is it me, or is this process seem so arbitrary?

[Dr Lyss]

True. Many people have told me (in the middle of my app cycle) that a compelling narrative is important and something you should always be thinking about.

Maintain the theme of the application throughout your PS, word your ECs so that it's noticeable, choose your LOR writers to reinforce it if possible, and remind interviewers of the narrative you want them to remember when visiting the campus.

Too many people, myself included, forget it after writing the PS--and even in the PS, it might not be as clearly stated as it should be.

The advice makes perfect sense in retrospect, but I guess I can thank hindsight for that.

this is very true & definitely underplayed on SDN. Most people view the essay as something you just have to get done but I think my PS & my secondary essays & my unique story were the key to my success because it definitely wasn't my numbers.

Having a theme & just plain ol' standing out from 10,000 other applicants can do wonders for your success. Schools are willing to take a chance on you if you are interesting enough IMO

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[nick_carraway]

this is very true & definitely underplayed on SDN. Most people view the essay as something you just have to get done but I think my PS & my secondary essays & my unique story were the key to my success because it definitely wasn't my numbers.

Having a theme & just plain ol' standing out from 10,000 other applicants can do wonders for your success. Schools are willing to take a chance on you if you are interesting enough IMO

My question is how do you know that your message is unique?

I thought that mine was last year, but when I read my PS again this year and thought about my message, it simply wasn't convincing or unique.

Falling into the same trap for my reapplication would be terrible!

 

[Dr Lyss]

My question is how do you know that your message is unique?

I thought that mine was last year, but when I read my PS again this year and thought about my message, it simply wasn't convincing or unique.

Falling into the same trap for my reapplication would be terrible!

well I had a couple of things working in my favor:
1. I am involved in the foster care system. Not many people applying to medical school are so already i stand out with that.
2. I have a lot of ECs related to social justice & underserved medicine. A lot of my ECs do not look medically related at first glance (I volunteered in a rehab for a year, I volunteered at homeless shelters for 2 yrs). Again, experiences I can talk about that most people can't

Basically, my strategy was to step out of the ordinary & be as unique as possible. My numbers weren't amazing but my story was compelling enough to get my foot in the door.

So with my experiences I created a picture. I weaved it all together to help the Adcoms get a really good feel of who I am and my motivations to enter medicine. If you think of it as creating a picture of yourself and not just a dry statement of why you want to go into medicine then a) it will be more interesting b) people will want to meet you!

 

[nick_carraway]

If you think of it as creating a picture of yourself and not just a dry statement of why you want to go into medicine then a) it will be more interesting b) people will want to meet you!

LizzyM has said that that's what you want to make the adcoms think!

Great job on your app, BTW. I'm trying to weave it all together without making it sound like I am and it's totally not working so far

 

[Dr Lyss]

LizzyM has said that that's what you want to make the adcoms think!

Great job on your app, BTW. I'm trying to weave it all together without making it sound like I am and it's totally not working so far

give it time. It took me a month to get my PS to sound the way I wanted it to... and even then I wasn't terribly happy with it. I read one of those "50 essays that will get u into med school" kind of books to get an idea of how to structure the essays.

 

[Steeler7588]

I agree entirely with people who argue that it is NOT a random process. The whole "this is arbitrary" thing is something that entitled premeds like to think is the reason why every med school doesnt kiss their feet and beg them to join their class. There are no absolutes in a process that is handled by human beings, but each school is looking for something- we just don't know what it is.

I agree with some of this, but come on. I know a guy who received acceptances from three top 10 universities wasn't even offered an interview at three others. That doesn't puzzle you, at least a little?

I agree that as a whole, in terms of getting an acceptance, the process is pretty fair. A lot of that depends on the applicant, as depending on your state schools, diversifying where you apply is very important. I also agree that schools are looking for different people and for a diverse class, which is why acceptances and waitlist acceptances can go in so many different ways. But what are we talking about when several of these "top" schools judge a candidate to be worthy of an acceptance, yet a few peer institutions don't even consider the same applicant for one of hundreds of interview spots?

