AdComs of SDN, by what month has your school given 80+% of interview invites?

[ayjaystudent]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Curious to hear how it works.

 

[Moko]

Around November at my school. This likely varies by school.

 

[907914]

Around November at my school. This likely varies by school.

That actually seems pretty late to me, actually. Have y’all just barely started sending?

 

[Moko]

That actually seems pretty late to me, actually. Have y’all just barely started sending?

Nice try, but I'm not giving you any more hints, Sir Patrick

 

[premed20172017]

That actually seems pretty late to me, actually. Have y’all just barely started sending?

I think it might sound surprising because of the notion on here that schools send 50% in September. I think that's only true for the high stats, super early applicants who are likely to use SDN/Reddit forums. While we know there are schools that send over 50% by this time at they cycle (i.e. Tulane), I don't think that's the rule for all schools. Plus, we have to consider the fact that once high stat early applicants start to get accepted in mid-October, they may withdraw from other IIs, causing more II spots to open up for other applicants --> more IIs are sent.

TLDR: I think it might sound surprising because of the selection bias we've got on here.

 

[907914]

Nice try, but I'm not giving you any more hints, Sir Patrick

It was not a ruse! I was just genuinely curious because that sounded a little late.

I don’t need to trick you to get the information I need. You may have an MD, but I have...an Associates degree. Which...means something...I guess?

 

[Moko]

It was not a ruse! I was just genuinely curious because that sounded a little late. I don’t need to trick you to get the information I need. You may have an MD, but I have...an Associates degree. Which...means something...I guess?

II slots are intentionally kept open to avoid missing out on strong applicants.

 

[907914]

to avoid missing out on strong applicants.

Early in the cycle, do you see 'more' strong applicants and thus the later strong applicants may have worse off chances?

 

[KnightDoc]

Early in the cycle, do you see 'more' strong applicants and thus the later strong applicants may have worse off chances?

I would be happy to be corrected by @Moko if I am wrong, but I'd bet that the whole point of keeping anything open to avoid missing out on strong applicants is to avoid that exact situation. Think about it -- more strong applicants apply early, and more IIs are issued to them. Fewer strong applicants show up later when only 20% of II spots remain. The goal is probably for strong applicants to have the same chances either way, and schools' deep experiences with the numbers year after year probably yields the results schools seek.

 

[wysdoc]

I would be happy to be corrected by @Moko if I am wrong, but I'd bet that the whole point of keeping anything open to avoid missing out on strong applicants is to avoid that exact situation. Think about it -- more strong applicants apply early, and more IIs are issued to them. Fewer strong applicants show up later when only 20% of II spots remain. The goal is probably for strong applicants to have the same chances either way, and schools' deep experiences with the numbers year after year probably yields the results schools seek.

Strong applicants are just as likely as average applicants to be procrastinators, to have some schedule snafu that delayed their MCAT, or to have late letters of rec submitted. The notion of a "perfect in every way pre-med" is oversold.

 

[Moko]

Early in the cycle, do you see 'more' strong applicants and thus the later strong applicants may have worse off chances?

Depending on how a school practices rolling vs non-rolling admissions, those interviewing much later on may be at a minor disadvantage as the pool of remaining acceptances may be smaller. The point of staggering acceptances is to give everyone a fair shot at acceptance.

 

[LizzyM]

November, I think. You can queue applicants but not send II's until closer to the interview date so you don't have people calling back to reschedule. If it is only 3 weeks out, there isn't as much room for negotiation.

 

[Lucca]

End of November is probably right. See figures in quote

All:

Over the past several months, I have slowly made my way through each of the school-specific threads for the 2015-2016 application cycle and logged each reported interview invitation (II) by month. The objective of this project is to provide applicants with a general idea of how many II's are left after each month of the cycle and to encourage people to apply early (48.7% of II's have been offered by the end of September). Of course, keep in mind the limitation that these trends are based on SDN self-reported data only.

The tracker.

Format:

The first sheet contains II's by month for each school. The tables provide numerical data and are color coded to match the graphs.

The second sheet contains the last reported II for each school sorted chronologically. Hopefully this is helpful to those of you who wonder in February and March if your schools are still interviewing (though this date of final II may change from year to year).

The third sheet contains a list of the schools with the earliest and latest interview cycles.

Scope:

Approximately 4229, or 5.4%, of the approximately 78,000 interview invitations (source: MSAR) that were given out last year by US allopathic schools were reported on SDN over the 132 included schools for an average of 32 II's per school.

