Info on number applicant per month?

[ur2l8]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi!

So if 40,000 (speculative) apply, does anyone know the spread of when most apply a given month?

Like for example 20k apply in June when apps open up, 10k apply in July, etc.

I'm kind of more interested in the months from June to October though

Thanks!

Sorry for grammar mistakes I'm on my phone

 

[Tots]

Hi!

So if 40,000 (speculative) apply, does anyone know the spread of when most apply a given month?

Like for example 20k apply in June when apps open up, 10k apply in July, etc.

I'm kind of more interested in the months from June to October though

Thanks!

Sorry for grammar mistakes I'm on my phone

Why does it matter? 😕

 

[centrigeugle]

Why does it matter? 😕

Because when you (relative to everybody else) apply matters a lot.

 

[LizzyM]

AMCAS sends med schools a data dump... I think it might be daily. I was told some years ago by the dean of admissions at my school that the first data dump -- day 1 -- consisted of 25% of all the applications that would be received in that cycle. That's about 1 month's work for the adcom. So, if a school does first in is first read, being in that second data dump means you aren't read until the second month of the admission cycle.

Now, as we've become more sophisticated with online application screening, we sort and skim and pull the most desirable applicants (by the numbers and special characteristics) to the top day to day so that being in the first data dump might not be as big a deal as it was 10 years ago.

 

[LizzyM]

.

 

[Heavens Cloud]

AMCAS sends med schools a data dump... I think it might be daily. I was told some years ago by the dean of admissions at my school that the first data dump -- day 1 -- consisted of 25% of all the applications that would be received in that cycle. That's about 1 month's work for the adcom. So, if a school does first in is first read, being in that second data dump means you aren't read until the second month of the admission cycle.

Now, as we've become more sophisticated with online application screening, we sort and skim and pull the most desirable applicants (by the numbers and special characteristics) to the top day to day so that being in the first data dump might not be as big a deal as it was 10 years ago.

What might be an example of a special characteristic? Just curious.

 

[ppfizenm]

AMCAS sends med schools a data dump... I think it might be daily. I was told some years ago by the dean of admissions at my school that the first data dump -- day 1 -- consisted of 25% of all the applications that would be received in that cycle. That's about 1 month's work for the adcom. So, if a school does first in is first read, being in that second data dump means you aren't read until the second month of the admission cycle.

Now, as we've become more sophisticated with online application screening, we sort and skim and pull the most desirable applicants (by the numbers and special characteristics) to the top day to day so that being in the first data dump might not be as big a deal as it was 10 years ago.

that borders on unethical

 

[LizzyM]

that borders on unethical

What borders on unethical as long as every application is read before the last interview invitation of the season is made?


Special characteristics might include URM and legacy,or applicants presenting geographic diversity by region or school. It is all very idiosycratic and every reviewer has some leaway.

 

[NYCMS2]

Hi!

So if 40,000 (speculative) apply, does anyone know the spread of when most apply a given month?

Like for example 20k apply in June when apps open up, 10k apply in July, etc.

I'm kind of more interested in the months from June to October though

Thanks!

Sorry for grammar mistakes I'm on my phone

I recall a few years ago that data was made public; IIRC, the vast majority of apps are submitted by August 1 - your estimation is probably pretty close.

Apply in June - it is just that simple.

 

[ur2l8]

AMCAS sends med schools a data dump... I think it might be daily. I was told some years ago by the dean of admissions at my school that the first data dump -- day 1 -- consisted of 25% of all the applications that would be received in that cycle. That's about 1 month's work for the adcom. So, if a school does first in is first read, being in that second data dump means you aren't read until the second month of the admission cycle.

Now, as we've become more sophisticated with online application screening, we sort and skim and pull the most desirable applicants (by the numbers and special characteristics) to the top day to day so that being in the first data dump might not be as big a deal as it was 10 years ago.

Thanks for the responses! That's pretty interesting, LizzyM!

 

[ppfizenm]

What borders on unethical as long as every application is read before the last interview invitation of the season is made?


Special characteristics might include URM and legacy,or applicants presenting geographic diversity by region or school. It is all very idiosycratic and every reviewer has some leaway.

