Letter of intent, no acceptances

[Arst]

In a letter of intent, should I mention that I'm preparing for reapplication? It's at a high ranked school, where they actually stated during the interview that they were sure anyone who made it there would get in somewhere. I worry that it will make my application look weaker since I haven't yet.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

No. They probably wont care anyway. Tell they why you want to go THERE, no why you want to go anywhere lol.

 

[Med Ed]

In a letter of intent, should I mention that I'm preparing for reapplication? It's at a high ranked school, where they actually stated during the interview that they were sure anyone who made it there would get in somewhere. I worry that it will make my application look weaker since I haven't yet.

Desperation is off putting.

 

[gyngyn]

We can see that you haven't been accepted, thus we already know you will come. There is no purpose for an "LOI."
Telling us about your re-application plan is sad.

 

[Goro]

How would you interpret a non enforceable contract from a desperate applicant?????

In a letter of intent, should I mention that I'm preparing for reapplication? It's at a high ranked school, where they actually stated during the interview that they were sure anyone who made it there would get in somewhere. I worry that it will make my application look weaker since I haven't yet.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Just send them a nicely written letter expressing why it is your top choice and that's it. Nothing to lose. I'm actually getting annoyed lately of how childish some of the responses on these LOI threads are. Some schools actually take them into account quite heavily and others don't. Don't listen to one person who tells you yes or no based on their specific experiences. You have nothing to lose OP, go for it but leave out the reapplication part.

 

[NotWayneBrady]

Just send them a nicely written letter expressing why it is your top choice and that's it. Nothing to lose. I'm actually getting annoyed lately of how childish some of the responses on these LOI threads are. Some schools actually take them into account quite heavily and others don't. Don't listen to one person who tells you yes or no based on their specific experiences. You have nothing to lose OP, go for it but leave out the reapplication part.

I agree jumping down people's throats about LOIs is unnecessary, but I also don't agree with pre-meds phrasing things about admissions like concrete facts when they've never been on an adcom.

Edit: Especially after several adcoms literally just told you the opposite.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Boy did i just laugh. You had 4 current or former adcoms give your their opinions of LOI. I suggest you reconsider your understanding and appreciation of people who have been heavily involved in admissions for many years.

And as I always say, every action has implications. That is, sending a LOI does have something to lose, looking desperate on to an adcom who may have been considering you for a WL. Whether consciously or subconsciously, this can influence their view of a candidate

Boy did I just roll on the floor laughing. As you point out, it is only 4 and as I pointed out in my post, which you may have read using your wonderful CARS skills: Some schools actually take them into account quite heavily and others don't. In case you haven't noticed by now, our limited sample of adcoms on SDN clearly don't give much weight to LOIs so saying that they are 4 adcoms is pointless. OP talks about top schools in particular, and I interviewed at the majority of the top 20, quite a few that stated during interview day that they do give considerable weight to LOIs and even encouraged them.

I agree that every action has implications. Once again, I kindly pointed out to OP that he should leave out the reapplication part to avoid looking desperate. As far as looking desperate just based on the fact that OP sends a letter, it is something you can't predict anywhere, even for the schools that like LOIs. There will be different thoughts on every issue wherever you go.

 

[osckey]

Instead of a letter of intent, why not just send them an update email informing them on new developments, things you've been up to, and at the end express your continued interest in the school.

 

[MaxPlancker]

View attachment 201185
I agree jumping down people's throats about LOIs is unnecessary, but I also don't agree with pre-meds phrasing things about admissions like concrete facts when they've never been on an adcom.

Edit: Especially after several adcoms literally just told you the opposite.

See post above. You don't have to be an adcom to make such statements when you've interviewed at the majority of top 20s and heard regarding LOIs from the school directly. There is no point in putting adcoms on a pedestal; they represent one person.

