Is there data on one vs. multiple interviews?

[voxveritatisetlucis]

I finally received an interview and am extremely grateful. In life, it is so rare to be given a second chance and now I may have just that. I would be thrilled to attend this school, however I’m uncertain whether I will be able to convert the interview into an acceptance.

Therefore, I was curious about the odds of receiving another interview. In other words, do IIs adhere to a bimodal distribution in which one group tends to receive 0 and the other tends to receive more than 1? Is there any data on the #of interviews per successful applicant? How many IIs does it take an applicant to get accepted?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DoctorFate]

In general, 3 interviews returns 1 acceptance is the motto (interviews 3 a doctor you'll be).
However, these things tend to correlate- a good interviewer might make 3 schools while a bad one will make none.

The good news is, usually early II (which i would say include August and September) usually means the schools are more interested in you and therefore more likely to accept you.

Was it an MD school or DO?

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

MD!

 

[DoctorFate]

MD!

Did you apply to any DO?
Also did you have any ties to the MD school? In state? Your stats were way above their average?

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

I didn’t apply to any DO. 45ish MD. So far I’ve received 1 II, 2 holds for interviews, 0 rejections.

I have no ties and am OOS (though it is fairly OOs friendly public school) so I was pleasantly surprised to get an II

 

[KnightDoc]

I finally received an interview and am extremely grateful. In life, it is so rare to be given a second chance and now I may have just that. I would be thrilled to attend this school, however I’m uncertain whether I will be able to convert the interview into an acceptance.

Therefore, I was curious about the odds of receiving another interview. In other words, do IIs adhere to a bimodal distribution in which one group tends to receive 0 and the other tends to receive more than 1? Is there any data on the #of interviews per successful applicant? How many IIs does it take an applicant to get accepted?

By this time you should realize that this is entirely up to you. Unfortunately, it is impossible to handicap your odds of receiving more interviews due to your unique circumstances, as you should know by now.

You have a huge red flag with an otherwise exceptional application, and no one on SDN can tell you how each school is going to react. You've already received inaccurate guidance; how much more do you really need?

Question -- is your II at a school you previously applied to? If the answer is no, that might provide a clue as to where you might be likely to find future success.

Typically, though, yes, of course you are onto something. Strong candidates tend to receive multiple IIs while weak candidates tend to receive none. The data on number of interviews per successful candidate stems from the II -->A conversion rate, which varies from as low as around 15% to as high as around 80%, with around 33% being a conservative rule of thumb. But, as @mshumor said, this also varies widely, with great candidates converting nearly all of their IIs to As, while poor interviewers or more marginal candidates might receive 5+ IIs and 0 As.

Again, great question, but the answer really has nothing at all to do with you. You already know you can be a spectacular candidate that many schools would want. You also know exactly what could potentially hold you back. Your circumstances are extremely atypical, and general data regarding how things play out for the pool as a whole will shed exactly zero light on your prospects this cycle.

In any event, once again, CONGRATULATIONS for defying the expectations of some and making it to the next stage of the process.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

By this time you should realize that this is entirely up to you. Unfortunately, it is impossible to handicap your odds of receiving more interviews due to your unique circumstances, as you should know by now.

You have a huge red flag with an otherwise exceptional application, and no one on SDN can tell you how each school is going to react. You've already received inaccurate guidance; how much more do you really need?

Question -- is your II at a school you previously applied to? If the answer is no, that might provide a clue as to where you might be likely to find future success.

Typically, though, yes, of course you are onto something. Strong candidates tend to receive multiple IIs while weak candidates tend to receive none. The data on number of interviews per successful candidate stems from the II -->A conversion rate, which varies from as low as around 15% to as high as around 80%, with around 33% being a conservative rule of thumb. But, as @mshumor said, this also varies widely, with great candidates converting nearly all of their IIs to As, while poor interviewers or more marginal candidates might receive 5+ IIs and 0 As.

Again, great question, but the answer really has nothing at all to do with you. You already know you can be a spectacular candidate that many schools would want. You also know exactly what could potentially hold you back. Your circumstances are extremely atypical, and general data regarding how things play out for the pool as a whole will shed exactly zero light on your prospects this cycle.

In any event, once again, CONGRATULATIONS for defying the expectations of some and making it to the next stage of the process.

I didn’t apply to this one before so I’m guessing that your intuition is correct. Actually none of the schools that I previously got IIs/As at have granted me interviews, but I’m of course grateful for the one that I have.

