2013-2014 Washington University in St. Louis Application Thread

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
@Asperphys and @chronicidal , thank you for your responses, I really appreciate them! If anything, the enthusiasm of WashU students about the school, their friendliness and other positive qualities make me like the school even more 🙂 I was already impressed by WashU students and staff friendliness and willingness to help during my interview visit.
I want to make it clear that I do like WashU (in fact, I was kind of defending it earlier in this thread 😉), but since I'm one of the lucky people who have a choice, I want to make sure I make the right one *for me*. In my - admittedly, naive premed - opinion, WashU's match lists are awesome and awesomely consistent from year to year (just like those of Penn, Harvard and JHU... and that's pretty much it, the other match lists are more variable). I'm glad that WashU's curriculum "forces" its students to perform so well on Step 1 etc., and I have no doubt that I'll be able to match to a good residency from WashU assuming I work hard (just like I will need to work hard anywhere else). I just want to make sure the school's curriculum and culture fit my personality, interests and aspirations.
I will certainly attend the second look to get more information and see how I feel about the school 🙂
 
Yeah. It's a bit sad. No clue why we have trouble drawing URMs here. I chalked it up to them not liking STL (attendings included). But better informed people than I are looking into this. We have a Dean of Diversity for the med school, and even have several administrators whose job is to specifically recruit URMs to the MSTP. The atmosphere is one welcoming of anyone regardless of background so I personally am mystified by this.

No offense but the Office of Diversity Programs is literally in a broom closet. I had one of my interviews there and I walked by the room twice because it looks like the entrance to a storage space. When I went inside, the office was TINY. It's nice that they have it, but at other top institutions I've been to their Offices of Diversity/Multicultural Affairs/etc have been way more legit.

The staff and the dean were incredibly nice, but, whether intentional or not, the office space provided for "diversity" gave the vibe that it was not an important thing to the institution as a whole. I really expected more out of a top 10 med school TBH.
 
Interesting that this is the case, bc your average WashU student in the middle 1/3 (and maybe even in the bottom 1/3 of the class), would quite easily have been in the top 1/3 or even AOA if they had attended a non-top 10 school or lower tier school. It just so happens that at WashU, you've already aggregated the best standardized exam takers (based on MCAT) and academically motivated students (based on GPA, from higher ranked schools), who presumably all are aiming/competing for Honors on rotations.

Being Top 1/3 or AOA at WashU (I'm assuming this is calculated based on # of Honors grades and Step 1 score) is a huge accomplishment due to the high caliber of the average student that attends WashU (there will always be outliers of course).

That is indeed an interesting thought. Would it be better to be middle to lower third at WashU or be AOA or top 1/3 at a lower tier school? Alas, we can only speculate. I would imagine that with Step 1 scores being something of an equalizer, a person who is at that level will have the same Step 1 score regardless of what school they attend-- unless they ended up going to one that makes them miserable. In any case, no one matriculates at WashU thinking, "I'm definitely gonna be in the bottom 1/3." Future performance in the wards cannot be clearly predicted even from grades in the preclinical classes-- case in point, I've tutored some first years who had trouble initially, but later did fantastic in 3rd year.

Before I start freaking out the premeds with the impression that WashU is a pressure-cooker ripe for backstabbing gunners, I might allay fears and anxieties if I explained how AOA students are chosen. They're not the literal top 20 students. We, as students, nominate our peers based on perceived leadership and other special qualities. So the students who are more active in extracurriculars, or did impressive stuff, or are most helpful to their peers by sharing notes etc are more likely to be nominated than the self-involved gunner. But it's not a straight-up popularity contest either. Among the students nominated, the administration will approve only those whose performance is in the top 1/3.

Getting AOA is certainly awesome. But it's not the end of one's ambition to match into plastics, ENT, uro, ROAD etc if one didn't make it. If one puts in tremendous effort to get great Step 1 scores and grades, then yes, they will certainly get top 1/3 ranking. Getting Honors in clerkship isn't a competition either. Students are compared to the "historical Wash U student". It's a collective impression the attendings have from having worked with several generations of WashU students. If your performance is typical of a WashU student (which is already pretty good), you get High Pass. If you manage to do better than that by being a fully contributing member of your clinical team, you will get Honors. An example of Honors level performance would be like being able to help with a difficult diagnosis by leading the team to (obscure) papers that report your patient's strange MRI findings can be a presentation of (insert weird eponym here) Syndrome. Students do not benefit from making their peers look bad. If you suck, but your peers suck even worse, none of you will get honors.
 
No offense but the Office of Diversity Programs is literally in a broom closet. I had one of my interviews there and I walked by the room twice because it looks like the entrance to a storage space. When I went inside, the office was TINY. It's nice that they have it, but at other top institutions I've been to their Offices of Diversity/Multicultural Affairs/etc have been way more legit.

The staff and the dean were incredibly nice, but, whether intentional or not, the office space provided for "diversity" gave the vibe that it was not an important thing to the institution as a whole. I really expected more out of a top 10 med school TBH.

That is definitely a legitimate criticism. But you think making the Office of Diversity bigger or making the label clearer (yeah, I missed it a few times too) is gonna draw more URMs to WashU? I think it's a bit strange that the solution is as simple as that. MSTP shares its offices with DBBS (yeah, the grad school administrators) and they don't give the impression that MD-PhDs are not taken seriously at WashU. Maybe you can share what kind of activities or programs the other top 10 med schools have that WashU can also engage in to draw URMs. That would definitely be helpful.
 
Last edited:
That is indeed an interesting thought. Would it be better to be middle to lower third at WashU or be AOA or top 1/3 at a lower tier school? Alas, we can only speculate. I would imagine that with Step 1 scores being something of an equalizer, a person who is at that level will have the same Step 1 score regardless of what school they attend-- unless they ended up going to one that makes them miserable. In any case, no one matriculates at WashU thinking, "I'm definitely gonna be in the bottom 1/3." Future performance in the wards cannot be clearly predicted even from grades in the preclinical classes-- case in point, I've tutored some first years who had trouble initially, but later did fantastic in 3rd year.

I agree, no one who matriculates at WashU (or any med school) aims to be in the bottom 1/3 of the class. It's just how things end up panning out, when everything is tabulated, esp. if you're unlucky enough to be on either side of the cutoff. I guess what I'm saying is that your "historical WashU student" is so much stronger to begin with vs. your student attending SLU, or even U of Missouri-Columbia. I don't know how much Residency PDs take this into account, although, I'm sure it's also specialty specific (i.e. Derm vs. IM), although, with so many applicants thru ERAS, it's just easier to employ strict cutoffs, without digging deeper.

I would say though that someone who got a Step 1 score that is lower might not necessarily have gotten the same score coming from another institution. There are certain medical schools whose basic science faculty have no desire to "teach to the boards" or whose professors don't incorporate information pertinent to Step 1 in their lectures (either bc they don't care or bc they don't know how - as if opening up a BRS, Rapid Review, or Pathoma, is that difficult). Thus the student is left to fend for themselves, not only 1) to go through the powerpoints/notes/textbook the professor covered in class for professor-made exams, but also to then 2) separately go through the information pertinent to Step 1 (i.e. First Aid and board review texts). In an ideal world, the professor would cover both and thus also give his/her knowledgeable insight.

Perfect example: Baylor College of Medicine - Their basic science curriculum and their faculty are known to actively incorporate USMLE Step 1 pertinent material and they have one of the highest USMLE Step 1 averages, even though their MCAT score averages are lower than WashU. I hardly doubt that somehow Baylor is recruiting vastly higher caliber (on paper) applicants.
 
Last edited:
No offense but the Office of Diversity Programs is literally in a broom closet. I had one of my interviews there and I walked by the room twice because it looks like the entrance to a storage space. When I went inside, the office was TINY. It's nice that they have it, but at other top institutions I've been to their Offices of Diversity/Multicultural Affairs/etc have been way more legit.

