- Joined
- May 13, 2002
- Messages
- 4,755
- Reaction score
- 8
Here are some comments from a former dean of admissions at a medical school in the northeast. It is an interesting read.
For The Non Superstars
- Thread starter kito
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2003
- Messages
- 20,588
- Reaction score
- 34,502
Where did you get this?
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2002
- Messages
- 4,129
- Reaction score
- 9
Hmm, I agree it sounds more like a student than a dean, its not very diplomatic at all. Then again, I guess that is why he is a FORMER dean of admissions and not so currently.
And of course ECs are as important as MCAT/GPA in determining a good doctor, he's not stating anything new.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2003
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 0
The above quote was taken from the recent September round table discussion forum at www.examkrackers.com The former admissions director is a lady named Judy Levine who was an admissions director at NYU (I believe). She also runs a pre-med advising service at www.premedadvising.com .
Judy answers questions of premed students every day. A very commendable deed, isn't it?
Judy answers questions of premed students every day. A very commendable deed, isn't it?
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2003
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 0
The above quote was also taken out of context with no reference to the question/post that prompted her reply. Here is the post she responded to:
Medical school admissions work crazy for all you out there. My cousin went to U. of Michigan undergraduate in Ann Arbor and had a 3.75 overall GPA, 3.9 science GPA, top 5% on the whole old MCAT. He only got into two top medical schools with that record. He is white and Jewish. He went to NYU. He did not even get an interview at any of the IVY league medical schools with a record like that. This was also when applicants were at an all time low in the 1980s. I know someone from Hunter that because he was Hispanic had much better luck with a much less record. He had a 3.5 overall, 3.5 science GPA, and 30 MCAT from a lesser known undergraduate school and is at Stanford now. Dont belive alot of the admissions information. They would take a Hispanic or Black person with much lower numbers or school then a white jewish or asian person with high numbers or from a top school.
Medical school admissions work crazy for all you out there. My cousin went to U. of Michigan undergraduate in Ann Arbor and had a 3.75 overall GPA, 3.9 science GPA, top 5% on the whole old MCAT. He only got into two top medical schools with that record. He is white and Jewish. He went to NYU. He did not even get an interview at any of the IVY league medical schools with a record like that. This was also when applicants were at an all time low in the 1980s. I know someone from Hunter that because he was Hispanic had much better luck with a much less record. He had a 3.5 overall, 3.5 science GPA, and 30 MCAT from a lesser known undergraduate school and is at Stanford now. Dont belive alot of the admissions information. They would take a Hispanic or Black person with much lower numbers or school then a white jewish or asian person with high numbers or from a top school.
E
Eraserhead
makes more sense that NYMC would reject those people, from my perspective they seem like a school looking for a certain work ethic and well roundedness versus people with very high numbers and/or people looking for prestigious academic careers.
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2002
- Messages
- 4,129
- Reaction score
- 9
It would be interesting to see if either of the two cases presented had significant/deficient ECs. Anyway, there is no way for me or the advisor to make a judgement without more information. But something makes me feel as if there was a flag in the high-stats persons application, something that isnt mentioned here.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 30,460
- Reaction score
- 23,510
What about this passage makes you think it's false? Do you really think a dean is going to come out and say, "We don't want any applicant who finds free time to enjoy life and interact with people. We feel the best applicants are people with a narrow focus, who sacrifice all pleasure to ensure their two numbers--GPA and MCAT--are as high as conceivable. Superior numbers make superior doctors."
I really don't see how anything in this passage strikes you as out of the ordinary.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2000
- Messages
- 6,276
- Reaction score
- 14
Quotas are real. These people are academics, they are skilled at bullsh*tting. They can argue the opposite if they wanted to and some guy could be posting this on SDN as the final say in the matter - from the horses mouth, so to speak.
In this example she is taking a perfectly normal example, and then stacking the odds in her favor, by saying that this 3.9/39 kid, of whom we know nothing further, has no activities outside of school. Then we compare this person with some hypothetical 3.5/30 kid who has had "multiple leadership roles, activities, and paid their way through college."
Well sure, if you put it that way, then maybe we can be fooled into thinking that all cases of racial bias in stats are due to certain groups being more involved in activities outside of medical school than others. But once we step back from all these smoke and mirror tricks, we are left with the realization that in real life, it is extremely rare for cases to be as clear cut as in the former adcom's favor, and yet a significant amount of certain races with significantly lower stats have a significant higher rate of success than those of other races of similar qualifications.
