Am I missing something?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
T

tardigrade

New Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2008
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I feel that I am a fairly strong applicant:

GPA Science 3.9
MCAT 37
pretty good private school (not ivy)
lots of volunteering, shadowing, working, clinical experience, 1 year research

I applied to about 20 private schools.

I interviewed at Pritzker, Case, Brown, Pittsburgh, and Vanderbilt, University of Rochester.

My concern is that, after coming out of these interviews and having numerous interviewers tell me that "I am a very strong applicant" (they actually said this to me), I have been waitlisted at each of these schools.

Could anyone offer me some opinions or advice as to what may be going on here (either with my application or what the schools are thinking)?

Thanks!!!!
Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
tardigrade said:
Hi,

I feel that I am a fairly strong applicant:

GPA Science 3.96 all others 3.86
PS 13 VR 11 M BS 13
pretty good private school (not ivy)
biology major
lots of volunteering, shadowing, working, clinical experience, 1 year cardiovascular research

I applied to about 20 private schools (really the top 20 US News schools that take out of state kids).

I interviewed, so far at (of concern) Pritzker, Case, Brown, Pittsburgh, and Vanderbilt, University of Rochester.

My concern is that, after coming out of these interviews and having numerous interviewers tell me that "I am a very strong applicant" (they actually said this to me), I have been waitlisted at each of these schools.

Could anyone offer me some opinions or advice as to what may be going on here (either with my application or what the schools are thinking)?

Thanks!!!!
Click to expand...

Welcome to the crap shoot.
 
Perhaps they feel your size and unjointed legs will inhibit you from being the kind of doctor they are looking for. Okay, that was lame. :thumbdown:
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Every person interviewing can probably be told, "You are a very strong applicant." It happened at two of my interviews. However, and I don't know how to say this easily, I feel your problem may have been your interviews. We all tend to say we interview well, extremely well, or that we knocked it out of the park. Think strongly about your interviews and if they went as well as they could have. The problem with higher tier applicants is they apply at some pretty competitive schools. You're just going through the motions.
 
Your problem is probably the schools you chose. The top-ranked institutions get tons of applicants with very strong stats. It probably would have been beneficial to you to apply more broadly.
 
saqrfaraj said:
Your problem is probably the schools you chose. The top-ranked institutions get tons of applicants with very strong stats. It probably would have been beneficial to you to apply more broadly.
Click to expand...

I would agree with this. Obviously, your scores, clinical experiences, etc are fantastic and thus you are a strong applicant. The problem is that most if not all of the other applicants interviewing at your schools are also very impressive on paper. When you are competing against the best, you need something to drive your application home - be it the interview of the century, some very unusual and impressive EC, or something else. If you don't have those things, top schools will likely waitlist you until they find other applicants who have the numbers, the experience, and that extra something.
 
Also, you're vying for very few spots at Brown. Most of those have already been spoken for (either combined bachelor's/MD program or other programs).
 
I mean if you have the numbers, and EC (which you seem to do..) what seems to need work is your interviewing/answering skills, how you present yourself and your LOR's.
You need to see how you can sell yourself better
 
tardigrade said:
Hi,

I feel that I am a fairly strong applicant:

GPA Science 3.96 all others 3.86
PS 13 VR 11 M BS 13
pretty good private school (not ivy)
biology major
lots of volunteering, shadowing, working, clinical experience, 1 year cardiovascular research

I applied to about 20 private schools (really the top 20 US News schools that take out of state kids).

I interviewed, so far at (of concern) Pritzker, Case, Brown, Pittsburgh, and Vanderbilt, University of Rochester.

My concern is that, after coming out of these interviews and having numerous interviewers tell me that "I am a very strong applicant" (they actually said this to me), I have been waitlisted at each of these schools.

Could anyone offer me some opinions or advice as to what may be going on here (either with my application or what the schools are thinking)?

Thanks!!!!
Click to expand...

Waitlist at Pritzker? Not just continued?
 
Out of curiosity, you didn't mention your other applications. Have you been accepted elsewhere?
 
well, to be more specific:

I know Brown is a little unusual in the sense that they have a few spots, so I can understand that (I suppose)

I am at school and got the Pritzker mail at my home, which my parents told me about, so it may have been a "keep in consideration" letter.

I did get in to my undergraduate school's medical school, so I am not complaining about not getting in, I just wanted to go to these schools.