 

[LizzyM]

I agree with some of this, but come on. I know a guy who received acceptances from three top 10 universities wasn't even offered an interview at three others. That doesn't puzzle you, at least a little?

I agree that as a whole, in terms of getting an acceptance, the process is pretty fair. A lot of that depends on the applicant, as depending on your state schools, diversifying where you apply is very important. I also agree that schools are looking for different people and for a diverse class, which is why acceptances and waitlist acceptances can go in so many different ways. But what are we talking about when several of these "top" schools judge a candidate to be worthy of an acceptance, yet a few peer institutions don't even consider the same applicant for one of hundreds of interview spots?

There may be hundreds of interview spots but there are thousands of applications. If we can interview only x applicants and the candidate is number x+1 on the list, he's not going to be invited to interview. If we interview only 15% of our applicants, does it mean that the other 85% don't deserve to go to medical school? Of course not. We are able to sleep at night because we know that applicants apply broadly and that the best (like that guy) do get admitted to other top schools and many are able to choose from among several excellent schools.

One school may grant interviews to a relatively large proportion of its applicant pool and then offer admission to a very small proportion of the interview pool. Another may grant few interviews but admit a larger proportion of the interview pool. Would you rather have a 15% chance of getting an offer letter if interviewed or a 50% chance?

 

[WashMe]

There may be hundreds of interview spots but there are thousands of applications. If we can interview only x applicants and the candidate is number x+1 on the list, he's not going to be invited to interview. If we interview only 15% of our applicants, does it mean that the other 85% don't deserve to go to medical school? Of course not. We are able to sleep at night because we know that applicants apply broadly and that the best (like that guy) do get admitted to other top schools and many are able to choose from among several excellent schools.

One school may grant interviews to a relatively large proportion of its applicant pool and then offer admission to a very small proportion of the interview pool. Another may grant few interviews but admit a larger proportion of the interview pool. Would you rather have a 15% chance of getting an offer letter if interviewed or a 50% chance?

I find it doesn't matter lol

I was WL'd at two schools that accept almost 70% of in-state students that they interview! I find the process a little arbitrary if I am to believe I fell in the bottom 30% of applicants at both schools.

 

[235009]

I agree with some of this, but come on. I know a guy who received acceptances from three top 10 universities wasn't even offered an interview at three others. That doesn't puzzle you, at least a little?

not at all.

has it ever occurred to you that schools might not interview a person who they feel might not matriculate there. just like in college admissions i'm sure med school adcoms can feel when someone is just using their school as a "safety". Some school with a median MCAT of 31 might not want to waste their time interviewing someone with a 41 MCAT and great ECs because they could sense that the person will likely get an interview at more prestegious schools and decide to matriculate there. Unless that student goes out of his way to express an interest in the school i doubt they would waste their time with him.

The whole state school factor also comes into play here. If your stats are competitive at your state schools, some private and OOS public schools whose stats or "prestige" is comparable to your state schools will likely shy away from interviewing you because you will likely choose your state school, which is half price, over them. I think this was definitely the case with me and as a result i feel like i overapplied to private schools where my stats were competitive (not complaining here...so what if i spent a few hundred bucks extra....i got in and that's what matters). Again you can go out of your way to show an interest in the school if you actually do want to go there and hope that gets you an interview.

the same things apply to post-interview acceptances but your demonstrated interest in the school when you visited also comes into play in this case.

 

[kakalak]

not at all.

has it ever occurred to you that schools might not interview a person who they feel might not matriculate there. just like in college admissions i'm sure med school adcoms can feel when someone is just using their school as a "safety". Some school with a median MCAT of 31 might not want to waste their time interviewing someone with a 41 MCAT and great ECs because they could sense that the person will likely get an interview at more prestegious schools and decide to matriculate there. Unless that student goes out of his way to express an interest in the school i doubt they would waste their time with him.

