For California applicants
- Thread starter Doctor School
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2010
- Messages
- 28
- Reaction score
- 1
On the topic of scholarships the most general answer is that scholarships are directed at the demography you want to attract to your program. Tuition is relieved, which may be a real boon to the recipient. But to the UC programs tuition revenue is miniscule compared to NIH grant revenue (include Stanford and USC in that as well), so there is very little real 'cost' to those institutions if they waive your tuition. Basically, scholarships are not based on raw academic merit, but rather on merit within a cohort of prospective students defined by demography. The UC Davis post-bac program is an example of this in action, although at the pre-med level.
Yo Doctor School,
Here's a nice little question for you. What kind of interviewee do you like the most?
Series of questions now that I started...
What makes you happiest in life?
What kind of music do you like to listen to?
If you could be any animal, what kind would you be?
Mind you these are serious lighthearted questions, and I think you are a very interesting person.
Here's a nice little question for you. What kind of interviewee do you like the most?
Series of questions now that I started...
What makes you happiest in life?
What kind of music do you like to listen to?
If you could be any animal, what kind would you be?
Mind you these are serious lighthearted questions, and I think you are a very interesting person.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2010
- Messages
- 28
- Reaction score
- 1
I concur with Excelsius. Time is valuable for everyone here and I would rather stay on the mechanics of California admissions itself. The information that I might be able to provide will not always be encouraging, but it should help some people be more aware as they prepare their applications.
I'll return to the 'fit to mission' concept and why it is important to fathom. The osteopathic school in northern California is a very good case in point. I understand their actual mission to be graduating primary care physicians who are likely to practice in northern California. Their enrollment data show that over 70% of their incoming class are CA residents (it is a private school). UCB and UCD, to put an even more regional spin on it, are their main feeder schools. The point is that the best fit to their mission, as suggested by their matriculant data, is an osteopathically-oriented resident of northern California.
Stanford certainly can admit very selectively. But by my last count 41% of their matriculants were CA residents. More telling is that 71% of USC matriculants are CA residents and 79% of UCSF matriculants are CA residents. Now the Stanford total could be because, let's face it, this state puts out seriously good applicants. But it has more to do with how their brand is defined and how their alumni historically have stayed nearby. The UCSF number is the most reflective of fit to mission. This is arguably the top or second to the top program in the country. By charter it must admit CA residents but it annually bends that down to the bare minimum. Because its mission is built on finding exceptional, diverse, unique people from an already select cohort of applicants who are diverse, unique and exceptional.
I understand that the operational mission of a medical school is not advertised explicitly to applicants. So how can knowing that your fit to mission matters heavily really help you if you do not know how each campus positions itself? Perhaps there are two starting points here. One is that you now have some awareness that progams are defining your worth to them less in terms of your statistics and more in terms of how well they think you will execute what they do best. Two, to the extent that you can, immerse yourself in their communities and see if you do not come away with a good sense of "what they are about". You might see that mission more readily than you think.
Best wishes.
I'll return to the 'fit to mission' concept and why it is important to fathom. The osteopathic school in northern California is a very good case in point. I understand their actual mission to be graduating primary care physicians who are likely to practice in northern California. Their enrollment data show that over 70% of their incoming class are CA residents (it is a private school). UCB and UCD, to put an even more regional spin on it, are their main feeder schools. The point is that the best fit to their mission, as suggested by their matriculant data, is an osteopathically-oriented resident of northern California.
Stanford certainly can admit very selectively. But by my last count 41% of their matriculants were CA residents. More telling is that 71% of USC matriculants are CA residents and 79% of UCSF matriculants are CA residents. Now the Stanford total could be because, let's face it, this state puts out seriously good applicants. But it has more to do with how their brand is defined and how their alumni historically have stayed nearby. The UCSF number is the most reflective of fit to mission. This is arguably the top or second to the top program in the country. By charter it must admit CA residents but it annually bends that down to the bare minimum. Because its mission is built on finding exceptional, diverse, unique people from an already select cohort of applicants who are diverse, unique and exceptional.