The staff and the dean were incredibly nice, but, whether intentional or not, the office space provided for "diversity" gave the vibe that it was not an important thing to the institution as a whole. I really expected more out of a top 10 med school TBH.

This is my naivete speaking here, but what extra resources are you wanting the Office of Diversity to give you, with respect to medical student success, that shouldn't be afforded to all students, regardless of URM status? The architecture and decor of their diversity office is hardly something WashU (much less any med school) should be judged on by students when it comes to affecting matriculation decisions.
 
Last edited:
Do we get an email/notification of waitlist? I interviewed ~3 months ago and have heard nada.


There was a big wave of waitlists through email on March 25. I would recommend that you check your spam folder, though there may be some that weren't waitlisted and are still being considered for outright admission.
 
I want to make it clear that I do like WashU (in fact, I was kind of defending it earlier in this thread 😉), but since I'm one of the lucky people who have a choice, I want to make sure I make the right one *for me*. In my - admittedly, naive premed - opinion, WashU's match lists are awesome and awesomely consistent from year to year (just like those of Penn, Harvard and JHU... and that's pretty much it, the other match lists are more variable). I'm glad that WashU's curriculum "forces" its students to perform so well on Step 1 etc., and I have no doubt that I'll be able to match to a good residency from WashU assuming I work hard (just like I will need to work hard anywhere else). I just want to make sure the school's curriculum and culture fit my personality, interests and aspirations.
I will certainly attend the second look to get more information and see how I feel about the school 🙂

Would be ironic after all that defending, if you still ended up choosing another school. 😆😆😆
 
I decided to withdraw my acceptance here...it was really tough to do, I loved this school when I visited for the interview, but I have a cheaper option closer to home. I hope my spot goes to one of you on the waitlist!
 
That is definitely a legitimate criticism. But you think making the Office of Diversity bigger or making the label clearer (yeah, I missed it a few times too) is gonna draw more URMs to WashU? I think it's a bit strange that the solution is as simple as that. MSTP shares its offices with DBBS (yeah, the grad school administrators) and they don't give the impression that MD-PhDs are not taken seriously at WashU. Maybe you can share what kind of activities or programs the other top 10 med schools have that WashU can also engage in to draw URMs. That would definitely be helpful.

Thanks for responding! I will address both of you below.

This is my naivete speaking here, but what extra resources are you wanting the Office of Diversity to give you, with respect to medical student success, that shouldn't be afforded to all students, regardless of URM status? The architecture and decor of their diversity office is hardly something WashU (much less any med school) should be judged by students when it comes to matriculation decisions.

I don't want to get into a URM flame war in a school-specific thread so I'll keep it relatively brief.

There is a lot of literature supporting the need for a supportive environment for minority students to be successful. This isn't just URMs but also LGBT, religious minorities, etc. This obviously was born out of undergraduate institutions, but has made it's way into graduate and professional schools as well. One of the big things that attracted me to schools when I went was a strong and vibrant SNMA or LMSA chapter, Offices of Diversity/Multicultural Affairs/etc that seemed well funded and respected at the institution, and the presence of URM students as tour guides, lunch participants, etc. I was shocked that the the literature I received from WashU before my interview actually omitted the existence of an SNMA chapter. I brought this up to the Dean of Diversity and she was really surprised and seemed embarrassed. She then proceeded to find a bunch of older diversity literature (probably 2011 or 2012) for me to read. Is this a huge deal? No, but perception is reality. When there are very few URMs to go around the top 20 or 30 schools and all the other schools are stressing their support of diversity and seeming to take it much more seriously, it makes the schools that aren't look bad, and this might push URM students into the arms of other suitors.

I am obviously only one person and this is only my experience, but it definitely surprised me on my interview day.

Let it be known that I think WashU does better with diversity than a lot of lower ranked institutions I saw. However, from what I saw at other Top 30 institutions was that diversity was emphasized much more. This may be why WashU has lower URMs on average than its peer institutions.

Just my $0.02 🙂 BTW I was incredibly impressed by the facilities and everything else at WashU 🙂
 
Would be ironic after all that defending, if you still ended up choosing another school. 😆😆😆
Ironic or not, there is indeed a non-zero probability of me going to a different school. My family and I are certainly not rich, so cost of attendance will play a substantial role in my decision making. I already have a surprisingly good offer from one school which may be hard to beat by others. And I like that school quite a lot anyway, so going there won't be a hard decision. But it ain't over till it's over; I will collect information and consider the relative merits of different schools until I get all the data I need. And I'm sorry to write this in a school-specific thread, but I think this is the kind of thinking most acceptees engage in.
 
That is definitely a legitimate criticism. But you think making the Office of Diversity bigger or making the label clearer (yeah, I missed it a few times too) is gonna draw more URMs to WashU? I think it's a bit strange that the solution is as simple as that. MSTP shares its offices with DBBS (yeah, the grad school administrators) and they don't give the impression that MD-PhDs are not taken seriously at WashU. Maybe you can share what kind of activities or programs the other top 10 med schools have that WashU can also engage in to draw URMs. That would definitely be helpful.

In my opinion the reason WashU has a lower percentage of URM's than some peer institutions is because they place more emphasis on things in the admission process (eg MCAT, GPA, etc) other than URM status than those peer schools. I don't think it's good or bad, I just think WashU is more interested in getting the "top" performing students in these areas rather than filling a certain quota of URM students


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
In my opinion the reason WashU has a lower percentage of URM's than some peer institutions is because they place more emphasis on things in the admission process (eg MCAT, GPA, etc) other than URM status than those peer schools. I don't think it's good or bad, I just think WashU is more interested in getting the "top" performing students in these areas rather than filling a certain quota of URM students


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
way to be welcoming. hope u don't end up my classmate.
 
way to be welcoming. hope u don't end up my classmate.

I'm sorry I didn't mean that to be unwelcoming, I was just describing the admissions process here, not my views personally. I love all of my classmates, and am so glad for the diversity that we do have!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I'm sorry I didn't mean that to be unwelcoming, I was just describing the admissions process here, not my views personally. I love all of my classmates, and am so glad for the diversity that we do have!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You're a Washu student....? Jeez. At least now I know what I might be getting into.
 
Thanks for responding! I will address both of you below.



I don't want to get into a URM flame war in a school-specific thread so I'll keep it relatively brief.

There is a lot of literature supporting the need for a supportive environment for minority students to be successful. This isn't just URMs but also LGBT, religious minorities, etc. This obviously was born out of undergraduate institutions, but has made it's way into graduate and professional schools as well. One of the big things that attracted me to schools when I went was a strong and vibrant SNMA or LMSA chapter, Offices of Diversity/Multicultural Affairs/etc that seemed well funded and respected at the institution, and the presence of URM students as tour guides, lunch participants, etc. I was shocked that the the literature I received from WashU before my interview actually omitted the existence of an SNMA chapter. I brought this up to the Dean of Diversity and she was really surprised and seemed embarrassed. She then proceeded to find a bunch of older diversity literature (probably 2011 or 2012) for me to read. Is this a huge deal? No, but perception is reality. When there are very few URMs to go around the top 20 or 30 schools and all the other schools are stressing their support of diversity and seeming to take it much more seriously, it makes the schools that aren't look bad, and this might push URM students into the arms of other suitors.

I am obviously only one person and this is only my experience, but it definitely surprised me on my interview day.

Let it be known that I think WashU does better with diversity than a lot of lower ranked institutions I saw. However, from what I saw at other Top 30 institutions was that diversity was emphasized much more. This may be why WashU has lower URMs on average than its peer institutions.

