How "competitive" is pharmacy school admissions?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

RxStudentatUB

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2014
Messages
386
Reaction score
200
Any thoughts on this? I have seen some schools boast a <20% admissions rate to their school. This could simply be due to the fact that students are placed onto the wait-list, with many (if not all) of them getting accepted a few months later. This worked with many mid-tier law schools and thus gave off the impression that a particular law school was competitive and a gateway to a solid career. Sneaky, but effective way to cook the books and get easy tuition $$$, while boasting the school's reputation.

Off topic; isn't it scary that a 1/5 success rate into pharmacy school gives off a "competitive" vibe?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Have you tried looking at the stats of the past admitted classes? That's a good indication of where you should be at statistically
 
Which schools are you speaking of?

Seems like a really open-ended question. Not sure anyone here is really qualified to speak holistically about the application process, but here's a few things:

1. UCSF apparently receives ~1200 applications, and ~120 attend. ~10% yield. Of those, I would guess that around ~150-160 are accepted or are waitlisted and then accepted - more or less. So acceptance rate could be a fair bit higher than yield, maybe up to 15%. Some people fudge up the numbers and conflate yield with acceptance rate. This is for the #1 pharmacy school in the country as per USNWR. 85% of the students who attend are from California (very populous state), so you can expect that a sizeable minority of applications were drawn from a pool of students who sent them to all the CA schools just to try their luck. UNC Chapel Hill, the #2 pharmacy school on that list, has a 27% acceptance rate. That is straight from its website (586 applications, 160 accepted). 87 %ile PCAT, 3.5 gpa average. However, its entering class is ~160 students, so this would be one example where yield is touted as acceptance rate.

2. More schools and dropping # of applications = decreasing selectivity and noncompetitive admissions, naturally. You can be a low GPA and PCAT student but make up for it with plenty of community service and work experience and vice versa. Or some combination. Well-roundedness not a requirement. Essentially a C+ 2.5 gpa student can get into pharmacy school if he/she tries hard enough, doesn't have the personality of a toaster oven, and is willing to pay for it. Last one probably the most important.

3. There are some exceptions to the downward selectivity trend. Cheap 0+6 public schools, possibly, which tend to receive applications from high-achieving high school students from around the area, some of whom apply just because they hear it's a good safety or a good profession from their guidance counselors. Admissions may be getting more selective due to financial tensions with student loans and a guaranteed admission, coupled with HS graduate naivety and current pharmacist salaries quoted by news articles. Maybe some other examples exist but none I can think of currently.

I'll speak from my own experience. When I first applied to Rutgers Pharmacy several years ago, I believe the numbers quoted were ~3600 HS applications, ~800 acceptances, ~225 attendees. Some places quote that Rutgers has a <10% acceptance rate; they are misinformed. Average SAT score for admitted students was 2100; GPA is on a 4.5 honors scale so it's not comparable. Surprisingly, it has since risen to 2200 (could be minorly attributed to Flynn effect, unsure), and I'm guessing has gotten more selective over time as well. The SOP doesn't post other statistics so I'm not sure.

4. University of Maryland (tied for #17) has a ~26% acceptance rate (960 applications and 250 acceptances) while University of Buffalo (#17) has a ~22% acceptance rate (~760 apps, ~170 acceptances). USC (private, tied for #10) has a ~31% acceptance rate while UCSD (public, #23) has a ~7% acceptance rate (~1150 applications, ~60 seats, probably ~80 overall acceptances) All of this suggests that local presence (state population, regional reputation), size of entering class and tuition may be more important than the oft-criticized USNWR rankings when the criteria is strength of entering class and selectivity rather than national reputation seen from the eyes of faculty (which is what the USNWR most closely represents). Pharmacy differs from law in that respect, though it could always change.

