Early interview invites received (Oct) but none since then- normal?

[dr.donkey]

Just curious, about both the interview invitation process/timeline. I was ecstatic to receive 2 IIs in October but it’s been totally silent ever since then. I’m an average/slightly below average applicant (3.3 GPA, 511 MCAT, nontrad w/master’s degree). Is it normal for things to significantly slow down at this point in the cycle? Not trying to be neurotic, just trying to learn a bit more about the cycle as it’s my first time through, and I’m preparing for a re-app for next year.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[reapplicant2021]

My last II was late October and I've got nothing since then. I kind of have given up on this cycle to be honest lol.

 

[dr.donkey]

My last II was late October and I've got nothing since then. I kind of have given up on this cycle to be honest lol.

Hahaha literally same. I’m just so confused by the way this process goes/what to expect

 

[arnim]

Of the approximately million individual applications submitted to schools, under 200,000 get any interview invites
1 interview invite is good
2 interview invites is great
3 or more just count your lucky stars

This is my favorite of the gonnif quotes

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

When I applied the first time (precovid), most of mine came in July and august but then I got a random one in January so it’s always possible especially since applicants don’t need as much time to plan

 

[dr.donkey]

Thanks for the insight everyone!! This has been super helpful

 

[arnim]

When I applied the first time (precovid), most of mine came in July and august but then I got a random one in January so it’s always possible especially since applicants don’t need as much time to plan

Mine have been spread out evenly month to month, some proof YMMV

 

[allseasons]

Of the approximately million individual applications submitted to schools, under 200,000 get any interview invites
1 interview invite is good
2 interview invites is great
3 or more just count your lucky stars

I've always wondered what the distribution is, and what percentage receive 10+ and 20+, especially broken down by race. But I doubt we're ever going to have access to those stats. Actually, I don't think AMCAS even has them? I don't think schools are required to notify the AAMC for interviews offered, or even waitlist, just acceptances.

 

[gyngyn]

I don't think schools are required to notify the AAMC for interviews offered, or even waitlist, just acceptances.

We are required to report all decisions, defer, WL, R and A.

 

[KnightDoc]

I've always wondered what the distribution is, and what percentage receive 10+ and 20+, especially broken down by race. But I doubt we're ever going to have access to those stats. Actually, I don't think AMCAS even has them? I don't think schools are required to notify the AAMC for interviews offered, or even waitlist, just acceptances.

AMCAS has everything! Actually, I have no idea about IIs, but schools certainly have nothing to hide.

Anyway, it's really not a race thing. There are a tiny fraction of top applicants of all races who do very well.

They are over represented on SDN, in addition to whoever is exaggerating how well they are actually doing. In any event, what's the difference?

High stat URMs who check all the other boxes do very well mainly because there are so few of them. They are no more representative of URMs as a whole than ORM or white applicants with amazing applications are of their groups. They are unicorns, their percentage generally tracks that of unicorns, and they perform accordingly.

What IS definitely reported is As. As has been widely reported on SDN, 64% received zero As last cycle. Every cycle, around half of all matriculants only have one A, and that includes last minute As off a WL. Beyond that, other than benchmarking yourself against everyone else, what's the difference how many people receive how many IIs, or As?

Until it's over, you honestly cannot tell how you are going to do based on your number of IIs. The average is one A for every 3 IIs, but there is a very wide variance based on just what schools you have IIs from, as well as your relative position in each school's pool. Plus, of course, how you perform as an interviewee. People with 7 As end up on 7 WLs and become reapplicants, while others with 3 IIs end up with 3 As.

If it helps, something I saw a few years ago suggested that the numbers decrease somewhat geometrically after 1 A, until you literally have a small handful of people with 10+ As (i.e., around 10K people with one A, 5K with 2, 2K with 3, 1K with 4, 0.5 K with 5, 0.2K with 6, etc.).

 

[allseasons]

AMCAS has everything! Actually, I have no idea about IIs, but schools certainly have nothing to hide.

Anyway, it's really not a race thing. There are a tiny fraction of top applicants of all races who do very well.

They are over represented on SDN, in addition to whoever is exaggerating how well they are actually doing. In any event, what's the difference?

High stat URMs who check all the other boxes do very well mainly because there are so few of them. They are no more representative of URMs as a whole than ORM or white applicants with amazing applications are of their groups. They are unicorns, their percentage generally tracks that of unicorns, and they perform accordingly.

What IS definitely reported is As. As has been widely reported on SDN, 64% received zero As last cycle. Every cycle, around half of all matriculants only have one A, and that includes last minute As off a WL. Beyond that, other than benchmarking yourself against everyone else, what's the difference how many people receive how many IIs, or As?