The sorting of the desirable applicants to the top of the pile. Doesn't that indicate that applications aren't reviewed in the order they were received? Doesn't that undermine the point of rolling admissions?

 

[LizzyM]

The sorting of the desirable applicants to the top of the pile. Doesn't that indicate that applications aren't reviewed in the order they were received? Doesn't that undermine the point of rolling admissions?

Rolling admission, to me, means that all the decisions are not held until the end. Some schools send some offers in October others hold all decisions until March.

 

[Soilworkgmbh]

I dont see why medical schools wanting to review the best or most "unique" applicants first is such a travesty lol

 

[ppfizenm]

I dont see why medical schools wanting to review the best or most "unique" applicants first is such a travesty lol

It would be like a store clerk letting the someone go ahead of you because they were prettier. It demeans the system no matter how it is justified.

If a school is going to do this it should be stated plainly on the secondary so you can decide if you want to pay to have your application pushed back to make room for more desirable people.

 

[yellowfish]

It would be like a store clerk letting the someone go ahead of you because they were prettier. It demeans the system no matter how it is justified.

If a school is going to do this it should be stated plainly on the secondary so you can decide if you want to pay to have your application pushed back to make room for more desirable people.

It'd be more like being pulled to the front of a modeling audition because you were prettier.

That's probably a more accurate analogy to this situation, and also sounds like a more acceptable practice.

 

[NYCMS2]

Rolling admissions does not mean first come, first served.

Apps are processed in the order received at AMCAS, but how individual schools process and review apps is a totally different matter.

 

[PhiPhenomenon]

AMCAS sends med schools a data dump... I think it might be daily. I was told some years ago by the dean of admissions at my school that the first data dump -- day 1 -- consisted of 25% of all the applications that would be received in that cycle. That's about 1 month's work for the adcom. So, if a school does first in is first read, being in that second data dump means you aren't read until the second month of the admission cycle.

Now, as we've become more sophisticated with online application screening, we sort and skim and pull the most desirable applicants (by the numbers and special characteristics) to the top day to day so that being in the first data dump might not be as big a deal as it was 10 years ago.

I'm ****ed. lol

 

[FSUseminoleEM1]

It'd be more like being pulled to the front of a modeling audition because you were prettier.

That's probably a more accurate analogy to this situation, and also sounds like a more acceptable practice.

Much better analogy. One can't expect a school to sort through apps chronologically (in regards to submission). Screening as per the school's desire seems perfectly acceptable. This also works to the applicant's advantage; DON'T apply to schools you KNOW will screen you out.

What if you were 3/4 of the way to the end out of thousands, and had to wait until Feb. to have your app initially reviewed? That's a bad situation for both excellent & poor applicants. The under qualified individuals don't receive ample time for alternative plans. The excellent applicants that should have interviewed earlier have their time absolutely wasted.

 

[ppfizenm]

It'd be more like being pulled to the front of a modeling audition because you were prettier.

That's probably a more accurate analogy to this situation, and also sounds like a more acceptable practice.

That isn't really how modeling auditions work. Regardless you aren't paying to be reviewed at a modeling interview.

Rolling admissions does not mean first come, first served.

Apps are processed in the order received at AMCAS, but how individual schools process and review apps is a totally different matter.

Then that should be advertised. I am surprised advocating for transparency is being met with such resistance.

 

[ppfizenm]

Much better analogy. One can't expect a school to sort through apps chronologically (in regards to submission). Screening as per the school's desire seems perfectly acceptable. This also works to the applicant's advantage; DON'T apply to schools you KNOW will screen you out.

What if you were 3/4 of the way to the end out of thousands, and had to wait until Feb. to have your app initially reviewed? That's a bad situation for both excellent & poor applicants. The under qualified individuals don't receive ample time for alternative plans. The excellent applicants that should have interviewed earlier have their time absolutely wasted.

No one is arguing against screening out. What we are talking about is a different situation. You are negating applicants who are good enough. This isn't removing unqualified applicants, this is moving the ones with better stats to the front of the line over others who are qualified to apply there as well.

