How would you reform medical school?

[Princeton Medical Student]

Free application and secondaries.
Less bull**** softs to get in.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Med Ed]

Free application and secondaries.

So everyone will apply everywhere. Great idea!

 

[Med Ed]

Is this thread really about reforming medical education? Or about the med school app process??????

Considering the audience, I think you know the answer.

 

[cometx3]

.

 

[Goro]

Considering the audience, I think you know the answer.

 

[Princeton Medical Student]

So everyone will apply everywhere. Great idea!

Yes I know thanks.

 

[cactusman]

I made a comment about changes I personally would like to see in medical school, so this particular issue doesn't need to be discussed further if you'd rather not. Although I do think there is a discussion to be had about the amount of money medical students are supposed to pay for things like standardized tests, residency applications, etc.

I like the max number of schools system (with adjustments for people with no publics) which @gyngyn has suggested. But that's a lil bit off of the main subject.

 

[sliceofbread136]

Well first off, as jqueb said - it's not the material, it's the maturity. I think you may have misread that. I am currently 24 and not the same person I was as a 22 year old, and I'm sure I'll be even more different when I finish med school in 2 years. Some of that is a result of two years of dealing with med school stuff specifically, some of that is just two years of dealing with plain ol' life experience. It should tell you something that the majority of people responding who have been through at least part of med school aren't fans of a shortened path to an MD.

And regarding the material itself, just for fun...the material itself is not that hard, it's having the work ethic and mental stamina to learn it all in what feels like an incredibly short amount of time, which partially comes with age. Obviously there are more factors than just age at play, but there is a school I interviewed at when I was applying and the majority of their students come from their 6-year BS/MD program. They told us that their Step 1 pass rate recently increased by 20% to a little over 80%. Most schools are over 90%. I would encourage you to look into the dropout rates and scores/match lists for US schools with most students coming from shortened BS/MD programs.

So you need 2 years of extra "maturity" to do largely the same thing that you were doing in undergrad, i.e. simply go to lecture and learn? This seems silly to me, if they can handle it in Europe why can they not handle it here? Can you actually point to any tangible difference 2 years makes or are you just reflexively defending the status quo?

If you can point me to any data comparing step 1 scores of BA-md students to traditional md students then yes I would take that into consideration. Drop rate is less relevant as with my proposed system screening is done at step 1 as opposed to in undergrad.

 

[PreMedMissteps]

if they can handle it in Europe why can they not handle it here?

Do we know the drop out rate for European/abroad med schools that enroll after high school?

 

[Mad Jack]

Additionally, if they made it a six year program as you claim, it will cost students less debt because of no inclusion of a previously earned undergraduate major. Medical School can also be taught at a much slower pace if it's spanned over 6 years as compared to 4.

I like it.

The basic sciences are sort of foundational to the first two years of medical school. European medical schools are six years long for a reason- the first two years are physics, chemistry, biochemistry, biology, etc. Without a foundational knowledge of these subjects, you will be a less effective physician.

To people that think this is strictly academic, I've had two patients that feel outside of the normal literature and required digging into odd mechanisms in the last month alone that would have been very difficult to grasp if I didn't understand the basic sciences as well as I do. Sure, you can easily be a bad doctor without a more broad education, but if you want to be exceptional, that foundation matters.

 

[PreMedMissteps]

So you need 2 years of extra "maturity" to do largely the same thing that you were doing in undergrad, i.e. simply go to lecture and learn?

This seems silly to me, if they can handle it in Europe why can they not handle it here?

Can you actually point to any tangible difference 2 years makes or are you just reflexively defending the status quo?

The above quote wasn't directed to me, but I'd like to respond. First of all, I think premed-undergrad would need to be at least 3 years (minimum!), so the difference would be 3 years, not 2. (And, I still prefer the full 4 years of undergrad for not only maturing, but also for broader education and experiences.)

Is there a difference in maturity between an 18 year old incoming freshman and a 20 year old? Yes, yes, yes. A number of our states had lowered the drinking age to 18/19 a few decades ago and then all raised them back to 21, because there is a difference between those two age groups.

As we age from the mid-20s forward, a couple of years doesn't matter much maturity-wise, but it usually does during the ages of 0-25.

