How do schools not get in trouble for sending acceptances early?

Started by MrLahey
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

MrLahey

Trailer Park Supervisor
10+ Year Member
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
How have schools gotten away with sending acceptances prior to october 15th?
And isnt the rule the acceptances have to come out "after" October 15th?
 
The whole rule seems kind of ambiguous. Without having a specific line that mentions the time that admissions offers can be made, there is not much of an argument that AAMC can make against people making offers on vs. after 10/15.

That and the fact that schools offering acceptances ON 10/15 compose a small percentage and (this is my 100% biased opinion) the benefit of upholding somewhat ambiguous traffic rules would not be worth the aggravation of trying to punish those who interpret the vague rule slightly differently by 24 hours.

It's not like schools are offering acceptances weeks ahead of the required date.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
From my understanding, schools offering acceptances before October 15th can do so because they start classes significantly earlier than other schools (early-to-mid July as opposed to mid-August). Schools who offer early acceptances, however, also make students decide before the normal May 15th deadline.
 
Why does it even matter? The only people that would actually likely didn't get acceptances from those schools.

confused. Only people who would actually complain?

I think it's done in an effort to keep schools from poaching students early. I feel like it's better for the applicants and all the schools that way. There are a lot of why examples I can think of but they are pretty easy to imagine for yourself.
 
confused. Only people who would actually complain?

I think it's done in an effort to keep schools from poaching students early. I feel like it's better for the applicants and all the schools that way. There are a lot of why examples I can think of but they are pretty easy to imagine for yourself.

The only reason it would matter is if schools put conditions on their acceptances (i.e., we'll only accept you if you matriculate here). Otherwise you as the applicant have all the power. You're under no pressure to stop attending interviews or to attend that school just because they accepted you first.

I just don't see how the poaching argument has any teeth. If you're an informed applicant, getting accepted earlier rather than later is unimportant.
 
ive been told at one school that since aamc makes it pretty ambiguous, the school interpreted "after" Oct 15 to be after midnight of Oct 15. They've been doing it for years with no problem.
 
The only reason it would matter is if schools put conditions on their acceptances (i.e., we'll only accept you if you matriculate here). Otherwise you as the applicant have all the power. You're under no pressure to stop attending interviews or to attend that school just because they accepted you first.

I just don't see how the poaching argument has any teeth. If you're an informed applicant, getting accepted earlier rather than later is unimportant.

Judging by sdn how many people do you think are informed applicants? In pools of 15,000 slight differences in the odds will make a difference. Why do you think different states are vying for the primaries earlier?

Also think of a good applicant getting accepted to a good school before he gets an interview at one with lower stats. He could go on that interview and absolutely love the school but doesn't get the chance b/c he is accepted elsewhere and declines the interview. I feel like the oct 15 date slightly helps with the polarization of applicants between schools while helping the lesser informed applicants at the same time.
 
How exactly would they 'get in trouble'?

Any rule is only as good as the teeth is has; and since AAMC has very little actual control I would figure it is more a guideline that most schools adhere to.
 
How exactly would they 'get in trouble'?

Any rule is only as good as the teeth is has; and since AAMC has very little actual control I would figure it is more a guideline that most schools adhere to.

it's this, more than anything. the traffic rules are not rules at all, they are recommendations that AAMC asks schools to operate by. some schools aren't particularly interested in the details of those recommendations, although their spirit is generally respected.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The only reason it would matter is if schools put conditions on their acceptances (i.e., we'll only accept you if you matriculate here). Otherwise you as the applicant have all the power. You're under no pressure to stop attending interviews or to attend that school just because they accepted you first.

I just don't see how the poaching argument has any teeth. If you're an informed applicant, getting accepted earlier rather than later is unimportant.

👍

The applicant has ALL of the power in medical school admissions. An October 14th versus October 15th acceptance is meaningless. Unless it's a an early decision program, you can stack up as many acceptances as you'd like by the May deadline, and make an informed decision then.

It's a little premature, but take a look at how the match works. THEN you'll start to see what things look like when they are unfair.
 
There is at least one school that offered regular MD pathway admission yesterday (the 14th), w/o any sort of binding requirements. I'm not sure what the AAMC could really do; after all, they only impose "guidelines."