Critiquing "Application Renovation"

Med School Insiders
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
M

MyOdyssey

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2015
Messages
2,132
Reaction score
1,388




A premed consultant with a popular YouTube Channel ("Application Renovation") centers each episode on critiquing the failed application of high stat applicants.

His general advice: (a) activities should always include a "story" illustrating the activity's impact on an applicant, (b) the personal statement should also "show, not tell" by using storytelling to explain why medicine.

I'm curious to hear what the SDN community has to say about this advice. I recall some ad coms opining that telling a story often comes across badly.

It seems to me the consultant pays too little attention to school list. The first student only applied to 4 schools. The second student - an uber high stats applicant with a 4.0/521 didn't apply to Wash U/NYU/Northwestern/Hopkins/Yale and a host of other high stat schools. The consultant focuses on the wording of activities and personal statement to the exclusion of correcting the school list. Your thoughts?
Members don't see this ad.
 
I find his advice generally helpful but there is no way you can put "stories" in every single activities. Not only there is a character limit but sometimes it doesn't make much sense to out stories rather than a solid description and a reflection aka what you learned.
 
Clint Southern said:
I find his advice generally helpful but there is no way you can put "stories" in every single activities. Not only there is a character limit but sometimes it doesn't make much sense to out stories rather than a solid description and a reflection aka what you learned.
Click to expand...
Making everything a story comes across as hokey if it's done for 10+ activities.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Personally, as a re-applicant, I gained a lot from watching Dr. Gray's Application Renovation series and his "show not tell" philosophy. I know many more students did too. I remember binge-watching the episodes lol. Very informative imo.

He looks at every aspect of the primary application (school lists included). In a lot more of his videos, he often encourages students to apply to schools based on stats and state of residence.
 
farfaraway said:
Personally, as a re-applicant, I gained a lot from watching Dr. Gray's Application Renovation series and his "show not tell" philosophy. I know many more students did too. I remember binge-watching the episodes lol. Very informative imo.

He looks at every aspect of the primary application (school lists included). In a lot more of his videos, he often encourages students to apply to schools based on stats and state of residence.
Click to expand...
I've watched several of his videos and he seems consistent in strongly advising AGAINST using stats to pick a school list. I have to disagree with this advice.

I don't think personal statements carry as much weight as he believes. Several adcoms on SDN have said that PSs should just be a mildly pleasant memory.

Dr. Gray is right to emphasize the importance of getting real solid clinical experience.
 
MyOdyssey said:
I've watched several of his videos and he seems consistent in strongly advising AGAINST using stats to pick a school list. I have to disagree with this advice.

I don't think personal statements carry as much weight as he believes. Several adcoms on SDN have said that PSs should just be a mildly pleasant memory.

Dr. Gray is right to emphasize the importance of getting real solid clinical experience.
Click to expand...
I agree with you but I think personal statement can carry a huge weight if you write it well and have a fascinating/unique story. Otherwise they are probably all very similar.
 
I haven't watched these videos, but I have occasionally heard Dr. Gray's podcasts. I happened to listen to one this morning in which he railed against what is sometimes a singular focus on GPA and MCAT scores in med applicant forums. His point wasn't that the stats don't count, but that there is so much more to a successful medical school application (and applicant) than those two numbers.

Frankly I agree with him. I have interviewed many med school admissions deans and directors. When asked what makes an app come alive for them, most talk about the critical role played by essays and fit with their schools' mission. And if you pay attention to the posts from adcom on SDN you'll see that they are not saying the numbers don't count, but they are not all that counts. There is so much that counts in addition to the numbers. Numbers are concrete. They are easy to understand. They are easy to point too.

But a medical school application (and a successful applicant) is multi-faceted and complex. There are subtle, nuanced elements to it, and those elements are not concrete, easy to understand, or easy to point to. Do you have to show in your application that you will be able to do the work? Yes. But is your final GPA from undergrad and your current MCAT determinative? The final word? No. You can change both if you aren't satisfied with them.

