How many people are exaggerating their hours?

[MybeMudPhud]

I've been peepin at some WAMC threads even though I shouldn't, and I can't help but think a good deal of people are juicin up their hours big-time. Is this super common and do people get called out on it? Like 600 hours for a pre-med organization, which famously do nothing?

I get that impact matters way more than hours, but it makes me a bit anxious about the hours I put in my app.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[_med21_e]

I've been peepin at some WAMC threads even though I shouldn't, and I can't help but think a good deal of people are juicin up their hours big-time. Is this super common and do people get called out on it? Like 600 hours for a pre-med organization, which famously do nothing?

I get that impact matters way more than hours, but it makes me a bit anxious about the hours I put in my app.

Most of my friends (who was not a scribe/CNA) lied and/or exaggerated their hours, esp if it was clinical volunteer/shadowing. I worked as a scribe for years so it was easy for me to rack up some hours, but it happens (although, it doesn't mean you should either). I def would not worry about other people's applications because someone else is always gonna have more than you or done more than you. Also SDN represents a very small % of the medical school applications anyways.

Good luck.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

I always presume we estimate the hours for an application. The usual calculation standard if you do the math is 2000 hours is a full year of employment (50 weeks x 40 hours per week). So half-time is about 1000 hours, or near 20 hours a week. So 100 hours is 2 hours a week commitment. Thus one can judge time commitment from this pretty easily.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Honestly, being a member of a “premed organization” is so insignificant that it wouldn’t matter if one had 50 or 50000 hours.

 

[candbgirl]

I hope people don’t exaggerate but I have to say , lately I’ve read several WAMC threads were posters have thousands and thousands of hours across the board. Makes me stop and . So I know what you are talking about.

 

[DrippingNeverTripping]

I hope people don’t exaggerate but I have to say , lately I’ve read several WAMC threads were posters have thousands and thousands of hours across the board. Makes me stop and . So I know what you are talking about.

Keep in mind a lot of these students who have thousands of hours are most likely nontrads/took gap years. It's become rarer to apply as a traditional student directly out of the end of junior year so unless you know the background of an applicant it'll be hard to gauge whether or not they're exaggerating their hours.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Furthermore, what you do is always more important than how you do it.

500 hours in a lab with 5 pubs >>> 3000 hours in a lab

1000 hours in a leadership role >>> 2000 hours as a member

For example

 

[KnightDoc]

I hope people don’t exaggerate but I have to say , lately I’ve read several WAMC threads were posters have thousands and thousands of hours across the board. Makes me stop and . So I know what you are talking about.

This^^^^. It happens all over the place. People are playing themselves, because adcoms surely take the numbers with a grain of salt and just don't care, so there is really no reason to do it.

The funniest thing is where people suddenly get a conscience after they are accepted and post on SDN, worrying that they are going to be outed if adcoms check. They are invariably told not to worry, and that no one is going to check unless the exaggeration is staggering.

 

[FireSlasher]

Furthermore, what you do is always more important than how you do it.

500 hours in a lab with 5 pubs >>> 3000 hours in a lab

1000 hours in a leadership role >>> 2000 hours as a member

For example

I know that quality outperforms quantity. But I really thought that someone with many hours on research who learned the ins and outs was more valuable than someone who managed to land a lucky position in a lab where you get published a lot even if it isnt your research project. Just my thoughts.

 

[senecca]

I admit I go wild when I see applicants reporting 5000 hours of research, 6000 hours of clinical experience and 1000 hours of shadowing etc. we all know what it means.

But, I wouldn’t blame the applicants but the indifference of American medical school admission process. It has become funny and reached a stage now, no ORM applicants can apply directly out of junior year but need minimum two gap years. What is the difference between 100 hours clinical experience vs 1000 hours in terms of gained knowledge?

On top of it, it has become a norm for ORM applicants to apply for 40, 50 schools and 30 of them ask “why us?” . Funny indeed.

