4.0 and still rejected

[sumstorm]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Yep, my county is a black hole for all the barely-got-by vets from Wisconsin, Purdue, Florida, Minnesota and Colorado State. (No, before you jump down my throat again, I am not saying these are horrendous schools that get everything wrong blah blah blah. Don't get your panties in a twist!)

I didn't actually jump down your throat, I questioned the validity of your all encompassing judgements. I am pointing out that I think everyone has the occasional encounter with a poor vet (poor SO, poor boss, poor X) but if you are attracting more than your fair share, then the common denominator is the attractant. There are some occasional exceptions to this, like areas where vets are so incredibly rare that you migh only encounter one or two over a decade and thus the sample size is n =1, but if you are encountering n = 10 with a wide variety of backgrounds that are all 'barely-got-by vets, then something is wrong other than admissions. I also think it is interesting that you are apparently self-professed to be far beyond the expertise of all these vets, but aren't yet a vet yourself.

The internet is a great way to check the pulse on everything in the country and I've been following it for 10 years so I could try and get the gist of who and what is good bad and indifferent (and no, not just on SDN thank you). Just because you don't agree with me doesn't mean I'm wrong.

So you are right, the ad coms that have been doing this 3-4x longer than you have been following trends that you aren't even naming are clueless, and your knowledge is superior to those that have already gone through the educational level that you are entering? I actually disagree that the internet is a great way to check the pulse on everything in the country. I love the internet, think it is a great tool, but I'll take the vet's with experience over Dr. Google anyday. Maybe that is only because I am old enough to remember when half the vet schools weren't even more than a page or three on the web over a decade ago and I am aware of how many stats aren't ever collected.

Don't you think, that if the same thing has been said for the past 30 years that maybe just maybe its about time to re-evaluate the system? I certainly am not content to sit around and let it be just because it's the status quo.

What makes you think they are doing the same thing? I mean, you are tracking all the trends, so you know that there have been huge changes in interviewing, testing (I still miss the VCAT), weighting of GPA (and subtypes)/GRE, formulations of alternative entry, pre-req adjustments, experience requirements, application methods, class size, tracking, diversity, etc. Admissions is continually adjusting, adapting, and changing, but there are always going to be folks that say it's broken. I never said the same thing has been going on for the past 30 years, I said that there have always been people unhappy with it. Heck, VMCAS, the system most of us use, is itself an outgrowth of change. I find it interesting that you got in, but are unhappy with it, but all you have is your own admissions experience and second hand commentary.

How about working with AVMA on one of the committees, seeing how it actually works at your school from a different perspective than an applicant, actually listening to the ad com arguments over the issues they face in making the selection, and learning more before you just declare 'its broken' and 'get your letters, ignore all advice' and 'don't be snarky' and yet your post was the first that actually seemed snarky. So maybe you should answer your own question...who pissed in your wheaties that you instantly felt folks were being snarky and started telling folks its all broken? 😱

Its not all broken, the internet isn't perfect, it is always adapting and changing, and each year at some point ad coms are thin slicing to determine the differences between students...and sometimes there isn't a great reason why A gets in and B doesn't. Sadly, the same is true for medicine itself.

 

[Cautionary Tail]

It's a system. Just about everyone uses the same questions and format (VMCAS), asks the same kind of supplementals (if they use them), and asks similar questions at the interviews, except for TAMU, that was intense! I've got 6 interviews under my belt this year alone. The panels are made of the same people; community vets, a professor or two, maybe a student.

I just google defined system and this is what came up; "an organized structure for arranging or classifying", "a procedure or process for obtaining an objective".

Do I know everything about the whole crap-shoot? No, never would want to say I do because then I'd be perfect and perfect people are BORING!

I'm going to have to agree with ArmyMutt on this one.

The programs I applied to were pretty diverse. One didn't use VMCAS at all. Of the four that did, one had a supplemental that required me to write ten essays and submit a CV. Another had no supplemental whatsoever. The other two had a few short-answer questions on them. One appeared to want to assess your interest in that particular program, the other asked questions about interests, experience, and diversity.

I got two interviews. Both were behavior-based, but the questions took slightly different directions. There was no actual overlap... I couldn't even get away with using the same scenarios. At the first school, I was interviewed for an hour by two individuals in administrative positions. At the second, I spent about 40 minutes with two professors (both of which, I believe, were DVMs).

Even if many schools are using VMCAS, similar supplementals, and similar interview questions, they aren't necessarily evaluating them in the same way. Academically, Minnesota only looks at your last 45 and prerequisite GPAs. When it comes to the final decision, academics, non-academic attributes, and your interview are weighted equally. VMRCVM's site is basically plastered with reminders that they don't do forgiveness in the GPA department. At Western, your application requires two "thumbs up" from committee members for an interview invite, and two more from your interviewers to advance to the dean, who then hand selects the class from the pool of eligible applicants. Some schools want broad experience, some want to see that you're more focused. Some want the Biology GRE, some don't. Some factor in your AW score, some don't.

If there were a true overall system in place (as opposed to individual ones at each school), I would expect more consistency. Some of the people rejected from programs that showed an interest in me had far better stats than I did. They were accepted into programs that wanted absolutely nothing to do with me. The adcoms may be using similar tools, but they're not using them in the same way.

 

[2CatMatt]

I know of someone that recruits chemical engineers for a fortune 500 company-- when they are reviewing applicants, it is far more important to the company that an individual has life skills (such as communication, problem solving, multitasking, etc) than it is for them to be capable of buring their nose in a book.