And if you are satisfied with them, what about other elements in your qualifications? clinical exposure? commitment to service? community engagement? Service to the underserved? teamwork? communications skills? Fit with the specific school you are applying to? Character? Grit? Resilience? Are they what they should be? Are they revealed in your application?

And finally if you feel that in all areas you are competitive at your target schools, are you presenting your qualifications effectively? No you don't need to write Shakespearean English. They don't want to read it. But are you writing clearly? Going beyond superficial answers that will make you look like every other applicant?

The numbers can get you to the door. They can keep you out, but they can't get you in.
 
I think Desai’s materials are much more helpful. Nothing against Dr. Gray, but I learned more from browsing SDN. Desai had some good tidbits that I wouldn’t have learned from here
 
MyOdyssey said:
Quien?
Click to expand...
Vox is talking about Samir Desai, who's written a number of books on interviewing and other med admissions stuff as well as stuff about succeeding in medical school--the interview books are where I know him from, and I would say there's some pretty decent info in there.
 
My general impression of Dr. Gray is that he gives wonderful advice for the average applicant and mediocre or even outright bad advice for wonderful applicants. In one of his videos, he mentions that the important of research is highly overstated in med school apps, and says it's completely fine to not mention research at all in personal statements. He generally advises not to focus too much on research in your application or even do "too much" research, as it comes off as not wanting to be a doctor. I think one of his videos is even titled "Research is Overrated" or something.

This is completely true for your average applicant. The important of research has absolutely been overhyped. However, at top schools, research productivity is of utmost importance. At every single one of my interviews, my research has come up. At top schools, my interviewers specifically commented on how extensive as a major positive point, with two schools (Pitt and WashU Dean) even opening with "your extensive research really makes you a perfect fit for our school". In fact, WashU dean outright told me "we don't really care about clinicals, so don't worry about that", when I brought up how all my clinical experience was rather recent.
 
sadwinter said:
My general impression of Dr. Gray is that he gives wonderful advice for the average applicant and mediocre or even outright bad advice for wonderful applicants. In one of his videos, he mentions that the important of research is highly overstated in med school apps, and says it's completely fine to not mention research at all in personal statements. He generally advises not to focus too much on research in your application or even do "too much" research, as it comes off as not wanting to be a doctor. I think one of his videos is even titled "Research is Overrated" or something.

This is completely true for your average applicant. The important of research has absolutely been overhyped. However, at top schools, research productivity is of utmost importance. At every single one of my interviews, my research has come up. At top schools, my interviewers specifically commented on how extensive as a major positive point, with two schools (Pitt and WashU Dean) even opening with "your extensive research really makes you a perfect fit for our school". In fact, WashU dean outright told me "we don't really care about clinicals, so don't worry about that", when I brought up how all my clinical experience was rather recent.
Click to expand...
He seems to think 3.7/514 opens the door at every school. That’s definitely not true especially in these days of stat creep.
 
MyOdyssey said:
He seems to think 3.7/514 opens the door at every school. That’s definitely not true especially in these days of stat creep.
Click to expand...
I don't remember his videos well enough to comment, but it would surprise me if he said that. I would think he said something more along the lines of 3.7/514 will open enough doors to get into a med school, so now focus on everything else (ECs, writing, etc.). That advice would be accurate.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
sadwinter said:
I don't remember his videos well enough to comment, but it would surprise me if he said that. I would think he said something more along the lines of 3.7/514 will open enough doors to get into a med school, so now focus on everything else (ECs, writing, etc.). That advice would be accurate.
Click to expand...
To paraphrase, he said no school will reject you because of your stats. He said this to several candidates with 514-516 MCAT scores.
 
None of this information is new. “ SDN” has always advised that stats get you to the door and then it’s the rest of your application and your interviews that get you in. As @voxveritatisetlucis said “…but I learned more from browsing SDN..” And this is so true. You might not believe everything but it’s always worth reading. And the advice from actual ADCOMS can’t be beat.
 