I understand that the operational mission of a medical school is not advertised explicitly to applicants. So how can knowing that your fit to mission matters heavily really help you if you do not know how each campus positions itself? Perhaps there are two starting points here. One is that you now have some awareness that progams are defining your worth to them less in terms of your statistics and more in terms of how well they think you will execute what they do best. Two, to the extent that you can, immerse yourself in their communities and see if you do not come away with a good sense of "what they are about". You might see that mission more readily than you think.
Best wishes.
- Joined
- May 27, 2009
- Messages
- 287
- Reaction score
- 0
We admit there are strong applicants in California due to several reasons. But, it's somehow misleading to assume everybody will stay in state after medical school, isn't it? If not so, then what is the importance of residency programs after medical school? We know that some specialties are more emphasized and excelled in some schools spread about the whole country.
Thus, you have to admit those two outcomes: 1) any CA resident student who graduated from a CA medical school may choose/find/suit a specialty in another state other than CA, thus will leave the state, even forever since s/he might choose to remain in that new state s/he would be graduated from the residency 2) any CA out-of-state applicant might wanna choose CA to remain to stay with whatever residency options would be given to him/her. In either case, if you're not gonna make a binding contract with those during medical school applications (not residency), you cannot be sure that they'll remain to stay in CA.
Having said that, I'd like to hear something more realistic about accepting more in-state or out-of-state applicants to CA schools, if exists, at all.
Another thing disturbing my mind is that being resident to a state shouldn't mean that you are only allowed to live in that state forever. This is America not fascist/communist country; there is freedom to move to other places in the country in order to follow your dreams. However, making comments of favoritism on in-state applicants clearly dictates the opposite, telling that "don't transpass our territory", which honestly bothers me a lot. On the flip side of this matter, I totally understand the out-of-state/in-state-resident tuition difference, because the in-state-resident students (or their parents) have already paid for their state taxes in that particular state, and there must be a slight difference "monetarily".
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,793
- Reaction score
- 9
Do adcoms tend to look down on ECs that don't revolve around large social groups/clubs/organizations. All the things that I like to do (outdoors stuff) I have always enjoyed by myself or with a couple of comrades. Do adcoms recognize people that generally like a lot of solitary time but still enjoy helping and working in teams when the time comes for that? Or are we just tossed aside into the loner, "do not want" pile? 
I actually do have community activities such as volunteering at two health centers and two two community centers that revolve around helping/teaching people. Hopefully that "balances" out my "loner" part of the app.
I actually do have community activities such as volunteering at two health centers and two two community centers that revolve around helping/teaching people. Hopefully that "balances" out my "loner" part of the app.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2009
- Messages
- 2,948
- Reaction score
- 660
How detrimental is a lukewarm letter of rec for an applicant
let's say an applicant has an above average GPA, MCAT, ECs, Research, and other great letters but one of the 4 is lukewarm or slightly negative. Is that applicant automatically rejected or is it mentioned during an interview?
let's say an applicant has an above average GPA, MCAT, ECs, Research, and other great letters but one of the 4 is lukewarm or slightly negative. Is that applicant automatically rejected or is it mentioned during an interview?
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2009
- Messages
- 1,146
- Reaction score
- 9
I'm wondering the same... One of my science recs is going to be whatever since most of the science courses I've taken have had so many students.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2009
- Messages
- 2,948
- Reaction score
- 660
For undergraduate (I don't know about medical schools) the UC system was founded to provide FREE education for California residents. Now obviously that didn't work out, so they had to start charging tuition. Part of the state constitution/UC rules, however, are that they cannot charge residents for instruction, and so may only charge for "maintenance" and "facilities" (i.e none of your UC tuition goes toward paying for professors/administrator paychecks but rather goes towards the overhead of the school). However, nothing in the rules prohibit the UCs from charging OOS students a far greater tuition, because they can also charge them for instruction and not just facilities, etc. That's where the difference in tuition comes from. The minimum in state acceptance rate is because, like you said, those students are paying through their taxes to keep the school running so they should have "first dibs" but if you notice OOS acceptance rates tend to rise when the UCs are in trouble financially (as an example the UG OOS UC acceptance rates are supposed to rise this year...)
