Stanford accepted 130 to 140 students this year. Assume 135. Forty five percent will accept, based on the statistical acceptance rate. This equates to 60. They will have to select 26 from the waitlist, and will have to make an offer to 57 students to get 26 students.
130 to 140 students accepted: 60 will accept
57 students from the wait list : 26 will accept
Total students offered admission: 200
Accepted: 86
I hope u are right! 👍 🙂
your basic assumption is that the waitlist yield rate is the same as the acceptance yield rate, and i'm curious if that's true. [LEFT[/LEFT] on one hand the waitlist is self-selecting since only people who want to go to stanford will stay on the list. on the other hand many people waitlisted at stanford will also be waitlisted at other top10s and could potentially get pulled off multiple lists
- Status
