Any 38+ MCAT with NO interviews?

[Spinach Dip]

---

Members don't see this ad.

The MCAT is just one part of a package.

Yeah... I know.

The MCAT is not the only factor... If the GPA is not high with that kind of MCAT it looks as if someone has a lot of talent but poor work ethic. For example, An MCAT of 38 with a GPA of 3.2 if going to be screened out at many top schools. If someone has not targeted their applications to schools where they are a good match in terms of GPA and MCAT, then they are F'ed but it isn't because the system is F'ed up.

I understand there's more to admissions than just the MCAT. If everything came down to that one test, we could forget about volunteering, shadowing, leadership, research, and all that other nonsense which is practically required these days.

But honestly, the reason this whole process seems random is because I dont know what adcoms are thinking, or what one school is looking for vs another.

"He got a 40, but he took physics at a community college. REJECTED"
"He got a 40, but his application lacks a dedication to helping orphans in Uganda. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but used the word "countermanded" in his PS. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but didn't have a job in college. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but didn't take 22 credits per term. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but this one LoR is mediocre. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, and likes riding horses. INTERVIEW INVITE."



I was in a little bit of a tough spot due to my highly unbalanced stats (40/3.4 (with upward trend)). I bought the MSAR and looked for HOURS for schools that fit my stats. For the majority of MD schools, I am below the 10th %tile in GPA, but 3-4 points above the 90th in MCAT....... Whats the optimal strategy for that? Load up the shotgun and pick 30 schools at random?

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

"He got a 40, but he took physics at a community college. REJECTED"
"He got a 40, but his application lacks a dedication to helping orphans in Uganda. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but used the word "countermanded" in his PS. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but didn't have a job in college. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but didn't take 22 credits per term. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but this one LoR is mediocre. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, and likes riding horses. INTERVIEW INVITE."

I could be wrong, but I think the process is more "holistic" than that. Meaning, the interview skims your file and if he gets a warm fuzzy feeling, you get an interview invite.

Warm fuzzy feeling ---> interview invite
No warm fuzzy feeling ---> no interview invite

The warm fuzzies are unpredictable and could be due almost anything. Maybe you have great stats, ECs, and a well-written PS. Maybe you remind the interviewer of himself when he was young. Maybe it's a sunny day and the interviewer just finished a cold beer and is feeling happy. You just never know.

 

[snowflakes]

But honestly, the reason this whole process seems random is because I dont know what adcoms are thinking, or what one school is looking for vs another.

I agree that as an applicant, it's sometimes hard to see the logic behind the admissions process. There's just seems to be so much variation in where people get called to interview within a group of relatively similar schools. For example, people who interview at Columbia and WashU but not Penn or interview UChicago and Penn but not Columbia, etc. Maybe its a little more random at the top because there's so many qualified applicants? Of course it's very possible there's some logic to this that I'm not seeing.
Personally speaking, different interviewers seem to identify with completely different aspects of my application due to totally unpredictable factors such as "Oh, you grew up here? My father was born there. Such a great place to learn community values" or "You did research on X disease? My mother died of X. I'm so glad to see you're involved with this" or "Your parent does Y? That's what I do. I'm so glad to meet the child of another Y" or "You worked with this underserved population? That's what I did back in medical school, and I think it's wonderful." These types of personal connections (again, completely random and unpredictable) can really impact your evaluation. I imagine that a certain degree of randomness enters the process because sometimes people randomly assigned to evaluate you can similarly be drawn to a certain part of your application for completely personal reasons. Hopefully with the more people that evaluate your application at a particular school, this randomness and personal bias plays less of a role. I know most schools will have many many people evaluating your application so hopefully this makes the process better. However, I still wish I could understand the logic that leads to so much variation in people's interviews at relatively similar schools.

 

[Spinach Dip]

I could be wrong, but I think the process is more "holistic" than that. Meaning, the interview skims your file and if he gets a warm fuzzy feeling, you get an interview invite.

Warm fuzzy feeling ---> interview invite
No warm fuzzy feeling ---> no interview invite

The warm fuzzies are unpredictable and could be due almost anything. Maybe you have great stats, ECs, and a well-written PS. Maybe you remind the interviewer of himself when he was young. Maybe it's a sunny day and the interviewer just finished a cold beer and is feeling happy. You just never know.

Yeah, I hope they're looking at the whole application.

But unless you are that 3.8/39 URM rhodes scholar who speaks 4 languages, you can never know what will tip your application one way or another. That's the point I was trying to make.

 

[LizzyM]

We are in an arms race....
There are more than twice as many applicants overall as there are seats. Regardless of how many applications are made, there will be ~54% who will not get in anywhere. Even if applications were intensely targeted and no one made more than 5 applications, 54% of applicants would be admitted. If every applicant made 50 applications, 54% would still be empty handed at the end of the season.

On the flip side, schools are receiving 20-30 applications or more for each seat. Despite the need to make 2 or 3 offers to fill each seat, schools are limited in terms of space and faculty to perform interviews and may interview only 10-20% of applicants. Schools have different strategies to screen thousands of applications and narrow the pool, conduct interviews and select students for admission.

I don't know how to end this arms race. Any ideas? Residency applications are even crazier.

 

[histidine]

We are in an arms race....
There are more than twice as many applicants overall as there are seats. Regardless of how many applications are made, there will be ~54% who will not get in anywhere. Even if applications were intensely targeted and no one made more than 5 applications, 54% of applicants would be admitted. If every applicant made 50 applications, 54% would still be empty handed at the end of the season.