 

[KnightDoc]

I didn’t apply to this one before so I’m guessing that your intuition is correct. Actually none of the schools that I previously got IIs/As at have granted me interviews, but I’m of course grateful for the one that I have.

Yup. It's not crazy to think you might be blacklisted where you had previous contact. The good news is that there are plenty of other excellent schools where you are coming in fresh, albeit with a disclosure.

Before you get in too deep, you might want to consult someone, live, in the real world, who knows what they are talking about, regarding your prospects for getting licensed, assuming things go well for you the rest of this cycle.

 

[LizzyM]

You are a good interviewer. We know that based on your past performance and the outcome of 4 (or more) interviews a few (?) seasons ago. I suspect that you will have at least 3 interviews by Thanksgiving and at least one offer by March 1. Now go out there and prove me right!

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

You are a good interviewer. We know that based on your past performance and the outcome of 4 (or more) interviews a few (?) seasons ago. I suspect that you will have at least 3 interviews by Thanksgiving and at least one offer by March 1. Now go out there and prove me right!

thank you! Will post updates as cycle goes on!

 

[DoctorFate]

thank you! Will post updates as cycle goes on!

If you don't mind me asking, what rank (approximately) is the school. Especially if its higher up and not in-state or you have close ties to it, you're in a really good position since you got an early II. The exception is schools like Tulane, where an II now might be borderline late (they're exceptionally early).

 

[proudofmykids]

I didn’t apply to this one before so I’m guessing that your intuition is correct. Actually none of the schools that I previously got IIs/As at have granted me interviews, but I’m of course grateful for the one that I have.

I know about your legal issue from past posts, did that overlap your cycle where you had received Acceptances? If not, and the legal issue already existed, when were your As presumable retracted?

Yup. It's not crazy to think you might be blacklisted where you had previous contact. The good news is that there are plenty of other excellent schools where you are coming in fresh, albeit with a disclosure.

Before you get in too deep, you might want to consult someone, live, in the real world, who knows what they are talking about, regarding your prospects for getting licensed, assuming things go well for you the rest of this cycle.

This bold part has been recommended to you before, have you begin the process? To me, having read about licensure difficulties with problems related to your issue, I’m rather surprised you haven’t done this yet, prior to spending thousands of dollars on Apps and any IIs again. This is of course you don’t expect to get licensed and instead use any MD degree to go into industry.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

If you don't mind me asking, what rank (approximately) is the school. Especially if its higher up and not in-state or you have close ties to it, you're in a really good position since you got an early II. The exception is schools like Tulane, where an II now might be borderline late (they're exceptionally early).

I would say T30 according to USNEWS. I guess their undergrad is considered a “public Ivy” but I don’t really go by those titles haha

 

[DoctorFate]

I would say T30 according to USNEWS. I guess their undergrad is considered a “public Ivy” but I don’t really go by those titles haha

Damn bro, that's insane. I think my friend attends that same one (M1). Good start! You have any connections to them or nah?

 

[doomer_md]

I would say T30 according to USNEWS. I guess their undergrad is considered a “public Ivy” but I don’t really go by those titles haha

UVA?

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Is it worth it to perhaps finish ~5 more secondaries? Was going to call it a wrap after finishing the UCSF secondary but the invite has given me some newfound motivation.I’m confident in my interviewing abilities, but this school prefers IS. They’re OOS friendly but still seem to have a higher Post II acceptance rate for IS. I think and even a good interview could lead to a WL.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Damn bro, that's insane. I think my friend attends that same one (M1). Good start! You have any connections to them or nah?

No connection but the premed advisor at my alma mater showed me a list of previous acceptances and the school is somewhat well represented given the disparate geographies of the two campuses. So maybe an indirect connection?

 

[chzsux]

If you don't mind me asking, what rank (approximately) is the school. Especially if its higher up and not in-state or you have close ties to it, you're in a really good position since you got an early II. The exception is schools like Tulane, where an II now might be borderline late (they're exceptionally early).

