For those of you that interviewed at top 20s, how many were you rejected pre-II?

[deleted993098]

Just curious to know how random the process is and whether people who get interviews at top 20s are rejected from a bunch too.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[907914]

Just curious to know how random the process is and whether people who get interviews at top 20s are rejected from a bunch too.

I know I have like 5 T20 Interviews and one T20 that screened me out pre secondary. I have seen several people on the school specifics that have Harvard, Duke, and/or Vandy interviews but Case and/or UChicago rejections. While as an applicant/from the outside it feels like this process is filled with randomness, it really is just different schools want differ things and see those different things in varying levels with the same applicant. So...yah, I take that back. It is just really really random.

 

[Goro]

Just curious to know how random the process is and whether people who get interviews at top 20s are rejected from a bunch too.

It's as random a process as Olympic trials.

 

[907914]

It's as random a process as Olympic trials.

Don’t Olympic trials rely purely on skill...?

 

[Goro]

Don’t Olympic trials rely purely on skill...?

So does admissions. How else is a med school going to cull 5000+ apps doesn to ~350?

 

[deleted993098]

So does admissions. How else is a med school going to cull 5000+ apps doesn to ~350?

But Goro, if someone is qualified to get an ii at 3 Top 20s but is rejected from another 3 what's the reasoning if it is based on skill? Surely someone qualified to get into UCSF is qualified to get into UCLA for example, but often times they'll get interviewed at one but rejected from another?

 

[907914]

So does admissions. How else is a med school going to cull 5000+ apps doesn to ~350?

Algorithms and protocols that identify factors that have very little real world correlation for an II followed by an in person evaluation of arbitrarily defined and unevenly applied subjective criteria. That’s my hunch.

 

[Goro]

But Goro, if someone is qualified to get an ii at 3 Top 20s but is rejected from another 3 what's the reasoning if it is based on skill? Surely someone qualified to get into UCSF is qualified to get into UCLA for example, but often times they'll get interviewed at one but rejected from another?

It depends upon what screeners like. One should also NOT assume that just because you're Stanford material that Harvard will see 100% of the things that Stanford does. Even major league baseball players can only get a base hit about 3 times every ten at bats.

 

[efle]

It's extremely random. I even had one t20 school offer me a full scholarship, while multiple others ranked right around it with similar stats didn't even offer an interview. You'll never make any sense of it. Way too much random chance involved with who you get assigned to make the first decisions about your file.

 

[FISTMCLARGEHUGE]

I have a few T20s coming up. I also have 2 hard Rs and a hold from other places.

and so, effectively, random

It isn't random. If I look at the places that told me no I can see why. Different missions, different goals with applicants, different secondary questions and so on. The IIs I have make sense because parts of my applications fit very well with their class profile last year and their mission. There are variables when it comes to reviewers but it doesn't seem to be random to the degree people suggest. Stats really dont matter when people are within the same range so I'd imagine looking at two schools that have the same median will prompt the idea that they are similar schools when they could have vastly different cultures and goals for their students in reality.

 

[Saturday’s Child]

It depends upon what screeners like. One should also NOT assume that just because you're Stanford material that Harvard will see 100% of the things that Stanford does. Even major league baseball players can only get a base hit about 3 times every ten at bats.

I like the batting average metaphor. You can extrapolate from it that getting an interview from a school is like hitting a certain type of pitch. Maybe you’re good at hitting a fastball, and that’s what a few T-20’s throw. If you have trouble with a curve, then you may not “get a hit” off of the schools that throw one.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Don’t Olympic trials rely purely on skill...?

some (like gymnastics, boxing etc...) needs judging, so is admissions process

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Random because it's holistic i..e. not purely based on stats/scores. Schools have different priorities, leadership, service, research, regional balances etc... Haven't you all seen this with undergrad admissions?

 

[efle]

I have a few T20s coming up. I also have 2 hard Rs and a hold from other places.

It isn't random. If I look at the places that told me no I can see why. Different missions, different goals with applicants, different secondary questions and so on. The IIs I have make sense because parts of my applications fit very well with their class profile last year and their mission. There are variables when it comes to reviewers but it doesn't seem to be random to the degree people suggest. Stats really dont matter when people are within the same range so I'd imagine looking at two schools that have the same median will prompt the idea that they are similar schools when they could have vastly different cultures and goals for their students in reality.

You're probably seeing more of a pattern than really exists. There are exceptions and extremes, like UCLA and WashU prioritize grades and test scores differently, or Mayo being Mayo. But the real mission of most t20s is to recruit very similar student bodies with high LizzyMs and strong research. You'll see some of the same folks on the interview trail, second look weekends, or in the class with you wherever you matriculate and it'll end up being a very unpredictable smattering of who got attention where.