I completely agree on the importance of other factors besides grades.

As far as the academic argument goes- It's not just vet med that somewhat scruitinizes people with perfect grades. It's a very fine line to walk (and no- I'm not advocating for those with great grades to slack off or those with cruddy grades not to try) ... When said individual was searching for internships, many of their peers were turned away because of their 4.0 and lack of an ability to do anything but study.

Maybe we are saying it backwards though. It is not that adcoms scrutinize people with perfect grades, it's that they are scrutinizing everyone for additional factors and life skills, and having a 4.0 doesn't protect you from that.

PS - sorry if the quote thing is messed up, new here and still figuring out how to post and all!

 

[pennyonthefloor]

Maybe we are saying it backwards though. It is not that adcoms scrutinize people with perfect grades, it's that they are scrutinizing everyone for additional factors and life skills, and having a 4.0 doesn't protect you from that.

I guess that's more of what I was saying... that a 4.0 doesn't give you a 'get out of jail free' card for every other area you're lacking....

 

[awaring1]

 

[2CatMatt]

hahaha, awesome icon!

 

[nyanko]

Don't you think, that if the same thing has been said for the past 30 years that maybe just maybe its about time to re-evaluate the system? I certainly am not content to sit around and let it be just because it's the status quo.

The system is obviously screwed up......

Draw your own inferences.

 

[kas9ey]

Holy moly boy and girls!!! When did I say I know everything about everything and I'm perfect and all vets are *****s and so on and so forth. I pointed out that there's people that get in and shouldn't, and wind up in the real world and don't do well (evidently this only happens where I'm from) and suddenly I'm the scourge of this useless little bit of code on a server somewhere.

So, you're older than me so you are without a doubt positive that I am completely 100% wrong. Don't you think that sort of thought process is one of the problems? You can't say that everyone that gets in is perfect and that its OK to get it right most of the time. If I went anywhere and some professional told me "yeah we get it right most of the time" I'd be heading for the door looking for someone else who had a little bit more confidence in whatever they were doing. Call me crazy but I kind of like high standards.

As for *insert dramatic music* "the system" *followed by a dundunDUUUN* I didn't mean every school is exactly the same. That is ridiculous. I meant that they use a similar evaluation process so the same things fall through the cracks time and time again. Complacency bothers me, but what do I know, I'm just a stupid kid.

 

[kas9ey]

Holy moly boy and girls!!! When did I say I know everything about everything and I'm perfect and all vets are *****s and so on and so forth. I pointed out that there's people that get in and shouldn't, and wind up in the real world and don't do well (evidently this only happens where I'm from) and suddenly I'm the scourge of this useless little bit of code on a server somewhere.

So, you're older than me so you are without a doubt positive that I am completely 100% wrong. Don't you think that sort of thought process is one of the problems? You can't say that everyone that gets in is perfect and that its OK to get it right most of the time. If I went anywhere and some professional told me "yeah we get it right most of the time" I'd be heading for the door looking for someone else who had a little bit more confidence in whatever they were doing. Call me crazy but I kind of like high standards.

As for *insert dramatic music* "the system" *followed by a dundunDUUUN* I didn't mean every school is exactly the same. That is ridiculous. I meant that they use a similar evaluation process so the same things fall through the cracks time and time again. Complacency bothers me, but what do I know, I'm just a stupid kid.

 

[awaring1]

Personally, I still like the "monkeys throwing darts at a dart board" theory for admission selection.

 

[Armymutt25A]

Holy moly boy and girls!!! When did I say I know everything about everything and I'm perfect and all vets are *****s and so on and so forth. I pointed out that there's people that get in and shouldn't, and wind up in the real world and don't do well (evidently this only happens where I'm from) and suddenly I'm the scourge of this useless little bit of code on a server somewhere.

So, you're older than me so you are without a doubt positive that I am completely 100% wrong. Don't you think that sort of thought process is one of the problems? You can't say that everyone that gets in is perfect and that its OK to get it right most of the time. If I went anywhere and some professional told me "yeah we get it right most of the time" I'd be heading for the door looking for someone else who had a little bit more confidence in whatever they were doing. Call me crazy but I kind of like high standards.

As for *insert dramatic music* "the system" *followed by a dundunDUUUN* I didn't mean every school is exactly the same. That is ridiculous. I meant that they use a similar evaluation process so the same things fall through the cracks time and time again. Complacency bothers me, but what do I know, I'm just a stupid kid.

Your faux self flagellation is unbecoming. Smacks of a temper tantrum. I'm a realist and a straight shooter. I would much rather have someone tell me that they get it right most of the time than someone try to BS me and state that they are perfect. When dealing with the natural world, things rarely are perfect. Unless I have total and absolute control, I cannot guarantee any outcome. This does not decrease the standard to which I perform. When my boss gives me a mission, I analyze the requirements and select the method that has the highest chance of success. Since I did not build the radio, the battery, the antenna, and the hand mic, I can't say for sure if they will work when properly assembled, even if I test them 100 times. I do not control the humidity, electrostatic density of the air, nor discharges of the sun. All I can do is use my past experiences applied to the current situation and give an honest assessment of success. Standards are about what you put into a task, not necessarily the results.