I did not just apply to the top schools, I had a lot of schools from different "rankings". I just thought it was unusual to get waitlisted at ALL of them.

I understand where you are coming from in regards to interviewing and selling it, but I really feel that I was on the same page with my interviewers and that I greatly appealed to them. Also, many commented that they loved reading my personal statement.

I just can't understand what is going on....
 
Probably went a little like this.

Adcom 1: Hey remember that kid you wrote the really good PS.
Adcom 2: Which one?
Adcom 1: Um, let me see her. I can't seem to recall.
Adcom 2: Oh, well back of the pile.


Moral of the story: Your file gets you and interview. Your interview gets you an acceptance. If you cannot sell YOURSELF you are doomed. DUMDUMDUM
 
tardigrade said:
I just thought it was unusual to get waitlisted at ALL of them.
Click to expand...

It's not. Not one bit.

My best friend got waitlisted at 9 places before getting an acceptance (Ivy League acceptance, too). He was waitlisted at 12 places total, accepted to 3 (two Ivies). This is why people apply to 15+ places.

So sit back, relax, and join the rest of us who are continuing to wait curiously to see how the rest of the cycle will turn out. Believe me, you're in good company.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Pitt also said something about how this year, they've decided to accept fewer people outright and as a result, will probably be taking more people off the waitlist. I'm sure you have a good chance of getting off at least one of this waitlists you're on.
 
mfrizzo3 said:
Probably went a little like this.

Adcom 1: Hey remember that kid you wrote the really good PS.
Adcom 2: Which one?
Adcom 1: Um, let me see her. I can't seem to recall.
Adcom 2: Oh, well back of the pile.


Moral of the story: Your file gets you and interview. Your interview gets you an acceptance. If you cannot sell YOURSELF you are doomed. DUMDUMDUM
Click to expand...

well that settles it!

when I see somebody who is an admin or a med student write something like that, I may take it a little more seriously. not another pre-med though.
 
mfrizzo3 said:
Moral of the story: Your file gets you and interview. Your interview gets you an acceptance.
Click to expand...

Couldn't be further from the truth. The interview really does not factor into your acceptance as much as most people think it does. I've been told the same thing from many adcoms. In most cases it's a pass/fail.
 
mfrizzo3 said:
Moral of the story: Your file gets you an interview. Your interview gets you an acceptance. If you cannot sell YOURSELF you are doomed. DUMDUMDUM
Click to expand...

This is the most accurate post I have seen on here in a long time. I was on the adcom my 4th year in med school and the 40 and 4.0's only get you an interview.

I have seen/heard about MANY of the high shooters crash and burn during the interviews and literally get black-balled.

I'd say sporting a ~30 and a ~3.8 with a life outside of academics and a genuine, friendly, outgoing personality nearly always got the acceptance. Purely anecdotal.
 
mfrizzo3 said:
Probably went a little like this.

Adcom 1: Hey remember that kid you wrote the really good PS.
Adcom 2: Which one?
Adcom 1: Um, let me see her. I can't seem to recall.
Adcom 2: Oh, well back of the pile.


Moral of the story: Your file gets you and interview. Your interview gets you an acceptance. If you cannot sell YOURSELF you are doomed. DUMDUMDUM
Click to expand...

Agree with this. You have to realize that EVERYONE the top schools seriously look at has amazing stats. But they literally get thousands of these applications, and at the end of the day, can only have a class of 150. So you have to stand out in some way other than your GPA/MCAT because EVERYBODY they look at is adequate in these. This means the interview makes or breaks you. You can be a "very strong applicant", but that may be the equivalent of being a model in a room full of supermodels -- unmemorable.

The dude who has stats comparable to you (or even a bit lower) but "clicked" with the interviewer is the one the school will most often decide was a "good fit". So no, it's not a crapshoot. There are very definite and consistent subjective factors at work. But looking at your application objectively isn't going to help you understand them. It's actually pretty normal for folks with top numbers to get lots of rejects and waitlists at the top schools.

Because those schools will look at hundreds to thousands of such folks, and while you may be way ahead of the dude with the 3.2/29, you aren't going to be perceived as ahead of the 3.7/34 they deemed worthy of an interview, and if they like that person better, you are going to be tossed aside. This is not an objective, by the numbers process. Schools used to do that in the 70s and were not satisfied with the kind of physician it produced. So now you are expected to bring more to the table. There are laws of diminishing returns at play and so a 40 MCAT is no longer regarded as better than a 35 -- the person they like better always wins that contest despite the score -- both are adequate "enough", that the school, won't care about the increase. (There are a few schools that are "number ******" who go against this conventional wisdom, but this is becoming a very small minority).
 
jumpingjax said:
This is the most accurate post I have seen on here in a long time. I was on the adcom my 4th year in med school and the 40 and 4.0's only get you an interview.