Just my $0.02 🙂 BTW I was incredibly impressed by the facilities and everything else at WashU 🙂

I wasn't trying to start a URM flame war by any means, so I'll try to be more clear. I don't see how the architecture of the Diversity office itself, affects the day-to-day life of a URM medical student at Wash U. Medical schools have certain allotted space as they are housed in buildings many of which have been built decades ago. Hence why when they expand, they only add buildings not destroy older buildings. They also run on budgets. Physical space is not an infinite commodity, which can be granted like Oprah can dole out gifts to her studio audience. It's not a "slight" towards any specific person/entity - it's logistics and what the functions of the physical space are (i.e. laboratory space vs. lecture hall, for example).

I don't see how based on that that how it affects the educational strength you would possibly get at WashU.

Here is an example at UPenn's medical school's diversity office: http://www.med.upenn.edu/diversityume/mentoring.shtml. Are you seriously saying that WashU does not have the same additional resources like extra tutoring, faculty-student mentorship programs (with URM faculty members or otherwise), buddy systems, etc.?

Wash U may have a lower # of URMs, but that's bc medicine AS A WHOLE has a low number of URMs. Hence the denotation of "underpresented" in comparison to the U.S. population. That being said, you also have to consider that Wash U matriculates people with high GPAs and high MCAT scores - that filters out A LOT of the applicant pool, BOTH URM and non-URM alike. This isn't surprising as Wash U's goal is to capture people who are more likely to strive to become specialists.

Lower ranked schools (compared to Wash U) also have lower matriculating GPAs and MCAT scores. Statistically, URMs tend to have lower GPAs/lower MCAT scores, based on released AAMC data. So while lower ranked schools may have more URMs, this may not be due to it's emphasis on diversity, but based on those URMs happening to fit their entering class statistics.

I was shocked that the the literature I received from WashU before my interview actually omitted the existence of an SNMA chapter. I brought this up to the Dean of Diversity and she was really surprised and seemed embarrassed. She then proceeded to find a bunch of older diversity literature (probably 2011 or 2012) for me to read. Is this a huge deal? No, but perception is reality. When there are very few URMs to go around the top 20 or 30 schools and all the other schools are stressing their support of diversity and seeming to take it much more seriously, it makes the schools that aren't look bad, and this might push URM students into the arms of other suitors.

Are you seriously judging a school, based on a WUSTL secretary forgetting to type the existence of an SNMA chapter on a handout? Seriously!?!?! Here after less than a minute of Googling: http://medschooldiversity.wustl.edu/student-life/organizations/#snma AND http://snma.wustl.edu/Pages/Default.aspx. That Dean was probably embarassed at the inadvertent admission by her secretary (typing up handouts is not her responsibility as the freakin' Dean where she has many other real responsibilities) and thus gave you other literature (which by the way 2011/2012 is not old - as this isn't a swiftly changing medical science)

Based on your criticisms of the diversity office being: "literally in a broom closet", "that the the literature I received from WashU before my interview actually omitted the existence of an SNMA chapter." It just seems like your complaints are quite petty. Did WashU not have "presence of URM students as tour guides, lunch participants, etc." or not enough to your liking? Not being mean here, I'm just genuinely asking if they had them

I just think you're attributing a lot of bad motivations to WashU that may not necessarily be true (and I am hardly someone to be the defender of the kingdom of WashU - based on my criticism of their preclinical grading system being a top tier school).
 
Last edited:
2 things:
  • I think what ChemEngMD is getting at is that smaller/less prominent placement for something like a Diversity Office MAY BE symptomatic of a larger issue at WashU. This problem is the embarrassingly low URM percentage.
  • A bigger issue to me is illustrated in MDubs1's comments. This issue is that a potential classmate will think that a random black/Latino/Native American student he meets will necessarily (or more likely) have inferior stats and necessarily got in because of the school's charity.
 
Are you seriously judging a school, based on a WUSTL secretary forgetting to type the existence of an SNMA chapter on a handout? Seriously!?!?! Here after less than a minute of Googling: http://medschooldiversity.wustl.edu/student-life/organizations/#snma AND http://snma.wustl.edu/Pages/Default.aspx. That Dean was probably embarassed at the inadvertent admission by her secretary (typing up handouts is not her responsibility as the freakin' Dean where she has many other real responsibilities) and thus gave you other literature (which by the way 2011/2012 is not old - as this isn't a swiftly changing medical science)

Based on your criticisms of the diversity office being: "literally in a broom closet", "that the the literature I received from WashU before my interview actually omitted the existence of an SNMA chapter." It just seems like your complaints are quite petty. Did WashU not have "presence of URM students as tour guides, lunch participants, etc." or not enough to your liking? Not being mean here, I'm just genuinely asking if they had them

I just think you're attributing a lot of bad motivations to WashU that may not necessarily be true (and I am hardly someone to be the defender of the kingdom of WashU - based on my criticism of their preclinical grading system).

1. As far as the office space, it is not about the functionality of the office as much as it is a representation of how much the school values the office. The Dean of Diversity seemed very competent and very passionate about her job. I'm sure she is wonderful and, as I know some URMs at WashU currently, I am confident in saying the office runs pretty well. This isn't about the Office of Diversity, it's about the medical school as a whole putting the Office of Diversity in a place that is not easily accessible. Whether intentional or not, it doesn't send a "we value diversity" message to someone visiting. This is compared to other schools that prominently display where the office is and it is much more accessible for the students.

2. In regards to the literature. It was not a simple typed up hand-out. This was a glossy, magazine style 8 page 8 1/2 X 11" quality mail-out. There was a section on diversity that touched upon the Asian student group and some other student groups but completely left out the main medical student group for URMs, SNMA. This wasn't a throw away hand-out - it was something the marketing team for the school put together and it was mass mailed out to many people.

Sorry that I did not explain that thoroughly before.

3. I did not see another URM current student on any tours, stopping by the office, or in any other capacity other than the one I stayed with the night before my interview (I have known this individual for 5 years). As for my interview group, there was 1 other URM.

You can see it as petty, but here's the thing: when you have choices, like many of the URMs admitted to WashU, why would you choose the school that puts the Office of Diversity in a tiny room, doesn't include SNMA on its major magazine style mail-out, and doesn't emphasize diversity at any point during the interview day? Especially when MANY of the other Top 20 schools are doing just that.

It's not saying that WashU is messing up by not doing this, but I have to imagine they are losing URMs to schools that are putting more of a good faith effort in recruiting them and showing their support for them.

Perhaps it is simply a marketing and branding issue?
 
Last edited:
2 things:
  • I think what ChemEngMD is getting at is that smaller/less prominent placement for something like a Diversity Office MAY BE symptomatic of a larger issue at WashU. This problem is the embarrassingly low URM percentage.
  • A bigger issue to me is illustrated in MDubs1's comments. This issue is that a potential classmate will think that a random black/Latino/Native American student he meets will necessarily (or more likely) have inferior stats and necessarily got in because of the school's charity.

Yes, but WashU tends to recruit those with high MCAT and high GPAs. They do this to serve themselves (more people who strive for specialist medicine and thus make the school look great), but they also do it bc the last thing they want is someone who may not make it all the way through the MD program curriculum, and now has undischargeable med school debt. Low GPAs/low MCATs are a red flag for not being able to make it thru. This is well established in the literature.

AAMC data shows that URMs on average tend to have lower GPA/MCAT scores. Are there exceptions? Sure! But I highly doubt that WUSTL would lower it's MCAT/GPA standard to a such a great degree, thru a quota system, as it would hurt the school and hurt the student. Also the school is located in St. Louis, not in places like Boston, NYC, LA, etc. URM applicants also want to live in great cities as well, just like non-URMs. So attributing the low URM percentage at WashU's med school directly to WashU's theoretical low commitment to diversity is laughable.
 
