High stats, no acceptances

[grapepopsicle]

---

Members don't see this ad.

https://www.aamc.org/download/270906/data/table24-mcatgpagridall0911.pdf

According to this chart, applicants with a GPA greater than 3.8 have the following acceptance rates:
MCAT between:
33-35 = 86%
36-38 = 90%
39-45 = 92%

What do you think is the main reason keeping these people out of med school? How much slack (for mediocre ECs) do schools cut to people with these kind of stats?

 

[armybound]

douchebaggery

 

[leeyuhang]

https://www.aamc.org/download/270906/data/table24-mcatgpagridall0911.pdf

According to this chart, applicants with a GPA greater than 3.8 have the following acceptance rates:
MCAT between:
33-35 = 86%
36-38 = 90%
39-45 = 92%

What do you think is the main reason for this?

put on your flame hat haha.... this has been asked too much

basically there are people who don't apply to many school (for example that person applied only to mayo which already has a really small size), didn't apply to the right schools, had really bad or no extracurriculars, red flags in their application such as criminal record, academic red mark, bad recommendation letter.

 

[carramrod06]

https://www.aamc.org/download/270906/data/table24-mcatgpagridall0911.pdf

According to this chart, applicants with a GPA greater than 3.8 have the following acceptance rates:
MCAT between:
33-35 = 86%
36-38 = 90%
39-45 = 92%

What do you think is the main reason for this?

Perceived premed curriculum difficulty is possibly low at their school; Poor interviewing skills; Decide not to continue with their application; apply to too few schools [or even only one school] ; decide to apply too top heavy; apply too late in the cycle; or a combination of the above.

 

[jjesque]

I know someone with stats in the top range (3.8+, 40+) who didn't get into any of his schools...of which there were three.

 

[BABSstudent]

Where is the applied late area? I put it under other, but that is the reason why my friends who got +3.8 and +38 MCAT scores did not get in. Sure their stats were great, but applying after acceptances have already been given out is stupid. You also have like zero time to write secondaries and have to balance school with it all.

 

[Narmerguy]

douchebaggery

Where is the applied late area? I put it under other, but that is the reason why my friends who got +3.8 and +38 MCAT scores did not get in. Sure their stats were great, but applying after acceptances have already been given out is stupid. You also have like zero time to write secondaries and have to balance school with it all.

+1, I think there's really too many different things that contribute to this. Someone may apply late, apply to only top scores, write terrible secondaries, and then be a jerk at the interview. Or someone could simply apply so late, there's just no realistic chance they can get accepted. Too many combos for us to speculate without an adcom actually commenting on why they send such applications down the tube.

 

[grapepopsicle]

Where is the applied late area? I put it under other, but that is the reason why my friends who got +3.8 and +38 MCAT scores did not get in. Sure their stats were great, but applying after acceptances have already been given out is stupid. You also have like zero time to write secondaries and have to balance school with it all.

Hmm, forgot about that one. That probably is a big reason for it.

 

[grapepopsicle]

+1, I think there's really too many different things that contribute to this. Someone may apply late, apply to only top scores, write terrible secondaries, and then be a jerk at the interview. Or someone could simply apply so late, there's just no realistic chance they can get accepted. Too many combos for us to speculate without an adcom actually commenting on why they send such applications down the tube.

Seems like you think the process itself (essays, interviews, top-heavy, etc.) plays a big role. So do you think adcoms can be forgiving of having less volunteering/clincial experience/research/etc when you have these kind of stats?

 

[circulus vitios]

Combination of applying to mostly top schools, applying late, and interviewing like a robot with Aspergers. I doubt personal statements and secondary essays are make-or-break unless they're exceptionally terrible. ECs are probably a non-issue for lower-tier schools unless the applicant has literally zero volunteering/shadowing hours.

 

[Narmerguy]

Seems like you think the process itself (essays, interviews, top-heavy, etc.) plays a big role. So do you think adcoms can be forgiving of having less volunteering/clincial experience/research/etc when you have these kind of stats?

