Application lateness kills chances... neurotic premed myth or reality?

[alexandertg6]

I have seen everywhere on SDN that having an application submitted in late September SIGNIFICANTLY decreases chances of acceptance. Is there any hard data on that? While this may be true, I feel like in general medical schools will not accept a bunch of less competitive applicants just because their application is in early if they know that applicant pools get competitive later in the cycle. And yes I know it is rolling admissions, and I know what that means so that is NOT my question. I am just looking for data showing that applicants with lower stats get in earlier than applicants with higher stats.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[notbobtrustme]

I think it's a logical extension of the rolling admissions process. If school x is accepting 25 people at a time, you want to be one of the first 25, when the number of total applicants is low, rather the last 25, when the number of total applicants will be high. It's much easier to stand out in the first batch than the last batch.

 

[music2doc]

I have seen everywhere on SDN that having an application submitted in late September SIGNIFICANTLY decreases chances of acceptance. Is there any hard data on that? While this may be true, I feel like in general medical schools will not accept a bunch of less competitive applicants just because their application is in early if they know that applicant pools get competitive later in the cycle. And yes I know it is rolling admissions, and I know what that means so that is NOT my question. I am just looking for data showing that applicants with lower stats get in earlier than applicants with higher stats.

While your theory sounds reasonable at first glance, it quickly falls apart on further examination.

Let's take a high-tier (top 30) state school as an example. This school, by mid-June 2011, had already received enough applications to fill its class THREE times over (around 500-600). Furthermore, their Dept of Admissions has stated it gets at least 4-5 classes worth of perfectly acceptable applicants that would give them NO pause before admitting -- that is, they get some 1,000 applicants they would consider "recommended or strongly recommended for admission." They expect some 10,000 applicants this year. From our school's data, students who interview there beyond the fall are rarely accepted directly (although they are occasionally accepted from the waitlist).

In other word, it's not that they are accepting lower stat people over higher stat people. It's that beyond some point, how high your stats are simply does not matter all that much! As long as you are 32+/3.8+, you are acceptable. At that point, they are looking at ECs very heavily and only occasionally considering the numbers.

 

[alexandertg6]

While your theory sounds reasonable at first glance, it quickly falls apart on further examination.

Let's take a high-tier (top 30) state school as an example. This school, by mid-June 2011, had already received enough applications to fill its class THREE times over (around 500-600). Furthermore, their Dept of Admissions has stated it gets at least 4-5 classes worth of perfectly acceptable applicants that would give them NO pause before admitting -- that is, they get some 1,000 applicants they would consider "recommended or strongly recommended for admission." They expect some 10,000 applicants this year. From our school's data, students who interview there beyond the fall are rarely accepted directly (although they are occasionally accepted from the waitlist).

In other word, it's not that they are accepting lower stat people over higher stat people. It's that beyond some point, how high your stats are simply does not matter all that much! As long as you are 32+/3.8+, you are acceptable. At that point, they are looking at ECs very heavily and only occasionally considering the numbers.

This is true, but by the laws of economics, would it not make more sense that the people they admit first be the MOST competitive applicants (3.9+/ 38+ with research, clinical, and saved a small country singlehandedly... there are people like that out there) in order to get applicant's "heart set" over the course of a few months to increase likelihood of matriculation at that school? I guess THAT is what I am having trouble understanding... it seems to go against basic economic principles if you view the schools as consumers and applicants as resources with varying levels of desirability, doesnt it? I guess I wrongly asserted that it was a numbers thing, but I think what I meant was that if medical schools compete over some of the same universally attractive applicants(whether numbers or ECs or another reason that makes them attractive applicants) as it makes sense they would, the theory that late applications hurt would not hold true because the majority dont get truly considered until later anyway.

 

[music2doc]

This is true, but by the laws of economics, would it not make more sense that the people they admit first be the MOST competitive applicants (3.9+/ 38+ with research, clinical, and saved a small country singlehandedly... there are people like that out there) in order to get applicant's "heart set" over the course of a few months to increase likelihood of matriculation at that school? I guess THAT is what I am having trouble understanding... it seems to go against basic economic principles if you view the schools as consumers and applicants as resources with varying levels of desirability, doesnt it? I guess I wrongly asserted that it was a numbers thing, but I think what I meant was that if medical schools compete over some of the same universally attractive applicants(whether numbers or ECs or another reason that makes them attractive applicants) as it makes sense they would, the theory that late applications hurt would not hold true because the majority dont get truly considered until later anyway.

