How much does class ranking matter?

[JackShephard MD]

Usually it's hard to separate great clinicians from nepotism. Med students aren't idiots and even if they have an "in" they'd still work their butt if they wanted a competitive field. Those cases of allowing in a more unqualified student solely because of their connections are more rare. You can't say which is more important...they both are and you'd be stupid not to use every advantage you have to achieve your goals.

This was my only point: there are many paths to success.

The other poster is trying to polarize my stance, "So Step 1 doesn't matter at all" or "Connections are everything!?"

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ppfizenm]

Once again, you're wrong. This thread is discussing class rank and it's potential importance and influence on students' aspirations. He pointed out that this influence is not standardized across the board, and the implications it has may vary with a school's pedigree.

He was 100% on topic, and I can't figure out why you refuse to accept this, unless you simply are in denial with regards to his post.

1) re-read what OP asked. Direct questions, but not this.
2) No ****, find one person posting on here who already didn't have an idea of that
3) Denial? Sure, that must be it. It couldn't be that after he brought it up the thread, which was providing some useful information turned into a classic "what do residency program directors look at and value the most debate".

 

[username456789]

1) re-read what OP asked. Direct questions, but not this.
2) No ****, find one person posting on here who already didn't have an idea of that
3) Denial? Sure, that must be it. It couldn't be that after he brought it up the thread, which was providing some useful information turned into a classic "what do residency program directors look at and value the most debate".

You are an odd bird. It's difficult to figure out why this seems to have set you off so much.

The reply to which you refer was on topic, like it or not. He mentioned a variable not initially discussed/broached in the OP's post because it is directly relevant to the discussion.

Your attitude on this matter seems problematic, and your type of concrete thinking will not serve you well in the future. If we were all so vehemently against incorporating additional relevant information into a discussion, we would stagnate as a culture.

 

[ppfizenm]

You are an odd bird. It's difficult to figure out why this seems to have set you off so much.

The reply to which you refer was on topic, like it or not. He mentioned a variable not initially discussed/broached in the OP's post because it is directly relevant to the discussion.

Your attitude on this matter seems problematic, and your type of concrete thinking will not serve you well in the future. If we were all so vehemently against incorporating additional relevant information into a discussion, we would stagnate as a culture.

Standard bashing.
Step 1. off-handed insult
Step 2. Reaffirm faulty premise as fact
Step 3. Have doubts about future of person you are arguing with.

Tell me what is new in this thread (that hasn't been discussed a thousand times before in allo and pre allo) after the he made the pedigree comment and you win. I'll email you a picture of a trophy and everything.

 

[username456789]

Standard bashing.
Step 1. off-handed insult
Step 2. Reaffirm faulty premise as fact
Step 3. Have doubts about future of person you are arguing with.

Tell me what is new in this thread (that hasn't been discussed a thousand times before in allo and pre allo) after the he made the pedigree comment and you win. I'll email you a picture of a trophy and everything.

Boy, talk about faulty premises.

Face it, you overreacted and were incorrect, the other poster was on topic, and now you've ironically been the one to help derail the thread. You accused the other poster of being off topic when he was clearly and emphatically not. Your "tell me what is new..." angle is a red herring and undermines your original point of view.

It's cliche, I realize, but maybe you should head back to Pre-Allo until you feel up to contributing again.

 

[ppfizenm]

Boy, talk about faulty premises.

Face it, you overreacted and were incorrect, the other poster was on topic, and now you've ironically been the one to help derail the thread. You accused the other poster of being off topic when he was clearly and emphatically not. Your "tell me what is new..." angle is a red herring and undermines your original point of view.

It's cliche, I realize, but maybe you should head back to Pre-Allo until you feel up to contributing again.

please continue to repeat yourself over and over.

It's not. I was actually interested in what was being discussed here before pedigree came up because it isn't often discussed and i haven't heard much about it. When pedigree does make an appearance however, the threads end up like this one has. You can't pretend some useful information is now being discussed. I've seen these arguments before, those graphs before, and that study before. You also can't pretend that there aren't discussions about step 1 scores going on at the moment as well as people talking about the importance of connections. I for one wasn't aware that your connections are factored into your class rank. But continue to tell me how this thread resembles what it originally asked and how, if pedigree was on topic, the thread has turned into this after it was brought up.

 

[rad0nc]

Hello!

Our school doesn't tell you where you're ranked (in an attempt to reduce the competitiveness, I suppose). But in the end, we found out where we're ranked when we apply to residencies. Residencies and deans can see our ranks, and our dean's letters will surely hint at what our class rank is (or explicitly state it).

How much does this rank matter, especially for competitive residencies? Does it matter if someone is in the bottom vs top half of the class? I've heard that if you're in the top 10-20 people, class rank matters b/c it leads to AOA, but otherwise everyone is the same. Is this true?

