Cornell MD -- Legacy a factor?

[Juicec]

Hey Folks, my wife currently attends Cornell as a JD applicant and is actually set to graduate the same year I plan to enter med school (hopefully). I was wondering if anyone has direct experience or heard from a friend of a friend... If the Cornell MD program considers, and how highly, any legacy from a direct family member? I know at their undergraduate level its a huge thing but I am hoping to gain some ground at this level as well.

Another quick question would be the fact that my wife is likely to get a job in NYC given her recent employment offers that have been coming in. With the Cornell Med school being in the city is there any additional weight put on my application because of my roots bringing and holding me to the city?

OK last one... final question being weight of a harder curriculum. A million and one threads, probably a million and two answers, but specifically for bioengineering for example, with what I would consider a fairly hard 4 year spit, would it/if so how much more would it be weighted then the average bio degree path? -- or possibly compared against less intensive paths such as literature.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[eli20]

You are not a legacy for Cornell MD because your wife was a Cornell JD...

The general consensus is that gpa matters more than perceived difficulty of a major/specific university, but there might be a slight adjustment from adcom to adcom.

And I know a lot of brilliant science kids who could barely function in a "less intensive" lit theory class. Lose your hierarchy.

 

[gettheleadout]

brb getting a dictionary for OP

 

[UpperEastSide]

Yeah, to be a legacy, the previous family generation is what matters.

 

[Juicec]

Well I do no that at an undergraduate level its simply "Has anyone in your family ever attended Cornell." There is nothing specific to which college or degree path, so based on your responses then they could careless she attended another graduate college within Cornell?

Any weight for having roots in NYC?

 

[indya]

Any weight for having roots in NYC?

no

 

[slatermd]

No idea about the legacy question, except that it refers to generational students (i.e. your parents/grandparents went there, they don't care about your wife)

Roots in NYC with the wife's job...not going to hurt you but don't count on it helping either. It certainly won't fill any holes in your application. Cornell could fill a class with Canadians willing to relocate; they're under no pressure to pick locally.

Bioengineering...won't matter at all unless your numbers are good enough for your application to get the initial review.

What I mean is, they're not going to be like, "3.3 lit major? Screened out. 3.3 bioengineering, let's give that a look!" However, if you had a 4.0 in bioengineering they might take the time to give you a cookie during your interview. At the end of the day, the 4.0 lit major has better chances than the 3.3 engineer, holding everything else constant.

 

[UpperEastSide]

Well I do no that at an undergraduate level its simply "Has anyone in your family ever attended Cornell." There is nothing specific to which college or degree path, so based on your responses then they could careless she attended another graduate college within Cornell?

Any weight for having roots in NYC?

No, because if you HAD to be in NY- try NYMC, SUNY, Albert Einsten, Stony Brook.. But cross your fingers for Cornell, Mount sinai, NYU, or Columbia

 

[Juicec]

Well I'm not just sitting here grasping at straws, I've been trying to build a quality application and I believe I'm getting there. I have 2 years remaining and a long way to go.

Cornell is a realistic goal at this time, I am simply wondering if the above would help to any degree. I was kind of thinking that during an interview process it might produce some talking points and alternate reasons for wanting to attend. But yeah of course, the initial interview wont happen without the numbers.

 

[bucks2010]

brb getting a dictionary for OP

lol.

I think the "state ties" factor is more likely to influence a state school like Downstate that is a little more inclined to produce physicians who will stay in NY.

 

[slatermd]

Well I'm not just sitting here grasping at straws, I've been trying to build a quality application and I believe I'm getting there. I have 2 years remaining and a long way to go.

Cornell is a realistic goal at this time, I am simply wondering if the above would help to any degree. I was kind of thinking that during an interview process it might produce some talking points and alternate reasons for wanting to attend. But yeah of course, the initial interview wont happen without the numbers.

Actually, some interviewers will ask "would you be comfortable living in this area?" as part of the small talk, or because the area legitimately sucks. I'd be surprised if Cornell wasted their breath on this, but hey if they do you've got the best answer: "I already am."

Good luck, OP. Keep your skin thick around this joint and you'll get any answers you need.

 

[Juicec]

Thanks for the advice 🙂

 

[LizzyM]

Being tied to the area because your wife is employed there might help in some "markets" but is unlikely to help in a location with multiple medical schools. Sometimes adcoms consider a need to live in that area to be a plus because they want to maximimize their yield (proportion of offers of admission that are accepted) but if you are admitted at Cornell it is more likely than not that you'll have at least one other offer in NYC and so the effect of admitting you on its yield is unpredictable.

