How is one a 'good fit' for a medical school?

[bozz]

I hear this term come up so often... and I don't even understand what it means. From talking to "older" doctors, many say it's all BS and that adcoms simply say that to sound unique... and that in the end, medical school is medical school. You mainly need to learn a lot of information.

So as a premed, how do you determine if you're a good fit... especially if all the info you get is from the MSAR, from a friend of a friend, or the school's website. It makes no sense to me whatsoever. Consider PBL, for example. How many undergrads honestly have any type of PBL experience to know if it's right for them?

I'm guessing we apply everywhere, play to each school's strengths during interviews, and only truly decide which programs are appropriate once we have acceptances in our hands.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Jolie South]

fit isn't a bogus expression. i think it does exist.

schools have different missions. take stanford, for example. they really want to produce physician scientists. if you're not into research and want to be a straight clinician, you probably won't be a good fit. or one of the HBCUs like Howard, they are looking to train people who will serve the underserved. now, if you're looking to be a plastic surgeon in beverly hills, you probably wouldn't be a good fit. these are extremes, but you get the point.

there's also an intangible feeling that you get while you're there on an interview. there were several schools i visited that i didn't think i fit at.

curriculum as you mentioned is large too. if you know that you're not a classroom learner, then you probably don't want to apply to a traditional school with an 8-5 schedule. and vice versa.

i chose the school that i did for a combination of factors: i liked the positive environment that i encountered on interviews, the facilities are awesome, the accelerated pre-clinical curriculum (1.5 years), and also cause i'm from texas and i like it here.

 

[TheRealMD]

Eh, I think the reverse is much easier to spot. There's such a thing as "bad" fit. For example, if you are a lecture-type person, you're not going to like so much a school that is heavily PBL. If you're more into academic medicine, a school who's mission is more leaning towards primary care won't serve your interests as well as other med schools can.

Of course, these are all extremes. When you get to grey areas, I don't think the term holds much weight.

 

[Doublecortin]

I hear this term come up so often... and I don't even understand what it means. From talking to "older" doctors, many say it's all BS and that adcoms simply say that to sound unique... and that in the end, medical school is medical school. You mainly need to learn a lot of information.

So as a premed, how do you determine if you're a good fit... especially if all the info you get is from the MSAR, from a friend of a friend, or the school's website. It makes no sense to me whatsoever. Consider PBL, for example. How many undergrads honestly have any type of PBL experience to know if it's right for them?

I'm guessing we apply everywhere, play to each school's strengths during interviews, and only truly decide which programs are appropriate once we have acceptances in our hands.

I agree with that statement. While in some cases, med schools want only a certain type of student, e.g. schools like Howard want African Americans who will work with underserved minority populations, I think the concept of "fit" is a bogus concept invented by med school administrators to justify why they reject so many qualified and overqualified applicants and to make applicants feel a little less depressed, it's the same reason they say in their rejection letters "it's not your fault for getting rejection, it's our fault that we have so many fabulous applicants and can't offer everyone a seat".

I will go even further to say that not only this concept of "fit" is a bogus one, but also things like PBL, being "well-rounded", having to do research and other bs EC's is all bogus. Look, 50 years ago schools had traditional curriculum, and applicants didn't have to jump through so many hoops to get in. And guess what? They trained superb doctors.

So the point to my rant is that don't fix something that ain't broke.


your last statement basically outlined a good strategy for approaching this process.

 

[Doublecortin]

Eh, I think the reverse is much easier to spot. There's such a thing as "bad" fit. For example, if you are a lecture-type person, you're not going to like so much a school that is heavily PBL. If you're more into academic medicine, a school who's mission is more leaning towards primary care won't serve your interests as well as other med schools can.

Of course, these are all extremes. When you get to grey areas, I don't think the term holds much weight.

agree, a bad fit is much easier to define and is real

 

[nevercold]

Jolie South hits it on the nose with the "intangible feeling" line. You'll notice it even more when you interview for residency. Different schools have different atmospheres. This may likely be reflected in how the student body interacts, but it also is something that will permeate the hospital and that will play a bigger role in your life as an upper level student on the wards. It doesn't matter who you are to sit down and be able to study some books as much as it matters who you are when you are asked to be on a healthcare team with other providers and auxiliary staff.

A lot of this "fit" tends to play out in regional differences in the US. The classic ones are Texas, southern California, the northwest, the south, and the northeast. Another classic difference is urban vs. suburban vs. rural. Those things really play out in the population of people you'll be working with even if your classmates and residents are from all over the world.