 

[FISTMCLARGEHUGE]

You're probably seeing more of a pattern than really exists. There are exceptions and extremes, like UCLA and WashU prioritize grades and test scores differently, or Mayo being Mayo. But the real mission of most t20s is to recruit very similar student bodies with high LizzyMs and strong research. You'll see some of the same folks on the interview trail, second look weekends, or in the class with you wherever you matriculate and it'll end up being a very unpredictable smattering of who got attention where.

I'm sure there is a lot of overlap. However, my stats are not great. I'm sitting around the 10th% for most of my interviews in MCAT and GPA. My background is very nontrad and I'm guessing the highlights of that sit better with some schools than others and the ones who sent invites aren't too surprising based on this. I'd agree that if you are the exact same as 50 other people then it is likely random but whatever group of 50 your story and app put you in is not random.

 

[907914]

Haven't you all seen this with undergrad admissions?

Am I the only one who went to an undergrad with guaranteed acceptance for IS residents? Anyone?

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Am I the only one who went to an undergrad with guaranteed acceptance for IS residents? Anyone?

In CA, UC admission is guaranteed if you are in certain top percentage of the class but they won't say which UC and top UCs have holistic process but not as holistic as Ivies

 

[apollo92]

In my experience it was random... I applied to 15 top 20s: got 11 interviews, attended 10, and ended up with 7 acceptances and 3 waitlists.

to be clear, 3 of those pre-II rejections were from top 5s, but I got into the other two (one of which gave me a full merit scholarship) - that always seemed super random. also, I got scholarship offers from two other top 20s, but neither was close to the money the top 5 offered me - again, seemed weird but obviously I wasn't complaining.

 

[gyngyn]

It is just really really random.

It really, really isn't random.
It doesn't have precise predictability, though.

 

[907914]

It really, really isn't random.

Oh certainly, it is not random. Each school has there own well defined policies, procedures, evaluations, yadda yadda and someone who knows those could likely very much predict where an applicant will be successful or not, this is why @Goro and @Faha making school lists for people is invaluable. However, from the outside perspective of an applicant who does not have any clue about these internal policies and procedures and can only read so far into the “data” on MSAR and self reported things on threads and Reddit, it appears to have chance as one of the factors.

Like, looking at Harvard you can assume they like military applicants based on their 3% Military in each class. Or you can tell Dartmouth likes non-trade based on their average matriculation age. Or that WUSTL has a missions statement of thicc stats based on their medians/percentiles. But a non-trad, Military, thicc boi that gets love from one may wonder why they don’t get love from the rest. It isn’t random, but it makes one feel as though it is.

 

[gyngyn]

It isn’t random, but it makes one feel as though it is.

I would never deny the reality of feelings.

 

[Heliobacter]

All of my interviews (except one at a state school and two others) are at top 30s.

Meanwhile I've already gotten a pre-II soft rejection at one of my less competitive state schools.

I also think that my application is not really suited towards institutions that are "lower ranked" for research. My research and academics may be enticing, but medical schools that accept students with lower stats probably value more community service and clinical experience. In that respect, I'm mediocre at best. I think fit is playing a huge role in where I'm getting interviews.

I've already gotten an interview at all schools (except one *looking at you Harvard HST*) where I genuinely thought I would be a good fit.

 

[907914]

I would never deny the reality of feelings.

*cannot tell if sarcasm or not, appreciated either way*

 

[mwsapphire]

Am I the only one who went to an undergrad with guaranteed acceptance for IS residents? Anyone?

I basically did, yeah. It was a good school tho.

 

[mwsapphire]

So does admissions. How else is a med school going to cull 5000+ apps doesn to ~350?

I know this has been asked before, but how many of them can go straight through to the reject pile bc of stats/lack of EC's ( in your opinion, at your DO school). I know it's been speculated but I want your input.

 

[MyOdyssey]

All of my interviews (except one at a state school and two others) are at top 30s.

Meanwhile I've already gotten a pre-II soft rejection at one of my less competitive state schools.

I also think that my application is not really suited towards institutions that are "lower ranked" for research. My research and academics may be enticing, but medical schools that accept students with lower stats probably value more community service and clinical experience. In that respect, I'm mediocre at best. I think fit is playing a huge role in where I'm getting interviews.

I've already gotten an interview at all schools (except one *looking at you Harvard HST*) where I genuinely thought I would be a good fit.

Where do you stand as far as community service and clinical experience are concerned? I'm curious to know what's considered lacking by state schools.