Just a PSA about Tulane this year. They've had a lot of issues with their website/software so many applicants still have not gotten their secondaries. This means that at least for this cycle, everything's shifted back a bit - people who are getting II right now are still able to choose dates before January whereas for previous years, the interview dates would've been booked through March by now.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

I decided that I will finish secondaries 3 or 4 more schools. Out of these schools, which is the best chance of receiving an II/A

TCU
Maryland
BU
Einstein
Rutgers NJ
Pitt
Rush
Wake forest
UVM
Colorado
Creighton

stats 521, 3.99. Decent research, abstract/conference presentation, good community service and ecs

thanks!
@LizzyM @gonnif

 

[DoctorFate]

I decided that I will finish secondaries 3 or 4 more schools. Out of these schools, which is the best chance of receiving an II/A

TCU
Maryland
BU
Einstein
Rutgers NJ
Pitt
Rush
Wake forest
UVM
Colorado
Creighton

stats 521, 3.99. Decent research, abstract/conference presentation, good community service and ecs

thanks!
@LizzyM @gonnif

Since you got an II from UVA, I would recommend a nearby peer ranked med school, Maryland.
I look forward to hearing how your cycle goes!

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

I decided that I will finish secondaries 3 or 4 more schools. Out of these schools, which is the best chance of receiving an II/A

TCU
Maryland
BU
Einstein
Rutgers NJ
Pitt
Rush
Wake forest
UVM
Colorado
Creighton

stats 521, 3.99. Decent research, abstract/conference presentation, good community service and ecs

thanks!
@LizzyM @gonnif

you should finish all.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

how many secondaries did you complete so far? 20-30 seems to be the normal range now a days.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Around 45

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Around 45

That's a lot. How many did you finish?

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

45 is the amount that I finished. I probably sent like 55 primaries

 

[sarcasmrules]

Statistics applies to populations, not individuals because in most cases, there are individual factors that cannot be accounted for (hence the need for randomization in statistical studies). I know someone who had 3 IIs and got into all 3 and someone who had 7 and had none. One of the individual factors here are your interviewing skills, which is difficult, if not impossible to quantify already. The only time statistics applies to individuals is when it is 100% random like the lottery. Rather than worry about II to A data, worry about honing your interviewing skills.

 

[srirachamayonnaise]

Focus on every interview, and they are independent of each other. So the statistics will only stress you out.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Is it possible that somehow the application was filtered in such a way (I’m assuming that reviewers don’t look at the raw amcas application) that red flags were missed? It’s a pretty small section on the application

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Is it possible that somehow the application was filtered in such a way (I’m assuming that reviewers don’t look at the raw amcas application) that red flags were missed? It’s a pretty small section on the application

You are worrying too much about things not in your control. I will assume that when committee meets to decide on As they will probably review the entire application and someone may point to the red flags and initiate a discussion.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Statistics applies to populations, not individuals because in most cases, there are individual factors that cannot be accounted for (hence the need for randomization in statistical studies). I know someone who had 3 IIs and got into all 3 and someone who had 7 and had none. One of the individual factors here are your interviewing skills, which is difficult, if not impossible to quantify already. The only time statistics applies to individuals is when it is 100% random like the lottery. Rather than worry about II to A data, worry about honing your interviewing skills.

So true. Years back a close friend of mine was diagnosed with Lukemia and he asked what I think are the odds of his recovery (based on public data). I told him stats don't mean anything for at individual level so it's either 100% or zero. Unfortunately he didn't make it.

 

[KnightDoc]

Is it possible that somehow the application was filtered in such a way (I’m assuming that reviewers don’t look at the raw amcas application) that red flags were missed? It’s a pretty small section on the application

I'm not sure I understand where you are going with this. The application is entirely online, other than LORs that are scanned in. While reviewers can certainly slice, dice and filter however they see fit, why would you think they are looking at anything other than the "raw" application as we submit it (what else is there to look at?), and why on earth would they ignore, of all things, the pretty small section of the application specifically dealing with disclosures of red flags?

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

I'm not sure I understand where you are going with this. The application is entirely online, other than LORs that are scanned in. While reviewers can certainly slice, dice and filter however they see fit, why would you think they are looking at anything other than the "raw" application as we submit it (what else is there to look at?), and why on earth would they ignore, of all things, the pretty small section of the application specifically dealing with disclosures of red flags?

I know that some states (ex Washington, California etc.) have very strict rules about background checks or disclosures until an offer is extended and accepted. Although I know job applications are much different than med school applications, you never know when some state laws change.

On UVA’s website it says that a “crime of moral turpitude” is an automatic disqualification. On Cornell Law’s legal encyclopedia, moral turpitude is “A phrase that describes wicked, deviant behavior constituting an immoral, unethical, or unjust departure from ordinary social standards such that it would shock a community.” I was a little worried that maybe uva schedules interviews and deals with background checks later. But maybe they saw it. Who knows

 

[KnightDoc]

I know that some states (ex Washington, California etc.) have very strict rules about background checks or disclosures until an offer is extended and accepted. Although I know job applications are much different than med school applications, you never know when some state laws change.