 

[LizzyM]

Can we make it 5 adcoms telling you that a LOI when you don't hold a single offer reeks of desperation and is off putting. A school may not want to make an offer if they aren't sure you will accept (for example, drop your current offer for their offer from the waitlist) but when they can SEE that you don't have any offers yet, there really is no question that you'll accept if offered a spot.

 

[EaglesontheWarpath]

See post above. You don't have to be an adcom to make such statements when you've interviewed at the majority of top 20s and heard regarding LOIs from the school directly. There is no point in putting adcoms on a pedestal; they represent one person.

I mean I don't know this for a fact, but I would guess that the four (now 5) of them are all independent of each other and sit on different committees, and if they're all in agreement they're probably right. But at the same time each person's application is different, and without having all the facts about them it is virtually impossible to give them exact advice that is perfect for their situation.

 

[MaxPlancker]

I mean I don't know this for a fact, but I would guess that the four (now 5) of them are all independent of each other and sit on different committees, and if they're all in agreement they're probably right. But at the same time each person's application is different, and without having all the facts about them it is virtually impossible to give them exact advice that is perfect for their situation.

5 adcoms at 5 schools doesn't represent anything other than 5 adcoms' views. If you pulled 5 people versed in politics from 5 counties that all support one candidate, does that mean that candidate is the way to go? All advice on SDN, including that of adcoms, is just that--advice. It does not represent the absolute truth or majority thinking. You use that advice as well as all the other advice out there and make the best decision for yourself.

There are several biases present but most important for OP is probably the fact that his WL school is a highly ranked one. It is my impression that more of the top schools care about LOIs for reasons including protecting yield. I agree most schools out of the >140 don't give a damn about LOIs but a fair share of top schools seem to.

 

[NotWayneBrady]

5 adcoms at 5 schools doesn't represent anything other than 5 adcoms' views. If you pulled 5 people versed in politics from 5 counties that all support one candidate, does that mean that candidate is the way to go? All advice on SDN, including that of adcoms, is just that--advice. It does not represent the absolute truth or majority thinking. You use that advice as well as all the other advice out there and make the best decision for yourself.

There are several biases present but most important for OP is probably the fact that his WL school is a highly ranked one. It is my impression that more of the top schools care about LOIs for reasons including protecting yield. I agree most schools out of the >140 don't give a damn about LOIs but a fair share of top schools seem to.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Can we make it 5 adcoms telling you that a LOI when you don't hold a single offer reeks of desperation and is off putting. A school may not want to make an offer if they aren't sure you will accept (for example, drop your current offer for their offer from the waitlist) but when they can SEE that you don't have any offers yet, there really is no question that you'll accept if offered a spot.

Once again, this is one person's perspective. CCLCM actually tells you that if you are WL and you have not been accepted elsewhere, they will give you extra special consideration.

 

[gyngyn]

It is my impression that more of the top schools care about LOIs for reasons including protecting yield. I agree most schools out of the >140 don't give a damn about LOIs but a fair share of top schools seem to.

There is a difference between a waitlisted candidate holding an acceptance at a prestigious school and one holding nowhere.
It is more likely that the less "prestigious" schools will care about intent, but only when the candidate is holding a spot at a "better" school.

 

[EaglesontheWarpath]

5 adcoms at 5 schools doesn't represent anything other than 5 adcoms' views. If you pulled 5 people versed in politics from 5 counties that all support one candidate, does that mean that candidate is the way to go? All advice on SDN, including that of adcoms, is just that--advice. It does not represent the absolute truth or majority thinking. You use that advice as well as all the other advice out there and make the best decision for yourself.

There are several biases present but most important for OP is probably the fact that his WL school is a highly ranked one. It is my impression that more of the top schools care about LOIs for reasons including protecting yield. I agree most schools out of the >140 don't give a damn about LOIs but a fair share of top schools seem to.