On the flip side, schools are receiving 20-30 applications or more for each seat. Despite the need to make 2 or 3 offers to fill each seat, schools are limited in terms of space and faculty to perform interviews and may interview only 10-20% of applicants. Schools have different strategies to screen thousands of applications and narrow the pool, conduct interviews and select students for admission.

I don't know how to end this arms race. Any ideas? Residency applications are even crazier.

Limit the number of applications per applicant? 8 or so seems reasonable. It would also limit the wealth advantage that some applicants have (myself included). An applicant with money wouldn't be able to shotgun apply to 40 schools

 

[Goro]

100% agree with my learned colleague. As I have pointed out in the past, a high MCAT and low GPA might mean someone is merely a good standardized test taker. While this is a very necessary skill in medical school, it's not the only one.

MD schools have a seller's market. There vastly more qualified applicants than seats. Therefore, they can be selective for those applicants who have high MCATs AND high GPAs.

DO schools are more forgiving in this aspect.

The MCAT is not the only factor... If the GPA is not high with that kind of MCAT it looks as if someone has a lot of talent but poor work ethic. For example, An MCAT of 38 with a GPA of 3.2 if going to be screened out at many top schools. If someone has not targeted their applications to schools where they are a good match in terms of GPA and MCAT, then they are F'ed but it isn't because the system is F'ed up.

Open more medical schools? Or improve the economy so that other professions look as or more inviting than Medicine? Our applications always go up when the economy tanks.

I don't know how to end this arms race. Any ideas? Residency applications are even crazier.

 

[LizzyM]

100% agree with my learned colleague. As I have pointed out in the past, a high MCAT and low GPA might mean someone is merely a good standardized test taker. While this is a very necessary skill in medical school, it's not the only one.

MD schools have a seller's market. There vastly more qualified applicants than seats. Therefore, they can be selective for those applicants who have high MCATs AND high GPAs.

DO schools are more forgiving in this aspect.




Open more medical schools? Or improve the economy so that other professions look as or more inviting than Medicine? Our applications always go up when the economy tanks.

I don't know how to end this arms race. Any ideas? Residency applications are even crazier.

Opening more medical schools does not solve the problem because there are a limited number of residency positions... and we really don't need to pump out 45,000 physicians per year in the US. Not to mention that some of the 45,000 are not suited for careers in medicine either by temperament and/or academic horsepower.

All grad school applications go up when the economy tanks because going to school is more attractive than being unemployed.

 

[Goro]

So true!!!


Not to mention that some of the 45,000 are not suited for careers in medicine either by temperament and/or academic horsepower.

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

We are in an arms race....
There are more than twice as many applicants overall as there are seats. Regardless of how many applications are made, there will be ~54% who will not get in anywhere. Even if applications were intensely targeted and no one made more than 5 applications, 54% of applicants would be admitted. If every applicant made 50 applications, 54% would still be empty handed at the end of the season.

On the flip side, schools are receiving 20-30 applications or more for each seat. Despite the need to make 2 or 3 offers to fill each seat, schools are limited in terms of space and faculty to perform interviews and may interview only 10-20% of applicants. Schools have different strategies to screen thousands of applications and narrow the pool, conduct interviews and select students for admission.

I don't know how to end this arms race. Any ideas? Residency applications are even crazier.

My idea: Make the pre-reqs more difficult, so they do the weeding out for you.

 

[LizzyM]

My idea: Make the pre-reqs more difficult, so they do the weeding out for you.

Maybe that's why they are adding social science. 😉

 

[Spinach Dip]

We are in an arms race....

...

I don't know how to end this arms race. Any ideas? Residency applications are even crazier.

I have one big idea, which I am writing a sort of opinion-piece on. Look for a thread started by me in the next couple days.

100% agree with my learned colleague. As I have pointed out in the past, a high MCAT and low GPA might mean someone is merely a good standardized test taker. While this is a very necessary skill in medical school, it's not the only one.

I know that sometimes (at least in my case), the low GPA (3.4!) is due to a multitude of factors including bad family relationships, frequent moving, switching majors a couple times, and poor academic advisers. At least when I was finally able to settle down, my GPA went up (~3.6 in my last year). But the 3.4 can't be erased.

I tried to make up for that by studying like crazy for the MCAT. It paid off, with a 40. Now I'm one of those statistical outliers which has a bad GPA but phenominal MCAT. What school is looking for people like that?

 

[Goro]

My suggestion is to aim at the following:

Your state school, if any (except CA)
All new MD programs
The low tiers, especially, NYMC, Albany, Rosy F, Tulane, Drexel, Tufts, GWU, Georgetown, SLU. MCW
Invest in MSAR and aim for schools whose median GPAs are closest to your own.
Some DO programs, including mine, somewhere west of the Missouri River.

Sometimes you have to take an app cycle on the chin, warts and all, just to see how things shake out.

I tried to make up for that by studying like crazy for the MCAT. It paid off, with a 40. Now I'm one of those statistical outliers which has a bad GPA but phenominal MCAT. What school is looking for people like that?[/quote]

 

[repititionition]

My suggestion is to aim at the following:

Your state school, if any (except CA)
All new MD programs
The low tiers, especially, NYMC, Albany, Rosy F, Tulane, Drexel, Tufts, GWU, Georgetown, SLU. MCW
Invest in MSAR and aim for schools whose median GPAs are closest to your own.
Some DO programs, including mine, somewhere west of the Missouri River.

Sometimes you have to take an app cycle on the chin, warts and all, just to see how things shake out.

I genuinely appreciate the ADCOM presence here, but also believe it's imperative that applicants understand that the advice (generous and well-informed as it is) is in no way scripture. It is, in every case, n=1; each a far more valuable "1" than any other random pre-med applicant, but still "1" to be sure.

While I mentioned before that I disagree with LizzyM's characterization of the admissions process as - as it is experienced by the applicant - here I have to disagree with Goro's advice for the wildly numerically imbalanced applicant.

I won't recap my stats - they're above. I applied to one school on that list and was summarily rejected. I applied to a few other schools generally regarded as in the same echelon (Loyola, for example) and was summarily rejected.

Again, while I pulled back from the school-specific boards once I started to accumulate II and realized I wanted some privacy, I'll gladly post the blow-by-blow details of my application process once I've decided where I'm going next year. And trust me when I say no matter which school I end up at, it has zero chance of being somewhere that would reflexively be recommended for an applicant with my numerical package from my state (as is the list above).

... But the 3.4 can't be erased.

I tried to make up for that by studying like crazy for the MCAT. It paid off, with a 40. Now I'm one of those statistical outliers which has a bad GPA but phenominal MCAT. What school is looking for people like that?

So answer your question, again with my n=1, but crucially, I believe, the 1 is from a recent (relatively... wtg on the MCAT) similar applicant: Every School. Every school is POTENTIALLY looking for people like that. You just have to apply to them to find out.

And now we're right back round to the real answer to why people spray and pray 30+ apps...

 

[Chipster.]

My suggestion is to aim at the following:

Your state school, if any (except CA)
All new MD programs
The low tiers, especially, NYMC, Albany, Rosy F, Tulane, Drexel, Tufts, GWU, Georgetown, SLU. MCW
Invest in MSAR and aim for schools whose median GPAs are closest to your own.
Some DO programs, including mine, somewhere west of the Missouri River.

Sometimes you have to take an app cycle on the chin, warts and all, just to see how things shake out.

I tried to make up for that by studying like crazy for the MCAT. It paid off, with a 40. Now I'm one of those statistical outliers which has a bad GPA but phenominal MCAT. What school is looking for people like that?

[/quote]

Tufts is in no way a low tier school, but that's not to say Spinach Dip shouldn't apply.

 

[Spinach Dip]

My suggestion is to aim at the following:

Your state school, if any (except CA)
All new MD programs
The low tiers, especially, NYMC, Albany, Rosy F, Tulane, Drexel, Tufts, GWU, Georgetown, SLU. MCW
Invest in MSAR and aim for schools whose median GPAs are closest to your own.
Some DO programs, including mine, somewhere west of the Missouri River.

Sometimes you have to take an app cycle on the chin, warts and all, just to see how things shake out.

TY Goro and Repetitionition.

I still have hope this year (like the OP), and pray every day that I dont become a reapplicant. But if I do, I know I'm going for the 'spray and pray' method. Pick a couple top-tier, a lot of mid-tier, a couple bottom-tier, and even a couple DO. Maybe I can get a loan from my rich uncle so I can apply to 30-40 schools.

It sucks thinking about reapplying next year, cause I can't think of anything I did wrong aside from have a low GPA and apply to less than 30 schools.

 

[Goro]

A 40 MCAT and a 3.4 GPA with a rising trend is not that egregious.

So answer your question, again with my n=1, but crucially, I believe, the 1 is from a recent (relatively... wtg on the MCAT) similar applicant: Every School. Every school is POTENTIALLY looking for people like that. You just have to apply to them to find out.

And now we're right back round to the real answer to why people spray and pray 30+ apps...

Another piece of advice I have for Spinach is to contact Admissions deans at the schools s/he's interested and ask if s/he's a competitive candidate for that school. I do NOT suggest applying to the top tiers. Apply strategically.

Tufts avg MCAT for acceptees is 34 (range of 29-38), with cGPA of 3.8 (range 3.4-4.0) and sGPA of 3.7 (3.3-4.0)
Drexel 3.7/3.6/31 (28-35); Rosy F 3.8/3.8/32 (27-36)

I concur with Chipster...and it looks like I should not consider Rosy F a low-tier either!

Tufts is in no way a low tier school, but that's not to say Spinach Dip shouldn't apply.

 

[LizzyM]

I genuinely appreciate the ADCOM presence here, but also believe it's imperative that applicants understand that the advice (generous and well-informed as it is) is in no way scripture. It is, in every case, n=1; each a far more valuable "1" than any other random pre-med applicant, but still "1" to be sure.

While I mentioned before that I disagree with LizzyM's characterization of the admissions process as - as it is experienced by the applicant - here I have to disagree with Goro's advice for the wildly numerically imbalanced applicant.

I won't recap my stats - they're above. I applied to one school on that list and was summarily rejected. I applied to a few other schools generally regarded as in the same echelon (Loyola, for example) and was summarily rejected.

Again, while I pulled back from the school-specific boards once I started to accumulate II and realized I wanted some privacy, I'll gladly post the blow-by-blow details of my application process once I've decided where I'm going next year. And trust me when I say no matter which school I end up at, it has zero chance of being somewhere that would reflexively be recommended for an applicant with my numerical package from my state (as is the list above).




So answer your question, again with my n=1, but crucially, I believe, the 1 is from a recent (relatively... wtg on the MCAT) similar applicant: Every School. Every school is POTENTIALLY looking for people like that. You just have to apply to them to find out.

And now we're right back round to the real answer to why people spray and pray 30+ apps...

Your stats above are:
<3.3 sci and cum (with 3.9 in all pre-reqs done in University-affiliated post-bacc)

33 MCAT (straight 11's - disappointed after averaging 36+ in FL's but wasn't going to chance a retake)
and you had 10 interview invites before you starting declining invitations.
What are you even doing here in a discussion of MCAT 38+ and no interviews?

 

[LizzyM]

Looking at AAMC Table 25 for White and Asian applicants., it appears that 81-88% of those applicants with MCAT scores of 36 or more get at least one offer of admission. That assumes that 81-88% get interview invites as well. One might expect the 81% to be a bit higher if the MCAT 36-37 were excluded. So, we might expect that no more than one in 10 applicants with a MCAT of 38+ does not have at least one interview invite. Please keep in mind that for a 3 year period from 2010-2012, there were ~2785 white applicants and ~1483 Asian applicants with MCAT 38 or higher.The numbers of applicants with high MCAT scores but low GPA are very low but it appears that much of the problem lies in GPA < 3.20 or even < 3.40 despite an exceptionally good MCAT. I should think that rather than scattershot, applicants who find themselves in that situation should pay close attention to the 10th percentile of admitted applicants (per MSAR). With the understanding that the admitted students who fall in the bottom 10% of admitted (8-20 students) are often URM or other "special" situations, you are best to direct your application to schools where your gpa is above the 10th percentile for that school to avoid being screened out on GPA.

 

[alpinism]

Yeah... I know.



I understand there's more to admissions than just the MCAT. If everything came down to that one test, we could forget about volunteering, shadowing, leadership, research, and all that other nonsense which is practically required these days.

But honestly, the reason this whole process seems random is because I dont know what adcoms are thinking, or what one school is looking for vs another.

"He got a 40, but he took physics at a community college. REJECTED"
"He got a 40, but his application lacks a dedication to helping orphans in Uganda. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but used the word "countermanded" in his PS. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but didn't have a job in college. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but didn't take 22 credits per term. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, but this one LoR is mediocre. REJECTED."
"He got a 40, and likes riding horses. INTERVIEW INVITE."



I was in a little bit of a tough spot due to my highly unbalanced stats (40/3.4 (with upward trend)). I bought the MSAR and looked for HOURS for schools that fit my stats. For the majority of MD schools, I am below the 10th %tile in GPA, but 3-4 points above the 90th in MCAT....... Whats the optimal strategy for that? Load up the shotgun and pick 30 schools at random?

Its more like:

"He got a 38, but he only has a 3.3 GPA. REJECTED"
"He got a 38, but he only has 20 hrs of community service all in the last 6 months. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no interesting or unique ECs. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no research. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no little to no clinical experience. REJECTED"
"He got a 38, but I can't understand why he's applying for an MD degree and not a PhD. REJECTED

 

[repititionition]

Your stats above are:
<3.3 sci and cum (with 3.9 in all pre-reqs done in University-affiliated post-bacc)

33 MCAT (straight 11's - disappointed after averaging 36+ in FL's but wasn't going to chance a retake)
and you had 10 interview invites before you starting declining invitations.
What are you even doing here in a discussion of MCAT 38+ and no interviews?

Come on now, your avatar would have at least cut me down with some wit. I don't often see you starting fights so I imagine my post simply caught you at an off moment.

If every thread in here were limited to those with precisely congruent experience, this place would rapidly implode in to a singularity. The ethic of SDN is to share our experience (or more often pure conjecture/dogma) and let those that read it sort the wheat from the chaff.

I don't know if I interviewed at your school, though I doubt it, given your high quantitive threshold. I do know that I have direct experience with a multitude of schools this cycle, and was sharing that experience with the OP and subsequent readers.

Thanks again for your presence here, truly.

 

[BeancheBlanco]

The "universal" opinion of SDN to apply to 15-20+ schools is absolutely not the best way to increase your chance of admission. Applying to the right programs increases your chances of admission.

No. The more schools you apply to, the better your chances of an admission. It may not be the most efficient method in terms of application costs, but adding a school to apply to will always increase your chances of an admission. And like others have mentioned, you never know which schools will give you that acceptance, even if they are outside your score range. Applying to medical school is a huge deal and many people would throw down a few hundred more dollars to have the chance at a few more schools, even if they are reaches. I've seen applicants gain a single admission to a USA Today "top 30 school" and rejected from many USA Today "much less than top 30 schools".

It's easy to say "just find your score range and apply to a select few schools in that range" when you have already gone through the application process, but pre-meds who are freaking out about whether or not they will get in somewhere have different priorities. With the amount of time (opportunity cost) we have all put into gaining admission, I think a few hundred dollars is worth a slight increase in chances.

I'm sorry, but what does this mean??

Clearly you are not a "power player" nor are you "on-point"

 

[Goro]

Sounds fair to me, given the surplus of high GPA/high MCAT candidates who do not have lacunae in their apps. The one in red especially merits rejection, because that candidate has no idea what s/he is getting into.


"He got a 38, but he only has a 3.3 GPA. REJECTED"
"He got a 38, but he only has 20 hrs of community service all in the last 6 months. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no interesting or unique ECs. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no research. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no little to no clinical experience. REJECTED"
"He got a 38, but I can't understand why he's applying for an MD degree and not a PhD. REJECTED[/quote]

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

Sounds fair to me, given the surplus of high GPA/high MCAT candidates who do not have lacunae in their apps. The one in red especially merits rejection, because that candidate has no idea what s/he is getting into.


"He got a 38, but he only has a 3.3 GPA. REJECTED"
"He got a 38, but he only has 20 hrs of community service all in the last 6 months. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no interesting or unique ECs. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no research. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no little to no clinical experience. REJECTED"
"He got a 38, but I can't understand why he's applying for an MD degree and not a PhD. REJECTED

[/quote]

I think that was the point of his entire post. If you have a 38 MCAT, you must have a glaring weakness in order to wind up with NO acceptances.