On UVA’s website it says that a “crime of moral turpitude” is an automatic disqualification. On Cornell Law’s legal encyclopedia, moral turpitude is “A phrase that describes wicked, deviant behavior constituting an immoral, unethical, or unjust departure from ordinary social standards such that it would shock a community.” I was a little worried that maybe uva schedules interviews and deals with background checks later. But maybe they saw it. Who knows

You raise a very interesting point! While this isn't about background checks (all they have now is the disclosure you voluntarily provided in your application), the stick that compels all of us to provide full disclosure on the front end, under the threat of having acceptances rescinded later (even after matriculation), is the possibility that our disclosures were not truthful and complete.

This begs the question, can and do schools rescind acceptances if they see something they don't like on a background check that WAS disclosed on the primary and/or secondary? If the answer is no, that would tell you all you need to know about the likelihood of anything being missed during an initial review!

Personally, I think it is highly unlikely anything was missed, which is actually much better for you than the alternative. You are not a reapplicant, and they apparently thought the rest of your application warranted an II. It's not an auto-A, but it's far better than the alternative.

There is no way they would intentionally not look at your disclosures now, waste resources on interviewing you, and then disqualify you later based on something they have in front of them now. This doesn't mean you won't ultimately be blocked by the entire adcom, but it does mean your II is not some mistake because someone didn't do their job and missed your disclosure, and you absolutely do have a greater than zero shot at receiving an A.

What do the experts say? @gonnif @Goro @LizzyM @gyngyn @Moko ????

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

You raise a very interesting point! While this isn't about background checks (all they have now is the disclosure you voluntarily provided in your application), the stick that compels all of us to provide full disclosure on the front end, under the threat of having acceptances rescinded later (even after matriculation), is the possibility that our disclosures were not truthful and complete.

This begs the question, can and do schools rescind acceptances if they see something they don't like on a background check that WAS disclosed on the primary and/or secondary? If the answer is no, that would tell you all you need to know about the likelihood of anything being missed during an initial review!

Personally, I think it is highly unlikely anything was missed, which is actually much better for you than the alternative. You are not a reapplicant, and they apparently thought the rest of your application warranted an II. It's not an auto-A, but it's far better than the alternative.

There is no way they would intentionally not look at your disclosures now, waste resources on interviewing you, and then disqualify you later based on something they have in front of them now. This doesn't mean you won't ultimately be blocked by the entire adcom, but it does mean your II is not some mistake because someone didn't do their job and missed your disclosure, and you absolutely do have a greater than zero shot at receiving an A.

I think that one more II will go a lot further in easing some of the worrying. It just seems so unlikely that a public school with which I have no ties would want to interview me when ~40 others didn’t bother (I would say 30 have already sent out interviews based on the data here), 2 WL, and 1 R. Seems more likely to be an error. Of course this time, my margin for error in interviews is much less and I will start lower in priority for an acceptance afterwards.

1 more invite would be enough for me to apply 1 more time if I don’t get in this time. Already reviewing uworld again during summer lull in dealflow in case I need to take the MCAT again. I really can’t imagine working 40+ years behind a desk staring at excel and a Bloomberg terminal

 

[sarcasmrules]

So true. Years back a close friend of mine was diagnosed with Lukemia and he asked what I think are the odds of his recovery (based on public data). I told him stats don't mean anything for at individual level so it's either 100% or zero. Unfortunately he didn't make it.

I am so sorry to hear that....... My friend fortunately did.

 

[KnightDoc]

Disclosure on an application may/will be seen and may/will be considered by the adcom. However, since background checks are not done until after acceptance and these may/will be reviewed by someone other than the adcom such as a dean, compliance officer, Counsel's office, they may in fact rescind based on the hard data from the check. These stakeholders may fear potential harm to reputation to any level of the institution or associated organizations such as health system or hospital. More likely, these groups may feel the background may not pass agreements with hospital/rotation site who have their own obligations/fears for their own institution. There are multiple stakeholder here, each with their own agenda and concerns. While these will be considered by the adcom, ultimately it is up to other players in some cases.

