2020-2021 UC San Francisco

BU Medical Sciences
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members do not see this ad.
ctfldyjbmttsklasnq said:
I thought UCSF was releasing admissions starting January according to MSAR? Did anyone get told differently on their interview day?
Click to expand...
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.... 😵
 
wstand said:
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.... 😵
Click to expand...
ctfldyjbmttsklasnq said:
I thought UCSF was releasing admissions starting January according to MSAR? Did anyone get told differently on their interview day?
Click to expand...
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
 
Also, does anyone know if UCSF does calls/emails for accepted applicants or email for everyone?
 
JustTryinToMatriculate said:
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.
Click to expand...
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:
ChicagoBob said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
drscorpio said:
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.
Click to expand...
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: 126
Last edited:
ChicagoBob said:
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.
Click to expand...
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!
 
has anyone who applied in october heard back? either II or pre II R?
 
ThatNeuroGuy1 said:
I was complete in October and haven’t heard back for anything - neither II nor pre-II R.
Click to expand...
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)"
 
Eternal Traveler said:
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?
Click to expand...
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 🙂
 
halcyon_ said:
i was told one of my interviewers would call me if accepted
Click to expand...
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).
 
Hi everyone! Do we know when the admissions office will start releasing post-interview decisions for those that have already interviewed?
 
champ_rulez said:
Hi everyone! Do we know when the admissions office will start releasing post-interview decisions for those that have already interviewed?
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

wysdoc
2024-2025 UC San Francisco
23 24 25 26 27
Replies
1K
Views
380K
jffyx _net
jffyx _net
wysdoc
2023-2024 UC San Francisco
35 36 37 38 39
Replies
2K
Views
523K
deleted1141024
D
wysdoc
2024-2025 UC San Diego
12 13 14 15 16
Replies
794
Views
266K
skyswitz
S
wysdoc
2022-2023 UC San Francisco
22 23 24 25 26
Replies
1K
Views
375K
Idkidkidkidkidkidk
I
gyngyn
2024-2025 San Juan Bautista
Replies
1
Views
4K
DrKingCEO
D
Top