How applicant fate is decided post interview?

[Calizboosted76]

Hey everyone so I have been so lucky to get two interviews this far, one to ACOM and one to ICOM.

My question is after the interview how is the applicants fate decided? I thought that if someone receives an interview that the admissions committee just wants to know if you’re a good fit for the school by the interview?

Now I am reading that after the interview the admissions committee decides and weighs the interviewers recommendation on there decision. However I was under the impression that if you receive an interview that the admissions committee is content with your metrics and application? Is this not true? Do admissions committees extend interviews and then reject solely based on metrics? Or is the admissions committee not even involved in who gets an interview.

Sorry for the long post, neuroticism Is kicking in lmfao.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Calizboosted76]

@Goro @Faha @Angus Avagadro

 

[deleted92121]

@Goro has a ton of interview-related threads over the years. Q and A style. Very informative.

Short Version: Interviewees enter the interview on steps. Some higher and some lower on the steps, based on whatever method a particular program uses. Good or bad interviews move you up and down those steps. It can be enough to admit or reject (or waitlist). Members of the committee can fight for you or not (though Goro admitted they usually protect applicants from hardasses and not the other way around). You’re metrics are what they are. If you got the II, they likely saw something that initially makes them think you can handle the rigors of medical education. Use the interview to nail that and your fit for the program down.

I hope I didn’t get anything wrong in that summary @Goro

 

[Goro]

My question is after the interview how is the applicants fate decided?

• Goro's Guide to Interviews: The View from Behind the Curtain

I thought that if someone receives an interview that the admissions committee just wants to know if you’re a good fit for the school by the interview?
It's more than that; we're looking to see if you have all the required competencies for a medical student and a doctor. There are fifteen on this list, but overall, the are six big ones, and five are humanstic. Only one is scientific knowledge.

The Core Competencies for Entering Medical Students

Successful medical school applicants are able to demonstrate skills, knowledge, and abilities in these areas. As you’ll see in the Anatomy of An Applicant student profiles, one experience can illustrate proficiency across multiple competencies.

students-residents.aamc.org

It's not merely "a good fit"...it's can we trust you to touch other human beings, including our family members? Can we see you in the white coat? Can we see you as a peer and colleague? Does the Calizboosted on paper match the real thing? Can you think on your feet? Can you handle pressure? etc.

Now I am reading that after the interview the admissions committee decides and weighs the interviewers recommendation on there decision. However I was under the impression that if you receive an interview that the admissions committee is content with your metrics and application? Is this not true?

It depends upon how the med school decides who to invite. Some schools use screeners, others have the Adcom vote on who to invite and at my school, we don't pre-screen, we rank people by stats only and invite the highest first. So there is a dichotomy betwene the invite process and the interview results. Basically, paper vs reality.

Do admissions committees extend interviews and then reject solely based on metrics?
At my school, yes. But I get the sense from years of reading these fora that even for MD, people get invited because they look interesting on paper despite thier stats, but can get rejected due to stats. In other words, the II team is gambling that one is worth a visit, then failed s/he failed to seal the deal in interview.

There have been a numbe rof times where we've interviewed someone and an interviewer will say "nice kid, but I'm worried about that MCAT score".

Or is the admissions committee not even involved in who gets an interview.
Answered above as per my school, and some others in varying degrees.

 

[Calizboosted76]

Thank you for the info as always @Goro
I am hoping that my interviews go well and that I am able to close. I was just startled when I seen that even after an interview someone can be rejected solely on their metrics (since my GPAs are very low, however my last 60 is amazing) we will see! I think I am going to take a step away from trying to use the forums to gauge if I am going to be accepted and maybe use this time to spend with my daughter. Thanks both of you @Goro and @dxu

 

[Angus Avagadro]

Students meet with me. I ask questions and digest their responses. I am looking to see if the applicant can connect with me, project warmth, and develop original responses to my questions. I fill out an evaluation form and make recommendations. The admissions comittee makes the final call. My impressions are USUALLY respected, but not always.
Said differently, if I say No, they may still say yes.

 

[Goro]

Thank you for the info as always @Goro
I am hoping that my interviews go well and that I am able to close. I was just startled when I seen that even after an interview someone can be rejected solely on their metrics (since my GPAs are very low, however my last 60 is amazing) we will see! I think I am going to take a step away from trying to use the forums to gauge if I am going to be accepted and maybe use this time to spend with my daughter. Thanks both of you @Goro and @dxu

I understand where you're coming from give your situation, but in my experience, metrics are not a common cause for rejection. Within that cohort, declining GPA trends or poor performance in a post-bac/SMP are the more common reasons.

 

[Calizboosted76]

I understand where you're coming from give your situation, but in my experience, metrics are not a common cause for rejection. Within that cohort, declining GPA trends or poor performance in a post-bac/SMP are the more common reasons.

Okay that makes me feel better. I’ve been trying to find a solid answer on the forums but it seemed wishy washy.

Like I was rejected from a school at first and reached out and the director of admissions said they were going to advocate for me and send me a secondary. I received the secondary the same day and an interview invite a month later. So I am hoping my metrics don’t get me rejected. I have confidence in my ability to interview because I converse with physicians everyday and am a very personable individual. My main concern was being rejected post interview based on metrics. We shall see though.

 

[deleted92121]

@Goro

I actually may have a new question that I’ve not seen explicitly answered.

If an applicant with a low cGPA/sGPA, the type screened out at nearly every single program in the nation, receives an II, does that imply anything about the review/screening process or way the program approaches admission decisions?