Data:

The numbers:
View attachment 215786

Total II's across all schools:
View attachment 215784

Percent of II's remaining:
View attachment 215785

Limitations/notes:

-Based on SDN self-reported II data for one cycle (2015-2016)
-Schools included are US MD schools that use AMCAS
-Does not contain EDP or MSTP/MDPhD II's
-This data should not be used to gauge how many II's are left at a given time for a certain medical school, since that data is likely too flexible from year to year to have any real meaning here. Instead, use it to determine overall trends and how early/late schools tend to interview.

Future improvements:

Feel free to PM me if you notice any errors in my data worth correcting, especially with regards to the last reported II's. I'll double check and update the google doc.

There are likely several analyses that can be performed with this data, such as the distribution of II's for "top 10" schools vs. state schools vs. "low-yield" schools, etc. Please post your analyses in this thread if you complete any. I'm sure they would be interesting for all of us to see.

Lastly, thanks to my good friend @efle for guidance.

Cheers!

 

[907914]

November as prime II

By this you mean most being sent out in November?

 

[907914]

when is my greatest chance for getting an II.

Personally, no - I am fairly satisfied in the interview invite department Save for 2 or 3 hopefuls.

I ask more so that I can have a better understanding of the admissions timeline from the perspective of an ADCOM/application reviewer.

 

[notsobabydoc]

Early in the cycle, do you see 'more' strong applicants and thus the later strong applicants may have worse off chances?

I think strong in that sense is unique.

 

[deleted972488]

Its not that strong applicants will submit earlier but they will be reviewed and considered before lower ranked candidates. Additionally evaluation and reviews queues are dynamic so as higher ranked candidates submit, it can push previously submitted but lower ranked applicant back in the queue

If someone was complete early at all schools and received early II at some schools but not others, does that mean they are highly ranked at the early II schools, but not the other schools?

 

[Engrailed]

If someone was complete early at all schools and received early II at some schools but not others, does that mean they are highly ranked at the early II schools, but not the other schools?

Ive met interviewees who kind of said the same thing. They submitted first week of July or similar, heard back from a bunch in that first wave of notifications and literally nothing since (for a good month). Seemed convinced that no other good news would emerge from this point onward

 

[KnightDoc]

If someone was complete early at all schools and received early II at some schools but not others, does that mean they are highly ranked at the early II schools, but not the other schools?

I would think, if not highly ranked, of particular interest and eligible for an early look. There are too many stories of people with high stats and early apps receiving IIs later in the season to believe that there is an early triage based only on stats that results in high early ranking. It might be semantics, but I think it's probably that some schools value certain attributes more than others, and that causes them to put certain applicants in an earlier review pile.

Tl; dr --of course there is a reason you are hearing from some schools and not others, but it's got nothing to do with "ranking," since, assuming you are talking about peer schools, your ranking should be similar at all peer schools. Rather, it's the differing value they are placing on each attribute of your application that cause some schools to prioritize you while others don't.

 

[deleted972488]

your ranking should be similar at all peer schools

I think this is untrue. I’ve gotten early II to some schools and pre-II rejections to other similar schools. I’m not “high stats” in the typical sense because of my GPA, but I do have other attributes that some schools seem to value more than others. I just wonder about the ones I haven’t heard from yet, and whether this means I’m in a lower priority “review later” (or “interview later” ?) pile.

 

[notsobabydoc]

I think this is untrue. I’ve gotten early II to some schools and pre-II rejections to other similar schools. I’m not “high stats” in the typical sense because of my GPA, but I do have other attributes that some schools seem to value more than others. I just wonder about the ones I haven’t heard from yet, and whether this means I’m in a lower priority “review later” (or “interview later” ?) pile.

I find it hard to believe that it takes more than 2 months for a school to have a pass on your application. I would safely assume that if you don't get an invite after two months, you are in the pile of further review.

 

[KnightDoc]

I think this is untrue. I’ve gotten early II to some schools and pre-II rejections to other similar schools. I’m not “high stats” in the typical sense because of my GPA, but I do have other attributes that some schools seem to value more than others. I just wonder about the ones I haven’t heard from yet, and whether this means I’m in a lower priority “review later” (or “interview later” ?) pile.

I actually think you are confirming my thoughts exactly. If you are not high stats, then it's all about the other aspects of your app. Some schools are highly valuing them, reviewing you early, liking what they see, and giving you an II. Others aren't targeting those attributes, and your app is sitting around waiting to be reviewed with thousands of others. And finally, at the R schools, you either didn't make the cut based on your stats and never got to the deeper level of review (and they also don't value what makes you attractive to the II schools), or you were reviewed and given an R. Come to think of it, your IIs could also be after a regular review as opposed to an expedited one based on whatever might be special about your app.