Not necessarily, but if the political decision is controlled by a governing body (adcoms) and multiple people on that body indicate their opinion as to the best way to going about to run for that political role, that's who I would place my trust in, as opposed to some ordinary citizen shouting "I'm running too! Guys I'm running too!" (imperfect metaphor since it implies that majority thinking is what is best, when in reality admissions is a strict monarchy run by admissions). Again, it is your opinion against theirs, only there's five of them vs. one of you, and they do it for a living. My metaphor would be asking the heads of a global bank's stocks department about how best to go about investing in stocks, versus asking a recent college graduate who works at a start up.

Edit: One thing I would add is that the majority of people in the world, even that are currently on the pre-allo section don't go/haven't been accepted to medical school, so majority opinion in general is definitely not the way to go. Although in this case the majority on this thread (5 adcoms) I would safe is a safe bet. Also, again I reiterate that unless we know everything about this applicant it's impossible to know what the best advice is to give them in their specific situation.

 

[MaxPlancker]

There is a difference between a waitlisted candidate holding at a prestigious school and one holding nowhere.
It is more likely that the less "prestigious" school will care about intent, but only when the candidate is holding at a "better" school.

What you say is true but it is irrelevant to the above discussion.

The fact that a less "prestigious" school is likely to care when a candidate holds an acceptance at a "better" school is a unique scenario (an apple)...top schools putting weight to LOIs is distinct (an orange).

Perhaps to clarify, I should say that "more" meant "proportionately more". Either way, I'm not arguing what tier school is more likely to be receptive because that is not helpful to OP.

 

[gyngyn]

Either way, I'm not arguing what tier school is more likely to be receptive because that is not helpful to OP.

I do agree with this.

 

[NotWayneBrady]

Once again, this is one person's perspective. CCLCM actually tells you that if you are WL and you have not been accepted elsewhere, they will give you extra special consideration.

Yes, this is one person's perspective. A perspective from a person who we all agree to know significantly more about the process than even a premed who's interviewed at a bunch of top 20s.

 

[NotWayneBrady]

Instead of a letter of intent, why not just send them an update email informing them on new developments, things you've been up to, and at the end express your continued interest in the school.

I think this sounds significantly more reasonable as a course of action for OP.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Not necessarily, but if the political decision is controlled by a governing body (adcoms) and multiple people on that body indicate their opinion as to the best way to going about to run for that political role, that's who I would place my trust in, as opposed to some ordinary citizen shouting "I'm running too! Guys I'm running too!" (imperfect metaphor since it implies that majority thinking is what is best, when in reality admissions is a strict monarchy run by admissions). Again, it is your opinion against theirs, only there's five of them vs. one of you, and they do it for a living. My metaphor would be asking the heads of a global bank's stocks department about how best to go about investing in stocks, versus asking a recent college graduate who works at a start up.

Edit: One thing I would add is that the majority of people in the world, even that are currently on the pre-allo section don't go/haven't been accepted to medical school, so majority opinion in general is definitely not the way to go. Although in this case the majority on this thread (5 adcoms) I would safe is a safe bet. Also, again I reiterate that unless we know everything about this applicant it's impossible to know what the best advice is to give them in their specific situation.

I agree. I simply stated my views to OP because I heard in person from several of the top 20 that they value LOIs. I would say in this case, if you actually believe a stranger saying they heard this from interview days (which I could care less about and is up to OP), my advice carries more weight for OP's particular case if his school is top 20…or he could just PM me and I can tell him the school that were supportive.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Yes, this is one person's perspective. A perspective from a person who we all agree to know significantly more about the process than even a premed who's interviewed at a bunch of top 20s.

Yea unless that pre-med heard the answer from the schools' admissions staffs in person. Anyhow, I'm done. OP can take it or leave it. And yes, I agree all 5 adcoms know far more than me about the process. Doesn't mean their advice is the only advice or the "correct" advice. It's just funny that people look up to people in positions with an absolute sense.

 

[Med Ed]

I agree. I simply stated my views to OP because I heard in person from several of the top 20 that they value LOIs.

