2019-2020 Central Florida

Started by PapaGuava
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
idkmed said:
Hey everyone.
I may be applying here next cycle. I've been doing some research on the school but a lot of the information is vague. Is it purely a research-focused school? Do you have a shot at an interview without research experience?
Click to expand...
During my interview, one of the deans specifically clarified to us that although the percentage of admitted students with research experience as seen on MSAR and their own presentations was around 90%, that % is based on the AMCAS application (student-entered) and he estimated the % of students who actually participated in true research was really more around 50-60%. He said this difference exists because adcoms don't count laboratory assistant positions in which you are simply counting cells in a Petri dish without working through scientific method, problem solving, innovation, etc. as "true research". Basically his point in saying all that was not to be discouraged if you don't have research. Always a plus, but not at all a dealbreaker.
 
redglycogen5 said:
During my interview, one of the deans specifically clarified to us that although the percentage of admitted students with research experience as seen on MSAR and their own presentations was around 90%, that % is based on the AMCAS application (student-entered) and he estimated the % of students who actually participated in true research was really more around 50-60%. He said this difference exists because adcoms don't count laboratory assistant positions in which you are simply counting cells in a Petri dish without working through scientific method, problem solving, innovation, etc. as "true research". Basically his point in saying all that was not to be discouraged if you don't have research. Always a plus, but not at all a dealbreaker.
Click to expand...

Great point and great advise. Thank You. It's really hard for some non-trads such as myself to get research experience, and most of us (non-trads) are so clinically focused (hence why we leave our careers to pursue medicine) that we don't even seek it out or know it's such a major factor to med schools until we actually apply lol.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I recently interviewed here, and absolutely fell in love with UCF and Lake Nona. Should I send a letter of update/interest before the committee meets or after hearing back their decision?
 
idkmed said:
Great point and great advise. Thank You. It's really hard for some non-trads such as myself to get research experience, and most of us (non-trads) are so clinically focused (hence why we leave our careers to pursue medicine) that we don't even seek it out or know it's such a major factor to med schools until we actually apply lol.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure it is universally understood that for career changers, besides the ones who did PhDs/SMPs that require a thesis, not having research experience is a common occurrence for obvious reasons. I wouldn't stress about it. You aren't the first and you won't be the last
 
If we are on the waitlist, will sending updates affect WL position? Do LOIs also affect position?
 
redglycogen5 said:
During my interview, one of the deans specifically clarified to us that although the percentage of admitted students with research experience as seen on MSAR and their own presentations was around 90%, that % is based on the AMCAS application (student-entered) and he estimated the % of students who actually participated in true research was really more around 50-60%. He said this difference exists because adcoms don't count laboratory assistant positions in which you are simply counting cells in a Petri dish without working through scientific method, problem solving, innovation, etc. as "true research". Basically his point in saying all that was not to be discouraged if you don't have research. Always a plus, but not at all a dealbreaker.
Click to expand...

This is right on target! Well said.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
cabbagefacts1 said:
Yikes... would love if a current student could shed some additional perspective on this
Click to expand...
This isn't new news, and was discussed here when the story came out in November.

REL said:
Sorry for the delay in my promised response: This is a question and my answer that was posted in March 2019 in last year's SDN thread. I hope that this is helpful.

"Question: Excuse my ignorance, but a quick question for any current students or students that attended interview this cycle. I've heard "whispers" of UCF burning bridges with ORMC and Florida Hospital (Advent Health now, I guess) so their current relationship isn't the best. What would that mean for a new matriculant to the school?

Also, any updated news about the estimated completion time for the Hospital?"