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,793
- Reaction score
- 9
edit: woops.
- Joined
- May 27, 2009
- Messages
- 287
- Reaction score
- 0
If they wish to see more new physicians in CA, they should have opened up more "residency" spots in CA with more attractive benefits packages, after graduation job placement services, etc. to compete with those in other states. This can only be a solid "mission" of the medical schools and centers, if they will. IMHO, saying that "we're expecting in-state applicants remain to stay in CA, thus we're favoring them" is an empty expectation and has no ground, sorry.
I don't know why, but it's really interesting to hear from many med-school graduate residents I spoke with that they have literally no interest in finding positions in CA. What deter(s) them from CA, I don't have any idea. Many are big on Eastern/Southern/Midwest states, though.
I'm pretty much sure that most of the new attendings can live a very decent life in CA on a physician salary. Therefore, there must be some other repulsive forces which deter them from CA.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2010
- Messages
- 28
- Reaction score
- 1
On the points raised by Ceng2Doc:
"We admit there are strong applicants in California due to several reasons. But, it's somehow misleading to assume everybody will stay in state after medical school, isn't it? If not so, then what is the importance of residency programs after medical school? We know that some specialties are more emphasized and excelled in some schools spread about the whole country.
Thus, you have to admit those two outcomes: 1) any CA resident student who graduated from a CA medical school may choose/find/suit a specialty in another state other than CA, thus will leave the state, even forever since s/he might choose to remain in that new state s/he would be graduated from the residency 2) any CA out-of-state applicant might wanna choose CA to remain to stay with whatever residency options would be given to him/her. In either case, if you're not gonna make a binding contract with those during medical school applications (not residency), you cannot be sure that they'll remain to stay in CA."
I understand the logic here, but within medical schools we see it differently. The campuses focused on primary care understand (or believe we do) what 'kind' of person is likely to really want a primary care career. This person is focused on family, community, and others. All of our alumni and retrospective studies affirm that applicants with family roots in California and all of the other markers of an outcome in primary care will, absolutely, seek to practice in those same or similar communities. One reason that Stanford and USC also have large CA resident matriculants follows their own alumni and retrospective studies. Basically, there is a palpably different "charge" in the conviction of a CA resident to remain in the state compared to that evinced by state residents elsewhere. I cannot tell you how many out-of-state applicants cite location as a primary reason they apply to my program. But our data suggest they are less likely to practice here after graduation.
from Ceng2Doc:
"Having said that, I'd like to hear something more realistic about accepting more in-state or out-of-state applicants to CA schools, if exists, at all.
Another thing disturbing my mind is that being resident to a state shouldn't mean that you are only allowed to live in that state forever. This is America not fascist/communist country; there is freedom to move to other places in the country in order to follow your dreams. However, making comments of favoritism on in-state applicants clearly dictates the opposite, telling that "don't transpass our territory", which honestly bothers me a lot. On the flip side of this matter, I totally understand the out-of-state/in-state-resident tuition difference, because the in-state-resident students (or their parents) have already paid for their state taxes in that particular state, and there must be a slight difference "monetarily"."
I think that clarity here might come from understanding how we think about admissions. From the applicant's perspective so much anxiety seems to center around gathering all of the right credentials to be competitive for admission. But from our perspective the evaluations are based on what we have committed ourselves to as outcomes. For the UC programs we are chartered to show that our graduates remain in the state. There is no 'penalty' if they do not, because as the poster notes there are other physicians who will take their place, but there is reward if they do. And, of course, by charter the UC programs must admit a high percentage of each class from within the state. The private programs, including the osteopathic ones, are also driving their admissions from the outcomes end. This is where 'fit to mission' has a very tangible impact on a specific applicant's file. If we tend to admit students disproportionately from regions within the state that are proximate to our campuses, it is as a direct result of what our graduates have done historically. I hope that my explanation here makes sense, because I know there are some subtleties that I am not expressing very clearly.