 

[BeancheBlanco]

Sounds fair to me, given the surplus of high GPA/high MCAT candidates who do not have lacunae in their apps. The one in red especially merits rejection, because that candidate has no idea what s/he is getting into.


"He got a 38, but he only has a 3.3 GPA. REJECTED"
"He got a 38, but he only has 20 hrs of community service all in the last 6 months. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no interesting or unique ECs. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no research. REJECTED."
"He got a 38, but he has no little to no clinical experience. REJECTED"
"He got a 38, but I can't understand why he's applying for an MD degree and not a PhD. REJECTED

I'm just a pre-med and know nothing about what makes a prospective medical student successful, but I have always been skeptical of this whole "clinical experience" as a reason for rejecting people. I've seen what people consider clinical experience and it usually doesn't teach anyone anything about what being a doctor means. I'd be very interested to see data on whether or not clinical experience itself deters anyone from pursuing medicine (e.g. a pre-med with great GPA/MCAT who is interested in medicine suddenly decides not to apply after volunteering in a hospital). Not saying it doesn't, but a lot of people assume that it does without any evidence. If it doesn't, then your proposal that "the candidate has no idea what s/he is getting into" is not valid.

 

[LizzyM]

I'm just a pre-med and know nothing about what makes a prospective medical student successful, but I have always been skeptical of this whole "clinical experience" as a reason for rejecting people. I've seen what people consider clinical experience and it usually doesn't teach anyone anything about what being a doctor means. I'd be very interested to see data on whether or not clinical experience itself deters anyone from pursuing medicine (e.g. a pre-med with great GPA/MCAT who is interested in medicine suddenly decides not to apply after volunteering in a hospital). Not saying it doesn't, but a lot of people assume that it does without any evidence. If it doesn't, then your proposal that "the candidate has no idea what s/he is getting into" is not valid.

I do know people who have decided on PhD after getting some clinical experience.

I also interviewed a quite infamous applicant who nixed the idea of going into dentistry due to an experience as an assistant in a dental office with the comment, "have you ever smelled an infected tooth?". It seemed that she had insufficient clinical experience in medicine to know that some medical patients do not smell very pleasant and I had to wonder if she knew what she was getting into in medicine.

Being close enough to the action to see (and smell ) what is going on will give you an idea that it is not all sunshine and lollipops and patients do curse, spit, vomit, cry, and sometimes they die. They don't always put their health first and they aren't always grateful that you've saved their butt. If you still want to serve them after being in close proximity to them, then you have passed that test on the way to medical school.

 

[LizzyM]

No. The more schools you apply to, the better your chances of an admission. It may not be the most efficient method in terms of application costs, but adding a school to apply to will always increase your chances of an admission.

That could not be more wrong. You could add U Washington, Mercer, UC Davis, UC Irvine, Florida State, Southern Illinois, Louisiana State Shreveport, UMass, U Mississippi, UMDNJ, U New Mexico, Brody (East Carolina), and UPuerto Rico -- 13 additional schools, and at least 11 of them will be a complete waste of time and for most people, all 13 will be a waste and not give you a better chance at admission. You have to target.

 

[Goro]

100% agree with the two previous posts from my very sage colleague. The whole idea of clinical experience is to show us that you actually want to be around sick and injured people AND their families, for the next 30-40 years.

I knew a woman who hated, absolutely hated touching patients. She went into pathology. That's all well and good, but we're not in the business of solely producing pathologists, radiologists or hospital administrators.

Here's another way of looking at it: would you buy a new car without test driving it? Buy a new suit or dress without trying it on??


I'm just a pre-med and know nothing about what makes a prospective medical student successful, but I have always been skeptical of this whole "clinical experience" as a reason for rejecting people. I've seen what people consider clinical experience and it usually doesn't teach anyone anything about what being a doctor means. I'd be very interested to see data on whether or not clinical experience itself deters anyone from pursuing medicine (e.g. a pre-med with great GPA/MCAT who is interested in medicine suddenly decides not to apply after volunteering in a hospital). Not saying it doesn't, but a lot of people assume that it does without any evidence. If it doesn't, then your proposal that "the candidate has no idea what s/he is getting into" is not valid.

 

[solitarius]

This issue extends beyond those with the "borderline" numbers as quantified above.

Let's take me. I myself am not ashamed to recap my application:

<3.3 sci and cum (with 3.9 in all pre-reqs done in University-affiliated post-bacc)

33 MCAT (straight 11's - disappointed after averaging 36+ in FL's but wasn't going to chance a retake)

Non-trad with substantial/compelling professional experience and a narrative that showed how I would leverage it during my medical career.

Ok - so if one started selecting schools based on my "numbers", I'd be looking at...

-safety schools: 0 (barring something like 4 years in Puerto Rico, and as a [non-urm] spanish speaker, I did consider this but ultimately did not apply)

-match schools: hope to god I live in a favorable state for IS admissions (womp womp, I live in CA), sooooo.... none, with my tragic GPA + slightly-above-average MCAT

-reach schools: essentially every allopathic institution in the CONUS

-"whynotit'sjustmoney" stratospheric reach schools: say the entire top 30 (and trust me, I don't believe that there IS any top 30, I'm just saying that there's a echelon of school that has its absolute PICK of who to take... these are the schools I'm referencing).

So I applied to 30 schools. I got something like 10 interviews before I started declining them. I withdrew from 10 schools after my first "dream" acceptance.