Until it's over, you honestly cannot tell how you are going to do based on your number of IIs. The average is one A for every 3 IIs, but there is a very wide variance based on just what schools you have IIs from, as well as your relative position in each school's pool. Plus, of course, how you perform as an interviewee. People with 7 As end up on 7 WLs and become reapplicants, while others with 3 IIs end up with 3 As.

If it helps, something I saw a few years ago suggested that the numbers decrease somewhat geometrically after 1 A, until you literally have a small handful of people with 10+ As (i.e., around 10K people with one A, 5K with 2, 2K with 3, 1K with 4, 0.5 K with 5, 0.2K with 6, etc.).

Oh, I'm making no pretenses that this information is in any way useful lol, I'm just curious, both for the numbers and to see how they correlate with race. Though really, I just want to see the base numbers at least. Purely curiosity, it's definitely not useful information to anyone lol.

 

[KnightDoc]

Oh, I'm making no pretenses that this information is in any way useful lol, I'm just curious, both for the numbers and to see how they correlate with race. Though really, I just want to see the base numbers at least. Purely curiosity, it's definitely not useful information to anyone lol.

Useless information correlated with race. I wonder why AAMC doesn't make that available???

 

[allseasons]

Useless information correlated with race. I wonder why AAMC doesn't make that available???

haha yup
useless in the sense that learning it would not help improve applications in any way

The reason I'm interested in the race part is that it's been said many times on this site that higher stat URMs tend to receive far more interviews and acceptances than ORMs not just due to AA, but because resource protection does not apply as much to them since there's far fewer of them and lower tier schools will interview and accept them knowing they won't go so that they can add to the statistics and show recruitment effort. I'm just curious what the high end of both these curves look like for that reason, especially broken down by stat distribution. Pretty much every URM I know with a 518+ (honestly maybe even 514+) has 20+ interviews from a massive range of schools, both top and bottom (T<50). Meanwhile most ORMs I know with 518+ and great ECs receive 10+ interviews almost solely from T30 schools and above, with pretty much the only exceptions being our respective state universities and one or two other in-state schools.

And I don't just mean I gather this from SDN. I have 13 interview that almost entirely within the T30. I have a URM friend at UVA with 25 interviews including unranked schools as well as Harvard.

So it's interesting information, but I absolutely don't expect the AAMC to make it available especially as it serves no actual purpose to improving applications. Plus it probably reflects negatively on both the schools and the organization itself.

 

[arnim]

haha yup
useless in the sense that learning it would not help improve applications in any way

The reason I'm interested in the race part is that it's been said many times on this site that higher stat URMs tend to receive far more interviews and acceptances than ORMs not just due to AA, but because resource protection does not apply as much to them since there's far fewer of them and lower tier schools will interview and accept them knowing they won't go so that they can add to the statistics and show recruitment effort. I'm just curious what the high end of both these curves look like for that reason, especially broken down by stat distribution. Pretty much every URM I know with a 518+ (honestly maybe even 514+) has 20+ interviews from a massive range of schools, both top and bottom (T<50). Meanwhile most ORMs I know with 518+ and great ECs receive 10+ interviews almost solely from T30 schools and above, with pretty much the only exceptions being our respective state universities and one or two other in-state schools.

And I don't just mean I gather this from SDN. I have 13 interview that almost entirely within the T30. I have a URM friend at UVA with 25 interviews including unranked schools as well as Harvard.

So it's interesting information, but I absolutely don't expect the AAMC to make it available especially as it serves no actual purpose to improving applications. Plus it probably reflects negatively on both the schools and the organization itself.

So I see this idea thrown around a lot on SDN, and as a URM should I then be worried that my IIs are from schools who have no intention of actually accepting me and are just trying to pump their diversity numbers up?

 

[allseasons]

So I see this idea thrown around a lot on SDN, and as a URM should I then be worried that my IIs are from schools who have no intention of actually accepting me and are just trying to pump their diversity numbers up?

oh no no, sorry I either didn't make myself clear enough or you misinterpreted what I was saying. These schools will all admit you (to pump up their diversity numbers) fully aware that you won't actually attend because you will have better offers. ORMs don't get that initial interview (and by extension the later acceptance) when schools know they won't attend as every school has limited interview resources and doesn't want to waste time on people that won't attend when it serves no other purpose. This isn't limited to URMs, if you have faculty connections (your family members worked there) to a uni with stats way below yours, you'll get an interview too even if you're overqualified. It's just that most people who have such a connection, only have one, while for URMs it applies to almost every school.