"We admit there are strong applicants in California due to several reasons. But, it's somehow misleading to assume everybody will stay in state after medical school, isn't it? If not so, then what is the importance of residency programs after medical school? We know that some specialties are more emphasized and excelled in some schools spread about the whole country.
Thus, you have to admit those two outcomes: 1) any CA resident student who graduated from a CA medical school may choose/find/suit a specialty in another state other than CA, thus will leave the state, even forever since s/he might choose to remain in that new state s/he would be graduated from the residency 2) any CA out-of-state applicant might wanna choose CA to remain to stay with whatever residency options would be given to him/her. In either case, if you're not gonna make a binding contract with those during medical school applications (not residency), you cannot be sure that they'll remain to stay in CA."
I understand the logic here, but within medical schools we see it differently. The campuses focused on primary care understand (or believe we do) what 'kind' of person is likely to really want a primary care career. This person is focused on family, community, and others. All of our alumni and retrospective studies affirm that applicants with family roots in California and all of the other markers of an outcome in primary care will, absolutely, seek to practice in those same or similar communities. One reason that Stanford and USC also have large CA resident matriculants follows their own alumni and retrospective studies. Basically, there is a palpably different "charge" in the conviction of a CA resident to remain in the state compared to that evinced by state residents elsewhere. I cannot tell you how many out-of-state applicants cite location as a primary reason they apply to my program. But our data suggest they are less likely to practice here after graduation.
from Ceng2Doc:
"Having said that, I'd like to hear something more realistic about accepting more in-state or out-of-state applicants to CA schools, if exists, at all.
Another thing disturbing my mind is that being resident to a state shouldn't mean that you are only allowed to live in that state forever. This is America not fascist/communist country; there is freedom to move to other places in the country in order to follow your dreams. However, making comments of favoritism on in-state applicants clearly dictates the opposite, telling that "don't transpass our territory", which honestly bothers me a lot. On the flip side of this matter, I totally understand the out-of-state/in-state-resident tuition difference, because the in-state-resident students (or their parents) have already paid for their state taxes in that particular state, and there must be a slight difference "monetarily"."
I think that clarity here might come from understanding how we think about admissions. From the applicant's perspective so much anxiety seems to center around gathering all of the right credentials to be competitive for admission. But from our perspective the evaluations are based on what we have committed ourselves to as outcomes. For the UC programs we are chartered to show that our graduates remain in the state. There is no 'penalty' if they do not, because as the poster notes there are other physicians who will take their place, but there is reward if they do. And, of course, by charter the UC programs must admit a high percentage of each class from within the state. The private programs, including the osteopathic ones, are also driving their admissions from the outcomes end. This is where 'fit to mission' has a very tangible impact on a specific applicant's file. If we tend to admit students disproportionately from regions within the state that are proximate to our campuses, it is as a direct result of what our graduates have done historically. I hope that my explanation here makes sense, because I know there are some subtleties that I am not expressing very clearly.
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2010
- Messages
- 28
- Reaction score
- 1
I'll try to cover the three posts about ECs and LORs at one time.
We look for consistency and conviction. A student who dives into their ECs with conviction will evidence that conviction in their application, whether it is through solo or group endeavors. The ECs are really about showing that you know who you are and you know where and how you are effective in a service capacity.
