CHECK THIS OUT

[JimmyD]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Found this link while surfing:

<a href="http://www.med.stanford.edu/senate/01-02/01-11-14%20Att%20B1%20Admissions%20Report.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.med.stanford.edu/senate/01-02/01-11-14%20Att%20B1%20Admissions%20Report.pdf</a>

 

[Luv Nietzsche]

Thanks for posting!

 

[simpleG]

good indepth look inside admissions. do you think stanford's method is very common among med schools

 

[JimmyD]

I'd imagine that Stanford's method may be similar to other schools that use the secondary as a weed out. I'm working out at UCLA this summer and my boss was on the ADCOM at Harvard. He said that the way it worked, at least when he was there, was that groups were assigned to review applicants from certain schools and then only applicants they approved would be considered by the committee as a whole. He emphasized the importance of the interview but, in no uncertain terms, stated that applicants, even after reaching the interview stage, were NOT on equal footing. If someone was just barely granted an interview, the interview itself becomes critical in admission. Less so for those that have higher stats. I know everyone is fond of providing (sometimes unsubstantiated) advice on the board. But this one was from the horse's mouth.

 

[applicant2003]

Wow, that was really interesting to read through. One thing I found very interesting was they listed sex as one of the variables when they consider an applicant. I thought it didn't matter much anymore since there are almost as many female applicants as male. Then later in the page it shows more women matriculants than men. I am a female applicant myself. Are female applicants looked at differently?

 

[simpleG]

thanks jimmy,

cool info thanks. yeah i think there is misinformation regarding admissions. i had heard somewhere that once you reach the interview stage, you're all at the same level, but your portrayal makes more sense.

 

[Mr.D]

You're not necessarily on equal footing when you interview for medical school. That's something that a lot of applicants believe (even I used to), but in reality it's a lot more complicated than that. Schools typically have applicants who they favor and others who they want to give a chance to "prove" themeselves during an interview, sort of a benefit of the doubt. Typically the interview is weighed a lot more heavily for these applicants. In sum the interview is not the grand equalizer we all would think it is.