Is there really that much advantage to apply to 30 schools?

[surftheiop]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I always read on here about people applying to like 20 different schools or the such. Presumably they are applying to that many schools in order to increase the chance of getting accepted somewhere as opposed to that they cant decide which of the 25 schools they want to go to.

While it is probaly best to do everything you can to increase chances, I question how much this actually helps.

For someone who is borderline it seems like they are VASTLY more likely to get into their instate schools than they are everywhere else.

Wouldn't it be better to completly focus yourself on your 1,2 or 3 instate schools instead of spreading yourself so thin by applying to 20 different schools?

(Im not saying that applying to more schools doesnt help but it seems like the marginal benefiet of doing so can't be very much).

I guess this might vary alot from state to state?

 

[scg]

Answer: Yes it is really that much of an advantage to apply to 30 schools.

 

[surftheiop]

Answer: Yes it is really that much of an advantage to apply to 30 schools.

Id be curious to see what percent of people DO NOT get into atleast one in-state school AND DO get into atleast one out of state school.

 

[megamega]

It really depends on what state you are a resident of. The more competitive state schools may not accept a borderline candidate, so you may have a better chance applying to many out of state schools. It can only benefit you to apply to more schools and increase your chances, but the price can be hefty if you go on lots of interviews.

 

[202781]

I applied to 30. If I had to do it all over again, I would still apply to 30 schools, but I would take out a bunch of the schools that get like 10,000+ apps.

 

[mmmcdowe]

I applied to 30 schools. If I did it over again I would have applied to 20 max. I ended up rejecting 10 interview offers.

 

[flip26]

It depends...if you are a marginal candidate, but 20 of your 30 apps are going to "Top 20" schools, 30 is probably not even enough...but if you send out 20 apps to schools you have a realistic shot at, 20 is more than enough...

 

[UVAbme2009]

I applied to 23. If I could do it over again I'd apply to only 12. But for every applicant there is a different story.

 

[virusgirl]

It totally depends on what state you're from. I'm from Massachusetts, which has one state school that, while not on par with the Cali schools in terms of being ridiculously hard to get into, but is certainly no day at the beach either.

I applied to 20 allopathic and 7 osteopathic schools. To address your question, yes, I think it is to an applicants advantage to apply to that many, and if I had had the money I probably would have applied to more allo. The process is so competitive that even very qualified applicants don't get in when they don't apply to enough schools (or apply to too many top tier places). You should apply to plenty of schools, and make sure that they are well-chosen, because it is better to over-apply, spend more $$, and have multiple acceptances than to under-apply and not get in.

You are correct though that you shouldn't apply to so many places that you're stretched thin and can't do a good job on your secondaries. Personally, I thought 30 schools was reasonable, but this number may fluctuate depending on your work habits. 50 schools is probably overkill.

 

[sevenmints]

This may be a worthwhile post to make.

The point of completing so many applications is so that you can get a good range of institutions. Ideally there would be some schools that are a long shot, others that are selective for students similar to you, and those that will easily grant you admissions.

Quite frankly, the admissions process is extremely arbitrary and sometimes you don't get interviews/admissions where you should and you do them where you statistically shouldn't. Applying broadly reduces the chances that you fall victim to the outlier circumstance that you don't get interviewed at/admitted to any schools at all. It also allows you to capitalize on the off chance that you may get some interviews and offers at great schools that are typically beyond your reach. This is a fairly sound statistical argument, if you ask me.

That said, it requires a lot of money and a lot of work, but the reward is less risk. Think about it this way, you can control how much work and money you put into the applications, but you can't control what the admissions committee ultimately decides, so best to be safe.

Now I am sure that there are many weaknesses to this argument, but it's what I've been taught at my institution. They suggest we apply to at least 22 (25 in this poor economy, where there are an increased number of applicants this year).

Anyhow, to illustrate my point, I'll show you what my admissions cycle looked like...

I know this sounds very superficial, but I followed USNWR rankings to make some of my groupings. I'll refrain from expounding the reasons here.

I applied to 28 schools, here's a rough breakdown:

1/3 top tier
1/3 mid-high tier
1/6 mid tier
1/6 mid-low tier

My yield in terms of 10 interviews so far:
2 top tier
4 mid-high tier
3 mid tier
1 mid-low tier

As you can see, applying broadly gives me a broad range of opportunities. There's even a normal distribution starting to form...PM if you have more questions.

