do people with late secondary submissions get reviewed?

[subparman]

For example, the secondary deadline for Creighton (this year) is January 15. If someone were to submit their secondary at the deadline, or even a week or two before, is it fair to say that the school is essentially just taking their application fee?

Of course, your chances go down as acceptances get sent out. I'm curious to know, how often do you all think (if at all) apps that arrive at the deadline go unreviewed?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[KnightDoc]

For example, the secondary deadline for Creighton (this year) is January 15. If someone were to submit their secondary at the deadline, or even a week or two before, is it fair to say that the school is essentially just taking their application fee?

Of course, your chances go down as acceptances get sent out. I'm curious to know, how often do you all think (if at all) apps that arrive at the deadline go unreviewed?

This would be pretty unethical, so it's hard to believe it actually occurs. No way to know for sure, though, unless the last II goes out prior to the deadline, and I'd bet anything schools are careful not to do that!

 

[deleted889094]

Anecdotally, I got an II from an October secondary, and I know someone who got an II from a December secondary. Both MD schools, the latter being an up-there one. So it's def possible

 

[DoctorWhere]

I interviewed at schools I submitted applications for right on the deadline. Definitely avoid submitting so late if possible, but there is a > 0 chance of receiving an II if you submit.

 

[Goro]

For example, the secondary deadline for Creighton (this year) is January 15. If someone were to submit their secondary at the deadline, or even a week or two before, is it fair to say that the school is essentially just taking their application fee?

Yup.

 

[KnightDoc]

Yup.

Sounds pretty unethical. Do you know for a fact that schools accept applications prior to a published deadline and don't review them, regardless of how good they might be? This would not only be contrary to their goal of building the best class possible, but, if proven, would constitute actual fraud since the fee is a payment for considering an application for admission, not a "donation" to a not for profit institution.

I agree submitting so late is a bad idea just due to the timing and the fact that many spots would already be spoken for, but that is VERY different from stating that an application submitted just before a published deadline won't be reviewed while the fee will be accepted, which is what is implied in the post ("essentially just taking the fee"). What other institution charges for a service and then fails to provide it with impunity, let alone an educational institution that values ethics so highly? I very seriously doubt this happens!!!!

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Sounds pretty unethical. Do you know for a fact that schools accept applications prior to a published deadline and don't review them, regardless of how good they might be? This would not only be contrary to their goal of building the best class possible, but, if proven, would constitute actual fraud since the fee is a payment for considering an application for admission, not a "donation" to a not for profit institution.

I agree submitting so late is a bad idea just due to the timing and the fact that many spots would already be spoken for, but that is VERY different from stating that an application submitted just before a published deadline won't be reviewed while the fee will be accepted, which is what is implied in the post ("essentially just taking the fee"). What other institution charges for a service and then fails to provide it with impunity, let alone an educational institution that values ethics so highly? I very seriously doubt this happens!!!!

yup

 

[Med Ed]

For example, the secondary deadline for Creighton (this year) is January 15. If someone were to submit their secondary at the deadline, or even a week or two before, is it fair to say that the school is essentially just taking their application fee?

Of course, your chances go down as acceptances get sent out. I'm curious to know, how often do you all think (if at all) apps that arrive at the deadline go unreviewed?

When you submit a secondary fee you are paying to have your complete application reviewed. So yes, it would be unethical for a school to simply collect the fee without holding up its end of the bargain. Does this sort of thing happen? I'd be surprised if it did not, particularly at schools that receive 10,000+ applications.

The question is what constitutes a review. If someone submits on the deadline I can tell in less than 120 seconds if their application will put them in contention for one of the dwindling number of seats. The answer is almost invariably "no." Would you consider that a fair review of your complete application?

 

[KnightDoc]

When you submit a secondary fee you are paying to have your complete application reviewed. So yes, it would be unethical for a school to simply collect the fee without holding up its end of the bargain. Does this sort of thing happen? I'd be surprised if it did not, particularly at schools that receive 10,000+ applications.

The question is what constitutes a review. If someone submits on the deadline I can tell in less than 120 seconds if their application will put them in contention for one of the dwindling number of seats. The answer is almost invariably "no." Would you consider that a fair review of your complete application?