 

[TomTheK9Fixr]

Your faux self flagellation is unbecoming. Smacks of a temper tantrum. I'm a realist and a straight shooter. I would much rather have someone tell me that they get it right most of the time than someone try to BS me and state that they are perfect. When dealing with the natural world, things rarely are perfect. Unless I have total and absolute control, I cannot guarantee any outcome. This does not decrease the standard to which I perform. When my boss gives me a mission, I analyze the requirements and select the method that has the highest chance of success. Since I did not build the radio, the battery, the antenna, and the hand mic, I can't say for sure if they will work when properly assembled, even if I test them 100 times. I do not control the humidity, electrostatic density of the air, nor discharges of the sun. All I can do is use my past experiences applied to the current situation and give an honest assessment of success. Standards are about what you put into a task, not necessarily the results.

You sir, have earned "BEST POST OF THE DAY". Brilliant!

 

[LetItSnow]

You can't say that everyone that gets in is perfect and that its OK to get it right most of the time. If I went anywhere and some professional told me "yeah we get it right most of the time" I'd be heading for the door looking for someone else [...]

I'm quite comfortable saying that most applicants are good choices and that it's OK to get it right most of the time. The fact that vet schools have a relatively low attrition rate is suggestive of a good job choosing applicants.

You don't aim for perfection, you aim for excellence. And insisting on nothing less than perfection is a recipe for, ironically, poor performance, underachievement, and burnout. If you require perfection from people, they will be paralyzed and unwilling to take risk and innovate. So if you want to achieve real results, "most of the time" is pretty doggone good.

My sister sits on an admitting privileges committee at the (human) hospital at which she practices. If they refused to give privs to every doctor that had anything less than 'perfection' in their background .... the hospital would be empty. They've all prescribed the wrong dosage at one point or another. They've all made mistakes. And yet, they are, for the most part, damn fine doctors and my first choice of places to go if one of my children is ever critically ill: even though they just get it right "most of the time."

I meant that they use a similar evaluation process so the same things fall through the cracks time and time again. Complacency bothers me, but what do I know, I'm just a stupid kid.

Part of the problem with this thread is that you keep making vague statements about the "system" being "broken" and that it's been broken for "30 years" and it needs to be overhauled and oh-my-god-they're-letting-in-unqualified-applicants .... but frankly, you haven't really said anything concrete about what problems you see with the applications process.

It might help if you could be more specific. What part of the process, exactly, is broken? And how would you fix it?

Personally, I still like the "monkeys throwing darts at a dart board" theory for admission selection.

👍

 

[Cautionary Tail]

So, you're older than me so you are without a doubt positive that I am completely 100% wrong. Don't you think that sort of thought process is one of the problems? You can't say that everyone that gets in is perfect and that its OK to get it right most of the time. If I went anywhere and some professional told me "yeah we get it right most of the time" I'd be heading for the door looking for someone else who had a little bit more confidence in whatever they were doing. Call me crazy but I kind of like high standards.

But there's a difference between expecting high standards and expecting perfection... and while you say you're not out for perfection, if getting it right 'most of the time' isn't enough, what is?

As for *insert dramatic music* "the system" *followed by a dundunDUUUN* I didn't mean every school is exactly the same. That is ridiculous. I meant that they use a similar evaluation process so the same things fall through the cracks time and time again. Complacency bothers me, but what do I know, I'm just a stupid kid.

But my point was that the evaluation process (aside from the general format of VMCAS + supplemental + interview) isn't always all that similar. Yeah, they're looking at the same stats (what other options do they have?), but if they're evaluating them differently and placing an emphasis on different things, I don't see how the same things are going to be falling through the cracks time and time again. At a particular school, perhaps, but not across the board.

Personally, I still like the "monkeys throwing darts at a dart board" theory for admission selection.

Agreed. 👍

 

[kas9ey]

Part of the problem with this thread is that you keep making vague statements about the "system" being "broken" and that it's been broken for "30 years" and it needs to be overhauled and oh-my-god-they're-letting-in-unqualified-applicants .... but frankly, you haven't really said anything concrete about what problems you see with the applications process.

It might help if you could be more specific. What part of the process, exactly, is broken? And how would you fix it?



👍

I agree that most applicants are pretty good. I'm not calling for an all out Libyan-style overthrow of all that was AAVMC or VMCAS or TMDSAS or whatever. I just think it can be better. When I think "most of the time" I'm thinking that's like 80%. I'd like it to be "really good!" at 95%. So if your "most" is 95% then yes I agree with you. Yes, I know everyone makes mistakes and that is to be expected in every single professional setting. I'm not talking about people that are stupid getting in, I'm talking about people who (true story) wear $300 sunglasses to look at a 4 YO horse then send me the bill to get them fixed when the horse breaks their sunglasses trying to do a flexion test, or the person that blames the owner when they miss a cantaloupe sized tumor on a 30 lb. dog (also a true story).

The 30 years was from someone else who said they've been working in it since the 80's, it's not something that I pulled out of thin air and I have to draft an essay for that persons reply as well but that's another story lol! So anyway, moving on!

I've already got a seat in the class, so why do I care? Because I know brilliant, honest, good people that don't get in, and I know just slimey people that do. I don't really want to get in to specifics because I don't like outing people who can't defend themselves, but here's some examples; like people who have added a zero to the end of their hours count, who wrote test answers on their desks, who paid other people to take tests for them (I went to a massive state school with giant 400 people assembly exams for some classes, there's some excellent fake ID makers out there evidently), who throw others under the bus when a group lab goes wrong and so on and so forth. I don't know how you fix "moral compasses" on people or test for it but there's gotta be a better way than this crap-shoot style we're on now. I guess what I'm saying is I'd like to see more people get in that have a spine, that are willing to take one for the team, that aren't focused solely on themselves. Call me a Utopian if you want but I think more gets done that way.