Yes, but WashU tends to recruit those with high MCAT and high GPAs. They do this to serve themselves (more people who strive for specialist medicine and thus make the school look great), but they also do it bc the last thing they want is someone who may not make it all the way through the MD program curriculum, and now has undischargeable med school debt. Low GPAs/low MCATs are a red flag for not being able to make it thru. This is well established in the literature.

AAMC data shows that URMs on average tend to have lower GPA/MCAT scores. Are there exceptions? Sure! But I highly doubt that WUSTL would lower it's MCAT/GPA standard to a such a great degree, thru a quota system, as it would hurt the school and hurt the student. Also the school is located in St. Louis, not in places like Boston, NYC, LA, etc. URM applicants also want to live in great cities as well, just like non-URMs. So attributing the low URM percentage at WashU's med school directly to WashU's theoretical low commitment to diversity is laughable.

Don't you just have the world all figured out?

What is established is that matriculating URM students AS A WHOLE have lower GPA/MCAT scores. Do you know that this holds up at top schools like WashU? I suspect that the trend for lower stats for URM's doesn't hold when dealing with these programs because they tend to "hog" all the great students, leaving the rest of the schools with lower-stats URM's. Also, who said other schools use quota systems? That would be illegal (at least at public institutions).

Lastly, I'm not so sure about your claim that WUSTL's location is a big contributing factor to its low URM percentage. For instance, Duke and WashU (arguably) have equally appealing/unappealing locations, yet Duke has double the URM percentage.
 
1. As far as the office space, it is not about the functionality of the office as much as it is a representation of how much the school values the office. The Dean of Diversity seemed very competent and very passionate about her job. I'm sure she is wonderful and, as I know some URMs at WashU currently, I am confident in saying the office runs pretty well. This isn't about the Office of Diversity, it's about the medical school as a whole putting the Office of Diversity in a place that is not easily accessible. Whether intentional or not, it doesn't send a "we value diversity" message to someone visiting. This is compared to other schools that prominently display where the office is and it is much more accessible for the students.

So it seems like the solution is paint and construction materials to make a prominent sign. I'm pretty sure that's not financially taxing for WashU.

2. In regards to the literature. It was not a simple typed up hand-out. This was a glossy, magazine style 8 page 8 1/2 X 11" quality mail-out. There was a section on diversity that touched upon the Asian student group and some other student groups but completely left out the main medical student group for URMs, SNMA. This wasn't a throw away hand-out - it was something the marketing team for the school put together and it was mass mailed out to many people.

A glossy magazine is also typed by some secretary and sent to professional printers. Yes, it's looked over before sending, but it's hard to encompass ALL the characteristics of a medical school that attract all applicants and be able to whittle it down to a digestible portable magazine, without being the size of a phone book. Hence why most applicants also use the internet, in which in less than 60 seconds, you could see the 2 websites of WUSTL's SNMA: one of which the SNMA gets a whole website to itself. You seem to be more engrossed in the gift wrap than what is actually underneath.

3. I did not see another URM current student on any tours, stopping by the office, or in any other capacity other than the one I stayed with the night before my interview (I have known this individual for 5 years). As for my interview group, there was 1 other URM.

At most schools, medical students volunteer to do tours. They are not required to so. This is bc a school can't "force" someone to do a tour, bc students are not employees of the school. They have classes, rotations, research, their own lives, other obligations to tend to and are very busy. They won't necessarily be visiting the Office of Diversity all the time, bc this isn't college where you have oodles of time after classes. Med school is a different ball game than college.

Do you want WUSTL to have certain quotas for tour guides? What if someone volunteers to be a tour guide but isn't a URM? Should the school tell them no? Or do you think WUSTL should have a separate one tour for the URMs with a URM tour guide, along with another tour guide for the non-URM?

You can see it as petty, but here's the thing: when you have choices, like many of the URMs admitted to WashU, why would you choose the school that puts the Office of Diversity in a tiny room, doesn't include SNMA on its major magazine style mail-out, and doesn't emphasize diversity at any point during the interview day? Especially when MANY of the other Top 20 schools are doing just that.

It's not saying that WashU is messing up by not doing this, but I have to imagine they are losing URMs to schools that are putting more of a good faith effort in recruiting them and showing their support for them.

Perhaps it is simply a marketing and branding issue?

Petty, maybe. Honestly, you come off as someone who believes WashU should cater to you by throwing out the red carpet for the honor of being in your presence, and you sound like you have a chip on your shoulder bc Wash U didn't try to court you (beyond most people's reasonable expectations). You seem to sound more like protypical, entitled millenial than a future entering medical student.
 
Petty, maybe. Honestly, you come off as someone who believes WashU should cater to you by throwing out the red carpet for the honor of being in your presence, and you sound like you have a chip on your shoulder bc Wash U didn't try to court you (beyond most people's reasonable expectations). You seem to sound more like protypical, entitled millenial than a future entering medical student.

When it's standard practice to do a certain thing in the admissions process of top medical schools, and a school chooses to be the odd man out, I don't think it's entitlement to wonder why that is the case.
 
Don't you just have the world all figured out?

What is established is that matriculating URM students AS A WHOLE have lower GPA/MCAT scores. Do you know that this holds up at top schools like WashU? I suspect that the trend for lower stats for URM's doesn't hold when dealing with these programs because they tend to "hog" all the great students, leaving the rest of the schools with lower-stats URM's. Also, who said other schools use quota systems? That would be illegal (at least at public institutions).

Lastly, I'm not so sure about your claim that WUSTL's location is a big contributing factor to its low URM percentage. For instance, Duke and WashU (arguably) have equally appealing/unappealing locations, yet Duke has double the URM percentage.

Where did I say "AS A WHOLE"?? I said "on average". There is a difference. Where's the data? Here: https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/app...mcat-gpa-grid-by-selected-race-ethnicity.html

You're right, who said other schools use quota systems? Definitely not me. I said, "I *highly doubt* that WUSTL would lower it's MCAT/GPA standard to a such a great degree, thru a quota system,..." Your reading comprehension needs some work.

Also, I didn't say location is a "big" contributing factor, but it is a contributing factor nonetheless. Duke also has a lower avg. GPA/MCAT when compared to WUSTL.
 
When it's standard practice to do a certain thing in the admissions process of top medical schools, and a school chooses to be the odd man out, I don't think it's entitlement to wonder why that is the case.

It is when you judge and attribute certain motivations to the administration/faculty of a school based on a printing of it's brochures, esp. when it has prominent websites of it's SNMA that is easily Googleable. But please tell me what is standard practice for medical school recruitment.
 
Last edited:
Where did I say "AS A WHOLE"?? I said "on average". There is a difference. Where's the data? Here: https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/app...mcat-gpa-grid-by-selected-race-ethnicity.html

You're right, who said other schools use quota systems? Definitely not me. I said, "I *highly doubt* that WUSTL would lower it's MCAT/GPA standard to a such a great degree, thru a quota system,..." Your reading comprehension needs some work.

Also, I didn't say location is a "big" contributing factor, but it is a contributing factor nonetheless. St. Louis is quite different from Durham in many ways. Duke also has a lower avg. GPA/MCAT when compared to WUSTL.

Seems like you like to attack other people's intelligence in general.
 
Seems like you like to attack other people's intelligence in general.

No, your reading comprehension of what I said was WRONG. Period.

My mentioning that, "Duke also has a lower avg. GPA/MCAT when compared to WUSTL." was with regards to capturing more URMs in the process. Which if you look at the data released by the AAMC in the link I posted you can clearly see statistics with regards to race, MCAT, and GPA. You assumed (incorrectly) that I was remarking about people's intelligence based on that. That reflects more on you than me.
 
No, your reading comprehension of what I said was WRONG. Period.