To conclude, pharmacy school is easy to get into if the goal is to get into any at all. USNWR is only loosely correlated to selectivity. Any school who quotes you a <20% acceptance rate is a public school with a very strong regional presence and/or small class size. If not, almost certainly not the case. Most top-tier schools aren't even below that figure.

Off-topic: I think it's interesting that most of the the "competitive" schools have an acceptance rate of >20%, closer to 25%.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
UCSF pharmacy has a 10% acceptance rate, compare that to the 3% acceptance rates for the average medical and dental school.

so to fix the previous conclusion, all pharmacy schools are easy to get into.
 
Last edited:
Schools know how to cook the book. This is how they do it:

Put very competitive candidates who are likely to go to another school on the wait list. Tell them if you are still want to go to XYZ school then they must return the wait list letter indicating such.

-- if no replied: do not accept
-- if replied: accept

Obviously someone who has decided to go to another school is not going to reply. Someone who wants to go to XYZ school because it is either his top choice or because ABC school has rejected him is going to reply. This is how they keep the % acceptance low and give the impression that it is very competitive to get accepted.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
 
0-6 schools will admit just about anybody

4 year schools can vary. My school supposedly had like an ~11% admission rate (IIRC from what their website stated) when I went but I doubt that is true.

Not sure about the 3 year "accelerated" programs that are now emerging.

But the truth is that these days you can get in somewhere as long as you are persistent enough.

And OP congrats on being accepted to a US MD school, I don't know why you are still hanging around the pharmacy forums. Maybe this thread was made before you were accepted? Anyway it doesn't matter to you now lol.
 
if we were to make a comparison of admission it would go like this

US MD medical > DMD dental = DVM veterinary > DO medical > PA > OD optometry > DPM podiatry > MD Caribbean > PharmD
 
Last edited:
if we were to make a comparison of admission it would go like this

US MD medical > DMD dental = DVM veterinary > DO medical > PA > OD optometry > DPM podiatry > MD Caribbean > PharmD
lol pharmd all the way at the bottom haha
 
Any thoughts on this? I have seen some schools boast a <20% admissions rate to their school. This could simply be due to the fact that students are placed onto the wait-list, with many (if not all) of them getting accepted a few months later. This worked with many mid-tier law schools and thus gave off the impression that a particular law school was competitive and a gateway to a solid career. Sneaky, but effective way to cook the books and get easy tuition $$$, while boasting the school's reputation.

Off topic; isn't it scary that a 1/5 success rate into pharmacy school gives off a "competitive" vibe?

isn't a 20% acceptance rate still considered competitive?
at least when I applied to college from high school I thought 20% meant it was hard to get into?
 
isn't a 20% acceptance rate still considered competitive?
at least when I applied to college from high school I thought 20% meant it was hard to get into?

the applicant pool is what matters.
those that apply to pharmacy school are from a pool of applicants that do not have what it takes to get into medical school
a 20% acceptance rate from a pool of strong applicants is competitive.
in the case for pharmacy, a 20% acceptance rate from a pool of weak applicants is ridiculously easy.
 
the applicant pool is what matters.
those that apply to pharmacy school are from a pool of applicants that do not have what it takes to get into medical school
a 20% acceptance rate from a pool of strong applicants is competitive.
in the case for pharmacy, a 20% acceptance rate from a pool of weak applicants is ridiculously easy.

i know a bunch of premed students who are way too dumb to even study science. Well idk how many of them will actually make it to med school. Even my friends who got into med school are not any smarter than me. To assume that all pharmacy students don't have what it takes to get into med school is just ignorant and arrogant. I know there are some schools that accept students with very low GPA and they are a joke, but to stereotype all pharmacy students is just wrong. Why do you keep lurking around this pharmacy forum and discourage ppl?

you know what's ridiculously easy? being a troll, like you.
 
i know a bunch of premed students who are way too dumb to even study science. Well idk how many of them will actually make it to med school. Even my friends who got into med school are not any smarter than me. To assume that all pharmacy students don't have what it takes to get into med school is just ignorant and arrogant. I know there are some schools that accept students with very low GPA and they are a joke, but to stereotype all pharmacy students is just wrong. Why do you keep lurking around this pharmacy forum and discourage ppl?

you know what's ridiculously easy? being a troll, like you.