I have seen/heard about MANY of the high shooters crash and burn during the interviews and literally get black-balled.

I'd say sporting a ~30 and a ~3.8 with a life outside of academics and a genuine, friendly, outgoing personality nearly always got the acceptance. Purely anecdotal.
Click to expand...

This is probably one of the best posts I've seen in a while. If that person with sky-high stats is uptight, arrogant, and devoid of a social life, then he or she will likely get passed up for a friendly and outgoing individual with somewhat lower stats every time. And from what I understand, this is true for the vast majority of adcoms. No one wants a doctor who cannot communicate with his or her patients. Anyone can spend tons and tons of time refining their personal statement - the interview is the benchmark for showing your personality and personal skills.
 
I can't really comment on how well you interviewed, since no one knows that save for your interviewers and the adcoms. What I can say, though, is that it is still possible for a good applicant to interview well and get waitlisted/rejected. There are many applicants out there who have incredible stats, great EC's, fantastic personalities, and want to be at those schools just as much, if not more, than you do. That's the sort of competition that you encounter with those higher ranked schools. If you really did your best, that's all you can do for now... If you think perhaps there's still an area for improvement, such as interview skills or maybe even something else, then reassess yourself and work on making it better. Really, that's all you can do.
 
AdmiralChz said:
This is probably one of the best posts I've seen in a while. If that person with sky-high stats is uptight, arrogant, and devoid of a social life, then he or she will likely get passed up for a friendly and outgoing individual with somewhat lower stats every time. And from what I understand, this is true for the vast majority of adcoms. No one wants a doctor who cannot communicate with his or her patients. Anyone can spend tons and tons of time refining their personal statement - the interview is the benchmark for showing your personality and personal skills.
Click to expand...

Well, I'd go farther and say you have to realize that you can miss the mark even if you aren't "uptight, arrogant or devoid of social life". Most interviewees aren't "bad". They just aren't as good as the next guy/gal. When a program only takes a third of those they interview, that means that you have to be better than two out of every three people. And the folks who get interviews are all good enough, numbers wise. So it comes down to hitting it off with an interviewer. If you are good but someone else is a bit better, you get sent off to the waitlist. That's true even if you are humble and nice. If the interviewer hits it off with an interviewee that person has a much better chance of getting the slot even if you had a solid interview.

The biggest mistake folks make in this process is thinking that the interview doesn't matter, is just a formality, or that they are fine if they simply don't screw up. It is, in fact, your one chance to sell yourself to the school. The person the interviewer likes best will get the slot. This is a skill you can get better at.
 
One other quick comment... Can you think of other reasons you feel the interview went well other than the fact that they said you are a "strong applicant"? That can be interpreted in different ways... For instance, you may be a "strong applicant" on paper but not as much in person. Did they say you were a strong applicant at the beginning or the end of the interview? Just curious...
 
messenger634 said:
well that settles it!

when I see somebody who is an admin or a med student write something like that, I may take it a little more seriously. not another pre-med though.
Click to expand...

Doc Andy said:
Couldn't be further from the truth. The interview really does not factor into your acceptance as much as most people think it does. I've been told the same thing from many adcoms. In most cases it's a pass/fail.
Click to expand...

My mistake. It probably went more along the lines of:

Adcom 1: Hey, remember that arrogant pretentious little prick douchnozzle on Thursday?
Adcom 2: Drops to his knees repeating we're not worthy.
Adcom 1: I mean, like OMG, he got a 4.0/39. Where can we get ten more of him? Maybe he has a cousin.
Adcom 2: You are so right Number 1. If we fill our whole class with a bunch of arrogant douchetards maybe we could finally win that coveted flag football trophy next year and show HMS.
Adcom 1: But what about this compassionate, caring, genuinley interested in saving folks applicant who has a great attitude is well spoken and handles pressure with the best of them?
Adcom 2: Ef-em. He only got a 3.6/32. We both know this interview crap is just a formality so we can pretend like we are giving everybody a chance. This institution is all about paper applicants, because we know they make the best doctors and flag footballers. **** only if little Tony could run a 4.2/40 that junior league championship would be ours.
Adcom 1: Duh. What was I thinking. Pass the doritos. *Crunch*


Disclaimer: I am only a pre-med. I don't know what I am talking about. I have no life experience and I live in a cave off the coast of Chile.
 
dezokitty said:
One other quick comment... Can you think of other reasons you feel the interview went well other than the fact that they said you are a "strong applicant"? That can be interpreted in different ways... For instance, you may be a "strong applicant" on paper but not as much in person. Did they say you were a strong applicant at the beginning or the end of the interview? Just curious...
Click to expand...

