How long do ADCOMS spend on each app?

[Larger]

just out of curious...how long do adcoms spend on each application before sending interviews or rejecting? Is it like a 5 min ordeal after reading the application or is it a long process involving a lot of debates between fellow members on the adcoms that spans a few days?....anyone know?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Mr Avante]

just out of curious...how long do adcoms spend on each application before sending interviews or rejecting? Is it like a 5 min ordeal after reading the application or is it a long process involving a lot of debates between fellow members on the adcoms that spans a few days?....anyone know?

Usually the committee agrees on everything as they often have the same vision; however, there are times when debates take place, usually when not-so-strong applicants are being considered but this is more of an acceptance situation.
Every school has its own policies any way.

 

[gyngyn]

just out of curious...how long do adcoms spend on each application before sending interviews or rejecting? Is it like a 5 min ordeal after reading the application or is it a long process involving a lot of debates between fellow members on the adcoms that spans a few days?....anyone know?

It depends on whether you are asking about primary screening or post interview evaluation.

 

[CarlosDanger]

both?

 

[Larger]

It depends on whether you are asking about primary screening or post interview evaluation.

i was asking about primary screening but post interview evaluation would be awesome as well...i was under the impression u have a 50% shot of getting an acceptance when u have an interview unless u bomb it

 

[gyngyn]

i was asking about primary screening but post interview evaluation would be awesome as well...i was under the impression u have a 50% shot of getting an acceptance when u have an interview unless u bomb it

Screening ranges from 30 seconds to a couple of days. Committee debate where I am is usually less than an hour to review a dozen candidates. Reviewers have already read all available info and given a preliminary vote prior to discussion.

 

[LizzyM]

There is no discussion pre-interview.... It will take me about 30 minutes to review an application if I'm "first eye" on the application. If someone has done a preliminary review and passes it to me for my opinion (like a consult), I'll look at the first review and then do a 2-15 minute review honing in on questions raised in my mind by the first review).

After the interview, each member reviews the application on their own taking as much time as they need (I take about 2 minutes). Then we discuss as a group. This can take 1 minute or 5 minutes.

If there is a second level of review before decision that can take no time at all (unanimous slam dunk or unanimous "not for us") or it can be a contentious, painful conversation that takes 10 minutes but seems like 30.

 

[MsTeacup]

Then how do ADCOM reject someone with average stats but amazing experiences within 2 weeks pre interview? Is it more of a score selection?

 

[Dbate]

Then how do ADCOM reject someone with average stats but amazing experiences within 2 weeks pre interview? Is it more of a score selection?

More than likely the "amazing experiences" are not that amazing in the applicant pool.

Just a possibility.

 

[MsTeacup]

I mean compared to those with high stats but very average experience.

 

[Dbate]

There is no discussion pre-interview.... It will take me about 30 minutes to review an application if I'm "first eye" on the application. If someone has done a preliminary review and passes it to me for my opinion (like a consult), I'll look at the first review and then do a 2-15 minute review honing in on questions raised in my mind by the first review).

After the interview, each member reviews the application on their own taking as much time as they need (I take about 2 minutes). Then we discuss as a group. This can take 1 minute or 5 minutes.

If there is a second level of review before decision that can take no time at all (unanimous slam dunk or unanimous "not for us") or it can be a contentious, painful conversation that takes 10 minutes but seems like 30.

I know you have talked about this before, but how much do stats matter in the post interview evaluation?

I ask because I got a really early interview (at the end of September) to a school where my stats (3.6 cgpa, 3.5 sgpa, 35) were way below the school's average (3.83cpga, 3.81 sgpa, 35).

Usually early interviews are reserved for the stellar candidates (i certainly am not one), so I wondered how much stats would matter in post interview process. Since they didn't hurt me pre-interview, I imagine it has to come back to bite me at some point.

 

[Dbate]

I mean compared to those with high stats but very average experience.

Some schools use a stats threshold. I didn't even get a secondary at Vandy and UCSF. So for those places, they use stats to screen.

As a result, the experiences wouldn't come into play at some schools.

I don't know anything about the actual process, but if a school screens by stats first, then that could be why.

 

[CarlosDanger]

I got a really early interview (at the end of September) to a school where my stats (3.6 cgpa, 3.5 sgpa, 35) were way below the school's average (3.83cpga, 3.81 sgpa, 35).

Usually early interviews are reserved for the stellar candidates (i certainly am not one), so I wondered how much stats would matter in post interview process. Since they didn't hurt me pre-interview, I imagine it has to come back to bite me at some point.

Your stats aren't way below average. Your MCAT is at the average, and thats probably more important than GPA, of which yours is fine. I wouldn't think a 3.5 would cripple you that much. Way below average would be if you had like a 30.