Let us back up for a moment. The OP’s question was not whether he/she should send an LOI, the question was whether to include a statement that he/she is preparing for a reapplication cycle. The answer to the OP’s real question is no, for a couple of reasons. For one, it would be objectively deleterious to emit that level of desperation.* For two, the school in question will already have a very good idea of the OP's position based on the multiple acceptance list.

*On a side note, the notion that an LOI "can't hurt" is faulty. When someone sends an LOI, one of three things will happen:
1. It does not get read by anyone, and therefore has no effect.
2. It does get read, but not by someone with any pull, and therefore has no effect.
3. It does get read by someone with pull, and therefore could potentially have an effect.

The applicant is obviously praying for #3, and by virtue of the fact that the reader does have some level of influence on the process, writing an off putting LOI absolutely could hurt.

Put more succinctly, if it can't hurt then it can't help.

 

[p0gono]

Yea unless that pre-med heard the answer from the schools' admissions staffs in person. Anyhow, I'm done. OP can take it or leave it. And yes, I agree all 5 adcoms know far more than me about the process. Doesn't mean their advice is the only advice or the "correct" advice. It's just funny that people look up to people in positions with an absolute sense.

Ok, I heard similar things at many top 20s about appreciating letters of interest or intent. But I think they were also operating under the assumption that NEARLY everyone who interviews at a "top 20" (and applied wisely) will get in somewhere. It sounds like LizzyM is speaking to the exceptions - people like OP - who slip through the cracks and don't get an acceptance. In these cases, it is fair to say intent is assumed.

IMHO a short update seems like a good idea, and if you want to throw in a couple concrete reasons you are specifically interested in the school and/or a thoughtful reflection on your impression on interview day (and why it resonated with you) that might be something nice to add to your file.

Keep it short though, because you want to avoid the stench of desperation that these adcoms seem to have a nose for.

It seems like everyone agrees that framing your update as activities "in preparation for next cycle" would not be a good idea. Positive spin, baby.

 

[songl4a]

.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Let us back up for a moment. The OP’s question was not whether he/she should send an LOI, the question was whether to include a statement that he/she is preparing for a reapplication cycle. The answer to the OP’s real question is no, for a couple of reasons. For one, it would be objectively deleterious to emit that level of desperation.* For two, the school in question will already have a very good idea of the OP's position based on the multiple acceptance list.

Correct about the original question. Seems like the thread started shifting slightly starting at post #4. I also agree with above posters that he should remove the reapplicant portion.

*On a side note, the notion that an LOI "can't hurt" is faulty. When someone sends an LOI, one of three things will happen:
1. It does not get read by anyone, and therefore has no effect.
2. It does get read, but not by someone with any pull, and therefore has no effect.
3. It does get read by someone with pull, and therefore could potentially have an effect.

The applicant is obviously praying for #3, and by virtue of the fact that the reader does have some level of influence on the process, writing an off putting LOI absolutely could hurt.

If a person has no acceptance to begin with, there is nothing he would lose. If in the astronomically small chance that both the adcom somehow has decided to pull OP from the WL and then decides not to based on an off-putting LOI, OP still does not "lose" anything. He had nothing to begin with.

Put more succinctly, if it can't hurt then it can't help.

Sure, there are many things that can help but not hurt if you pause and think before you type.

 

[MaxPlancker]

I assume mentioning a DO acceptance in an MD LoI would have no effect either?

Usually I would think that unless you have an acceptance at a particularly prestigious school, you would not mention the exact name of the school as it would serve little to no purpose.

 

[p0gono]

Usually I would think that unless you have an acceptance at a particularly prestigious school, you would not mention the exact name of the school as it would serve little to no purpose.

That's an interesting point. Theoretically, the applicant could be holding an acceptance through TMDSAS and AMCAS wouldn't list it in the March 15 report.... Right?

I don't think OP is Texan, though.