MyOdyssey said:
To paraphrase, he said no school will reject you because of your stats. He said this to several candidates with 514-516 MCAT scores.
Click to expand...
And, this is true. There is no school in the country that screens at a higher number than that!
 
MyOdyssey said:
To paraphrase, he said no school will reject you because of your stats. He said this to several candidates with 514-516 MCAT scores.
Click to expand...
KnightDoc said:
And, this is true. There is no school in the country that screens at a higher number than that!
Click to expand...
screening wise, yes. In terms of getting an interview or admission though, there's a decent number of schools for which having a 514 (non URM) will definitely substantially decrease your chances, and you will need absolutely exceptional ECs that aren't feasible for the overwhelming majority at that range.
 
KnightDoc said:
And, this is true. There is no school in the country that screens at a higher number than that!
Click to expand...

Not sure that's correct. A couple of years ago, LizzyM posted in a thread that she never reads an application with a MCAT score lower than 518. Tea leaf readers on SDN interpreted that to mean that candidates with no admissions preferences at her T20 school were MCAT screened at 518.
 
MyOdyssey said:
Not sure that's correct. A couple of years ago, LizzyM posted in a thread that she never reads an application with a MCAT score lower than 518. Tea leaf readers on SDN interpreted that to mean that candidates with no admissions preferences at her T20 school were MCAT screened at 518.
Click to expand...
I can't respond to random, vague, years old supposed @LizzyM posts. I'm going by MSAR and information I have received directly from schools over the years. I am pretty sure that no matter where she is, she is reading files from applicants with MCATs below 518. @LizzyM -- care to confirm?? 🙂 I'd be willing to bet a lot that no school sets a screen that high.

No school, not NYU, not Penn, not any stat wh*re you can think of, has zero non-URMs in their class with a MCAT below 518, or 516, or 514. Yes, it's rare at a school with a 520 or 522 median, especially as you get closer to 514, but it's not unheard of. Also, I'm not Dr. Gray's PR guy, but I'm pretty sure "no school will reject you" means you won't be screened out, not that you will be admitted!
 
KnightDoc said:
I can't respond to random, vague, years old supposed @LizzyM posts. I'm going by MSAR and information I have received directly from schools over the years. I am pretty sure that no matter where she is, she is reading files from applicants with MCATs below 518. @LizzyM -- care to confirm?? 🙂 I'd be willing to bet a lot that no school sets a screen that high.

No school, not NYU, not Penn, not any stat wh*re you can think of, has zero non-URMs in their class with a MCAT below 518, or 516, or 514. Yes, it's rare at a school with a 520 or 522 median, especially as you get closer to 514, but it's not unheard of. Also, I'm not Dr. Gray's PR guy, but I'm pretty sure "no school will reject you" means you won't be screened out, not that you will be admitted!
Click to expand...

URMs aren't the only ones to receive admissions preferences. Consider, for example, applicants from military, first responder or other non-traditional backgrounds.
 
sadwinter said:
screening wise, yes. In terms of getting an interview or admission though, there's a decent number of schools for which having a 514 (non URM) will definitely substantially decrease your chances, and you will need absolutely exceptional ECs that aren't feasible for the overwhelming majority at that range.
Click to expand...
Well, sure. This is no great revelation at a T10 school with an II rate around 10% and an admit rate under 5%, so what's your point? 🙂 Literally, screening wise is all he's talking about, and I'm sure he's not talking about the extremely few schools in the country with 520+ medians when he says that.
 