Did I miss anything?

 

[TomTheK9Fixr]

I agree that most applicants are pretty good. I'm not calling for an all out Libyan-style overthrow of all that was AAVMC or VMCAS or TMDSAS or whatever. I just think it can be better. When I think "most of the time" I'm thinking that's like 80%. I'd like it to be "really good!" at 95%. So if your "most" is 95% then yes I agree with you. Yes, I know everyone makes mistakes and that is to be expected in every single professional setting. I'm not talking about people that are stupid getting in, I'm talking about people who (true story) wear $300 sunglasses to look at a 4 YO horse then send me the bill to get them fixed when the horse breaks their sunglasses trying to do a flexion test, or the person that blames the owner when they miss a cantaloupe sized tumor on a 30 lb. dog (also a true story).

The 30 years was from someone else who said they've been working in it since the 80's, it's not something that I pulled out of thin air and I have to draft an essay for that persons reply as well but that's another story lol! So anyway, moving on!

I've already got a seat in the class, so why do I care? Because I know brilliant, honest, good people that don't get in, and I know just slimey people that do. I don't really want to get in to specifics because I don't like outing people who can't defend themselves, but here's some examples; like people who have added a zero to the end of their hours count, who wrote test answers on their desks, who paid other people to take tests for them (I went to a massive state school with giant 400 people assembly exams for some classes, there's some excellent fake ID makers out there evidently), who throw others under the bus when a group lab goes wrong and so on and so forth. I don't know how you fix "moral compasses" on people or test for it but there's gotta be a better way than this crap-shoot style we're on now. I guess what I'm saying is I'd like to see more people get in that have a spine, that are willing to take one for the team, that aren't focused solely on themselves. Call me a Utopian if you want but I think more gets done that way.

Did I miss anything?

May I offer an opinion/recommendation?

You'd (we'd all do best) be best to focus on the positive people and opportunities that await. A lot of people point out the bad things in our world (e.g., politics, war, questionable vet school admits, etc). IMO waaaay too many people overlook the positives.

I understand your frustration with some clinicians. However, instead of pointing out how terrible they are, store it in your mind and use as motivation to never be like them.

 

[LetItSnow]

Did I miss anything?

Yes. You keep talking about vague stories. The rest of us keep talking about the applications process. How would you improve the applications process to alleviate this egregious problem you see? Clearly you'd like to see all these no-gooders fail to get into school. Great. How?

I'm kinda with Tom. I'd rather focus on the positive. And from my perspective ... the positive is that I've talked to one 4th-year student after another over the last two years at UMN (one of their elective rotations is where I volunteer, so I throw dozens of questions at them...), and almost without exception they've been intelligent, competent (to my untrained eye, anyway), and had an excellent demeanor. I truthfully can't think of a single one that made me think "Man. How did THAT person get into/through vet school??"

If that's the result of a broken applications system, then I guess I'd like it to stay broken.

 

[libster06]

May I offer an opinion/recommendation?

You'd (we'd all do best) be best to focus on the positive people and opportunities that await. A lot of people point out the bad things in our world (e.g., politics, war, questionable vet school admits, etc). IMO waaaay too many people overlook the positives.

I understand your frustration with some clinicians. However, instead of pointing out how terrible they are, store it in your mind and use as motivation to never be like them.

.... OR how about you focusing on yourself and not everyone else? You know... mind your own biznass... you do you, I'll do me... see? It's interesting that you've gotten as far as you have with the seemingly constant monitoring of the "moral compass" (or lack thereof) of others. You don't speak for all 27 vet schools. The "system" is not broken, and I think every person on here currently in vet school can attest to that. It's sad that you think this way, and are just embarking on your vet school/career journey. You could really be mis-judging a lot of people. You really might want to re-think your attitude.

 

[kas9ey]

I didn't actually jump down your throat, I questioned the validity of your all encompassing judgements. I am pointing out that I think everyone has the occasional encounter with a poor vet (poor SO, poor boss, poor X) but if you are attracting more than your fair share, then the common denominator is the attractant. There are some occasional exceptions to this, like areas where vets are so incredibly rare that you migh only encounter one or two over a decade and thus the sample size is n =1, but if you are encountering n = 10 with a wide variety of backgrounds that are all 'barely-got-by vets, then something is wrong other than admissions. I also think it is interesting that you are apparently self-professed to be far beyond the expertise of all these vets, but aren't yet a vet yourself.

"...you are a part of the problem" Sorry, but where I come from this is jumping down someones throat, along with insinuating that they're stupid because they're younger than you.

So you are right, the ad coms that have been doing this 3-4x longer than you have been following trends that you aren't even naming are clueless, and your knowledge is superior to those that have already gone through the educational level that you are entering? I actually disagree that the internet is a great way to check the pulse on everything in the country. I love the internet, think it is a great tool, but I'll take the vet's with experience over Dr. Google anyday. Maybe that is only because I am old enough to remember when half the vet schools weren't even more than a page or three on the web over a decade ago and I am aware of how many stats aren't ever collected.