Thanks!

My school does the same thing. I think that it matters for AOA and not much else. AOA is important for residency, but I doubt that the actual rank matters much because many schools don't have it, while most have AOA. My school only gives out quartiles, not an actual rank.

 

[Phyozo]

My school does the same thing. I think that it matters for AOA and not much else. AOA is important for residency, but I doubt that the actual rank matters much because many schools don't have it, while most have AOA. My school only gives out quartiles, not an actual rank.

It's a common misconception that most schools don't have ranks, but nearly all of them do in some fashion. As you stated, your school ranks based on quartiles. Some rank based on upper/mid/lower third, others by percentile rounded to the nearest 10th, others by each student. Many schools do not release exact ranks because they want to encourage teamwork and prevent competition/gunnerism, but everyone school has some sort of internal rank.

I asked an aPD about this at my school and he mentioned that rank is necessary to stratify students. Schools that don't rank make it a lot harder for PDs to set up their rank lists and give interviews because they have to place more weight on other forms of objective data (namely step scores/# of 3rd year honors). As a personal anecdote, I spent the last 4 years being told our school doesn't rank only to find out they actually do on my dean's letter.

 

[JackShephard MD]

boy, talk about faulty premises.

Face it, you overreacted and were incorrect, the other poster was on topic, and now you've ironically been the one to help derail the thread. You accused the other poster of being off topic when he was clearly and emphatically not. Your "tell me what is new..." angle is a red herring and undermines your original point of view.

It's cliche, i realize, but maybe you should head back to pre-allo until you feel up to contributing again.

+1

 

[KinasePro]

As a personal anecdote, I spent the last 4 years being told our school doesn't rank only to find out they actually do on my dean's letter.

Which school do you attend? That sounds completely unethical.

Also, I disagree that all schools with P/F resort to this type of deceit. Many schools within the top 25 USNWR claim to be true P/F without rank -- are all of these administrations just lying to their students? Doubtful.

As a personal anecdote, I know students who have failed classes in their pre-clinical years at "true" P/F schools and still matched into elite residencies. I highly doubt this could happen if a secret rank or grades were being communicated on their dean's letter.

 

[Butler]

Which school do you attend? That sounds completely unethical.

Also, I disagree that all schools with P/F resort to this type of deceit. Many schools within the top 25 USNWR claim to be true P/F without rank -- are all of these administrations just lying to their students? Doubtful.

As a personal anecdote, I know students who have failed classes in their pre-clinical years at "true" P/F schools and still matched into elite residencies. I highly doubt this could happen if a secret rank or grades were being communicated on their dean's letter.

From what I understand, most schools keep rank lists whether they are known to the students or not. Also, from what I understand, the MSPE will include your quartile (1 or 2nd..etc) or say top half or bottom half, but they won't say he was number 40 in a class of 200. So PDs get a feel for how you did in relation to your peers, but not your exact rank. My school claims to be P/F, but we all know they have rank lists based on our test scores. If I chose to press my Dean about it, he might tell me what quartile I was in, but I really don't care. Being confident that I know the info and learning what will be relevant to patient care as well as what I am responsible for on the Steps is more important than a few extra percentage points on a preclinical test.

 

[rad0nc]

It's a common misconception that most schools don't have ranks, but nearly all of them do in some fashion. As you stated, your school ranks based on quartiles. Some rank based on upper/mid/lower third, others by percentile rounded to the nearest 10th, others by each student. Many schools do not release exact ranks because they want to encourage teamwork and prevent competition/gunnerism, but everyone school has some sort of internal rank.

I asked an aPD about this at my school and he mentioned that rank is necessary to stratify students. Schools that don't rank make it a lot harder for PDs to set up their rank lists and give interviews because they have to place more weight on other forms of objective data (namely step scores/# of 3rd year honors). As a personal anecdote, I spent the last 4 years being told our school doesn't rank only to find out they actually do on my dean's letter.

In my personal experience, the PD's didn't care about class rank. When you are interviewing they often have cheat sheets. A couple of times I saw step scores, AOA, and clerkships that were honored. I never saw anything about my quartile even though it is listed in my MSPE. Maybe it is just my specialty, but I really don't think anyone cares about class rank.

I also saw the exact same list of discriminating factors during one of my TY interviews.

 

[KinasePro]

From what I understand, most schools keep rank lists whether they are known to the students or not. Also, from what I understand, the MSPE will include your quartile (1 or 2nd..etc) or say top half or bottom half, but they won't say he was number 40 in a class of 200. So PDs get a feel for how you did in relation to your peers, but not your exact rank. My school claims to be P/F, but we all know they have rank lists based on our test scores. If I chose to press my Dean about it, he might tell me what quartile I was in, but I really don't care.