MyOdyssey said:
URMs aren't the only ones to receive admissions preferences. Consider, for example, applicants from military, first responder or other non-traditional backgrounds.
Click to expand...
Great. I don't think you need an admissions preference, no matter how you want to define that, to avoid being auto-screened out anywhere in the country with a 517 MCAT. Doesn't mean a rando with bleh ECs, a 3.6 and a 515 is going to receive an II at NYU, but it means someone is going to look at that file before it is rejected. Is this really worth arguing about? 🙂
 
KnightDoc said:
Well, sure. This is no great revelation at a T10 school with an II rate around 10% and an admit rate under 5%, so what's your point? 🙂 Literally, screening wise is all he's talking about, and I'm sure he's not talking about the extremely few schools in the country with 520+ medians when he says that.
Click to expand...
I was under the impression he meant acceptance. I didn't watch this video myself so idk. But yea, he's definitely right if he's just talking about screening.
 
sadwinter said:
My general impression of Dr. Gray is that he gives wonderful advice for the average applicant and mediocre or even outright bad advice for wonderful applicants. In one of his videos, he mentions that the important of research is highly overstated in med school apps, and says it's completely fine to not mention research at all in personal statements. He generally advises not to focus too much on research in your application or even do "too much" research, as it comes off as not wanting to be a doctor. I think one of his videos is even titled "Research is Overrated" or something.

This is completely true for your average applicant. The important of research has absolutely been overhyped. However, at top schools, research productivity is of utmost importance. At every single one of my interviews, my research has come up. At top schools, my interviewers specifically commented on how extensive as a major positive point, with two schools (Pitt and WashU Dean) even opening with "your extensive research really makes you a perfect fit for our school". In fact, WashU dean outright told me "we don't really care about clinicals, so don't worry about that", when I brought up how all my clinical experience was rather recent.
Click to expand...
Can confirm for WashU and research. That is all we spoke about with my interviewers - both my research as well as the research conducted by my interviewers. Honestly felt like I was interviewing for my PhD all over again
 
KnightDoc said:
I can't respond to random, vague, years old supposed @LizzyM posts. I'm going by MSAR and information I have received directly from schools over the years. I am pretty sure that no matter where she is, she is reading files from applicants with MCATs below 518. @LizzyM -- care to confirm?? 🙂 I'd be willing to bet a lot that no school sets a screen that high.

No school, not NYU, not Penn, not any stat wh*re you can think of, has zero non-URMs in their class with a MCAT below 518, or 516, or 514. Yes, it's rare at a school with a 520 or 522 median, especially as you get closer to 514, but it's not unheard of. Also, I'm not Dr. Gray's PR guy, but I'm pretty sure "no school will reject you" means you won't be screened out, not that you will be admitted!
Click to expand...
For the past year or two, I've only been seeing applicants after they are selected for interview. So, while someone else is reading the applications, they weren't being queued for interview with less than 130 in at least 3 sections and nothing less than 128 in the lowest section which does some to not less than 518. However, times are changing and this year I'm seeing more scores in the 512-517 range although they are vastly outnumbered by the 520+ applicants.

Many years ago, I felt sad that so many people here reported applying "broadly" meaning that they applied to the T20s with a 3.5/510 and I came up with the LizzyM score to help people target their applications to the schools where they'd be among the "average" students and not applying solely to reaches. WARS has pretty much supplanted the LizzyM score but it is still wise, I think, to target your applications with your "metrics" rather than expecting that your "stories" will make you a "must interview" applicant despite a "below-average-for-that-school" MCAT/GPA.
 
LizzyM said:
For the past year or two, I've only been seeing applicants after they are selected for interview. So, while someone else is reading the applications, they weren't being queued for interview with less than 130 in at least 3 sections and nothing less than 128 in the lowest section which does some to not less than 518. However, times are changing and this year I'm seeing more scores in the 512-517 range although they are vastly outnumbered by the 520+ applicants.