We realize that it is hard to get professors to take an interest in your development to the point that they are comfortable writing an out-of-the-box letter. The consistency thread here is that if your academics are strong we expect your letters to be strong too. One lemon in the bunch is OK, but more than one lemon raises a concern. If your academics are not your strong suit, your LORs need to be operatic. Because if you think about it, in the climate of CA resident applications, there are too many people who have both. The issue, as I have stressed here, is not that we see that lemon letter and say "OK, another one bites the dust". Far from it. If I did not feel for all of the applicants who get close but do not make it, I would not be on this forum at 12:40 in the morning. Instead, we cannot turn away the applicant who is in the zone, who turned heads as a collegian, who writes with conviction.
I want to convey to applicants that motivation and inspiration are quite different and the more of the latter you can convey the more it rings true for us. 90% of applicants are motivated. But far fewer are inspired. You know it when you feel it, and others around you, even cranky o-chem professors, respond. I want pre-meds who are considering a career in medicine to find that inspiration and divorce it from the powerful thrust of your motivation. Take your time.
In future posts I would like to focus on what I think are some important things a CA resident should do to improve their chances of going to medical school anywhere, not just in CA. Because in the end going to medical school anywhere is infinitely better than is not going to medical school at all. I have a few suggestions that some of you might find helpful, as well as some advice for getting the most out of your medical education if it does take place outside of CA.
Best wishes.
We look for consistency and conviction. A student who dives into their ECs with conviction will evidence that conviction in their application, whether it is through solo or group endeavors. The ECs are really about showing that you know who you are and you know where and how you are effective in a service capacity.
We realize that it is hard to get professors to take an interest in your development to the point that they are comfortable writing an out-of-the-box letter. The consistency thread here is that if your academics are strong we expect your letters to be strong too. One lemon in the bunch is OK, but more than one lemon raises a concern. If your academics are not your strong suit, your LORs need to be operatic. Because if you think about it, in the climate of CA resident applications, there are too many people who have both. The issue, as I have stressed here, is not that we see that lemon letter and say "OK, another one bites the dust". Far from it. If I did not feel for all of the applicants who get close but do not make it, I would not be on this forum at 12:40 in the morning. Instead, we cannot turn away the applicant who is in the zone, who turned heads as a collegian, who writes with conviction.
I want to convey to applicants that motivation and inspiration are quite different and the more of the latter you can convey the more it rings true for us. 90% of applicants are motivated. But far fewer are inspired. You know it when you feel it, and others around you, even cranky o-chem professors, respond. I want pre-meds who are considering a career in medicine to find that inspiration and divorce it from the powerful thrust of your motivation. Take your time.
In future posts I would like to focus on what I think are some important things a CA resident should do to improve their chances of going to medical school anywhere, not just in CA. Because in the end going to medical school anywhere is infinitely better than is not going to medical school at all. I have a few suggestions that some of you might find helpful, as well as some advice for getting the most out of your medical education if it does take place outside of CA.
Best wishes.
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2009
- Messages
- 1,603
- Reaction score
- 268
Doctor School,
This is not necessarily a CA specific question, but it does apply to a CA school.
I am not a CA resident, but very interested in a certain public CA medical school (it is my top choice). I also wish to do a CA residency and to live in CA... and obviously (well at least I am under this impression) going to a CA medical school would help this.
Post-interview, are things that very seriously interested applicants can do to perhaps further boost/enhance their overall application/file in the eyes of the admissions committee? Additional letters of recommendation? Letters of interest/intent...stating specifically why the particular school is your top choice or why you would be a great fit? etc...
Thanks so much. It is one thing to get the opinion of pre-medical and medical students on SDN, but quite another to see the perspective of an administrator such as yourself.
This is not necessarily a CA specific question, but it does apply to a CA school.
I am not a CA resident, but very interested in a certain public CA medical school (it is my top choice). I also wish to do a CA residency and to live in CA... and obviously (well at least I am under this impression) going to a CA medical school would help this.
Post-interview, are things that very seriously interested applicants can do to perhaps further boost/enhance their overall application/file in the eyes of the admissions committee? Additional letters of recommendation? Letters of interest/intent...stating specifically why the particular school is your top choice or why you would be a great fit? etc...
