- Joined
- Jan 17, 2008
- Messages
- 246
- Reaction score
- 368
So, I am a non-traditional applicant,many years out of school
Yes, as a child, I came from a financially poor family, however, it's been some time out of school, and fortunately, my wife and I do very well financially (not boasting).
When applying, because I'm lucky enough to have some financial opportunities that is probably not afforded to actually disadvantaged applicants, when AMCAS asked if I am disadvantaged, I put No.
My application was verified a few days ago, and, perhaps because you have to report your childhood family income or family's level of education, but AMCAS came back and labeled me as SES Disadvantaged E01. Luckily, the question "Disadvantaged? No." appears in the application as well, however, I am worried how this is perceived.
Should I take this as a positive? I didn't want to be considered as a disadvantaged student, but can't think of negative reasons why (other than its an inappropriate title for my current situation). Any thoughts SDNers? Does this help me at all? Should I have this corrected?
Yes, as a child, I came from a financially poor family, however, it's been some time out of school, and fortunately, my wife and I do very well financially (not boasting).
When applying, because I'm lucky enough to have some financial opportunities that is probably not afforded to actually disadvantaged applicants, when AMCAS asked if I am disadvantaged, I put No.
My application was verified a few days ago, and, perhaps because you have to report your childhood family income or family's level of education, but AMCAS came back and labeled me as SES Disadvantaged E01. Luckily, the question "Disadvantaged? No." appears in the application as well, however, I am worried how this is perceived.
Should I take this as a positive? I didn't want to be considered as a disadvantaged student, but can't think of negative reasons why (other than its an inappropriate title for my current situation). Any thoughts SDNers? Does this help me at all? Should I have this corrected?
Last edited: