How much of an edge do athletes have in medical school admissions

[app1]

From reading the school specific threads I can see a trend that people involved in athletics are very likely to get interviews, more than people that have volunteered a ton or done research.

I am interested to see if anybody else sees this trend and if any student athlete's interviews focused on their athletics. For discussion purposes lets just say that there are three levels of athletes. What effect does each have on the app?

recreational/intramural
college/NCAA
professional/olympic

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[NickNaylor]

It's just like any other activity. The more dedicated and accomplished you are, the better. Sports, research, random activity... doesn't matter.

 

[mauberley]

It's just like any other activity. The more dedicated and accomplished you are, the better. Sports, research, random activity... doesn't matter.

So if one were, say, a dedicated and accomplished pole dancer...

 

[Medicine4Bruhs]

recreational/intramural
college/NCAA
professional/olympic

They can make a good applicant great.

 

[NickNaylor]

So if one were, say, a dedicated and accomplished pole dancer...

They can make a good applicant great.

Being nationally/internationally recognized in almost ANY activity would give you points in admissions. There's nothing intrinsic to sports that somehow makes athletes more sought after.

 

[Medicine4Bruhs]

Being nationally/internationally recognized in almost ANY activity would give you points in admissions. There's nothing intrinsic to sports that somehow makes athletes more sought after.

I just answered the question.

 

[Soulstice]

Considering how much these people practice and all, it'd probably also give you some wiggle room with numbers..

 

[Nymphicus]

Being nationally/internationally recognized in almost ANY activity would give you points in admissions. There's nothing intrinsic to sports that somehow makes athletes more sought after.

I would say though that if you play NCAA or another standardized competitive level (not rec, club) it stands out in a certain way because of how competitive and time consuming it is, especially if you keep your grades concurrently. Time management, leadership, ability to work well with others in a team, and whole bunch of other relevant qualities are showcased by excelling at sports. If you are good, sports are also is a sort of pre-outlined pathway to some unique achievements (all-american, school records in your sport, etc) that not many applicants will have that can set you apart.

 

[Kangaroo Paw]

I'm in no way involved in athletics, but am heavily involved in dance (leadership, choreography, etc). At an EAP interview last year, I was asked the following question: "Considering the college you attend, applicants we usually see from there have 1) outstanding academic talent 2) in-depth extracurricular involvement and 3) strong athletic involvement. You only have the first two. Explain how you fit or don't fit the mold of your college, and why you chose to go there in the first place seeing as you don't have athletics".

I thought it was a bit of a strange/overly aggressive question (yeah I don't have sports... sorry?), but I guess some adcoms do view applicants in the context of athlete/non-athlete.

 

[Slack3r]

I would say the traits necessary to compete at a collegiate level seem to g hand-in-hand with what many schools supposedly look for. Ability to work in a team, leadership, dedication, etc. are all strongly illustrated in sports, as someone mentioned above. How many secondaries ask you about what kind of experiences you have that showcase these traits? I'd say sports exemplify a lot of things that medical schools at least say they're looking for, more so than some other accomplishment such as music.

Of course, this applies to NCAA athletes or Olympians, not your average intramural competitor.

Edit: I'd also say that those with military service would similarly demonstrate the same types of characteristics as competitive athletes.

 

[Tapepsi]

I would say the traits necessary to compete at a collegiate level seem to g hand-in-hand with what many schools supposedly look for. Ability to work in a team, leadership, dedication, etc. are all strongly illustrated in sports, as someone mentioned above. How many secondaries ask you about what kind of experiences you have that showcase these traits? I'd say sports exemplify a lot of things that medical schools at least say they're looking for, more so than some other accomplishment such as music.

Of course, this applies to NCAA athletes or Olympians, not your average intramural competitor.

Edit: I'd also say that those with military service would similarly demonstrate the same types of characteristics as competitive athletes.

^ This. I would say that athletes do have an edge in terms of EC's. You'll still need decent numbers though to get the attention of adcoms.

 

[NickNaylor]

I would say though that if you play NCAA or another standardized competitive level (not rec, club) it stands out in a certain way because of how competitive and time consuming it is, especially if you keep your grades concurrently. Time management, leadership, ability to work well with others in a team, and whole bunch of other relevant qualities are showcased by excelling at sports. If you are good, sports are also is a sort of pre-outlined pathway to some unique achievements (all-american, school records in your sport, etc) that not many applicants will have that can set you apart.

I agree, but none of this is exclusive to sports. There are plenty of other things that develop all of the qualities you mentioned and are significantly time consuming.

I'm not trying to denigrate the value of sports. But to say that sports are somehow in their own category is also fallacious I think.

 

[n3xa]

^ This. I would say that athletes do have an edge in terms of EC's. You'll still need decent numbers though to get the attention of adcoms.

Highlighted again for emphasis. Too lazy to highlight nymphicus's point that you need to keep up with your grades.

I saw one student go up to an adcom member and ask if doing a sport at some private university in the midwest would be taken into consideration because the person's GPA was a 2-point-something.

"But it's a really tough school!"

CN: sports are a great EC but like everything else, will not override a subpar GPA

 

[linebacker57]

I've spoken to a couple deans of admissions at various medical schools about this, because i'm an NCAA football player, albeit at the division 3 level, but it is still the 2nd biggest time commitment in my life, behind academics. (yes that includes sleep, lol). From these conversations, i've gathered that they understand that athletes aren't going to have very many other EC's and they are forgiving about it, which i guess kind of makes athletics king of the EC's, haha. They also said occasionally there is a little bit of wiggle room on the numbers.
just my .02

 

[Lil Mick]

It's definitely noticed, especially if you've won some awards or competed at a high level for athletics. I had one school ask if I would consider using some of my eligibility during the M1/2/graduate part of the program. Wouldn't recommend it...

That being said, you need to keep your grades high, shadow, volunteer... just like anyone else. This is probably why athletes get bonus points--hard to do the normal pre-med stuff and spend 20-30 hours a week training and competing.

 

[REMMAH]

Being a college athlete is definitely a huge part of my app, so hopefully it counts for quite a bit

 

[ShockDoctrine]

If you can get good stats (MCAT and Gpa) AND handle college sports, adcoms might assume you can handle a med school education.