Once again I'm wrong because I'm not ancient. Ever hear that saying that sometimes it takes an outsider to see a problem.

What makes you think they are doing the same thing? I mean, you are tracking all the trends, so you know that there have been huge changes in interviewing, testing (I still miss the VCAT), weighting of GPA (and subtypes)/GRE, formulations of alternative entry, pre-req adjustments, experience requirements, application methods, class size, tracking, diversity, etc. Admissions is continually adjusting, adapting, and changing, but there are always going to be folks that say it's broken. I never said the same thing has been going on for the past 30 years, I said that there have always been people unhappy with it. Heck, VMCAS, the system most of us use, is itself an outgrowth of change. I find it interesting that you got in, but are unhappy with it, but all you have is your own admissions experience and second hand commentary.

How the GRE is supposed to judge veterinary ability is beyond me as well. So what you're saying is that the process (I won't use system anymore since it's so offensive hahaha) has been molded before, and (maybe I'm reading to far into into this, and using too man of these "()") you've been a part of shaping it because it wasn't great before. But when I say it's still got some tweaking to do I'm wrong? huh? I just replied with my reasons to someone else, I'm sure you can find it.
Here's where I pulled "last 30 years":
"Just so you know, the same thing was said when I started working with Purdue extension in the 80's, when I was in college in the 90's, and when I was working with vets in the 00's. I take it with a great big grain of salt." 2011 - 1980 = 31 years. Well maybe George Orwell disagrees and says its 72 years, but I don't know, he's not really good at answering e-mails.

Why am I unhappy about the system since it worked for me? Because, as I said to someone else earlier, I know good people that should have gotten in and didn't, and some, for lack of a better word, slimy people who I don't think should have. I want to do what's right and not what's easiest.

How about working with AVMA on one of the committees, seeing how it actually works at your school from a different perspective than an applicant, actually listening to the ad com arguments over the issues they face in making the selection, and learning more before you just declare 'its broken' and 'get your letters, ignore all advice' and 'don't be snarky' and yet your post was the first that actually seemed snarky. So maybe you should answer your own question...who pissed in your wheaties that you instantly felt folks were being snarky and started telling folks its all broken? 😱

Its not all broken, the internet isn't perfect, it is always adapting and changing, and each year at some point ad coms are thin slicing to determine the differences between students...and sometimes there isn't a great reason why A gets in and B doesn't. Sadly, the same is true for medicine itself.

I don't know where you work but the adcoms I know tend to not like having applicants under their feet lol. I will be looking into it once I get to campus in the fall for sure. I also didn't mean ignore all advice. I meant ignore the other applicants around you so kids aren't endlessly comparing themselves to people and making themselves crazy!

I like being snarky with people who are snarky with me, as you can see. And some stuff was supposed to be like "funny haha" sarcasm, not snarky. But whatever, you can interpret it however you want.

Here's the bottom line for me, I don't care if you agree with me or not, or think I'm a loser, who cares, its a chat board. But before you automatically dismiss someone for not being old and put words in their mouth, just ask to see why they think what they think first, like LetItSnow did.

 

[kas9ey]

Yes. You keep talking about vague stories. The rest of us keep talking about the applications process. How would you improve the applications process to alleviate this egregious problem you see? Clearly you'd like to see all these no-gooders fail to get into school. Great. How?

I'm kinda with Tom. I'd rather focus on the positive. And from my perspective ... the positive is that I've talked to one 4th-year student after another over the last two years at UMN (one of their elective rotations is where I volunteer, so I throw dozens of questions at them...), and almost without exception they've been intelligent, competent (to my untrained eye, anyway), and had an excellent demeanor. I truthfully can't think of a single one that made me think "Man. How did THAT person get into/through vet school??"

If that's the result of a broken applications system, then I guess I'd like it to stay broken.

I was purposely vague because like I said earlier, I don't want to out anybody prematurely. I'm also trying to answer everyone's questions so it feels like I keep digressing into old stuff lol. My thought process was to clarify the problem I see (the no-gooders as you said) and then move on to the process. So I'm not ignoring the process questions I promise!!

How to fix it? I don't know (kiss of death right there, bring out the wolves ahhh!!!!) All I see is the problem. And I don't want to focus on keeping the crappy ones out, I want to get the good ones in. I know it's the same thing just with a different spin but whatever you get the point. What about this hair-brained scheme I've got: just about everyone uses VMCAS right? You have to put your main undergrad school and major/program in right? So put a simple survey at the end, randomly selects 5 or 6 people from your school and asks you about them, do you know them, they're super, they sleep through class, they pick their nose, whatever. Even if it didn't work it would at least be hilarious! 😉

I think it's excellent that you haven't ran into anyone you don't like in the halls at the U. Maybe they have it right lol

 

[kas9ey]

May I offer an opinion/recommendation?

You'd (we'd all do best) be best to focus on the positive people and opportunities that await. A lot of people point out the bad things in our world (e.g., politics, war, questionable vet school admits, etc). IMO waaaay too many people overlook the positives.

I understand your frustration with some clinicians. However, instead of pointing out how terrible they are, store it in your mind and use as motivation to never be like them.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean for this to turn into a "vet school sucks and you're all a-holes" kind of thing. I am insanely excited to get started! I was asked to provide examples of why I thought it was screwed up so I did, and now I'm the negative nelly in the room, not what I wanted to happen!! I know some absolutely stellar people in the industry and I've modeled my approach after theirs. I also want to push it in the right direction, and to do that you've got to have good people. And to get there you've got to identify the problems. That's what I was aiming for.

