Changing the System - Transparency in Admissons

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
How did a thread about admissions transparency turn into a debate over URMs in medicine? If you don't like it, don't apply. That will show those admission committees you mean business.

Back on transparency...UMichigan's admissions process/office is awesome.
Members don't see this ad.
 
gobroncos123 said:
How did a thread about admissions transparency turn into a debate over URMs in medicine? If you don't like it, don't apply. That will show those admission committees you mean business.

Back on transparency...UMichigan's admissions process/office is awesome.
Click to expand...


:thumbup::thumbup:. Why do you think its awesome? Because it prevents applicants from knowing and feeling comfortable?
 
texasm said:
The thing I hate the most:

1 - Someone starts a very promising thread.
2 - A responder derails it and diverts it to discussing a non-productive and controversial topic like affirmative action.
3 - Everyone else starts arguing and debating about affirmative action
4 - A beautiful thread is destroyed.
Click to expand...

To be fair this thread never stood a chance:
1) There is no universal reason for schools being so 'secretive' and anything claiming otherwise would be purely conjecture
2) Even if the SDN community were to form a consensus, we have absolutely no pull and nothing would be changed
 
Members don't see this ad :)
aSagacious said:
To be fair this thread never stood a chance:
1) There is no universal reason for schools being so 'secretive' and anything claiming otherwise would be purely conjecture
2) Even if the SDN community were to form a consensus, we have absolutely no pull and nothing would be changed
Click to expand...

Saggy... you forgot to mention that we wouldn't have anything to discuss then.
 
CodeBlu said:
Saggy... you forgot to mention that we wouldn't have anything to discuss then.
Click to expand...

Tons, like:
- I've been verified for 6 days, 3 hours, 24 minutes... why haven't I been invited for an interview yet?
- Which med school should I go to if I want to be a cardiothoracic surgeon?
- If my study partner in gen chem was an Illinois resident, does that count as strong state ties?
 
I'm surprised no one has reverted to placing

n) Profit

to the list. Pretty standard SDN.

I think discussing these topics is important and keeps a lot of us sharp on different stances and opinions. There is a lot of knowledge on these boards and even if we don't learn much, someone will glance at this and their opinions may change.

What is the issue with transparency? Afraid of the unknown?
 
rossbossss said:
:thumbup::thumbup:. Why do you think its awesome? Because it prevents applicants from knowing and feeling comfortable?
Click to expand...

UMich has an admissions tracker on their front page, which is updated regularly so you can see where things stand as time goes on. This is better than most schools which offer nothing of the sort.

Plus, they move very fast in the admissions process. Fast is good.
 
What the hell happened here? OP praises transparency in medical school apps, and literally the first response is about affirmative action.
 
For whoever cares, here's LizzyM's breakdown of how admissions works. As you can see, by the nature of the process it is labor-intensive and time-consuming. I might speculate that the reason for the apparent secrecy is nothing more than a lack of time/resources to provide something analogous to UMich.
 
aSagacious said:
For whoever cares, here's LizzyM's breakdown of how admissions works. As you can see, by the nature of the process it is labor-intensive and time-consuming. I might speculate that the reason for the apparent secrecy is nothing more than a lack of time/resources to provide something analogous to UMich.
Click to expand...

I'm not buying that. How long it that have possibly taken her to write that?
 
aSagacious said:
For whoever cares, here's LizzyM's breakdown of how admissions works. As you can see, by the nature of the process it is labor-intensive and time-consuming. I might speculate that the reason for the apparent secrecy is nothing more than a lack of time/resources to provide something analogous to UMich.
Click to expand...

I agree, but if one school can do it, it means it's doable. I think part of it is that schools have their established systems for doing things and the hardest part would probably be changing. Because if you think about it admission offices hardly have a break. By the time they have a full class of people who will matriculate, the next group of people have already begun applying.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
RookTookIt said:
I'm not buying that. How long it that have possibly taken her to write that?
Click to expand...

Not buying it?