You know what? The interviews were from every part of the country (except - you guessed it - CA) and absolutely all over the range of perceived prestige and selectivity, from "gets the job done", to "top 10". I have tried to reconcile the where's and who's and why's of my application cycle but THERE IS NO LOGIC THAT I CAN SEE. (And for the ADCOM's reading this - I'm forever grateful for each and every one of you that took a chance on me!)

So, for those with a marginal application (and by that I mean everyone with even a single blemish on their application), I give the same advice that I give to everyone who I talk to in my post-bacc: apply everywhere. I'm not kidding. Everywhere. Apply up, apply down, NSEW, etc., because as an applicant you JUST DON'T KNOW.

Edited to add:

I post my story just to show people a) the inherent unpredictability of the process, and b) that literally anyone who has shown themselves capable of doing the work (irrespective of past mistakes) can be a competitive candidate. Don't buy the SDN "perfection or failure" dichotomy. Believe in yourself!

Your story is inspiring, and I congratulate you on your success in this application cycle. You certainly smoked my butt in this process, even though my numbers were higher.

Regardless, I question how much of your personal success can translate onto other people. For instance, the majority of applicants are fairly bland, predictable and cookie-cutter. They are college seniors or recent grads three years out and biology majors. Truth is ad comms cut you some slack that they frankly won't cut for the standard Asian/white cookie-cutter applicant. And while the Ad Comm SDN members' advice obviously can't apply to every applicant in the process, they will apply to the majority of applicants, or succinctly, the typical candidate.

You know, yesterday, I noticed that a URM got into an allopathic medical school despite a low 20's MCAT score. I shudder to think that he or she starts posting advice on here for other applicants based on his/her success.

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

Your story is inspiring, and I congratulate you on your success in this application cycle. You certainly smoked my butt in this process, even though my numbers were higher.

Regardless, I question how much of your personal success can translate onto other people. For instance, the majority of applicants are fairly bland, predictable and cookie-cutter. They are college seniors or recent grads three years out and biology majors. Truth is ad comms cut you some slack that they frankly won't cut for the standard Asian/white cookie-cutter applicant. And while the Ad Comm SDN members' advice obviously can't apply to every applicant in the process, they will apply the majority of applicants or succinctly the average candidate.

You know, yesterday, I noticed that a URM got into an allopathic medical school despite a low 20's MCAT score. I shudder to think that she starts posting advice on here for other applicants based on her success.

The trick is to stalk MDapps, and look to see where people with your profile were interviewed/accepted. It's not perfect research, but I did this, and it worked for me. I got most of the interviews that I predicted I would get, including several that should have been out of reach stats-wise.

 

[snowflakes]

100% agree with the two previous posts from my very sage colleague. The whole idea of clinical experience is to show us that you actually want to be around sick and injured people AND their families, for the next 30-40 years.

I knew a woman who hated, absolutely hated touching patients. She went into pathology. That's all well and good, but we're not in the business of solely producing pathologists, radiologists or hospital administrators.

Here's another way of looking at it: would you buy a new car without test driving it? Buy a new suit or dress without trying it on??


I'm just a pre-med and know nothing about what makes a prospective medical student successful, but I have always been skeptical of this whole "clinical experience" as a reason for rejecting people. I've seen what people consider clinical experience and it usually doesn't teach anyone anything about what being a doctor means. I'd be very interested to see data on whether or not clinical experience itself deters anyone from pursuing medicine (e.g. a pre-med with great GPA/MCAT who is interested in medicine suddenly decides not to apply after volunteering in a hospital). Not saying it doesn't, but a lot of people assume that it does without any evidence. If it doesn't, then your proposal that "the candidate has no idea what s/he is getting into" is not valid.

But part of the problem is that many of the clinical experiences that people put on AMCAS don't really expose them well to the realities of healthcare. A lot of pre-meds will volunteer in the hospital and do mainly administrative/organizational work and occasionally fetch patients refreshments or push around a wheel chair. I have to doubt if this really gives them a good idea of if they "want to be around sick and injured people AND their families, for the next 30-40 years." Of course, there's also lots of clinical experiences that truly give the applicant lots of good patient contact and are useful in this regard. I'm curious--how easy is it for adcoms to distinguish between meaningful and fluffy clinical experiences?

 

[juliuspepperwood]

That could not be more wrong. You could add U Washington, Mercer, UC Davis, UC Irvine, Florida State, Southern Illinois, Louisiana State Shreveport, UMass, U Mississippi, UMDNJ, U New Mexico, Brody (East Carolina), and UPuerto Rico -- 13 additional schools, and at least 11 of them will be a complete waste of time and for most people, all 13 will be a waste and not give you a better chance at admission. You have to target.

I definitely think targeting is important but sometimes it can be difficult. While I admittedly applied to a lot of schools I also attempted to get in a good amount that were targeted to my stats/interests/experiences. I've been really lucky with the schools I've interviewed at, but if I end up not getting in to any of them I would have an even harder time targeting schools for next year. Two of my three interviews are very much "reach" schools for me considering my 3.4 GPA and many of the schools which my stats are superficially a better match for rejected me quickly.

 

[repititionition]

Your story is inspiring, and I congratulate you on your success in this application cycle. You certainly smoked my butt in this process, even though my numbers were higher.

Regardless, I question how much of your personal success can translate onto other people. For instance, the majority of applicants are fairly bland, predictable and cookie-cutter. They are college seniors or recent grads three years out and biology majors. Truth is ad comms cut you some slack that they frankly won't cut for the standard Asian/white cookie-cutter applicant.

...

Sure, but I attribute my success to applying broadly and essentially ignoring the convention of "targeting" schools for my numbers - essentially impossible, since few/no schools have a median GPA anywhere near 3.3.