Also, just to clarify when I said "These schools will all admit you (to pump up their diversity numbers)", I meant that you're overqualified to be there, and if you were ORM you wouldn't even be offer the interview most likely (aka your stats are 3.9/518 and the school's average is 3.6/510). Not that you're underqualified and the school is adding you as a "diversity hire".

 

[arnim]

oh no no, sorry I either didn't make myself clear enough or you misinterpreted what I was saying. These schools will all admit you (to pump up their diversity numbers) fully aware that you won't actually attend because you will have better offers. ORMs don't get that initial interview (and by extension the later acceptance) when schools know they won't attend as every school has limited interview resources and doesn't want to waste time on people that won't attend when it serves no other purpose.

Also, just to clarify when I said "These schools will all admit you (to pump up their diversity numbers)", I meant that you're overqualified to be there, and if you were ORM you wouldn't even be offer the interview most likely (aka your stats are 3.9/518 and the school's average is 3.6/510). Not that you're underqualified and the school is adding you as a "diversity hire".

Gotcha, although I have seen the "but we interviewed X amount of URM (although we admitted only 2)" claim thrown around as well. Your explanation does make perfect sense, its really silly how this all works. We are just trying to work within an inherently flawed system that often feels random while likely just being in the dark to a complicated process unique to 150+ schools.

 

[allseasons]

Gotcha, although I have seen the "but we interviewed X amount of URM (although we admitted only 2)" claim thrown around as well. Your explanation does make perfect sense, its really silly how this all works. We are just trying to work within an inherently flawed system that often feels random while likely just being in the dark to a complicated process unique to 150+ schools.

ah, gotcha. Just curious, but which schools have you found to be like that? I'm mostly focused on T30s and above, so sometimes I miss the picture with lower ranked schools, but at T>30, the few schools that release stats tend to look like this: 2021 MD Admissions Statistics | Duke University School of Medicine

URMs make up 19% of the application pool, 28% of the interview pool, and 35% of the acceptance pool.

Duke is a top school, but you'll notice even here, the matriculated number (31%) is lower than the acceptance number. In lower tier schools, the accepted/matriculated ratios tend to be even worse, as the high stat URMs all choose better schools, and meanwhile the low tier school can say "look we admitted 35% URMs, not our fault they didn't come! we tried!" This way, they keep their overall acceptance GPA/MCAT stats high while still aligning better with LCME diversity guidelines.

 

[arnim]

ah, gotcha. Just curious, but which schools have you found to be like that? I'm mostly focused on T30s and above, so sometimes I miss the picture with lower ranked schools, but at T>30, the few schools that release stats tend to look like this: 2021 MD Admissions Statistics | Duke University School of Medicine

URMs make up 19% of the application pool, 28% of the interview pool, and 35% of the acceptance pool.

Duke is a top school, but you'll notice even here, the matriculated number (31%) is lower than the acceptance number. In lower tier schools, the accepted/matriculated ratios tend to be even worse, as the high stat URMs all choose better schools, and meanwhile the low tier school can say "look we admitted 35% URMs, not our fault they didn't come! we tried!" This way, they keep their overall acceptance GPA/MCAT stats high while still aligning better with LCME diversity guidelines.

My only direct experience with feeling that actual "diversity" was inflated or fabricated was with UMissouri two cycles ago. The schools I have interviewed with this cycle have all been community service centered and I have not found any of them to be like that thankfully.

Our experiences are probably different as we are probably interviewing in different tiers but I know my experience isn't representative of all URMs or even some URMs.

 

[allseasons]

My only direct experience with feeling that actual "diversity" was inflated or fabricated was with UMissouri two cycles ago. The schools I have interviewed with this cycle have all been community service centered and I have not found any of them to be like that thankfully.

Our experiences are probably different as we are probably interviewing in different tiers but I know my experience isn't representative of all URMs or even some URMs.

got it! wish you the best! seems like this cycle has improved quite a bit for you with 7 IIs!

 

[arnim]

got it! wish you the best! seems like this cycle has improved quite a bit for you with 7 IIs!

Considering I only had a single late II two cycle ago that turned into a WL, I appreciate it so much! You seem to have a lot of success so I hope you enjoy some well earned time off before we (hopefully) both start next Fall

 

[allseasons]

Considering I only had a single late II two cycle ago that turned into a WL, I appreciate it so much! You seem to have a lot of success so I hope you enjoy some well earned time off before we (hopefully) both start next Fall

yup! I'm a reapplicant myself, so I know the struggle haha!