Well, they said it after the interview. I really felt like we did "click" because they would get excited and surprised that I was familiar or took part in something that they too enjoyed.
 
mfrizzo3 said:
Disclaimer: I am only a pre-med. I don't know what I am talking about. I have no life experience and I live in a cave off the coast of Chile.
Click to expand...



and yet... and yet... so wise for a person of your age
 
I agree with previous posters, you are probably on hold until December or something, rather than on the waitlist. The ususally don't start filling their waitlist until that point. As far as interviews making or breaking you, it depends on the school. Some schools put a lot more emphasis on the application, while other care much more about the interview. You can't generalize.
 
mmmcdowe said:
I agree with previous posters, you are probably on hold until December or something, rather than on the waitlist.
Click to expand...

It's school dependent. Pitt has definitely said they will not look at waitlisted candidates until May.

But yes, some of these may be more like "holds" instead of "waitlists." Keep that in mind.
 
My concern is that, after coming out of these interviews and having numerous interviewers tell me that "I am a very strong applicant" (they actually said this to me), I have been waitlisted at each of these schools.
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm stretching it a little too thin,
but that saying, "you're a very strong applicant,"
I just don't see that as such a positive sign.
That says nothing about acceptance nor does that mean that the interviewer liked you in any way.
It feels more like that "you're a great guy, but... "

I've had one interviewer who said that I was a strong applicant.
He also added that I'll get in somewhere.
What he probably didn't say was - "just not here."
 
At some schools, having seen their assessment guidelines, the "interview" holds equal rank with "Application review", "Academic assessment", and "Letters of recommendation", each assessed on a scale of 1-5, 5 being the best. This breakdown comes after the initial screen, and only applies to applicants that are interviewed.

So best score out of 20 gets the acceptance.
 
liverfingers said:
At some schools, having seen their assessment guidelines, the "interview" holds equal rank with "Application review", "Academic assessment", and "Letters of recommendation", each assessed on a scale of 1-5, 5 being the best. This breakdown comes after the initial screen, and only applies to applicants that are interviewed.

So best score out of 20 gets the acceptance.
Click to expand...

At some schools the interview is the only game in town once you make the cut on those other things. At other schools it's more like the score may out of 20 but the interview is worth 10 or more (ie the driving force in the determination). Bottom line, once you make it to an interview (and thus survive many of the cuts), at a lot of med schools it's the interview that's going to decide whether you attend over the other 2/3 that make it that far. It's actually the small minority of schools where it isn't the single most important factor once you make it to that stage. Ignore any premed who says it's just a formality. Those are people who dislike the idea that all of their hard work during college is going to come down to how they perform interpersonally for an hour. But in fact it does.

Interviewing is a skill you can improve upon with practice. I strongly recommend you do so. And research the programs ahead of time.
 
One thing to keep in mind--life is rarely clear-cut into black-and-white differences...it's not that common that the 4.0/40 is an arrogant ***** while the 3.5/30 is a social genius. Those kinds of analogies are easy and attractive to make, but in real life they tend to be in a minority. The majority of candidates are going to be within a range where these differences in social ability are not so pronounced. What then? The schools would somehow have to take into account the styles of their interviewers to ensure a fair interview to all applicants, and something as small as personal preference could play a big role here.
 
Law2Doc said:
At some schools the interview is the only game in town once you make the cut on those other things. At other schools it's more like the score may out of 20 but the interview is worth 10 or more (ie the driving force in the determination). Bottom line, once you make it to an interview (and thus survive many of the cuts), at a lot of med schools it's the interview that's going to decide whether you attend over the other 2/3 that make it that far. It's actually the small minority of schools where it isn't the single most important factor once you make it to that stage. Ignore any premed who says it's just a formality. Those are people who dislike the idea that all of their hard work during college is going to come down to how they perform interpersonally for an hour. But in fact it does.