 

[Heliobacter]

Where do you stand as far as community service and clinical experience are concerned? I'm curious to know what's considered lacking by state schools.

I’m fairly standard. Several short volunteer experiences, along with some fairly recent ones totaling about 200 hours. They happened in bursts and have not lasted more than a year. About 200 hours of “clinical employment” in a medical office over a summer, and like 10 hours of shadowing.

 

[907914]

10 hours of shadowing.

*And the minds of a million SDN followers explode as they shout at their screens “But he didn’t check the 50 hour shadowing box? How can he be successful? This doesn’t make sense! RRREEEEEEEEEEE”*

 

[mwsapphire]

I’m fairly standard. Several short volunteer experiences, along with some fairly recent ones totaling about 200 hours. They happened in bursts and have not lasted more than a year. About 200 hours of “clinical employment” in a medical office over a summer, and like 10 hours of shadowing.

I actually think thats considered good? i think it's more yeild protection that made it so you got top II- you have to keep in mind, top schools do want it all, at the end of the day. They do value research more than other schools but still want above average clinical and non clinical volunteering.

 

[Heliobacter]

*And the minds of a million SDN followers explode as they shout at their screens “But he didn’t check the 50 hour shadowing box? How can he be successful? This doesn’t make sense! RRREEEEEEEEEEE”*

Well, I haven't gotten in anywhere so I don't know if I'm successful yet Maybe this is why I'm getting very little in-state love from the publics or mid-tier privates.

I actually think thats considered good? i think it's more yeild protection that made it so you got top II- you have to keep in mind, top schools do want it all, at the end of the day. They do value research more than other schools but still want above average clinical and non clinical volunteering.

Perhaps. I think my community service definitely looks like "this kid remembered he was applying to med school in January and suddenly decided to add several new volunteering gigs". I have a gap in my activity history where I did very minimal volunteering.

 

[mwsapphire]

Well, I haven't gotten in anywhere so I don't know if I'm successful yet Maybe this is why I'm getting very little in-state love from the publics or mid-tier privates.



Perhaps. I think my community service definitely looks like "this kid remembered he was applying to med school in January and suddenly decided to add several new volunteering gigs". I have a gap in my activity history where I did very minimal volunteering.

Yeah, duration is your problem, not hours. If your volunteering were lacking you wouldnt be getting T30 love.

 

[strappysandals]

In my experience it was random... I applied to 15 top 20s: got 11 interviews, attended 10, and ended up with 7 acceptances and 3 waitlists.

to be clear, 3 of those pre-II rejections were from top 5s, but I got into the other two (one of which gave me a full merit scholarship) - that always seemed super random. also, I got scholarship offers from two other top 20s, but neither was close to the money the top 5 offered me - again, seemed weird but obviously I wasn't complaining.

Which T5 does full merit scholarships?! I thought they were all need based

 

[efle]

Which T5 does full merit scholarships?! I thought they were all need based

Penn has ~20 full ride merit packages per year (21st century scholars program). UCSF also does some merit money. It's only Hopkins, HMS and Stanford that officially have need-only policies.

 

[907914]

HMS and Stanford

And even then, their need based is very very generous for students whose parents make less than a certain amount.

 

[mwsapphire]

And even then, their need based is very very generous for students whose parents make less than a certain amount.

See, bur what about people cut off from their parents? Some parents just ..like...stop supporting their child after 18 or so ( or sometimes until
like 22 ish). So then, would parents income matter?

 

[907914]

See, bur what about people cut off from their parents? Some parents just ..like...stop supporting their child after 18 or so ( or sometimes until
like 22 ish). So then, would parents income matter?

I have been completely financially cut off from my parents since 17 (almost 8 years ago) so I wish this were the case, but these schools explicitly state financial independence and even being estranged from your parents is not sufficient in most cases and your parental income is always considered at almost all schools.

Edit: not cut off like they cut me off, but like we don’t really have wealth (parental income <$100k) and they just haven’t paid for anything (not that I have asked them to...)

 

[beattheprocess]

I’m fairly standard. Several short volunteer experiences, along with some fairly recent ones totaling about 200 hours. They happened in bursts and have not lasted more than a year. About 200 hours of “clinical employment” in a medical office over a summer, and like 10 hours of shadowing.

You’re my hero

 

[deleted688779]

I’m fairly standard. Several short volunteer experiences, along with some fairly recent ones totaling about 200 hours. They happened in bursts and have not lasted more than a year. About 200 hours of “clinical employment” in a medical office over a summer, and like 10 hours of shadowing.