Bottom line -- if you haven't heard yet, you're definitely not in the review early priority pile. Whether this means you have been reviewed and are being held without giving you notice, or if you haven't been reviewed yet is impossible to say, but, at least you have some early IIs, which is more than many can say. With any luck, you'll get some great news in a few weeks, and the pressure will be off as the question shifts to whether you're going to get your first choice with lots of money as opposed to whether you're going to have to go through this again!! 🙂

 

[KnightDoc]

I find it hard to believe that it takes more than 2 months for a school to have a pass on your application. I would safely assume that if you don't get an invite after two months, you are in the pile of further review.

Not true - several adcoms have posted that with 5,000+ apps at each school, they can take up to 4 months or more to go through. The first "pass" is to see if they want to look at you early or weed you out. That's not really a review, so still sitting there after 2 months is really not waiting for a further review if all that's happened so far is you weren't prioritized or rejected. You're really just waiting for your first review.

 

[notsobabydoc]

I actually think you are confirming my thoughts exactly. If you are not high stats, then it's all about the other aspects of your app. Some schools are highly valuing them, reviewing you early, liking what they see, and giving you an II. Others aren't targeting those attributes, and your app is sitting around waiting to be reviewed with thousands of others. And finally, at the R schools, you either didn't make the cut based on your stats and never got to the deeper level of review (and they also don't value what makes you attractive to the II schools), or you were reviewed and given an R. Come to think of it, your IIs could also be after a regular review as opposed to an expedited one based on whatever might be special about your app.

Bottom line -- if you haven't heard yet, you're definitely not in the review early priority pile. Whether this means you have been reviewed and are being held without giving you notice, or if you haven't been reviewed yet is impossible to say, but, at least you have some early IIs, which is more than many can say. With any luck, you'll get some great news in a few weeks, and the pressure will be off as the question shifts to whether you're going to get your first choice with lots of money as opposed to whether you're going to have to go through this again!! 🙂

I disagree on the point that high stats get interviews automatically at top places. I think it's the high stats with stuff that particular school wants that will get you the interview early. Depending on how you define high stats, I can easily see more than 1000 people qualify for that definition and yet we know they only interview little more than half of those. I think if you are high stats (LM 75+) and you have that extra they want, you are golden there. If you are high stats (LM 75+) without that extra, you are in this wait and see pile. If you are lower stats (<75) and you have that extra, you are in wait and see, if you are low stat and don't have that extra, you are straight to R.

 

[notsobabydoc]

Not true - several adcoms have posted that with 5,000+ apps at each school, they can take up to 4 months or more to go through. The first "pass" is to see if they want to look at you early or weed you out. That's not really a review, so still sitting there after 2 months is really not waiting for a further review if all that's happened so far is you weren't prioritized or rejected. You're really just waiting for your first review.

Right, that's what I meant, they know you exist within that 2 months period. Whether they decide to deliberate on your file is a different matter. That's what I said "it's hard to believe that they haven't seen your stuff at all after two months"

 

[deleted972488]

I actually think you are confirming my thoughts exactly. If you are not high stats, then it's all about the other aspects of your app. Some schools are highly valuing them, reviewing you early, liking what they see, and giving you an II. Others aren't targeting those attributes, and your app is sitting around waiting to be reviewed with thousands of others. And finally, at the R schools, you either didn't make the cut based on your stats and never got to the deeper level of review (and they also don't value what makes you attractive to the II schools), or you were reviewed and given an R. Come to think of it, your IIs could also be after a regular review as opposed to an expedited one based on whatever might be special about your app.

Bottom line -- if you haven't heard yet, you're definitely not in the review early priority pile. Whether this means you have been reviewed and are being held without giving you notice, or if you haven't been reviewed yet is impossible to say, but, at least you have some early IIs, which is more than many can say. With any luck, you'll get some great news in a few weeks, and the pressure will be off as the question shifts to whether you're going to get your first choice with lots of money as opposed to whether you're going to have to go through this again!! 🙂

I agree with almost all of what you said originally and in this post. I was just saying that my ranking must not be equal amongst all peer schools if some review/interview me early and some reject me. Anyway, I was just curious if the ranking system for review priority varies from institution to institution, but I guess it is hard for any of us to know, really. I’m definitely surprised by the IIs I have and am grateful! I was just wondering about the process.

 

[KnightDoc]

I disagree on the point that high stats get interviews automatically at top places. I think it's the high stats with stuff that particular school wants that will get you the interview early. Depending on how you define high stats, I can easily see more than 1000 people qualify for that definition and yet we know they only interview little more than half of those. I think if you are high stats (LM 75+) and you have that extra they want, you are golden there. If you are high stats (LM 75+) without that extra, you are in this wait and see pile. If you are lower stats (<75) and you have that extra, you are in wait and see, if you are low stat and don't have that extra, you are straight to R.