My mentioning that, "Duke also has a lower avg. GPA/MCAT when compared to WUSTL." was with regards to capturing more URMs in the process. Which if you look at the data released by the AAMC in the link I posted you can clearly see statistics with regards to race, MCAT, and GPA. You assumed (incorrectly) that I was remarking about people's intelligence based on that. That reflects more on you than me.

Automatically assuming lower GPA/MCAT means they "captured more URM's in the process" is pretty offensive and illustrates that you do like to insult other people's intelligences. And (more importantly) you're likely mistaken. I think you're overestimating the degree to which the general pool of URM's has low stats. For example, remember that URM's are a small portion of all med school applicants to start with. Then, a large number of URM's are taken by the 3(?) HBCU's. The 2 or 3 Puerto Rican schools also take in many low scoring URMs.
 
Automatically assuming lower GPA/MCAT means they "captured more URM's in the process" is pretty offensive and illustrates that you do like to insult other people's intelligences. And (more importantly) you're likely mistaken. I think you're overestimating the degree to which the general pool of URM's has low stats. For example, remember that URM's are a small portion of all med school applicants to start with. Then, a large number of URM's are taken by the 3(?) HBCU's. The 2 or 3 Puerto Rican schools also take in many low scoring URMs.

I'm not overestimating anything. This is directly from the AAMC data from their link which is quite clear. Those schools with lower avg. GPA/MCAT will capture more students with that lower avg. GPA/MCAT. Those schools with higher avg. GPA/MCAT will capture more students with that higher avg. GPA/MCAT. That's common sense. The HBCUs/Puerto Rican schools have a set number of seats. They nowhere encompass a majority of medical school seats.

WashU wants to recruit students with high GPAs and high MCATs, period. If they get a URM with high GPAs and high MCATs - the better for them.
 
2 things:
  • I think what ChemEngMD is getting at is that smaller/less prominent placement for something like a Diversity Office MAY BE symptomatic of a larger issue at WashU. This problem is the embarrassingly low URM percentage.
I totally get that the location/poor labeling/ small space of the Office of Diversity is giving the wrong impression. As I've mention before, this is unintentional as missions considered as important as recruiting URMs (ie the MSTP, student research etc) are housed in equally tiny cube farms. Will definitely pass on that an obviously ostentatious office might go over better for selling WashU to URMs. But I doubt that solves the problem, that's why I'm still sifting for insights underneath this unnecessary flame war.

  • A bigger issue to me is illustrated in MDubs1's comments. This issue is that a potential classmate will think that a random black/Latino/Native American student he meets will necessarily (or more likely) have inferior stats and necessarily got in because of the school's charity.
You're misunderstanding MDub1. We don't view URM students as charity cases or having inferior stats. Please don't come in with this kind of insecurity. If you've been accepted at WashU, it is understood by everyone that your stats are up to par. WashU does not relax it's selection criteria for anyone. The URM students from my class for example, have academic pedigrees so impressive, they make me **** my pants. We are desperate to recruit more of these students. I suspect that being URMs, they are rare and we are fighting tooth and nail to draw them away from institutions like HMS, Stanford etc and have them come here.
 
There is a lot of literature supporting the need for a supportive environment for minority students to be successful. This isn't just URMs but also LGBT, religious minorities, etc. This obviously was born out of undergraduate institutions, but has made it's way into graduate and professional schools as well. One of the big things that attracted me to schools when I went was a strong and vibrant SNMA or LMSA chapter, Offices of Diversity/Multicultural Affairs/etc that seemed well funded and respected at the institution, and the presence of URM students as tour guides, lunch participants, etc. I was shocked that the the literature I received from WashU before my interview actually omitted the existence of an SNMA chapter. I brought this up to the Dean of Diversity and she was really surprised and seemed embarrassed. She then proceeded to find a bunch of older diversity literature (probably 2011 or 2012) for me to read. Is this a huge deal? No, but perception is reality. When there are very few URMs to go around the top 20 or 30 schools and all the other schools are stressing their support of diversity and seeming to take it much more seriously, it makes the schools that aren't look bad, and this might push URM students into the arms of other suitors.
I agree that we have to make a bigger show of how supportive our environment is for minority students. I understand that unless the intended recipient gets the impression that we put in a lot of money and effort into supporting diversity at WashU, we will not get credit for it. Thank you for that insight.
 
[*]A bigger issue to me is illustrated in MDubs1's comments. This issue is that a potential classmate will think that a random black/Latino/Native American student he meets will necessarily (or more likely) have inferior stats and necessarily got in because of the school's charity.

I think if you read my comments again you'll see that I never said this at all. Sorry if it came across that way



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Does anyone know what type of drug test we have to do at orientation? MJ is legal in some states and if they do a hair test, I would like to know....thanks in advance.
Check your acceptance package (the one you received by mail), there should be a document about the kind of test that's done (I don't remember exactly and don't have these materials with me, but I'm pretty sure it's saliva and/or urine but not hair) and what's tested.
If anything is detected, it will be interpreted under the laws of the state of Missouri, not Colorado.
 
1. As far as the office space, it is not about the functionality of the office as much as it is a representation of how much the school values the office. The Dean of Diversity seemed very competent and very passionate about her job. I'm sure she is wonderful and, as I know some URMs at WashU currently, I am confident in saying the office runs pretty well. This isn't about the Office of Diversity, it's about the medical school as a whole putting the Office of Diversity in a place that is not easily accessible. Whether intentional or not, it doesn't send a "we value diversity" message to someone visiting. This is compared to other schools that prominently display where the office is and it is much more accessible for the students.

2. In regards to the literature. It was not a simple typed up hand-out. This was a glossy, magazine style 8 page 8 1/2 X 11" quality mail-out. There was a section on diversity that touched upon the Asian student group and some other student groups but completely left out the main medical student group for URMs, SNMA. This wasn't a throw away hand-out - it was something the marketing team for the school put together and it was mass mailed out to many people.

Sorry that I did not explain that thoroughly before.

3. I did not see another URM current student on any tours, stopping by the office, or in any other capacity other than the one I stayed with the night before my interview (I have known this individual for 5 years). As for my interview group, there was 1 other URM.

You can see it as petty, but here's the thing: when you have choices, like many of the URMs admitted to WashU, why would you choose the school that puts the Office of Diversity in a tiny room, doesn't include SNMA on its major magazine style mail-out, and doesn't emphasize diversity at any point during the interview day? Especially when MANY of the other Top 20 schools are doing just that.

It's not saying that WashU is messing up by not doing this, but I have to imagine they are losing URMs to schools that are putting more of a good faith effort in recruiting them and showing their support for them.

Perhaps it is simply a marketing and branding issue?


By no means am I attending a top 5 or top 20 medical school, but our MD/PhD program is very well regarded nationally and to whatever extent people like to boast it, internationally. There is no MD/PhD or MSTP office - it is a 'virtual office' divided up between our program director and the associate director and the program assistants office. Do I think this means the school does not value our MD/PhD program as much as it should? Not at all - they are proud of the program, very proud.

Adding my own 2 cents here: for someone who holds scholarhips at some great programs, you sure have some funny things to complain about at other medical schools. If diversity is something you value, you're going to find alot more of that in Chicago than you will in St. Louis - maybe. Don't let this be a deterrent if you are debating between WashU and UChicago (full disclosure I haven't read everything) but honestly, scholarship $$ in general is tough to walk away from, especially if it's at a great program. Be grateful for what your application cycle has yielded and run with it man!
 
Last edited:
By no means am I attending a top 5 or top 20 medical school, but our MD/PhD program is very well regarded nationally and to whatever extent people like to boast it, internationally. There is no MD/PhD or MSTP office - it is a 'virtual office' divided up between our program director and the associate director and the program assistants office. Do I think this means the school does not value our MD/PhD program as much as it should? Not at all - they are proud of the program, very proud.