In this example she is taking a perfectly normal example, and then stacking the odds in her favor, by saying that this 3.9/39 kid, of whom we know nothing further, has no activities outside of school. Then we compare this person with some hypothetical 3.5/30 kid who has had "multiple leadership roles, activities, and paid their way through college."
Well sure, if you put it that way, then maybe we can be fooled into thinking that all cases of racial bias in stats are due to certain groups being more involved in activities outside of medical school than others. But once we step back from all these smoke and mirror tricks, we are left with the realization that in real life, it is extremely rare for cases to be as clear cut as in the former adcom's favor, and yet a significant amount of certain races with significantly lower stats have a significant higher rate of success than those of other races of similar qualifications.
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2003
- Messages
- 1,516
- Reaction score
- 21
Exactly why I plan to get married before applying (my new last name will be Gonzalez), wear brown contacts, get a tan, and know a healthy amount of Spanish. 😉
Seeing as this isn't the Lounge, I guess I should put a disclaimer. I have no real intention of doing any of the above-mentioned things.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 30,460
- Reaction score
- 23,510
You guys crack me up. Show me a school that doesn't have any white people. Then, if you don't get into said school, I would start to wonder if your race had something to do with it. But as long as there are white people (or asians) excepted to the school that you wanted to get into, then RACE WAS NOT WHY YOU DIDN'T GET IN. The whole point is that other factors play into why you did or didn't get in.
I'm as white as can be, blond hair, blue eyes, and the whole bit, yet I'm not stressing it. I'd be far more pissed off if I got into a great school only to find out on the first day of school that my class had as much racial diversity as a family reunion, than I would to be rejected from my first choices.
Get over yourselves. If you don't get to your destination, you should've tried harder. Quit with all this scapegoating BS.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2000
- Messages
- 6,276
- Reaction score
- 14
Wow that is a great rebuttal.
There are white people in medical school.
Therefore quotas don't exist.
LOL
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 30,460
- Reaction score
- 23,510
Wow, Street Philosopher, you should try some of that book philosophy.
Where did I say that quotas didn't exist? I just said that there are white people in medical school, so if you're white, you can still get in to medical school.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2000
- Messages
- 6,276
- Reaction score
- 14
That's good shadow boxing, another classic tool in the bullsh*tter's arsenal. When did I ever imply that white people couldn't get into medical school? I said, "A significant amount of certain races with significantly lower stats have a significant higher rate of success than those of other races of similar qualifications." Do you disagree with that? If not, then what are you arguing against?
According to your stringent requirements, hypothetically, as long as a school admits a few token Asians or Whites or Hispanics or Blacks, then that is proof that they are not racially biased. That 1 person out of 100 is enough to satisfy your critical eye. 🙄 Give me a break, I am only stating what is obvious. I love having a diverse class; but that doesn't mean I have to buy into all the bullsh*t people say to rationalize it and justify it.
According to your stringent requirements, hypothetically, as long as a school admits a few token Asians or Whites or Hispanics or Blacks, then that is proof that they are not racially biased. That 1 person out of 100 is enough to satisfy your critical eye. 🙄 Give me a break, I am only stating what is obvious. I love having a diverse class; but that doesn't mean I have to buy into all the bullsh*t people say to rationalize it and justify it.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 30,460
- Reaction score
- 23,510
Christ almighty, don't get your panties in a bunch. I never said quotas don't exist, and I never said admissions weren't racially biased. My point is merely that if white people are in medical school, then a white person cannot sell that argument that quotas are what kept them out--it was their failure to be as attractive of a candidate as the white people who did get into school. My entire point was that all this crying about affirmative action is a waste of your precious breath.
I saw a dude on MDapplicants.com that blamed almost every rejection on affirmative action. He also noted that one school said that the school might not be a good fit for his conservativism. God's sakes, how do you impress upon an ad com that you're a right winger without bringing espousing your strong opinions? This kid should read the article my evil friend deep within has posted. He's blaming anything but himself, and not realizing that if make a point of telling your political biases in a social situation that should be based on diplomatic relations, ad coms are going to think you're immature.
All I'm saying is:
1) White people can get into medical school, so find something else to blame for your failures other than your race.
2) You are pissing and moaning about a process that makes the Universities better learning environments.
And another thing--what's all this crap about 'rebuttal'? You'd swear I slapped someone with a glove and demanded satisfaction. I'm not on some f***ing schedule to logically meet all claims or some crap, and adhere to guidlines. Don't pretend that anything on any of these threads has ever qualified for serious debate. It's just a diversion from doing my homework.