If it's beginning to grate on people, I'm happy to bow out (and will do so now), but not before being perfectly clear: I'm sure there are/were many factors at play in my ability to overcome a bad numbers story (my professional experience and LORs being two), but in my mind a deciding factor was also the simple fact that I applied to many schools - many of which I would not have, were I to have listened to conventional wisdom.

Anyway, best of luck to all.

 

[solitarius]

If it's beginning to grate on people, I'm happy to bow out (and will do so now), but not before being perfectly clear: I'm sure there are/were many factors at play in my ability to overcome a bad numbers story (my professional experience and LORs being two), but in my mind a deciding factor was also the simple fact that I applied to many schools - many of which I would not have, were I to have listened to conventional wisdom.

Not at all. I got in, so I frankly have nothing but good will towards your success.

I'm more concerned about misinformation. The WAMC board is populated with unrealistic aspirations that have to be routinely deflated out of people. Success like yours has to be taken in context.

 

[BeancheBlanco]

That could not be more wrong. You could add U Washington, Mercer, UC Davis, UC Irvine, Florida State, Southern Illinois, Louisiana State Shreveport, UMass, U Mississippi, UMDNJ, U New Mexico, Brody (East Carolina), and UPuerto Rico -- 13 additional schools, and at least 11 of them will be a complete waste of time and for most people, all 13 will be a waste and not give you a better chance at admission. You have to target.

They increase your chance of an admission. Significantly? Maybe not. But the chance of an admission did go up.

I do know people who have decided on PhD after getting some clinical experience.

I also interviewed a quite infamous applicant who nixed the idea of going into dentistry due to an experience as an assistant in a dental office with the comment, "have you ever smelled an infected tooth?". It seemed that she had insufficient clinical experience in medicine to know that some medical patients do not smell very pleasant and I had to wonder if she knew what she was getting into in medicine.

Being close enough to the action to see (and smell ) what is going on will give you an idea that it is not all sunshine and lollipops and patients do curse, spit, vomit, cry, and sometimes they die. They don't always put their health first and they aren't always grateful that you've saved their butt. If you still want to serve them after being in close proximity to them, then you have passed that test on the way to medical school.

I'm sure it has weeded out many people from the profession who wouldn't be successful. I'm just skeptical about how effective it is at doing that compared to the value that people place on clinical experience. Especially since the value of clinical experience is almost completely dependent on your attitude while doing it. I don't think it's a given that if a person sees the negative aspects of medicine in a volunteer experience, that he/she will know if it's the wrong career choice. There's a big difference between watching someone take care of a difficult situation and actually taking care of that difficult situation yourself. In order to do that, you have to be thinking about your clinical experience truly as preparation for being a doctor rather than a means to get into medical school. Many people do that and many people do not. I mean, take a look at the "what do you do when volunteering in a hospital" thread. Most people are just sitting around doing nothing so that they can check off that box on their application. I guess the trick for the admissions committees is figuring out who is who.

Maybe I'm just taking some of these things for granted.

 

[chenzt]

.

 

[Goro]

Spoken like someone who's never seen the MSAR. What my learned colleague was referring to were school with a high degree of in-state favoratism. This whole porcess favors people who know what they're doing.

They increase your chance of an admission. Significantly? Maybe not. But the chance of an admission did go up.

 

[BeancheBlanco]

Spoken like someone who's never seen the MSAR. What my learned colleague was referring to were school with a high degree of in-state favoratism. This whole porcess favors people who know what they're doing.

You must be misunderstanding me. Like I said originally, I am not talking about the most efficient nor the most cost-effective way of applying to medical schools. I'm not encouraging people to apply to OOS public schools. I'm simply saying that if you add a school to apply to, then your chances of getting into a school go up. If you apply to 0 schools, you have a 0% chance of getting an admission. If you apply to 1 school, your chances of getting an admission are >0%, no matter what that school is. Yes, this is a trivial point, but I only brought it up because someone earlier said that adding schools does NOT increase your chances of admission, which is false.

 

[Spinach Dip]

I understand the desire for applicants to have "clinical experience", but I wonder if physician shadowing is considered equivalent, or if it depends on the school.

I learned a lot more shadowing an anesthesiologist for 50 hours than I did restocking shelves for 500.

 

[CyberMaxx]

You must be misunderstanding me. Like I said originally, I am not talking about the most efficient nor the most cost-effective way of applying to medical schools. I'm not encouraging people to apply to OOS public schools. I'm simply saying that if you add a school to apply to, then your chances of getting into a school go up. If you apply to 0 schools, you have a 0% chance of getting an admission. If you apply to 1 school, your chances of getting an admission are >0%, no matter what that school is. Yes, this is a trivial point, but I only brought it up because someone earlier said that adding schools does NOT increase your chances of admission, which is false.

I understand what your saying BeancheBlanco, but I think the point others on this thread are trying to make (and one which I agree with) is that medical school admissions is not like playing the slot machine. You cannot treat the acceptance rate posted by USN&WR, or any other such number, as odds which you can beat if you just pull the lever enough times. Sure, NYU accepts 5 % of applicants but that does not mean that if you could somehow apply to NYU 20 times you would get in. There are applicants out there who will never be accepted by NYU and therefore adding it to their school list doesn't increase their chances of acceptance at all.

You might argue that this hypothetical applicant who will never get into NYU may not have any way of knowing this (their numbers may be competitive for example), and you'd be right. However, if you take the time to really evaluate your application and school's admissions profiles there are only a limited number of places where this is the case. Depending on your application this number may be large or small, but at a certain point it is no longer reasonable to think you are increasing your chances for admission by adding more schools.