Then you should have gotten your application in earlier. Your scenario is basically solved by what happens at non-rolling admissions schools. Also, who says timing shouldn't be a factor in this? Perhaps the better applicant stats wise is lazy and wasn't active in getting his application together. Do you want a lazy doctor?

 

[PhiPhenomenon]

No one is arguing against screening out. What we are talking about is a different situation. You are negating applicants who are good enough. This isn't removing unqualified applicants, this is moving the ones with better stats to the front of the line over others who are qualified to apply there as well.

But you imply someone with a 3.3 uGPA could have the same potential as someone with a 3.9 uGPA, horror of horrors.

 

[LizzyM]

Dean of Admissions: We start interviewing on [date] and have 10 slots that day. Who do we want to be sure gets an interview before they get an offer from one of those early offer schools and decide not to bother with an interview from us? Who do we want to consider for an early offer from us?


Should the assistant dean's response be, "here are the first 200 applicants to arrive on day 1. By the way, they are all in the beginning section of the alphabet because our first day of applications included over 1,000 and we currently have 3,000 awaiting review." or "I've culled through and selected 200 applicants who had above average stats for us including 30 URM and 12 tagged as being from rural areas. You might want to read through these applications and choose our first 10 applicants for interview invitations from this group."

 

[flodhi1]

that borders on unethical

wtf?

 

[pkwraith]

ITT, triage is now considered unethical.

 

[kexy]

Then that should be advertised. I am surprised advocating for transparency is being met with such resistance.

I agree that it would be ideal if schools disclosed all of their admissions practices, but isn't it fairly common knowledge that schools do this? I mean, you can tell from looking at any of the threads in School-Specific Discussions. This is why applicants' turnaround times from secondary completion to interview invite differ. If a school invites me to interview 1 week after I submitted my secondary, I am pretty confident that they like me more than the school who invites me to interview 4 months later. And I think it's justifiable, if sucky for some of us, that schools do this. I think it's fair that schools rush to get the applicants they want, because like LizzyM just mentioned, by getting to them first, they have a better chance of getting them to matriculate. I had a very hard time withdrawing my acceptance from the first school to accept me.

 

[PhiPhenomenon]

Dean of Admissions: We start interviewing on [date] and have 10 slots that day. Who do we want to be sure gets an interview before they get an offer from one of those early offer schools and decide not to bother with an interview from us? Who do we want to consider for an early offer from us?


Should the assistant dean's response be, "here are the first 200 applicants to arrive on day 1. By the way, they are all in the beginning section of the alphabet because our first day of applications included over 1,000 and we currently have 3,000 awaiting review." or "I've culled through and selected 200 applicants who had above average stats for us including 30 URM and 12 tagged as being from rural areas. You might want to read through these applications and choose our first 10 applicants for interview invitations from this group."

Brutal.

 

[ppfizenm]

But you imply someone with a 3.3 uGPA could have the same potential as someone with a 3.9 uGPA, horror of horrors.

what are you talking about? re-read please.

 

[PhiPhenomenon]

what are you talking about? re-read please.

Correct me if I'm wrong but you are suggesting that rolling admissions means that applicants should be considered upon the order of their arrival based upon whether the applicant meets the criteria necessary to be admitted into a med school, assuming you meant >3.0 GPA and having completed the prereqs. If numbers are the primary consideration in determining who is admitted, isn't it really just a waste of time to go over other lower numbered apps in spite of the order which they were received even if they 'qualify'?

 

[flodhi1]

Correct me if I'm wrong but you are suggesting that rolling admissions means that applicants should be considered upon the order of their arrival based upon whether the applicant meets the criteria necessary to be admitted into a med school, assuming you meant >3.0 GPA and having completed the prereqs. If numbers are the primary consideration in determining who is admitted, isn't it really just a waste of time to go over other lower numbered apps in spite of the order which they were received even if they 'qualify'?

That's what I understood from his posts too. Idk why he's asking people to re-read when he needs to actually re-write.

