Soooo...from what I'm seeing here, next weekend should be fun (?)
2011-2012 University of California - Los Angeles Application Thread
- Thread starter Sammich117
- Start date
- Status
Well, maybe that doesn't matter as much with MMI. Then again, I don't really remember the scenarios.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2012
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 0
We had this classmate in high school who was very clearly bipolar, and was the histrionic type that would yell at teachers for giving him low grades and such. He then went to UCLA undergrad, and is now a med student at UCLA. Actually he did a piece of artwork that is in that DGSOM magazinethey gave us at the interview (the one with poems and stuff in it) The MMI has its merits, but is obviously not perfect with respect to weeding out people with psychiatric dysfunction.
Oh also he was an assistant for a course at UCLA, and this dude would start randomly acting out (i actually heard this part from other people though)
Interesting, I didn't view MMI as something that focuses on those aspects. I felt that the traditional interviews are great at determining sociopath status, but MMI was a little too detached. There were some ethical/people skill scenarios if I recall correctly, but since they were hypothetical I didn't know if they would be effective at letting someone's true personality come through. There was a lot of room for acting, in my opinion. But don't think I was being insincere throughout mine!
Does anyone know how the MMI is considered when giving out acceptances? Is it a scoring system?
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2012
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 0
I agree. Exactly. It seems to prefer manipulative people, and i had the greatest success in interviews where "keeping it real" is the norm. What do i know though, right?
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2009
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 1
Personal attacks clearly violate the SDN code of conduct. Moderators please?
- Joined
- May 22, 2011
- Messages
- 100
- Reaction score
- 26
I agree with this. I thought MMI seemed to favor confidence and salesmanship/acting ability. There's no way that it doesn't change the personality composition of the class. It'll be interesting, with time, to see in what direction the MMI schools trend. Any current students have theories on this?
Maybe a mix of MMI and traditional is best? Gives the adcoms a mix of objective and subjective analysis before they close their eyes and draw ping-pong balls.
This is one of my main questions, and I'm glad you brought it up as well. I do wonder how it affects who is chosen. I doubt that the class will be full of disingenuous and manipulative people (or maybe I'm biased because I don't want to be viewed as such 😛). Nonetheless, I felt that the traditional interviews would try to see how applicants fit a school's personality expectations so that the most complementary people can be chosen. I guess it's like putting together any sports team where you can't have identical people, but you don't want those that clash either.
Then again, if I knew for sure I'd skip med school and make a living off writing books on how to work the system.
good to know. Thanks!
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2012
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 0
I was thinking the same thing, the traditional interview definitely exposes more personal traits, whereas MMI can obviously be played (by people telling their soon to-be-interviewing friends what the questions are, etc), and would theoretically prefer the most pathologically manipulative strain of individuals. I digress however, it may be that the MMI doesn't play as large of a role as we think in admissions. Its an interesting experiment. I dont know how useful it is though, since it can be easily cheated
You know I don't really like the MMI system either, I do believe there are better ways to go about selecting a class. A mixture of MMI and traditional would seem to put added strain on an already slow UCLA process. I would be in favor on a traditional interview plus maybe a second interview session that consisted of maybe 3-4 scenarios with a single interviewer. Whatever the case, I have heard that UCLA actually does use the MMI scores pretty heavily when selecting its class. Not sure on the specifics but I have heard they accept those with the highest MMI scores first. I am sure they weed out those have obvious flaws or causes for concern. But who knows...
- Joined
- May 22, 2011
- Messages
- 100
- Reaction score
- 26
The argument against a cheater's advantage is that there is in theory no "right answer" to any of the questions, because they are supposed to be looking at more of the "how" than the the concrete details of the argument. But it seems like analyzing "how someone thinks/speaks/explains" just shifts the advantage away from looking at what you know towards people who are confident and good storytellers. The same thoughtful analysis in the hands of a good storyteller can seem significantly more profound.
Still, i do think it's worth some schools experimenting to find what works best.
Still, i do think it's worth some schools experimenting to find what works best.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 38
- Reaction score
- 22
this DGSOM admissions process is just super stressful
I think this sums it all up quite nicely. I feel for all of you who are waiting; the entire process can be greatly improved.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2012
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 0
ive heard that too, thats why im confused. i was told by a student that your entire application is given a numerical score (including MMI, mcat gpa, extracurrics), and they base your acceptance on that score. but on the other hand ive heard that the entire schedule of releasing admissions is based on MMI alone. i really want to know what exactly it is...
On my interview day, I heard about the former method (entire application is given a numerical score). But I forgot from whom. I think it may have been from one of the tour guides...