I saw a dude on MDapplicants.com that blamed almost every rejection on affirmative action. He also noted that one school said that the school might not be a good fit for his conservativism. God's sakes, how do you impress upon an ad com that you're a right winger without bringing espousing your strong opinions? This kid should read the article my evil friend deep within has posted. He's blaming anything but himself, and not realizing that if make a point of telling your political biases in a social situation that should be based on diplomatic relations, ad coms are going to think you're immature.
All I'm saying is:
1) White people can get into medical school, so find something else to blame for your failures other than your race.
2) You are pissing and moaning about a process that makes the Universities better learning environments.
And another thing--what's all this crap about 'rebuttal'? You'd swear I slapped someone with a glove and demanded satisfaction. I'm not on some f***ing schedule to logically meet all claims or some crap, and adhere to guidlines. Don't pretend that anything on any of these threads has ever qualified for serious debate. It's just a diversion from doing my homework.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2000
- Messages
- 6,276
- Reaction score
- 14
I am not pissing or moaning, I am laying out what is obvious to most unbiased people. If anyone is doing the pissing and moaning it is you who mistakenly thought that I was in any way complaining about affirmative action.
I suppose you might find it ironic that I go to the University of Michigan. The reality is that I am in medical school and I really don't give a rat's ass about the school's stance one way or the other. What I don't like is fairy-tale fluff being fed to the masses to make it seem more noble than it is.
And in regards to it improving my learning environment, I offer you this from George Will:
I suppose you might find it ironic that I go to the University of Michigan. The reality is that I am in medical school and I really don't give a rat's ass about the school's stance one way or the other. What I don't like is fairy-tale fluff being fed to the masses to make it seem more noble than it is.
And in regards to it improving my learning environment, I offer you this from George Will:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2003
- Messages
- 543
- Reaction score
- 1
I always question the intelligence of someone who would reject a very high MCAT applicant on the basis of lack of EC's, lack of communicating skills or whatever. It is not something like arrogance or some other damaging personalities.
Isn't a medical school a place to teach and train? Why dump a smart brain? It is always an arrogance, ignorance, negligence or whatever... when a group of older and wiser doctors reject a young neophyte. Even an idiot has his chance where he belongs. Adcom should be more passive and give benefit of the doubt to such a case.
Please don't tell me that a medical school can't teach medicine to such an applicant. Smart person can learn anything fast. It is a malpractice to treat such a case as hopeless.
There is always a place in medicine for a top brain. What if the person you reject is interested in becoming a pathologist, a coroner or some pure interest in the science of medicine....? Is it wrong to go to a medical school so that one could teach anatomy to medical students, write a text book....etc? Could one just do some kind of analysis for a living after graduation? WHAT IF THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO GO ANYWHERE THAT NEED HIM/her? (When worse becomes worst, he/she may have to do just that.)
How would one know that this person will never find a way to cure cancer? What if that rejected person was your own child? Always giive a genius a chance. I am willing to bet that in 4-8 years, he/she will not be below the 50 percentile.
Recognize the difference between the two extremes of the bell curve, please!
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2003
- Messages
- 1,501
- Reaction score
- 9
WORD!!!
As far as my issue with the original quote; the tone and style seem a bit unbecoming of someone who is highly educated, mature and in such a visible/political position. Just my opinion and you know what they say about those.....
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2002
- Messages
- 115
- Reaction score
- 0
Hi there,
Admission to medical school depends largely on the mission and values of the medical schools. Values vary from school to school and arguably, collective values have evolved over the years.
"Geniuses" can learn, and they have a good shot at finding a cure for cancer, but rarer is the "genius" who has the more unusual combination of another set of superlative talents in conjunction with their superior academic skill-set. For example, the talents required to act well (Geena Davis), or those required to be a great doctor. I'd argue that some of these other talents may be a little less easy to learn--but that's an entirely separate issue.
The mandates of admissions committees will dictate what specific talents are included in the non-academic skill set of the doctors that they would like to produce, and you already have an idea of what those may be, simply by looking at what they ask for within the AMCAS and supplementary applications. Was the demand for medical school seats not so high, then it may be possible that those "geniuses" with solely stratospheric GPAs and MCAT scores may be more successful in gaining a medical school acceptance, but given the huge number of applicants per medical school seat, combined with the specific mandates of schools to find individuals with certain non-academic talents, chances are the "geniuses" are going to encounter some stiffer competition.