I do. But I also think this is school dependent. Some schools have a large pool of 3.8, 37+ applicants to choose from so these stats won't do much for them.

I'm sure you'll find plenty of people who have seen/experienced both outcomes.

 

[kpcrew]

By being bad at lying on essays and in the interview.

 

[UrshumMurshum]

Probably the number one reason they don't get accepted is they apply to too few schools.

 

[I like meowmix]

Lack of extracurriculars (I know someone with 3.98, 40 who got in nowhere)
Applying exclusively to top schools

 

[circulus vitios]

Lack of extracurriculars (I know someone with 3.98, 40 who got in nowhere)
Applying exclusively to top schools

Did he apply to any lower or mid tier schools?

 

[PreMedOrDead]

Did he apply to any lower or mid tier schools?

Read the nonbolded portion of the comment you quoted.

 

[circulus vitios]

Read the nonbolded portion of the comment you quoted.

I thought those were separate instances. I can't believe the lower-tier schools would reject a 99th percentile applicant even if he had terrible ECs. Absolutely no ECs, maybe.

 

[TheShaker]

Probably another reason would be a very negative LOR.

 

[PreMedOrDead]

I thought those were separate instances. I can't believe the lower-tier schools would reject a 99th percentile applicant even if he had terrible ECs. Absolutely no ECs, maybe.

Terrible ECs will pretty much invalidate an upper percentile applicant. Not saying they won't get anywhere, as 9/10 times they will, but to say you're surprised they'd get rejected is a bit much.

Think of it this way:

At upper tiers, everyone has 'killer stats' so ECs are what separate applicants.

At lower tiers, school missions focus far more on empathy and altruism, which are reflected in ECs. High stat applicants without these are likely to not be appealing. Maybe moreso to middle tiers, but lower tiers could care less.


"Boosting numbers" doesn't really come into play, as the numbers are pretty well defined as a median, not an average. High stat applicants don't mean much in that regard.

 

[circulus vitios]

Terrible ECs will pretty much invalidate an upper percentile applicant. Not saying they won't get anywhere, as 9/10 times they will, but to say you're surprised they'd get rejected is a bit much.

Think of it this way:

At upper tiers, everyone has 'killer stats' so ECs are what separate applicants.

At lower tiers, school missions focus far more on empathy and altruism, which are reflected in ECs. High stat applicants without these are likely to not be appealing. Maybe moreso to middle tiers, but lower tiers could care less.


"Boosting numbers" doesn't really come into play, as the numbers are pretty well defined as a median, not an average. High stat applicants don't mean much in that regard.

I've yet to see a school on the MSAR with 100% of matriculants having non-clinical and/or clinical volunteering.

 

[TheMightySmiter]

I've yet to see a school on the MSAR with 100% of matriculants having non-clinical and clinical volunteering.

I would imagine that between those two, almost all matriculants have SOME form of volunteering. They may not have clinical volunteering if they worked in a clinical setting, but they volunteered somewhere else. Or they may have only done clinical volunteering.

 

[chillaxbro]

So if I have 3.8 and 33-35 mcats I have a 86% chance of getting somewhere?
What if I have below average ec and lor and essays but applied only to mid/low schools?

 

[PreMedOrDead]

I've yet to see a school on the MSAR with 100% of matriculants having non-clinical and/or clinical volunteering.

Asking for 100% is a bit ridiculous, is it not?

Check out Mayo.

And you don't necessarily have to have all of them, but I guarantee damn near 100% of them have at least one of them.

Having no ECs is absurd, and I can't imagine any ADCOM thinking otherwise.

So if I have 3.8 and 33-35 mcats I have a 86% chance of getting somewhere?
What if I have below average ec and lor and essays but applied only to mid/low schools?

Think about it, it's an average.

That means the 'average' applicant (Average EC, LOR, Essays) with those stats get in 86% of the time.

If your EC/LOR/Essays are all below average, you are likely to have a significantly more difficult time.