Many years ago, I felt sad that so many people here reported applying "broadly" meaning that they applied to the T20s with a 3.5/510 and I came up with the LizzyM score to help people target their applications to the schools where they'd be among the "average" students and not applying solely to reaches. WARS has pretty much supplanted the LizzyM score but it is still wise, I think, to target your applications with your "metrics" rather than expecting that your "stories" will make you a "must interview" applicant despite a "below-average-for-that-school" MCAT/GPA.
Click to expand...
At the average school, how many readers need to give a thumbs up for the interview? How many adcom members need to thumbs up for acceptance? Do any schools that you know of have whole adcomittee vote on interviews?

Are interview readers adcom members?
 
LizzyM said:
For the past year or two, I've only been seeing applicants after they are selected for interview. So, while someone else is reading the applications, they weren't being queued for interview with less than 130 in at least 3 sections and nothing less than 128 in the lowest section which does some to not less than 518. However, times are changing and this year I'm seeing more scores in the 512-517 range although they are vastly outnumbered by the 520+ applicants.

Many years ago, I felt sad that so many people here reported applying "broadly" meaning that they applied to the T20s with a 3.5/510 and I came up with the LizzyM score to help people target their applications to the schools where they'd be among the "average" students and not applying solely to reaches. WARS has pretty much supplanted the LizzyM score but it is still wise, I think, to target your applications with your "metrics" rather than expecting that your "stories" will make you a "must interview" applicant despite a "below-average-for-that-school" MCAT/GPA.
Click to expand...
Thank you very much for responding. Even back in the day, it doesn't sound like people were being auto-screened below 518, even if they weren't making it to you to be interviewed. That was my only point! 🙂

Clearly, if a school is going to have a 520+ median, that is where a lot of the IIs are going to be. As you said, however, you still need to dip down to around the national median in order to round out your class.
 
LizzyM said:
However, times are changing and this year I'm seeing more scores in the 512-517 range although they are vastly outnumbered by the 520+ applicants.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your response. Are these "changing" times a Covid-driven phenomenon that will revert to the 518 norm?

KnightDoc said:
Thank you very much for responding. Even back in the day, it doesn't sound like people were being auto-screened below 518, even if they weren't making it to you to be interviewed. That was my only point! 🙂
Click to expand...

You're a glass half full personality type but I think LizzyM confirmed that the 518 de facto screen did in fact exist pre-pandemic.
 
If you don't make it to the interview, you don't get admitted. Schools could be going more "holistic" at least with interviews, even if the applicants who end up getting offers aren't more "diverse" (in all kinds of ways, not just race/ethnicity) than before.
 
Last edited:
LizzyM said:
For the past year or two, I've only been seeing applicants after they are selected for interview. So, while someone else is reading the applications, they weren't being queued for interview with less than 130 in at least 3 sections and nothing less than 128 in the lowest section which does some to not less than 518. However, times are changing and this year I'm seeing more scores in the 512-517 range although they are vastly outnumbered by the 520+ applicants.

Many years ago, I felt sad that so many people here reported applying "broadly" meaning that they applied to the T20s with a 3.5/510 and I came up with the LizzyM score to help people target their applications to the schools where they'd be among the "average" students and not applying solely to reaches. WARS has pretty much supplanted the LizzyM score but it is still wise, I think, to target your applications with your "metrics" rather than expecting that your "stories" will make you a "must interview" applicant despite a "below-average-for-that-school" MCAT/GPA.
Click to expand...
That’s quite a stat wh*re move lol. It can screen out a lot of 520 to 522’s. WashU?! However, I always think it’s a lot harder to score above 520 with almost all sections above 130 than a skewed score combo. By your standard, the only people who will absolutely not be screened out are those scoring 524+.
 
Last edited:
srirachamayonnaise said:
That’s quite a stat wh*re move lol. It can screen out a lot of 520 to 522’s. WashU?! However, I always think it’s a lot harder to score above 520 with almost all sections above 130 than a skewed score combo. By your standard, the only people who will absolutely not be screened out are those scoring 524+.
Click to expand...