Cheers,
Kirsteen
Admission to medical school depends largely on the mission and values of the medical schools. Values vary from school to school and arguably, collective values have evolved over the years.
"Geniuses" can learn, and they have a good shot at finding a cure for cancer, but rarer is the "genius" who has the more unusual combination of another set of superlative talents in conjunction with their superior academic skill-set. For example, the talents required to act well (Geena Davis), or those required to be a great doctor. I'd argue that some of these other talents may be a little less easy to learn--but that's an entirely separate issue.
The mandates of admissions committees will dictate what specific talents are included in the non-academic skill set of the doctors that they would like to produce, and you already have an idea of what those may be, simply by looking at what they ask for within the AMCAS and supplementary applications. Was the demand for medical school seats not so high, then it may be possible that those "geniuses" with solely stratospheric GPAs and MCAT scores may be more successful in gaining a medical school acceptance, but given the huge number of applicants per medical school seat, combined with the specific mandates of schools to find individuals with certain non-academic talents, chances are the "geniuses" are going to encounter some stiffer competition.
Cheers,
Kirsteen
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 789
- Reaction score
- 15
Traditional applicants are in a rather contrived situation, though. They have three years to perform acadmeically, and prove that they're the future Mother Theresa! Thank goodness I wasn't a pre-med as an undergrad. It's almost certain that the type of social committment demanded will be, at best, cursory ("I was president of the Feed The Hungry in Uganda campaign at my school-- 3h/wk").
Excellent point, Kirsteen B.
Nutmeg, I see what you're getting at. It's more an attitudinal truth than a real truth, i.e. it's something you tell yourself because if you tell yourself anything else you'll be sabotaging yourself. Here's the logic: "If this really isn't your fault, if you really didn't have control over it, there is nothing you can do to fix it so you should give up now. But, if you accept it as being your fault, you'll be motivated to do what you can to make things work." That logic is what you've gotta have to apply and re-apply, but when you're in charge of a medical school (as I'm sure you will be some day 😉) it's not the greatest thing.
Peace,
Anka
Excellent point, Kirsteen B.
Nutmeg, I see what you're getting at. It's more an attitudinal truth than a real truth, i.e. it's something you tell yourself because if you tell yourself anything else you'll be sabotaging yourself. Here's the logic: "If this really isn't your fault, if you really didn't have control over it, there is nothing you can do to fix it so you should give up now. But, if you accept it as being your fault, you'll be motivated to do what you can to make things work." That logic is what you've gotta have to apply and re-apply, but when you're in charge of a medical school (as I'm sure you will be some day 😉) it's not the greatest thing.
Peace,
Anka
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 1,209
- Reaction score
- 0
Do you mean this guy?
I found his profile to be somewhat funny if not childish. Check his age. He is 19. Even if he entered college at 17 and took 21 CH per semester and took many courses through the various summer cycles that some schools offer and graduated by the time he was 19, he still would have 0 time to do ALL of his ECs.
Even if what he said is true his science GPA is sub par in most of the schools he applied to. I still don't get how he found out that he was " rated as one of the top applying premedical students in the country by the experts and deans of many schools". Yes you can get into med school with his scores but he definately was not top.
Plus as nutmeg said : His extremist religious views hurt him. Maybe he would have had more luck at Loma Linda or other Jesuit schools such as SLU and Loyla?
His whole profile has nothing to do with AA. His profile obviously had waaaaaayyyyyy too many "problems".
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2003
- Messages
- 20,588
- Reaction score
- 34,502
I have a hard time believing this profile, given that he claims, regarding his rejection at Mayo, that he "was told it came down to affirmative action." What administrator at a school would say that?🙄
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2003
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 1
No reason to believe the origianally posted excerpt wasn't a true one - I am glad there are admissions directors willing to jump out onto a shaky limb and say numbers are certainly not everything.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2002
- Messages
- 713
- Reaction score
- 1
If that guy is interested in the science of medicine, there is another path for him ... it's called being a Ph.D. Ph.D.'s also work with cancer and other diseases, and they don't have to work with people. If you want to be an M.D., and don't show a commitment to working with people -- after all, what is medicine? it's combining science with people skills to care for SICK PEOPLE -- then you have some problems. Being a doctor means you need to have contact with people, and you need to show that by working, having EC's, leadership skills, etc. If you have a 3.9 GPA and a 40+ MCAT with nothing else, then you show that you know nothing about the real world besides what the library looks like.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2003
- Messages
- 333
- Reaction score
- 4
Dara's right.