 

[BeancheBlanco]

I understand what your saying BeancheBlanco, but I think the point others on this thread are trying to make (and one which I agree with) is that medical school admissions is not like playing the slot machine. You cannot treat the acceptance rate posted by USN&WR, or any other such number, as odds which you can beat if you just pull the lever enough times. Sure, NYU accepts 5 % of applicants but that does not mean that if you could somehow apply to NYU 20 times you would get in. There are applicants out there who will never be accepted by NYU and therefore adding it to their school list doesn't increase their chances of acceptance at all.

You might argue that this hypothetical applicant who will never get into NYU may not have any way of knowing this (their numbers may be competitive for example), and you'd be right. However, if you take the time to really evaluate your application and school's admissions profiles there are only a limited number of places where this is the case. Depending on your application this number may be large or small, but at a certain point it is no longer reasonable to think you are increasing your chances for admission by adding more schools.

While it's true that getting accepted into a medical school is not a random variable, it is also true that my knowledge of admissions committees' methods for selecting students IS a random variable. You recognize this as well, which is why you suggest applying to multiple schools despite knowing you won't be accepted to all of them. The only difference is that you are suggesting there is a point where your chances become 0, which doesn't make sense to me.

 

[Goro]

Sorry to be snide, but have you taken your math or stats classes yet? Applying to n schools where your chances are effectively 0% will not increase your chances. Unless one's MCAT AND GPA are well above avg. But if you're avg, and you live in NY, then why should the taxpayers in CO or UT wish to supplement your education when they have thier own > avg applicants?

You must be misunderstanding me. Like I said originally, I am not talking about the most efficient nor the most cost-effective way of applying to medical schools. I'm not encouraging people to apply to OOS public schools. I'm simply saying that if you add a school to apply to, then your chances of getting into a school go up. If you apply to 0 schools, you have a 0% chance of getting an admission. If you apply to 1 school, your chances of getting an admission are >0%, no matter what that school is. Yes, this is a trivial point, but I only brought it up because someone earlier said that adding schools does NOT increase your chances of admission, which is false.

 

[orangeman25]

The MCAT is just one part of a package.

Yeah but probably the most important part of the package and OP destroyed it. It's astonishing he didn't get an interview. A 3.2/38 yielding no interview is believable, but a 3.4-3.5/38 with no luck is straight up astonishing.

 

[QuinnTheEskimo]

While it's true that getting accepted into a medical school is not a random variable, it is also true that my knowledge of admissions committees' methods for selecting students IS a random variable.You recognize this as well, which is why you suggest to apply to multiple schools despite knowing you won't be accepted to all of them. The only difference is that you are suggesting there is a point where your chances become 0, which doesn't make sense to me.

To add to this...I'd argue that the "slot machine" model becomes more accurate as the discrepancy between GPA/MCAT becomes larger. For high MCAT/low GPA applicants like OP, the process can seem VERY random, and often applicants like this will "beat the odds" that you would expect based on their LizzyM scores.

 

[BeancheBlanco]

Sorry to be snide, but have you taken your math or stats classes yet? Applying to n schools where your chances are effectively 0% will not increase your chances. Unless one's MCAT AND GPA are well above avg. But if you're avg, and you live in NY, then why should the taxpayers in CO or UT wish to supplement your education when they have thier own > avg applicants?

Graduated with a degree in math actually hehehehehehe. Just forget it. The misunderstanding is that you are saying the chance of getting into a reach school is 0% and I'm saying it's ~0.001%. There's no point in arguing more about this.

 

[LizzyM]

They increase your chance of an admission. Significantly? Maybe not. But the chance of an admission did go up.

YOu don't seem to understand. If you apply to Mercer and you are not from Georgia your chances of admission to Mercer are 0. So, adding Mercer does not improve your chances at all. Your application arrives and goes straight to the trash can. The same goes for those other 12 schools. You can apply to bunches of schools and not move the needle one bit because your application was doomed from the start. Applicants need to be educated and they need to target.

 

[Launcelot]

Meaning, the interview skims your file and if he gets a warm fuzzy feeling, you get an interview invite.

Warm fuzzy feeling ---> interview invite
No warm fuzzy feeling ---> no interview invite

The warm fuzzies are unpredictable and could be due almost anything.

I ALWAYS get a warm fuzzy feeling when I see adcoms posting in our threads (thanks LizzyM and Goro)! 😍

And I feel a lot better about my 3.3/28 after reading some of the example you've all listed. (This is when I know that I've strayed too long from the pre-osteo forums!)

 

[BeancheBlanco]

YOu don't seem to understand. If you apply to Mercer and you are not from Georgia your chances of admission to Mercer are 0. So, adding Mercer does not improve your chances at all. Your application arrives and goes straight to the trash can. The same goes for those other 12 schools. You can apply to bunches of schools and not move the needle one bit because your application was doomed from the start. Applicants need to be educated and they need to target.

I didn't know 100% of Mercer students were in-state. If that's the case, then you are right about that particular school. Once again, I'm not telling people not to target. I'm just saying that if you add a school where your demographic has a >0% acceptance rate, then your chances of gaining an admission are greater than your chances of gaining an admission without that school. If a school only accepts one person out of state, there is a >0% change that person will be you. Is it realistic? No. Do I recommend applying to that school out of state if you have less than infinite money and less than infinite time? No.

 

[Cmdr_Shepard]

Blanco, I think you may be confusing statistics and probability.

 

[BeancheBlanco]

Blanco, I think you may be confusing statistics and probability.

That's possible. Please enlighten.