Personally, I would expect the same level of review that any other rejected candidate with a similar application receives. Given some schools receive 10,000+ applications, if rejected applicants with a similar application receive less than 120 seconds of your time in September, then, sure, I would consider that fair. On the other hand, if the only reason I am receiving a superficial quickie review is that you are pressed for time in December, even though your deadline is 11/30, then I'd suggest you either make time or refund my fee and tell me you are sorry that you are overwhelmed by applications this year and cannot give me a fair review, because otherwise I am simply not receiving what I am paying for even though I complied with all of your requirements for submission.

 

[Med Ed]

Personally, I would expect the same level of review that any other rejected candidate with a similar application receives. Given some schools receive 10,000+ applications, if rejected applicants with a similar application receive less than 120 seconds of your time in September, then, sure, I would consider that fair. On the other hand, if the only reason I am receiving a superficial quickie review is that you are pressed for time in December, even though your deadline is 11/30, then I'd suggest you either make time or refund my fee and tell me you are sorry that you are overwhelmed by applications this year and cannot give me a fair review, because otherwise I am simply not receiving what I am paying for even though I complied with all of your requirements for submission.

Okay, how do you define "level of review"?

 

[KnightDoc]

Okay, how do you define "level of review"?

Whatever is typical. I'm just trying to distinguish between an adcom going through the motions and taking my money versus actually providing the service they are collecting the fee for.

As I tried to say, I'm not demanding several hours of review by the entire committee before a rejection for my $100. If you normally spend less than 2 minutes on a file before putting it in the reject pile in August, then I expect no more in December. But, if I'm only receiving that level of review because it's late in the cycle and you no longer have time for me, you need to either push your deadline up to make more time, throw more bodies at the application pile, or, at the very minimum, apologize for underestimating the volume of applications and return my fee since I am not receiving the level of review I am entitled to as an applicant submitting before the deadline (i.e., the same level of review all other applicants filing before you decided it's too late to warrant giving me more than 120 seconds of your time).

Put another way, I understand I'm putting myself at a strategic disadvantage by applying late due to the fact many IIs and possibly even As will have been given out by then, which by definition makes them unavailable to me. I do not understand that I am also receiving anything less than a full review for any remaining IIs. If that's the case, you really need to close the application after a predetermined number have been received, and return the excess, along with the fees.

THAT would provide full disclosure, motivate applicants to apply early (if they aren't already properly motivated) and remove any incentive for the schools to encourage applications as a money raising venture without the intent or capacity to actually provide the necessary level of review to each and every one of them, even if you just KNOW after 120 seconds that they will be Rs. Otherwise, even if you are correct 99% of the time, 1 in every 100 on-time applicants receiving a 2 minute review will be screwed out of an II because you don't have the time to do the job you were paid do.

Again, if 2 minutes is all the time anyone receives prior to a R, then never mind, it's all good, but you are the one who qualified it by saying "If someone submits on the deadline I can tell in less than 120 seconds if their application will put them in contention for one of the dwindling number of seats. The answer is almost invariably "no.""!

 

[Talldoctor96]

Whatever is typical. I'm just trying to distinguish between an adcom going through the motions and taking my money versus actually providing the service they are collecting the fee for.

As tried to say, I'm not demanding several hours of review by the entire committee before a rejection for my $100. If you normally spend less than 2 minutes on a file before putting it in the reject pile in August, then I expect no more in December. But, if I'm only receiving that level of review because it's late in the cycle and you no longer have time for me, you need to either push your deadline up to make more time, throw more bodies at the application pile, or, at the very minimum, apologize for underestimating the volume of applications and return my fee since I am not receiving the level of review I am entitled to as an applicant submitting before the deadline (i.e., the same level of review all other applicants filing before you decided it's too late to warrant giving me more than 120 seconds of your time).

Put another way, I understand I'm putting myself at a strategic disadvantage by applying late due to the fact many IIs and possibly even As will have been given out by then, which by definition makes them unavailable to me. I do not understand that I am also receiving anything less than a full review for any remaining IIs. If that's the case, you really need to close the application after a predetermined number have been received, and return the excess, along with the fees.