As for Europe and other countries that admit 18 year olds into med school: Do we have any data that indicates what their drop-out rate is? In the US, our MD med school drop out rate is very low. I have never seen any data in regards to these other countries' schools, but I would imagine that their drop-out rate is much higher than ours. If that is true, that's another huge consideration. I wouldn't want many students borrowing $50k-80k per year and then dropping out after 2nd year of med school. As an aside, isn't med school much cheaper, maybe even free, in those other countries? If so, then the cost/debt-risk isn't the same.

And let's not kid ourselves. Not any young citizen in those countries can try for med school. Many of those countries heavily track their students into paths. If you're not lucky enough to be on the right path as a young student, med school wouldn't really ever be an option for you. They don't seem to have the late-bloomer option we have in the states.

 

[deleted862527]

I wouldn't want many students borrowing $50k-80k per year and then dropping out after 2nd year of med school.

I wouldn't want to either, but this happens even in undergrad. I can't tell you how many times I have witnessed classmates of mine just taking the F, and laughed it off when they got a 40% on the anatomy lab practical. Sometimes I see older adults taking the F, and thinking nothing of it--and I am not kidding you. They would laugh it off after they bombed the General Chemistry exam, and think they were cool about it. It was like High School.

Maturity depends on the individual, in my opinion. Some people never learn responsibility or hard work, and end up wasting their money. It's the hard, cold, unfortunate truth. Some friends of mine wasted their whole freshman year. One was a pre-med majoring in Biology and he was in his early 20's. His freshman year report card was all withdrawals and W's. He then switched his major to business and his motto is, "C's get degrees."

I would like to see the drop out rate in Europe as well. If anyone has any data please post it in this thread.

 

[sliceofbread136]

I'll say it again for the folks in the back: it's not about the material. I already said the material itself is not that hard. My main concern is having the emotional intelligence to see patients and handle situations in that realm. But as I'm sure you know if you're a med student, even the "simply going to lecture and learning" is way more pressure/intensity than undergrad was, and it takes some maturity to be able to handle that from both a work ethic and an emotional stability perspective, certainly more than I got from my joke of a public school education by the time I graduated even as someone who took the most advanced classes possible. This stuff isn't easily measurable or tangible, but that doesn't mean it's nonexistent or unimportant. You don't think you're a different person than you were 2 years ago? You don't think you had some personal growth between the time you graduated college and the time you started your clinical rotations?

I would also argue that the culture in Europe (and many other countries) is very different from the US in terms of when young adults tend to mature and start acting like grown ups instead of frat boys. Not saying everybody needs those extra couple years, but some certainly do.

Regarding the step 1 data, I don't have any because most schools don't publish this (particularly if it's below average). However, the statistic I gave above that this particular program, who has 80% 6-year BS/MD students, that went from a 60ish% pass rate to 80ish% comes directly from an admissions employee on interview day, so I'd argue that's about as legitimate a source as you can get if you want to trust an internet stranger.

ETA: And I'm not "reflexively defending the status quo" - there are plenty of things I'd change about medical education. This just isn't one of them.

We are going to have to agree to disagree I guess. I just find your assertion ridiculous that so much is gained for US students in 2 years that it is critical that we require 2 extra years of college but that it is not needed for Europeans since they grow up so much more mature.

And no I do not put much stock in some random numbers you once heard on an interview, sorry. Even if the step 1 fail rate is higher with a 6 year system that is fine as that is where the new screening out would take place

 

[deleted862527]

My critique is a fairly broad one, that really applies to almost all of higher education:

Until very recently (i.e. The 00's), we went to institutes of higher learning because that's where the knowledge was. The professors had it and thick, dense, expensive, unapproachable textbooks had it.

So you went to school, went to class, took notes, and learned what the professors distilled to you.

That is how the system worked.

You also largely lived in your own little bubble, with the assumption that similar/the same knowledge was being passed down at other universities.

Now though, we are all connected. I don't need to be in a classroom with a professor to learn from them. I can watch a video, view an interactive slide show, take an online quiz with performance feedback and thorough explanations of the answers.

There is really no compelling reason for the traditional classroom model to continue. Students are already eschewing it, as we know that med school attendance rate is down to something like 20% (unless your school requires attendance).

What schools should do is work together, identify the absolute best teachers, and put those best teachers out there in video lectures/interactive formats online. I don't need the path professor from my own medical school who happens to be a crummy teacher but has to fill the lecture slots, when I could have Goljan instead.