First, getting a 3.9+ 39 MCAT does not a genius make....
Second if the person has NO extracurriculars or obvious social skills than they're getting into the wrong profession. I think people who think otherwise are buying into the hype that gpa/mcat are the only determinant into medical school, not just the main one.
Doctors with bad social skills are like a blind bus driver etc... there are certainly talents desperately needed in this field and you really can't overlook interpersonal skills for a profession that is interacting with hundreds of people every day.
PhD's are generally where the brightest minds go anyway (brace for flames...)
First, getting a 3.9+ 39 MCAT does not a genius make....
Second if the person has NO extracurriculars or obvious social skills than they're getting into the wrong profession. I think people who think otherwise are buying into the hype that gpa/mcat are the only determinant into medical school, not just the main one.
Doctors with bad social skills are like a blind bus driver etc... there are certainly talents desperately needed in this field and you really can't overlook interpersonal skills for a profession that is interacting with hundreds of people every day.
PhD's are generally where the brightest minds go anyway (brace for flames...)
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2002
- Messages
- 4,372
- Reaction score
- 5
well, now we know where blitzkrieg is going to med school at
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2003
- Messages
- 543
- Reaction score
- 1
Is it very hard to acquire the skills you all are talking about?
This doctor that I know. He has all kinds of personality problems, very quiet, rarely associated with his peers and pessimistic all the time. He doesn't communate well even in his native language. But he still finds a place to build up a very successful practice here in the U.S.A...........
He told me that he was lucky to be an MD. His medical school (somewhere oversea) only looked at the score from the entrance examination. (equivalent to MCAT without GPA's and other things) Only 1% of the applicants, or less, was rejected after the interview. Since the matriculation, the only good thing he was able to do was to maintain good grades. All other activities were so negative that he was nearly expelled from the school. He said that because of his personality, he had been through several strings of rejection since graduation, both in his country and here in the U.S.A. But his luck never ran out on him. There was always one place that gave him a chance.
What I am trying to say is that I am willing to bet that someone with very high MCAT can be a doctor as good as most of the successful applicants with significantly lower scores. The chance for anyone of them would become a superstar MD is not that much.
By the way, the doctor that I talked about always told me to go with the flow. But I wanted to see if I would get a unigue reply.😀
Has anyone ever seen disciplinary action reports from your "Medical Board?" Sexes, drugs and fraud ...etc happen all the time. It may be too hard for anyone to judge a fellow human beings.
This doctor that I know. He has all kinds of personality problems, very quiet, rarely associated with his peers and pessimistic all the time. He doesn't communate well even in his native language. But he still finds a place to build up a very successful practice here in the U.S.A...........
He told me that he was lucky to be an MD. His medical school (somewhere oversea) only looked at the score from the entrance examination. (equivalent to MCAT without GPA's and other things) Only 1% of the applicants, or less, was rejected after the interview. Since the matriculation, the only good thing he was able to do was to maintain good grades. All other activities were so negative that he was nearly expelled from the school. He said that because of his personality, he had been through several strings of rejection since graduation, both in his country and here in the U.S.A. But his luck never ran out on him. There was always one place that gave him a chance.
What I am trying to say is that I am willing to bet that someone with very high MCAT can be a doctor as good as most of the successful applicants with significantly lower scores. The chance for anyone of them would become a superstar MD is not that much.
By the way, the doctor that I talked about always told me to go with the flow. But I wanted to see if I would get a unigue reply.😀
Has anyone ever seen disciplinary action reports from your "Medical Board?" Sexes, drugs and fraud ...etc happen all the time. It may be too hard for anyone to judge a fellow human beings.
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 30,460
- Reaction score
- 23,510
Amen to the lot of you. I'd like to add also that it's not like a 'genius' is going to get rejected from med school and spend the rest of his life shining shoes. Most people with high aptitude and a hint of work ethic will find some way to use their intellect in their pursuits. Meanwhile, what with the need for great doctors that deliver quality healthcare to the masses, I'd suggest that the hard working and dedicated 'subgeniuses' get a chance to pursue their ambitions. Great minds do not necessarily make great doctors!!!