 

[awaring1]

While this thread is entertaining to read, I do not see why everyone is getting their panties in a bunch. I do not feel like kas9ey is making any hugely dramatic statements. Although a lot of the counterpoints have correct ideas there seems to be some people defending the admissions process like they designed the damn thing.

There is no 100% perfect way to run the admissions process. No matter what happened, there will always be brilliant people that slip through the cracks and idiots who weaseled their way in. There are a few things that I feel really need to be changed Such as Cornell weighing both the GRE and your GPA as 30% each. How can they count your entire 4 year performance equal to one two-hour exam is crazy to me. Also, I hear some schools only offer interview invites by GPA and don't even look at your experience until afterwords.

I think schools are doing the best with what they have. Obviously some schools are interested in rankings and blah blah blah but it is within the best interest of every single institution to find the best people possible. I guess the variable is what they determine "best" to be.


/rant



We don't want to look like this!

 

[libster06]

While this thread is entertaining to read, I do not see why everyone is getting their panties in a bunch. I do not feel like kas9ey is making any hugely dramatic statements. Although a lot of the counterpoints have correct ideas there seems to be some people defending the admissions process like they designed the damn thing.

There is no 100% perfect way to run the admissions process. No matter what happened, there will always be brilliant people that slip through the cracks and idiots who weaseled their way in. There are a few things that I feel really need to be changed Such as Cornell weighing both the GRE and your GPA as 30% each. How can they count your entire 4 year performance equal to one two-hour exam is crazy to me. Also, I hear some schools only offer interview invites by GPA and don't even look at your experience until afterwords.

I think schools are doing the best with what they have. Obviously some schools are interested in rankings and blah blah blah but it is within the best interest of every single institution to find the best people possible. I guess the variable is what they determine "best" to be.


/rant



We don't want to look like this!

Too bad that's almost every single freaking thread on this website.

 

[kas9ey]

.... OR how about you focusing on yourself and not everyone else? You know... mind your own biznass... you do you, I'll do me... see? It's interesting that you've gotten as far as you have with the seemingly constant monitoring of the "moral compass" (or lack thereof) of others. You don't speak for all 27 vet schools. The "system" is not broken, and I think every person on here currently in vet school can attest to that. It's sad that you think this way, and are just embarking on your vet school/career journey. You could really be mis-judging a lot of people. You really might want to re-think your attitude.

I thought being selfish was frowned upon...? Haha jk I know what you mean. You could follow your own advice and mind your own business instead of judging someone you don't know. That's kind of insulting don't you think? You're surprised that someone is aware of their surroundings and points out where things are failing? Isn't that kind of a big portion of the job? It's not all about me or all about you. Don't you think we all could get even further if we didn't have to just ignore what didn't work in the world and tried to fix it instead? And I'm pretty sure that your "every person" statement is wrong since there's multiple people on here (read up a some posts) that agree the process is screwy.

 

[kas9ey]

While this thread is entertaining to read, I do not see why everyone is getting their panties in a bunch. I do not feel like kas9ey is making any hugely dramatic statements. Although a lot of the counterpoints have correct ideas there seems to be some people defending the admissions process like they designed the damn thing.

There is no 100% perfect way to run the admissions process. No matter what happened, there will always be brilliant people that slip through the cracks and idiots who weaseled their way in. There are a few things that I feel really need to be changed Such as Cornell weighing both the GRE and your GPA as 30% each. How can they count your entire 4 year performance equal to one two-hour exam is crazy to me. Also, I hear some schools only offer interview invites by GPA and don't even look at your experience until afterwords.

I think schools are doing the best with what they have. Obviously some schools are interested in rankings and blah blah blah but it is within the best interest of every single institution to find the best people possible. I guess the variable is what they determine "best" to be.


/rant



We don't want to look like this!

HAHAHAHAHA EXCELLENT! I really don't have anything better to do, I've already cleaned all my stalls for the day!!!! Scooping poo or throwing in on the interweb, that's all I do!!!

Bye the way, just so you know, 99.9% of my giant over generalizations are satire, you're supposed to laugh. I'm not actually that crazy...well most of the time.

 

[libster06]

You're surprised that someone is aware of their surroundings and points out where things are failing? Isn't that kind of a big portion of the job? It's not all about me or all about you. Don't you think we all could get even further if we didn't have to just ignore what didn't work in the world and tried to fix it instead? .

I don't see anything to really "fix". I feel like you're making a mountain out of a mole hill... and no, most people on this particular thread disagreed with your assumption of the said "system" (I think I counted 2 that did not or were on the fence.) Also, no I don't go scrolling the entire website for discrepancies among this argument, because I honestly don't have the time or the concern.


I'm not sure how I've "judged someone I don't know." You, yourself, in this thread have made quite a bit of (albeit vague for whatever reason) accusations and I was just going off of what you've stated. It just seemed to me like you had a lot of time to evaluate other people's shortcomings... I certainly couldn't point out 6 different examples of ways my peers and people I've encountered in the field have not met my standards of who should be getting into vet school or not. I'm not on here to fight, but you came on here with a lot of bold statements and now that I've challenged you, I have somehow inadvertently "judged" you. For that, I apologize.

 

[awaring1]

Too bad that's almost every single freaking thread on this website.

Meh. Some are worse than others.