Listen... LizzyM is an amazing resource. She is helpful, blunt at times, but honest. She has contributed A LOT to this community. What is with people hating on someone for writing a long post?

Some people contribute, others don't. Either way, I'm sure you've used the LizzyM score or you will. You will come across Lizzy's advice in this forum a lot. She doesn't have to do this. But she wants to. So don't talk about what you don't know.
 
aSagacious said:
:confused: Why do you care how long it took her to write this post? I was talking about the time needed to evaluate/organize/update applications.
Click to expand...

I only care because you suggest the reason that schools don't provide transparency is due to lack of time/resources. But even something as simple as LizzyM's post (which takes very little time/resources and doesn't need to be written during file review time) could be listed in any given school's admissions page.

aSagacious said:
For whoever cares, here's LizzyM's breakdown of how admissions works. As you can see, by the nature of the process it is labor-intensive and time-consuming. I might speculate that the reason for the apparent secrecy is nothing more than a lack of time/resources to provide something analogous to UMich.
Click to expand...
 
CodeBlu said:
Not buying it?

Listen... LizzyM is an amazing resource. She is helpful, blunt at times, but honest. She has contributed A LOT to this community. What is with people hating on someone for writing a long post?

Some people contribute, others don't. Either way, I'm sure you've used the LizzyM score or you will. You will come across Lizzy's advice in this forum a lot. She doesn't have to do this. But she wants to. So don't talk about what you don't know.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you guys misunderstand me. Everything that comes out of LizzyM is gold -- no doubt about that. I just don't buy that lack of time/resources is why schools aren't more transparent about their process.
 
RookTookIt said:
Sorry, you guys misunderstand me. Everything that comes out of LizzyM is gold -- no doubt about that. I just don't buy that lack of time/resources is why schools aren't more transparent about their process.
Click to expand...

Most admissions offices do have a lack of time/resources.

Not all schools have as much money as the University of Michigan. Their admissions office seems to be one of the best run in the country.
 
CodeBlu said:
Not buying it?

Listen... LizzyM is an amazing resource. She is helpful, blunt at times, but honest. She has contributed A LOT to this community. What is with people hating on someone for writing a long post?

Some people contribute, others don't. Either way, I'm sure you've used the LizzyM score or you will. You will come across Lizzy's advice in this forum a lot. She doesn't have to do this. But she wants to. So don't talk about what you don't know.
Click to expand...

I think he means that if LizzyM can make a post detailing her schools admissions process within a few minutes, then how can staffs at med schools claim that they don't have the time or resources to do so.
 
RookTookIt said:
I only care because you suggest the reason that schools don't provide transparency is due to lack of time/resources. But even something as simple as LizzyM's post (which takes very little time/resources and doesn't need to be written during file review time) could be listed in any given school's admissions page.
Click to expand...

Valid point.
 
RookTookIt said:
Sorry, you guys misunderstand me. Everything that comes out of LizzyM is gold -- no doubt about that. I just don't buy that lack of time/resources is why schools aren't more transparent about their process.
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you haven't been on any interviews yet. The fact is that many admissions offices are woefully understaffed. They might have one or two secretaries and a few high level people and that's it. Sure, they recruit people to read and review applications but those people have other commitments. Also keep in mind that many schools receive upwards of 4000-5000 applications that must be at least superficially reviewed.

I'm not justifying some of the things some schools do, but if you think they're being disingenuous when they say that they don't have resources, I don't think you have a clear picture of what things look like. It's nothing like undergrad admissions where they have gobs of time and money to dedicate to the process.
 
CodeBlu said:
Most admissions offices do have a lack of time/resources.

Not all schools have as much money as the University of Michigan. Their admissions office seems to be one of the best run in the country.
Click to expand...

I think when we talk about transparency, it doesn't have to be quite as extensive as UM. For example, UW has a very extensive admissions faq that is extremely helpful that probably didn't take that long to write and put on a webpage.here's the link if anyone is interested.

http://uwmedicine.washington.edu/Education/MD-Program/Admissions/Pages/FrequentlyAskedQuestions.aspx
 
CodeBlu said:
Med schools like to be vague...

here's a humorous video though about affirmative action..