 

[Zarika]

Just an n=1, but I didn't even get an interview at Cornell and my Mother and Grandfather went there. (Not to the med school though). Cornell was a stretch for me (3.7, 33) anyways, but I'm just giving you an example that without the right application, all the connections in the world aren't going to make much of a difference to such a competitive school.

 

[slatermd]

Being tied to the area because your wife is employed there might help in some "markets" but is unlikely to help in a location with multiple medical schools. Sometimes adcoms consider a need to live in that area to be a plus because they want to maximimize their yield (proportion of offers of admission that are accepted) but if you are admitted at Cornell it is more likely than not that you'll have at least one other offer in NYC and so the effect of admitting you on its yield is unpredictable.

This is exactly what I was trying to say. Sometimes roots do matter, but for Cornell there are too many other confounding variables for them to really factor this into your application.

 

[lavinia]

3.7 and 33 wasn't enough to even get you an interview at Cornell? Now I'm worried... do you know if they screened you out based on your numbers, or if they did a more holistic review before inviting for interviews? Also, did you apply early/late in the game?

 

[bucks2010]

I doubt it was a screening thing. It's just hard to set yourself apart applying to a school like Cornell where the median acceptee stats are 3.8/36, plus extracurricular quality.

 

[lavinia]

I just don't see that 3.7/33 is so different from a 3.8/36 that one would get an interview and the other wouldn't. I mean, 36 obviously sounds a lot better than a 33, but that's only 1 point better on each section of the MCAT. And 3.7 versus a 3.8 gpa is not exactly a significant difference...

 

[BadHorse]

3.7 and 33 wasn't enough to even get you an interview at Cornell?

ooph, you have some surprises in store.

 

[LizzyM]

I just don't see that 3.7/33 is so different from a 3.8/36 that one would get an interview and the other wouldn't. I mean, 36 obviously sounds a lot better than a 33, but that's only 1 point better on each section of the MCAT. And 3.7 versus a 3.8 gpa is not exactly a significant difference...

And thus the LizzyM score was born. So whereas the applicant has a LizzyM score of 70 the school comes in at 3.8(10)+36 - 1 = 73 so clearly the applicant would be a bit below average for that school. Maybe not deal breaking low but consider that Cornell has 5,500 applications for 777 interview spots to fill 101 seats.

 

[rhcarolina]

Just an n=1, but I didn't even get an interview at Cornell and my Mother and Grandfather went there. (Not to the med school though). Cornell was a stretch for me (3.7, 33) anyways, but I'm just giving you an example that without the right application, all the connections in the world aren't going to make much of a difference to such a competitive school.

I got wait listed with lower stats, but I had done a significant amount of research at the medical school. Applications are really more than the numbers...

 

[lavinia]

I'm not suggesting that the applicant had a great shot at getting in, just that their scores are not so low that it is a huge stretch. I would have hoped that, even having scores slightly below the school's average, the applicant would have been given a chance to interview and show what the applicant has that is special beyond those scores. But maybe that's wistful thinking?

 

[CardiacIntensivist]

I just don't see that 3.7/33 is so different from a 3.8/36 that one would get an interview and the other wouldn't. I mean, 36 obviously sounds a lot better than a 33, but that's only 1 point better on each section of the MCAT. And 3.7 versus a 3.8 gpa is not exactly a significant difference...

You sound like you are rationalizing without much knowledge about medical school admissions. My advice is to lurk more and gain more knowledge first. Your position is how bad advice gets circulated in this forums.

 

[lavinia]

You sound like you are rationalizing without much knowledge about medical school admissions. My advice is to lurk more and gain more knowledge first. Your position is how bad advice gets circulated in this forums.

Well, my concern is based on the assumption that the applicant was screened out based on his/her numbers. If that's not the case, then I think it's perfectly reasonable that someone with a 3.7/33 was not invited for an interview based on ECs, etc. I'm simply stating that I think it would be unwise to screen out an applicant with a 3.7/33 but interview an applicant with a 3.8/36 PURELY based on their stats.

 

[LizzyM]

I'm not suggesting that the applicant had a great shot at getting in, just that their scores are not so low that it is a huge stretch. I would have hoped that, even having scores slightly below the school's average, the applicant would have been given a chance to interview and show what the applicant has that is special beyond those scores. But maybe that's wistful thinking?

You try looking at 5,500 applications and narrowing it down to the 777 you can fit into the schedule for interviews. Which applicants will you give the chance and which 4,723 you will reject before interview? There are thousands of applicants with gpa >3.8 and MCAT >32. While one might not screen strictly on numbers, the point is that there are far more qualified candidates based on numbers, experinece, personal statement, etc than there are interview spots.