I hope that the government gets involved and put a stop to all this non sense. Let’s move to an admission process based on 100% objective criteria. There should be only one page application. If they need essay, let the applicants write them under proctored environment like mcat centers. Let the applicants come up with preference list and get matched based on their stats. Any volunteering or shadowing should only be a minimum requirement, not as selection factors.

It has become crazy indeed

 

[senecca]

I know that quality outperforms quantity. But I really thought that someone with many hours on research who learned the ins and outs was more valuable than someone who managed to land a lucky position in a lab where you get published a lot even if it isnt your research project. Just my thoughts.

This is What happens When we have subjective selection criteria. Think about those unfortunate applicants who don’t have the connection/network to gain a research opportunity or have no access to hospitals to gain clinical experience or couldn’t get any physicians to gain shadowing.

 

[betterweather]

I can't speak to what medical school adcoms do, but I was on an admissions committee for a very competitive graduate program and this was something we paid a lot of attention to. If someone listed 200 hours at something but during the interview was unable to articulate even 100 hours worth of work, they didn't get in to our program. Dishonesty is a big deal; I don't want dishonest students and I don’t want dishonest healthcare providers.

Personally, I did not exaggerate hours at all. If I wasn't sure, I rounded down.

 

[Nontrad_FL_LGBT]

This is What happens When we have subjective selection criteria. Think about those unfortunate applicants who don’t have the connection/network to gain a research opportunity or have no access to hospitals to gain clinical experience or couldn’t get any physicians to gain shadowing.

You could say the same thing about the low SES applicant who worked 40 hours through school to support themselves, the gay kid from the south who was closeted and depressed and tanked his GPA while in therapy, or girl who got leukemia as a sophomore and had way more important things on her mind than a math test.

There's more to the equation of most peoples' lives than a few objective numbers. No ADCOM lets someone in just because they've got a nice story or really love the homeless or are extra URM, you do have to show that you're at least minimally intellectually capable of handling medical school rigor. If you're admitted, you are good enough; you almost invariably will become a physician per the 96% medical school completion rate. It feels sort of "old man yells at clouds" to complain about people getting a boost for serving their communities, having jobs, achieving things, etc.

Admissions are like this because everyone applies to 50 schools. Imo, cap applications at 10 per person and you'd have a much more equitable and much less insane process. People who really want to go to T10s will still go just as hard but if you want to go to Jim's Backyard College of Medicine and be a regular clinician, self-selecting applicants will set the bar. Nobody with 100k hours of clinical experience is applying to Jim's Backyard COM with 1/10 possible apps.

 

[senecca]

“You could say the same thing about the low SES applicant who worked 40 hours through school to support themselves, the gay kid from the south who was closeted and depressed and tanked his GPA while in therapy, or girl who got leukemia as a sophomore and had way more important things on her mind than a math test.”

Well, don’t you think that lives of those people would far more easier if we use only MCAT and give some weight to the GPA, rather than asking them to do research, shadowing, non clinical volunteering, clinical volunteering, leadership etc. on top of securing a competitive GPA and MCAT? If they are time and resource strapped and that’s why they can’t do well in a standardized test MCAT, and secure a competitive gpa, how does it make easier if you ask them do more stuff on top of it? So, I don’t buy your argument. Of course, the real problem with using only the objective criteria is that, we cannot bend the rules and defend/justify the admission decisions based on favors , preferences and discrimination, rather than purely on merit.

Also, in my opinion, if 10000+ students apply for 100+ seats, “ability to graduate medical school” shouldn’t be the criteria. It should be based on who is the most qualified based on objective criteria. We need not play God!!

Of course, if some preference given to one group of people and discriminate another group of people, the former group will defend it with every possible reason and the later will oppose it . It is only natural. But, it doesn’t make it right.