 

[ppfizenm]

I agree that it would be ideal if schools disclosed all of their admissions practices, but isn't it fairly common knowledge that schools do this? I mean, you can tell from looking at any of the threads in School-Specific Discussions. This is why applicants' turnaround times from secondary completion to interview invite differ. If a school invites me to interview 1 week after I submitted my secondary, I am pretty confident that they like me more than the school who invites me to interview 4 months later. And I think it's justifiable, if sucky for some of us, that schools do this. I think it's fair that schools rush to get the applicants they want, because like LizzyM just mentioned, by getting to them first, they have a better chance of getting them to matriculate. I had a very hard time withdrawing my acceptance from the first school to accept me.

We might know that but I can guarantee you that the majority do not. The users of this site are the exception. In any case, the burden at that point should be on the school. Perhaps if they want to cut down the number of applicants to assure they only get the best they should say this on their secondary or impose a hard cut off. If we didn't have to pay to have the applications reviewed then I would agree that this practice is fine but taking the money of students you have no plan of interviewing or accepting and giving their app a cursory glance to rule them out isn't what people have in mind when they pay the application fee. That is why I find this unethical. When money changes hands a degree of fairness in the process should be expected barring prior notification.

You can joke (Not directed at Kexy) but this is how I feel. Also I feel the need to remind certain people that applying to med school is not triage.

 

[ppfizenm]

Correct me if I'm wrong but you are suggesting that rolling admissions means that applicants should be considered upon the order of their arrival based upon whether the applicant meets the criteria necessary to be admitted into a med school, assuming you meant >3.0 GPA and having completed the prereqs. If numbers are the primary consideration in determining who is admitted, isn't it really just a waste of time to go over other lower numbered apps in spite of the order which they were received even if they 'qualify'?

I forgot ever saying everyone greater than a 3.0 is considered acceptable?

O wait. It's because I didn't say that.

I do remember saying screening out the unacceptable applicants is fine. I also remember limiting my scenario to acceptable applicants which as I define are the ones who would be considered average or above for the school. That is why you were urged to re-read. If you had a question as to my meaning, you should have asked.

 

[PhiPhenomenon]

I forgot ever saying everyone greater than a 3.0 is considered acceptable?

O wait. It's because I didn't say that.

I do remember saying screening out the unacceptable applicants is fine. I also remember limiting my scenario to acceptable applicants which as I define are the ones who would be considered average or above for the school. That is why you were urged to re-read. If you had a question as to my meaning, you should have asked.

What is acceptable then? I heard there are many schools that only screen if you are sub 3.0.

 

[ppfizenm]

What is acceptable then?

see above.

 

[PhiPhenomenon]

see above.

The only direct quote is you saying 'good enough' which implies being just above the screen.

 

[ppfizenm]

The only direct quote is you saying 'good enough' which implies being just above the screen.

By good enough I meant the average of accepted students.

If you took it as just above cut off and think schools don't consider those students anyway perhaps they should raise the cut off.

You're negating the argument with semantics though. If you want to continue discussing the larger issue feel free but I am done responding to this particular tangent.

 

[PhiPhenomenon]

if you want to continue discussing the larger issue feel free but i am done responding to this particular tangent.

+1

 

[ppfizenm]

+1

har har

 

[ur2l8]

On the original question, I recall from discussions I had with both AAMC/AMCAS and AACOM/AACOMAS application services managers about two years ago, both systems have in excess of 85% of applications submitted within 30 days of the cycle and have less than 5% of the applications submitted after 60 days. This refers solely to initial submission by the applicant and does not refer to any submission of supporting documents, validation by service, or forwarding to schools. Counting both systems, its about 60,000 applications submitted and processed

In short, 95% of primary apps are submitted by end of July. You could easily speculate that by end of August, 80% or more of applications are complete and off to the schools.

Thanks for answering the question. That's a lot more than I thought would do so that early. Looks like its June to have a competitive app!

 

[UnclePhil]

The sorting of the desirable applicants to the top of the pile. Doesn't that indicate that applications aren't reviewed in the order they were received? Doesn't that undermine the point of rolling admissions?

Is giving out early interviews based on strength of applicant also unethical then?

 

[sector9]

I forgot ever saying everyone greater than a 3.0 is considered acceptable?

O wait. It's because I didn't say that.