Interesting. Are you a strong research applicant or have a unique non-academic or non-medically related leadership experience? Or do you think that LM score is doing a lot of heavy lifting, resulting in your admirable amount of IIs?

 

[MyOdyssey]

Penn has ~20 full ride merit packages per year (21st century scholars program). UCSF also does some merit money. It's only Hopkins, HMS and Stanford that officially have need-only policies.

What do you know about the rest of the T20-T25's merit based scholarship policies?

Do merit based scholarships from these schools treat very high stats (>3.9 and >521) as a necessary but not sufficient qualification?

 

[907914]

What do you know about the rest of the T20-T25's merit based scholarship policies?

Do merit based scholarships from these schools treat very high stats (>3.9 and >521) as a necessary but not sufficient qualification?

While numbers due play a significant role in receiving merit aid, most medical Schools that offer it site things such as leadership potential experiences and things of that nature. They don’t just wanna offer marinade for the people with the highest stats, they wanna offer merit aid to the people they feel will make the best and largest contribution to their class and to the future mission of their school

 

[Heliobacter]

Interesting. Are you a strong research applicant or have a unique non-academic or non-medically related leadership experience? Or do you think that LM score is doing a lot of heavy lifting, resulting in your admirable amount of IIs?

I would say that my academic/research/work background is unique, though I have zero publications (but this is hopefully going to change this year), zero prestigious awards, and even zero presentations. I also have a unique musical activity, extensive leadership/teaching involvement, and a personal narrative that ties together several other unique non-medical extracurriculars. I won't deny that my involvement in identity groups and my essays about identity-related lived experiences are probably playing a role as well.

It's the product of being a weird kid and, honestly, pursuing things I was passionate about while strategically doing the bare minimum to check certain boxes.

 

[907914]

It's the product of being a weird kid and, honestly, pursuing things I was passionate about while strategically doing the bare minimum to check certain boxes.

This is how to be a successful MED school applicant in a goddamn nutshell.

 

[MyOdyssey]

This is how to be a successful MED school applicant in a goddamn nutshell.

That and LizzyM = 82.

 

[907914]

That and LizzyM = 82.

I mean, I am an LM 74.5 and he and I have almost identical success accounting for number of schools applied to, so I can guarantee you it is more than stats. @EmbryonalCarcinoma is seeing similar success and he is an LM 76.5 and I know his path to medicine is the same “be weird and follow your passion with some check boxing.”

Don’t get sucked into the trap of thinking it is just stats. Yes, the stats get you looked at a significant amount, but there are more people with high stats that have zero interviews so far than those who have >30%. The narrative and ECs really do matter.

 

[capriccio]

I applied to 15 T20s, received and attended 6 interviews, and received 2 acceptances, 3 waitlists, and 1 rejection. Applied to 21 schools total and received 3 IIs (attended 2) from the remaining 6 non-T20 schools and was accepted to both. So yes, I was rejected pre-II by a lot of T20s! I think the perceived randomness stems from which T20s are interested in you, which then probably relates to program fit and how adcoms are interpreting your application and your individual place in the prospective class. It's not so much that great application=interview=acceptance, but great application+fit=interview=acceptance.

 

[907914]

fit

This process would be a whole lot easier, less stressful, and save applicants a lot of money if schools clearly defined (or at least generally outlined) what their ‘fit’ is. Many schools do this (ie. UChicago very clearly is looking for a diverse group to look after their community) but even more do not (ie. Every school with a mission statement about ‘developing leaders in medicine through biomedical innovation, diversity, and compassion’)

 

[MyOdyssey]

I applied to 15 T20s, received and attended 6 interviews, and received 2 acceptances, 3 waitlists, and 1 rejection. Applied to 21 schools total and received 3 IIs (attended 2) from the remaining 6 non-T20 schools and was accepted to both. So yes, I was rejected pre-II by a lot of T20s! I think the perceived randomness stems from which T20s are interested in you, which then probably relates to program fit and how adcoms are interpreting your application and your individual place in the prospective class. It's not so much that great application=interview=acceptance, but great application+fit=interview=acceptance.

What are some big mission distinctions among T20s that would affect fit?

 

[beattheprocess]

The "fit" schools look for is BS. If you accept me, I will make myself fit. But I guess you have to weed out the apps somehow.

 

[Luckyone1023]

Of course the process is random! There is no accounting for the subjective element of interviews, particularly in a one-on-one situation. In my case I had multiple offers of admission with substantial merit awards to higher ranked top 20 (top 10 actually) programs and multiple rejections from lower ranked top 20 programs.

 

[theKingLT]

some (like gymnastics, boxing etc...) needs judging, so is admissions process

Exactly and judging is anything but consistent