"Response: There is a long and a short answer. The short answer is that the administrators at ORMC and AH simply could not play together for the good of the population of Orlando. Both wanted to work with the COM, but neither would consent to work with the other. Let me be very plain that the physicians in both systems are sick that their "leaders" have made this decision to not work together for the third year clerkships. The Docs in both systems see great value in our relationship and definitely want to see our students in the 4th year and their residencies. Note that we all knew that this was coming and the COM has been developing relationships with multiple teaching hospitals to support our students during their clerkship years. This includes multiple HCA hospitals as well as our two strong partners here in Lake Nona (Nemours Pediatric Hospital and the very large VA Hospital). ORMC and AH actually maintained their relationship with us until we were fully developed to support our students in the clerkship year before making this decision. Our new UCF Hospital will open here in Lake Nona at the end of 2020 and will also become a hospital to train our students."
Click to expand...
 
KnightDoc said:
This isn't new news, and was discussed here when the story came out in November.
Click to expand...

I’m glad you monitor most SDN posts on an hourly basis but it might be new information to those that don’t.

Regardless of it not being “new news” it’s still a relevant loss of 40% rotations and I’d want an M3s/M4s opinion on it rather than a COM affiliate if any of them are prowling around feel free to msg.
 
Icebird said:
I’m glad you monitor most SDN posts on an hourly basis but it might be new information to those that don’t.

Regardless of it not being “new news” it’s still a relevant loss of 40% rotations and I’d want an M3s/M4s opinion on it rather than a COM affiliate if any of them are prowling around feel free to msg.
Click to expand...
So I actually spoke to an M4 who rotated at both the prior affiliated hospitals and the new HCA hospitals, and he seemed very transparent about there being no difference or negative impact on his learning/rotations.

*edit* : he is going into radiology by the way
 
Last edited:
AAMC just announced Step 1 will be “PASS/FAIL”, Step 2 remain scored.

That would be a game changer for many “lower ranked” schools which have students scoring well in Step 1, but does not have the general panache of higher ranked schools.

How would that affect the high scoring schools like UCF that put much of their eggs in the Step 1 basket ?
 
SteyrFWB said:
AAMC just announced Step 1 will be “PASS/FAIL”, Step 2 remain scored.

That would be a game changer for many “lower ranked” schools which have students scoring well in Step 1, but does not have the general panache of higher ranked schools.

How would that affect the high scoring schools like UCF that put much of their eggs in the Step 1 basket ?
Click to expand...
@REL?????
 
I also would be interested to know if Medical Schools were in the loop that this was going to happen or did the AAMC throw them under the bus. I'm assuming this would require some curriculum change that schools might not be able to figure out quickly enough? Might be wrong though
 
potato101 said:
I also would be interested to know if Medical Schools were in the loop that this was going to happen or did the AAMC throw them under the bus. I'm assuming this would require some curriculum change that schools might not be able to figure out quickly enough? Might be wrong though
Click to expand...
From reading the announcement, FSMB and AMA both are on board.
 
Major rerouting of curriculum ?

Duke style? Preclinical compressed into one year, pass Step1, clinical rotation second year, 3rd year research, Step2 after 2nd or 3rd year.

That makes much more sense than present study from your bedroom curriculum.
 
KnightDoc said:
@REL?????
Click to expand...
So I have not seen the announcement yet regarding this and I will look for something on this. There was a post not long ago that I spoke of this being considered for the last 3-4 years, and that it would hurt P/F schools as they go into the Match. Many believe that Med schools with a P/F system and a P/F Step 1 would be disadvantaged when it comes to residency applications if this change were implemented. This is one of the main reasons that we kept a modified P/F (A,B,C,F; H/P/F; P/F) in our first two years. Truly the Step 2 has over-taken the Step 1 in value since students are taking it earlier. My final comment is that if this is going to happen they would have to put implementation off for about 2-3 years to allow for any adjustments. (Now I will go look for the article...and see what it says and get back to you in a day or so.)
 
Last edited:
SteyrFWB said:
Major rerouting of curriculum ?

Duke style? Preclinical compressed into one year, pass Step1, clinical rotation second year, 3rd year research, Step2 after 2nd or 3rd year.

That makes much more sense than present study from your bedroom curriculum.
Click to expand...
Most schools do a curricular review every 10-12 years. We already have a new curriulum that will be implemented in a year or two.
 