I think that would change if third party test prep companies were better able to mimic the style and logic of actual CARS passages and/or if premeds devoted more time to a diverse liberal arts undergrad curriculum that included lots of challenging readings.
 
srirachamayonnaise said:
That’s quite a stat wh*re move lol. It can screen out a lot of 520 to 522’s. WashU?! However, I always think it’s a lot harder to score above 520 with almost all sections above 130 than a skewed score combo. By your standard, the only people who will absolutely not be screened out are those scoring 524+.
Click to expand...
I have a 520 with a 128 and a 129, so guess I'm out by a hair lol (others are obviously 132 and 131)
 
LizzyM said:
For the past year or two, I've only been seeing applicants after they are selected for interview. So, while someone else is reading the applications, they weren't being queued for interview with less than 130 in at least 3 sections and nothing less than 128 in the lowest section which does some to not less than 518. However, times are changing and this year I'm seeing more scores in the 512-517 range although they are vastly outnumbered by the 520+ applicants.

Many years ago, I felt sad that so many people here reported applying "broadly" meaning that they applied to the T20s with a 3.5/510 and I came up with the LizzyM score to help people target their applications to the schools where they'd be among the "average" students and not applying solely to reaches. WARS has pretty much supplanted the LizzyM score but it is still wise, I think, to target your applications with your "metrics" rather than expecting that your "stories" will make you a "must interview" applicant despite a "below-average-for-that-school" MCAT/GPA.
Click to expand...
KnightDoc said:
Thank you very much for responding. Even back in the day, it doesn't sound like people were being auto-screened below 518, even if they weren't making it to you to be interviewed. That was my only point! 🙂

Clearly, if a school is going to have a 520+ median, that is where a lot of the IIs are going to be. As you said, however, you still need to dip down to around the national median in order to round out your class.
Click to expand...
MyOdyssey said:
Thanks for your response. Are these "changing" times a Covid-driven phenomenon that will revert to the 518 norm?



You're a glass half full personality type but I think LizzyM confirmed that the 518 de facto screen did in fact exist pre-pandemic.
Click to expand...
Yea, imma be honest, I don't think there's any worthwhile different between auto-screening and a person screening them after reading if they both end up rejected. While I understand there's a different internally, it's not a difference that matters to me personally
 
sadwinter said:
Yea, imma be honest, I don't think there's any worthwhile different between auto-screening and a person screening them after reading if they both end up rejected. While I understand there's a different internally, it's not a difference that matters to me personally
Click to expand...
Aaaand, this is exactly what I meant in Post #22 when I asked what we were arguing about! 🙂

For the record, the difference is that one way a person has an opportunity to catch someone's eye while the other way they don't. In a world where around 90% are screened out pre-II one way or the other at each school, however, the practical difference is tiny.

At the end of the day, you pay your $142 -- do you want someone to take the time to look at your file, or not? 🙂 I do, even if I'm going to end up in the exactly same place either way. If you don't really care since the result is unlikely to change either way, that's legit too! I just like feeling like I got something for my money.
 
MyOdyssey said:
Times are a changing . . .
Click to expand...
tbh, I'm surprised it's shifting doward instead of upward as applicant volumes increase and MCAT percentiles shift a bit to the right.
 
LizzyM said:
For the past year or two, I've only been seeing applicants after they are selected for interview. So, while someone else is reading the applications, they weren't being queued for interview with less than 130 in at least 3 sections and nothing less than 128 in the lowest section which does some to not less than 518. However, times are changing and this year I'm seeing more scores in the 512-517 range although they are vastly outnumbered by the 520+ applicants.

Many years ago, I felt sad that so many people here reported applying "broadly" meaning that they applied to the T20s with a 3.5/510 and I came up with the LizzyM score to help people target their applications to the schools where they'd be among the "average" students and not applying solely to reaches. WARS has pretty much supplanted the LizzyM score but it is still wise, I think, to target your applications with your "metrics" rather than expecting that your "stories" will make you a "must interview" applicant despite a "below-average-for-that-school" MCAT/GPA.
Click to expand...
How did your school ever recruit URMs with those cutoffs? Or did you mean "except URMs" when you mentioned you never saw anyone with stats below the ones you mentioned. There aren't that many URMs that not only have a 518+, but meet all those section specific cutoffs, which pretty much make 520+ mandatory.
 