I don't speak on rarities, what I said is the entire applicant pool, you think the applicant pool for pharmacy is smarter than that of medicine? get off your high horse

everything I said up there is fact, whats easy is regarding whatever that makes you feel bad as trolling.
 
I know there are some schools that accept students with very low GPA and they are a joke, but to stereotype all pharmacy students is just wrong.

every single pharmacy school regardless of rank is easier to get into than any medical, dental, or veterinary school
you're going to Wisconsin, a school that accepts over 40% of everyone that applies there.
The day that one of these other graduate programs have anything near a 40% acceptance rate you can say that its easier than pharmacy.

Since you're from Wisconsin we can take your local dental school Marquette as an example
they accept 100 students out of an applicant pool of 2,300, thats a 4% acceptance rate.
Yes, the top pharmacy school of Wisconsin is literally 10 times easier to get into than their dental school.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
every single pharmacy school regardless of rank is easier to get into than any medical, dental, or veterinary school
you're going to Wisconsin, a school that accepts over 40% of everyone that applies there.
The day that one of these other graduate programs have anything near a 40% acceptance rate you can say that its easier than pharmacy.

Since you're from Wisconsin we can take your local dental school Marquette as an example
they accept 100 students out of an applicant pool of 2,300, thats a 4% acceptance rate.
Yes, the top pharmacy school of Wisconsin is literally 10 times easier to get into than their dental school.

You can't really compare the two unless you're working with identical stats.. you're telling me if 2,300 people applied to the pharmacy school, they would accept 920 students? No. Pretty terrible logic there.
 
Haha I like how pre med students think they are the smartest . U know the stats. Most of them never make it to professional school (pharmacy, dental, medicine) . The few that will make it 30 % won't complete their program. Instead of figuring out your strengths while in pre med , you are bashing people who are in professional program trying to hard to succeed.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
I don't speak on rarities, what I said is the entire applicant pool, you think the applicant pool for pharmacy is smarter than that of medicine? get off your high horse

everything I said up there is fact, whats easy is regarding whatever that makes you feel bad as trolling.

i never said the applicant pool for pharmacy is smarter than that of medicine. I said it's unfair and unreasonable to assume ALL medical applicants are smarter than ALL pharmacy applicants which is basically what you said. I was a biochem undergrad and at least half of my class was pre-med, and some of them struggled more than I ever had. Are you fond of degrading people?
 
i never said the applicant pool for pharmacy is smarter than that of medicine. I said it's unfair and unreasonable to assume ALL medical applicants are smarter than ALL pharmacy applicants which is basically what you said. I was a biochem undergrad and at least half of my class was pre-med, and some of them struggled more than I ever had. Are you fond of degrading people?
I find this trend of bashing on other student majors and field of study highly among pre med and engineering students. Don't get me wrong both are tough field. The irony of it is that most of the students that think that they are the smartest are not really that smart. I understand that most of them are teens or in their early 20s, never actually having to deal with the struggle as an young adult in mid 20s or above while attending professional school . At that age most of them just care about what their peers think of them. As they get older they realize what really matters.
I actually have 2 friends,one who went to USc dropped out in the third year and raked up $200,000 in debt and the other James who studied pharmacy in Montana and completed with only $40,000.
James earn $120,000 in Alaska now. Guess whose laughing now.


Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile
 
I find this trend of bashing on other student majors and field of study highly among pre med and engineering students. Don't get me wrong both are tough field. The irony of it is that most of the students that think that they are the smartest are not really that smart. I understand that most of them are teens or in their early 20s, never actually having to deal with the struggle as an young adult in mid 20s or above while attending professional school . At that age most of them just care about what their peers think of them. As they get older they realize what really matters.
I actually have 2 friends,one who went to USc dropped out in the third year and raked up $200,000 in debt and the other James who studied pharmacy in Montana and completed with only $40,000.
James earn $120,000 in Alaska now. Guess whose laughing now.


Sent from my iPad using SDN mobile
Probably not the guy who had to move to Alaska to make $120k...
 
You can't really compare the two unless you're working with identical stats.. you're telling me if 2,300 people applied to the pharmacy school, they would accept 920 students? No. Pretty terrible logic there.

less students apply to pharmacy school because all the competitive applicants apply elsewhere, those with weak stats apply to pharmacy
the horrible job outlook is why the size of the applicant pool has decreased so much over the past decade, causing those with weak stats to be accepted.
he is speaking about the competitiveness of admission
you seriously think that a class of 100 from a pool of 2300 is less competitive than a class of 150 from a pool of 350?
you can deny it all you want but the truth is that pharmacy is ridiculously easy to get into

Haha I like how pre med students think they are the smartest . U know the stats. Most of them never make it to professional school (pharmacy, dental, medicine) . The few that will make it 30 % won't complete their program. Instead of figuring out your strengths while in pre med , you are bashing people who are in professional program trying to hard to succeed.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

generally,
premeds that cannot make it to medical school go to Caribbeans.
biology majors that never had strong stats go to pharmacy school.
and I am not bashing anything, the OP made a thread regarding on how pharmacy admissions is a joke, I like others am simply supporting him.

i never said the applicant pool for pharmacy is smarter than that of medicine. I said it's unfair and unreasonable to assume ALL medical applicants are smarter than ALL pharmacy applicants which is basically what you said. I was a biochem undergrad and at least half of my class was pre-med, and some of them struggled more than I ever had. Are you fond of degrading people?

That is never the case that all applicants to pharmacy school are less intelligent, however it is fact that on average pharmacy applicants are weaker in stats compared
medical and dental. If the above comparison regarding Wisconsin's dental and pharmacy school's admission rate isn't enough to make you admit that pharmacy is easier
to get into, then you are lying to yourself.
 
Last edited:
less students apply to pharmacy school because all the competitive applicants apply elsewhere, those with weak stats apply to pharmacy
the horrible job outlook is why the size of the applicant pool has decreased so much over the past decade, causing those with weak stats to be accepted.
you seriously think that a class of 100 from a pool of 2300 is less competitive than a class of 150 from a pool of 350?
he is speaking about the competitiveness of admission, not on the ratio of how many should be accepted.
you can deny it all you want but the truth is that pharmacy is ridiculously easy to get into



generally,
premeds that cannot make it to medical school go to Caribbeans.
biology majors that never had strong stats go to pharmacy school.
and I am not bashing anything, the OP made a thread regarding on how pharmacy admissions is a joke, I like others am simply supporting him.



That is never the case that all applicants to pharmacy school are less intelligent, however it is fact that on average pharmacy applicants are weaker in stats compared
medical and dental. If the above comparison regarding Wisconsin's dental and pharmacy school's admission rate isn't enough make you admit that pharmacy is easier
to get into, then you are lying to yourself.

Making assumptions are never good. Have you ever considered the fact that pharmacy school requires more pre-reqs...which is probably why applicants have a lesser GPA then med and dental students. Just out of required courses...pharmacy schools require gen chem, org chem, bio, calc, physics (large majority), microbio, anatomy, biochem (large majority).... most dental schools and medical schools ONLY require gen chem, org chem, physics, bio, and statistics making all of the other classes i mentioned as "recommended" but NOT required. Therefore, although pharm applicants might have a lesser GPA, they still have to take a greater amount of classes, which makes it harder IMP. Therefore, I would say it is harder than PA for sure.
 