Sure... and they frequently do (e.g., students who are high stat/EC in-state and/or are otherwise are most attractive are often invited to the earliest interviews). That said, most aren't going to wait a whole lot to get the very best. Instead, they will go for the early strong candidates. Later, it is ONLY the strongest candidates who will get offers up-front (i.e., no waitlist).

 

[WeAreNotRobots]

I have seen everywhere on SDN that having an application submitted in late September SIGNIFICANTLY decreases chances of acceptance. Is there any hard data on that?

you're asking for data that doesn't exist, and doesn't need to exist. you have lower chances of getting in the later you apply. the exact cut-offs concerning what is early, on time, and late-- and the related chances of acceptance--are fuzzy, but the main idea is clear: the longer you wait, the worse off you are. it's up to you to decide when to apply.

but don't plan on using that as an excuse for the rest of your life: "i could have been a doctor, but i applied late in the cycle..."

 

[chiapet874]

you're asking for data that doesn't exist, and doesn't need to exist. you have lower chances of getting in the later you apply. the exact cut-offs concerning what is early, on time, and late-- and the related chances of acceptance--are fuzzy, but the main idea is clear: the longer you wait, the worse off you are. it's up to you to decide when to apply.

but don't plan on using that as an excuse for the rest of your life: "i could have been a doctor, but i applied late in the cycle..."

+1 logic

Schools get so many applicants that it will be no problem for them to find EARLY and COMPETITIVE applicants.

 

[235788]

true!

 

[NickNaylor]

If you're looking for data, go to U. Michigan's Twitter and look at posts from around March. An overwhelming majority of students that get accepted there applied by August. I think something like 90% of applicants that got accepted were complete by September.

Michigan is an extreme example because they're very aggressive with rolling admissions, but I'd be willing to bet that you see similar trends in other schools.

 

[shinbeats]

Last year I was verified in the end of August and had been complete at most schools in the mid of September, I applied to 30 schools and got 0 Interviews. This year with the same exact stats and ECs, I was verified in June and had been complete at most schools in July, I applied to 15 schools and got 3 interviews that I have already attended and it just turned October. I think you can figure this out. Common sense would dictate that most rolling admission schools will fill up their classes early. Thus, later in the cycle you have LESS SEATS and SAME or MORE APPLICANTS. What do you think will happen?
Even though there is no data a lot of re-applicants will tell you that they failed the first time because they applied ridiculously late in the cycle (what I consider as late September). As everyone stated by that time it's only the glorious Stats & EC's that stand a chance.

 

[Myuu]

It absolutely does kill chances. Really.

 

[LizzyM]

The problem is interview slots.... you can't get in without an interview and the slots fill up (even if the interview offer isn't made until 4 weeks before the interview date, the applicant is queued for interview) with excellent candidates. With thousands more applicants than interview slots, many very qualified applicants end up without an interview and those most likely not to get an interview are those who arrive late to the party.

 

[TheChronic]

I applied to a Top 30 in mid September just to see if they'd bite. A couple of days later, interview invite!

If you have something unique to offer, EC wise, you might stick out.

 

[Morsetlis]

Just to be sure the point gets across, I had a 3.63/36T, publication, EMT: applied twice, first time completing my secondaries by December, the second time by September.

Guess where I got in!

 

[Stumpyman]

Just to be sure the point gets across, I had a 3.63/36T, publication, EMT: applied twice, first time completing my secondaries by December, the second time by September.

Guess where I got in!

Woah. Did you apply top-heavy or something?

 

[kpcrew]

Just to be sure the point gets across, I had a 3.63/36T, publication, EMT: applied twice, first time completing my secondaries by December, the second time by September.

Guess where I got in!

wtf wow

 

[Etorphine]

Just to be sure the point gets across, I had a 3.63/36T, publication, EMT: applied twice, first time completing my secondaries by December, the second time by September.

Guess where I got in!

!!! Game.Set.Match.

 

[chronicidal]

!!! Game.Set.Match.

I don't understand. he applied earlier and got into a caribbean school. I don't think you can draw any conclusions from that.

 

[Morsetlis]

I don't understand. he applied earlier and got into a caribbean school. I don't think you can draw any conclusions from that.

September is not early silly.

 

[Stumpyman]

September is not early silly.

It's pretty late but those are beast stats

 

[Morsetlis]

It's pretty late but those are beast stats

I also had only 1 science professor LOR (and a bunch of MD/DO/PhD LOR's)

Explicitly rejected from some schools because of that.