The whole state school factor also comes into play here. If your stats are competitive at your state schools, some private and OOS public schools whose stats or "prestige" is comparable to your state schools will likely shy away from interviewing you because you will likely choose your state school, which is half price, over them. I think this was definitely the case with me and as a result i feel like i overapplied to private schools where my stats were competitive (not complaining here...so what if i spent a few hundred bucks extra....i got in and that's what matters). Again you can go out of your way to show an interest in the school if you actually do want to go there and hope that gets you an interview.

the same things apply to post-interview acceptances but your demonstrated interest in the school when you visited also comes into play in this case.

I don't think that applies because the guy was referring to other top 10 schools. To me the most arbitrary, although necessary, part of the process is the MCAT score range from 32-37. A 32 and 35 comes down to only a handful of questions on the MCAT, yet the person with a 32 has little shot at the top 10s(without some other great EC). Is the person with the 35 significantly smarter? Maybe. For those with a good application only lacking a few points on the MCAT, knowing that a few better guesses could have been your ticket to a top 10 interview leaves a bad taste in your mouth.

 

[batman1983]

To some extent, the application process is a combination of luck and the subjective nature of applicants’ reviewers. For example, at my interviews at UCLA and Vermont, I was grilled by PhDs for not having done research and my extensive work experiences, which in their minds gave off the image that I was “money hungry” and etc. However, at other interviews, my interviewers were impressed by my ECs and etc. From my experiences, I think the interviewers to some extent already have their minds made up about the applicants they interview before the interview has even started(assuming an open file interview).

 

[Vihsadas]

I think one thing applicants assume without much thought is that the admissions processes are very similar from school to school. I don't know all that much about specific admissions processes, but I've asked around. They really are very different from school to school, so it's hard to say. If you just looked at "school x" you'd probably have a much more likely chance of predicting who would and would not be interviewed at that school. Trying to compare between schools, however, is much more difficult and seemingly confounding because the processes are so different for each of those schools. Of course there is some luck in the process, and I'm sure that it matters who specifically is reviewing your app, but my personal belief is that on the whole this process is probably less random than we give it credit for.
​

 

[A Long Story]

The subjective parts of the process 1. the person who happens to review your file for interview, 2. your interviewer and 3.how many other applicants are comparable to you in terms of numbers...probably others I am missing. I think as pre-meds or just as humans we want to know that if we do this, this and that, we are going to get in but life in general is not like that. It is good to cover your bases but don't think you have anything in the bag until you have gotten in....

 

[WashMe]

If the application cycle is going your way and you have great/multiple acceptances, you will think it is less random (you DESERVE all these great things while everyone else gets s**t on)

If the application cycle is NOT going your way, you will think the process is completely arbitrary.

I maintain that the process is arbitrary.

 

[pianola]

I think it's somewhat arbitrary and somewhat not.

If you apply with a 2.0 GPA and an 8L MCAT, you will most assuredly not get in anywhere. If you are a convicted rapist with several grand larceny charges, you're pretty much assured of non-acceptance. Here's the non-arbitrary part: Beyond a certain cutoff, you can be assured of not getting admitted.

However, you have factors that work in your favor to varying degrees. No individual factor (MCAT, GPA, ECs, personal statement, LORs, interview) will guarantee you anything.

But you can probably make general correlations of MCAT with acceptance and GPA with acceptance. There will be a few outliers (OnlyNeedOneYes) but generally the higher the MCAT, the greater your chances are of admission, for example. The better your ECs, the greater your chances are of admission.



Usually, it's not just one guy in a room with a bunch of papers trying to muddle through it all to the best of his ability. It's usually several people who have the opportunity to evaluate your application.

So my vote is for somewhat arbitary but somewhat not.

 

[redlight]

No, I guess it's not an issue of semantics. Doublespeak, might be more apt.