Adding my own 2 cents here: for someone getting $180K from University of Chicago, you sure have some funny things to complain about at other medical schools. If diversity is something you value, you're going to find alot more of that in Chicago than you will in St. Louis - maybe. Don't let this be a deterrent if you are debating between WashU and UChicago (full disclosure I haven't read everything) but honestly, scholarship $$ in general is tough to walk away from, especially from a top program. Be grateful for what your application cycle has yielded and run with it man!

Truthfully, it isn't about my application cycle as I have done quite well and I'm very happy. I'm blessed to be in the position I'm in. This is about other URMs in the future and why they may choose another school over WashU (this was the question posed).

I am simply trying to relay my experiences at different medical schools as I interviewed across the ranking spectrum and saw some differences between them. Thank you to @Asperphys for taking my posts for what they were - constructive criticism. I think WashU is an amazing school and out of all that I visited, they easily had the most impressive hospital facilities. I also loved the 1st and 2nd year study spaces. It shows that WashU cares about its students' studies.

I didn't mean for this to turn into a flame war. On contrary to what @DermViser said, I am not entitled or looking for special treatment as a URM. I am simply stating that WashU was the 11th school I visited and when comparing it to other top institutions, it didn't seem to have the same baseline level of diversity infrastructure that the other schools of its caliber have. Once again, I'm not saying they need to change it - I am simply saying that they may be losing URM students to these other institutions that DO have this infrastructure.

Also @bakedbeans18 you bring up a good point with the MD-PhD program, but I do think there is a bit of a difference. Absolutely, MD/PhD students need support and resources, but I don't think it's equivalent to an underrepresented minority group. For instance, I'm sure you could find plenty of MD/PhD mentors in a staff at any given school that has an MSTP program (or at least an MD who does research in whatever field you're interested in), but finding a faculty mentor in a specific specialty of your ethnicity when you're a URM is much more difficult.

I don't want to fight anymore 😍 🙂 I just want WashU to be a great place for everyone 🙂
 
Last edited:
Truthfully, it isn't about my application cycle as I have done quite well and I'm very happy. I'm blessed to be in the position I'm in. This is about other URMs in the future and why they may choose another school over WashU (this was the question posed).

I am simply trying to relay my experiences at different medical schools as I interviewed across the ranking spectrum and saw some differences between them. Thank you to @Asperphys for taking my posts for what they were - constructive criticism. I think WashU is an amazing school and out of all that I visited, they easily had the most impressive hospital facilities. I also loved the 1st and 2nd year study spaces. It shows that WashU cares about its students' studies.

I didn't mean for this to turn into a flame war. On contrary to what @DermViser said, I am not entitled or looking for special treatment as a URM. I am simply stating that WashU was the 11th school I visited and when comparing it to other top institutions, it didn't seem to have the same baseline level of diversity infrastructure that the other schools of its caliber have. Once again, I'm not saying they need to change it - I am simply saying that they may be losing URM students to these other institutions that DO have this infrastructure.

Also @bakedbeans18 you bring up a good point with the MD-PhD program, but I do think there is a bit of a difference. Absolutely, MD/PhD students need support and resources, but I don't think it's equivalent to an underrepresented minority group. For instance, I'm sure you could find plenty of MD/PhD mentors in a staff at any given school that has an MSTP program (or at least an MD who does research in whatever field you're interested in), but finding a faculty mentor in a specific specialty of your ethnicity when you're a URM is much more difficult.

I don't want to fight anymore 😍 🙂 I just want WashU to be a great place for everyone 🙂

I think everyone is saying that you are jumping to conclusions based on your initial impressions and interview day. Constructive criticism is great, but you don't have enough information to offer it. Especially as applicants, we are ignorant of the big picture at the schools we visit.
 
I think everyone is saying that you are jumping to conclusions based on your initial impressions and interview day. Constructive criticism is great, but you don't have enough information to offer it. Especially as applicants, we are ignorant of the big picture at the schools we visit.

Yes, but as applicants what else do we have to go by? I am simply saying that if WashU is only 11.5% URM and all of the other Top 10 schools are well above 15% and some above 20% then obviously there is a reason why those URM students are choosing other schools. From my experience, URMs admitted to 1 top 20 are usually admitted to multiple top 20s because there are so few to go around. I think most of these top schools are fully aware that they are competing for the same group of students and thus some of them have chosen to make more of an effort on interview day to show their supportive diverse environment.

You can blame it on geography, but as someone pointed out, Duke isn't in a major diverse city and they do a much better job of getting URM students. Same thing with UNC.
 
Last edited:
Those are really good questions that I don't know the answer to, but you're getting push back on your first post that implied that Wash U doesn't care about diversity because of office size.
 
I think people are attacking ChemEngMD's thing about the size/niceness of the office as a red herring. The real issue is the low URM %.
 
I find it interesting that in response to ChemEngMDs pretty measured criticisms, a lot of students posted along the lines of "what more do you want?"

So what if the office is in a broom closet? Schools have limited resources.

So what if you didn't happen to see any URMs on your tour? We just let whoever volunteers lead the tour.

Why does a magazine matter? Its just a magazine.

And the best, WashU places more emphasis on MCAT and GPA, and less emphasis on URMs.

Both these students responses and ChemEngMDs posts are getting at the same point: WashU probably has other, higher priorities than diversity. No one is saying that diversity has to be WashUs highest priority. I think everyone in the thread can agree that it shouldn't be their top priority. Obviously the school should focus on great students and a great program- and it does.

However, schools can make choices about which offices are housed in which rooms- believe it or not, sometimes departments can even be asked to move their offices. Is the office location the most important thing? No, of course not, no one says it is- but can it give a bad impression? Yes. Is it possible that this reflects the school's priorities? Yes. The exact same can be said for the magazine and the tour guides. If the school wanted to prioritize creating a more diverse student body and appearing more attractive to URMS, it could spend a little more time checking that section of the magazine, it could ask its URMs to be tour guides.

Even if no one even considered these issues at WashU, it was a total oversight, unintentional etc., that shows that the school isn't terribly concerned with the impression of diversity they are giving. They don't have to be more concerned, I am in no position to dictate how much of a priority this should be to what is clearly a great institution in many many ways, and I don't think ChemEngMD was making a value call either. The point is only that if they did want to attract a more diverse student body, then (in addition to the things they already do well) there are some things they could do better, that is all.
 
I think people are attacking ChemEngMD's thing about the size/niceness of the office as a red herring. The real issue is the low URM %.

I think @ChemEngMD hit the nail in the head. We do want more URMs, but not just any URM-- we want those who ace the MCAT and have astounding grades. Now that the air has cleared a bit, I think we all agree that WashU will not lower the bar just to fix the numbers. It's not only offensive to URMs, but it will be a disservice to the goals that WashU had spent decades trying to hold up.

To get a better sense of how difficult the job of recruiting WashU caliber URMs is, let's look at the numbers. I don't have the exact values I need to make definitive calculations, but I'll do my estimates based on the following data from AAMC:
https://www.aamc.org/download/321520/data/2012factstable25-5.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321508/data/2013factstable24.pdf

Assuming we want only the students who get 3.8 to 4.0 GPA and MCAT of 33 to 45, in a period of 2 years, we end up with a possible 473 URMs that we're targeting. Compare this to the total 12,100 students who have the same stats. That's only 3.9%. If playing a color-blind, numbers only game, WashU will have a similar URM percentage. The fact that we have 11.5% indicates that we are doing something to recruit URMs, but it's just not at goal yet. That's why feedback and outsider insight might help because this is a difficult problem to solve.
 
I think @ChemEngMD hit the nail in the head. We do want more URMs, but not just any URM-- we want those who ace the MCAT and have astounding grades. Now that the air has cleared a bit, I think we all agree that WashU will not lower the bar just to fix the numbers. It's not only offensive to URMs, but it will be a disservice to the goals that WashU had spent decades trying to hold up.

