2020-2021 Columbia VP&S

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Huh my friend got the week before that. So they’re going week by week I guess.
 
Strategos said:
II! There were three dates for the week of 9/14 and the entire week of 9/21 available.
Click to expand...

Would you mind sharing when you were complete? it looks like most people who received IIs were complete on day 1 (7/23) so I am very curious haha
 
Any of those who have received an II, firstly, congrats! Secondly, were any of you MD/PhD applicants?
 
Congrats to those that got interviews! Looks like II's are going out in chronological order of complete date. Even better for my neuroticism
 
laffingdead said:
Congrats to those that got interviews! Looks like II's are going out in chronological order of complete date. Even better for my neuroticism
Click to expand...
Please don't say that lol I was complete 7/23 and someone got one who was complete 7/24 so by your logic I'm already screwed.
 
laffingdead said:
Congrats to those that got interviews! Looks like II's are going out in chronological order of complete date. Even better for my neuroticism
Click to expand...

I feel this way too hard -- every day I'm like I need to STOP checking SDN bc I'm neurotic af and everyone getting IIs submitted very early whereas I was definitely on the tail end of 2 weeks for a lot of my schools, but I find myself on here regardless
 
Do these ivies cater to their own students more (Barnard, CC, SEAS, GS)? I know Brown does idk about columbia
 
I-cry-everyday said:
Do these ivies cater to their own students more (Barnard, CC, SEAS, GS)? I know Brown does idk about columbia
Click to expand...

I think as a general rule, medical schools will favor their own undergrads, though obviously not at the level brown does and the degree of which this happens is often school specific
 
Hang in there guys.
Columbia sends out twice the number of IIs compared to Michigan for roughly equal number of applicants (1073 Columbia II v/s 507 Michigan II).
 
Hiphopscorpio31 said:
Wow I wonder what the benefit is of interviewing so many applicants?
Click to expand...
More choices? They have the capacity, so they give more people a chance to impress. Sucks if you would have received an II anyway, since it lowers your chances post II. Makes all the difference in the world if you would have been shut out otherwise, and now you have a chance to break through.

It's important to remember that many more applicants than can be interviewed are highly qualified at tippy top schools, so why not see more if you can, rather than artificially cut them off for no reason at all? People who think the additional people interviewing have no chance act as though there is a discernible difference between those receiving interviews and many who don't, or between many of those who receive As and those who don't. That's just not true, as evidenced by all the superstars who receive interviews and/or acceptances at some top schools and not others.

More interviews is ultimately better for everyone, since it gives everyone more opportunities to succeed, even though, once you have yours, it's understandable why you'd want to limit the competition.
 
premedstudent145231 said:
Well thats a pessimistic way of looking at it. Presumably interviewing weaker applicants gives them a shot when otherwise they would have none
Click to expand...
Weaker? I'd venture to guess that top schools like Columbia don't waste their time interviewing any "weaker" candidates, given how many "strong" candidates don't receive IIs at all every year.
 
premedstudent145231 said:
I said “weaker,” not “weak.” As in, rather than denying 515 mcat scorers or whatever they might at least give them a chance in interviews.
Click to expand...
Having a slightly lower MCAT score doesn't automatically make somebody a weaker candidate. Same with GPA. Stats are one of many aspects. Plenty of incredible students with good (but not great) stats but the rest of the application is stellar. They're not just suddenly weaker because of the stats.
 
premedstudent145231 said:
I said “weaker,” not “weak.” As in, rather than denying 515 mcat scorers or whatever they might at least give them a chance in interviews.
Click to expand...
I know what you said, and I'm saying there is no such thing. When a school like Columbia is not sending IIs to candidates with 4.0/520+ (and I'm sure there are scores of people in this position every year), anyone who does receive an II, whether they send out 500 IIs or 1500, is not "weaker" in the eyes of the adcom, regardless of their stats.

If stats really were all that mattered, the application could be completed on a postcard, and they wouldn't need essays, interviews, LORs, etc. to make a decision. High stat candidates clearly, and for understandable reasons, wish this were the case, but it isn't.

To further blow your mind, because this is clearly counterintuitive, "weaker" candidates do not receive IIs, whether they are coming in with a 4.0 and a 526, or a 3.7 and a 516, so you really don't have to worry about weaker candidates gobbling up interview slots, no matter how many are available. On some level, whether it's spectacular ECs, compelling essays, amazing life story, URM, or whatever, the 515 who receives an interview is not viewed as weaker than the 522 who does not, again, regardless of how many interviews are ultimately conducted.

The bottom line is the same as in my prior post -- more interviews hurt those who already have one, and help those who don't. No matter how high your stats, you can't take anything for granted, so you should be in favor of more IIs everywhere. Mark my words, before the cycle is over, plenty of high stat candidates, at every top school, are going to be shocked that they didn't receive an II.
 
@KnightDoc : I disagree. High-stat candidates who receive interviews definitely have an edge over lower-stat ones who do (within the same demographic group). Just look at MDapps or something, "low-stat" candidates for these schools have worse outcomes than higher-stat (again, within the same demographic group) after getting II even though the lower-stat ones obviously needed better ECs to even get the II in the first place. If they were viewed as equal then we would see similar post II acceptance rates. Also I highly doubt lower stat ones just all happened to have worse interviews ; if anything, they probably had better ones on average since they needed better "personal factors" (whatever that means) to land the interview compared to like a 4.0/525 or smtng
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

wysdoc
2024-2025 Columbia (Vagelos)
8 9 10 11 12
Replies
579
Views
227K
monetary_bear
M
wysdoc
2024-2025 Missouri - Columbia
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
283
Views
52K
homeadelove
homeadelove
wysdoc
2024-2025 South Carolina - Columbia
2 3 4
Replies
178
Views
48K
Lil Car's Son
Lil Car's Son
TheDataKing
2020-2021 Missouri - Columbia
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
618
Views
124K
DesiPreMed
D
wysdoc
2021-2022 Columbia (Vagelos)
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
547
Views
218K
Jalapeño22
J
Top