Making assumptions are never good. Have you ever considered the fact that pharmacy school requires more pre-reqs...which is probably why applicants have a lesser GPA then med and dental students.

the reason pharmacy applicants have a lower GPA is because they underperformed throughout their entire undergrad.
most dental and medical applicants take those classes anyway.

if you want a comparison of a dental program that requires microbio, biochem, physio, anatomy, look at Midwestern Arizona.

Midwestern Dental has an average GPA of 3.6 and 5% acceptance rate
Midwestern Pharm has an average GPA of 3.3 and 32% acceptance rate
again their dental school is 6 times harder to get into.
 
You can't really compare the two unless you're working with identical stats.. you're telling me if 2,300 people applied to the pharmacy school, they would accept 920 students? No. Pretty terrible logic there.

Terrible logic is thinking that a program that has a higher acceptance rate to be more competitive.
 
Last edited:
Terrible logic is thinking that a program that has a higher acceptance rate to be more competitive.

The acceptance rate fluctuates depending on the number of applicants. It's not more competitive because it's held to a higher standard or it's better in any way shape or form. Pharmacy just gets less applicants. So to say dental school is "10x" tougher to get into is only based on the number of applicants. I never said pharmacy school is more competitive. You're putting words in my mouth and calling it terrible logic. Not to mention that there are pharmacy schools that get over 1000 applicants, only offer interviews to maybe 200, and accept 80. Use some common sense.
 
The acceptance rate fluctuates depending on the number of applicants. It's not more competitive because it's held to a higher standard or it's better in any way shape or form. Pharmacy just gets less applicants. So to say dental school is "10x" tougher to get into is only based on the number of applicants. I never said pharmacy school is more competitive. You're putting words in my mouth and calling it terrible logic. Not to mention that there are pharmacy schools that get over 1000 applicants, only offer interviews to maybe 200, and accept 80. Use some common sense.

you still don't realize that a program with a 40% acceptance rate is a lot easier to get into than one with a 4%?
pharm schools don't fluctuate their admissions rate from 40% to 10% every other year, it stays constant.
dental schools have a higher average GPA and stronger applicants, of those 2300 applicants hundreds have over a 3.6 GPA, of your 350 applicants most do not.
competitive individuals will be denied admission to dental school because of the low acceptance rate and will be forced to reapply
for pharmacy where most applicants are weak, those with decent stats will get in with less effort because the competition is so easy.
i seriously had to spell this out for you? wow
 
Last edited:
The acceptance rate fluctuates depending on the number of applicants. It's not more competitive because it's held to a higher standard or it's better in any way shape or form. Pharmacy just gets less applicants. So to say dental school is "10x" tougher to get into is only based on the number of applicants. I never said pharmacy school is more competitive. You're putting words in my mouth and calling it terrible logic. Not to mention that there are pharmacy schools that get over 1000 applicants, only offer interviews to maybe 200, and accept 80. Use some common sense.
I agree.
 
The acceptance rate fluctuates depending on the number of applicants. It's not more competitive because it's held to a higher standard or it's better in any way shape or form. Pharmacy just gets less applicants. So to say dental school is "10x" tougher to get into is only based on the number of applicants. I never said pharmacy school is more competitive. You're putting words in my mouth and calling it terrible logic. Not to mention that there are pharmacy schools that get over 1000 applicants, only offer interviews to maybe 200, and accept 80. Use some common sense.

As a previous Pharmacy School applicant I got into 83% of the schools I applied to, all of which being "Top 10 Schools." (Voluntarily withdrew from the remainder)

The percentage of Medical Schools I have gotten into is less than half of that.

My stats did not significantly change between these two time periods.


To say "Dental/Medical school is tougher to get into based ONLY on the number of applicants" does in fact mean that it is more competitive and requires stronger applications due to the growing number of increasingly qualified applicants for the same limited number of seats.