 

[Myuu]

Yeaaaah, I did a similar thing.

AMCAS submitted in October (brilliant, I know): 2 interviews offered, 0 acceptances
AMCAS submitted in May with very few changes and secondaries in within a reasonable amount of time: 8 interviews offered, 1 acceptance (I suck at interviewing, what can I say...)

 

[Morsetlis]

Yeaaaah, I did a similar thing.

AMCAS submitted in October (brilliant, I know): 2 interviews offered, 0 acceptances
AMCAS submitted in May with very few changes and secondaries in within a reasonable amount of time: 8 interviews offered, 1 acceptance (I suck at interviewing, what can I say...)

Ah hah.

*nods sagely*

 

[alexandertg6]

wow... So by what Lizzy M said it comes down to interviews more than anything... if you get a good number of interviews the lateness no longer plays a major role? I could be misunderstanding. Morsetlis, how many interviews did you get if I may ask?

 

[scarshapedstar]

Let's approach this deductively.

Reasons why it's bad to apply early in the admissions cycle:

...

...

...Bueller?

 

[LifeTake2]

N=1 example.

UK is granting interviews now for Jan dates.

The admissions office will tell you that historically the class is full by Dec.

Look at your calendar and tell me if my mediocre stats that interviewed today have a better chance than a 3.9/38 that doesn't interview till Feb??

 

[45408]

This is true, but by the laws of economics, would it not make more sense that the people they admit first be the MOST competitive applicants (3.9+/ 38+ with research, clinical, and saved a small country singlehandedly... there are people like that out there) in order to get applicant's "heart set" over the course of a few months to increase likelihood of matriculation at that school? I guess THAT is what I am having trouble understanding... it seems to go against basic economic principles if you view the schools as consumers and applicants as resources with varying levels of desirability, doesnt it?

There is an abundance of resources, so it's a buyer's market. You're not the buyer.

It's absolutely true for any school that has a component of rolling admissions. Unless they accept all applications, then block any further applications, and then review them all before offering any interviews, there's at least some component of rolling admissions. My alma mater gave me an acceptance before some people had even applied.

 

[45408]

wow... So by what Lizzy M said it comes down to interviews more than anything... if you get a good number of interviews the lateness no longer plays a major role? I could be misunderstanding.

No, because your interviews also need to be early in the season at many schools, or your only chance is a shot at the waitlist.

Furthermore, you're less likely to get a "good number" of interviews when you show up late to the table.

 

[haloschief]

I also had only 1 science professor LOR (and a bunch of MD/DO/PhD LOR's)

Explicitly rejected from some schools because of that.

How many interviews did you get? And where the rejections due to LORs post or pre-interview?

 

[NH14]

Apply late definitely hurts your chances - no doubt about it. I think previous posters did a good job of fleshing the reasons out...interviews are scheduled up to months in advance, schools receive a ton more qualified applicants early. I guess I don't understand why people apply late. If you took a late MCAT or your prehealth committee is slow as hell with letters - these are valid excuses.

But how do you think it looks to adcoms if you apply late for no good, solid reason?

 

[418865]

so, when is the ideal time to take MCAT? Is taking it in late July or mid-July too late?

 

[centrigeugle]

As somebody who was complete early-mid September, this thread makes me really scurred.

 

[NickNaylor]

so, when is the ideal time to take MCAT? Is taking it in late July or mid-July too late?

If possible and without sacrificing the quality of your application (including MCAT scores), I would try and be complete by late July or early August if possible. Will you be screwed if you aren't? By no means. But I think that's a great timeline to shoot for.

 

[NH14]

so, when is the ideal time to take MCAT? Is taking it in late July or mid-July too late?

Ideally, take it anytime in the spring (i.e. before June). It takes a month for your scores to come back - which is a month of wasting time. READ: https://www.aamc.org/students/applying/mcat/reserving/152894/deadlineandscorerelease.html

I think traditional students (college juniors) take the MCAT in spring typically.

That being said, taking the MCAT in July may not seriously hurt your chances - that is if everything else in your app is already done. Yet, if you do poorly, you really may have to re-take at a time that would truly hurt your chances of getting in that cycle, and you would probably have to re-apply the next year.

 

[eli20]

Anecdotally, I've seen it happen to several other-wise shoe-in candidates, who when applying earlier the next year were accepted early on.

 

[Asyouwereatrio]

Also, it's a crapshoot...I mean, I'm sure if a "late applicant" was "extremely desirable" to the schoool, they'd "make room" for that individual. Granted, that's probably an extreme case too--like you'd have to be some sort of Watson and Crick superstar applicant.