The professors also don't have to keep giving the same talk year after year after year. They can give it once, record, it, make an online module, and then update prn if content changes.

Medical schools should be crowd-sourcing and working together to define a common curriculum. They won't though, because of the individualist nature of institutions, the desire to adhere to tradition, and of course the financial aspects.

Couldn't have said it better, @SouthernSurgeon

 

[sliceofbread136]

Do we know the drop out rate for European/abroad med schools that enroll after high school?

Of course it's higher as the screening is built into it. As long as you screen before clinicals this does not matter

 

[Upstage]

Do we know the drop out rate for European/abroad med schools that enroll after high school?

I don't know any statistics-- but i have been living in France for the past year and anytime i tell anyone of our system they are super surprised. The way it works in France is you can either go to medical school straight from high-school, or after some college or degrees if you want. For the first year of medical school they accept a lot of people, but for the 2nd year only about 25% get to continue. I know a few people who tried, but kind of just gave up because that first year is so hard and has crazy competition. System here is cool, but they really don't make money(but have a good life compared to the general population according to a physician i spoke to a few weeks ago he told me to practice in America.

I have visited many doctors while i've been here because my visits cost from 25 euro to 65 and i don't even have insurance yet(for average citizens they get back between 70-100% of there money back at the end of the month. I've visited a generalist,podiatrist, nutritionist, and a osteopath(more like a chiropractor here) and they have all been some of the best physician i have come into contact with. Aside from the knowledge and amazing personalities they have a patient contact that is crazy! I think it helps that they are the one's giving the bill, but they really look out for you and genuinely want you to have insurance and make the right decisions.




Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[deleted862527]

I don't know any statistics-- but i have been living in France for the past year and anytime i tell anyone of our system they are super surprised. The way it works in France is you can either go to medical school straight from high-school, or after some college or degrees if you want. For the first year of medical school they accept a lot of people, but for the 2nd year only about 25% get to continue. I know a few people who tried, but kind of just gave up because that first year is so hard and has crazy competition. System here is cool, but they really don't make money(but have a good life compared to the general population according to a physician i spoke to a few weeks ago he told me to practice in America.

I have visited many doctors while i've been here because my visits cost from 25 euro to 65 and i don't even have insurance yet(for average citizens they get back between 70-100% of there money back at the end of the month. I've visited a generalist,podiatrist, nutritionist, and a osteopath(more like a chiropractor here) and they have all been some of the best physician i have come into contact with. Aside from the knowledge and amazing personalities they have a patient contact that is crazy! I think it helps that they are the one's giving the bill, but they really look out for you and genuinely want you to have insurance and make the right decisions.




Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

Wow!!! I wish we had that in the U.S.

Can I transfer to France, please??

 

[Goro]

My wise young colleague is, as usual spot on in his observations, although I'm a bit nervous about the "just record it once" bit, as that would put me out of a job! Don't tell my parent university about this....they'd outsource us to India if they could get away with it.

We are in the midst of an educational revolution, where there is actual data that the flipped classroom improves learning and retention, and makes for more involved students. We don't know if they'll be happier students...med school is hard no matter how you deliver content!

It will take some time before we figure out what is the best way to deliver content, and what curriculum style works the best. One has to keep in mind that not all adult learners are the same, and some people do better with PBL or TBL, and others are quite happy to attend lectures.

I am appalled that a number of schools (both MD and DO) still require lecture attendance. I hope it won't take another generation of lecturers to retire before we see all lectures recorded and attendance mandatory.

My critique is a fairly broad one, that really applies to almost all of higher education:

Until very recently (i.e. The 00's), we went to institutes of higher learning because that's where the knowledge was. The professors had it and thick, dense, expensive, unapproachable textbooks had it.

So you went to school, went to class, took notes, and learned what the professors distilled to you.

That is how the system worked.

You also largely lived in your own little bubble, with the assumption that similar/the same knowledge was being passed down at other universities.

Now though, we are all connected. I don't need to be in a classroom with a professor to learn from them. I can watch a video, view an interactive slide show, take an online quiz with performance feedback and thorough explanations of the answers.

There is really no compelling reason for the traditional classroom model to continue. Students are already eschewing it, as we know that med school attendance rate is down to something like 20% (unless your school requires attendance).

What schools should do is work together, identify the absolute best teachers, and put those best teachers out there in video lectures/interactive formats online. I don't need the path professor from my own medical school who happens to be a crummy teacher but has to fill the lecture slots, when I could have Goljan instead.

The professors also don't have to keep giving the same talk year after year after year. They can give it once, record, it, make an online module, and then update prn if content changes.

Medical schools should be crowd-sourcing and working together to define a common curriculum. They won't though, because of the individualist nature of institutions, the desire to adhere to tradition, and of course the financial aspects.

 

[Toutie]

In my personal opinion, I have a problem with receiving a primary application from somebody who has absolutely no chance of getting in (be that for GPA, MCAT, personal history, etc.) and then charging them an exorbitant fee just to be rejected. Are they making a bad decision by applying? Yes. Should they have done proper research before pursuing a path that was certain to fail? Yes. But selling false hope for $100 just doesn't sit right with me. It actually sounds like a microcosm for everything that the Caribbean schools do. Again, just my opinion.

I made a comment about changes I personally would like to see in medical school, so this particular issue doesn't need to be discussed further if you'd rather not. Although I do think there is a discussion to be had about the amount of money medical students are supposed to pay for things like standardized tests, residency applications, etc.

Especially to receive that rejection within hours of payment as some on here have experienced.

 

[The Broccoli Industry]

De-emphasize the importance of research publications and clinical experience.

The amount of nepotism I see at academic medical centers is absurd to the point where publications and internships are handed out based on who your daddy is rather than merit.

I believe we should keep things objective. Make the process nearly entirely dependent on things students can control like GPA and MCAT.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Goro]

De-emphasize the importance of research publications and clinical experience.

The amount of nepotism I see at academic medical centers is absurd to the point where publications and internships are handed out based on who your daddy is rather than merit.

I believe we should keep things objective. Make the process nearly entirely dependent on things students can control like GPA and MCAT.
Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

So we should accept people who have no clue as to what they're getting into? Or hate touching patients? Have no idea what a doctor's day is like??

From the wise LizzyM”: I am always reminded of a certain frequent poster of a few years ago. He was adamant about not volunteering as he did not want to give his services for free and he was busy and helping others was inconvenient. He matriculated to a medical school and lasted less than one year. He's now in school to become an accountant.

The problem with the red/bold is that med schools have a sea of academic clones for applicants. How do we distinguish them apart? We're looking for people who will make good doctors, not merely good medical students.

 

[deleted862527]

My wise young colleague is, as usual spot on in his observations, although I'm a bit nervous about the "just record it once" bit, as that would put me out of a job! Don't tell my parent university about this....they'd outsource us to India if they could get away with it.

We are in the midst of an educational revolution, where there is actual data that the flipped classroom improves learning and retention, and makes for more involved students. We don't know if they'll be happier students...med school is hard no matter how you deliver content!

It will take some time before we figure out what is the best way to deliver content, and what curriculum style works the best. One has to keep in mind that not all adult learners are the same, and some people do better with PBL or TBL, and others are quite happy to attend lectures.

I am appalled that a number of schools (both MD and DO) still require lecture attendance. I hope it won't take another generation of lecturers to retire before we see all lectures recorded and attendance mandatory.

Right on, Goro!!

 

[PreMedMissteps]

We are going to have to agree to disagree I guess. I just find your assertion ridiculous that so much is gained for US students in 2 years that it is critical that we require 2 extra years of college but that it is not needed for Europeans since they grow up so much more mature.

And no I do not put much stock in some random numbers you once heard on an interview, sorry. Even if the step 1 fail rate is higher with a 6 year system that is fine as that is where the new screening out would take place

I don't think we want the new screening to take place after Step 1.

 

[sliceofbread136]

I don't think we want the new screening to take place after Step 1.

At step 1*.

 

[PreMedMissteps]

At step 1*.

I don't think we're talking about different things. The student takes step 1, gets scores about a month later. If the weeding takes place at that point due to low score, then that's technically after step 1.

 

[vm26]

If you had to reform the medical school educational curriculum, what alterations would you make and why? Personally, as cheesy as this sounds (I'll probably get a firestorm for saying, but get the popcorn ready), I sort of wish getting an M.D. was its own undergraduate major like Nursing, etc. because I wish I could start on this journey ASAP instead of waiting until after College (hey, we'd all graduate and begin our careers four years earlier if this happened), but I completely understand the reasons why this is (because they want mature students, as well as students who 100% know this is what they want to do).

So, what changes would you make? Would you make any at all? This thread is meant for this type of discussion.

As others have already mentioned, gotta make it more affordable. Total cost of attendance for my in-state med school 10 years ago was around 168K, now its around 266K...if we end up with a single-payor system which would give the government complete control of reimbursement, we can't have new grads coming out with 2-300K or more in loans

 

[sliceofbread136]

I don't think we're talking about different things. The student takes step 1, gets scores about a month later. If the weeding takes place at that point due to low score, then that's technically after step 1.

Yup, that's how it would work. If you can't pass that point you don't get to do clinicals=weed out

 

[PreMedMissteps]

Especially to receive that rejection within hours of payment as some on here have experienced.

Right. I've seen a number of those posts. Rejections coming in within a couple hours of submitting secondaries in the middle of the night, when it's very unlikely anyone really read thru them.

At least schools who prescreen are being more honorable.


One problem I see with limiting the number of apps is that students who live in Texas would have a significant advantage. They could apply to all their schools thru TMDSAS and then get to apply to limit of AMCAS apps.

If the limit were to happen, then maybe other states would make their own app, too.

 

[The Broccoli Industry]

So we should accept people who have no clue as to what they're getting into? Or hate touching patients? Have no idea what a doctor's day is like??

From the wise LizzyM”: I am always reminded of a certain frequent poster of a few years ago. He was adamant about not volunteering as he did not want to give his services for free and he was busy and helping others was inconvenient. He matriculated to a medical school and lasted less than one year. He's now in school to become an accountant.

The problem with the red/bold is that med schools have a sea of academic clones for applicants. How do we distinguish them apart? We're looking for people who will make good doctors, not merely good medical students.

I said de-emphasize the importance of clinical experience not completely get rid of it.

The process should distinguish academic clones primarily based on the interview. Anyone can mindlessly volunteer or shadow but few actually possess the traits necessary to make a good physician which would be displayed on interview day.

And at the very least definitely de-emphasize the importance of research publications. The amount of nepotism there is absolutely absurd and subjective.

And to respond to the anecdote you mentioned, did the individual drop out because of academic rigor or apathy towards patients? I find it hard to believe a MS1 would drop out pre-clinical years because he/she didn't care about helping others. In that case my point about academic metrics stand.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[Goro]

I said de-emphasize the importance of clinical experience not completely get rid of it.

The process should distinguish academic clones primarily based on the interview. Anyone can mindlessly volunteer or shadow but few actually possess the traits necessary to make a good physician which would be displayed on interview day.

And at the very least definitely de-emphasize the importance of research publications. The amount of nepotism there is absolutely absurd and subjective.

And to respond to the anecdote you mentioned, did the individual drop out because of academic rigor or apathy towards patients? I find it hard to believe a MS1 would drop out pre-clinical years because he/she didn't care about helping others. In that case my point about academic metrics stand.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

"Make the process nearly entirely dependent on things students can control like GPA and MCAT."

My point was we have candidates with this in superabundance.

"The process should distinguish academic clones primarily based on the interview."
But who do we invite to interview???? Why should anyone invest resources (including the candidates) only to get rejected when in interview we see that they're clueless, overtly greedy or starry-eyed because they watched House or Scrubs?


Anyone can mindlessly volunteer or shadow but few actually possess the traits necessary to make a good physician which would be displayed on interview day. "
And you know this how? Exactly how many admissions interviews have you done for a medical school? I don't mean as a candidate, I mean as an interviewer?

You would be surprised how much we can learn about a person in a one hour interview.

 

[cactusman]

So you need 2 years of extra "maturity" to do largely the same thing that you were doing in undergrad, i.e. simply go to lecture and learn? This seems silly to me, if they can handle it in Europe why can they not handle it here? Can you actually point to any tangible difference 2 years makes or are you just reflexively defending the status quo?

If you can point me to any data comparing step 1 scores of BA-md students to traditional md students then yes I would take that into consideration. Drop rate is less relevant as with my proposed system screening is done at step 1 as opposed to in undergrad.

I'm primarily familiar with Germany, but I believe most of those Europeans had an additional year of high school and their high school diplomas may be comparable to a U.S. associate's degree, meaning it's only 1 extra year here.

 

[The Broccoli Industry]

"Make the process nearly entirely dependent on things students can control like GPA and MCAT."

My point was we have candidates with this in superabundance.

"The process should distinguish academic clones primarily based on the interview."
But who do we invite to interview???? Why should anyone invest resources (including the candidates) only to get rejected when in interview we see that they're clueless, overtly greedy or starry-eyed because they watched House or Scrubs?


Anyone can mindlessly volunteer or shadow but few actually possess the traits necessary to make a good physician which would be displayed on interview day. "
And you know this how? Exactly how many admissions interviews have you done for a medical school? I don't mean as a candidate, I mean as an interviewer?

You would be surprised how much we can learn about a person in a one hour interview.

Let's be real here, the vast majority of premeds don't volunteer out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it because they know it's essentially a requirement to get into med school (in that sense I wouldn't even call it volunteering, it's more of an investment).

In the same vein, it doesn't take hundreds of hours of clinical experience to figure out what being a doctor is like. However, it seems that admissions these days is all based on competition, so having hundreds of hours of experience will clearly make you more competitive all other things equal.

To be honest, there's no metric in my opinion that is indicative of empathy and thoughtfulness. The premeds that volunteer extensively at my school are some of the greediest, cutthroat people I've ever met, who see volunteering as an investment (as most premeds do).

Because of this, I think those with high stats DESERVE to get interview invites. At the very least that metric is objectively uniform and most people can agree that academic ability is highly indicative of med school performance. If you don't want clinically clueless candidates on interview day then make a certain number of clinical hours a pre-requisite (ex: 75 hours).






Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[The Broccoli Industry]

.

 

[cactusman]

Anyone can mindlessly volunteer or shadow but few actually possess the traits necessary to make a good physician which would be displayed on interview day. "
And you know this how? Exactly how many admissions interviews have you done for a medical school? I don't mean as a candidate, I mean as an interviewer?

You would be surprised how much we can learn about a person in a one hour interview.

On the other hand, psychological research has found that people tend to massively overestimate the effectiveness of an interview. I think this article was posted here before:
Opinion | The Utter Uselessness of Job Interviews

Though many of our interviewers were allowed to ask any questions they wanted, some were told to ask only yes/no or this/that questions. In half of these interviews, the interviewees were instructed to answer honestly. But in the other half, the interviewees were instructed to answer randomly...

Strikingly, not one interviewer reported noticing that he or she was conducting a random interview. More striking still, the students who conducted random interviews rated the degree to which they “got to know” the interviewee slightly higher on average than those who conducted honest interviews.

We explained what we had done, and what our findings were, to another group of student subjects. Then we asked them to rank the information they would like to have when making a G.P.A. prediction: honest interviews, random interviews, or no interviews at all. They most often ranked no interview last. In other words, a majority felt they would rather base their predictions on an interview they knew to be random than to have to base their predictions on background information alone.

I don't doubt that medical school interviews are valuable - essential at least for weeding out those with particularly terrible social skills, and useful for getting a more detailed image of a person as well. This study specifically tests unstructured interviews, which seem to be inherently less useful. Still, I get the feeling med school interviews are overrated and they eliminate a lot of good applicants arbitrarily (but necessarily).

 

[raiderette]

From my experience in rural communities, I would like to see more dedicated spots for premeds if they complete med school and practice in a rural area. I know of a few spots at our state school for students, but the need is great. Target smart high school kids in rural public high schools.

 

[jm192]

I'd get rid of all "reflection" assignments and group discussions that as far as I can tell only serve to fill med students with blinding rage, unless of course they're the insufferable kind of people who want to spew BS about how much they blossomed as human beings in the previous semester.

"Dear my medical school, I learned so much last week when I got near a patient but wasn't allowed to interact with them yet, it really made me reconsider how I view the relationship between patients and physicians, am I at the minimum word count yet? No? Okay, it was windy yet sunny day the first time I saw a patient, I believe I was wearing a blue shirt...."

Introspection is the hardest thing you'll ever do. It sucks. It's scary and uncomfortable. Identifying what you suck at and why you suck isn't designed to fill you with blinding rage. It's designed to make you a better person, and God willing, a better physician. Trust the process.

 

[kopftonmd]

I think everyone's made a lot of good (and tbh some not so good) comments and suggestions here, but I wonder if there's any point to this kind of thinking.

I am just a humble premed, but it certainly seems to me that until medicine doesn't offer a guaranteed job with >$200,000 salary, there will be gazillions of people all trying to get in, so the admissions game will be super high-stakes and focused on checking boxes and out-volunteering, out-scoring, out-self-promoting everyone else, rather than on empathy, desire to serve, etc. (@The Broccoli Industry, @Goro), so there would need to be structural changes to really shake up admissions.

And as for education and pedagogy, as @SouthernSurgeon said, things are in flux. And since we don't have any idea where things will be in, say, 10 years, so it's hard to predict how med school/teaching/curricula should be changed. Though really, cutting tuition would be cool.

Not to be a downer though! I think discourse is good, please keep going!

 

[Goro]

Let's be real here, the vast majority of premeds don't volunteer out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it because they know it's essentially a requirement to get into med school (in that sense I wouldn't even call it volunteering, it's more of an investment).

In the same vein, it doesn't take hundreds of hours of clinical experience to figure out what being a doctor is like. However, it seems that admissions these days is all based on competition, so having hundreds of hours of experience will clearly make you more competitive all other things equal.

To be honest, there's no metric in my opinion that is indicative of empathy and thoughtfulness. The premeds that volunteer extensively at my school are some of the greediest, cutthroat people I've ever met, who see volunteering as an investment (as most premeds do).

Because of this, I think those with high stats DESERVE to get interview invites. At the very least that metric is objectively uniform and most people can agree that academic ability is highly indicative of med school performance. If you don't want clinically clueless candidates on interview day then make a certain number of clinical hours a pre-requisite (ex: 75 hours).

Try to avoid the sin of solipsism.

We're pretty good at spotting box checkers from people who do what they and love what they do. The hyperacheivers never get this. I suppose that they never will.

 

[UBLI-EINSTEIN]

Try to avoid the sin of solipsism.

We're pretty good at spotting box checkers from people who do what they and love what they do. The hyperacheivers never get this. I suppose that they never will.

Would you mind to explain how you might figure out who's the box checker and who's not? Only through interview or you can have hints before that?

 

[lolpremed22]

Try to avoid the sin of solipsism.

We're pretty good at spotting box checkers from people who do what they and love what they do. The hyperacheivers never get this. I suppose that they never will.

Just of curiosity, how exactly is it that you spot the box checkers? Some of these people are very good at what they do and know how to put on a front for interviews.

 

[Goro]

Would you mind to explain how you might figure out who's the box checker and who's not? Only through interview or you can have hints before that?

I am not sharing.

 

[jcorpsmanMD]

Let's be real here, the vast majority of premeds don't volunteer out of the goodness of their hearts, they do it because they know it's essentially a requirement to get into med school (in that sense I wouldn't even call it volunteering, it's more of an investment).

In the same vein, it doesn't take hundreds of hours of clinical experience to figure out what being a doctor is like. However, it seems that admissions these days is all based on competition, so having hundreds of hours of experience will clearly make you more competitive all other things equal.

To be honest, there's no metric in my opinion that is indicative of empathy and thoughtfulness. The premeds that volunteer extensively at my school are some of the greediest, cutthroat people I've ever met, who see volunteering as an investment (as most premeds do).

Because of this, I think those with high stats DESERVE to get interview invites. At the very least that metric is objectively uniform and most people can agree that academic ability is highly indicative of med school performance. If you don't want clinically clueless candidates on interview day then make a certain number of clinical hours a pre-requisite (ex: 75 hours).



Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I've met plenty of pre-meds who just volunteer to get "hours" but I've also met plenty of pre-meds that have a genuine passion for whatever organization they're volunteering for or even starting organizations on campus that they're passionate about.. I, as a fellow pre-med, have met people that have done some amazing things in terms of "volunteer work" were as I've met those that you speak of as well, who have done 100 hrs at various places. Just checking boxes. Seems to me like you're one of those. It doesn't take a 4.0 GPA and 528 MCAT to know who's truly passionate about something and those who just volunteer to volunteer..

