everyone has a reason why they got in...

[sflo]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Delete

 

[WashMe]

isn't it around 40-50% of applicants accepted each cycle? that statistic includes the folks who mistakenly only apply to top 20 schools, and would have probably been more successful if they'd done their homework.

are we all really as special and wonderful as we think we are or would like to be? my guess is some of us are, but most of us really aren't. i don't think it's really that difficult to get into a medical school. when you get choosy about schools, that's another issue.

👍 !!!

 

[htownpremie]

👍 !!!

you aren't the only one. i met a kid on the interview trail this year, who made that mistake last year [i think he might have overestimated the power of a harvard pedigree]...i don't even think he got a single interview.

 

[nick_carraway]

you aren't the only one. i met a kid on the interview trail this year, who made that mistake last year [i think he might have overestimated the power of a harvard pedigree]...i don't even think he got a single interview.

But how many of the 20,000 applicants who get rejected are this naive?

40% odds sound great until you consider just how many people equates to the 60% rejected.

 

[cpants]

I really doubt that a large percentage of rejected applicants only applied to reach schools. Yes there are some, but most people think pretty hard about how to maximize their acceptance by applying to schools they have a decent chance at. Exorbitant application fees and a real desire to be accepted are motivators to choose wisely.

 

[Ariadne]

I really doubt that a large percentage of rejected applicants only applied to reach schools. Yes there are some, but most people think pretty hard about how to maximize their acceptance by applying to schools they have a decent chance at. Exorbitant application fees and a real desire to be accepted are motivators to choose wisely.

I agree. If you look at people with higher MCATs and GPAs they have > 75% acceptance rates. I'd assume this is where people who miscalculate and only apply to the top ranked are to be found. What really pulls down the overall acceptance rate is the large numbers of low MCAT/GPA people with acceptance rates < 30%...

 

[htownpremie]

But how many of the 20,000 applicants who get rejected are this naive?

40% odds sound great until you consider just how many people equates to the 60% rejected.

so what, if 10 people apply and 4 people get in and 6 do not does that change the nature of the acceptance rate? 8 in and 12 rejections, etc. etc.? not really, 40% odds is still very good for something that is supposed to be "really competitive."

I really doubt that a large percentage of rejected applicants only applied to reach schools. Yes there are some, but most people think pretty hard about how to maximize their acceptance by applying to schools they have a decent chance at. Exorbitant application fees and a real desire to be accepted are motivators to choose wisely.

i wasn't making any claims about what percentage of applicants only apply to reach schools, i was merely stating that the 40-50% statistic includes these individuals, and that it would be higher (albeit perhaps not by very much) if these folks were more careful in their selection of schools.

 

[pianola]

What is the point of this thread? 😕😕

 

[htownpremie]

What is the point of this thread? 😕😕

place to toot a horn about being special and great...

thats all i can gather.

 

[QofQuimica]

Maybe...

- Good stats (mine are good too, but I lack what's listed below)
- Good "fit" school choices (I missed out here)
- Lucked into research under incredible PI (b/c of UG)
- Parent(s) is/are physicians
- Legacy at 1-2 schools (if 1 or both parents is/are docs)
- Attended more prestigious UG (shouldn't matter, but does)
- URM or disadvantaged

I think most people who are accepted "everywhere" fall into at least half of above categories. Prove me wrong. The italicized points were/are out of my control.

The people who are accepted "everywhere" are people who are strong in every aspect of their application. That means, they have *all* of the following:

1. Excellent grades/MCAT
2. Stellar LORs (some people really do get lukewarm ones)
3. Thoughtful and well-written essays (it's amazing that some applicants don't even bother to spellcheck)
4. Significant ECs that at minimum include clinical experience and community service, and that often also include one or more of the following: research with or without pubs, work experience, graduate degrees, military service, athletic accomplishments, tutoring/TAing experience, musical or other artistic accomplishments, church involvement, Greek organization participation, etc.
5. Personable interviewees who strike us as being humble in spite of their considerable accomplishments, interested in our school, and genuinely nice. Basically, if I wouldn't want you on my team on the wards, I sure wouldn't want to subject the incoming first year class to you.

Most of the other things you mentioned don't matter very much, if at all.