Amen, brother, Amen ! - Joined
- Jun 9, 2003
- Messages
- 866
- Reaction score
- 2
Why do medical schools equate ECs with people skills/sociability , and a lack thereof as proof positive that a person only studies all the time? For the first three years of college I filled up my time with clubs and organized activities. During that time I can say that the amount of "meaningful" interactions was at a minimum. Sure, on paper it looks like I must have been Mr. Involved and therefore "well-rounded" socially, but I wasn't. For the past year or so I have nearly abandoned organized clubs/activities. I find my time is better spent getting to know people in a meaningful way. It wasn't UNTIL I dropped most ECs that I have better learned to relate to people. I have spent more time with family and friends, more time pursing "unofficial" hobbies, learned much more about myself and the people around me.
I don't buy for a minute that people with 3.9+ 39 scores just study all day. The smartest people I know hardly study at all... they don't have to (the smart thing). Instead, most of them find other things to do and are very "well rounded" (whatever that actually means). They may not be "active" on paper, but resumes are all BS. If someone is really into something that happens to be associated with an official group, great. If not, who cares. It will be apparent at the interview if the applicant can communicate with other human beings.
Does anyone else feel this way?
I don't buy for a minute that people with 3.9+ 39 scores just study all day. The smartest people I know hardly study at all... they don't have to (the smart thing). Instead, most of them find other things to do and are very "well rounded" (whatever that actually means). They may not be "active" on paper, but resumes are all BS. If someone is really into something that happens to be associated with an official group, great. If not, who cares. It will be apparent at the interview if the applicant can communicate with other human beings.
Does anyone else feel this way?
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 30,460
- Reaction score
- 23,510
I know what you mean, mattorama. EC's don't mean social skill, but high MCAT doesn't necessarily mean intelligent(it could mean KAPLAN receptive monkey), and high GPA doesn't necessarily mean bright or hard working (it can mean 'Brown nosing cheater'). But it's the way things are--the ad com can't follow you around for a few weeks. That's what personal statements, LOR's, and interviews are for.
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2002
- Messages
- 4,129
- Reaction score
- 9
Good point, I have encountered as many arrogant gunners in ECs as I have in upper level classes. I really think you can be a social gunner as much as a stats one, and I am sure many of you know the type.
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2003
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 1
People are questioning what bearing EC's have on your career as a doctor. Now that first post from that former admissions dean made perfect sense to me. As someone who has been in involved in the real world process of hiring and evaluating people, well roundedness speaks volumes. Weather directectly or indirectly, EC's paint you as a sociable person, and they generally DO require you to interact with others. Since, as someone pointed out, patient care and interaction is such a large part of your day to day activities, you'll need to have sufficiently developed people skills. An introverted genius may make an excellent radiologist, but no doubt a very poor family doctor.
Also, being a doctor is extremely demanding, and requires frequent multi-tasking. The ability to focus on more than one tast at a time is criticical to being a good doctor, and from what I gather, being a doctor may involve information flowing at you in rapid sucession from 5 different directions. Your ability to absorp, process, and act on that information can be critical, and literally mean the difference between life and death. So EC's show that you are capable of doing this in the real world working environment. So with competition so fierce, and the academic portion being so close, the social aspect of a person is what they will use to seperate people. If you think otherwise, then you're sadly mistaken.
Also, being a doctor is extremely demanding, and requires frequent multi-tasking. The ability to focus on more than one tast at a time is criticical to being a good doctor, and from what I gather, being a doctor may involve information flowing at you in rapid sucession from 5 different directions. Your ability to absorp, process, and act on that information can be critical, and literally mean the difference between life and death. So EC's show that you are capable of doing this in the real world working environment. So with competition so fierce, and the academic portion being so close, the social aspect of a person is what they will use to seperate people. If you think otherwise, then you're sadly mistaken.
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2003
- Messages
- 866
- Reaction score
- 2
I agree that the social aspect of a person is VERY important. I never denied that. Being involved in clubs in no way implies MEANINGFUL social interaction. One can be involved in many activities, have interactions, but in the long run many can be meaningless interactions. This is not always the case, but I know from experience that it is more then a remote posibility.
Likewise, not being involved in ECs doesn't mean that one doesn't know how to social. You can do a lot of "unoffical" things and have meaningful intereactions with others without having an offical title to pad a resume/application.
Letters or recommendation and especially the interview should be enough to determine an applicant's ability to "play well with others".
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2003
- Messages
- 944
- Reaction score
- 2
Goodness, finally some truth amongst all this nonsense.
You guys are unbelieveable, what do clubs or sports have to do with social interaction or people skills. You can participate in a whole lot of the former, and have absorb hardly any of the latter. Interviews, if anything, should be in some capacity the judge of people skills.