 

[slatermd]

Well, my concern is based on the assumption that the applicant was screened out based on his/her numbers. If that's not the case, then I think it's perfectly reasonable that someone with a 3.7/33 was not invited for an interview based on ECs, etc. I'm simply stating that I think it would be unwise to screen out an applicant with a 3.7/33 but interview an applicant with a 3.8/36 PURELY based on their stats.

WashU and Pritzker have something to say about this. You weren't selected to hear it though.

 

[lavinia]

Of course I see your point and I understand it's a very competitive process. But, like I said, my comments have been based on the assumption that the applicant was screened out based on their numbers. That may not have been the case (in fact, I would guess it probably wasn't-- it was more likely a combination of mediocre stats compared to the rest of the applicant pool along with other factors). Are you trying to tell me someone with a 3.7/33 has no shot at getting into Cornell? I don't think that's true either.

 

[rhcarolina]

washu and pritzker have something to say about this. You weren't selected to hear it though.

winning.

 

[Kaustikos]

Well, my concern is based on the assumption that the applicant was screened out based on his/her numbers. If that's not the case, then I think it's perfectly reasonable that someone with a 3.7/33 was not invited for an interview based on ECs, etc. I'm simply stating that I think it would be unwise to screen out an applicant with a 3.7/33 but interview an applicant with a 3.8/36 PURELY based on their stats.

You're cute

 

[rhcarolina]

Are you trying to tell me someone with a 3.7/33 has no shot at getting into Cornell?

No, no one is saying that.

 

[LizzyM]

Of course I see your point and I understand it's a very competitive process. But, like I said, my comments have been based on the assumption that the applicant was screened out based on their numbers. That may not have been the case (in fact, I would guess it probably wasn't-- it was more likely a combination of mediocre stats compared to the rest of the applicant pool along with other factors). Are you trying to tell me someone with a 3.7/33 has no shot at getting into Cornell? I don't think that's true either.

mdapplicants.com

Search Profiles
You searched for applicants who:
Had a Total MCAT between 31 and 34, had an Overall GPA between 3.65 and 3.75, had a Science GPA between 3.65 and 3.75, were accepted and applied to Cornell University.

Your search generated 0 result.


Never say never but it would be a long shot, perhaps.

So, I dropped the science gpa to >3.0 and turned up 5 admissions, including 3 in the 2010 cycle. However, they were from top undergrad (Stanford, Cornell) and had amazing backgrounds.

 

[lavinia]

mdapplicants.com

Search Profiles
You searched for applicants who:
Had a Total MCAT between 31 and 34, had an Overall GPA between 3.65 and 3.75, had a Science GPA between 3.65 and 3.75, were accepted and applied to Cornell University.

Your search generated 0 result.


Never say never but it would be a long shot, perhaps.

So, I dropped the science gpa to >3.0 and turned up 5 admissions, including 3 in the 2010 cycle. However, they were from top undergrad (Stanford, Cornell) and had amazing backgrounds.

I was told otherwise by my pre-medical advisor (based on applicant logs from the past 3 years at my school), but perhaps you're right.

In any case, I didn't mean to hijack this thread. Sorry, OP.

 

[FrazzleSnazzle]

OP, I'm gonna contradict with most of the other posters in this thread and say that there actually can be some legacy factor in family members of the same generation as you, not just with parents/grandparents. At Columbia, there are quite a few people in my class who also have older siblings in school and/or younger ones coming in next year, way more than for it to just be a coincidence. Of course, these cases all involved the relative being specifically at Columbia med school (not just any school of Columbia) and there probably is a difference between a significant other being at a school and a blood relative being there. And I have no clue if Cornell's admissions carries these same factors as well, just saying that it does exist at a similar school in the same area.

Well, my concern is based on the assumption that the applicant was screened out based on his/her numbers. If that's not the case, then I think it's perfectly reasonable that someone with a 3.7/33 was not invited for an interview based on ECs, etc. I'm simply stating that I think it would be unwise to screen out an applicant with a 3.7/33 but interview an applicant with a 3.8/36 PURELY based on their stats.

No offense, but there IS a pretty significantly big difference between a 3.7/33 and a 3.8/36. Maybe if you just altered one of those two factors (i.e, 3.7/36 vs. 3.8/36), those candidates would be considered relatively similar stats-wise. But the reason why admissions committees place so much emphasis on both GPA and MCAT scores is because the two things require very different abilities and skills to succeed in and they want to see your record in both those departments. If one candidate was less qualified than another in not just one but both of those stats, it would give the committee pretty big incentive to pick the candidate with the higher stats.