THAT would provide full disclosure, motivate applicants to apply early (if they aren't already properly motivated) and remove any incentive for the schools to encourage applications as a money raising venture without the intent or capacity to actually provide the necessary level of review to each and every one of them, even if you just KNOW after 120 seconds that they will be Rs, because, even if you are correct 99% of the time, 1 in every 100 on-time applicants receiving a 2 minute review will be screwed out of an II because you don't have the time to do the job you were paid do. Again, if 2 minutes is all the time anyone receives prior to a R, then never mind, it's all good!

hate to break it to you but a lot of readers aren’t adcoms— at my school many are M3s who have time in between rotations!

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Whatever is typical. I'm just trying to distinguish between an adcom going through the motions and taking my money versus actually providing the service they are collecting the fee for.

As tried to say, I'm not demanding several hours of review by the entire committee before a rejection for my $100. If you normally spend less than 2 minutes on a file before putting it in the reject pile in August, then I expect no more in December. But, if I'm only receiving that level of review because it's late in the cycle and you no longer have time for me, you need to either push your deadline up to make more time, throw more bodies at the application pile, or, at the very minimum, apologize for underestimating the volume of applications and return my fee since I am not receiving the level of review I am entitled to as an applicant submitting before the deadline (i.e., the same level of review all other applicants filing before you decided it's too late to warrant giving me more than 120 seconds of your time).

Put another way, I understand I'm putting myself at a strategic disadvantage by applying late due to the fact many IIs and possibly even As will have been given out by then, which by definition makes them unavailable to me. I do not understand that I am also receiving anything less than a full review for any remaining IIs. If that's the case, you really need to close the application after a predetermined number have been received, and return the excess, along with the fees.

THAT would provide full disclosure, motivate applicants to apply early (if they aren't already properly motivated) and remove any incentive for the schools to encourage applications as a money raising venture without the intent or capacity to actually provide the necessary level of review to each and every one of them, even if you just KNOW after 120 seconds that they will be Rs, because, even if you are correct 99% of the time, 1 in every 100 on-time applicants receiving a 2 minute review will be screwed out of an II because you don't have the time to do the job you were paid do. Again, if 2 minutes is all the time anyone receives prior to a R, then never mind, it's all good!

This response is longer than some of the secondary prompt responses I have seen ☺️

 

[KnightDoc]

hate to break it to you but a lot of readers aren’t adcoms— at my school many are M3s who have time in between rotations!

Totally understand. The issue is whether an applicant submitting just prior to the deadline receives the same level of review, by the same people, as someon submitting 4 months before the deadline. I understand there are initial readers and then someone higher up who decides on IIs.

 

[KnightDoc]

This response is longer than some of the secondary prompt responses I have seen ☺️

Yeah, I don't expect to have any problems filling space on an application!

 

[Talldoctor96]

Totally understand. The issue is whether an applicant submitting just prior to the deadline receives the same level of review, by the same people, as someon submitting 4 months before the deadline. I understand there are initial readers and then someone higher up who decides on IIs.

Its different at every school.

 

[KnightDoc]

Its different at every school.

Who does the reviewing, or the level of review a late, but still on time application receives? If it's the latter, to the extent any on-time applicant does not receive a full review, that person is getting screwed.

Full disclosure -- I'm just trying to be a consumer advocate here. Personally, I would never submit at the deadline due to all of the negatives associated with it, so it's not an issue for me. I'm just pointing out that it's BS for a school to accept a credit card payment and then take the position that it's too late and they are too busy to do what they are supposed to do.

 

[r2med]

If they know they won't review (or won't review in detail), why give that date as the deadline?

 

[Talldoctor96]

Who does the reviewing, or the level of review a late, but still on time applicant receives? If it's the latter, to the extent any on-time applicant does not receive a full review, that person is getting screwed.

What you are missing is they may receive the same review, but the threshold of interview gets higher and higher as the IIs left get lower and lower. So sure you might get the same review as someone as July 2nd, but the score that would have gotten you a II in July may not get you one in december.

 

[Talldoctor96]

If they know they won't review (or won't review in detail), why give that date as the deadline?

Youre generalizing 160 MD schools which is impossible.

 

[r2med]

Youre generalizing 160 MD schools which is impossible.

I was just going by what is discussed on this thread.

 

[KnightDoc]

What you are missing is they may receive the same review, but the threshold of interview gets higher and higher as the IIs left get lower and lower. So sure you might get the same review as someone as July 2nd, but the score that would have gotten you a II in July may not get you one in december.