Either way, I just wished DGSOM would have a more structured schedule for results releasing. The complete lack of transparency is driving a lot of people nuts...
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2009
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 1
Regarding MMI:
There are pros and cons to any method for interviewing students.
Originally, the reasoning for MMI that i'd heard followed this logic: studies indicated that first impressions where formed after the initial 10 minutes of an interview and statistically did not change after an additional 40 mins. Therefore, subjecting a student to several 10 minute interviews would give a larger basis for comparison among interviewers and lead to a more objective assessment reducing the impact of bizarre personality clashes or connections.
Having been through MMI now, it seems to do much more than that. Presenting students with a variety of thought puzzles makes the students think on their toes and explores different technical and ethical dilemmas. There are no right or wrong answers here. In addition, the questioners job is to challenge the applicant. It doesn't matter if you've prepared with a friend and although you can be told the dilemma by friends you can not know how you will be challenged by the interviewer. In a way it is very similar to a graduate students qualifying exam.
Above it was mentioned that MMI assessed how students think, which to me is critical for assessing who will succeed in medical school and beyond. Thought patterns can not be taught or faked as easily as factual content. I've often envisioned an interview that would just be a complex board game where you were instructed to learn the rules as you went along and play as well as possible. An interviewer would assess the student for abstract and logical thought and how quickly they made connections.
In addition to the pros stated above, MMI makes it easy on the committee to select students using a numerical score. The "interview" section can be more easily objectivied with each station giving a raw ranking and thus there's less handwaving subjectivity. From the adcom's view this is a definite plus although maybe this can be debated from the student's perspective on what makes a great doctor.
I see MMI falling down in the following 3 areas:
1. It removes a central advocate for your application. There's no single ad com member who knows you well to speak up for you during the committee's evaluation.
2. It doesn't allow the applicant to address any shortcomings int heir application. This was crucial for me, as I felt there were some things I needed to explain about my app so I sent a letter.
3. It preferentially selects for quick thinkers and good public speakers. Many people have other great qualities to offer, such as empathy or compassion, which may not come across as well, if they're not as brilliant salesmen.
In the end, I think MMI are a force for good, although maybe the optimum set-up would be to have several MMI's followed by a traditional interview that would allow the student to address any specific concerns or comments about their application. This would also allow for a advocate as well as a more concrete objective score.
There are pros and cons to any method for interviewing students.
Originally, the reasoning for MMI that i'd heard followed this logic: studies indicated that first impressions where formed after the initial 10 minutes of an interview and statistically did not change after an additional 40 mins. Therefore, subjecting a student to several 10 minute interviews would give a larger basis for comparison among interviewers and lead to a more objective assessment reducing the impact of bizarre personality clashes or connections.
Having been through MMI now, it seems to do much more than that. Presenting students with a variety of thought puzzles makes the students think on their toes and explores different technical and ethical dilemmas. There are no right or wrong answers here. In addition, the questioners job is to challenge the applicant. It doesn't matter if you've prepared with a friend and although you can be told the dilemma by friends you can not know how you will be challenged by the interviewer. In a way it is very similar to a graduate students qualifying exam.
Above it was mentioned that MMI assessed how students think, which to me is critical for assessing who will succeed in medical school and beyond. Thought patterns can not be taught or faked as easily as factual content. I've often envisioned an interview that would just be a complex board game where you were instructed to learn the rules as you went along and play as well as possible. An interviewer would assess the student for abstract and logical thought and how quickly they made connections.
In addition to the pros stated above, MMI makes it easy on the committee to select students using a numerical score. The "interview" section can be more easily objectivied with each station giving a raw ranking and thus there's less handwaving subjectivity. From the adcom's view this is a definite plus although maybe this can be debated from the student's perspective on what makes a great doctor.
I see MMI falling down in the following 3 areas:
1. It removes a central advocate for your application. There's no single ad com member who knows you well to speak up for you during the committee's evaluation.
2. It doesn't allow the applicant to address any shortcomings int heir application. This was crucial for me, as I felt there were some things I needed to explain about my app so I sent a letter.
3. It preferentially selects for quick thinkers and good public speakers. Many people have other great qualities to offer, such as empathy or compassion, which may not come across as well, if they're not as brilliant salesmen.
In the end, I think MMI are a force for good, although maybe the optimum set-up would be to have several MMI's followed by a traditional interview that would allow the student to address any specific concerns or comments about their application. This would also allow for a advocate as well as a more concrete objective score.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2009
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 1
In my observation, MMI's traditionally left the applicants in high spirits and full of energy at the end. I'm not sure if this is a good thing or not, but I enjoyed it.