And then of course as both Jolie South and TheRealMD said, there are the practical elements of lecture vs. PBL, research vs. primary care, basic provider vs. healthcare innovator, etc.

And then there are the people who are not the right fit anywhere because it's obvious they aren't really giving/caring/passionate. With so many applicants, it doesn't even come down to those people; instead, the ones who don't demonstrate those essential things the most get left behind even if they'd fit in fine. Someone else just fits in "better."

 

[kypdurron5]

I interviewed at 8 schools and by number 7 thought the whole "fit" thing was bogus. Number 8, however, was a perfect fit and I knew it instantly. You'll know when you find it....if you do >).

 

[QofQuimica]

I interviewed at 8 schools and by number 7 thought the whole "fit" thing was bogus. Number 8, however, was a perfect fit and I knew it instantly. You'll know when you find it....if you do >).

Me too. I interviewed at a lot of schools, and liked all of them. I think I could have pretty much been happy at any school. But when I got to this school, I just knew it was the right one, and so did they. I had been planning to go to a different school and almost didn't even attend this interview because it was late in the season. After my interview day, I completely changed my plans.

OP, I disagree that fit is BS. As other people have already said, it's the extremes who really stand out. Most people don't strongly stand out as being either perfect fits or awful fits, but some do. My school, at least, is looking for people who have good people skills and who fit with our mission. You'd be amazed how many people come to interviews and fail miserably in those two categories, even though they look like some kind of saint on paper.

 

[RasslinGod]

Someone mentioned research schools like stanford. I'm wondering does the research that an applicant does have to be science?? I like doing social science research like history for my undergraduate education..should i not apply for research schools?

 

[bozz]

Me too. I interviewed at a lot of schools, and liked all of them. I think I could have pretty much been happy at any school. But when I got to this school, I just knew it was the right one, and so did they. I had been planning to go to a different school and almost didn't even attend this interview because it was late in the season. After my interview day, I completely changed my plans.

OP, I disagree that fit is BS. As other people have already said, it's the extremes who really stand out. Most people don't strongly stand out as being either perfect fits or awful fits, but some do. My school, at least, is looking for people who have good people skills and who fit with our mission. You'd be amazed how many people come to interviews and fail miserably in those two categories, even though they look like some kind of saint on paper.

really? what do you mean by people skills? most premeds I know can have decent conversations and can be sociable if they needed to.

 

[chad5871]

really? what do you mean by people skills? most premeds I know can have decent conversations and can be sociable if they needed to.

You obviously don't go to my undergrad.

 

[bozz]

You obviously don't go to my undergrad.

weird... I mean many people aren't party animals or anything... but if needed, especially with people like other MDs, I'd think we'd all be sociable

Do you really think that when forced, a premed can't be enthusiastic about what he/she has done?

 

[chad5871]

weird... I mean many people aren't party animals or anything... but if needed, especially with people like other MDs, I'd think we'd all be sociable

Do you really think that when forced, a premed can't be enthusiastic about what he/she has done?

It's not that - it's just that some people have some really strange personality traits that come across in high-stress situations that I would never expect.

For example, in my Crime Scene class this past semester we had a mock trial. I knew pretty much everyone in the class (there were only 20 of us), and we all got along. During cross-examination each person was put through a string of difficult questions, and they had to admit their mistakes or tactfully answer the question. Well, some of the people were scared stiff, some got defensive, some were extremely casual and un-professional in their speech and behavior. I think everyone just responds differently when they're under high stress, and if that's the only impression the interviewer gets of your personality then they are going to assume you are always that way.

 

[QofQuimica]

really? what do you mean by people skills? most premeds I know can have decent conversations and can be sociable if they needed to.

I mean, some people can't even pretend to be interested in this school and act in a socially acceptable way for even the duration of a single interview day. For example, we have had interviewees do the following:

1) Badmouth other schools while visiting ours (total bad judgment and tasteless to boot)
2) Badmouth our school and challenge the med students to defend it
3) Leave the room during the information session because they don't feel like sitting through it
4) Sit there like a lump and not interact with the other interviewees and/or the med students who are attending the lunches (you don't even have to ask questions--all you have to do is act like you're interested in hearing about the school for one freaking hour!)
5) Answer phone calls and/or text message while in the information session
6) Use the computer to check email while in the information session
7) Brag to their student host about how great their stats are (total toolery)
8) Brag about what school they attend/ed (also total toolery)
9) Act obviously different around someone after finding out that person was an adcom (totally transparent and not impressing anyone)
10) Be rude to the admissions secretary (this is like the kiss of death--of all the mistakes to make, this one is stupid, stupid, STUPID)

And this is all before they get to the interview, where some of them go on to come across as being either totally self-absorbed or completely amoral, neither of which is going to do wonders for their admissions score.

