I'm not asking what makes someone the best. Obviously the higher your GPA, MCAT, and hours (both in research and medical exposure) are, the better the chance you have at being admitted into medical school. With that said, however, what do you believe is a benchmark for at least a sure acceptance or two?
In your mind, what is a "good" candidate profile?
- Thread starter Rustie
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2014
- Messages
- 357
- Reaction score
- 678
Lol I believe there is no such thing my friend. Tis all a mystery.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2013
- Messages
- 1,439
- Reaction score
- 1,068
No cookie-cutter formula OP. I have known people who have had 3.7/34 get rejected from every school and a buddy get in with a 3.4/3.0/30. In fact, a lot of med school ADCOMS I have talked to say that they have rejected people with 35+ MCAT and or 3.8+ GPA all the time
I'm not quite sure I understand.
I could see a 3.4/3.0/30 be admitted if they have excellent research hours/publications, volunteer work/medical exposure, and excellent LoR's, assuming that the 3.7/3.6/34 had very little in the area of EC's and poor LoR's. I can't imagine an instance where a 3.4/3.0/30 is accepted before a 3.7/3.6/34 with otherwise fairly equivalent EC's.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2013
- Messages
- 1,439
- Reaction score
- 1,068
It happens. Especially at places where the school is very mission specific.
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2013
- Messages
- 796
- Reaction score
- 913
I would imagine your app needs to be focused along with high numbers.
I'm thinking something like this:
Research in cancer, volunteering with oncology patients, spearheading fundraiser for cancer research, etc. Add in an interesting hobby or two, and you've just become the "cancer advocate applicant."
Theme/focus is the way to go.
I'm thinking something like this:
Research in cancer, volunteering with oncology patients, spearheading fundraiser for cancer research, etc. Add in an interesting hobby or two, and you've just become the "cancer advocate applicant."
Theme/focus is the way to go.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2011
- Messages
- 1,689
- Reaction score
- 1,373
Check out the AAMC data if you don't believe it. Interview, personal statement, letter of recs, circumstances, life experiences, work experiences, and attitude all play a role. You want a complete package (a person), some numbers on paper will only get you to the front door of medschool.
But a ridiculous candidate might be this guy, William Hwang. He finished an MD/PHD at Harvard, not sure why that part has been removed.
http://www.pdsoros.org/current_fellows/index.cfm/yr/2008
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2012
- Messages
- 2,780
- Reaction score
- 2,492
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2014
- Messages
- 53
- Reaction score
- 47
She probably doesn't have the prereqs, she might need to do a post-bac.
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Messages
- 4,832
- Reaction score
- 14,382
#1 Prove that you are a serious academic. This means having a good GPA and MCAT. There are dozens of posts on this elsewhere on the forum. The key points are to pick a major that you enjoy (only criteria that should matter) and to realize that you don't need a 4.0 and a 45 to get in. You need to be an excellent student, not a perfect one.
#2 Enrichment is important. You are so lucky compared to most people. You know very early that you are interested in medical school. Do NOT fall into the trap of talking or thinking about "research hours" or "clinical experiences". People that do, end up "checking boxes" which will hurt you in the long run. Do things that you enjoy that are going to make you better prepared to be a medical student and more importantly a future physician. Think you might be interested in research? Get involved. Learn something. Do something productive. Nobody cares how many hours you worked in a lab. I care that you got something out of it. I care that you learned something about yourself from it. I care that you took a project to completion (even if you don't publish it). Research is just one example, there are dozens.
#3 Regarding LOR: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/letters-of-recommendation.985472/ again, you are early. This is HUGE when it comes to figuring out LOR.
And by far the most important:
#4 Have fun. You are a failure if you get into medical school and didn't enjoy your undergrad. Why? Because, I guarantee you, by starting early and having a plan, you can have both.
Originally posted here: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/thr...for-a-pre-med-freshman.1093247/#post-15593957
#2 Enrichment is important. You are so lucky compared to most people. You know very early that you are interested in medical school. Do NOT fall into the trap of talking or thinking about "research hours" or "clinical experiences". People that do, end up "checking boxes" which will hurt you in the long run. Do things that you enjoy that are going to make you better prepared to be a medical student and more importantly a future physician. Think you might be interested in research? Get involved. Learn something. Do something productive. Nobody cares how many hours you worked in a lab. I care that you got something out of it. I care that you learned something about yourself from it. I care that you took a project to completion (even if you don't publish it). Research is just one example, there are dozens.
#3 Regarding LOR: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/letters-of-recommendation.985472/ again, you are early. This is HUGE when it comes to figuring out LOR.
And by far the most important:
#4 Have fun. You are a failure if you get into medical school and didn't enjoy your undergrad. Why? Because, I guarantee you, by starting early and having a plan, you can have both.
Originally posted here: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/thr...for-a-pre-med-freshman.1093247/#post-15593957
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2013
- Messages
- 38,642
- Reaction score
- 76,677
I also don't believe that even LUCOM accepts the dead.
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2010
- Messages
- 75,139
- Reaction score
- 120,722
Dedicated service to others, understanding of what one is getting into, maturity, intelligence, understanding of the scientific process, great communications skills, and thorough evidence of all of this.
You're looking only at numbers. Those only get you to the door. Other things get you into the door, like good interview skills. At my school, we've rejected 4.0/40 candidates, because they had huge deficits apparent at interviews. Lacking clinicals is the most common reason at my school and others.
I could see a 3.4/3.0/30 be admitted if they have excellent research hours/publications, volunteer work/medical exposure, and excellent LoR's, assuming that the 3.7/3.6/34 had very little in the area of EC's and poor LoR's. I can't imagine an instance where a 3.4/3.0/30 is accepted before a 3.7/3.6/34 with otherwise fairly equivalent EC's.
You're looking only at numbers. Those only get you to the door. Other things get you into the door, like good interview skills. At my school, we've rejected 4.0/40 candidates, because they had huge deficits apparent at interviews. Lacking clinicals is the most common reason at my school and others.
I could see a 3.4/3.0/30 be admitted if they have excellent research hours/publications, volunteer work/medical exposure, and excellent LoR's, assuming that the 3.7/3.6/34 had very little in the area of EC's and poor LoR's. I can't imagine an instance where a 3.4/3.0/30 is accepted before a 3.7/3.6/34 with otherwise fairly equivalent EC's.
I do appreciate what advice you have given me, but it's sort of confusing in its own way. You're saying that I shouldn't check boxes, but by doing something "worthwhile", you're inevitably going to being checking boxes anyway. There are boxes to be checked before applying to medical school.
I want to learn about the field, but I want to make sure that what I'm signing for isn't a waste of my time... and that's not even mentioning the fact that I don't know what to sign up for.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2011
- Messages
- 8,147
- Reaction score
- 7,732
There's a big difference between checking boxes to check boxes, i.e. doing the bare minimum and having next to nothing to show for it vs. getting involved in a project/organization/etc for a while and actually accomplishing something.