The USMLE program will change score reporting for Step 1 from a three-digit numeric score to reporting only a pass/fail outcome. A numeric score will continue to be reported for Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) and Step 3. Step 2 Clinical Skills (CS) will continue to be reported as Pass/Fail. This policy will take effect no earlier than January 1, 2022 with further details to follow later this year.

In taking this action, the USMLE’s co-sponsors—the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) and the National Board of Medical Examiners® (NBME®)—considered the broad range of input received from the Invitational Conference on USMLE Scoring (InCUS), the subsequent InCUS report and its preliminary recommendations, and the extensive feedback and national conversation that preceded and followed the conference.*

In reaching this decision, various score reporting options were considered, including maintaining the status quo (i.e., no change to score reporting). The views of all stakeholders were considered throughout the score reporting discussions. Specific consideration was placed on supporting the educational engagement and overall experience of medical students – and on increasing the dialogue about how multiple assessments of competency could best be utilized by stakeholders in medical regulation and medical education.

The FSMB and NBME believe that changing Step 1 score reporting to pass/fail can help reduce some of the current overemphasis on USMLE performance, while also retaining the ability of medical licensing authorities to use the exam for its primary purpose of medical licensure eligibility. The USMLE co-sponsors also believe that moving to pass/fail reporting of Step 1 while retaining a scored Step 2 CK represents a positive step toward system-wide change, while limiting large-scale disruption to the overall educational and licensing environment.

For the entire article you can go to: United States Medical Licensing Examination | Invitational Conference on USMLE Scoring
 
Last edited:
REL said:
So I have not seen the announcement yet regarding this and I will look for something on this. There was a post not long ago that I spoke of this being considered for the last 3-4 years, and that it would hurt P/F schools as they go into the Match. Med schools with a P/F system and a P/F Step 1 would disadvantage those schools when it comes to residency applications. My thoughts are that med schools with a P/F curriculum and a P/F step may be disadvantaged in the match process. This is one of the main reasons that we kept a modified P/F (A,B,C,F; H/P/F; P/F) in our first two years. Truly the Step 2 has over-taken the Step 1 in value since students are taking it earlier. My final comment is that if this is going to happen they would have to put implementation off for about 2-3 years to allow for any adjustments. (Now I will go look for the article...and see what it says and get back to you in a day or so.)
Click to expand...
Many thanks!! As always, we greatly appreciate your transparency and accessibility. The question was whether this move would disadvantage a lower ranked, higher STEP 1 scoring school like UCF in favor of more prestigious, higher ranked, more name brand schools now that STEP 1 scores won't be available to distinguish high scoring UCF students. Assuming this is the case, will the fact that your pre-clinical is graded really mitigate this impact?
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
KnightDoc said:
Many thanks!! As always, we greatly appreciate your transparency and accessibility. The question was whether this move would disadvantage a lower ranked, higher STEP 1 scoring school like UCF in favor of more prestigious, higher ranked, more name brand schools now that STEP 1 scores won't be available to distinguish high scoring UCF students. Assuming this is the case, will the fact that your pre-clinical is graded really mitigate this impact?
Click to expand...

Describe what you mean by "lower ranked" please? Please dont tell me you are paying attention to the annual money-making rag that ranks med schools.

Short Answer: I dont see this change hindering UCF at all, considering our reliable grading scale it likely helps us even more.

Long answer: Granted we are not household names like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. We are likely at the top of our state based on outcomes provided by the 3-year NRMP information that we receive. The NRMP ranks our Step 1, Step 2, research, and student altrusim - well above the 75% nationally; likely in the upper half of that upper quartile. We are also at the top our of state schools when comparing the traditional nine tough residencies to get into (basically tied with UM) looking at 3 year match data. We have been successful every year matching our students of which 75% leave Florida to get into top residencies across the nation in all specialties. Certainly after 10 years the residency directors know who our students are.
 
Last edited:
REL said:
Describe what you mean by "lower ranked" please? Please dont tell me you are paying attention to the annual money-making rag that ranks med schools.