As always, I give the most extreme possibility which is unlikely in 99%+ of cases. However, after years of doing this, there is always the one case that could possibly happen. BTW, a “crime of moral turpitude” or "good morals" is often a phrase found in the statutes or regulation regarding licensing

Okay, so I guess my question is, just how does a reputable, ethical institution justify rescinding an acceptance based on information that comes to their attention through a background check that was already disclosed by the applicant as part of the application, just because they were too lazy or incompetent to notice or consider it prior to that point?

And, if you are actually suggesting that this is a thing, ever, what's the point of even asking the question as part of the application? To get people to disclose things that might not appear on a background check, just in case anyone at the school actually wants to pay attention and see or consider it?

TBH, and, of course, I haven't seen whatever contingencies schools put on acceptances, but I'd seriously consider getting a lawyer involved if I went through the process, actually received an acceptance, and then had it pulled after Certiphi came back with information I already disclosed on my primary and/or secondary. I can't believe schools are so cavalier about seeing and considering disclosures in applications, given the stakes for all involved if mistakes are made.

I also get that your perspective is that the sellers can always do whatever they want, whenever they want in the sellers market, but it's worth remembering that in the real world pissed off people with legitimate axes to grind do sue, and I'd imagine schools would want to take reasonable steps to avoid that. And nothing is more reasonable than actually reading and considering all information submitted by applicants before extending an acceptance.

As legitimate as all of the institutional considerations you described are, taking something as valuable as a medical school acceptance away from an applicant also has real world consequences. As I implied above, these powerful institutions really can't just do whatever the hell they want with impunity, in a world with courts, contingency fee attorneys and the rule of law, which is why I highly doubt they are as careless with applicant disclosures as you imply.

If the applicant does the right thing and makes all the required disclosures, and somehow slips by until a background check comes back, I'd think the school would have to either suck it up and deal with its partners, or suck it up and compensate the applicant. Two bad options, which is why I HIGHLY doubt schools would "maybe" see and consider disclosures made by the applicant prior to making a decision to accept.

I think someone would get fired for missing it, and, one way or the other, the school would deal with the consequences, because being the seller in the sellers' market wouldn't necessarily shield it from potential liability, regardless of how one-sided the acceptance language reads. I know for a fact we don't live in a world in which these schools have never been sued by a student or applicant, and I'd be willing to bet a full ride to medical school that more than one of those claims has resulted in a judgment or settlement in favor of the applicant or student.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

1) medical schools arent a single entity. The evaluators evaluate, the reviewers review, the adcom votes, (when acceptances are offered) goes thru the Admissions Dean to Dean to compliance, counsel, and other reviews, depending, which is all part of post-acceptance / pre-matriculation review.
2) In a large fraction of evaluations/reviews, the evaluators and adcom do not, repeat, do not see IA or other disclosures as that can be seen as outside their particular function. It may be left to pre-acceptance offer or to pre-matriculation phase
3) At every medical school, the moment you apply, you are bound the rules in the student handbook and other policies that always include a section on applicants. The moment you apply, you have agreed to follow those rules.
4) In everyone of those handbooks, there is always a rule/regulation that is worded to allow the medical school to rescind your acceptance for essentially any reason under ethical, professionalism, or other harm to the school.
5) This is, of course, reinforced, by at least 3 (primary, secondary, taking acceptance offer) often a matriculation agreement, that you have signed and agreed to adhere.
6) I have observed numerous cases in this area, from both sides of the courtroom, all rulings come down to three things that almost always side with school.
-Very clear expression that the school can rescind for almost anything and that you have agreed to it multiple times
-The court will give tremendous leeway to the "professional judgement" of the adcom, school, etc
-applicants have no right to a seat. They have agreed to these conditions from moment they have applied

I have yet to be involved in a case where a student had any success in a court ruling, only with negotiated/arbitrated settlement. BTW, the handbook rules also makes it virtually impossible for any dismissed medical student to win in court. I have contacted many times over the years by applicants, students, family, and attorneys for assistance in such suits. Often none of them have any idea that they are covered by the handbook and they dont have a leg to stand on.

Any attorney that doesn’t attempt to push his or her case into the court of public opinion when they lack formal legal standing isn’t doing their job. For example, at brown med school a bunch of students were accused of cheating on virtual exams based on elearning software. These students were about to be expelled. Sure enough, one of the students’ lawyers reached out to NYT, WaPo, WSJ. They got a “data expert”, certainly paid by the lawyers office, to call the process into question,Brown got terrible PR and sure enough none of the students were suspended, let alone expelled.