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWS_MDJSiEE[/YOUTUBE]


I like UMich's transparency as well. But truth be told, the adcoms I've spoken to say "Yes, now you and your application are at our mercy."

Diversity is the name of the game. I agree with including members of URMs, because the white guy isn't going to go help a clinic in the ghetto. What I don't agree with is that the African American guy who climbs the medical ladder and forgets where he came from. A sell out if you know what I mean. These people get up and out of the hood, and that's a good thing. But for them, it's all out of sight and out of mind.
Click to expand...

I see what you saying Code Blu :) and I sort of agree with your statement and I am an AA from an urban area in New York
 
aSagacious said:
To be fair this thread never stood a chance:
1) There is no universal reason for schools being so 'secretive' and anything claiming otherwise would be purely conjecture
2) Even if the SDN community were to form a consensus, we have absolutely no pull and nothing would be changed
Click to expand...

I highly disagree with this statement. Provided we make it through, we will be the next generation of physicians/faculty/adcom members who will be either changing the system or maintaining the status quo. Even as pre-medical/medical students we have a voice and deserve to be considered. Advocacy is an intrinsic part of what you'll be doing as a physician (for your patients) but can and should be applied broadly (science education, research funding, etc.)

I hope your personal statement wasn't quite so nihilistic about effecting change. Remember: "Whether you think you can, or you think you can't--you're right." - H.F.
 
NickNaylor said:
I'm guessing you haven't been on any interviews yet. The fact is that many admissions offices are woefully understaffed. They might have one or two secretaries and a few high level people and that's it. Sure, they recruit people to read and review applications but those people have other commitments. Also keep in mind that many schools receive upwards of 4000-5000 applications that must be at least superficially reviewed.

I'm not justifying some of the things some schools do, but if you think they're being disingenuous when they say that they don't have resources, I don't think you have a clear picture of what things look like. It's nothing like undergrad admissions where they have gobs of time and money to dedicate to the process.
Click to expand...

Not the case. I understand completely, but I still believe there is a better way to do things. I mean, some things that I mentioned take ZERO time/resources (i.e. telling someone where they fall on a ranked waitlist). I'm sure schools have their reasons for keeping much of the admissions process a secret, but I don't think we can just jump to lack of time/resources as the explanation. And 5000 applications is maybe $300,000 in app fees. I would be happy to donate mine (especially at schools where I don't meet the cutoff anyway) for somebody to spend a few minutes typing something up on a webpage.
 
dermocrat88 said:
Good, Good and you're always on SDN lol

Any by transparency what do we exactly mean?
Click to expand...

I am an SDN addict with things to say.

Transparency meaning... knowing what's happening to your application at different stages. How many interviews they've given out... what criteria they use for admissions... secret formulas to calculate your admissions average.
 
So, realistically, what should be expected from a school?
- FAQ page (pre-reqs, LORs, timeline, etc)
- Class profile (MCAT, cGPA, sGPA, IS/OOS)
- About us (research institutions, nearby hospitals, affiliated programs)
- Applicant status page

... to the last point I might add, how arbitrarily specific are we asking?
- updates after every committee meeting
- interviews+acceptances given (similar to UMich)
- updates after all interview invites have been given
- ranked waitlist (thirds, quartiles, numerical ranking)

It's easy for a school to have an automatically generated email for an individual's status changes, but running cumulative applicant pool figures/stats are no small feat.
 
I know of a certain school in Canada. The University of Western Ontario... they receive 2000 applications every year.

They have MCAT and GPA cut offs and they make them no secret. They have preference for people from the region that their school is in, to promote health care delivery in that area.

The MCAT and GPA cut offs are 8-8-8-O for someone from the region... but they must have a total score of 30.

For applicants that are not from the region the cut offs are
PS- 9
VR- 11
BS - 10
Total - 30

The GPA criteria is strict for both applicant pools at a 3.75.

Meet the criteria, you get an interview offer. Don't meet the criteria... rejected outright.

