2020-2021 UC San Francisco

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I thought UCSF was releasing admissions starting January according to MSAR? Did anyone get told differently on their interview day?

Members don't see this ad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
"Dec 6, 2020" "friend" those comments seems sus to me :unsure:

I tend to trust people but yeah... doesn't sound like reliable information to me considering how UCSF has always been releasing the first wave of post-II decisions on the same day for people who interviewed earlier (late Sept to early Nov) and how often I met "trolls" on SDN (e.g. someone posted interview date earlier than mine on the official II tracker but I heard from the admissions that my interview date (FYI 9/29/20) was the first in this application cycle). But I also keep in mind that this year we have new associate dean for admissions, Dr. Albert, so things could turn out a bit different as well. My best educated guess for the decision date is 16th.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I thought UCSF was releasing admissions starting January according to MSAR? Did anyone get told differently on their interview day?
I think it depends on your interview date. Last year MSAR said Jan as well, though the first wave of decisions was released in mid-December. People who interviewed before Nov would probably hear soon.... o_O
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I think it depends on your interview date. Last year MSAR said Jan as well, though the first wave of decisions was released in mid-December. People who interviewed before Nov would probably hear soon.... o_O
I thought UCSF was releasing admissions starting January according to MSAR? Did anyone get told differently on their interview day?
Yeahh I agree! I was told that we will hear anytime between December and January with January being the latest. Maybe it’s likely that the first three groups of people who interview in September and October are probably the most likely to hear back next week. At least it’s my educated guess also. Same with @wstand
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
II today for MD/PRIME! Complete late September
 
  • Like
Reactions: 10 users
End of watch on my end. Complete 9/24, pre-II R. Good luck to everyone else in the running.
 
  • Care
Reactions: 4 users
Pre-II R just now, complete 9/14
 
  • Care
Reactions: 1 users
Also, does anyone know if UCSF does calls/emails for accepted applicants or email for everyone?
 
As for the second point about the representation amongst our class...interesting that you potentially see it as concerning? I'll just say that I don't think it's an explicit policy and hope that puts you at ease.
Thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts. I'm a disadvantaged Asian American refugee whose ethnicity is technically equally represented in medicine and who grew up low income to a single parent. I've had success at many good schools so far (6 IIs so far across tiers) who value diversity outside of/in addition to race/ethnicity, but am concerned if race is considered strongly over all other diversity aspects.

I know nothing is guaranteed nor expected, but I was really excited about UCSF and am anxious about my chances if there are any policy changes, explicit or implicit.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
Thanks for taking the time to post your thoughts. I'm a disadvantaged Asian American refugee whose ethnicity is technically equally represented in medicine and who grew up low income to a single parent. I've had success at many good schools so far (6 IIs so far across tiers) who value diversity outside of/in addition to race/ethnicity, but am concerned if race is considered strongly over all other diversity aspects.

I know nothing is guaranteed nor expected, but I was really excited about UCSF and am anxious about my chances if there are any policy changes, explicit or implicit.
just my two cents but I highly doubt there is an explicit policy that would disadvantage anyone solely by race...the way I see it, UCSF is just making a genuine effort to accept people from historically disadvantaged backgrounds and create more representation in medicine. I don't think they're saying "ok let's accept X Asian people, Y Black people, Z Hispanic people". I think they are accepting qualified applicants that fit their school, while also considering how their background may have created obstacles for them, whether that be race, economics, or other hardships. I have a good feeling they are increasing representation of all disadvantaged people regardless of race. It just so happens that Black and Hispanic people are more likely to be economically disadvantaged than White or Asian people, so it's easy to look superficially and think it's only about race. Who knows- I'm not UCSF Adcom, but I hope I was able to provide you with a different perspective.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 7 users
just my two cents but I highly doubt there is an explicit policy that would disadvantage anyone solely by race...the way I see it, UCSF is just making a genuine effort to accept people from historically disadvantaged backgrounds and create more representation in medicine. I don't think they're saying "ok let's accept X Asian people, Y Black people, Z Hispanic people". I think they are accepting qualified applicants that fit their school, while also considering how their background may have created obstacles for them, whether that be race, economics, or other hardships. I have a good feeling they are increasing representation of all disadvantaged people regardless of race. It just so happens that Black and Hispanic people are more likely to be economically disadvantaged than White or Asian people, so it's easy to look superficially and think it's only about race. Who knows- I'm not UCSF Adcom, but I hope I was able to provide you with a different perspective.
I'd like to believe what you're saying, but from their disadvantaged status MSAR reporting it's actually gone down.

I don't think there would be an explicit policy (because the people of CA just reaffirmed that admissions for public schools based on race is illegal), but implicitly there are ways around this.

You also bolded qualified, and my stats are above UCSF and EC's have gotten my II and 2 A's from T15's, but I do have a thing for UCSF because of its mission for social justice and community activism. I understand how competitive this process is and am not expecting anything, just bummed if UCSF is considering race above disadvantaged status.