Most schools would rather settle out of court than risk having admissions officers be forced into a sworn deposition.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

@gonnif
If most evaluators/Adcoms don’t see IAs/other disclosures, how is it possible that I went from 10+ interviews when I previously applied without the red flag to only 1 now? Seems like too large a discrepancy unless schools are proceeding more slowly due to Covid.

 

[Med Ed]

Any attorney that doesn’t attempt to push his or her case into the court of public opinion when they lack formal legal standing isn’t doing their job. For example, at brown med school a bunch of students were accused of cheating on virtual exams based on elearning software. These students were about to be expelled. Sure enough, one of the students’ lawyers reached out to NYT, WaPo, WSJ. They got a “data expert”, certainly paid by the lawyers office, to call the process into question,Brown got terrible PR and sure enough none of the students were suspended, let alone expelled.

Most schools would rather settle out of court than risk having admissions officers be forced into a sworn deposition.

Brown's PR team must have done an amazing job handling this, because everyone thinks it happened at Dartmouth.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Brown's PR team must have done an amazing job handling this, because everyone thinks it happened at Dartmouth.

lol I knew it was one of the two but forgot which

 

[Med Ed]

Okay, so I guess my question is, just how does a reputable, ethical institution justify rescinding an acceptance based on information that comes to their attention through a background check that was already disclosed by the applicant as part of the application, just because they were too lazy or incompetent to notice or consider it prior to that point?

And, if you are actually suggesting that this is a thing, ever, what's the point of even asking the question as part of the application? To get people to disclose things that might not appear on a background check, just in case anyone at the school actually wants to pay attention and see or consider it?

TBH, and, of course, I haven't seen whatever contingencies schools put on acceptances, but I'd seriously consider getting a lawyer involved if I went through the process, actually received an acceptance, and then had it pulled after Certiphi came back with information I already disclosed on my primary and/or secondary. I can't believe schools are so cavalier about seeing and considering disclosures in applications, given the stakes for all involved if mistakes are made.

I also get that your perspective is that the sellers can always do whatever they want, whenever they want in the sellers market, but it's worth remembering that in the real world pissed off people with legitimate axes to grind do sue, and I'd imagine schools would want to take reasonable steps to avoid that. And nothing is more reasonable than actually reading and considering all information submitted by applicants before extending an acceptance.

As legitimate as all of the institutional considerations you described are, taking something as valuable as a medical school acceptance away from an applicant also has real world consequences. As I implied above, these powerful institutions really can't just do whatever the hell they want with impunity, in a world with courts, contingency fee attorneys and the rule of law, which is why I highly doubt they are as careless with applicant disclosures as you imply.

If the applicant does the right thing and makes all the required disclosures, and somehow slips by until a background check comes back, I'd think the school would have to either suck it up and deal with its partners, or suck it up and compensate the applicant. Two bad options, which is why I HIGHLY doubt schools would "maybe" see and consider disclosures made by the applicant prior to making a decision to accept.

I think someone would get fired for missing it, and, one way or the other, the school would deal with the consequences, because being the seller in the sellers' market wouldn't necessarily shield it from potential liability, regardless of how one-sided the acceptance language reads. I know for a fact we don't live in a world in which these schools have never been sued by a student or applicant, and I'd be willing to bet a full ride to medical school that more than one of those claims has resulted in a judgment or settlement in favor of the applicant or student.

I have not personally seen an acceptance rescinded in spite of disclosure. I have seen background checks indicate that a given incident was more serious than the disclosure suggested.

I have also seen a disclosure not show up in the application due to a computer glitch. Fortunately this was discovered prior to a decision being rendered.

But please, tell me more about how lazy and incompetent we are.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

I wasn’t implying that at all. I know that it’s an essential but often thankless part of the job

 

[KnightDoc]

1) medical schools arent a single entity. The evaluators evaluate, the reviewers review, the adcom votes, (when acceptances are offered) goes thru the Admissions Dean to Dean to compliance, counsel, and other reviews, depending, which is all part of post-acceptance / pre-matriculation review.
2) In a large fraction of evaluations/reviews, the evaluators and adcom do not, repeat, do not see IA or other disclosures as that can be seen as outside their particular function. It may be left to pre-acceptance offer or to pre-matriculation phase
3) At every medical school, the moment you apply, you are bound the rules in the student handbook and other policies that always include a section on applicants. The moment you apply, you have agreed to follow those rules.
4) In everyone of those handbooks, there is always a rule/regulation that is worded to allow the medical school to rescind your acceptance for essentially any reason under ethical, professionalism, or other harm to the school.
5) This is, of course, reinforced, by at least 3 (primary, secondary, taking acceptance offer) often a matriculation agreement, that you have signed and agreed to adhere.
6) I have observed numerous cases in this area, from both sides of the courtroom, all rulings come down to three things that almost always side with school.
-Very clear expression that the school can rescind for almost anything and that you have agreed to it multiple times
-The court will give tremendous leeway to the "professional judgement" of the adcom, school, etc
-applicants have no right to a seat. They have agreed to these conditions from moment they have applied