Post interview their admissions formula is 25% MCAT (only VR and WS) + 25% your GPA + 50% your interview score.


I know this because my cousin attends this school currently. It seems to be working well for them.

Now you ask... what about people who have crappy GPAs... good thing you asked... they will look at your BEST two years GPA only. So if your GPA looked like this...

Freshman - 2.60
Sophomore - 2.25
Junior - 3.89
Senior - 3.98

Your junior and senior years would be used. Essentially it's a post-bacc if you already have a degree. Get two good years of school and apply.

Oh and there are no pre-reqs at this school either. My cousin did NOT take organic chemistry. (I'm a lot jelly)
 
aSagacious said:
So, realistically, what should be expected from a school?
- FAQ page (pre-reqs, LORs, timeline, etc)
- Class profile (MCAT, cGPA, sGPA, IS/OOS)
- About us (research institutions, nearby hospitals, affiliated programs)
- Applicant status page

... to the last point I might add, how arbitrarily specific are we asking?
- updates after every committee meeting
- interviews+acceptances given (similar to UMich)
- updates after all interview invites have been given
- ranked waitlist (thirds, quartiles, numerical ranking)

It's easy for a school to have an automatically generated email for an individual's status changes, but running cumulative applicant pool figures/stats are no small feat.
Click to expand...

I think if wait-lists should be ranked. If not, at the very least, the schools should detail the process by which they will choose people from the waitlist. And also provide data on how many people were chosen from the waitlist in previous years.

Also a solid timeline of post-interview events would be nice. At one of my state schools they tell everyone during their interview day the exact date in which you will hear of a decision.
 
ilton said:
I think if wait-lists should be ranked. If not, at the very least, the schools should detail the process by which they will choose people from the waitlist. And also provide data on how many people were chosen from the waitlist in previous years.

Also a solid timeline of post-interview events would be nice. At one of my state schools they tell everyone during their interview day the exact date in which you will hear of a decision.
Click to expand...

This. Applicants deserve to know.
 
When I interviewed at UW, I received amongst the normal portfolio material, a 10-page spreadsheet of statistics, including organized race, undergraduate institute, majors with applicant, matriculant, and acceptance data. Almost every single combination of demographics was available with associated application chances and percentages. It was a class profile on crack.

That kind of data is available on a computer somewhere in every admission office. They just choose not to share it, except for UW, and that was late in the admission process.
 
pkwraith said:
When I interviewed at UW, I received amongst the normal portfolio material, a 10-page spreadsheet of statistics, including organized race, undergraduate institute, majors with applicant, matriculant, and acceptance data. Almost every single combination of demographics was available with associated application chances and percentages. It was a class profile on crack.

That kind of data is available on a computer somewhere in every admission office. They just choose not to share it, except for UW, and that was late in the admission process.
Click to expand...

I think that would make me paranoid. :laugh:
 
RookTookIt said:
I'll try also.

There should definitely be more transparency in this process. My three biggest concerns:
- Schools should take a little more consideration into who they give secondaries. If you don't meet their (unstated) cutoffs, they shouldn't be taking your money. (VCU is awesome about their secondary.)
- Many schools do calculations of some sort to determine if you'll be invited to interview or if you'll be accepted post-interview. Depending on the school, these calculations will weigh more heavily on certain factors. Why is it such a secret what each schools thinks is important in an applicant? People on SDN always say to save money by only applying to schools where you are a fit, but it seems impossible to determine where I'll be a good fit if schools aren't going to tell me what they're looking for.
- Ranked waitlists where they refuse to tell you your rank. Give me a break.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what you mean ;). It's frustrating as hell, and is a complete mystery the entire waitlist season about how firm to make your second choice plans for the upcoming year. I don't need to necessarily know that I'm number 42, but that im in the second quarter would be nice.

I'll also add that since we pay insane fees for some schools ($130 Dartmouth, whassup?) they should tell us specifically what we got rejected for pre-interview. I know some schools will meet with you and tell you, but others won't. One school I was rejected from claimed you could find out, but when I called she just read off a list of the things they looked for (it was literally as generic as "community service, health care experience, research helps"... and I had those things listed on my app already).
 