 

[chillaxbro]

Asking for 100% is a bit ridiculous, is it not?

Check out Mayo.

And you don't necessarily have to have all of them, but I guarantee damn near 100% of them have at least one of them.

Having no ECs is absurd, and I can't imagine any ADCOM thinking otherwise.



Think about it, it's an average.

That means the 'average' applicant (Average EC, LOR, Essays) with those stats get in 86% of the time.

If your EC/LOR/Essays are all below average, you are likely to have a significantly more difficult time.

I was thinking the crappy stats would balance out with applying to a crappy school

didnt think about that the 86% includes people who only got accepted to the ****tiest school

 

[PreMedOrDead]

I was thinking the crappy stats would balance out with applying to a crappy school

didnt think about that the 86% includes people who only got accepted to the ****tiest school

I promise you, there is no ****ty LCME-licensed MD program in the United States. They're held to rigorous standards. This isn't law schoo.

This is precisely why high stat applicants don't make the cut every year. Making any medical college is an accomplishment in and of itself. That's also why there are no actual 'safety' schools.

 

[kpcrew]

So if I have 3.8 and 33-35 mcats I have a 86% chance of getting somewhere?
What if I have below average ec and lor and essays but applied only to mid/low schools?

No, that's not how the chart works. It says that 86% of the people with a 3.8 and a 33-35 mcat got into a medical school. It has nothing to do with probability or chance.

 

[PreMedOrDead]

No, that's not how the chart works. It says that 86% of the people with a 3.8 and a 33-35 mcat got into a medical school. It has nothing to do with probability or chance.

 

[alpinism]

Probably the number one reason they don't get accepted is they apply to too few schools.

agreed

In my experience by far the #1 reason people w/ a 3.8+ and 36+ don't get accepted is that they have a poor choice of schools.

You'd be suprised how many people only apply to 1-2 schools for various reasons like wanting to stay with a SO or family or just never wanting to leave home. As an example, there are a ton of people who only apply to UCSF/Stanford cause they want to stay in the bay area. Same goes for UW and Washington as well as UCLA/USC and LA etc...

Another reason is some applicants just get cocky and think that cause they've got a 3.9/39 they deserve to go to a top 10 and only apply top 10.

Just an educated guess but I'd say that the above 2 reasons prob account for >75% of the 10% with a 3.8+/36+ who don't get in anywhere.

Even if you apply really late in Oct., if you have stellar stats AND apply broadly enough, you'll still have a decent shot to get in somewhere (obv your chances are alot lower though)

 

[circulus vitios]

Asking for 100% is a bit ridiculous, is it not?

Check out Mayo.

And you don't necessarily have to have all of them, but I guarantee damn near 100% of them have at least one of them.

Having no ECs is absurd, and I can't imagine any ADCOM thinking otherwise.

High stats indicate intelligence or strong work ethic. Even if a hypothetical applicant avoids extracurricular activities, it still takes determination to grind through a 4 year degree with a 3.8+ GPA, score in the 90th percentile on one of the difficult pre-professional standardized tests in existence, and research/participate in the applications process. I think that a lower-tier school would accept an exceptional applicant with terrible ECs, possibly no ECs, because it boosts the school's accepted stats and it's a safe bet that he will be a good medical student.

 

[iforget2]

+1, I think there's really too many different things that contribute to this. Someone may apply late, apply to only top scores, write terrible secondaries, and then be a jerk at the interview. Or someone could simply apply so late, there's just no realistic chance they can get accepted. Too many combos for us to speculate without an adcom actually commenting on why they send such applications down the tube.

Sorry, I'm not all too familiar with the interview process yet, but do people really act like jerks in an interview? I've seen this a few times on SDN and wonder why you would want to act like a douche during an interview.

 

[notbobtrustme]

I would have been part of that group because of my late application if I wasn't taken off the waitlist.

 

[TrojanBacteria]

Sorry, I'm not all too familiar with the interview process yet, but do people really act like jerks in an interview? I've seen this a few times on SDN and wonder why you would want to act like a douche during an interview.