I totally agree with you, and probably wasn't clear in what I posted. I didn't mean to suggest that high stats meant auto II. I meant to say high stats at many schools can get you into the early review pile. Of course, what you say about high stats being in the eye of the beholder is also very true, and it will take more than a 4.0/522 to be in the Penn early review pile, while it is probably sufficient on its own at Penn State! 🙂

 

[notsobabydoc]

I totally agree with you, and probably wasn't clear in what I posted. I didn't mean to suggest that high stats meant auto II. I meant to say high stats at many schools can get you into the early review pile. Of course, what you say about high stats being in the eye of the beholder is also very true, and it will take more than a 4.0/522 to be in the Penn early interview pile, while it is probably sufficient on its own at Penn State! 🙂

It after all is quite a dynamic process. I really don't think it's a random process. It may appear random from one person's perspective, but if you look at all of the applicants, the pattern becomes more obvious.

 

[KnightDoc]

Right, that's what I meant, they know you exist within that 2 months period. Whether they decide to deliberate on your file is a different matter. That's what I said "it's hard to believe that they haven't seen your stuff at all after two months"

I guess it's semantics, but putting you through a screen and not rejecting you or sending you on to be read by the adcom doesn't qualify to me as having been seen yet. I'm not talking about deliberating the file; I'm talking about reading it.

 

[KnightDoc]

It after all is quite a dynamic process. I really don't think it's a random process. It may appear random from one person's perspective, but if you look at all of the applicants, the pattern becomes more obvious.

Agreed!

 

[notsobabydoc]

I guess it's semantics, but putting you through a screen and not rejecting you or sending you on to be read by the adcom doesn't qualify to me as having been seen yet. I'm not talking about deliberating the file; I'm talking about reading it.

Right, they probably scan it so quickly to glean anything that pops first.

 

[KnightDoc]

I agree with almost all of what you said originally and in this post. I was just saying that my ranking must not be equal amongst all peer schools if some review/interview me early and some reject me. Anyway, I was just curious if the ranking system for review priority varies from institution to institution, but I guess it is hard for any of us to know, really. I’m definitely surprised by the IIs I have and am grateful! I was just wondering about the process.

Yes, of course you are correct. By semantics, I mean that to me "ranking" refers to GPA, MCAT, etc. Different ECs, SES, diversity, etc. is valued very differently based on each school's mission, present student body, etc., so, to me, doesn't translate to "ranking," but, rather, to valuing what is unique about you and your app. In the end, I guess it's all the same thing insofar as some schools find you very attractive, some not so much, and yet others not at all!

From the outside looking in we are never going to have the insight into the process you seek, but there is much to be learned from this forum. My takeaway is that you shouldn't be surprised by the success you are having, and also shouldn't take it for granted (which you clearly do not) or expect to extrapolate it to all schools because of the differing values they are going to place on the more subjective aspects of your application. I think you'd see more consistency in your results if your GPA was at or above the median or mean at the top schools you are talking about.

There really is no deeper insight into the process that we are lacking. If your numbers were a tighter match to the schools' medians, you'd be seeing more uniform success, but your application is still nevertheless strong enough to be attractive to some, but not all, of these schools, depending on what they value and also what they already have in their classes.

 

[notsobabydoc]

Yes, of course you are correct. By semantics, I mean that to me "ranking" refers to GPA, MCAT, etc. Different ECs, SES, diversity, etc. is valued very differently based on each school's mission, present student body, etc., so, to me, doesn't translate to "ranking," but, rather, to valuing what is unique about you and your app. In the end, I guess it's all the same thing insofar as some schools find you very attractive, some not so much, and yet others not at all!

From the outside looking in we are never going to have the insight into the process you seek, but there is much to be learned from this forum. My takeaway is that you shouldn't be surprised by the success you are having, and also shouldn't take it for granted (which you clearly do not) or expect to extrapolate it to all schools because of the differing values they are going to place on the more subjective aspects of your application. I think you'd see more consistency in your results if your GPA was at or above the median or mean at the top schools you are talking about.

There really is no deeper insight into the process that we are lacking. If your numbers were a tighter match to the schools' medians, you'd be seeing more uniform success, but your application is still nevertheless strong enough to be attractive to some, but not all, of these schools, depending on what they value and also what they already have in their classes.

Well said. So, the word of advice to future applicants is that try to hit every single point on the above list. If not, try to hit as many as possible to maximize your chance.

However, it's basically an ordering exercise so we really don't need many techniques other than comparing. We know several constraints the school has. Number of seats, number of interviews, and MCAT score range. I don't think GPA is a constraint because if you look at MSAR, almost every school has the same profile on GPA's be it 0.1 or 0.15 apart in the median. To me with those constraints and conditions (specific mission, and specific attributes) in mind, it's just an optimization problem.