To err on the side of caution, have your application in as soon as you can, and you'll be set. As more and more people starting realizing this trend, it becomes even more important because you're "defacto late" as the months pass on from June.

 

[45408]

so, when is the ideal time to take MCAT? Is taking it in late July or mid-July too late?

Take it early. BACK IN MY DAY, the MCAT was offered only twice a year (I think), in April and August (I think). I took it in August '04 right after my sophomore year. I had lots and lots of time before applying after my junior year.

 

[Hotshy]

I've met applicants that took the MCAT in September and that were complete in mid-October just before the school's AMCAS deadline. They were actually admitted to 2-3 programs with a 3.9+ and a 31 MCAT. It can happen, you are taking a bit of a risk though, he's more of the exception and not the rule.

 

[Myuu]

I've met applicants that took the MCAT in September and that were complete in mid-October just before the school's AMCAS deadline. They were actually admitted to 2-3 programs with a 3.9+ and a 31 MCAT. It can happen, you are taking a bit of a risk though, he's more of the exception and not the rule.

Ahh, but what were the schools?

 

[Hotshy]

Ahh, but what were the schools?

A couple of Mid-tier programs, nothing noteworthy, one being my state school.

 

[ATPase8]

Completed mid september, have an interview . Its a total crapshoot

 

[Snuke]

Take it early. BACK IN MY DAY, the MCAT was offered only twice a year (I think), in April and August (I think). I took it in August '04 right after my sophomore year. I had lots and lots of time before applying after my junior year.

I took mine in August right before my Junior year, and it worked out great. All my required coursework was completed and I had the entire summer to study. I highly recommend this route to anyone who can do it, because it means you don't have to study for the MCAT during school.

 

[alexandertg6]

There is an abundance of resources, so it's a buyer's market. You're not the buyer.

I think its a double-buyers market. Yes, med school has to choose you, but med schools also have to sell themselves to you because if they offer you an acceptance they want YOU specifically to matriculate. I agree that getting it in early is the best thing to do unless you have a reason to wait (in my case MCAT retake). I still think it would be interesting to gather data on Lizzy M score vs. date of application completion for accepted applicants.

 

[GetThePointe77]

Okay so from my experience of my friends - three applied really late - i'm talking about secondaries in november, last day accepted kinda late. I think they all took the MCAT in august, but I'm not completely sure. They all had decent scores (30-36), and okay GPAs. They all are in medical school right now. Yes, they all interviewed really late, but they all got into at least one place, and good schools at that. Now personally seeing the stress they went through I submitted my primary June 1st, and got most of my secondaries in ASAP, but I have seen people who applied late still have no problem getting in.

 

[45408]

I think its a double-buyers market. Yes, med school has to choose you, but med schools also have to sell themselves to you because if they offer you an acceptance they want YOU specifically to matriculate. I agree that getting it in early is the best thing to do unless you have a reason to wait (in my case MCAT retake). I still think it would be interesting to gather data on Lizzy M score vs. date of application completion for accepted applicants.

Not really. They obviously put their best foot forward because there's no reason not to, but they hold all the power in this equation.

 

[BHaus9]

Part of me wonders why schools that would otherwise have no difficulty filling their classes with qualified candidates have such late application deadlines. It's misleading and pointless.

 

[centrigeugle]

Why don't you go ahead and tell me all about power.

Also, this thread still makes me scurred. Damn you all.

 

[BHaus9]

Why don't you go ahead and tell me all about power.

Also, this thread still makes me scurred. Damn you all.

Haha, I'm in the same boat. I would have been complete a month ago, but 4 weeks were squandered in waiting for one stupid LOR I asked for in April.

 

[Myuu]

Haha, I'm in the same boat. I would have been complete a month ago, but 4 weeks were squandered in waiting for one stupid LOR I asked for in April.

Why did you wait for the LOR?

 

[BHaus9]

Why did you wait for the LOR?

It was my second letter from an academic "science" source, which is an explicit requirement for many schools, and by the time I started to get real antsy about it, I felt it would have been too late to seek out alternative letter writers (even if they'd agreed, their letters would have been just as late in coming). Furthermore, this particular professor also happened to be my undergraduate advisor, and I felt strongly that he could provide a very intimate, favorable, and accurate assessment of me. I was somewhat limited in my options, too, because I graduated a couple years ago and only really took the bare minimum in hard science courses.