 

[knoxsdb]

This may be a worthwhile post to make.

The point of completing so many applications is so that you can get a good range of institutions. Ideally there would be some schools that are a long shot, others that are selective for students similar to you, and those that will easily grant you admissions.

Quite frankly, the admissions process is extremely arbitrary and sometimes you don't get interviews/admissions where you should and you do them where you statistically shouldn't. Applying broadly reduces the chances that you fall victim to the outlier circumstance that you don't get interviewed at/admitted to any schools at all. It also allows you to capitalize on the off chance that you may get some interviews and offers at great schools that are typically beyond your reach. This is a fairly sound statistical argument, if you ask me.

That said, it requires a lot of money and a lot of work, but the reward is less risk. Think about it this way, you can control how much work and money you put into the applications, but you can't control what the admissions committee ultimately decides, so best to be safe.

Now I am sure that there are many weaknesses to this argument, but it's what I've been taught at my institution. They suggest we apply to at least 22 (25 in this poor economy, where there are an increased number of applicants this year).

Anyhow, to illustrate my point, I'll show you what my admissions cycle looked like...

I know this sounds very superficial, but I followed USNWR rankings to make some of my groupings. I'll refrain from expounding the reasons here.

I applied to 28 schools, here's a rough breakdown:

1/3 top tier
1/3 mid-high tier
1/6 mid tier
1/6 mid-low tier

My yield in terms of 10 interviews so far:
2 top tier
4 mid-high tier
3 mid tier
1 mid-low tier

As you can see, applying broadly gives me a broad range of opportunities. There's even a normal distribution starting to form...PM if you have more questions.

What did your resume' look like, in terms of GPA, MCAT, EC, etc...?

 

[nontrdgsbuiucmd]

I think the number of schools one should apply to depends on how close a match the applicant is to what the schools want. As a reapplicant, I applied (a bit late - secondaries mostly completed in mid-September) to 9 schools that were all very good fits for me per extensive research and conversations with those schools.

Of these, I attended two interviews, rec'd one acceptance at my preferred school, and turned down interview #3, my guess is that I may receive another interview offer or two and possibly another acceptance from interview #2.

The benefit to applying broadly is partially that it takes a lot of time to do research on each school, and if you apply broadly this becomes less crucial. i.e., learning that med college wisconsin values early application dates as much as strength of the application, and that Creighton was 6 weeks' backlogged in Oct/Nov. Or that certain schools require shadowing, etc. If you did enough research into each of these areas, probably 10-15 schools would be enough, provided you could complete all applications thoroughly.

 

[surftheiop]

I think the number of schools one should apply to depends on how close a match the applicant is to what the schools want. As a reapplicant, I applied (a bit late - secondaries mostly completed in mid-September) to 9 schools that were all very good fits for me per extensive research and conversations with those schools.

Of these, I attended two interviews, rec'd one acceptance at my preferred school, and turned down interview #3, my guess is that I may receive another interview offer or two and possibly another acceptance from interview #2.

The benefit to applying broadly is partially that it takes a lot of time to do research on each school, and if you apply broadly this becomes less crucial. i.e., learning that med college wisconsin values early application dates as much as strength of the application, and that Creighton was 6 weeks' backlogged in Oct/Nov. Or that certain schools require shadowing, etc. If you did enough research into each of these areas, probably 10-15 schools would be enough, provided you could complete all applications thoroughly.

I think ill probably do something similar seeing as my GPA isnt going to be amazing, I think first time around I will just apply to my two instate medical schools (because they are definately my top-2 choices and also I would have better chance of getting into them because they heavily favor in-state candidates). If i don't get into either I will talk to them about how to spcifically improve my application then I would re-apply more widely after I do whatever they say to do. (whether thats take some more classes to raise GPA, find a research position for a year, volunteer/shadow more, etc.)

 

[Deleted member 237747]

....................

 

[sindadel]

I don't think so. And it would be very expensive and an overwhelming amount of work turning in secondaries.

GPA and MCAT are only part of the picture. Anecdotally, candidates who get in with poor numerical stats have a compelling story. Also, you don't know if they are a non-trad who did a few years of school at 18 and did poorly, started over again at 28 and made a 4.0 in their second attempt vs. a 22 year old who made between a 2.0 and a 3.0 in each year of school. The two candidates would look pretty different to me if I were on an adcom.

Adcoms want to know that a candidate can adequately handle the academic expectations of medical school. They also need to have some way to reduce the number of applications to a manageable number to read. GPA and MCAT are a first cut stat, not a final cut stat.

 

[mmagnett]

Apply broadly. You never know what will happen. I am an Illinois resident and as such I thought my best odds were in Illinois. So I applied to all Illinois schools and a few other "dream" schools.

Guess what. It doesn't look like I am going to get even an INTERVIEW at my home state schools* and I've been accepted and interviewed at those "dream" schools.

This is one truly strange process.

**I was interviewed and wait listed at SIU

 

[Myuu]

Id be curious to see what percent of people DO NOT get into atleast one in-state school AND DO get into atleast one out of state school.

No idea, but I know that I certainly didn't get into at least one of my state schools... Granted, I only applied to two out of three...

 

[flip26]

I always read on here about people applying to like 20 different schools or the such. Presumably they are applying to that many schools in order to increase the chance of getting accepted somewhere as opposed to that they cant decide which of the 25 schools they want to go to.

While it is probaly best to do everything you can to increase chances, I question how much this actually helps.

For someone who is borderline it seems like they are VASTLY more likely to get into their instate schools than they are everywhere else.

Wouldn't it be better to completly focus yourself on your 1,2 or 3 instate schools instead of spreading yourself so thin by applying to 20 different schools?

(Im not saying that applying to more schools doesnt help but it seems like the marginal benefiet of doing so can't be very much).

I guess this might vary alot from state to state?

Ask marginal applicants from California about their instate chances versus out of state. For some of them, the waste of time, money, and effort is in applying instate in the first place.

If you live in certain states (e.g., Louisiana or Mississippi, and there are others), you can probably safely apply to your instate schools and as few out of state schools as you desire.

It is ill advised for anybody to only apply to one or two med schools no matter what state they live in. There are hurdles to the interview, and you never know when your app doesn't clear the secondary hurdle getting you to the interview stage. And ultimately you want more than one interview determining your fate - I see the reason behind applying to 15+ schools being to increase the number of interviews.

 

[surftheiop]

Ask marginal applicants from California about their instate chances versus out of state. For some of them, the waste of time, money, and effort is in applying instate in the first place.

If you live in certain states (e.g., Louisiana or Mississippi, and there are others), you can probably safely apply to your instate schools and as few out of state schools as you desire.

It is ill advised for anybody to only apply to one or two med schools no matter what state they live in. There are hurdles to the interview, and you never know when your app doesn't clear the secondary hurdle getting you to the interview stage. And ultimately you want more than one interview determining your fate - I see the reason behind applying to 15+ schools being to increase the number of interviews.

Im from south carolina so I would be essentially guranteed interviews at MUSC and USC , but yeah I see your point, I still have awhile to figure this out though

 

[dwc929]

If you are a borderline case such as I thought myself to be, my mentality was would you rather spend more money and apply to more schools now to increase my chances versus short change yourself, second guess yourself, and have to redo this whole process next year costing you more money and keep you another year back?

 

[surftheiop]

If you are a borderline case such as I thought myself to be, my mentality was would you rather spend more money and apply to more schools now to increase my chances versus short change yourself, second guess yourself, and have to redo this whole process next year costing you more money and keep you another year back?

My thought is if I can't get into one of the instate schools there is probably something fundamentally wrong with my application that might take a year or more to fix. But it does seem most logical/efficient to apply widely so im sure I probaly will end up doing so.

 

[Myuu]

My thought is if I can't get into one of the instate schools there is probably something fundamentally wrong with my application that might take a year or more to fix. But it does seem most logical/efficient to apply widely so im sure I probaly will end up doing so.

Well, it's also possible that your state school is particularly fussy about one particular facet of your application. Other schools, even out of state ones, may not value it as highly or at all.👍

 

[flip26]

My thought is if I can't get into one of the instate schools there is probably something fundamentally wrong with my application that might take a year or more to fix. But it does seem most logical/efficient to apply widely so im sure I probaly will end up doing so.