I'm not missing anything at all. I was responding to a post stating that a specific reviewer can tell in less than 120 seconds, specifically with respect to applications received at the deadline, whether an application will be in contention for one of the dwindling number of seats. "The answer is almost invariably "no."" If that's not true in August, it shouldn't be true in December.

That's my only point. I fully understand the bar rises as the number of seats dwindle. The application should still receive a full review, no matter how long it takes, before that determination is made. Anything less is cheating the applicant, regardless of the how sure the reviewer is of his determination after less than 120 seconds. My dad also thought he knew how a game was going to end after the 7th inning or 3rd quarter. I missed a lot of great finishes, but we never did get caught in traffic in the parking lot after the game.

 

[Goro]

If they know they won't review (or won't review in detail), why give that date as the deadline?

They might hope to mine late arriving diamonds.

 

[r2med]

They might hope to mine late arriving diamonds.

And what percentage would that likely be? 0.0001?

 

[r2med]

I will sign off from this post with the hope that schools review every application they receive till their deadline or refund the money to those applications they did not get a chance to review (not just stats - which they could always publish ahead and tell people not to apply if lower than their stats)

 

[deleted889094]

Submitting an application just gets them to review your file. There is no promise or contract about having the same chances as someone who had their ducks in a row to apply early. And frankly, they have a lot of work to do to get a whole class set up by Summer, so it makes sense to incentivize early applications. It's not an ideal world, @KnightDoc and I think you might have a lot in store for you when you see how unideal the medical system (I.e. the world) is.

 

[Med Ed]

Whatever is typical. I'm just trying to distinguish between an adcom going through the motions and taking my money versus actually providing the service they are collecting the fee for.

As tried to say, I'm not demanding several hours of review by the entire committee before a rejection for my $100. If you normally spend less than 2 minutes on a file before putting it in the reject pile in August, then I expect no more in December. But, if I'm only receiving that level of review because it's late in the cycle and you no longer have time for me, you need to either push your deadline up to make more time, throw more bodies at the application pile, or, at the very minimum, apologize for underestimating the volume of applications and return my fee since I am not receiving the level of review I am entitled to as an applicant submitting before the deadline (i.e., the same level of review all other applicants filing before you decided it's too late to warrant giving me more than 120 seconds of your time).

Put another way, I understand I'm putting myself at a strategic disadvantage by applying late due to the fact many IIs and possibly even As will have been given out by then, which by definition makes them unavailable to me. I do not understand that I am also receiving anything less than a full review for any remaining IIs. If that's the case, you really need to close the application after a predetermined number have been received, and return the excess, along with the fees.

THAT would provide full disclosure, motivate applicants to apply early (if they aren't already properly motivated) and remove any incentive for the schools to encourage applications as a money raising venture without the intent or capacity to actually provide the necessary level of review to each and every one of them, even if you just KNOW after 120 seconds that they will be Rs. Otherwise, even if you are correct 99% of the time, 1 in every 100 on-time applicants receiving a 2 minute review will be screwed out of an II because you don't have the time to do the job you were paid do.

Again, if 2 minutes is all the time anyone receives prior to a R, then never mind, it's all good, but you are the one who qualified by saying "If someone submits on the deadline I can tell in less than 120 seconds if their application will put them in contention for one of the dwindling number of seats. The answer is almost invariably "no.""!

A full review could mean spending a minimum amount of time on the application. It could mean reading all the components, or at least the ones deemed most relevant. It could mean reading enough to make a reasonable determination for an interview offer.

For example, say I read an application and there is the disclosure of a felony conviction for domestic battery, with subsequent incarceration and no apparent mitigating factors. I know the applicant would be DOA before the committee, so an interview is pointless. Should I still read the LORs? If not, have I still given the applicant a satisfactory review?

The bigger issue is simply timing. At the start of the cycle you have a bunch of empty seats and no idea how the pool will shape up. You're more inclined to look for diamonds in the rough. By the time the deadline arrives you have fewer empty seats, many fewer interview slots, and a much better idea of how the pool looks. It's much easier to say yes/no for an interview without going through every line in AMCAS. A lot of the people who apply at the last minute are marginal candidates who didn't get response earlier in the cycle and are panicking. It doesn't make them any more attractive.