• Anyone can work for an "incredible PI" no matter where they go to school if they have enough initiative to find opportunities that they feel are lacking at their own school. There are tons of research programs at big research schools that cater to college kids interested in doing research. Heck, there are even programs like that which cater to HS students. There is no law saying that you must do research at your home institution.
• Having parents who are physicians doesn't really enter into the equation. It might give you more access to shadowing experiences, but it's equally likely that you will get an interviewer who challenges you to defend yourself that you're not only going to med school to please your parents.
• Being a legacy applicant will sometimes get you a courtesy interview at my school, but it doesn't at all guarantee you an acceptance. We reject plenty of them.
• UG attended doesn't really matter at my school. If it's a school we haven't heard of, we're literate enough to look up information about it. IMO, the only time it might help you slightly to have attended a well-known school is if you have an average GPA. If you have a below-average GPA, attending a name-brand school won't compensate for your low grades. But if you have a stellar GPA from a legitimate, accredited American/Canadian college, that will help you tremendously.
• Being disadvantaged (especially if you are also URM) is a special case. The vast majority of medical school applicants are upper-middle class. They have access to better education and EC opportunities, are better able to afford to use outside services (ex. test prep, application advisors), and are less likely to have to work excessively large numbers of hours (ex. to support themselves and possibly their families) while in school. So yes, people do get some slack if they come from a disadvantaged background. That is because we look at the total distance traveled (i.e., how much the person accomplished despite starting out far behind most other applicants), and not just the final level of accomplishment achieved.

None of the people on SDN will ever "prove you wrong." Most of them can't, because as premeds, they don't have access to the information you seek. They only have access to their own applications, which gives them no standard by which to judge what makes an applicant truly stellar versus average. (Even your own app is not entirely known to you since you have not seen your LORs, and you do not know how the interviewer has scored you.) The few people in the know on this website, the ones who see tons of apps, have the ability to prove you wrong, but aren't going to divulge the personal information of thousands of other applicants. So I guess you will only get the proof you seek if you join your school's adcom once you get into medical school. 😉

 

[slick27]

So I guess you will only get the proof you seek if you join your school's adcom once you get into medical school. 😉[/quote]

I never want to be on my schools adcom. I woudn't want to make that decision of who gets in and who doesn't since everyone is derserving. If the applicant put the time in to take the courses and MCAT, etc...

I just woudn't want that power.

 

[nick_carraway]

I never want to be on my schools adcom. I woudn't want to make that decision of who gets in and who doesn't since everyone is derserving. If the applicant put the time in to take the courses and MCAT, etc...

I just woudn't want that power.

I would. PWN.

 

[QofQuimica]

I never want to be on my schools adcom. I woudn't want to make that decision of who gets in and who doesn't since everyone is derserving. If the applicant put the time in to take the courses and MCAT, etc...

I just woudn't want that power.

I assume you mean that everyone is competitive when you say they are "deserving," and not that they are owed a seat simply because they fulfilled the prereqs. I can't agree that everyone is "deserving" in the sense of being equally competitive, but you are certainly right that there are many more competitive applicants than there are seats in the class, or even interview slots. That's why it is always a good idea to apply early. You are also right that making decisions is not very easy in many cases. There is always a group of applicants who are clearly not competitive for medical school, and another group of applicants who are unequivocally stellar. But the vast majority fall somewhere in the middle, and most of those folks would be reasonably good choices. We just aren't able to accomodate them all.

 

[WildlifeSaver]

This guy is the man. He is right about everything.



This guy is not the man. You know what? I see you whining here a lot about how you didn't get accepted this round and I didn't want to say it before, but you are not special and if you think you are special, get a reality check. Your numbers are not special, you ECs are average. If you want better feedback, make a more detailed MD apps since you seem to think your **** is all in order cockily writing "check....check."

Luck is what losers attribute to their losses. They never fail to put the blame on some bull**** intangible thing like luck or chance for their failures. Look at yourself and fix whatever it is ALL the adcoms at ALL the schools you applied to saw as a flaw in your app.

You do need to calm down and take a chill pill.

There are a ton of over qualified and just qualified applications to medical school. People are on a wait list for reasons. They have what the schools want, but not enough seats to give out to everyone. That is why. I know some people are just not qualified enough standing next to all of the apps. Its competition buddy. All because they are on a waitlist or didn't get accepted that doesn't mean there stats suck. Why do you think we don't get accepted everywhere.