I admit I haven't read all the posts on this thread, but I do think med school applicants deserve a little more respect. I went through a cycle in 2008-2009 where I spent thousands of dollars, paid for my own travel fees for interviews (compare this to prospective grad students or even some MD/PhD-MSTP students), and sometimes don't even get the decency of a rejection letter. I also think that some of these schools "know," perhaps just based on your numbers and your CV, that you stand a very low chance of getting in, but not only do they make you fill out the automated secondaries, but they don't really communicate to you for months and months... if ever.

I know that they have financial incentives to do this, and given the number of eager premeds every year, they don't have an incentive to make any changes to the system, but that doesn't make it any less frustrating!! But it makes me so sad to see how people who are applying to grad school programs: don't spend nearly as much money/time on applications, don't have to wait as long to hear back, don't have as high a high chance of not getting in anywhere, get PAID to travel for interviews, and are treated so nicely when they do go for a school visit.
 
luckyducky87 said:
I admit I haven't read all the posts on this thread, but I do think med school applicants deserve a little more respect. I went through a cycle in 2008-2009 where I spent thousands of dollars, paid for my own travel fees for interviews (compare this to prospective grad students or even some MD/PhD-MSTP students), and sometimes don't even get the decency of a rejection letter. I also think that some of these schools "know," perhaps just based on your numbers and your CV, that you stand a very low chance of getting in, but not only do they make you fill out the automated secondaries, but they don't really communicate to you for months and months... if ever.

I know that they have financial incentives to do this, and given the number of eager premeds every year, they don't have an incentive to make any changes to the system, but that doesn't make it any less frustrating!! But it makes me so sad to see how people who are applying to grad school programs: don't spend nearly as much money/time on applications, don't have to wait as long to hear back, don't have as high a high chance of not getting in anywhere, get PAID to travel for interviews, and are treated so nicely when they do go for a school visit.
Click to expand...

Very valid points.
 
The problem with this is that schools have absolutely no incentive to change anything. They could make the process more ridiculous if they wanted to, because that's going to deter very few if any people from applying.

We can make all these nice, lovely suggestions and draft a SDN declaration, but it's not going to matter. Schools do the things they do for a reason. Right or wrong, it works for them, and that's really all that matters.
 
Here's one thing that everyone can do. After interviews and before matriculation, most schools have feedback processes where you can comment on their admission process. Just give honest truthful comments about what was good about the process at each school and what could be improved. Don't just blow it off.

And of course, don't forget thank you letters to the admission director/staff. There were a few schools that I have had great process with (prompt updates, great communication), and I made sure to let them know that it was very much appreciated.

Many schools are making changes to their process, and it's important to give them appropriate feedback for them to find the right balance.
 
Too much transparency is bad. If they were completely honest and open about the admission process then they would need to be brutally honest to people about the reason why they didn't get accepted. Stuff like favoring specific applicants over others, regardless of their stats.

And also it might get messy with URM's. Since then you will see certain URM's being favored over others ones. And honestly, I doubt that is the information most would not want to see. I know I wouldn't. I rather not be reminded how my life is "perfect" compared to others. I already have predetermined "white guilt" as it is, I don't need to feel worthless because I don't have a terminal disease, didn't grow up in a ****ty environment with ****ty parents, etc.

So as a healthy white man with non-divorced parents that did not have a ****ty upbringing, I am okay with not knowing that if I was "lucky" enough to have a rough childhood or has some terminal disease that my chances of being admitted would have been better off.
 
MeowMeowCAT said:
Too much transparency is bad. If they were completely honest and open about the admission process then they would need to be brutally honest to people about the reason why they didn't get accepted. Stuff like favoring specific applicants over others, regardless of their stats.