EDIT: Also, just a data point that is from my own personal neuroticism, but all the other 4 UCs I applied to sent a secondary back to me in a very reasonable time (UCLA within days). UCSF took the long end (10 weeks) for the secondary to come back. Whatever prioritization algorithm they used, for me it did not prioritize disadvantaged status it seems.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2020-12-08 at 8.48.45 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2020-12-08 at 8.48.45 AM.png
    40.8 KB · Views: 84
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I'd like to believe what you're saying, but from their disadvantaged status MSAR reporting it's actually gone down.

I don't think there would be an explicit policy (because the people of CA just reaffirmed that admissions for public schools based on race is illegal), but implicitly there are ways around this.

You also bolded qualified, and my stats are above UCSF and EC's have gotten my II and 2 A's from T15's, but I do have a thing for UCSF because of its mission for social justice and community activism. I understand how competitive this process is and am not expecting anything, just bummed if UCSF is considering race above disadvantaged status.

EDIT: Also, just a data point that is from my own personal neuroticism, but all the other 4 UCs I applied to sent a secondary back to me in a very reasonable time (UCLA within days). UCSF took the long end (10 weeks) for the secondary to come back. Whatever prioritization algorithm they used, for me it did not prioritize disadvantaged status it seems.
well you do sound like a qualified applicant that fits their school! I understand your neuroticism; we're all worrying about what other applicants have that we don't. But even if they are specifically trying to increase their racial diversity, that's still only one factor. You still have awesome stats, a compelling background, and hopefully a demonstrated investment in their values of social justice and community activism. Your race is just one factor. I was also thinking that their race stats could be a reflection of their mission. Like another poster recently mentioned, their students are heavily involved in social justice and community organizing. The people most likely to do advocacy work with the underprivileged are those who belong to those groups themselves (even if total SES disadvantaged matriculants are slightly dropping). Again, that often means race/ethnic groups, but in your case it does not necessarily relate to race. And it's important that these communities their advocating for see themselves represented in the health professionals advocating for them.

It sounds like you have a great shot at UCSF. But I think in these conversations about how much a school prioritizes race, it often seems to be an implicit suggestion that those accepted who are URM aren't as equally qualified or that they wouldn't have gotten in if it weren't for their race. To me, it's a matter of equity, and to understand equity you have to consider how these social factors make it seem as though certain groups are underqualified whereas it's likely that social barriers have impeded their potential. Just a thought.

Lastly, from the looks of this thread, we truly don't know how UCSF decides to send out secondaries.

Good luck!
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Care
Reactions: 12 users
has anyone who applied in october heard back? either II or pre II R?
 
sorry to hear that. not to be annoying, but its hard not to. when in october were you complete? and oos or IS?
OOS and complete 10/14. Took the last MCAT possible for this cycle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
has anyone who applied in october heard back? either II or pre II R?
I was complete in October and haven’t heard back for anything - neither II nor pre-II R.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
who else is freaking out about the 16th coming up so soon? :')
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
I was complete in October and haven’t heard back for anything - neither II nor pre-II R.
Same - completed 10/13.
I currently work at UCSF so I should of added in the "expand on your activities" section on my secondary the classic Liam Neeson quote "I will find you and I will kill you (if you reject me)"
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
yes omg! got waitlisted and it broke my heart :'( so i really need this
Omggg me too!! UCSD and UCSF the only two IIs LOL and waitlisted at UCSD so RIP haha please feel free to DM me for emotional support for each other haha
 
  • Care
Reactions: 1 user
Just got the pre-R II, I'll be back for residency maybe haha
 
  • Care
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
Just got that Pre-II R. Complete 9/23. Good luck to everyone!
 
  • Care
Reactions: 4 users
God damn...I wish they would just tell me that I am rejected already. I can't sit here all day refreshing my stupid email and this stupid page (love y'all tho).
 
  • Like
  • Care
Reactions: 2 users
Hi friends, my AMCAS app was verified on 10/13, secondary was received 11/16 (super fortunate for the invite), and secondary was submitted 11/23. Does anyone happen to know when applicants in this position get notified of II’s?
I am in a similar boat as you -- or close to it. (a) AMCAS verified on 28 Sep, (b) Secondary received on 4 Nov, (c) Secondary submitted on 12 Nov...and now waiting :)
 
Does UCSF defer you to regular MD admissions if they don't want you for JMP/PRIME?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
i was told one of my interviewers would call me if accepted
Oh really? You mean either faculty or med student who interviewed an applicant? If I'm lucky enough to be accepted, there's a good chance that I would never answer the call (so many spam/random calls with the bay area code).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Hi everyone! Do we know when the admissions office will start releasing post-interview decisions for those that have already interviewed?
 
Hi everyone! Do we know when the admissions office will start releasing post-interview decisions for those that have already interviewed?
Website as well as the adcoms on the interview day said anytime between December and January. But based on the last three years thread on decision dates, we are speculating dec 16th, next wed? lol but can be later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Website as well as the adcoms on the interview day said anytime between December and January. But based on the last three years thread on decision dates, we are speculating dec 16th, next wed? lol but can be later.
Ahh, let's hope! Thanks for clarifying
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Saw this coming, Pre-II R just now. Complete 9/18, good luck to everyone still in the running!
 
  • Care
Reactions: 3 users
Top