I remember a couple of instances during 2nd looks last year where dean's were pressed on this topic. On one occasion at a state school, the dean acknowledged a confidential rank that was used for MSPE and awarding scholarships (only P/F grades were given in coursework). But on all other occasions, the dean's strongly denied secret rankings/quartiles. If what you're saying is true, then we have a lot of dishonest medical school administrators in this country.

 

[Phyozo]

The easiest way to know whether your school keeps an internal rank is to check out your dean's letter. If it says your percentile / quartile, you know there has to be some way they are stratifying students. I agree that the ranking may not necessarily be as obvious as # 5 of 140 but you know there are hard numbers which determine why someone gets to be top quartile vs upper middle quartile. For those who come from P/F schools, I do too, and my guess is the ranking is based off of 3rd year evals +/- step scores.

PDs and administrators are not above lying (if you'd prefer, equivocating), though most will not be openly, obviously dishonest. Anyone who has been through the match knows what I'm talking about.

 

[Phyozo]

In my personal experience, the PD's didn't care about class rank. When you are interviewing they often have cheat sheets. A couple of times I saw step scores, AOA, and clerkships that were honored. I never saw anything about my quartile even though it is listed in my MSPE. Maybe it is just my specialty, but I really don't think anyone cares about class rank.

I also saw the exact same list of discriminating factors during one of my TY interviews.

You may very well be right as I can only speak for my own school and what I know anecdotally. One possibility is that the class rank is used more for determining who gets interviews. I guess we'll never know until/unless we step into the mysterious world of being a dean or PD

 

[KinasePro]

For those who come from P/F schools, I do too, and my guess is the ranking is based off of 3rd year evals +/- step scores.

Yeah, I could definitely see this being the case.

I assumed you meant that all P/F schools routinely conceal pre-clinical rankings, my bad.

 

[ijn]

I heard Harvard systematically rejects class ranks 1-3.

 

[Mr RADical]

I heard Harvard systematically rejects class ranks 1-3.

Love it.

 

[Pseudopseudonym]

Let's face it, George Bush didn't get into Yale because of an SAT score or a fabulous essay.

You know how well George Bush did on SAT? Just because he mispronounces "nuclear" doesn't mean he's an idiot.

 

[ensuii]

You know how well George Bush did on SAT? Just because he mispronounces "nuclear" doesn't mean he's an idiot.

His academic performance is public information. I think if I recall correctly he scored 1260 or something on the 1600 point scale

 

[Megatron2016]

566 verbal, 640 math.

Idiot? No. Yale worthy sans connections? Probably not

 

[Deferoxamine]

Um...

1260 back in those days meant a lot more than it did when you and I took it.
I recall a "recentering" of scores back in the mid-1990's so that everyone could get higher scores and feel "good" about themselves. I also recall everyone and their mother "studying" for that stupid test back in high school and taking it like 7 times.

Wealthy suburban overachieving parents who brag about their darling Jessica's 1200 SAT score these days is a total joke.

Hell, I took the SATs only once. I think I even did it after sports practice on a Saturday morning. Only thing I did to "prepare" for it was buy a number 2 pencil.

... I feel like I might have gone off-topic here.

 

[ensuii]

Regardless, I think it's pretty safe to say that Bush Jr. didn't have the individual qualifications most people would expect to see in someone attending a premier academic institution. Moreover...he just isn't that intelligent :-\

 

[Pseudopseudonym]

His academic performance is public information. I think if I recall correctly he scored 1260 or something on the 1600 point scale

1260 in 1965 or whenever is was was a hell of a lot higher than 1260 today. Probably something on the order of 1350 or so now.

Was/is he a genius? No.

Is saying he got into Yale solely based on his connections naive? Yes.

 

[SpecterGT260]

Class rank could be a hindrance for MOST medical students, since a lot of people are naturally bottom half of the pack.

I would bet only about half are in the bottom half

I read a thing from a residency director who listed what she looks for in applicants. Step1 was first. Your interview itself was second. Then everything else.

 

[JackShephard MD]

1260 in 1965 or whenever is was was a hell of a lot higher than 1260 today. Probably something on the order of 1350 or so now.

Was/is he a genius? No.

Is saying he got into Yale solely based on his connections naive? Yes.

I've been seeing this happen a lot: one takes a statement, makes the statement more extreme, then says that the extreme position is wrong.

I stated that Bush likely didn't get into Yale based upon his SAT (implying that things like: being the son and grandson of alumni, being in a politically influential family help). I never said he only got into the school solely because of connections or that he was an idiot. Yet, people on here have taken my statement to be that. They also have stated, "You can't get into residency with a *insert low Step 1 score* and connections" after I said that connections are important. Each time, my stance is made extreme and then the extreme is proved wrong.

Regardless, I think it's pretty safe to say that Bush Jr. didn't have the individual qualifications most people would expect to see in someone attending a premier academic institution.