Stupid is as stupid does? I think the same thing applies to jerks/d-bags. Real jerks act like jerks. They might not even think that the way they're acting is arrogant. But an interview panel will probably pick up on that instantly.

 

[Narmerguy]

Sorry, I'm not all too familiar with the interview process yet, but do people really act like jerks in an interview? I've seen this a few times on SDN and wonder why you would want to act like a douche during an interview.

I don't think most of them realize how they come off to others. It doesn't have to be monumental I imagine. Even being simply irritating at an interview seems likely to seriously harm your chances. If you can't be pleasant and sufferable on your best behavior, what will your peers and colleagues think after having to work with you for hours and hours straight during the day?

I'm actually disappointed more people know how to hide their inner jerk so well If only we could just weed them all out.

 

[MedPR]

douchebaggery

+1

 

[tn4596]

High stats indicate intelligence or strong work ethic. Even if a hypothetical applicant avoids extracurricular activities, it still takes determination to grind through a 4 year degree with a 3.8+ GPA, score in the 90th percentile on one of the difficult pre-professional standardized tests in existence, and research/participate in the applications process. I think that a lower-tier school would accept an exceptional applicant with terrible ECs, possibly no ECs, because it boosts the school's accepted stats and it's a safe bet that he will be a good medical student.

my ECs are horrible, lets hope you are right

 

[Sephiroth]

Sorry, I'm not all too familiar with the interview process yet, but do people really act like jerks in an interview? I've seen this a few times on SDN and wonder why you would want to act like a douche during an interview.

Stupid is as stupid does? I think the same thing applies to jerks/d-bags. Real jerks act like jerks. They might not even think that the way they're acting is arrogant. But an interview panel will probably pick up on that instantly.

There are many other ways to screw up interviews other than just acting like a jerk. For instance, I believe the issue I had was largely based on focusing only on answering the question and not my mannerisms, so I was very terse and unemotive, which probably didn't come off well, as well as letting some of my poor speech patterns out when I was speaking. So that probably didn't come off too well.

 

[aposkaha]

They forgot to give fake smiles in the interview.

 

[MT Headed]

Perceived premed curriculum difficulty is possibly low at their school;

😕 Isn't that why there is an MCAT? Could somebody get a good MCAT score at an easy school and still not get in because their school was perceived as being too easy?

 

[kpcrew]

I don't think most of them realize how they come off to others. It doesn't have to be monumental I imagine. Even being simply irritating at an interview seems likely to seriously harm your chances. If you can't be pleasant and sufferable on your best behavior, what will your peers and colleagues think after having to work with you for hours and hours straight during the day?

I'm actually disappointed more people know how to hide their inner jerk so well If only we could just weed them all out.

Pretty much everyone has an inner jerk except maybe Mr. Rogers.

 

[quiltlady]

There's also the notable case about 5 years ago when a student was accepted at a school (Duke, I think), then got drunk and insulting at the second look event and his acceptance was rescinded. You can find the story on SDN if you look.

 

[xXIDaShizIXx]

Being cocky in an interview is a bad idea.

 

[PreMedOrDead]

😕 Isn't that why there is an MCAT? Could somebody get a good MCAT score at an easy school and still not get in because their school was perceived as being too easy?

Nope, that's the point of the MCAT. If you went to the lowest ranked university in the US to get a 4.0 and scored highly on the MCAT, you'd be viewed the same as a 4.0 at Harvard with a high MCAT. And additionally, you could probably mark that you were at a disadvantaged university 😉

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

I've yet to see a school on the MSAR with 100% of matriculants having non-clinical and/or clinical volunteering.

They may not have volunteering, but they probably make up for it in some other category, like having multiple first author publications along with 3.8+ GPA and 36+ MCAT. Maybe their dad is best friends with the dean, who knows. Also keep in mind that while not everyone has non-clinical and clinical volunteering, it's very possible (if not likely) that a person who applied with no non-clinical volunteering still had a lot of volunteer hours and vice versa. It's unlikely there exists a student in the school who had neither.

