Is it True? Interview= Level Playing Field?

[annabelle.]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hey does anyone know if it is true that an interview means that more or less you are on a level playing field with everyone else?

 

[spinestudent]

I'm 9999.999% this is not true.

Applicant A has a 3.95/38. Great Ec's. great clinical experience.

Applicant B has a 3.40/28. Good ec's. Good clinical experience.

Let's say both applied to their state medical school(University of Alabama in this case). If anyone things these two applicants are going into the interview on equal footing, that's insane.

 

[finnpipette]

at a lot of schools, it's more or less true, where they interview people with roughly the same gpa, mcat, ec's, etc. then you have anywhere between 30-50% acceptance rate at that point. however, some schools interview a lot of people, eg. columbia, and the range is wide. it all depends on the school. either way though, if you have interviews, be happy.

 

[omores]

As finnipippete points out, you'd only be on a level playing field if the rest of your application was similarly consistent with other applicants'. But as a general principle, interview does not equal level playing field. At most schools, the interviewer submits a report that becomes part of your file. That report is then taken into consideration with everything else (GPA, MCAT, essays).

At some schools, your interviewer also presents you to the admissions committe and acts as your advocate, but it's still your whole file that gets considered, not just the interview.

 

[exmike]

Exactly. So people lower stats need to excel at interviewing.

Originally posted by omores
As finnipippete points out, you'd only be on a level playing field if the rest of your application was similarly consistent with other applicants'. But as a general principle, interview does not equal level playing field. At most schools, the interviewer submits a report that becomes part of your file. That report is then taken into consideration with everything else (GPA, MCAT, essays).

At some schools, your interviewer also presents you to the admissions committe and acts as your advocate, but it's still your whole file that gets considered, not just the interview.

 

[hmno82]

HECK NO!!! Without going into personal details, I can assure you that we are not on a level playing field. They will take the person with an average interview with great everything else over someone who has an awesome interview and lacks in one or more areas. Just make sure you have an amazing interview if you feel that you are not the "perfect" applicant. This way someone on the adcom can stick up for you when another person says... "well he/she only has X on their MCAT, or grades, etc." GOOD LUCK!

 

[....]

totaly untrue

 

[Jalby]

Nope.

 

[mamie]

This really depends on what school you are applying too. At my school, this statement would be true. At others it wouldn't.

 

[medhopeful08]

mamie,

so once you get an interview at HMS, the interview entirely (or largely) determines the outcome? do they review the entire file (recs, essays, etc) when making the decision?

 

[LP1CW]

But having a great interview is sometimes up in the air. It's not just about us, it's about who they stick us with. You could get the worst doctor to interview you. It's such a subjective thing. Some people, I click well with and others I don't.

 

[evines]

Originally posted by mamie
This really depends on what school you are applying too. At my school, this statement would be true. At others it wouldn't.

I'll agree that the weight of the interview varies with school, but I highly doubt that HMS clumps all of their interviewees together and bases acceptances solely on the outcome of the interview. I would think HMS (and its students) would be smarter than that.

 

[usmaple]

Hmmm, when I interviewed at HMS the coordinator was pretty deliberate in talking about how you go to committee and are defended and assigned a score based upon all of your information. I think the interview may count for more there, but my impression was that it's still not an even playing field.

I hope you're right, though, because I had the best interview of my life there. 😎

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Think of it as a tiebreaker.

 

[meanderson]

Again, I think it depends so much on the school. At state schools that end up interviewing 60% of all in state applicants, you are looking at mcat/gpa ranges from 4.0/38 to 3.0/24. It would be beyond naive to think those applicants have anywhere similar chances of getting an acceptance.

But as another poster pointing out, it's probably a lot more complicated at a school like HMS. I'm not so sure we would go as far as saying that everyone is on equal footing, but the gap between applicants is much much smaller and often harder to figure out who has the slightest edge going in.....

 

[mamie]

Originally posted by meanderson
Again, I think it depends so much on the school. At state schools that end up interviewing 60% of all in state applicants, you are looking at mcat/gpa ranges from 4.0/38 to 3.0/24. It would be beyond naive to think those applicants have anywhere similar chances of getting an acceptance.

But as another poster pointing out, it's probably a lot more complicated at a school like HMS. I'm not so sure we would go as far as saying that everyone is on equal footing, but the gap between applicants is much much smaller and often harder to figure out who has the slightest edge going in.....

You're exactly right. At a school like HMS or Hopkins where differences between students are miniscule, the interview will primarily be the key to acceptance or rejection. State schools will not generally have that same option.


"mamie,

so once you get an interview at HMS, the interview entirely (or largely) determines the outcome? do they review the entire file (recs, essays, etc) when making the decision?"