Enough with this nonsense of these arbitrary relationships between grades and social skills. Not having a nauseating list of EC's is perhaps the best way to save time for actual social interaction in a world outside of the artificial university one. The only problem is that schools don't always see it that way.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2000
- Messages
- 6,276
- Reaction score
- 14
I think it's a mistake to think that schools care about EC's solely to evaluate an applicant's qualifications. There is an element of schools looking for bragging rights, to claim that their student body consists of ballet dancers, climbers of Mt. Everest, professional surfers, URMs, etc.
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2003
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 1
I would point out that I never said that EC's were the sole determining factor in med school acceptance. The interview, and essays also figure into it. I'm sure there's not a single aspect of the application process that stands out as much as the overall picture. EC's are just one part of that formula. I'm just explaining for the benefit of those who seem to think that it isn't important. It's equally as important as the other parts. Weather or those activities present the whole picture of the individual, when taken in context with the other aspects such as the interview and essay, it presents the most accurate picture that can be derrived without actually following the person around😉
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2003
- Messages
- 20,588
- Reaction score
- 34,502
I would venture that these ad coms don't look at ECs with as uncritical an eye as some people seem to think they do. They must realize that a lot of it is padding and that many of these experiences are not meaningful. But again, it's the total package. Maybe it's something in the personal statement that makes one or two activites in particular stand out or otherwise more attention grabbing, or something mentioned in a rec, or so on. By and large when I was interviewing, the vast majority of things that I had listed were entirely ignored, but a couple came up here and there. These admissions folks aren't stupid -- they deal with thousands of applicants a year and I'm sure they can in general spot when someone is taking them for a ride...
-Z
-Z
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2003
- Messages
- 946
- Reaction score
- 1
I completely agree with Street Philosopher. After visiting various med school websites, I've noticed how many of them love saying, "In our recent entering class, we had a firefighter, a world-reknowned violinist, a former investment banker, and an olympic gold medalist in sacrinized swimming!" (I'm exaggerating a little...) I do think that being a non-traditional applicant is a huge advantage as long as you didn't spend your years after undergrad living in your mom's basement and working in any one of the following jobs: stripper, adult film star, bartender, crackwhore, assistant crackwhore, or the worst one of all...attorney. Anything that separates you from the legions of other premeds out there is a huge advantage (for URMs...their race alone is a huge advantage...but for the rest of us, we need what college guidance counselors call a "hook")...for instance...if a particular medical school values volunteer/non-profit work more than academic research...I'm sure they'd take an applicant who spent a year working for an NGO/non-profit organization in Africa over one of the thousands of premeds who did research with their professor during their junior and senior years..(NGO=Non-governmental organization...i.e.: the United Nations, World Health Organization, International Red Cross, etc) I also think premeds tend to flock to the SAME ECs by the droves..making these ECs really trite and too worthless to even mention on an application and/or during an interview (volunteering in your local hospital is a good example...being a member of **insert your campus here**'s honors premed society is another great example). Not even research experience can really help an adcom separate the good from the best...and I don't think that having X number of publications will help one's cause either (I think it only really matters for MD/PhD applicants...which is a definitely a minority in the applicantions process). My advice would be to choose your ECs wisely...make sure you're passionate about it (above all else)...but also try to blaze your own trail instead of following the one that 32874923748397 premeds before you used...
To Street Philosopher: **here's a Kleenex...you can wipe it off** (ask Sacrament for the details behind that comment)
To Street Philosopher: **here's a Kleenex...you can wipe it off** (ask Sacrament for the details behind that comment)
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2001
- Messages
- 250
- Reaction score
- 0
Don't most if not all schools encourage applicants to have other interest outside of medicine? Working in a hospital, volunteering, and research experience are a given and are necessary to make sure you are in the right field. However a future applicant who is a ballet dancer and or firefighter is "rare", and just goes to show you don't have to be about all medicine which is a good thing. Most medical schools also encourage students to have "lives" outside of the classroom and don't want you in the books 24/7.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but just adding my .02 cents to your post.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2001
- Messages
- 1,117
- Reaction score
- 8
BerkeleyPremed's post is very true. I used to do admissions work as a med student, and how he describes relative value of extra-curriculars is exactly how we would evaluate applications. There's a huge difference between EC's. I can't tell you how many applications I have read where the applicants had volunteered in the ER, been a member of their school's premed society, or volunteered at their school's blood drives. A LOT of people do those activities, and therefore those applicants have a difficult time distinguishing themselves from the other thousands of applicants who have done the same things. Different med schools have different values of what they look for in applicants. At my med school (a research-oriented school), the admissions office valued research and leadership (particularly leadership in community service, but it could be leadership in anything). Therefore, the applications that really stood out to us would exemplify those traits more so than other applications. For example, the applicant that stood out might have had multiple first author publications from their research, or had founded a health screening clinic in a local underserved community (rather than dabbling in some research for a summer or volunteering in a clinic that already exists). See the difference?