Thanks so much. It is one thing to get the opinion of pre-medical and medical students on SDN, but quite another to see the perspective of an administrator such as yourself.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,793
- Reaction score
- 9
Thanks for the replies!
How much weight do you place on one's undergrad school? Is a 3.8 GPA and 35 MCAT from Cal State Fullerton the same as a 3.8 and 35 from UCLA?
How much weight do you place on one's undergrad school? Is a 3.8 GPA and 35 MCAT from Cal State Fullerton the same as a 3.8 and 35 from UCLA?
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2009
- Messages
- 1,603
- Reaction score
- 268
lol.....is this coming straight from "that" thread? good question nonetheless (coming from a less prestigious state school myself)
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2009
- Messages
- 9,746
- Reaction score
- 1,666
As a general question, does the USNEWS rankings motivate admissions in any way? Whether this be through yield protection or cutoffs?
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2008
- Messages
- 1,793
- Reaction score
- 9
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2010
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 1
I once had a dream that the rest of the UCs w/o med schools (Cal, Santa Cruz, Santa Barbara, Merced-although one is supposedly coming about) all built new med schools...
and then like half the Cal States went and built med schools as well...
that would take care of the problem that CA residents are faced with..
oh wait, that's impossible and we're in a crapload of debt.
never mind.
but one can dream can't they??
(time to wake up and go back to mcat studying and the never-until-i-cure-cancer-will-i-get-accepted-to-Cali-schools reality)
and then like half the Cal States went and built med schools as well...
that would take care of the problem that CA residents are faced with..
oh wait, that's impossible and we're in a crapload of debt.
never mind.
but one can dream can't they??
(time to wake up and go back to mcat studying and the never-until-i-cure-cancer-will-i-get-accepted-to-Cali-schools reality)
Bump
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2009
- Messages
- 339
- Reaction score
- 0
Hi Doctor School!
I've been told that I may have put myself at a serious disadvantage in terms of getting into medical schools by moving to California for the year and a half before I want to attend. I'm originally a VA resident: I went to college in VA and did a post bac program on the east coast. After post bac I decided to take another year off to earn some money while applying to schools, and I ended up in Los Angeles. My plan wasn't to move to CA so that I have a better shot at getting into a CA school; this is just where the circumstances took me. I'm now a CA resident (because there's no way that I could see of keeping my VA residence if I'm working out here), and worried that neither California schools or east coast schools are going to want me because I'm too new to CA, but still a resident. Do you have any insight into this kind of situation? Thanks!!
I've been told that I may have put myself at a serious disadvantage in terms of getting into medical schools by moving to California for the year and a half before I want to attend. I'm originally a VA resident: I went to college in VA and did a post bac program on the east coast. After post bac I decided to take another year off to earn some money while applying to schools, and I ended up in Los Angeles. My plan wasn't to move to CA so that I have a better shot at getting into a CA school; this is just where the circumstances took me. I'm now a CA resident (because there's no way that I could see of keeping my VA residence if I'm working out here), and worried that neither California schools or east coast schools are going to want me because I'm too new to CA, but still a resident. Do you have any insight into this kind of situation? Thanks!!
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2010
- Messages
- 43
- Reaction score
- 0
Doctor School,
I understand the importance of applying early and wanted to know more about what is considered early. You mentioned that once 60% of the seats are filled things get more competitive. When (Sept? Oct? Nov?) does this usually occur?
Also, I'm currently planning on taking the MCAT in May but am not near my target score. I'm at a 31 and would like a 35. If I postponed to June 17 I think the extra time would help me get there. Would this be considered too late?
Thanks for your help!
I understand the importance of applying early and wanted to know more about what is considered early. You mentioned that once 60% of the seats are filled things get more competitive. When (Sept? Oct? Nov?) does this usually occur?
Also, I'm currently planning on taking the MCAT in May but am not near my target score. I'm at a 31 and would like a 35. If I postponed to June 17 I think the extra time would help me get there. Would this be considered too late?
Thanks for your help!