The point I was trying to make earlier is that I approach this from the "how many interviews do I need to be pretty sure of an acceptance" perspective...for me, at a bare minimum, I hope to have 5 interviews...so clearly I have to apply to at least 5 schools to be assured of that, but obviously to be safe I probably need to apply to at least 10 schools where I am reasonably competitive...after that, if there are some "reach/dream" schools, I add them to the pile, but I assign low expectations for interviews...this is how I am arriving at a list of 15 or so med schools. Reading through SDN, you will find plenty of examples where people did not get any instate interviews, but they got them at out of state schools they did not feel particularly competitive at...I don't buy the "crapshoot" thinking, but there are no certainties in any of this, so it is better to slightly over apply than to narrow your chances down to 1 or 2 schools.

 

[mmmcdowe]

The point I was trying to make earlier is that I approach this from the "how many interviews do I need to be pretty sure of an acceptance" perspective...for me, at a bare minimum, I hope to have 5 interviews...so clearly I have to apply to at least 5 schools to be assured of that, but obviously to be safe I probably need to apply to at least 10 schools where I am reasonably competitive...after that, if there are some "reach/dream" schools, I add them to the pile, but I assign low expectations for interviews...this is how I am arriving at a list of 15 or so med schools. Reading through SDN, you will find plenty of examples where people did not get any instate interviews, but they got them at out of state schools they did not feel particularly competitive at...I don't buy the "crapshoot" thinking, but there are no certainties in any of this, so it is better to slightly over apply than to narrow your chances down to 1 or 2 schools.

I agree. This process is definitely not a crapshoot, its just beyond our ability to understand because we aren't sitting in at every meeting of every adcom committee of every school!

 

[Apexx]

Apply broadly. You never know what will happen. I am an Illinois resident and as such I thought my best odds were in Illinois. So I applied to all Illinois schools and a few other "dream" schools.

Guess what. It doesn't look like I am going to get even an INTERVIEW at my home state schools* and I've been accepted and interviewed at those "dream" schools.

This is one truly strange process.

**I was interviewed and wait listed at SIU

What were the dream schools you applied to??

 

[987]

I agree with Apexx...the schools I thought I would at least get interviews at I did not and I am going to my 1st choice school where I did not think I would be accepted.

 

[NurWollen]

Wouldn't it be better to completly focus yourself on your 1,2 or 3 instate schools instead of spreading yourself so thin by applying to 20 different schools?

 

[Myuu]

Wouldn't it be better to completly focus yourself on your 1,2 or 3 instate schools instead of spreading yourself so thin by applying to 20 different schools?

That really depends on your state schools and a) how competitive they are and b) how much you actually like your state.

Applying to 20 different schools isn't really spreading yourself thin unless you don't have the time to put in the effort. Really, it's all up to you and how much time and money you have to invest in the process.

 

[NurWollen]

That really depends on your state schools and a) how competitive they are and b) how much you actually like your state.

Applying to 20 different schools isn't really spreading yourself thin unless you don't have the time to put in the effort. Really, it's all up to you and how much time and money you have to invest in the process.

Oops...that post above was an attempt to quote something said by the OP....some how the "originally posted by..." box got removed. Anyway, what I wanted to say was the following: It really depends on the state. Coming from California, from a small, unkown, OOS private university, which little research experience, I would have to be nuts to focus on the UC schools. In fact, I really don't plan on applying to any of them. California schools, though are a different beast than most state schools. Maybe for some people, focusing on state schools would be wise.

 

[Myuu]

Oops...that post above was an attempt to quote something said by the OP....some how the "originally posted by..." box got removed. Anyway, what I wanted to say was the following: It really depends on the state. Coming from California, from a small, unkown, OOS private university, which little research experience, I would have to be nuts to focus on the UC schools. In fact, I really don't plan on applying to any of them. California schools, though are a different beast than most state schools. Maybe for some people, focusing on state schools would be wise.

Ahhh, gotcha!👍

 

[Apexx]

I agree with Apexx...the schools I thought I would at least get interviews at I did not and I am going to my 1st choice school where I did not think I would be accepted.

So what was your #1 choice?