 

[FSAP]

I am a prime example of why the process is messed up. I got interviews at Pritzker, Northwestern, Case and UIC. Nothing from Rush. Where is the logic here? I guess I am a bad fit.

 

[drizzt3117]

I am a prime example of why the process is messed up. I got interviews at Pritzker, Northwestern, Case and UIC. Nothing from Rush. Where is the logic here? I guess I am a bad fit.

Maybe they just didn't like you...

I got an interview at Rush (that I declined) despite being far above their average stats... sometimes schools just interview people they like even if there is a small chance they'll go there. Sometimes they don't like people that are above their average stats (U of C was one of my few preinterview rejections) It's not exactly random, as much as it is qualitative and subjective. Otherwise, the low stat people would be totally F-ed.

 

[aggieallure]

Most of all I wrote a bizzare personal statement that made everyone want to meet me. It. was so polarizing i had people loving it or hating it. I will post it to give u an idea.

I'm intrigued. Must have been one heck of a statement.

 

[beckhunter116]

SFLO, A greekorican!!!! I love it! 😍

 

[slowbutsteady]

you aren't the only one. i met a kid on the interview trail this year, who made that mistake last year [i think he might have overestimated the power of a harvard pedigree]...i don't even think he got a single interview.

If you met him on the interview trail, i guess he got one interview.

 

[slowbutsteady]

I totally agree with your post.

I also believe there is a bit of luck or fate involved. However, because of the inherent randomness of the process, I applied to a good number of schools- precisely trying to account for the couple of schools where my application would be seen at the end of a very long, exhausting day. I figured if I had a number of schools from each "tier" (if there even is such a thing), I could avoid most random effects and hopefully get a fair shake.

I'm also a big believer in fate in the sense that I feel like the adcom people know more than I do about who fits into their school and who doesn't. If they see me and they think "not sciency enough" or "not academic enough" or "too weird", that's fine, cause chances are I wouldn't fit into that school as well as I could elsewhere. They know what kind of class they're trying to form, what kind of environment they want to foster, what kind of people they want to unite. And hey, I trust their judgment. If they want a group of super-intense, extremely dedicated, all-science, all-research people, then I don't belong there. If they want super-ambitious, serious, competitive people, I don't belong there either. Thank God they rejected me.

I mean, sure, maybe I slipped through the cracks (there is one school in particular that I still think I would have been a great fit for- apparently, they disagreed) at a couple of places, but I'm sure for the most part I was screened out the old-fashioned way, and due to reasons that are ultimately better for me anyway.

Maybe I'm naive, but I like to see it that way. It's definitely made this process a lot less miserable than it could have been.

OK, it's official. The wisest person on SDN for the 2009 cycle is LET. This post really sums it up for me, and probably for most people.

I am a perfect fit, I believe, for the school I attend. They knew it; I didn't. And, knowing what I know now, my former "first choice" would not have been right for me.

[Don't get too happy LET. Being the "wisest" on SDN doesn't say much!! But you are probably wise in real life as well as virtual life! Thanks for all your comments.]

 

[ButImLETired]

OK, it's official. The wisest person on SDN for the 2009 cycle is LET. This post really sums it up for me, and probably for most people.

I am a perfect fit, I believe, for the school I attend. They knew it; I didn't. And, knowing what I know now, my former "first choice" would not have been right for me.

[Don't get too happy LET. Being the "wisest" on SDN doesn't say much!! But you are probably wise in real life as well as virtual life! Thanks for all your comments.]

😳😍

 

[htownpremie]

If you met him on the interview trail, i guess he got one interview.

if clarification is needed: he made the mistake during the last application cycle, not the current one. he realized his mistake and applied quite broadly during the current cycle. i actually ran into him at 4 or so different interviews.

 

[flaahless]

Luck is what losers attribute to their losses. They never fail to put the blame on some bull**** intangible thing like luck or chance for their failures.

Co-sign.

I don't think it's a crapshoot. Sure there may be an element of luck, but that's why you apply to 20 schools - to minimize your chances of error. If you fall through the cracks at 1 school, that's understandable. If you fall through the cracks at 20 schools, maybe it's you and not them. Review your app, refine your strategy, and re-apply.