 

[kas9ey]

I don't see anything to really "fix". I feel like you're making a mountain out of a mole hill... and no, most people on this particular thread disagreed with your assumption of the said "system" (I think I counted 2 that did not or were on the fence.) Also, no I don't go scrolling the entire website for discrepancies among this argument, because I honestly don't have the time or the concern.

You said everyone thinks its fine. I said it can't be everyone because those other two people happen to agree with me. Statistically it can't be "everyone" if there's someone that doesn't agree. I didn't tell you to scroll the whole website, but you must have been scrolling for something if you wound up here in the first place.

I'm not sure how I've "judged someone I don't know." You, yourself, in this thread have made quite a bit of (albeit vague for whatever reason) accusations and I was just going off of what you've stated. It just seemed to me like you had a lot of time to evaluate other people's shortcomings... I certainly couldn't point out 6 different examples of ways my peers and people I've encountered in the field have not met my standards of who should be getting into vet school or not. I'm not on here to fight, but you came on here with a lot of bold statements and now that I've challenged you, I have somehow inadvertently "judged" you. For that, I apologize.

Read below please 🙂

OR how about you focusing on yourself and not everyone else? ... It's interesting that you've gotten as far as you have with the seemingly constant monitoring of the "moral compass" (or lack thereof) of others. You don't speak for all 27 vet schools.... It's sad that you think this way, and are just embarking on your vet school/career journey. You could really be mis-judging a lot of people. You really might want to re-think your attitude.

I count 6 judgements right there, about what I should focus on, my "constant monitoring", that I'm "sad", etc. It's a typical attempt at an end-game, going after the person instead of their argument.

You've challenged me along with 14 other people, welcome to the club. I don't think it's really that difficult to see obvious cheating as a shortcoming on someone. People are good for certain reasons, and people suck for certain reasons. I get asked why they suck, and answer, and all of the sudden I'm the SDN anti-christ for answering a question LOL. Oh wait I probably shouldn't say anti-christ on the internet, oh well.

 

[gsi924]

I can't help my self anymore

JERRY! JERRY! JERRY!

please don't take this seriously, this thread could use some comic relief for a bit, then it can proceed as usual

 

[kas9ey]

Oh I find it vastly entertaining, I'm laughing my fat little butt off over here. And I'm not even being sarcastic, surprisingly. I just can't wait for the next box to pop up so I can see what rude tidbits we can say to each other!!! I think I actually just saw that Seinfeld commercial a couple minutes ago. How about the episode where George spends all night arguing with what's-his-nutts on the street about weather or not you can pull in nose first in a parallel spot. Classic. I am so bored, is it August yet? I'll stop rambling now.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Had to insert some classics

I love you guys 🙂 🙂 🙂 😆

 

[gsi924]

Oh I find it vastly entertaining, I'm laughing my fat little butt off over here. And I'm not even being sarcastic, surprisingly. I just can't wait for the next box to pop up so I can see what rude tidbits we can say to each other!!! I think I actually just saw that Seinfeld commercial a couple minutes ago. How about the episode where George spends all night arguing with what's-his-nutts on the street about weather or not you can pull in nose first in a parallel spot. Classic. I am so bored, is it August yet? I'll stop rambling now.

Im bored too obviously

yay an amicable convo and agreement! 👍

 

[kas9ey]

Its making me crazy I used the wrong weather. I mean whether.

I'm pretty sure I answered an interview question just like this.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WALIARHHLII&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

 

[libster06]

I really don't have anything better to do

.... you don't say....

[insert LOLHAHAHAHAOMG😀🙂😴😉]

I feel like I'm talking to Michael Scott.

 

[LetItSnow]

Woah.... that's going too far.... I love my bro.

 

[twelvetigers]

Mansseire!

 

[Halebug]

To the OP: do the schools you were rejected from offer some sort of application counseling? Some schools will give you a profile of how you were assessed and other schools will actually talk to you about how to make a more competitive application next time.

One of the schools does offer that and I plan to attend!

 

[Vet Med]

.

 

[kas9ey]

.... you don't say....

[insert LOLHAHAHAHAOMG😀🙂😴😉]

I feel like I'm talking to Michael Scott.

You obviously don't either if you're still here hahaha! I feel like I'm talking to someone with no sense of humor.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Lh4RPd8Vwk[/YOUTUBE]

 

[DVMDream]

I have to point out the REAL problem on this discussion (and what I know is really upsetting everyone, but no one wants to mention it):

Everyone keeps talking about the 27 vet schools in the US, but:

There are 28 vet schools in the US.

Ok... now that we have cleared that up, everyone can be happy again. 😀

Or continue with the original discussion, which in that case:

 

[LetItSnow]

Mansseire!

I knew it was time to start working out again when my boobs were bigger than my wife's. 😉

 

[spicykimchi]

I have to point out the REAL problem on this discussion (and what I know is really upsetting everyone, but no one wants to mention it):

Everyone keeps talking about the 27 vet schools in the US, but:

There are 28 vet schools in the US.

Ok... now that we have cleared that up, everyone can be happy again. 😀

Or continue with the original discussion, which in that case:

I noticed that too but I was too nice to correct anybody xD

- - -

I don't know how to feel about the admissions process: I suppose it doesn't hurt for admissions committies to seek betterment of themselves since, as stated, the admissions process will never be perfect. If it will never be perfect it can always be improved, if but by a little. I like thinking of a perfection as an impossible goal we will never reach but always strive to get a little closer to.