 

[KnightDoc]

Also, in my opinion, if 10000+ students apply for 100+ seats, “ability to graduate medical school” shouldn’t be the criteria. It should be based on who is the most qualified based on objective criteria. We need not play God!!

Yup, but the problem with your argument is that there is no "objective criteria" to determine who will make the best physicians. Decades of experience tells us it sure as hell isn't necessarily the ability to do well on a standardized test, or to arrange a college schedule in such a way so as to be able to apply to med school with an inflated GPA. These are important metrics, but so are more subjective indicia of leadership, compassion, charity, just being a decent human being, etc.

Not to mention all the studies that show patient outcomes are improved when their healthcare providers look like them and share a common background and set of experiences. It is an imperfect system, but they all are. It's not like the countries that employ the objective entrance criteria you long for have such great outcomes, or are such attractive places to practice that you are seeking them out, rather than just wishing that the US system played into what is probably a strength for you!

 

[Neuroscifan]

“You could say the same thing about the low SES applicant who worked 40 hours through school to support themselves, the gay kid from the south who was closeted and depressed and tanked his GPA while in therapy, or girl who got leukemia as a sophomore and had way more important things on her mind than a math test.”

Well, don’t you think that lives of those people would far more easier if we use only MCAT and give some weight to the GPA, rather than asking them to do research, shadowing, non clinical volunteering, clinical volunteering, leadership etc. on top of securing a competitive GPA and MCAT? If they are time and resource strapped and that’s why they can’t do well in a standardized test MCAT, and secure a competitive gpa, how does it make easier if you ask them do more stuff on top of it? So, I don’t buy your argument. Of course, the real problem with using only the objective criteria is that, we cannot bend the rules and defend/justify the admission decisions based on favors , preferences and discrimination, rather than purely on merit.

Also, in my opinion, if 10000+ students apply for 100+ seats, “ability to graduate medical school” shouldn’t be the criteria. It should be based on who is the most qualified based on objective criteria. We need not play God!!

Of course, if some preference given to one group of people and discriminate another group of people, the former group will defend it with every possible reason and the later will oppose it . It is only natural. But, it doesn’t make it right.

A reason you’re forgetting for taking URM and low SES into account is the current lack of diversity of practicing physicians, and the resulting intersectionality that exists in the medical system. Many URM are such because of difficulties in life that make it difficult to succeed in the typical, standard way that can be measured by standardized testing and GPA. Adding other factors and considering background and the path to medicine helps increase the diversity of the physician population, which helps alleviate the intersectionality in healthcare quality and accessibility. In theory. Like my wife says, she is much more comfortable seeing a female ob/gyn, and has had better experiences with them. More women in medicine can directly lead to better quality of care for women and similarly for other categories of human difference.

 

[Neuroscifan]

Like with US Congress. Is it really a representative democracy when the vast majority of those representatives have historically been Protestant white males?

 

[Talldoctor96]

This^^^^. It happens all over the place. People are playing themselves, because adcoms surely take the numbers with a grain of salt and just don't care, so there is really no reason to do it.

The funniest thing is where people suddenly get a conscience after they are accepted and post on SDN, worrying that they are going to be outed if adcoms check. They are invariably told not to worry, and that no one is going to check unless the exaggeration is staggering.

You’d be surprised … when ur processing 10k apps, there’s more automation and literallt taking the numbers at full value

 

[DarkBluMage]

I admit I go wild when I see applicants reporting 5000 hours of research, 6000 hours of clinical experience and 1000 hours of shadowing etc. we all know what it means.

But, I wouldn’t blame the applicants but the indifference of American medical school admission process. It has become funny and reached a stage now, no ORM applicants can apply directly out of junior year but need minimum two gap years. What is the difference between 100 hours clinical experience vs 1000 hours in terms of gained knowledge?

On top of it, it has become a norm for ORM applicants to apply for 40, 50 schools and 30 of them ask “why us?” . Funny indeed.