It should be fairly obvious that a greater number of applications => a greater number of strong candidates => higher competition for a given seat => a more difficult to get into program

What are you even arguing about right now?
 
Last edited:
As a previous Pharmacy School applicant I got into 83% of the schools I applied to, all of which being "Top 10 Schools." (Voluntarily withdrew from the remainder)

The percentage of Medical Schools I have gotten into is less than half of that.

My stats did not significantly change between these two time periods.


To say "Dental/Medical school is tougher to get into based ONLY on the number of applicants" does in fact mean that it is more competitive and requires stronger applications due to the growing number of increasingly qualified applicants for the same limited number of seats.

It should be fairly obvious that a greater number of applications => a greater number of strong candidates => higher competition for a given seat => a more difficult to get into program

What are you even arguing about right now?

The person that I initially replied to (musicplease) said "you're going to Wisconsin, a school that accepts over 40% of everyone that applies there." Which is not true. Comprende?
 
you still don't realize that a program with a 40% acceptance rate is a lot easier to get into than one with a 4%?
pharm schools don't fluctuate their admissions rate from 40% to 10% every other year, it stays constant.
dental schools have a higher average GPA and stronger applicants, of those 2300 applicants hundreds have over a 3.6 GPA, of your 350 applicants most do not.
competitive individuals will be denied admission to dental school because of the low acceptance rate and will be forced to reapply
for pharmacy where most applicants are weak, those with decent stats will get in with less effort because the competition is so easy.
i seriously had to spell this out for you? wow
Ok, then don't go into pharmacy. Its as simple as that.
 
you still don't realize that a program with a 40% acceptance rate is a lot easier to get into than one with a 4%?
pharm schools don't fluctuate their admissions rate from 40% to 10% every other year, it stays constant.
dental schools have a higher average GPA and stronger applicants, of those 2300 applicants hundreds have over a 3.6 GPA, of your 350 applicants most do not.
competitive individuals will be denied admission to dental school because of the low acceptance rate and will be forced to reapply
for pharmacy where most applicants are weak, those with decent stats will get in with less effort because the competition is so easy.
i seriously had to spell this out for you? wow

Don't argue when you don't even know what the hell you're typing. First of all, you said they accept "40% of everyone" that applies, which is not true. That is what I was explaining. Guess I had to spell it out for you.. and it seems like you're putting too much into picking a career based on what other people will think.
 
Last edited:
Don't argue when you don't even know what the hell you're typing. First of all, you said they accept "40% of everyone" that applies, which is not true. That is what I was explaining. Guess I had to spell it out for you.. and it seems like you're putting too much into picking a career based on what other people will think.

do tell, what is the actual percentage that is accepted from everyone that applies?
 
If you guys really love the passion of pharmacy, then go for it. Both jokersmile and musicplease have been discouraging people to not go to pharmacy. I literally see them on every page I go to and there is not one positive thing that they say lol. Think some people on the USC c/o 2020 forum even got pissed at them. I feel like they just come to criticize on pharmacy forums bc they have nothing to do with their lives. If they do not like pharmacy, they should just have a friendly chat in some other forums. I am sure the prepharmacy forum existed so that all the members can help each other out in pursuing pharmacy, not trying to convince individuals to stray away from the field. In the end, everyone has to treat patients in order to make them feel better. And so, all of us in the end has to collaborate with one another in the future. I really hope there will be a time where all heatlhcare professions will be respected equally. Because as I see it, and I'll say this again, all professions in the healthcare field have one common goal, and that is to really care for patients. Obviously, if someone doesn't have that mindset, then they will be unhappy being a pharmacist, dentist, doctors, and so on.
 