To get a better sense of how difficult the job of recruiting WashU caliber URMs is, let's look at the numbers. I don't have the exact values I need to make definitive calculations, but I'll do my estimates based on the following data from AAMC:
https://www.aamc.org/download/321520/data/2012factstable25-5.pdf
https://www.aamc.org/download/321508/data/2013factstable24.pdf

Assuming we want only the students who get 3.8 to 4.0 GPA and MCAT of 33 to 45, in a period of 2 years, we end up with a possible 473 URMs that we're targeting. Compare this to the total 12,100 students who have the same stats. That's only 3.9%. If playing a color-blind, numbers only game, WashU will have a similar URM percentage. The fact that we have 11.5% indicates that we are doing something to recruit URMs, but it's just not at goal yet. That's why feedback and outsider insight might help because this is a difficult problem to solve.

Exactly! If there are only ~160 URMs that fit that bill each year then you have to imagine that all of the top institutions are fighting for those same students.

@EMME25 said exactly what I was trying to get at. It's not that WashU is doing poorly in regards to diversity, it's that other schools of the same caliber that are recruiting these same students are going the extra mile to get them to matriculate at their institutions.
 
Exactly! If there are only ~160 URMs that fit that bill each year then you have to imagine that all of the top institutions are fighting for those same students.

@EMME25 said exactly what I was trying to get at. It's not that WashU is doing poorly in regards to diversity, it's that other schools of the same caliber that are recruiting these same students are going the extra mile to get them to matriculate at their institutions.

Yes, all of the top institutions may be fighting for the same set of URM students who fit the MCAT/GPA mold they desire. Those URMs (just like non-URMs) are also going to take into account perceived prestige (based on USWNR ranks - which is misguided but whatever), offering of a much better financial aid package, location, curriculum structure, grading, proximity to family, etc. WashU, as a top tier school, is not going to change their GPA/MCAT criteria. They want URMs WITH the GPA/MCAT that WashU wants of all their students.

I'm pretty sure they're not going to be petty enough to judge a school's diversity office based on omissions in brochures. They're going to look at more concrete issues.

I highly doubt WashU is missing buddy systems, faculty-student mentoring, and extra tutoring, that all the other schools that are more ostentatious with their diversity office, with big signs and mentioned in a brochure, would offer.
 
Chiming in with people including Duke and UNC in their URM percentage arguments (I am considering both strongly): Duke more heavily recruits international students than WashU, with many of those international students hailing from Asia (Central, South, and East), North Africa, and Nigeria - many of those students count as URM but also are often more prepared to pay high tuition than domestic URM since they don't expect federal financial assistance. It makes a difference to recruit internationally rather than mainly domestically, though it's obviously more complicated than just that. Duke also has a medical school in Singapore, which may factor into its URM percentages but totally may not, don't take my word for it, just putting it out there.

UNC, on the other hand, has a rather large URM population because it has a huge tuition advantage over almost every school in the country - while it advertises being something like 80% in-state, in reality, UNC admits their pick of OOS students and can often offer them in-state status after the first year at only $17,000/year tuition (those students then count as in-state in official tallies). So even as a OOS application, comparing a WashU tuition vs the possibility of in-state at UNC draws any student, not just URM, to UNC, but UNC does take pride in its URM population.

The point of bringing in totally unrelated schools here (besides that someone mentioned them earlier) is to show that every school has different reasons for why they have the URM percentage they do, and I just happen to know Duke and UNC's in particular. WashU has a different set of challenges from these two and any other school for competing with other schools of its caliber for the best of the best, URM included. Personally, I found WUSM just as diverse as any other top notch school, through ethnicity, nontrads, interests, hobbies, but I understand every interview day is different, so pay attention during Second Look (or if on the wait list and you get in, check out the Facebook page).
 
Yes, all of the top institutions may be fighting for the same set of URM students who fit the MCAT/GPA mold they desire. Those URMs (just like non-URMs) are also going to take into account perceived prestige (based on USWNR ranks - which is misguided but whatever), offering of a much better financial aid package, location, curriculum structure, grading, proximity to family, etc. WashU, as a top tier school, is not going to change their GPA/MCAT criteria. They want URMs WITH the GPA/MCAT that WashU wants of all their students.

I'm pretty sure they're not going to be petty enough to judge a school's diversity office based on omissions in brochures. They're going to look at more concrete issues.

I highly doubt WashU is missing buddy systems, faculty-student mentoring, and extra tutoring, that all the other schools that are more ostentatious with their diversity office, with big signs and mentioned in a brochure, would offer.

I don't know how I can explain it to you any better than I and other people in the thread have.

Speaking as a URM who has been courted by multiple Top 30 schools, I can tell you that yes prestige, fin aid, location, curriculum, etc is obviously important, BUT perceived importance of diversity to the school and a very strong SNMA chapter ranks above a lot of those other attributes for me personally and I know I'm not alone in that. If I have a choice between 3 or 4 schools of somewhat equivalent prestige, curriculum, etc - I am going to choose the one where I feel most comfortable and welcomed at. Truthfully, I would probably choose a school that made diversity a prominent part of their school and had lower prestige (say 10-15 USNWR ranks lower) over one who did not.

The question posed was why are WashU's URM % low - I never said that they should drop their standards. I said that they needed to recruit those ~200 URMs who do meet their standards more fervently IF they wanted to increase their numbers.

URM #s may not be a priority for the institution, and that is totally and completely their prerogative, I am simply saying that if they want to increase those numbers there are things they could do (that other top institutions are already doing) to do so.

I think we can stop arguing now because we just have very different perceptions on what a URM is looking for in a medical school haha.

EDIT: Just remembered, before I started my application cycle, I created an excel sheet with a bunch of data from the MSAR and one of those data points was how many URMs (%) were at each of the schools I was applying to. I brought this up with other URMs I met throughout the season and found out that I was not the only one who had done this. While diversity may not be in the top 3 or 4 reasons for choosing a medical school for many people, for URMs it often towards the top and is something we pay attention to.
 
Last edited:
I don't know how I can explain it to you any better than I and other people in the thread have.

Speaking as a URM who has been courted by multiple Top 30 schools, I can tell you that yes prestige, fin aid, location, curriculum, etc is obviously important, BUT perceived importance of diversity to the school and a very strong SNMA chapter ranks above a lot of those other attributes for me personally and I know I'm not alone in that. If I have a choice between 3 or 4 schools of somewhat equivalent prestige, curriculum, etc - I am going to choose the one where I feel most comfortable and welcomed at. Truthfully, I would probably choose a school that made diversity a prominent part of their school and had lower prestige (say 10-15 USNWR ranks lower) over one who did not.

The question posed was why are WashU's URM % low - I never said that they should drop their standards. I said that they needed to recruit those ~200 URMs who do meet their standards more fervently IF they wanted to increase their numbers.

URM #s may not be a priority for the institution, and that is totally and completely their prerogative, I am simply saying that if they want to increase those numbers there are things they could do (that other top institutions are already doing) to do so.

I think we can stop arguing now because we just have very different perceptions on what a URM is looking for in a medical school haha.

3-4 schools when compared directly are rarely equivalent in terms of prestige, curriculum, grading, scholarships, etc. There are usually sizable differences.

What I am saying is I don't think you can extrapolate your observations to directly saying that URMs are "not a priority" for WashU as you just have. That's quite an accusation to make. Something tells me though next year, WashU will be investing in the biggest sign on the med school campus. LOL.
 