What I just said sounded really stupid but I just wanted to post something xD Just to let ya'll know I was hear and I read this thread 😛

 

[vetme]

.... you don't say....

[insert LOLHAHAHAHAOMG😀🙂😴😉]

I feel like I'm talking to Michael Scott.

Pffffft Ahahahah

I have to point out the REAL problem on this discussion (and what I know is really upsetting everyone, but no one wants to mention it):

Everyone keeps talking about the 27 vet schools in the US, but:

There are 28 vet schools in the US.

Ok... now that we have cleared that up, everyone can be happy again. 😀

Or continue with the original discussion, which in that case:

Thanks DVMDream👍

 

[Dsmoody23]

Sweet.

Another thread with five post-grads running a train on an undergrad.

Let me guess... we're just 'sharing experiences', and 'mentoring'...?

 

[vetme]

Sweet.

Another thread with five post-grads running a train on an undergrad.

Let me guess... we're just 'sharing experiences', and 'mentoring'...?

Well.... you know, that is sooo much fun

 

[sumstorm]

Sweet.

Another thread with five post-grads running a train on an undergrad.

Let me guess... we're just 'sharing experiences', and 'mentoring'...?

What 5 post grads are you referring to?

And I'm certainly not mentoring. I think if someone's going to cry that the system is broken and site how they know more than the flock of vets they've dealt with and the liars and cheaters that got in, the whinging should at least come with ideas for improvement and a knowledge of what changes have already occured in at least the last half dozen years. As usual though, opinions are worth whats paid for them.

One thing I think gets left out alot in any discussion about vet school admissions is the level of fine slicing that occurs. We generally aren't talking about whether one student is worthy and another is unworthy....we are generally talking about how applicants are selected from a pool where 90% are likely worthy. And I think the NAVLE pass scores and low failure rates speak to that. This isn't about taking the whole undergrad class and figuring out who belongs in vet school....this is about figuring out who belongs 2SD's to the right of the bell curve.

 

[Dsmoody23]

What 5 post grads are you referring to?

And I'm certainly not mentoring. I think if someone's going to cry that the system is unfair and site how they know more than the flock of vets they've dealt with and the liars and cheaters that got in, the whinging should at least come with ideas for improvement and a knowledge of what changes have already occured in at least the last half dozen years. As usual though, opinions are worth whats paid for them.

One thing I think gets left out alot in any discussion about vet school admissions is the level of fine slicing that occurs. We generally aren't talking about whether one student is worthy and another is unworthy....we are generally talking about how applicants are selected from a pool where 90% are likely worthy. And I think the NAVLE pass scores and low failure rates speak to that. This isn't about taking the whole undergrad class and figuring out who belongs in vet school....this is about figuring out who belongs 2SD's to the right of the bell curve.

The second part is excellent.

The first part is silly.

Everything on the internet that you don't agree with isn't a call to battle.

I think there were some disappointed people who missed acceptances they wanted, and were venting. If I got turned down with a 4.0, regardless of the circumstances, I'd be pissed for a few days too.

Deep breaths, killer.

 

[alliecat44]

I am one of those who does believe the system can be greatly improved. The veterinary profession as a whole does realize that this is a problem. If you go to http://www.aavmc.org/navmec.htm and download a PDF of their recommendations, it does address the admissions process.

Here's the problem: there have been some (a few) studies on what factors predict academic success in veterinary school. These positive predictors are mainly GPA and GRE scores.

However, there are NO studies about what factors outlined on a vet school application are positive predictors for being good DOCTORS. In other words, we (kind of, and only in a few studies) know what predicts to make good vet students, but not what will make good veterinarians.

The recommendations in the NAVMEC guidelines will likely change the admissions process, hopefully significantly. Being friends with faculty members/house officers at various veterinary schools, I know that what kas9ey says is right on the money--people involved with veterinary admissions know that things aren't as good as they could be are are continuously actively working to improve the selection process.

It's difficult for people on here to appreciate, because the folks who haven't yet gotten in want to think that there's some "good" reason why they haven't and if only they do X or raise their score Y it will solve the problem. At the same time, no veterinary student wants to think that maybe others who did not get accepted would make better doctors than they will. 🙂

And FYI, this is something that has been EXTENSIVELY studied about the medical school admissions process--relating pre-med attributes to being competent/etc doctors, not just good test takers.

It's difficult but everyone's trying to do the best they can with the information we have available. What we really need are more studies, and I for one am certainly not smart enough to design them. 🙂

 

[AngSchmange]

Which is why it really kills me how some schools can get by without interviews. Am I right by saying that this is a little crazy, to select a class without hosting interviews?

 

[nyanko]

If it's been studied so much in the med school process, then were the determinants actually MCAT scores and GPA? Because those really seem to be a larger focus in medical school admissions than GRE scores and GPA are in veterinary school admissions.

Honestly, with the kind of GPA that I had as an undergraduate, I definitely would not have been competitive for MD programs, end of story. I'd be pretty borderline for DO, even with an equivalent percentile of MCAT score to my GRE score (90+). Vet schools seemed more willing to look past that to other attributes (obv my sparkling personality )

I'm not trying to be argumentative or anything, just pointing out that to me it looks like (at least generally) veterinary schools are trying harder than medical schools to look at an applicant beyond the scores already. So it would seem confusing to me that this would be the case if medical schools were already doing research in that area beyond vet schools.