Getting high stats isn't that hard if you just have mommy and daddy supporting you the entire way through school. So yeah I feel you 100% on nepotism but some people actually have to work full-time and try to do everything else that most pre-meds do. So yeah, I think adcoms around the nation are doing the right job, at least to the best of their ability.

 

[deleted862527]

I am not sharing.

Haha, Goro is keeping the recipe we all want to know a secret

 

[sliceofbread136]

Try to avoid the sin of solipsism.

We're pretty good at spotting box checkers from people who do what they and love what they do. The hyperacheivers never get this. I suppose that they never will.

You really aren't. The system is pretty easy to game in almost every facet. Pretty much the only actual requirement is to be a half decent test taker

 

[deleted862527]

Getting high stats isn't that hard if you just have mommy and daddy supporting you the entire way through school.

I respectfully disagree. Earning high stats is not an easy task, even if your parents are supporting you. I have a 3.94 GPA, and getting that GPA sucked the soul out of my life on top of other requirements for medical school. I will like to add that I am fortunate enough to attend College without having to work a part time job, and I have noticed that other classmates of mine who do have a part-time job had more of a social life than I have. Once they don't get the grade they like, they immediately bring up the fact that because they work a part-time job they weren't able to do as well as they hoped---even though they were up the night before the exam partying their butts off.

Now this isn't to say that being a College student and working on top of it isn't difficult. I am just trying to eliminate the stigma that in College if you don't work = everything is easy. This hasn't been the case. This stuff is hard.

 

[Goro]

Something I would like to add the the admissions process are the following:

• Applicants must taken either biochem, cell bio or molecular bio
• Applicants must have one year of employment history, with copies of W2 for to prove it. Working for relatives will not suffice.
• Physics is no longer required as a pre-req.

 

[deleted862527]

Something I would like to add the the admissions process are the following:

• Applicants must taken either biochem, cell bio or molecular bio
• Applicants must have one year of employment history, with copies of W2 for to prove it. Working for relatives will not suffice.
• Physics is no longer required as a pre-req.

Physics is no longer required as a pre-req? This is news to me.

When did this happen?

 

[jcorpsmanMD]

I respectfully disagree. Earning high stats is not an easy task, even if your parents are supporting you. I have a 3.94 GPA, and getting that GPA sucked the soul out of my life on top of other requirements for medical school. I will like to add that I am fortunate enough to attend College without having to work a part time job, and I have noticed that other classmates of mine who do have a part-time job had more of a social life than I have. Once they don't get the grade they like, they immediately bring up the fact that because they work a part-time job they weren't able to do as well as they hoped---even though they were up the night before the exam partying their butts off.

Now this isn't to say that being a College student and working on top of it isn't easy. I am just trying to eliminate the stigma that in College if you don't work = everything is easy. This hasn't been the case. This stuff is hard.

Yeah now try to get that GPA while working 30-40 hours a week to support yourself. You've made my point, thank you.

FACT - College is a lot easier if you have the PRIVILEGE to treat it like a job. Which you seem to be doing, so good for you. Keep the hard work up.

 

[Goro]

Physics is no longer required as a pre-req? This is news to me.

When did this happen?

C'mon Matrix......Have you taken the MCAT yet?

Note what I wrote:
Something I would like to add the the admissions process are the following:

 

[PossibleDOC?]

I respectfully disagree. Earning high stats is not an easy task, even if your parents are supporting you. I have a 3.94 GPA, and getting that GPA sucked the soul out of my life on top of other requirements for medical school. I will like to add that I am fortunate enough to attend College without having to work a part time job, and I have noticed that other classmates of mine who do have a part-time job had more of a social life than I have. Once they don't get the grade they like, they immediately bring up the fact that because they work a part-time job they weren't able to do as well as they hoped---even though they were up the night before the exam partying their butts off.

Now this isn't to say that being a College student and working on top of it isn't easy. I am just trying to eliminate the stigma that in College if you don't work = everything is easy. This hasn't been the case. This stuff is hard.

If you have unlimited time to do things because of no work restraints and mom and dad say "get into med school we got you" then you're fortunate....take it as it is. If I didn't have to work, do the pre-reqs, and do all of the other ECs needed for med school my gpa would'v been sky high but its not the hand I was dealt.....you have the silver spoon...eat with it and get into med school. Most students experience a shock the first year if gen bio was tough for you prepare hard before you get into med school anatomy and biochem are a whole other ball game