It's a lot like how when you look at MD/PhD programs at top tier schools you find the average stats of the student body is typically 3.8 GPA and 36 MCAT but the range goes from 3.3 GPA and 29 MCAT to 4.0 GPA and 43 MCAT. This doesn't mean that a student got accepted with a 3.3 GPA and 29 MCAT. Rather what happened is that an electrical engineering major from MIT got accepted with a 3.3 GPA and a 41 MCAT, and the 29 MCAT belonged to a biochemistry major with a 4.0 from Yale, and both had outstanding research backgrounds with first authored papers, maybe even a prestigious fellowship or two.

Put another way, if you want to be the exception to the rule, you need to be exceptional.

I don't think most of them realize how they come off to others. It doesn't have to be monumental I imagine. Even being simply irritating at an interview seems likely to seriously harm your chances. If you can't be pleasant and sufferable on your best behavior, what will your peers and colleagues think after having to work with you for hours and hours straight during the day?

I'm actually disappointed more people know how to hide their inner jerk so well If only we could just weed them all out.

This. I had a college roommate with stats and ECs that were good enough to earn so many interviews I lost track, one of which was at Harvard. He ended up not getting into any school that cycle. If I had to make a guess as to why, I'd imagine it had something to do with his massive ego. This was a guy who couldn't go a single conservation (no matter how short) without fishing for compliments or bragging about something he had done. It was so bad that me and other people who knew him suspected that he did in fact get accepted to med school that year but that he chose not to attend any of them because Harvard wasn't among his acceptances.

 

[Galatasaray]

I've yet to see a school on the MSAR with 100% of matriculants having non-clinical and/or clinical volunteering.

md/phd programs...

 

[STAT EKG]

😕 Isn't that why there is an MCAT? Could somebody get a good MCAT score at an easy school and still not get in because their school was perceived as being too easy?

Nope, my 3.6/27 at princeton is way better than that guy's 4.0/36 at community college then a local very unknown state university


🙄

 

[MaenadsDance]

Nope, my 3.6/27 at princeton is way better than that guy's 4.0/36 at community college then a local very unknown state university


🙄

I think you can legitimately argue that a 3.6 from a university which is both prestigious (known for the caliber of its students) and rigorous (known not to grade-inflate) is better than a 4.0 from a school of lesser or unknown quality. But the MCAT is the MCAT wherever you go.

(I suspect that you were joking, but I'm an irritating pedant.)

 

[Narmerguy]

I think you can legitimately argue that a 3.6 from a university which is both prestigious (known for the caliber of its students) and rigorous (known not to grade-inflate) is better than a 4.0 from a school of lesser or unknown quality. But the MCAT is the MCAT wherever you go.

(I suspect that you were joking, but I'm an irritating pedant.)

It's very difficult for a 3.6 from anywhere to be better than a 4.0 somewhere else. A 4.0 means you excelled in every class, in every setting, at every opportunity. A student more brilliant than your hypothetical 3.6 student can do no better than a 4.0.

This is, of course, not even getting into all the horrible flaws with that mentality when evaluating GPA's from different universities. But let's not derail this thread, there's another thread floating around (actually there's hundreds of them) about this very topic.

 

[Chrome19]

I promise you, there is no ****ty LCME-licensed MD program in the United States. They're held to rigorous standards. This isn't law schoo.

This is precisely why high stat applicants don't make the cut every year. Making any medical college is an accomplishment in and of itself. That's also why there are no actual 'safety' schools.

I know of an applicant who applied to many schools but got in nowhere except Johns Hopkins.

 

[deleted127837]

.

 

[DrDestroyMD]

I've heard similar horror stories about people with 3.8+ GPAs and 38+ MCATs getting into only one or no schools at all. These stories also usually end with "that person was a huge douche" or "they were super awkward." The lesson we can take from this is be a real human and not a neurotic SDN roboot during interviews.