I have a little bit of experience with the admissions process here mainly because I am a member of the admissions committee. (there are approx. 12 students consisting of 2nd and 4th years who are voted in by their peers to be on the adcom)
Once you get an interview, it is basically understood that you have the capability to do the work at HMS. The interview is very important here and the interviewer will use the interview as the basis of his/her rating of you. Grades, recs, and essays of course will be taken into account. However, most of the applicants will have great recs, essay, grades, etc. So, the interview is very important.


"I'll agree that the weight of the interview varies with school, but I highly doubt that HMS clumps all of their interviewees together and bases acceptances solely on the outcome of the interview. I would think HMS (and its students) would be smarter than that."

Like I said earlier, once you get an interview here, we know that you have what it takes to succeed here. The interview delegates whether you will be a good fit with the system or not.

If anyone has anymore questions, don't hesitate to ask.

peace

 

[Downhill Racer]

There are no level playing fields in life... so why would you expect to find one here?

I'd say the interview gives you an opportunity to level the playing field. Specifically, address the shortcomings in your application and emphasize your strengths. There is no stronger advocate for your application then yourself.... so have an effective interview. Drive the conversation and handle yourself with poise/professionalism and you'll make an impact. Physically, in person, you have the ability to do as much as all the 2-D paper filling your file. Of course, the applicants most likely to have this type of impact have the requiste stats, evidenced by extraordinary experiences, essays, LORs, grades etc.

Make it simple, you've got an interview, they like you... now make them like,like like you 🙂

G'luck!

 

[XCanadianRagwee]

No...

My last interview all I was asked about were my stats. I had to defend my application. Unfortunately for myself and the interviewer I never waived the white flag. I should have. 🙄

 

[AlternateSome1]

As mentioned in the previous post, open file interviews kill any shot at a "level playing field". Once an intervierer has seen your MCAT and GPA's, its pretty difficult to be impartial at that point. If you read the interview feedback from UVA, there is a huge difference in the difficulty of questions asked to interviewers, and one states that it seemed like the adcom had already made up his/her mind before the interview began.

~AS1~

 

[rgporter]

Hmmmm. In general, I would say I don't know. I know at the University of Utah once you are at the point of an interview the field is mostly level. From that point on numbers only count for 20% of the acceptance criteria. It's one of the reasons I didn't apply there. I don't want some of my accomplishments disregarded, it's not fair.

 

[nuclearrabbit77]

it's important to differentiate between a blind interview, and the whole review process. many schools will conduct the interview not knowing your gpa/mcat, and score the interview accordingly. however, when it comes time to review your application, they'll consider the total application, including the blind interview score. again, schools differ, but this method is quite common.

 

[bigbaubdi]

mamie,

Does HMS really weigh the interview w/ the student as much as the faculty interview? Is admission to HMS based on a quantitative ranking of students' interviewer "ratings"? for ex. students w/ interviewer ratings of 100 or above get in, ratings of 80-100 get waitlisted, 80 or below get rejected...

Also when does the adcom get together and make a decision about a particular student? Does the adcom get together after all of the interviews and then make a decision about all of the students? If so, will they forget about ppl who interviewed in mid October?

thanks

 

[hotpremed]

You can rise above the level playing field if you're hot...

 

[bigbaubdi]

Originally posted by mamie
...At a school like HMS or Hopkins where differences between students are miniscule, the interview will primarily be the key to acceptance or rejection. State schools will not generally have that same option.

Not sure this is true. When I interviewed at GW, they told me that everyone was equal at the interview stage. Maybe the relative importance of an interview depends on the selectivity of the adcom in awarding interviews.

 

[acab]

Mamie,

Please check our PMs!

 

[mamie]

Originally posted by bigbaubdi
mamie,

Does HMS really weigh the interview w/ the student as much as the faculty interview? Is admission to HMS based on a quantitative ranking of students' interviewer "ratings"? for ex. students w/ interviewer ratings of 100 or above get in, ratings of 80-100 get waitlisted, 80 or below get rejected...

Also when does the adcom get together and make a decision about a particular student? Does the adcom get together after all of the interviews and then make a decision about all of the students? If so, will they forget about ppl who interviewed in mid October?

thanks

Just to answer your questions:

1. The student interview and faculty interview are rated the same.

2. Admissions is decided on the interviewers rating of you as well as the other criteria (grades, recs, activities)

3. The adcoms get together once to twice a month to pick students. So, no, they don't forget about those who interviewed early.

peace

 

[medhopeful08]

mamie,

so HMS doesn't wait until the very end (when all the interviews are done) before they start choosing people?

is there a disadvantage in interviewing late then?😕