Just to be fair, we've also had plenty of interviewees who are just amazing and awesome people in person. They impress everyone they meet, including students, admissions staff, and faculty because they have the right attitude. They know about the school and are interested in learning more. They can express well-thought out reasons for why they want to come here. They treat other people respectfully, even when they don't think those people can do anything to help them get in. And that explains how sometimes, Person A with the 4.0 GPA and 40 MCAT from a top school gets rejected, while Person B with more average scores from the unranked school gets in.

 

[AmoryBlaine]

Fit is definitely important and you will get it once you see it. I think it comes mostly from interacting with the current students.

I think it should be thrown into the pile about equally with cost and prestige of the school when it comes time to make your decision. If you "fit" really well at private school X but you are also accepted to State U you have a quandry on your hands. For some of us, State U is also a fairly prestigious institution (Michigan, Ohio State, Washington) come to mind. If that good state school is also alot cheaper, don't nail yourself to the tune of an extra 50-100k just because you liked the "fit."

 

[CCLCMer]

Someone mentioned research schools like stanford. I'm wondering does the research that an applicant does have to be science?? I like doing social science research like history for my undergraduate education..should i not apply for research schools?

Most schools don't have research as a pre-req, even schools that are top-ranked research schools. Mine (CCLCM) is one of the exceptions, because this is a five-year research MD program. So our requirements are more in between an MD and an MD/PhD program when it comes to research background. Even here though, there is no requirement that the research has to necessarily be hardcore bench science. I think that most research-oriented schools would like to see that you've performed some kind of scholarship, so yes, that would include history research. You could easily combine the two interests and do research in medical history, which would be pretty cool and not the same as what every other premed has done. We have a history of medicine elective and library/museum at Case, and other research-oriented schools offer these kinds of electives too. So I don't think anyone would think you were weird for doing history research.

I've already said this in another thread, but just to answer bozz's question, fit is really important for this program. We don't have grades or tests, and some people are not comfortable with that because they want an objective outside number to know where they stand. Also, if you're not a person who is pretty self-directed or you don't like working in small groups, CCLCM is definitely not going to be a good fit for you, even if you love research.

 

[TheRealMD]

I've already said this in another thread, but just to answer bozz's question, fit is really important for this program. We don't have grades or tests, and some people are not comfortable with that because they want an objective outside number to know where they stand. Also, if you're not a person who is pretty self-directed or you don't like working in small groups, CCLCM is definitely not going to be a good fit for you, even if you love research.

But I think it's easier to know what is "bad fit" than "good fit", if that even makes sense. However, the problem when you start talking about "good fit" is that it includes intangible things that you can't really place on a pro/con comparison very well. Then the concept of fit just becomes confusing.

 

[QofQuimica]

But I think it's easier to know what is "bad fit" than "good fit", if that even makes sense. However, the problem when you start talking about "good fit" is that it includes intangible things that you can't really place on a pro/con comparison very well. Then the concept of fit just becomes confusing.

Oh, the bad fits definitely are pretty obvious (see my above post). I guess that's true at any school.

 

[TheRealMD]

Oh, the bad fits definitely are pretty obvious (see my above post). I guess that's true at any school.

That's not bad fit. That's acting like a fool.

 

[LizzyM]

That's not bad fit. That's acting like a fool.

Fools are not a good fit at my school.

Sometimes we wonder if people who don't like a school but who will get family pressure to attend (legacy, geographic proximity to family, cost, etc) act in such a way to guarantee a rejection.

 

[QofQuimica]

Fools are not a good fit at my school.

Sometimes we wonder if people who don't like a school but who will get family pressure to attend (legacy, geographic proximity to family, cost, etc) act in such a way to guarantee a rejection.

I've wondered the same thing.

 

[chad5871]

Fools are not a good fit at my school.

Sometimes we wonder if people who don't like a school but who will get family pressure to attend (legacy, geographic proximity to family, cost, etc) act in such a way to guarantee a rejection.

I've wondered the same thing.

I think part of it may just be a nerves issue. I mean, medical school interviews are a crucially important part of your life - honestly I think some people just can't perform well under pressure.

And I'm sure some of them are just fools who sabotage their own interviews too.