I hope that the government gets involved and put a stop to all this non sense. Let’s move to an admission process based on 100% objective criteria. There should be only one page application. If they need essay, let the applicants write them under proctored environment like mcat centers. Let the applicants come up with preference list and get matched based on their stats. Any volunteering or shadowing should only be a minimum requirement, not as selection factors.

It has become crazy indeed

This would be a huge disadvantage and unfair process honestly for disadvantaged or low income students without access to opportunities. Stats are also affected by socioeconomic status. Schools being able to employ a holistic admissions process if they so choose is a good thing.

 

[Nontrad_FL_LGBT]

“Well, don’t you think that lives of those people would far more easier if we use only MCAT and give some weight to the GPA, rather than asking them to do research, shadowing, non clinical volunteering, clinical volunteering, leadership etc. on top of securing a competitive GPA and MCAT?

Not necessarily.

Argument A, URMs score statistically significantly lower than ORMs on the MCAT. Some of the reasons for that include having to work to support themselves and thus not being able to study full time for an extracurricular exam for 3-6+ months, statistically having attended worse schools their entire lives, not being able to afford a $6k 515+ Guarantee Prep Course, and not even knowing how to find resources like SDN or Anki or the MCAT review documents because they're effectively blazing the path for their family/friend group a lot of the time. If we only cared about MCAT scores, there would be even fewer URMs enrolling than there are now; go look at the publicly available data, it's kinda shocking how steep the gap is in these scores.

Argument B, some people are just mediocre test takers. If you have an obvious issue like test anxiety or just not knowing testing strategy, that's something you can fix assuming you have some time and money available (again, not everyone does), but not everyone can be a 99th percentile test taker. Notice I don't say 99th percentile in intelligence; educational psychologists do not even agree that a singular concept of "intelligence" exists. Being a doctor involves a lot of tests, and of course those tests are not optional, but in total standardized testing will take up less than 1% of your working life. Things like performing a hands on skill or procedure, talking to a patient or colleague when emotions are running high, or managing your own mental health well enough to prevent burnout for a long career take up way more than that. The MCAT doesn't test for those abilities, but being a shift lead at McDonald's or volunteering at a hospice does. Passing the test well enough to safely progress to the next level of training based on the opinion of people much further along than you should be enough to at least move forward, even if it's not to the exact school or specialty you want.

Argument C, anyone who decides on medicine later in life or has issues crop up during undergrad is likely screwed if the only two metrics are MCAT and GPA. If 50% or (25% if GPA is weighed less) of my overall score is based on my GPA then I'm out of the game before I start unless I get a 520+. This pattern of thought actually caused me to initially not pursue medicine because I thought I needed a 4.0 to get in. I completed my degree 10 years ago with a 3.3 when I was 19, depressed, trans and closeted in the south. I had to finish it as quickly as possible so I could quit being reliant on my parents, graduate, get a real job, and find a psychiatrist who would let me transition, so I did a bs degree in 4 semesters with all my AP/IB credits; I was taking 18-24 credits per semester and getting mostly Bs with some As mixed in, but I don't deserve a shot even though I'm now a super high achiever in every aspect of my life? Doesn't seem super equitable to me.

Also, in my opinion, if 10000+ students apply for 100+ seats, “ability to graduate medical school” shouldn’t be the criteria. It should be based on who is the most qualified based on objective criteria. We need not play God!!

Argument D, many URM and other underprivileged folks (LGBT, low SES, etc) are super active in their communities. They're volunteering and spending a disproportionate time out there doing good in the world because they love their people and want to help improve their lives. If med schools didn't care about "objective criteria" such as previous academic achievement beyond passing (I am not advocating for this of course), then a lot more URMs would probably be getting in based off of strengths in service, work ethic, etc. These traits would likely translate well in medical school when they have less external pressures such as working hanging over them and more resources to learn study and test taking skills.