Grades meant very little to us after the applicant passed the initial cutoff. If I saw an application with outstanding grades and MCATs, but nothing else, that application would automatically get a recommendation for rejection, and I've never actually seen an applicant interview at my school with that kind of application. The reasoning is that by not doing anything else besides schoolwork, the applicant does not demonstrate any of the qualities that my school values in it's students.
In addition, in response to the posts stating that anyone who makes great grades can learn to be a good physician -- that's never been shown to be the case. Our Dean of Admissions would often cite a study that was done around 5 years ago (I don't remember the source, otherwise I would post it) that showed that the best predictor of success of a physician after medical school was not their undergrad grades or MCAT scores, but it was the amount of their life experience before medical school (ie, all those EC's, or jobs in the real world, etc). Something to think about...
Grades meant very little to us after the applicant passed the initial cutoff. If I saw an application with outstanding grades and MCATs, but nothing else, that application would automatically get a recommendation for rejection, and I've never actually seen an applicant interview at my school with that kind of application. The reasoning is that by not doing anything else besides schoolwork, the applicant does not demonstrate any of the qualities that my school values in it's students.
In addition, in response to the posts stating that anyone who makes great grades can learn to be a good physician -- that's never been shown to be the case. Our Dean of Admissions would often cite a study that was done around 5 years ago (I don't remember the source, otherwise I would post it) that showed that the best predictor of success of a physician after medical school was not their undergrad grades or MCAT scores, but it was the amount of their life experience before medical school (ie, all those EC's, or jobs in the real world, etc). Something to think about...
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2003
- Messages
- 325
- Reaction score
- 0
Makes you wonder how sunny and sweet his interviews were...
Reality is, it was another "A" word that was responsible for his rejections, ARROGANCE. As "one of the best premedical students applying in the country," as he was told by expert deans, wtf? 🙄
Anyone this young applying should be humbled because they do not have significant life experiences (did he ever work anywhere?); his scores are GOOD but if he was humble he would of gotten into a top school.
Top schools want top students that know it and don't need to flaunt it in interviews, humble intelligence.
😎
Reality is, it was another "A" word that was responsible for his rejections, ARROGANCE. As "one of the best premedical students applying in the country," as he was told by expert deans, wtf? 🙄
Anyone this young applying should be humbled because they do not have significant life experiences (did he ever work anywhere?); his scores are GOOD but if he was humble he would of gotten into a top school.
Top schools want top students that know it and don't need to flaunt it in interviews, humble intelligence.
😎
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 1,209
- Reaction score
- 0
This summer i was doing a 2.5 month research in South Africa. While being there another friend of mine from highschool (currently in Yale undergrad) was volunteering in South Africa also. He brought me in contact with a few other American students. 1 more from Stanford and 2 others from Yale. I was simply AMAZED by them. One of them had already spent about 10,000 on the trip and the other one had rented a car for about 3 months for 5,000 USD. Especially when they started making comments about the financial condition of South Africa and the "bad parts" of Johannesburg . I was like "haven't you guys ever been to the "bad" parts of Boston or SF or LA?". Of course they didn't know. Their upper-middle class suburban upbringing in gated communities had created people that weren't aware of the social conditions that many fellow Americans have to face day by day. Although i am sure that their volunteer work in SA will look good in their applications , there was no need to charge daddys Platinum American Express non stop in order to gain social awareness. So even if they get the interviews and have the adcom go "wow" at their ECs, I do believe that their ignorant lifestyle will come through in the interview process and it will hurt them in the end. Then again maybe not.
Just my 2c
Just my 2c
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2003
- Messages
- 261
- Reaction score
- 0
So Tezzie, are you saying that people who grew up in a rough environment are better prepared for medical school than people who did not?!?
Just wondering...
Just wondering...
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 30,460
- Reaction score
- 23,510
If Tezzie isn't saying it, I will.