You don't think that there is an inherent randomness to a process that involves a human's subjective judgement on eliminating thousands of applications from his/her desk?

You don't think that there's a chance that two identical applications land on the desk at different times and one is accepted and one is not due to the judgement of that particular officer at that particular moment due to his/her particular mood?

Even human bias and a degree of randomness exists when diagnosing tongue cancers, which ostensibly uses more exact guidelines than an adcom's mission statement. Depending on the mood or physician looking at the EKG, certain things are noticed some of the time and not at others.

listen, when you say this process is random, you make it seem as though names are being picked out of a hat. obviously false. sure there are many variables that factor into who gets in and who doesnt. that doesnt make the process random; it just means that it is hard to predict results. just because you cant tell who gets in and who does doesnt make the process random. we are not adcom, we dont know exactly what they want, we dont know what is influencing their judgements, we dont know the process that they go through to pick applicants. we just dont know, hence the feeling that this process is random. not saying that these feelings are unwarrented- im just saying the process is far too opague to make such statements.

 

[What up doc]

let's see what dictionary.com has to say:

ran⋅dom   /ˈræn

dəm/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [ran-duh

m] Show IPA Pronunciation

–adjective 1.proceeding, made, or occurring without definite aim, reason, or pattern: the random selection of numbers.



i think it safe to assume that there is an aim, reason in whom schools choose to admit but perhaps there lacks a pattern. perhaps the lack of a pattern permits us to call the process random.

i personally feel like the process is random because of the many random factors that play into who gets an interview. for instance, one adcomm member may view anyone who plays a musical instrument in a favorable light and subconsciously is more likely to select said applicants for an interview. on the contrary, another adcomm member may feel the same way, but not for muscians, but for athletes. these various, uncontrollable, yet very important differences often play more of a role in who recieves an interview or even an acceptance than most ppl would like to think.

but to an extent, i agree with LET. too many ppl are so entitled and think because they have a 38/3.9 that they should be accepted to every medical school to which they apply. just because you memorize a whole bunch of facts and know how to beat a test does not mean you will be a valueable member of a medical school class or even become a good doctor. but the problem is, How the hell can we tell who is going to be a good doctor by 1 or maybe 2 interviews and a resume that may or may not be entirely fabricated? the straight up answer is, WE CANT! but this is how our world works. life is not a meritocracy. for those who wish it were, the truth is no single human being can impartially choose that factors or criteria that determine merit. standardized tests and GPAs are not meritocratic. until you show me a research study that shows me that ALL the best doctors had the highest GPA and MCAT combinations then i will refuse to believe that a good MCAT/GPA should be automatic reason to accept an applicant. in the meantime, you gotta make do with the process we have. it seems to be working pretty good so far. at least for me

 

[What up doc]

To some extent, the application process is a combination of luck and the subjective nature of applicants’ reviewers. For example, at my interviews at UCLA and Vermont, I was grilled by PhDs for not having done research and my extensive work experiences, which in their minds gave off the image that I was “money hungry” and etc. However, at other interviews, my interviewers were impressed by my ECs and etc. From my experiences, I think the interviewers to some extent already have their minds made up about the applicants they interview before the interview has even started(assuming an open file interview).

soooo true. human nature.

 

[JJMrK]

As I read people's posts, I can't help but look at their medical profiles as well. I am baffled to read that someone with a 3.97 GPA (both science and total) with a 35 MCAT got rejected by Vanderbilt for an interview, or some other schools. EC's looking bomb digity. I don't get it? This whole process seems crazy to me, what are your thoughts??

Are you saying that out of all the schools this person applied to, they didn't get an interview at a specific one? Or that they got rejected for an interview at all of them?

If you're talking about the first case, some schools are looking for specific things in secondaries/LOR/personal statements. I don't think everyone expects to get into every school they apply to.

If it's the second case, the person probably has a bad PS or a bad letter.

 

[Steeler7588]

It's also possible the person had a bad interview.

He means not being offered an interview.

 

[JJMrK]

He means not being offered an interview.

LOL, thanks, I guess I missed that.

 

[pooghe]

I was talking to a friend of mine who is currently a fellow in a surgical program. He said in order to be accepted to a medical school, you need to play the game. You need a decent GPA and MCAT (3.5 / 30), but most importantly, you need a story that makes you stand out. I'm not talking about the typical pre-medical wet dream cliche garbage like volunteering to save dead babies in Africa, I'm talking real world experience that the other mindless pre-med drones can't match. If you have a PPL license or worked a summer internship as a water tester for the EPA, then talk about that. All you have to do is tell an interesting story that sets you apart from everyone else, and somehow play into how it deals with your choice to become a doctor.

I've got a PPL and IR, how can I make this work for medicine?

 

[LizzyM]

From my experiences, I think the interviewers to some extent already have their minds made up about the applicants they interview before the interview has even started(assuming an open file interview).

I sometimes have a preconceived notion based on the application and I'm prepared to blow away my preconceptions. It happened twice this week-- someone who I thought would be geeky, immature and a bad fit was fabulous and someone who seemed great on paper interviewed very poorly. Interviewers have to be humble enough to put aside preconceived notions and base their recommendation on the interview.

 

[rama kandra]

how about instead of calling it arbitrary (which to me, makes it seem like its entropy) we should just consider a portion of every decision comes with Luck. It is safe to say that calling something random/arbitrary vs rigid/defined is also rather arbitrary since there is always a murky middle ground. If you get accepted with stellar stats, you say it was all hard work and numbers, if you get in with poor stats, you call it luck.

What is the outcome of this discussion? If it is arbitrary does that mean you should give up some of your power? Not at all - a strong app is always a strong app - and usually wins in the statistics. An outlier is always something people love to consider, but on the end, I think this process is more solid than say, college admissions, which can really be off the wall.

 

[neurolddoc]

Could it be as bad as described in this article about undergrad admissions?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-01-09/dirty-secrets-of-college-admissions/

 

[LizzyM]

There is a grain of truth in that article that neuroldoc linked to. Fortunately, we adcom members are "volunteers" who do this (reviewing applications) for a couple hours per week. If we get food poisoning in Buffalo or have PMS, we can take the day off from reviewing. There is no reason to punish applicants because the reviewer is having a bad day.

 

[JJMrK]

someone who I thought would be geeky, immature and a bad fit

Is this something you came up with based on the person's secondaries?

 

[LizzyM]

Is this something you came up with based on the person's secondaries?

age, race and sex plus MCAT and gpa I couldn't have been more wrong.

 

[202781]

I don't think that the process is that arbitrary.
I think schools are interested in
A. Can you succeed here?
-Shown by MCAT, GPA
B. Are you interested in medicine
- they look at personal statment, volunteer activity, shadowing
C. Will you fit in with the other students/contribute to the other students
- How well you interview. Believe it or not I am a pretty likeable person. I am capable of having a relaxed discussion with the people interviewing me and I have interests outside of medicine which we actually end up talking about more than medicine. So while I have been rejected to schools (before an interview has been offered), I am not surprised that every school I have interviewed at has offered me an immediate acceptance. The interviewers will compliment me on how sincere and humble I am (disregard this post), how I am realistic in my expectations of what life will be like as a physician, and how I don't act like I am the greatest thing since sliced bread.


I think the people that think this process is arbitrary are those people that think high gpa and MCAT scores will reserve your spot in a class...they let their ego run wild and neglect to be a real person with flaws and forgets that they also make mistakes and are *gasp* human.

 

[fizzle]

.