Also, consider this: MMI's are still a new interview technique. There is less training available for them as professional coaches are still coming to terms with the technique just as the schools who administer them are. As time goes by, I'm sure MMI's will be "gamed" to a greater extent and prepared for more successfully than they are now. Perhaps this will reduce their effectiveness or their current potential benefits over traditional interviews. Only time will tell.
Honestly though, with time any system can be "gamed" which is why occasional system changes are a good thing for the administration seeking quick thinkers.
On another note: after interviewing at 16 different schools and seeing 16 different systems, I've seen there are far, far worse techniques to use than MMI.
The worst I think are those schools with a single interviewer (sometimes through necessity due to applicant/interviewer pool size) and interviewers who don't read a students application ahead of time and thus end up asking all the "canned" questions which result in "canned" responses. Ironically, I've seen it's usually the more prestigious interviewers who do this, either because they're too busy or too political to realize it's a bad method.
Also, consider this: MMI's are still a new interview technique. There is less training available for them as professional coaches are still coming to terms with the technique just as the schools who administer them are. As time goes by, I'm sure MMI's will be "gamed" to a greater extent and prepared for more successfully than they are now. Perhaps this will reduce their effectiveness or their current potential benefits over traditional interviews. Only time will tell.
Honestly though, with time any system can be "gamed" which is why occasional system changes are a good thing for the administration seeking quick thinkers.
On another note: after interviewing at 16 different schools and seeing 16 different systems, I've seen there are far, far worse techniques to use than MMI.
The worst I think are those schools with a single interviewer (sometimes through necessity due to applicant/interviewer pool size) and interviewers who don't read a students application ahead of time and thus end up asking all the "canned" questions which result in "canned" responses. Ironically, I've seen it's usually the more prestigious interviewers who do this, either because they're too busy or too political to realize it's a bad method.
Sorry if this has been discussed before (search only found 1 post). Does UCLA accept letters of intent? Do they care? Even a teeny bit? I remember reading that they only want updates if they're significant. I have literally nothing to update them about, but I could certainly send them a love letter. 😍 Thanks if anyone knows.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2009
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 1
Send it.
If they read it, good. If they don't read it, no loss.
Expressing interest in a school that you love can't hurt you in my opinion.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2011
- Messages
- 45
- Reaction score
- 0
I sent them one. They responded thanking me for my letter of interest. Don't know if it'll make a difference as I'm still "wait listed" but we'll see.
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2010
- Messages
- 1,981
- Reaction score
- 499
Do it!
As for the MMI, I'm pretty confident mine went poorly and I'm here at UCLA... Speculate all you want, but the interview is just one part of a *much* bigger application process. I think its purpose is to remove the possibility of getting an unlucky personality mismatch between interviewer/interviewee and potentially spoiling a good applicant's chances. The intention of the MMI is to standardize the interview process, not to let cheaters in 🙄
But yeah, sam500, I totally agree with your ideas of MMI's shortcomings and I had the same problems as you did during my interview... whatever the case, it seems like they account for it so keep up hope everyone
What email address did you send your letter of interest to and who did you address it to?
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2009
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 1
I'd send it to all 3 of the following:
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
I addressed my email and attached letter to "Admissions Staff".
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2011
- Messages
- 2,272
- Reaction score
- 24
So somebody who is only on a wait-list is already an expert on psychiatric dysfunction? And furthermore, the MMI weeded you out, so who's to say it isn't working?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2011
- Messages
- 2,272
- Reaction score
- 24
better luck in whatever career you go into after you get rejected.
Haha, okay, thanks.
Yeah, me too.
Do it!
As for the MMI, I'm pretty confident mine went poorly and I'm here at UCLA... Speculate all you want, but the interview is just one part of a *much* bigger application process. I think its purpose is to remove the possibility of getting an unlucky personality mismatch between interviewer/interviewee and potentially spoiling a good applicant's chances. The intention of the MMI is to standardize the interview process, not to let cheaters in 🙄
But yeah, sam500, I totally agree with your ideas of MMI's shortcomings and I had the same problems as you did during my interview... whatever the case, it seems like they account for it so keep up hope everyone
I cried during an intense MMI scenario at another school and got accepted. I guess you never know what they're looking for...
Thanks!
I cried during an intense MMI scenario at another school and got accepted. I guess you never know what they're looking for...
If you don't mind my asking, was it the content/description of the scenario that affected you or how you were being interviewed about it? This is just out of my own curiosity. I wonder what kind of scenarios other schools have; UCLA was my only MMI.