@ChemEngMD is making very valid points. The absolute first thing I did when making a list of schools was go to there SNMA/LMSA pages and diversity offices. The top tier medical schools tend to have the best diversity offices for a number of factors. Location near urban centers, resources that support diversity and inclusion, and successful alumni. I don't think Wash U is necessarily against diversity, I just think it is very hard to recruit URM students to Wash U over Harvard, Yale etc. Wash U is a great school but it does not have the track record in URM communities that its peers have. These schools go through unbelievable lengths to recruit URM students because the pool is so small and top tier schools have rigid academic requirements. There are only 300 Blacks with over a 30 less than 100 over a 33/3.6 so you have 140+ MD schools attempting to recruit from this small pool of applicants with credentials good enough for admission into these schools. 9/10 unless the URM student is from the midwest or has ties there he/she will pick the top 10/20 east coast school if possible because its a safer choice. Latino/Latina numbers are not far off.

Wash U also is in the midwest, which prevents it from getting to URM-dense areas like NYC, Chicago, Philly, DC etc. I know the diversity people on a first-name basis at most of these schools because they travel. They legit get on the bus/plane and travel. From NYC, you can reach a disproportionate amount of URMs in a 4 hour radius.


http://www.hms.harvard.edu/dcp/
http://ecommons.med.harvard.edu/ec_vqp.asp?name_GUID={400FCB06-3487-4108-8209-14FFA40875F0}
http://medicine.yale.edu/education/omca/diversity/history.aspx
http://ps.columbia.edu/education/student-life/office-diversity

From Harvard:

Forty-two years ago the Black American enrollment at Harvard Medical School (HMS) was less than one percent. HMS was not alone in being a predominantly white institution: in 1968, only four percent of all first year medical students nationwide were from minority groups (2.8 percent were Black). Until the early 1970’s, most Black American doctors were educated at Howard and Meharry medical schools.

However, the social climate of the late 1960’s sparked the first nationwide efforts to bring minority students into medical schools. After the 1968 assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., close to 300 HMS students signed a petition urging the school to comprehensively review its ability to train Black physicians and to assess its relationship to the Black community in Boston. That same year, HMS Dean Robert H. Ebert created the Committee for Disadvantaged Students, charging it with increasing the number of disadvantaged students at HMS and Harvard School of Dental Medicine (HSDM). The new committee recommended to the faculty that 15 slots be created for disadvantaged students.

These efforts by HMS have produced impressive results. In 1969, HMS accepted 16 Black students for the class of 1973. Since that time, HMS has graduated over 1,100 minority physicians. Many of our alumni have assumed leadership roles in different fields of medicine. The Medical School currently has 172 (24%) students from underrepresented groups (89 African Americans, 29 Chicanos/Mexican Americans, 6 Native Americans, 6 Puerto Ricans, and 42 Hispanics)

From Yale:
The Yale University School of Medicine has made a strong commitment to training underrepresented minority physicians and scientists. Over the past 30 years, over 300 African American students have graduated with MD's or with combined MD/PhD degrees; African American graduates comprised 9.5% of the MD's graduating from the School during this period.

Beginning in the mid-1980's, Hispanic/Latino and Asian American students began to comprise an increasing proportion of the classes admitted to YSM. In 1999, the minority student entering class included 24 Asian American, 13 African American, and 11 Hispanic/Latino student in a class of 104. These three ethnic/racial groups now comprise 40% of the Yale medical students: (Asian Americans 21%, African Americans 11% and Hispanic/Latino student 8%).

Approximately 12 students each year are accepted into Yale's MD/PhD program. Currently, 12 of the 75 MD/PhD students are African American or Hispanic/Latino students. Participants in the program are selected from already enrolled Yale medical students and from new applicants.

@DermViser - I would say that amongst the top 20/30 schools when compared directly are equivalent in terms of prestige, curriculum, grading etc. The big difference comes in the diversity office and scholarships, which usually separates the top 10 and the top 20 from a URM perspective. The top schools have low unit loans and disadvantaged scholarships. Even if I wasn't disadvantaged, just the fact the the school has them says something about its character. Wash U isn't known to be strong in institutional support for URMs and scholarships. I never even heard of Wash U until my junior year of college. In contrast, Harvard sends fliers on official crimson red letter to ever pre-medical committee recruiting URMs. I went to a totally unknown, no prestige, small liberal arts college and guess what fliers were hanging up on the pre-med bulletin in the BIO dept. You bet, Harvard.

I will make an analogy to football. Its like patriots vs. 49ers. If I am coming out of college and want to make a super bowl, I will probably want to sign with patriots over the 49ers - even though the 49ers are really good. Wash U is really good and has great programs but it doesn't have the track record of its peers. Harvard is like the Patriots of diversity and inclusiveness.
 
These efforts by HMS have produced impressive results. In 1969, HMS accepted 16 Black students for the class of 1973. Since that time, HMS has graduated over 1,100 minority physicians. Many of our alumni have assumed leadership roles in different fields of medicine. The Medical School currently has 172 (24%) students from underrepresented groups (89 African Americans, 29 Chicanos/Mexican Americans, 6 Native Americans, 6 Puerto Ricans, and 42 Hispanics)

The big difference comes in the diversity office and scholarships, which usually separates the top 10 and the top 20 from a URM perspective. The top schools have low unit loans and disadvantaged scholarships. Even if I wasn't disadvantaged, just the fact the the school has them says something about its character. Wash U isn't known to be strong in institutional support for URMs and scholarships. I never even heard of Wash U until my junior year of college. In contrast, Harvard sends fliers on official crimson red letter to ever pre-medical committee recruiting URMs. I went to a totally unknown, no prestige, small liberal arts college and guess what fliers were hanging up on the pre-med bulletin in the BIO dept. You bet, Harvard.

Thank you for sharing the above @Espadaleader. Clearly, Harvard is ahead of the curve on URM recruitment and it would benefit WashU to follow suit. What I'm hearing is that they were ahead in generating URM leaders in academic medicine, which started the "virtuous cycle" (credits to Robert Reich) of drawing URMs to Harvard who then became leaders in medicine and so on.

On a side note, Dermviser and a number of people already tread a lot of ground in the URM discussion but we will have a little less hand-waving if we do a chronicidal-style data analysis. So I took a stab at it and I got the following:
Slide1.jpg
The schools are identical to those in chronicidal's original list. The %URM is also what he reported. Among the issues raised are whether the strict GPA/MCAT criteria limit the %URM at WashU, how much better peer institutions are in recruiting URMs etc. So I went back to the publicly available data. MCAT and GPAs were obtained from findthebest.com website (after a Google search) and the rest were from AAMC again (data aggregated from TWO years-- so if you want annual numbers, mentally divide by 2). What is immediately evident is that WashU MCAT cutoff being higher than other schools cuts the pool of considered URMs from 1845 to about half (835). Ditto for non-URMs.

DISCLAIMER: This table is not meant to imply any kind of med school ranking. There is obviously a LOT more that goes into med student admissions than stats.

I then calculated the projected %URM = (#URM in the range considered by the school)/(#total in that same range). If you divide the school's %URM with this value, you get a sense of the effectiveness of URM recruitment (recruitment yield). WashU aside, in the (yellow) block that considered the 1845 top students, Penn and Vanderbilt were the standouts. This is where we'd like to hear feedback about what they are doing-- nice big office? premed recruitment a la Harvard? more financial aid? URM faculty as mentors? better URM representation at interview events?

Now keeping in mind the size of the URM pool that is being considered by each school (URM pool = #URM in range for each school / # total URM applicants), I wondered if it would be more fair to correct the value of the recruitment yield based on the size of the URM pool being considered (ie corrected yield = %URM/URM Pool). So in a way, would WashU getting 11.5% URM from a pool half the size that Penn etc were considering be comparable to getting double that URM% that was chosen from a pool twice as big as WashU's? Just a thought. Being a basic scientist, I'm not very good with this kind of analysis.
 
Top