Argument E, patient care improves when the patient trusts the physician and coming from a similar background is a great way to immediately start off on the right foot. There are tons of studies showing that diverse patients have better outcomes when treated by physicians of their own race. Even if the patient doesn't care, you are obviously going to have ingroup knowledge and context that someone outside of your racial/ethic/identity group may not have that could help when working with a particular patient. So if the point is to optimize the level of care provided to patients by having the "best" doctors, allowing more URM folks into the pipeline is of imperative importance.

Argument F, you don't want a class of people that is exactly alike, I.e. really good at standardized tests to the exclusion of all else. Have you ever met someone that's a carbon copy of your own personality? My best friend and I are like that; I have an amazing time with him when I've got a few beers in my system, but he doesn't exactly push me out of my comfort zone and force me to grow. People unlike yourself do that. I want my med school class to have 22 yos and 40 yos, people who like spiders and people who own pelotons, moms and dads, stamp collectors and Bumble chads, folks of whatever religious groups folks are following these days, and lots of people who are not white because these are all things that do not describe me and they can probably teach me something about life that'll shift how I think about something a bit.

Argument G, Matriculants in 2001 averaged a 29.6 (507) / 3.60 GPA; Matriculants in 2021 averaged a 512 / 3.72 GPA. Those first numbers are actually right around what modern URM Matriculants are putting up btw. I think we can both agree that +5 / +.12 would be a huge difference between two applicants in the same cycle, but those people with a 3.60 have been attendings for the past 10-15 years at this point. Most of them are presumably pretty good at what they do, so I don't think we should fault people for doing as well as others who are already successful.

To sum it up, I'm really not worried about low quality people sneaking into medical school because they did a lot of volunteering or changed career plans or dealt with unexpected struggles early in life. It's logical to want "the best" people to become doctors, but the best doesn't mean anything objectively. Personally, I find it more important that ADCOMs select for personality/temperament, diversity (in all meanings of the word beyond simple URM status), and a commitment to service than play a game of find all the biggest brains in the room.

 

[KnightDoc]

You’d be surprised … when ur processing 10k apps, there’s more automation and literallt taking the numbers at full value

Maybe, but my personal experience has been that the bar must be VERY low for the auto screen. Once humans take a look at the application, there is no way adcoms are taking the numbers at face value, given how inflated many of them are, and given how people like me are successful with reported hours at a small fraction of those reported by others.

 

[Talldoctor96]

Maybe, but my personal experience has been that the bar must be VERY low for the auto screen. Once humans take a look at the application, there is no way adcoms are taking the numbers at face value, given how inflated many of them are, and given how people like me are successful with reported hours at a small fraction of those reported by others.

I hate to break it to you homie, but that’s just not how it works. We absolutely are.

 

[KnightDoc]

I hate to break it to you homie, but that’s just not how it works. We absolutely are.

Then I guess it's you who are getting played by a bunch of premeds who are exaggerating their hours, knowing you don't check. Shame on me for not doing the same, but I naively didn't think it was necessary, or would work. Live and learn!

 

[senecca]

Glad to see so many reactions. Unfortunately, there is nothing new. We hear the same arguments that are repeated starting from middle school and high school magnet program admissions, undergrad admissions, medical school and law school admissions, business school admissions , residency, job recruitment everywhere. Now, people have started even demanding for holistic grading system, holistic employee performance review and holistic promotion etc. There seems to be no end. In my opinion, 90% of these arguments are BS, just excuses and tried and tested talking points to preserve the favors/preferences. I am from a very poor family and a high achiever too but just didn’t have the fortune of born with the right skin color. So, my passion and dreams seem irrelevant.

It is funny to me to hear people repeatedly say that the admission committee can see through and figure out the personality of the applicants, how caring and passionate they are and their commitments to serve poor by just looking at their essays that could’ve been written by anyone and the extracurriculars that are not verified. But, they also claim that the URM patients are better served by the URM doctors. Which is true? Can’t the adcoms use their skill to select the best applicants irrespective of their race that can also serve the URM patients better, by looking at their essays, extracurriculars and interviews ? If white customers say that they are better served by or be comfortable with only white customer representatives, are we going to accept that? Or, if a white business owner feels that he feels comfortable to serve only the white customers, are we going to accept that?