Interviewing is a skill you can improve upon with practice. I strongly recommend you do so. And research the programs ahead of time.
Click to expand...

Have you sat in on a great many adcom meetings at several different medical schools? I'm wondering how you know that this is the way that "most" schools work.
 
well despite ur awesome stats... it seems like u'd be the "average" amongst everyone who received an interview.. do you have anything that relaly makes u stand out? if not, it makes sense that they'll consider u after accepting all the students who really stood out (life experiences, traveling, unique EC's, etc.)
 
Does anybody else think that it's strange that med schools apparently put so much emphasis on the interview? I mean I understand that med school's have a strong interest in making sure that potential candidates can interact with other people, deal with stressful situations, and that they aren't complete tools. But really an interview is so subjective. Having an interview with adcom member #1 could lead to a very different interview than an inverview with adcom member#2 and could leave these two individuals to end up with very different opinions of you. For whatever reason- personalities, interests, etc...it's just easier to hit it off with some people than others. I just don't feel like a half hour conversation should hold as much weight as grades that you've worked years for, or the MCAT which you've studies months for, activities that you've dedicated so much time that demonstrate dedication or a desire to help others or a passion for medicine, or letters of recommendation from people that have known you for years and not minutes (i might be off base but this is just my opinion & for the record, i really like talking to people and enjoy interviewing :))
 
scarletgirl777 said:
Have you sat in on a great many adcom meetings at several different medical schools? I'm wondering how you know that this is the way that "most" schools work.
Click to expand...

x2. Because personal experience dictates otherwise.
 
ana0608 said:
Does anybody else think that it's strange that med schools apparently put so much emphasis on the interview? I mean I understand that med school's have a strong interest in making sure that potential candidates can interact with other people, deal with stressful situations, and that they aren't complete tools. But really an interview is so subjective. Having an interview with adcom member #1 could lead to a very different interview than an inverview with adcom member#2 and could leave these two individuals to end up with very different opinions of you. For whatever reason- personalities, interests, etc...it's just easier to hit it off with some people than others. I just don't feel like a half hour conversation should hold as much weight as grades that you've worked years for, or the MCAT which you've studies months for, activities that you've dedicated so much time that demonstrate dedication or a desire to help others or a passion for medicine, or letters of recommendation from people that have known you for years and not minutes (i might be off base but this is just my opinion & for the record, i really like talking to people and enjoy interviewing :))
Click to expand...

You know, as much as the importance of a good interview is stressed, I think a good portion of schools are still going to consider your whole application, interview, MCAT, GPA, and all... As much as I would like to support Law2Doc in saying that you cannot underestimate the importance of an interview, it's still possible to be rejected even with a stellar interview due to other factors in your application... The med school application process is pretty rough, and I don't think you can completely generalize in saying any one thing (MCAT, GPA, interview) is definitely going to get you into the school of your choice. The best we can do is beef up our applications as best as we can, and prep like all heck for our interviews.
 
tardigrade said:
Hi,

I feel that I am a fairly strong applicant:

GPA Science 3.9
MCAT 37
pretty good private school (not ivy)
lots of volunteering, shadowing, working, clinical experience, 1 year research

I applied to about 20 private schools.

I interviewed at Pritzker, Case, Brown, Pittsburgh, and Vanderbilt, University of Rochester.

My concern is that, after coming out of these interviews and having numerous interviewers tell me that "I am a very strong applicant" (they actually said this to me), I have been waitlisted at each of these schools.

Could anyone offer me some opinions or advice as to what may be going on here (either with my application or what the schools are thinking)?

Thanks!!!!
Click to expand...

You are only competitive within the pool of applicants to the schools that you applied. If you apply across the board, you may be more "competitive" but if you only applied to schools that have national reputations, you may have looped yourself out of the running. Still wait-list is not rejection and you may still get into one of those schools that wait-listed you. Chronic pre-med syndrome is overestimating your competitiveness within the applicant pool to the schools that you applied to and then whining about being waitlisted.
 
ana0608 said:
Does anybody else think that it's strange that med schools apparently put so much emphasis on the interview? I mean I understand that med school's have a strong interest in making sure that potential candidates can interact with other people, deal with stressful situations, and that they aren't complete tools. But really an interview is so subjective.
Click to expand...