I do remember saying screening out the unacceptable applicants is fine. I also remember limiting my scenario to acceptable applicants which as I define are the ones who would be considered average or above for the school. That is why you were urged to re-read. If you had a question as to my meaning, you should have asked.

I'm not following how it's unethical for med schools to evaluate applicants in whatever order they want to. Applicants can take their time and complete secondaries in whatever order they want and schools can evaluate their candidates in whatever order they want. That should be their prerogative. I do think it's borderline unethical to accept money from applicants that are screened out by a computer post-secondary, never having a human read their application.

I know of at least one school where completed applications are sent to admissions office staff members based on the applicant's last name. If your assigned staff member is busy for a few weeks, you'll be put off until s/he has time to look over your app. Other applicants with a different last name who submitted after you could have already received II's.

 

[circulus vitios]

Dean of Admissions: We start interviewing on [date] and have 10 slots that day. Who do we want to be sure gets an interview before they get an offer from one of those early offer schools and decide not to bother with an interview from us? Who do we want to consider for an early offer from us?


Should the assistant dean's response be, "here are the first 200 applicants to arrive on day 1. By the way, they are all in the beginning section of the alphabet because our first day of applications included over 1,000 and we currently have 3,000 awaiting review." or "I've culled through and selected 200 applicants who had above average stats for us including 30 URM and 12 tagged as being from rural areas. You might want to read through these applications and choose our first 10 applicants for interview invitations from this group."

Does being from/attending school in a rural area really improve one's chances? How rural is "rural?" I'm from, and still live in, a town of 3k people. My school, with a 3400 student population, is located in a town of 3500 people.

 

[ppfizenm]

I'm not following how it's unethical for med schools to evaluate applicants in whatever order they want to. Applicants can take their time and complete secondaries in whatever order they want and schools can evaluate their candidates in whatever order they want. That should be their prerogative. I do think it's borderline unethical to accept money from applicants that are screened out by a computer post-secondary, never having a human read their application.

I know of at least one school where completed applications are sent to admissions office staff members based on the applicant's last name. If your assigned staff member is busy for a few weeks, you'll be put off until s/he has time to look over your app. Other applicants with a different last name who submitted after you could have already received II's.

I suppose I'm advocating for an idealized system.

I realize the schools have to accommodate thousands of applicants and generally there is no practical and fair way to do that but I feel that with all the money they charge for this process a degree of transparency should at least be required of them.

 

[ppfizenm]

Does being from/attending school in a rural area really improve one's chances? How rural is "rural?" I'm from, and still live in, a town of 3k people. My school, with a 3400 student population, is located in a town of 3500 people.

The rational is that because rural areas tend to be under served medically, applicants from rural areas may feel the need to go back after their medical training is complete.

 

[sector9]

I suppose I'm advocating for an idealized system.

I realize the schools have to accommodate thousands of applicants and generally there is no practical and fair way to do that but I feel that with all the money they charge for this process a degree of transparency should at least be required of them.

I can definitely agree to increased transparency

 

[circulus vitios]

The rational is that because rural areas tend to be under served medically, applicants from rural areas may feel the need to go back after their medical training is complete.

I understand that, and in most cases it's a complete lie since underserved communities have continually remained underserved. I have no intention of staying in small town America for the rest of my life. I just want to know if I'll get a slight bump toward the top of the pile if I happen to live/go to school in a rural area.

 

[LizzyM]

Does being from/attending school in a rural area really improve one's chances? How rural is "rural?" I'm from, and still live in, a town of 3k people. My school, with a 3400 student population, is located in a town of 3500 people.

AMCAS will tag your application as rural (R) based on a classification of the county you're from. If schools wants to be sure to enroll students from rural areas (perhaps it is part of their mission) then they might skim off the excellent rural applicants to be sure they get some interview slots. (lots of "ifs").

 

[yellowfish]

That isn't really how modeling auditions work. Regardless you aren't paying to be reviewed at a modeling interview.

That totally refutes my point.

 

[ppfizenm]

That totally refutes my point.

because using an example that doesn't compare completely validates your point.

 

[yellowfish]

because using an example that doesn't compare completely validates your point.

I was actually going to respond to this, but I'm just going to go ahead and...