I have yet to be involved in a case where a student had any success in a court ruling, only with negotiated/arbitrated settlement. BTW, the handbook rules also makes it virtually impossible for any dismissed medical student to win in court. I have contacted many times over the years by applicants, students, family, and attorneys for assistance in such suits. Often none of them have any idea that they are covered by the handbook and they dont have a leg to stand on.

I understand all of this, and agree with it, other than to the extent it involves information known to the school at the time it made a decision to admit. I have to believe all of the policies in the handbook are meant to apply to new information that only comes to the school's attention later, and is not meant to shield the school from bad decisions it makes due to its own negligence.

Given all your years of experience, rather than speculate regarding the schools' total omnipotence, have you EVER seen a case involving information the school had in its possession from Day One that it used to rescind an acceptance much later? If the answer is no, as I suspect it is, that's really all we need to know regarding the likelihood of such a situation ever presenting itself.

 

[KnightDoc]

I have not personally seen an acceptance rescinded in spite of disclosure. I have seen background checks indicate that a given incident was more serious than the disclosure suggested.

I have also seen a disclosure not show up in the application due to a computer glitch. Fortunately this was discovered prior to a decision being rendered.

But please, tell me more about how lazy and incompetent we are.

I would never, in a million years, suggest any adcom is lazy or incompetent, unless I was told of an instance where an adcom failed to notice or consider a full disclosure of a criminal conviction made by an applicant on a primary or secondary (as @gonnif suggested is a possibility in the seller-centric world of the sellers' market), made an offer of admission, and then rescinded it upon having the disclosure slap them right in the face when the Certiphi report came back.

If that actually ever occurred, I would be thrilled to spend all day telling you all about how lazy and incompetent that adcom was, and how it was inappropriate for it to attempt to saddle the applicant with the consequences of its own negligence.

 

[DoctorFate]

I would never, in a million years, suggest any adcom is lazy or incompetent, unless I was told of an instance where an adcom failed to notice or consider a full disclosure of a criminal conviction made by an applicant on a primary or secondary (as @gonnif suggested is a possibility in the seller-centric world of the sellers' market), made an offer of admission, and then rescinded it upon having the disclosure slap them right in the face when the Certiphi report came back.

If that actually ever occurred, I would be thrilled to spend all day telling you all about how lazy and incompetent that adcom was, and how it was inappropriate for it to attempt to saddle the applicant with the consequences of its own negligence.

I wonder if something can be extrapolated from the Mayo acceptance issue two years ago. The school accidentally sent acceptance letters to every single interviewee, many of which had not been accepted. A few even paid there deposits. Others withdrew from their other medical schools. Yet, Mayo was legally able to rescind every mistaken acceptance.

 

[KnightDoc]

I wonder if something can be extrapolated from the Mayo acceptance issue two years ago. The school accidentally sent acceptance letters to every single interviewee, many of which had not been accepted. A few even paid there deposits. Others withdrew from their other medical schools. Yet, Mayo was legally able to rescind every mistaken acceptance.

Yes, I remember that well. That was a technical mistake that was promptly corrected within hours. Nobody was prejudiced, and Mayo actually offered to go to any school where anyone withdrew and explain the situation. No harm, no foul, and everyone ended up exactly where they would have been had the mistake not occurred. Bad look for Mayo, lots of bad feelings, but no actual harm, and no realistic way to fix it by quadrupling the number of people accepted in order to accommodate everyone.

That's very different from negligently neglecting to notice, read, or consider a red flag disclosure made by a single applicant at the very beginning of the process, and then using it to rescind an acceptance at the very end of the process. I'm sure schools have language that allows them to do anything at any time. That doesn't mean a court would always uphold it under circumstances like these.

