Could someone please explain to me what the most important things are when being assessed by a medical school? What do they look at the most?
I know that all these are very important: Grades (GPA and sGPA), MCAT score, EC's, leadership, research, community service, interview and personal statement
But how are these ranked in order of importance?? I've heard of many people who get into top med schools with mediocre grades because of their awesome EC's or because of something significant they did. At the same time, there are people who get in because of their very high grades and MCAT score, regardless of what EC's they pursued...
I'm very confused.
I don't think this question is answered best as:
1. X
2. Y
3. Z
because contexts vary so for a student from background A, maybe GPA means less due to certain reasons.
That being said, I think there are a few basic ground rules. They are not ranked in order of importance (All this is my own opinion btw)
1. GPA and MCAT are viewed as filters more than anything else. It's funny because most students (including myself) judge themselves most heavily on these factors but oftentimes they're the things, I THINK, that are scrutinized the least. I honestly think adcoms do some MS Excel work with GPAs and MCATs. They can break down the MCAT but they're not going to scrutinize the GPA. (Maybe if they're interested in a candidate for other reasons, they might sift through and try to rationalize bad grades as a first year trend followed by successive improvement).
2. Medical schools look for (a.k.a. require) CLINICAL EXPERIENCE. One nearly mandatory form of it is shadowing and then after that something along the lines of a scribe (job), hospital volunteer, nurse assistant, etc. will serve as the second un-official requirement. If you don't have it, or lack a substantial amount of exposure to it, this will hurt your application.
3. The previous two points are things that will make your application competitive with the rest so it's not screened out (i.e. eliminated from competition). However, having a PASSION is something that I think medical schools look for and this is what will give your application the big boost it needs for a successful interview and acceptance. You must show evidence that you've stuck to something and are passionate about it whether it's a sport, research, cause, art, etc. It also helps if you have some awards/evidence of achievement (like a 1st place award or a paper published) to demonstrate your skill in said passion. I bet you've heard this since undergrad admissions but it's best to have one solid thing than 3-4 mediocre things. As I said a couple sentences ago, research can count as a passion and that's why I think research has helped so many applications. If you only have "check-the box" research though, it's best to try to look for another passion to develop.
4. Personal Statements are usually pretty similar no matter how much you try to distinguish yourself. From what I've heard from Adcoms, so as long as you don't screw it up, I don't see this (or secondaries for that matter) being a big determining factor. Therefore, make sure you don't strain yourself to sound unique or you might end up in the said 5% of PS's that are "bad" instead of the 90% that are "good enough". Of course, write your PS and activities well and proof-read multiple times and make sure your passions are underscored with colorful examples through your PS and 3 most meaningful activities. Lastly, Letters of Recommendations often will not carry much weight as so many times, students ask professors and the process is seemed more like a formality. I have seen letters before and I have seen embellishment on the side of recommenders and even cases where students are given the chance to write their own letters of recommendation. However, there are also many cases where LORs are well-written (by the actual faculty) and contain colorful examples that demonstrate why or how a student will contribute or be successful in medical school. If an LOR does this, I think this would be an extremely valuable asset to an application and will outweigh an average or perhaps even a poor PS. I suspect that interview decisions might even be made if an LOR contains something like "this student was one of the top 5 students I have taught in 500 student BIOC 4100 that I have taught for 7 yrs and in addition [input colorful examples] On the other hand, LORs can just as damaging as a negative LOR will literally serve as a big fat, STAY AWAY sign to an otherwise decent application. My friend actually had this happen to him (he was totally unaware of it) but luckily, his interviewer told him about his. (His results that cycle were 2 in-state interviews having applied to 19 schools w/ a 3.8 GPA and 36 MCAT (bal.) with all else being there for the most part..one acceptance, one wait list, and like 6 pre-interview rejections currently).
5. Profile. If you're not invited for an interview at a medical school you thought you were more than qualified for, realize that MCAT and GPA are just screening tools. Even if you've demonstrated a passion and have clinical experience there are unsaid factors schools are looking for. Also, in my opinion (that I don't vocalize often), I think medical schools somehow have knowledge of what the acceptance/waitlist/interview invite status of students elsewhere are as I've already heard of one such example from an adcom in PA. In addition, as publicized widely on SDN race, gender, etc. do play a factor as schools aim to keep the demographics somewhat balanced but there are certain demographics that are over-represented and under-represented. Also, something as simple as your interests may play a factor. For example, oftentimes schools may have already selected 3 students who are good marathoners and now might prefer a student who excels in another area. As another example, maybe the admissions statistics at present are 60% female and 40% male. In this scenario, male applicants will get the upper hand in admissions. Also, I think it goes without saying but any record of misconduct will definitely reflect very poorly on an otherwise decent application.
6. Things that people stress that I personally think are overrated:
1. Undergraduate Course load/schedule:
Simple Bio degree w/ minimal reqs filled and 12 credits each semester w/ a 4.0> Physiology Major taking advanced upper levels classes w/ a Biochemistry Minor with a 3.8
At the same time though, having two majors with one in a different fields and oftentimes having an engineering major is supposedly advantageous (not a huge one) but I have not seen an isolated example of this.
2. Prestige of Undergraduate Institution:
The elites will always carry respect but don't expect 0.3 to be added to your GPA because of attending one.
3. Overseas "medical" Trips:
Recently, it has even become conventional wisdom on SDN as well that these thousand dollar trips to foreign countries do not serve as a unique experience. You will, in fact, get dinged if you are found to have performed any medical duties that are above your head during these trips. You'll likely be doing more good volunteering at home. That being said, starting your own group, raising funds single-handedly, and fulfilling a planned and specific public health objective while making friends along the way is impressive and a different story.
Overall, the competition is harsh but staying humble and working hard while maintaining other constructive interests will put you in a good position moving forward. Oftentimes, the reason for your rejection can be silly and can be as simple as luck (as I discussed when talking about maintaining a balanced class) so it's best not to put judge oneself to harshly for (silent) rejections.