Short Answer: I dont see this change hindering UCF at all, considering our reliable grading scale it likely helps us even more.

Long answer: Granted we are not household names like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. We are likely at the top of our state based on outcomes provided by the 3-year NRMP information that we receive. The NRMP ranks our Step 1, Step 2, research, and student altrusim - well above the 75% nationally; likely in the upper half of that upper quartile. We are also at the top our of state schools when comparing the traditional nine tough residencies to get into (basically tied with UM) looking at 3 year match data. We have been successful every year matching our students of which 75% leave Florida to get into top residencies across the nation in all specialties. Certainly after 10 years the residency directors know who our students are.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the thoughtful response. Also, guilty as charged!!! 🙂

As you might know, I am a HUGE fan of yours personally as well as the school. A concern is that one of the great strengths of the school that has allowed it to "punch above its weight" and outperform more established, higher ranked schools in the match has been a curriculum that has bucked the trend toward pre-clinical P/F (you explained why in a previous post), which I believe was primarily responsible for above expected STEP 1 scores, which, along with all the other great things happening at UCF allowed the school to outperform in the match, even given the relatively low rank given to UCF not only in the "rag," but also in the published PD ranking.

The question is whether this over performance will continue when UCF is denied one of the most important metrics it was able to use to distinguish itself, not just in Florida, but nationally. In the new environment, what is the risk that, in the absence of STEP 1 scores (and pre-clinical grades at many schools), PDs default to the admissions screen performed by the most insanely competitive, highest ranked, highest stat schools, in addition to the networking and whatever opportunities are available to students at those schools?
 
In the state of Florida, there are schools that consistently underperform in Step1 relative to their reputation (UF, UM)

There is other school that has consistently overperformed on Step2 relative to its reputation (FSU)

Those two categories of schools will benefit from Step1 Pass/Fail, and with more import being given to Step2.

Step1 Pass/Fail is a good thing. There are many intramural data from many, many schools that showed class attendance rate in pre-clinical years in 10-15% at best. That is just wrong.

The Step1 pass/fail, coupled with continuation of traditional grading system is a good thing. It forces students back to classroom, and re-established relationship with professors. Now all eyes will be on professors; they can’t just go through the motions. Re-establishing that relationship is a Very good thing.

Now everyone knows research is going to be ever more important. Pushing more research is good for the students, good for UCF.

UCF will continue to innovate. I bet you Step 2 will be greater than what it is now, in a few years.

I bet you.
 
SteyrFWB said:
In the state of Florida, there are schools that consistently underperform in Step1 relative to their reputation (UF, UM)

There is other school that has consistently overperformed on Step2 relative to its reputation (FSU)

Those two categories of schools will benefit from Step1 Pass/Fail, and with more import being given to Step2.

Step1 Pass/Fail is a good thing. There are many intramural data from many, many schools that showed class attendance rate in pre-clinical years in 10-15% at best. That is just wrong.

The Step1 pass/fail, coupled with continuation of traditional grading system is a good thing. It forces students back to classroom, and re-established relationship with professors. Now all eyes will be on professors; they can’t just go through the motions. Re-establishing that relationship is a Very good thing.

Now everyone knows research is going to be ever more important. Pushing more research is good for the students, good for UCF.

UCF will continue to innovate. I bet you Step 2 will be greater than what it is now, in a few years.

I bet you.
Click to expand...

I agree with what you say. Our 3-year average Step 2 is in that upper half of the upper quartile nationally, so not sure how much more it can go up? I do agree that there has been huge pressure to perform on Step 1 at most schools, at least for the top students who are shooting high. Our new curriculum will also shorten the basic science years and allow for earlier clinicals and other things that will help those heading toward some research, public health, sectors, etc.
 