You are going to learn that the most important years of med school (the clinical years) are primarily subjective grading, as will be your training and career. This is how the world of medicine works. Test scores may have gotten you this far, but medicine is a service industry, not a science, and the perception of how good you are with patients, presenting things to the team, how "smart" you are, is going to be much more important than how you do on paper. So yeah, it is subjective, but subjective is how you are going to be graded/evaluated a bit further down the road, so it makes total sense to focus on this.
 
tardigrade said:
Thanks for all the advice!
Click to expand...


Don't let all the SDNers tell you that you're a bad interviewer or don't know how to sell yourself. It's also possible that you have great stats and experiences (which got you the interviews in the first place) but that those schools don't think you would be a good fit with their student body or that their school doesn't align with your interests. In my opinion, once a school decides to interview you, it means your stats are good enough for them. The purpose of the interview is for them to see if you're the sort of personality they think will be good with their current students / their idea of what they want for their student body. If they don't think they want you based on that, then it's for the best anyway! They would know better than anyone else if you will fit in there.
 
dezokitty said:
One other quick comment... Can you think of other reasons you feel the interview went well other than the fact that they said you are a "strong applicant"? That can be interpreted in different ways... For instance, you may be a "strong applicant" on paper but not as much in person. Did they say you were a strong applicant at the beginning or the end of the interview? Just curious...
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Sometimes I feel that the "strong applicant" compliment might be too generic to be a good sign. It's really important to stand out I think.
 
zpiff said:
I agree with this. Sometimes I feel that the "strong applicant" compliment might be too generic to be a good sign. It's really important to stand out I think.
Click to expand...

Hehehe...one of the schools I interviewed at gave a generic response at the end of the interview: "We hope that you will consider us when you are deciding where you attend medical school."

(yes, everyone got that same line). :laugh:

Acceptance rate for this school? 15%
 
pianola said:
Hehehe...one of the schools I interviewed at gave a generic response at the end of the interview: "We hope that you will consider us when you are deciding where you attend medical school."

(yes, everyone got that same line). :laugh:

Acceptance rate for this school? 15%
Click to expand...


That is a bit cruel!
 
I think people are misconstruing what "interviewing well" means... it's not all about being "friendly"/"outgoing"/"laid-back"/"selling oneself"... is it ?

The friendly part, sure. But the whole idea that everyone should present themselves as outgoing/laidback kinds of ppl who can chug back a beer reminds me of that whole election thing about voters going for the "beer-drinker" guy/girl next door.

Is that really what Adcoms value as well? I sure hope not. Coming across as friendly & well-rounded is important during interview, I agree. The other parts people like to insert about appearing "outgoing" or "laidback" is just superfluous, imo. That seems to be a purely personal preference of who some people find easy to *socialize* with. An interview is still an *interview* for a qualified candidate.

How about appearing knowledgeable, well-informed, or intellectual? How about appearing disciplined, driven, or passionate even about EC activities? I would think these qualities would be more important than seeming the "guy/girl next door". Schools aren't looking for the down to earth/cool guy/girl to hang out/have a beer with... they're looking for future physicians who can contribute to society through clinical practice, policy, and research.

Also, I disagree with the idea that post-interview, the original file becomes largely irrelevant. Not talking about numbers (GPA/MCAT here)... but I sure as hell hope the PS still matters! Unique ECs/life experiences still play a significant role too, I would think.

Ppl like to blame a "bad interview" as the reason an applicant with great stats get rejected... but could it be because that applicant is simply pretty "vanilla", despite great stats? Being "outgoing" or "laidback" doesn't necessarily make an average or uninteresting person into an unique or interesting one.

Often schools have a certain "angle" they're going for, be it intellectually curious & research-oriented, or crusader for the underserved, or wannabe PCP & clinically-oriented. One can be a great applicant and still not fit in their "slot" so to speak.
 
Last edited:
Maybe you're a strong applicant and you know it, and that is sometimes a turn off in the interviews.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

J
  • Question
Am I missing something with Tulane’s academic calendar??
Replies
2
Views
470
gyngyn
gyngyn
H
Missing committee letter
Replies
18
Views
1K
stebgbby
stebgbby
B
Applying with multiple prereqs missing
Replies
15
Views
759
Med Ed
Med Ed
R
Do I have a chance to apply this year? Or should I consider something else?
Replies
5
Views
599
GoSpursGo
GoSpursGo
Msarandme
Am I doomed?
Replies
5
Views
1K
Goro
Goro
Top