 

[aznb0y129]

I don't think that the process is that arbitrary.
I think schools are interested in
A. Can you succeed here?
-Shown by MCAT, GPA
B. Are you interested in medicine
- they look at personal statment, volunteer activity, shadowing
C. Will you fit in with the other students/contribute to the other students
- How well you interview. Believe it or not I am a pretty likeable person. I am capable of having a relaxed discussion with the people interviewing me and I have interests outside of medicine which we actually end up talking about more than medicine. So while I have been rejected to schools (before an interview has been offered), I am not surprised that every school I have interviewed at has offered me an immediate acceptance. The interviewers will compliment me on how sincere and humble I am (disregard this post), how I am realistic in my expectations of what life will be like as a physician, and how I don't act like I am the greatest thing since sliced bread.


I think the people that think this process is arbitrary are those people that think high gpa and MCAT scores will reserve your spot in a class...they let their ego run wild and neglect to be a real person with flaws and forgets that they also make mistakes and are *gasp* human.

Probably the most necessary disclaimer ever

 

[fizzle]

.

 

[fizzle]

Deleted my posts!

Sorry for the blank posts above.

 

[nick_carraway]

I think the people that think this process is arbitrary are those people that think high gpa and MCAT scores will reserve your spot in a class...they let their ego run wild and neglect to be a real person with flaws and forgets that they also make mistakes and are *gasp* human.

See, I just don't understand why you and LET and others say this when no one on this thread has said that they deserve a spot that someone else got. Nobody who has said that this process is arbitrary/lucky/random has played the GPA card or the MCAT card or the ego card.

 

[batman1983]

age, race and sex plus MCAT and gpa I couldn't have been more wrong.

I have experienced as well as heard about interviewers with those types of perceptions, especially based on race. I remember one of my interviewers telling me about his stereotypes of Asian medical school applicants(by that, he meant ppl in general from Asia) as immature and bookworms with no creativity that only go into medicine for job security, money, and family pressure. I didnt even really know how to response to this, esp when its coming from a physician faculty member at a prestigious university.

 

[LizzyM]

I have experienced as well as heard about interviewers with those types of perceptions, especially based on race. I remember one of my interviewers telling me about his stereotypes of Asian medical school applicants(by that, he meant ppl in general from Asia) as immature and bookworms with no creativity that only go into medicine for job security, money, and family pressure. I didnt even really know how to response to this, esp when its coming from a physician faculty member at a prestigious university.

I gues that is throwing down the gauntlet. Your task then is to give concrete examples showing that you have interests outside of books, that your interest in medicine goes beyond financial security and extends to concern for sick or otherwise needy people (as demonstrated by your volunteer work with ...), and that you are a creative problem solver as demonstrated by ....

 

[nick_carraway]

I have experienced as well as heard about interviewers with those types of perceptions, especially based on race. I remember one of my interviewers telling me about his stereotypes of Asian medical school applicants(by that, he meant ppl in general from Asia) as immature and bookworms with no creativity that only go into medicine for job security, money, and family pressure. I didnt even really know how to response to this, esp when its coming from a physician faculty member at a prestigious university.

"Thank you for being so honest, sir, and please feel free to ask me anything you want. This is a great chance for me to show you that I deserve to be in next year's class."

 

[202781]

See, I just don't understand why you and LET and others say this when no one on this thread has said that they deserve a spot that someone else got. Nobody who has said that this process is arbitrary/lucky/random has played the GPA card or the MCAT card or the ego card.

Would you be asking why you did not get a place in a class if you had a 34+ MCAT and a 3.8+ GPA?

I think you would...maybe you would not post it on this site...but you would be thinking "Ohh this process is a crapshoot."

Not to sound like a complete jerk but I think it is probably how you interview. Even if somebody had good stats/gpa/experience... I would not enthusiastically recommend them to the ADCOM committee if they had a hard time communicating or sounding enthusiastic about those experiences that they were talking about. I would much rather have a class that is not full of bookworms who get 37 on their MCAT and have a perfect gpa and cannot engage me (or someone else) in a conversation for more than 5 min. I would want my class to be full of enthusiastic people who are smart enough to have success in the classroom AS WELL as with communicating with patients.

(I do not know how you interview so I cannot be certain that that is your problem, but given your MCAT I would guess that is the problem...maybe it is the slightly low gpa that has not gotten you more interviews though)

 

[nick_carraway]

Would you be asking why you did not get a place in a class if you had a 34+ MCAT and a 3.8+ GPA?

I think you would...maybe you would not post it on this site...but you would be thinking "Ohh this process is a crapshoot."

Not to sound like a complete jerk but I think it is probably how you interview.

...

(I do not know how you interview so I cannot be certain that that is your problem, but given your MCAT I would guess that is the problem...maybe it is the slightly low gpa that has not gotten you more interviews though)

Well, look... nobody here has said that they deserve a spot even if they have a 34+ MCAT and a 3.8+ GPA. It's presumptuous to accuse others of feeling entitled because even if they exist, they have not posted here. The fact that they haven't posted here means that some people who are saying the process is random/arbitrary/lucky are saying so without that sense of entitlement and it's ridiculous to say they're all entitled.

As for your advice, I doubt that my interview skills were my major problem since I only got one interview. Were my interview skills the best? No, but I think it's a bit much to say that's why I need to reapply when I only had one face-to-face meeting. My greater problems were the GPA and the limited clinical experience at the time, according to schools that I contacted.

For anecdotal evidence for what makes this process random, I booked a plane ticket and a hotel for an interview just to be handed an information packet for another kid with the same name. For thirty minutes, I sat in the waiting room as applicants around me went to their interviews.

To this day, I'm still not convinced that I was the applicant they meant to interview. If I wasn't, that means some poor schmuck at U. Penn lost an interview and I spent a few hundred dollars to eat frozen lasagna in a hotel room.

 

[202781]

Yes, it is an arbitrary process that depends upon human whims and computer cutoffs.

Although 44.6% of applicants will get accepted somewhere, 55.4% of them will not.

They need to trim out those 23,457 applicants some how.

Well, look... nobody here has said that they deserve a spot even if they have a 34+ MCAT and a 3.8+ GPA. It's presumptuous to accuse others of feeling entitled because even if they exist, they have not posted here. The fact that they haven't posted here means that some people who are saying the process is random/arbitrary/lucky are saying so without that sense of entitlement and it's ridiculous to say they're all entitled.

As for your advice, I doubt that my interview skills were my major problem since I only got one interview. Were my interview skills the best? No, but I think it's a bit much to say that's why I need to reapply when I only had one face-to-face meeting. My greater problems were the GPA and the limited clinical experience at the time, according to schools that I contacted.

For anecdotal evidence for what makes this process random, I booked a plane ticket and a hotel for an interview just to be handed an information packet for another kid with the same name. For thirty minutes, I sat in the waiting room as applicants around me went to their interviews.

To this day, I'm still not convinced that I was the applicant they meant to interview. If I wasn't, that means some poor schmuck at U. Penn lost an interview and I spent a few hundred dollars to eat frozen lasagna in a hotel room.

You act like I am trying to personally insult you which I am not at all trying to do. I am just saying that there is a reason you are either selected to interview or you are not. Obviously you have understood why you were not selected for more interviews this year (See BOLD) so I dont see why you would still think it was random for others.

While there may be a very smally minority of people who will be having a bad day and actually take it out on the people negatively...there will also be a very small that are having a great day and have a positive reaction to someones application that they would otherwise have thought was less than stellar.

There is a reason that everyone was rejected from a particular school. Whether it be that they can only take so many OOS applicants, your gpa or MCAT is not high enough, limited clincal/volunteer/EC experiences or just a personal statement that was not well thought out (or did not mesh with that particular school)

I just hate seeing people mope about all their rejections and cry about how unfair and arbitrary the process is (ESPECIALLY when they have realized the flaws in their application)

My suggestion would be for any applicant that wonders why he/she got rejected to go to their pre-med advisor or another medical student and have them explain the possible reasons...AND THEN TRY AND FIX THOSE FLAWS

 

[batman1983]

I gues that is throwing down the gauntlet. Your task then is to give concrete examples showing that you have interests outside of books, that your interest in medicine goes beyond financial security and extends to concern for sick or otherwise needy people (as demonstrated by your volunteer work with ...), and that you are a creative problem solver as demonstrated by ....