I know the OP’s background (and you know mine) but I promise you, those of us with low stats and an II likely have a foreboding, if irrational, feeling that this is a “mercy interview” or feels unreal. On the other hand, if we didn’t feel confident in the “you now is not you of ten years ago” mantra and have a non-zero chance at acceptance, why did bother applying in the first place?

 

[Angus Avagadro]

Occasionally someone with a very low MCAT, like 487 gets an interview. I have rejected people with low stats, but only after a mediocre interview. I had one lady who had a great interview with that very mcat score, i suggested post bac for her. Thats the only one I can think of rejecting soley on stats.

 

[Calizboosted76]

Occasionally someone with a very low MCAT, like 487 gets an interview. I have rejected people with low stats, but only after a mediocre interview. I had one lady who had a great interview with that very mcat score, i suggested post bac for her. Thats the only one I can think of rejecting soley on stats.

My MCAT is a 506
GPA is under 3.0 but last 60 is 3.8
I have a really compelling story.
Just hoping that my GPAs don’t get me rejected. I plan to knock them out of the park with my interview. I have great reasoning as to why DO as well so fingers crossed.

 

[deleted92121]

Occasionally someone with a very low MCAT, like 487 gets an interview. I have rejected people with low stats, but only after a mediocre interview. I had one lady who had a great interview with that very mcat score, i suggested post bac for her. Thats the only one I can think of rejecting soley on stats.

This leaves me with a few thoughts.

What factors led to her receiving an II? If the MCAT score was known prior to the interview and there was essentially zero chance of acceptance, why interview her? What else could she have done to convince you or other committee members to admit with that score?

 

[Real McCoy]

Political/social favors and Dean overrides at the interview and acceptance stage still exist in this day and age...

 

[Calizboosted76]

Political/social favors and Dean overrides at the interview and acceptance stage still exist in this day and age...

Right, I already have an interview I am just hoping that if I get accepted or favored to be accepted it Doesn’t get over ridden

 

[deleted92121]

Political/social favors and Dean overrides at the interview and acceptance stage still exist in this day and age...

How many medical school deans in this country? I would like to think most trust their adcoms recommendation and move on. But you’re totally spot on signaling it does happen.

 

[Real McCoy]

Deans are more likely to override a rejection rather than an acceptance.

 

[Angus Avagadro]

This leaves me with a few thoughts.

What factors led to her receiving an II? If the MCAT score was known prior to the interview and there was essentially zero chance of acceptance, why interview her? What else could she have done to convince you or other committee members to admit with that score?

She was URM with also low gpa. I felt better prep with our post bac would be preferable to her struggling or failing. What could she do to convince me? Nothing. Im sure someone at some school would offer admission with little concern for her success in school. I was not convinced she was prepared to handle the coursework. TBH, I really liked her. Outside of her academic deficiencies, I thought she would make a great doctor.

 

[Goro]

Deans are more likely to override a rejection rather than an acceptance.

True, but Only at DO schools!

 

[deleted92121]

True, but Only at DO schools!

Any particular reason DO only?

 

[deleted92121]

She was URM with also low gpa. I felt better prep with our post bac would be preferable to her struggling or failing. What could she do to convince me? Nothing. Im sure someone at some school would offer admission with little concern for her success in school. I was not convinced she was prepared to handle the coursework. TBH, I really liked her. Outside of her academic deficiencies, I thought she would make a great doctor.

Did she follow through with your advice?

 

[Goro]

@Goro

I actually may have a new question that I’ve not seen explicitly answered.

If an applicant with a low cGPA/sGPA, the type screened out at nearly every single program in the nation, receives an II, does that imply anything about the review/screening process or way the program approaches admission decisions?

I know the OP’s background (and you know mine) but I promise you, those of us with low stats and an II likely have a foreboding, if irrational, feeling that this is a “mercy interview” or feels unreal. On the other hand, if we didn’t feel confident in the “you now is not you of ten years ago” mantra and have a non-zero chance at acceptance, why did bother applying in the first place?

Medical schools don't waste precious interview slots and time on sympathy ****s.

OP got IIs because on paper, Admissions felt that s/he could handle med school.

The acceptance process is different from the II process.

 

[Goro]

Any particular reason DO only?

Lmce mandates that the dean's do not have the power to accept people.. This lies solely with the admissions committee

 

[deleted92121]

@Goro I think you touching on the acceptance vs interview process is the key. Most folks, myself included, thought or think they are the same . Thank you for the clarification.

 

[futurexray]

Admissions Committee reviews files and will often take a chance, maybe they are a legacy or come from a strong feeder school. The faculty will interview and decide yay or nay and then present to the full faculty committee. They will look at the big picture and majority will decide. They may love on paper but still have hesitancy if metrics are not strong. They are not doing anyone a favor in accepting an applicant and putting them into major debt if they truly believe they can not get through med school. It is a very arduous process for the committee and a thankless job.

 

[deleted92121]

Admissions Committee reviews files and will often take a chance, maybe they are a legacy or come from a strong feeder school. The faculty will interview and decide yay or nay and then present to the full faculty committee. They will look at the big picture and majority will decide. They may love on paper but still have hesitancy if metrics are not strong. They are not doing anyone a favor in accepting an applicant and putting them into major debt if they truly believe they can not get through med school. It is a very arduous process for the committee and a thankless job.

I get accepted and there are multiple fruit baskets in some adcoms future

 

[Real McCoy]

Lcme mandates that the dean's do not have the power to accept people.. This lies solely with the admissions committee

Yes, that's the reason...the only reason...and we're sticking to that story.

 

[Angus Avagadro]

Did she follow through with your advice?

Never saw her. I suspect a school less concerned with her succes offered her admission.