As for the MMI, I'm pretty confident mine went poorly and I'm here at UCLA... Speculate all you want, but the interview is just one part of a *much* bigger application process. I think its purpose is to remove the possibility of getting an unlucky personality mismatch between interviewer/interviewee and potentially spoiling a good applicant's chances. The intention of the MMI is to standardize the interview process, not to let cheaters in 🙄
But yeah, sam500, I totally agree with your ideas of MMI's shortcomings and I had the same problems as you did during my interview... whatever the case, it seems like they account for it so keep up hope everyone
Yeah, I definitely screwed up on more than 1 scenario during my MMI. The sample size is small, but I would guess that UCLA might be looking for the screw ups 😀. And before anyone can get insulted (which tends to happen a lot in this thread), lemme clarify that that is a joke.
I can see how MMI would be used to ensure some sort of fairness or standardization, but since med school admissions are often seen as a crap shoot it would be nice to have an avenue that you could sway to your advantage (such as the interviewer as a personal advocate).
Question to current students: What kind of homework assignments do you get? How are they graded? I vaguely remember our tour guide saying you get weekly essay-type assignments? If so, do you get feedback on these? Thanks!
+1. I hate homework, it promotes procrastination.
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2009
- Messages
- 33
- Reaction score
- 44
We have weekly assigned Learning Issues from questions we have from our first day of PBL of the week. These are usually 500-700 word (basically a page to page and a quarter) compositions answering a question that could help understand the case of the week better.
For example if the case is about a patient coming in with a possible heart attack, you might have a learning issue on how angioplasty and stenting are performed or what is the mechanism behind beta blocker use in MIs or what is the efficacy of a cardiac enzyme panel in patients presenting with angina, etc. These are assigned in class on Monday and then you have till Thursday morning to search Pubmed, textbooks, and acceptable sources for your little 500-700 word blurb and then you post it before Thursday morning on your group's online discussion board.
They are graded in the sense that are required and are factored into your written feedback for the Block. And yes your PBL instructor does give you weekly feedback. They will usually post on Thursday afternoon feedback and maybe some questions to investigate before discussing your learning issue at PBL on Friday morning.
I'm not sure how much I'm allowed to state because of the non-disclosure agreement, but it was a role-playing scenario where the actor was yelling at me and insulting me. Normally that wouldn't make me cry, but it was so unexpected during a medical school interview that I started to tear up...probably out of shock. This is part of the reason I'm not too keen on MMI's as they're currently done. I think MMI's have just as much bias as regular interviews, if not more. For example, they don't always use the same interviewer for the same station. If I got someone who was a little TOO into the acting, and you got someone chill and laid back, how can you possibly objectively compare our scores? Ugh.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2009
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 1
Wow, that sounds intense. Subjecting students fresh out of college to that type of abuse is not useful in my opinion. Just cruel and unusual. Since medicine is a service industry, dealing with abusive patients should be part of the education, not an expectation prior to entry. I'm sorry you had to go through that.
I hope you made a comment on the survey they gave you at the end.
Haha, thanks, it was intense. I honestly think it was just a test to see whether applicants could take undeserved abuse without getting confrontational. I guess I passed 👍
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2011
- Messages
- 45
- Reaction score
- 0
That's my guess, but then again this is UCLA, so it could be tomorrow or it could be mid-June
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2011
- Messages
- 2,272
- Reaction score
- 24
You may not hear anything until August. They'll keep you on the wait-list until school starts in case they need to fill spots. They aren't just going to magically make decisions on May 15. They will keep everyone on the wait-list forever so they can fill spots last minute.
They don't keep everyone on the waitlist. I personally know of someone who got rejected post interview at the end of May as well as people reporting being rejected on last year's thread. I also know another person who was notified that they are officially on the waitlist sometime in May as well. It can still go either way for those of us who don't have decisions yet.
TL;DR: No status decision does not mean waitlist
Well, crap.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2012
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 0
yeah there were a ton of decisions at the end of may last year, basically no decision can also mean hold, waitlist, or rejection. Seems like there were a ton of rejections at that time though
I wish they'd send rejections sooner...
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2012
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 0
Do you personally believe that they've filled the class? I totally believed it at first, but now that I look at the facebook group and see how many have joined the group, compared to how many joined the 2015 group at the same time last year, I'm starting to have doubts. Nevertheless, they definitely have accepted quite a few so far (based on mdapps data). Also, it just seems so fishy that no one has posted on this VERY active thread of an acceptance, since 3/9/2012
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2011
- Messages
- 2,272
- Reaction score
- 24
Yea, they probably filled their 100% korean quota already.
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2012
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 0
That march 30th rule is actually more of a recommendation than a mandated law.
Why are people so bitter towards admissions offices? -___- It's not going to help you get in, which is the entire point of this process. Just let the people do their thing! If the office says it's full, it's probably full. Not everyone who was accepted posts on SDN or has an mdapp.
- Status