 

[lavinia]

I was told otherwise by my pre-medical advisor (based on applicant logs from the past 3 years at my school), but perhaps you're right.

In any case, I didn't mean to hijack this thread. Sorry, OP.

Oh wait, sorry LizzyM, you updated your message while I was replying.

 

[lavinia]

No offense, but there IS a pretty significantly big difference between a 3.7/33 and a 3.8/36. Maybe if you just altered one of those two factors (i.e, 3.7/36 vs. 3.8/36), those candidates would be considered relatively similar stats-wise. But the reason why admissions committees place so much emphasis on both GPA and MCAT scores is because the two things require very different abilities and skills to succeed in and they want to see your record in both those departments. If one candidate was less qualified than another in not just one but both of those stats, it would give the committee pretty big incentive to pick the candidate with the higher stats.

Okay... I guess I'm hijacking this for a little longer.

So, if someone were to have around a 3.7 gpa and a 33 mcat, would it make a big difference to retake the mcat and get the score up to a 36? Most people I've talked to (including my pre-medical advisor) do not think it will make much of a difference, but this information would suggest otherwise. Asking in earnest. I would actually agree with you, FrazzleSnazzle, but I have been told so many times that it would make no difference that I am not so sure anymore.

 

[FrazzleSnazzle]

Okay... I guess I'm hijacking this for a little longer.

So, if someone were to have around a 3.7 gpa and a 33 mcat, would it make a big difference to retake the mcat and get the score up to a 36? Most people I've talked to (including my pre-medical advisor) do not think it will make much of a difference, but this information would suggest otherwise. Asking in earnest.

Well first of all, I would not suggest retaking the MCAT if you have a 33. Getting any score above a 30 (and assuming an adequate GPA) will pretty much guarantee you an acceptance into a med school. It will probably make it hard for you to get into a top-tier school (like Cornell) but you'll have over a 90% chance of getting in somewhere. Retaking it again just to get a higher score is not only a huge risk (you can't guarantee you'll do that well again) but it will make adcoms see you as petty and perfectionist, which are not qualities that you want to display.

That being said, if there were two otherwise completely equal applicants and on their first tries taking the MCAT, one got a 33 and the other got a 36, the applicant with the 36 would have a much higher chance of getting into a top-tier school. The issue is that there will probably never be a situation where the two applicants are completely equal like that. The 33-score applicant could have better grades and ECs, have gone to college at a more renowned institution, be a resident of of a state that is more advantageous, be a better essay-writer, have better LORs, etc. It is entirely possible for a 33 applicant to get an interview while a 36 applicant does not. However, all of that is based on arbitrary and hard-to-quantify factors, and a lot of it is also due to luck. Thus, from an objective and statistical point of view, I would say the 36 applicant has a better chance.

 

[bucks2010]

I was told otherwise by my pre-medical advisor

Here's your prob.

My pre-med advisor told me that I needed >=40 MCAT to have a decent shot at going OOS. (and the rest of my application isn't bad)

Take everything you hear with a grain of salt.

I would follow others' suggestions to lurk/learn a little longer - it will benefit you in the long run. There are some ... "outliers" around here in terms of advice and whatnot but overall you'll find plenty of people with good advice for you (LizzyM being one of them).

 

[Zarika]

Opps, I didn't mean to stir up such a big discussion. Sorry about that. All I was trying to say, OP, was that the legacy thing certainly can't hurt, but don't count on it to make up for any "flaws" in your application. If you still have two more years before applying, spend those two years to make your application Cornell-quality if you want a good shot at Cornell (and even then it won't be any guarantee.)

I'm sure ppl did get interviewed/accepted at Cornell with worse numbers, but I had decent/standard ECs and decent stats so it just wasn't top-tier material (which I knew when I applied.)

 

[Juicec]

haha, thanks for all the input folks. Pretty quality hijack if I've ever seen one. My main goal was to try to get input from an assortment of different areas given I presume most of you guys aren't actually adcoms?

Being in NYC Cornell isn't my only option obviously, there are many fantastic schools in the city. Many of which I would assume would give credit for these "roots." Preference is placed with Cornell given my interest in the school but with my current grades, EC's and practice MCAT scores (I hate standardized tests -_-) I believe as mentioned above Cornell to still be in my sights.

I look forward to progressing forward with the thinking that "roots" and "legacy" may play a factor, possibly even with schools the likes of Cornell with the right adcom but is by no means a determining factor alone.

Thanks again.