If you guys really love the passion of pharmacy, then go for it. Both jokersmile and musicplease have been discouraging people to not go to pharmacy. I literally see them on every page I go to and there is not one positive thing that they say lol. Think some people on the USC c/o 2020 forum even got pissed at them. I feel like they just come to criticize on pharmacy forums bc they have nothing to do with their lives. If they do not like pharmacy, they should just have a friendly chat in some other forums. I am sure the prepharmacy forum existed so that all the members can help each other out in pursuing pharmacy, not trying to convince individuals to stray away from the field. In the end, everyone has to treat patients in order to make them feel better. And so, all of us in the end has to collaborate with one another in the future. I really hope there will be a time where all heatlhcare professions will be respected equally. Because as I see it, and I'll say this again, all professions in the healthcare field have one common goal, and that is to really care for patients. Obviously, if someone doesn't have that mindset, then they will be unhappy being a pharmacist, dentist, doctors, and so on.

nice of you to single me out, no there have been warnings against pharmacy for years
the warnings inform applicants that pharmacy has a horrible outlook
many people benefit from the warnings that are stated here
those that decide to change career paths don't comment saying "oh ok I'm glad I know now, let me become a premed"
they simply read and move on with their lives
if you would rather not acknowledge the truth then that's your own issue.
 
I have personally thankful for all the people that have explained the job market for me.
I have lurked on this forum for a while and if it weren't for their information I would never known about all of these problems.
 
Last edited:
UCSF pharmacy has a 10% acceptance rate, compare that to the 3% acceptance rates for the average medical and dental school.

so to fix the previous conclusion, all pharmacy schools are easy to get into.
Easier would be more apt. No need to turn this into an ego trip. For someone who is neither interested in nor attending pharmacy school you seem awfully invested.
 
Easier would be more apt. No need to turn this into an ego trip. For someone who is neither interested in nor attending pharmacy school you seem awfully invested.

you don't have to be applying to have pharm experience.
yes, easier whatever floats your boat.
 
I have personally thankful for all the people that have explained the job market for me.
I have lurked on this forum for a while and if it weren't for their information I would never known about all of these problems.


Same here. I actually was at an interview last year where one of the P1 told us,"don't make it all about studying in pharmacy school, you will still be a pharmacist and can still get a job with a 2.0 gpa." Honestly, I was shocked that someone in pharmacy school would say such a thing.

What a horrible advice to give to prospective students?!

If I had not been on this forum reading all the posts on saturation and job prospects, I would have probably thought the guy was giving a good advice and that pharmacy school is an easy ride that will still guarantee you a job at the end of 4 years as long as you do the bare minimum.

Reading all the posts on saturation has made me realize that you cannot be complacent, that you have to work twice as hard and network like crazy throughout the four years and be willing to move anywhere in the US if you want to land a job. I'm still going to pharmacy school in the fall but I don't have rose tinted glasses on, thanks to this forum.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
 
you don't have to be applying to have pharm experience.
yes, easier whatever floats your boat.
Well, my main point is that you certainly have more enjoyable things to do than involve yourself in this.
 
Same here. I actually was at an interview last year where one of the P1 told us,"don't make it all about studying in pharmacy school, you will still be a pharmacist and can still get a job with a 2.0 gpa." Honestly, I was shocked that someone in pharmacy school would say such a thing.

What a horrible advice to give to prospective students?!

If I had not been on this forum reading all the posts on saturation and job prospects, I would have probably thought the guy was giving a good advice and that pharmacy school is an easy ride that will still guarantee you a job at the end of 4 years as long as you do the bare minimum.

Reading all the posts on saturation has made me realize that you cannot be complacent, that you have to work twice as hard and network like crazy throughout the four years and be willing to move anywhere in the US if you want to land a job. I'm still going to pharmacy school in the fall but I don't have rose tinted glasses on, thanks to this forum.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

I should add that networking is a flawed concept because it implies that you are forming relationships with the intent to gain advantage in the future. The problem is that the way the field is now, everyone is trying to gain the same advantage and this strategy only works well when no one else is doing it. Now even if you do network, everyone else is doing it and it still comes down to whether or not you are more qualified (and more well liked) than everyone else.
 