For the record, I highly doubt this ever occurs. We are discussing it because @gonnif suggested that schools might not consider disclosures on the front end because they don't have to, since they always have the right to do anything they want. I just don't think that's true, and that @voxveritatisetlucis' experience suggests that schools very carefully consider them, immediately, and certainly before decisions are made on IIs, let alone As.

@voxveritatisetlucis seems to think a mistake might have been made because he now has one aberrational data point. I'm not buying that, and don't think mistakes like this are made, due to the potential consequences for all involved. I think someone thought @voxveritatisetlucis was worth meeting, which is certainly no guarantee he will make it past the entire committee, but it does suggest he has a chance.

 

[Goro]

Any attorney that doesn’t attempt to push his or her case into the court of public opinion when they lack formal legal standing isn’t doing their job. For example, at brown med school a bunch of students were accused of cheating on virtual exams based on elearning software. These students were about to be expelled. Sure enough, one of the students’ lawyers reached out to NYT, WaPo, WSJ. They got a “data expert”, certainly paid by the lawyers office, to call the process into question,Brown got terrible PR and sure enough none of the students were suspended, let alone expelled.

Most schools would rather settle out of court than risk having admissions officers be forced into a sworn deposition.

There's a huge difference between a school making a mistake due to software issues and allowing convicted criminals (you know, that crimes of moral turpitude stuff?) to get a seat in a medical school.

Court of public opinion indeed. I can see the headline now in the Washington Post.

"Drug pusher seeks reinstatement for his/her expulsion"

 

[KnightDoc]

There's a huge difference between a school making a mistake due to software issues and allowing convicted criminals (you know, that crimes of moral turpitude stuff?) to get a seat in a medical school.

Court of public opinion indeed. I can see the headline now in the Washington Post.

"Drug pusher seeks reinstatement for his/her expulsion"

VERY true!!! The fact remains, however, that the school really does have an obligation to get it right on the front end, assuming full disclosure was made, rather than negligently handling an application and putting itself in a position to feel the need to take something away (an acceptance) after it has been given.

The headline "Medical School Rescinds Acceptance of Admitted Drug Pusher After Ignoring Disclosure on Application" is no more flattering.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

There's a huge difference between a school making a mistake due to software issues and allowing convicted criminals (you know, that crimes of moral turpitude stuff?) to get a seat in a medical school.

Court of public opinion indeed. I can see the headline now in the Washington Post.

"Drug pusher seeks reinstatement for his/her expulsion"

Lol I’m not against schools using convictions/IA as admissions criteria. I do think that it is in poor taste to revoke an acceptance based on something that was fully disclosed twice (primary and secondary applications)

 

[DoctorFate]

Yes, I remember that well. That was a technical mistake that was promptly corrected within hours. Nobody was prejudiced, and Mayo actually offered to go to any school where anyone withdrew and explain the situation. No harm, no foul, and everyone ended up exactly where they would have been had the mistake not occurred. Bad look for Mayo, lots of bad feelings, but no actual harm, and no realistic way to fix it by quadrupling the number of people accepted in order to accommodate everyone.

That's very different from negligently neglecting to notice, read, or consider a red flag disclosure made by a single applicant at the very beginning of the process, and then using it to rescind an acceptance at the very end of the process. I'm sure schools have language that allows them to do anything at any time. That doesn't mean a court would always uphold it under circumstances like these.

For the record, I highly doubt this ever occurs. We are discussing it because @gonnif suggested that schools might not consider disclosures on the front end because they don't have to, since they always have the right to do anything they want. I just don't think that's true, and that @voxveritatisetlucis' experience suggests that schools very carefully consider them, immediately, and certainly before decisions are made on IIs, let alone As.

@voxveritatisetlucis seems to think a mistake might have been made because he now has one aberrational data point. I'm not buying that, and don't think mistakes like this are made, due to the potential consequences for all involved. I think someone thought @voxveritatisetlucis was worth meeting, which is certainly no guarantee he will make it past the entire committee, but it does suggest he has a chance.

I think its certainly possible (but unlikely) that @voxveritatisetlucis might have gotten an II because an adcom accidentally missed his disclosure. While its very unlikely, applying to so many schools across two cycles makes it a little more likely that the unlikely will happen at least once, at one school. I find it near impossible, however, that such a fact would be skipped before acceptance review.

There's no real point in speculating though. If it comes up in his interview, then he knows they saw it. If it doesn't, then he knows they probably did not (as something that major that deeply affected his life is extremely unlikely to be considered unimportant).
When is your interview?