I mean you're right, it sounds off to me; I was doing math at 2am, which doesn't always have a solid track record 😂 Not sure where it went wrong though? I did post my calculations, and am still lost as to where the error might be.
It's 1.63 A per accepted applicant, not total applicants. Total As given out hover around 20k at the moment.
Yup. The calculations are incorrect on their face, because @wpneuro is multiplying what he thinks is As per applicant by the total number of applicants, and then coming up with a crazy high number that he is not subjecting to a reality check. (@Rheopecty -- 1.63*60,000 applicants/12,613 accepted applicants = 7.8 As per accepted applicant!)
The number he is looking for is already provided by AAMC, but the AAMC labeling is less than crystal clear. There are, as of 2/8, 1.63 acceptances per accepted applicant, which is down slightly from last year.
Ah, missed your earlier post too; that's my bad! I guess I was biased by my experiences on the MD-PhD side, especially since I haven't followed the stuff here quite as closely. Thanks for the correction!
Where you went wrong was by misreading the ambiguous labeling. The 1.63 is per accepted applicant, not total applicants. In a world where almost 60% have zero As and half of the remainder have one, there is no way that the average for all applicants could be 1.63, and the average for accepted applicants could be close to 8, when only a tiny fraction of a percent of accepted applicants have more than 8 (as of 2/8, 56 out of 12,613!).
RIP my basic arithmetic skills making it through K12 and undergrad to be felled in the 2am gauntlet of SDN... 😂 To be fair, it's not ambiguous labeling by AAMC; it's straight-up incorrect. I *should* have noticed the mismatch between my calculations and the other numbers in the table though, so that's on me 😅 This is what I get for taking AAMC's words at face value lmao
This analysis is incorrect. Second column in table is "accepted" applicant. Number of A's handed out is 20559 vs. 23008 at same time last year. Very poor labeling by AAMC.
I'm just confused on where you got that 9,000 number from?
12,613 individuals held at least one A as of 2/8. There were 21,625 US-MD MS1 seats last year. 21,625-12,613=9,012 additional people who will have at least one A by the time all the schools begin classes this summer.
Yeah. Nice observation. Sounds like more transcripts per applicant. Any conclusions you'd like to share? I have my own thoughts, but I'd not sure people will appreciate them coming from a lowly premed, so I'd love to hear your thoughts as a respected, experienced adcom.
My theory:
But, that happens every year. He's asking why 13% more applications were started, 18% more applications were submitted, but a whopping 72% more transcripts were received? On its face, it seems incongruent.
To be honest, not coping well. This is my second cycle. Waitlisted at my top choice for the second time. It’s really damaging to your spirit to have worked this hard and been through so much just to be told you aren’t good enough. So far, the only thing that has given me any sort of comfort has been talking to people here on the SDN who really know how hard this is and have shared experience. I urge you to reach out to any kind of support you have and talk through things. Aside from that, always ALWAYS hope for the best, but plan for the worst so you can set yourself up for success moving forward.
I feel like by default anybody who puts themselves through this bs does not qualify as sane (aka all of us). I forgot what unadulterated sanity feels like after I hit submit on AMCAS.
Totally. Some will be transparent but, unfortunately, many will not tell you anything.
On 5 WLs currently with two more most likely coming. Honestly not doing amazing but life goes on, trying to figure out if I'm gonna apply this summer or wait. This was my 3rd time already. Just trying to hang with friends/family/do the things I love so things feel normal.
Many (most?) schools have an unranked waitlist. Thus, at this point, there is nothing to tell.
IMO, the most important metric for assessing year-over-year changes in applicant volume is completed secondaries - does this data exist? Without the completed secondaries benchmark, you can't really meaningfully speculate on the overall applicant picture.
In general, it doesn't happen! The "C" in CTE stands for "Commit." Under the rules (guidelines) you are supposed to withdraw from ALL WLs when you select CTE. If the CTE school learns that you did not, your acceptance could be rescinded. In addition, if the WL schools are playing by the rules, they will kick you off the WL when they see you have selected CTE elsewhere, as they will be able to see beginning on 4/30.
You really in every thread huh
Not quite, but, there are a few that deal with the same issues over and over and over and over. Having taken the time to educate myself in these areas, I am happy to provide answers over and over and over and over.
No. Read this:
CTE dates are all over the place. After your CTE deadline, plenty of people could theoretically still be on those WLs while being PTE somewhere, which is totally unfair to people like you. It's definitely not just for people with no As. That's not until the very end, after classes have begun in most of the country, just like you'd expect.Nobody can see anything until 4/30. Unfortunately for you, if 4/30 is really your CTE deadline (please confirm this with the school), the "rules" require that you withdraw from all your WLs when you select CTE. Your WL school will see this on 4/30, and, if they are playing by the "rules" they will kick you off the WL if you don't withdraw, so you won't ever have to worry about being accepted.
This is what is evil about allowing schools to set arbitrary CTE dates. There is absolutely no connection between 4/30 and when classes start at any school, so there is no reason to require anyone to select it so early. It is merely the first date that the CYMS tool will allow you to select CTE. It is just a device to force you to attend your CTE school without affording you the opportunity to see if you are called off the WL at your top choice. An opportunity that thousands of other applicants across the country will not be denied. Evil.
@gyngyn, @LizzyM, @Moko -- Do you guys have any juice, or have access to people that do? You have all proven yourselves to be strong advocates for applicants and students, and AMCAS REALLY should consider not allowing the tool to be used for CTE selection until the end of May, a full month after the requirement to reduce to one A and to provide visibility to schools regarding PTE selections. This would provide the necessary buffer to allow the system to work its magic, and to allow everyone to participate as the bulk of WL movement occurs.
Does any school really need a CTE date before then? Do any schools actually begin orientation before the third week of June? It is honestly BS that people like OP are going to be disadvantaged like this, as some schools simply game the system to their advantage. It would be great if this glaring inequity were addressed, if not now, then maybe in time for me next year.
It's probably going off-topic, but 4/30 is PTE and 6/30 is CTE, commonly used by AMCAS, I thought. No?
No. Most, but not all, schools require you to reduce to one A and select PTE by 4/30. CTE dates are all over the place, and are determined STRICTLY by the schools. AMCAS recommends that it be 3 weeks before orientation, but it can be whenever schools decide, and some schools set it as early as 4/30, as I noted in my quote above.
Is there a list floating around on SDN with those dates?
Maybe, but don't rely on it. You have 2 As!!!! Go directly to the source and get the most accurate, up to date information!!!!!!
Ok - will reach out. Hope the CTE is August!!!
The ethical schools set it 3 weeks before orientation, so start with that. Most schools have a timeline on their admissions websites, so you shouldn't have to actually personally reach out to anyone. Schools do start anywhere from June-August, so that drives some of the disparity, but, some schools do just go out of their way to screw you over by forcing you to commit early and drop all WLs, so be careful. I am pretty sure your schools are not dicks when it comes to this, so you should be reasonably okay.
Ahhhh, hard relate! Here's to both of us getting in sometime soon!It sucks knowing that my cycle is basically over and I'm just waiting for any one out of the six schools I'm waitlisted at to accept me