Just my opinion

 

[calgirl1234]

Some schools use a stats threshold. I didn't even get a secondary at Vandy and UCSF. So for those places, they use stats to screen.

As a result, the experiences wouldn't come into play at some schools.

I don't know anything about the actual process, but if a school screens by stats first, then that could be why.

I don't think all schools use a stats threshold. I also didn't get a secondary at Vandy and I have a balanced LizzyM of 76 and have gotten interviews elsewhere. Who knows

 

[MsTeacup]

Your stats aren't way below average. Your MCAT is at the average, and thats probably more important than GPA, of which yours is fine. I wouldn't think a 3.5 would cripple you that much. Way below average would be if you had like a 30.

Just my opinion

Agreed. From looking at other threads, MCAT is definitely more important than GPA, which makes sense because GPA is highly dependant on ones school

 

[Jennyfishy]

I know you have talked about this before, but how much do stats matter in the post interview evaluation?

I ask because I got a really early interview (at the end of September) to a school where my stats (3.6 cgpa, 3.5 sgpa, 35) were way below the school's average (3.83cpga, 3.81 sgpa, 35).

Usually early interviews are reserved for the stellar candidates (i certainly am not one), so I wondered how much stats would matter in post interview process. Since they didn't hurt me pre-interview, I imagine it has to come back to bite me at some point.

That's not really "way below" from what I see!

Although I am curious about this question too. I also received an early interview at a school that is known for not being OOS "friendly" and my MCAT is far below the average (28 vs 32), but my GPA is fine.

 

[MedGrl@2022]

That's not really "way below" from what I see!

Although I am curious about this question too. I also received an early interview at a school that is known for not being OOS "friendly" and my MCAT is far below the average (28 vs 32), but my GPA is fine.

What school? Maybe they thought that you fit their mission. Congrats on the interview!

 

[Jennyfishy]

What school? Maybe they thought that you fit their mission. Congrats on the interview!

It was at UWisconsin + Thanks! We're supposed to find out their final decision in ~2 weeks but I'm hoping that the stats are more significant pre-interview than post (because I imagine that would be the #1 reason I would get waitlisted/rejected anywhere)

 

[Goro]

At our school it's because someone's GPA or MCAT are below our minimums, or possible barely above them.

Then how do ADCOM reject someone with average stats but amazing experiences within 2 weeks pre interview? Is it more of a score selection?


For us it's pretty much the same. I get a folder, and I spend about 30 mins to go over it thoroughly. I then come up with the questions I'll ask. We do a panel format and we do NOT consult prior to interview. If the inteviewee did a good job (or a horrible one), I'll accept or reject within 5 mins of leaving the interview. People who are on the fence, I'll mull over for a bit longer.

At the AdCom meeting, we tend to argue over discordant reports fromt eh interviewers. I can love someon but my colleague can hate him/her, and then we have to hash it out. Sometime my kid wins, and sometimes my kid loses.

Lizzy's answer is so close to what we do it makes me thinks she's one of my fellow Faculty!

There is no discussion pre-interview.... It will take me about 30 minutes to review an application if I'm "first eye" on the application. If someone has done a preliminary review and passes it to me for my opinion (like a consult), I'll look at the first review and then do a 2-15 minute review honing in on questions raised in my mind by the first review).

After the interview, each member reviews the application on their own taking as much time as they need (I take about 2 minutes). Then we discuss as a group. This can take 1 minute or 5 minutes.

If there is a second level of review before decision that can take no time at all (unanimous slam dunk or unanimous "not for us") or it can be a contentious, painful conversation that takes 10 minutes but seems like 30.

 

[premed2000]

Do adcoms go thru letters of recommendations before sending out interview invites? Or do they not read letters until after interview?

 

[LizzyM]

Do adcoms go thru letters of recommendations before sending out interview invites? Or do they not read letters until after interview?

We are supposed to read them before. Sadly, I think that they sometimes get short shrift. Then we interview someone, the person is weird and we look back at the letters to see if there was any clue available to us in advance of the interview that this person has a problem (never shuts up, or painfully shy or, flaky & irresponsible, or arrogant)

 

[Ismet]

Then how do ADCOM reject someone with average stats but amazing experiences within 2 weeks pre interview? Is it more of a score selection?

I mean compared to those with high stats but very average experience.

It depends on the stats and the "amazing" experiences, but ECs don't really make up for lackluster stats or stats that are low for the school in question. An exception might be if the applicant had to work full time to pay their way through school or support a family, and that might explain the lower stats. Also, what you may consider to be average vs. amazing may not agree with what the adcom considers to be average or amazing.