"Thank you for being so honest, sir, and please feel free to ask me anything you want. This is a great chance for me to show you that I deserve to be in next year's class."

I wish I had thought to say what you both mentioned, but it was so spur of the moment and I was kinda of amazed by the statement. I paused for a couple seconds and just tried to shift the conversation elsewhere.

Btw, Koko, did you do go to Berkeley? Im just asking because I did a semester informal postbac at SFSU too, and it was fully of Berkeley premeds with strong MCATs and relatively lower GPAs . Given your large amt of research, and if you can get your GPA to 3.5, I dont think its even worth doing the Georgetown SMP. You would get into somewhere for sure w/o it, plus probably save yourself $50K. Best of luck.

 

[nick_carraway]

You act like I am trying to personally insult you which I am not at all trying to do. I am just saying that there is a reason you are either selected to interview or you are not. Obviously you have understood why you were not selected for more interviews this year (See BOLD) so I dont see why you would still think it was random for others.

While there may be a very smally minority of people who will be having a bad day and actually take it out on the people negatively...there will also be a very small that are having a great day and have a positive reaction to someones application that they would otherwise have thought was less than stellar.

There is a reason that everyone was rejected from a particular school. Whether it be that they can only take so many OOS applicants, your gpa or MCAT is not high enough, limited clincal/volunteer/EC experiences or just a personal statement that was not well thought out (or did not mesh with that particular school)

I just hate seeing people mope about all their rejections and cry about how unfair and arbitrary the process is (ESPECIALLY when they have realized the flaws in their application)

My suggestion would be for any applicant that wonders why he/she got rejected to go to their pre-med advisor or another medical student and have them explain the possible reasons...AND THEN TRY AND FIX THOSE FLAWS

I don't think you're insulting me in particular, but I think that saying only entitled premeds think the system is random/arbitrary is a bold and inaccurate statement. Don't get me wrong; you aren't the only person to have said this, but you are the most recent person and so that's why I'm going after your post specifically.

I appreciate that evaluators can have good days as well as bad days, but I think that proves my point. The fact that someone has a great day and will be more forgiving of applicants on that day is nonetheless a huge variable.

I agree that applicants must look at their package carefully and seek advice when appropriate. Many schools will give you reasons and possible solutions, but that's not to say that that's why an applicant was rejected.

Sure, the GPA might not be up to snuff or they might be OOS, but another reason could be that the application was in the bottom of a stack and the evaluator was lenient until the middle of the stack.

Evaluating your application critically and seeking advice and finding solutions eliminates some of the variables of the process and undoubtedly makes you more competitive, but the variables that exist still make this a far from objective process and appreciating that fact doesn't make someone whiny or entitled, in my mind.

 

[nick_carraway]

I wish I had thought to say what you both mentioned, but it was so spur of the moment and I was kinda of amazed by the statement. I paused for a couple seconds and just tried to shift the conversation elsewhere.

Btw, Koko, did you do go to Berkeley? Im just asking because I did a semester informal postbac at SFSU too, and it was fully of Berkeley premeds with strong MCATs and relatively lower GPAs . Given your large amt of research, and if you can get your GPA to 3.5, I dont think its even worth doing the Georgetown SMP. You would get into somewhere for sure w/o it, plus probably save yourself $50K. Best of luck.

I actually didn't go to Berkeley, but you're right that there are A LOT of Cal alumni here.

As for your advice, I know that I might not need Georgetown, but I really do want to maximize my chances when I reapply and I don't want to end the cycle with what-ifs despite the $$$. Thanks for the well wishes, too!