If the dreams , aspirations and passions of someone with 3.3/507 is important, then how can we dismiss the dreams and aspirations of someone with 3.9/520+ as not important or undeserving? What sin did he/she commit? You can browse through SDN MCAT, r/mcat, r/sat, r/act, r/lsat, r/gmat and you will see that none of the high achieving scorers took any expensive coaching and majority of them come from a poor or middle class background. Still, people have no heart and dismiss their achievements by saying they took expensive coaching or they are from a rich family. Does the truth even matter anymore?

I believe that they government should step in and take away the power from ALL the schools (magnet) and universities and give it to the students as it is in the rest of the world. The admissions should be carried out by third party organizations in a simple , straightforward and open manner. No secrets or behind the scenes adjustments. They should define the criteria , publish the criteria, evaluate every applicant against every criteria and assign them to a school or university based on their preference and post the results along with the entire applications of all the applicants online along with their scores and reasons for acceptance/rejection. It will take away all the anxieties involved with our secretive admission system.

This will be my last post on this thread, I do not want to get banned.

 

[kkkdada321]

Glad to see so many reactions. Unfortunately, there is nothing new. We hear the same arguments that are repeated starting from middle school and high school magnet program admissions, undergrad admissions, medical school and law school admissions, business school admissions , residency, job recruitment everywhere. Now, people have started even demanding for holistic grading system, holistic employee performance review and holistic promotion etc. There seems to be no end. In my opinion, 90% of these arguments are BS, just excuses and tried and tested talking points to preserve the favors/preferences. I am from a very poor family and a high achiever too but just didn’t have the fortune of born with the right skin color. So, my passion and dreams seem irrelevant.

It is funny to me to hear people repeatedly say that the admission committee can see through and figure out the personality of the applicants, how caring and passionate they are and their commitments to serve poor by just looking at their essays that could’ve been written by anyone and the extracurriculars that are not verified. But, they also claim that the URM patients are better served by the URM doctors. Which is true? Can’t the adcoms use their skill to select the best applicants irrespective of their race that can also serve the URM patients better, by looking at their essays, extracurriculars and interviews ? If white customers say that they are better served by or be comfortable with only white customer representatives, are we going to accept that? Or, if a white business owner feels that he feels comfortable to serve only the white customers, are we going to accept that?

If the dreams , aspirations and passions of someone with 3.3/507 is important, then how can we dismiss the dreams and aspirations of someone with 3.9/520+ as not important or undeserving? What sin did he/she commit? You can browse through SDN MCAT, r/mcat, r/sat, r/act, r/lsat, r/gmat and you will see that none of the high achieving scorers took any expensive coaching and majority of them come from a poor or middle class background. Still, people have no heart and dismiss their achievements by saying they took expensive coaching or they are from a rich family. Does the truth even matter anymore?

I believe that they government should step in and take away the power from ALL the schools (magnet) and universities and give it to the students as it is in the rest of the world. The admissions should be carried out by third party organizations in a simple , straightforward and open manner. No secrets or behind the scenes adjustments. They should define the criteria , publish the criteria, evaluate every applicant against every criteria and assign them to a school or university based on their preference and post the results along with the entire applications of all the applicants online along with their scores and reasons for acceptance/rejection. It will take away all the anxieties involved with our secretive admission system.

This will be my last post on this thread, I do not want to get banned.

Well said. Well said. This is the logical fallacy of those that have claimed things above. You want the whole world to tailor to the URMs (medicine) because they have been discriminated against while discriminating others in the process. Also, if you've been discriminated by white people, why do you want to return the favor to other races??