REL said:
I agree with what you say. Our 3-year average Step 2 is in that upper half of the upper quartile nationally, so not sure how much more it can go up? I do agree that there has been huge pressure to perform on Step 1 at most schools, at least for the top students who are shooting high. Our new curriculum will also shorten the basic science years and allow for earlier clinicals and other things that will help those heading toward some research, public health, sectors, etc.
Click to expand...
This "new curriculum" that you mentioned, is this for the class of 2024?
 
KnightDoc said:
Thanks for the thoughtful response. Also, guilty as charged!!! 🙂

As you might know, I am a HUGE fan of yours personally as well as the school. A concern is that one of the great strengths of the school that has allowed it to "punch above its weight" and outperform more established, higher ranked schools in the match has been a curriculum that has bucked the trend toward pre-clinical P/F (you explained why in a previous post), which I believe was primarily responsible for above expected STEP 1 scores, which, along with all the other great things happening at UCF allowed the school to outperform in the match, even given the relatively low rank given to UCF not only in the "rag," but also in the published PD ranking.

The question is whether this over performance will continue when UCF is denied one of the most important metrics it was able to use to distinguish itself, not just in Florida, but nationally. In the new environment, what is the risk that, in the absence of STEP 1 scores (and pre-clinical grades at many schools), PDs default to the admissions screen performed by the most insanely competitive, highest ranked, highest stat schools, in addition to the networking and whatever opportunities are available to students at those schools?
Click to expand...

That goofy publication tries to translate med school acceptance data and research into rankings. They dont put any weight into performance during med school and match performance. They collect data from each school (might there be a conflict of interest here) and then use some odd categories for to create their rankings. The dont want to work to collect data so they dont really have reliable data to begin with. They dont look at outcome data (they dont have access to Step) and it would be too time consuming to collect and analyze match list data that is on most school web sites. They could get real data from the AAMC but they would have to pay for it - that takes away from the mega profit they make on the annual med school edition which has little integrity of data. It's just all a mess.

We do punch above our weight, but we had the advantage of starting new and immediately adopting the best from the top programs to create our curriculum and processes. Our leadership team stayed together throughout so everyone knew the goal and continued build a strong program. Our success is mainly because we are careful to select students who will fit here and faculty and a curriculum that allowed for interactive learning. The new curriculum will allow for more. Our admissions entry averages are in the top 3 in the state, but our match data appears to exceed. The difference is the students, faculty, and curriculum......location and strong community support helps too.
 
REL said:
Just checked on rollout of new curriculum, looks like it will be entering class of 2022 (grad 2026)
Click to expand...
What about making changes for the class of 2024, to adapt to the new STEP 1 changes? Do you believe all schools should make some changes to accommodate this, or is everything fine as is?
 
netflix007 said:
What about making changes for the class of 2024, to adapt to the new STEP 1 changes? Do you believe all schools should make some changes to accommodate this, or is everything fine as is?
Click to expand...
there could be few scenarios that can be played out. Step 1 changes implementation is not guaranteed before Jan'22, means it may get delayed.
If its delayed,
  • you had prepared for P/F, it won't bode well as now you have to give numeric score exam and so specialties are at stake.
  • you had prepared of numeric score, you are good.
If it doesn't delay,
  • you had prepared for P/F, you are good.
  • you had prepared for numeric score, you are still good.
So for transit students it makes more sense to prepare for numeric score and let the ball roll.
There are still few decisions to be made on suggestions those were submitted, including number of attempts allowed for step 1.
If for some reason that is reduced drastically, numeric score preparation will help students than just preparing for it.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

wysdoc
2025-2026 UCF (U Central Florida)
2
Replies
81
Views
36K
Thukuna
Thukuna
wysdoc
2024-2025 University of Central Florida (UCF)
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
317
Views
96K
LaurelePoole
L
chilly_md
2025-2026 Central Michigan University
2 3
Replies
145
Views
45K
JayPe@
J
wysdoc
2025-2026 Universidad Central del Caribe
Replies
7
Views
3K
WhiteCoatTrack
WhiteCoatTrack
wysdoc
2025-2026 Florida
2 3
Replies
108
Views
39K
Moosehorns
M