And also it might get messy with URM's. Since then you will see certain URM's being favored over others ones. And honestly, I doubt that is the information most would not want to see. I know I wouldn't. I rather not be reminded how my life is "perfect" compared to others. I already have predetermined "white guilt" as it is, I don't need to feel worthless because I don't have a terminal disease, didn't grow up in a ****ty environment with ****ty parents, etc.

So as a healthy white man with non-divorced parents that did not have a ****ty upbringing, I am okay with not knowing that if I was "lucky" enough to have a rough childhood or has some terminal disease that my chances of being admitted would have been better off.
Click to expand...

I think we (at least I do) mean transparency about the process not the reasons behind decision making during that process.
 
Too few paid employees and too little time. Very true.

No incentive to be transparent. No vision of what it could be. No desire to spend money on IT to build something that is not essential. (The administrators that approve the admissions office budget don't entertain the idea of frills in these tight times... and those thousands paid in fees go to central administration, not to the adcom office directly-- basically, those fees are paying for the flowerbeds outside the administration building and lots of other things, too).

Not all waitlists are ranked. Furthermore, the rank can change not only by taking people from the top but by having people in the middle drop out because they've been accepted to another school that they prefer over this one. Many schools don't have ranked wait lists and use the choices from the waitlist to social engineer the class (more women than men accepted offers, choose only men from the waitlist to achieve balance).

And knowing how many came off the waitlist last year means nothing. It is like those disclaimers for investments "past performance is no guarantee of future returns".... I've seen the same school take 2 from the waitlist one year and 50 the next, and none the year after that.

Things can change on a dime... if there are a load of excellent candidates at the end of the season, several interview days cancelled due to snow, a VIP's kid who needs to get interviewed to save the Provost's office from imploding, etc, then there might be an extra interview day shoehorned into the schedule at the end of the season.... how would you deal with that in a transparent system?


Advertised cut points would be nice but some schools like the luxury of taking a look at an exceptional student who doesn't meet the cut point but who has life experiences that make them attractive to the school... I'm not just talking URM but bunches of other things too (including being born into a wealthy local dynasty). Many times those interviews are a courtesy and despite the b.s. that if you get an interview you are admissable, there are times when we hold our noses and interview someone because someone "upstairs" has requested the we give the application "every consideration". I doubt those account for more than 3 interviews per year though so it isn't as if many people are shunted aside for the VIPs.
 
Wouldn't publishing data on ECs and time spent on research/shadowing/volunteering for a certain school create cookie cutter applicants?
 
CodeBlu said:
Med schools like to be vague...

here's a humorous video though about affirmative action..

[YOUTUBE]hWS_MDJSiEE[/YOUTUBE]


I like UMich's transparency as well. But truth be told, the adcoms I've spoken to say "Yes, now you and your application are at our mercy."

Diversity is the name of the game. I agree with including members of URMs, because the white guy isn't going to go help a clinic in the ghetto. What I don't agree with is that the African American guy who climbs the medical ladder and forgets where he came from. A sell out if you know what I mean. These people get up and out of the hood, and that's a good thing. But for them, it's all out of sight and out of mind.
Click to expand...
how'd you get from transparency to this random bull**** rant on URMs? wtf is wrong with you
 
texasm said:
I have heard others speak of LizzyM. Who is LizzyM by the way? Is she an adcom only because she and the others say she is or does she also have an institutional affiliation that can be shared? And I ask this question respectfully but curiously.
Click to expand...

SDN members who claim to be attending physicians or faculty members are screened by moderators. It is against the rules of the forum to inquire as to where they work, though (for the sake of anonymity).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

premadbaddie
Changing Address/State Residency
Replies
0
Views
255
premadbaddie
premadbaddie
E
Changing a letter of interest to a letter of Intent?
Replies
2
Views
488
Moko
Moko
oatmilkplease
Current state of US health system and policy
Replies
3
Views
666
pablo213
pablo213
N
Is hospital staffing a valid problem with the US healthcare system to discuss in interviews?
Replies
11
Views
1K
Rector
R
N
Change in immigration status in the middle of the cycle- how to update schools?
Replies
7
Views
665
notanorthobro
N
Top