Last edited:
sadwinter said:
tbh, I'm surprised it's shifting doward instead of upward as applicant volumes increase and MCAT percentiles shift a bit to the right.
Click to expand...

With the pandemic, there's been a movement to deemphasize standardized testing. Consider:

1. ETS abolishes SAT subject tests.
2. U of California abolishes the SAT/ACT.
3. All Ivies make the SAT/ACT optional.

LizzyM's school, and perhaps other schools, is interviewing lower stat candidates now, which is consistent with that trend. However, at least for those who don't receive an admissions preference, the higher tiered schools are still accepting mostly the higher stat applicants.
 
Strong_and_Independent🙌✨ said:
Why can't the MCAT be de-emphasized?
Click to expand...

Because giving everyone the same test (ie standardization) as part of the admissions process beats relying entirely on different tests being administered to different people.

The absence of any standardization leads to a contest of pedigrees, which is what the Ivies had in the early part of the 20th century. Read “The Great Gatsby” to get a sense of what that was like.
 
Last edited:
Strong_and_Independent🙌✨ said:
Yeah I was gonna say that many med schools are doing pass fail so gpas are being deempasized in someway I guess.
Click to expand...
Nope. That's once you are in, to reduce stress and pressure. As an admission metric, along with MCAT, it is the single most important one, although all the other stuff is also very important. Don't believe me? Try applying with a bunch of P/F prereqs, even at schools that are entirely P/F, and then let us all know how de-emphasized GPAs are! 🙂

@LizzyM didn't mention GPAs because sky high ones are a given, not because they are not emphasized. The median at all the top schools is 3.8x-3.9x.
 
Last edited:
KnightDoc said:
Nope. That's once you are in, to reduce stress and pressure. As an admission metric, along with MCAT, it is the single most important one, although all the other stuff is also very important. Don't believe me? Try applying with a bunch of P/F prereqs, even at schools that are entirely P/F, and then let us all know how de-emphasized GPAs are! 🙂

@LizzyM didn't mention GPAs because sky high ones are a given, not because they are not emphasized. The median at all the top schools is 3.8x-3.9x.
Click to expand...
@LizzyM could you clarify how gpa evaluation works at your school. I'm just curious. Does cGPA vs sGPA come into play?
 
After an initial electronic screening (I don't know the metrics used for that), those that meet the screen are sent for in-depth review by a faculty member. (those that miss the screen might still get eyeballs for a minute to be sure nothing extraordinary was missed). The pre-interview screen will look at GPA, rigor of the major and the school, MCAT, letters of rec, community service, experience with medicine including shadowing, research, teamwork/leadership, other considerations. The reviewer recommends interview or not. There may be a second and even a third review to confirm or refute the recommendation of the first reviewer but the goal is to whittle the pool of applicants down to the 10-15% who can be accommodated for an interview.

Along with GPA and major and sGPA, one might look at when the applicant was likely to have chosen to pursue pre-med. Someone with a 3.3 GPA and a 3.95 sGPA may be a former opera singer whose grades in the conservatory were okay but who kicked it up a notch in a post-bac at age 26. Sometimes the eyeballs on the application are really necessary as a screen misses some real gems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
  • Question Question
In State Application
Replies
3
Views
360
LLB03
L
T
  • Locked
AP Bio Credit (Upcoming Application)
Replies
2
Views
162
thebadge
T
G
Medical School Application Updates?
Replies
6
Views
958
golfduck23
G
E
New Job During Application Cycle
Replies
2
Views
388
LindaAccepted
LindaAccepted
M
VA HPSP Application
Replies
4
Views
2K
decentfish
D
Top