 

[just_wear_a_mask]

I also wonder if 2020 just adds to the uncertainty of late applications. For example, my secondary applications were all marked complete later than anticipated (mid-September) after my MCAT was canceled/delayed so many times. It seems like this crazy year makes this unpredictable process even more unpredictable! At this point, I am just here for the ride, best of luck to all!!!

 

[KnightDoc]

A full review could mean spending a minimum amount of time on the application. It could mean reading all the components, or at least the ones deemed most relevant. It could mean reading enough to make a reasonable determination for an interview offer.

For example, say I read an application and there is the disclosure of a felony conviction for domestic battery, with subsequent incarceration and no apparent mitigating factors. I know the applicant would be DOA before the committee, so an interview is pointless. Should I still read the LORs? If not, have I still given the applicant a satisfactory review?

The bigger issue is simply timing. At the start of the cycle you have a bunch of empty seats and no idea how the pool will shape up. You're more inclined to look for diamonds in the rough. By the time the deadline arrives you have fewer empty seats, many fewer interview slots, and a much better idea of how the pool looks. It's much easier to say yes/no for an interview without going through every line in AMCAS. A lot of the people who apply at the last minute are marginal candidates who didn't get response earlier in the cycle and are panicking. It doesn't make them any more attractive.

All of this makes perfect sense. Am I correct in assuming that the felony conviction would be a non-starter in August just like in December? If so, you wouldn't read LORs in either case, so the later app receives the same review as the early one. It's probably also safe to assume the marginal candidate receives the same consideration regardless of when the app comes in. If so, it's all good.

The only issue is when you said before that the late arrival receives a no within 120 seconds, not because it's marginal, but because you're near the end. As long as an app receives the same level of review, no problem. Of course a given applicant's chances are better early. That goes without saying, and was never the point. The point was not giving a full review while accepting a full fee.

 

[Med Ed]

The point was not giving a full review while accepting a full fee.

Since no one has defined what constitutes a full review this seems rather moot.

 

[KnightDoc]

Since no one has defined what constitutes a full review this seems rather moot.

TBH, based on your latest posts, I think we are talking about the same thing.

Full review, to me, means whatever level of review an applicant would receive at any other time during the cycle. Clearly, a deficient or unattractive candidate will not receive more than a cursory review, regardless of when the file is actually reviewed.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I am interpreting your later posts to mean that, at least in your experience, these constitute the majority of late submissions, and that's why and how you form a negative opinion in under 120 seconds, not merely because the submission is on the deadline. And that, in fact, if an app submitted on the deadline is otherwise good, it doesn't receive short shrift just because it comes in at the end. Would it be fair to say that?

 

[Med Ed]

Full review, to me, means whatever level of review an applicant would receive at any other time during the cycle. Clearly, a deficient or unattractive candidate will not receive more than a cursory review, regardless of when the file is actually reviewed.

I don't think in terms of full or non-full (partial?) review. I conduct whatever investigation is necessary to make a reasonable determination, a process that evolves predictably over each cycle. As has been noted repeatedly in this thread, diamonds in the rough need to apply early. Those who apply late should be diamonds on display.

 

[r2med]

I don't think in terms of full or non-full (partial?) review. I conduct whatever investigation is necessary to make a reasonable determination, a process that evolves predictably over each cycle. As has been noted repeatedly in this thread, diamonds in the rough need to apply early. Those who apply late should be diamonds on display.

Unless diamonds on display have extremely extenuating circumstances, they would have applied early anyways, right?

 

[KnightDoc]

I don't think in terms of full or non-full (partial?) review. I conduct whatever investigation is necessary to make a reasonable determination, a process that evolves predictably over each cycle. As has been noted repeatedly in this thread, diamonds in the rough need to apply early. Those who apply late should be diamonds on display.

But, do diamonds in the rough receive a different level of review from you in August as compared to December? If so, that is what is unfair. Not the result, if you just don't have spots anymore, but the level of review, which is analogous to polishing performed by the reviewer.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

I don't think in terms of full or non-full (partial?) review. I conduct whatever investigation is necessary to make a reasonable determination, a process that evolves predictably over each cycle. As has been noted repeatedly in this thread, diamonds in the rough need to apply early. Those who apply late should be diamonds on display.

Do you focus on all 4Cs when judging the diamond or one specific C like Windsor knot?