I should add that networking is a flawed concept because it implies that you are forming relationships with the intent to gain advantage in the future. The problem is that the way the field is now, everyone is trying to gain the same advantage and this strategy only works well when no one else is doing it. Now even if you do network, everyone else is doing it and it still comes down to whether or not you are more qualified (and more well liked) than everyone else.

Wow. So very wrong. The problem is that most 26 year olds have no idea *how* to network let alone how to do it well. I remember this one student at ASAP midyear who went with the intention of networking and meeting as many people in hiring capacities as possible. But his social skills were so poor that I can all but guarantee he eliminated himself from the future applicant pool of anywhere he applied. He might have had a shot at an interview had he just submitted resumes - but he didn't even get that far because his applications were immediately blacklisted.

All grad schools are the same - 50 percent is what you know, 50 percent is who you know.

If there are two candidates of equal aptitude, the one who comes with a personal reference will get the job. Every. Single. Time.
 
Wow. So very wrong. The problem is that most 26 year olds have no idea *how* to network let alone how to do it well. I remember this one student at ASAP midyear who went with the intention of networking and meeting as many people in hiring capacities as possible. But his social skills were so poor that I can all but guarantee he eliminated himself from the future applicant pool of anywhere he applied. He might have had a shot at an interview had he just submitted resumes - but he didn't even get that far because his applications were immediately blacklisted.

All grad schools are the same - 50 percent is what you know, 50 percent is who you know.

If there are two candidates of equal aptitude, the one who comes with a personal reference will get the job. Every. Single. Time.

Might want to brush up on your reading comprehension you just justified my post.
 
Might want to brush up on your reading comprehension you just justified my post.

Nonsense. You explicitly state the latest networking no longer matters (because everyone is networking) and qualifications do matter. And you couldn't be more wrong in that regard. I can assure you that there is no shortage of poorly qualified but highly recommended applicants who will get a job before a highly qualified and unreferred one.

Networking is still critical. You suggest otherwise.

There is no reading comprehension issue.

Networking well IS the way to get the job. Because in pharmacy, we are all "equally qualified".
 
Nonsense. You explicitly state the latest networking no longer matters (because everyone is networking) and qualifications do matter. And you couldn't be more wrong in that regard. I can assure you that there is no shortage of poorly qualified but highly recommended applicants who will get a job before a highly qualified and unreferred one.

Networking is still critical. You suggest otherwise.

There is no reading comprehension issue.

Networking well IS the way to get the job. Because in pharmacy, we are all "equally qualified".

No, that is not what I said. I said if everyone is networking it comes down to your qualifications. You misread my statement and added a bunch of your conditional ideas to backup your statement, like BUT SOME NETWORK BETTER THAN OTHERS!

Wow. So very wrong. The problem is that most 26 year olds have no idea *how* to network let alone how to do it well. I remember this one student at ASAP midyear who went with the intention of networking and meeting as many people in hiring capacities as possible. But his social skills were so poor that I can all but guarantee he eliminated himself from the future applicant pool of anywhere he applied. He might have had a shot at an interview had he just submitted resumes - but he didn't even get that far because his applications were immediately blacklisted.

All grad schools are the same - 50 percent is what you know, 50 percent is who you know.

If there are two candidates of equal aptitude, the one who comes with a personal reference will get the job. Every. Single. Time.

As I said, if everyone is networking, and there are two candidates of equal aptitude, and both know the same person from networking, the edge from networking is effectively nullified.

Thanks again for justifying my post. Next time you can do it without your personal commentary; "nonsense" or "Wow. So very wrong." It's precisely because of this line of thought that has degenerated American education to this nadir where everyone thinks they can just get by, by "networking" and that it's more important than qualifications.
 
Networking or not, the entire scope of pharmacy has turned into a pathetic minefield. Who in their right mind will sign up for this, in 2016?
 
Top