Edit: not true, the two systems share acceptance data this early in the cycle

 

[Im76at711]

Can we make it 5 adcoms telling you that a LOI when you don't hold a single offer reeks of desperation and is off putting. A school may not want to make an offer if they aren't sure you will accept (for example, drop your current offer for their offer from the waitlist) but when they can SEE that you don't have any offers yet, there really is no question that you'll accept if offered a spot.

when do schools start seeing your other offers?

 

[p0gono]

when do schools start seeing your other offers?

As of Feb 10, all schools where you hold acceptances can see each other.

As of March 15, all schools where you are waitlisted can see where you hold acceptances.

As of April 1, all schools where you are waitlisted or accepted can see where you have been accepted this cycle, even if you have withdrawn post-acceptance. (Correct me if I'm wrong ... @gonnif)

 

[gyngyn]

That's an interesting point. Theoretically, the applicant could be holding an acceptance through TMDSAS and AMCAS wouldn't list it in the March 15 report.... Right?

I don't think OP is Texan, though.

We can see TX MD acceptances.

 

[Pantaloooons]

As of Feb 10, all schools where you hold acceptances can see each other.

As of March 15, all schools where you are waitlisted can see where you hold acceptances.

As of April 1, all schools where you are waitlisted or accepted can see where you have been accepted this cycle, even if you have withdrawn post-acceptance. (Correct me if I'm wrong ... @gonnif)

Is there any sort of boost in acceptance offers that occurs following either March 15th or April 1st? That is, do adcoms rely on the information available on those respective days to make decisions? I imagine that the month of April sees a lot of movement, particularly for acceptance offers to waitlisted candidates, but that could also be because candidates are dropping their seats if they have multiple acceptances.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Actually, in my case, it does. Unlike the other adcoms here who have been directly associated with a single school, I have recently retired from a career that for the past nearly 20 years has specialized in analyzing and developing computerized application processes and procedures for multiple schools and associations. During that time, my group was involved with approximately 40 schools at some level of process management, of that 12 were in depth, full development of systems. This requires a full understanding of their admissions methodology and process usually as being either an non-voting member of the committee (ie reader/interviewer) or observer of the meetings (until I sold the company last year non-disclosures kept from discussing this at length). Overall of these 40 or so schools, and associations, which included MD, DO, and DPM, I can only recall a couple that made any substantial formal process for both inserting updated material into an application that included any defined re-review step or had any real process for WL management, especially after the 4/30 deadline where still starts resembling a free for all.

Congratulations on your retirement. Sounds like you had quite a successful company. While it is interesting to hear that few schools have formal processes available for adding updates to an application, it is to my knowledge that at the many schools that do emphasize LOIs the dean her/himself that takes care of that aspect. Furthermore, more and more schools have recently adopted online portals where material can be uploaded though whether this material is actually seen and taken into account is unknown.

The reality of the admissions process from a workflow management perspective is an enormous task of several thousand applications whittled down to a few hundred. Additional steps such as updates, LOI, and alike add to already overburdened workflow. Some schools, too many in my opinion, still utilize static documents PDF or paper) to review applicants, thus having no real mechanism to update these files. Some of these do so on purpose to keep from being drowned in needless and mostly useless communication from applicants (and their parents for that matter).

As you mention, it seems very school-specific.

Yes, some schools welcome updates, real, substantive updates and thus imply at least tenuously that maybe an LOI matters. Some schools specifically discourage updates. Most simply dont have the staff or time resources to manage them. And all the schools know that every hopeful applicant would send one these letters to every school if they could, which is the main reason they are typically not considered useful

Agreed, but I was not basing my position upon an interpretation of offices implying that maybe a LOI matters through welcoming updates.

The only real circumstance that this is useful is late in the cycle or after the 4/30 deadline for accepting a single offer that am applicant who had multiple acceptance and has strong reasons, hopefully previously expressed in application or interview, as to why they would rather attend a particular school. An applicant who had no acceptances, and every school will know that after 4/30, this is simply a useless act that could sit in the file and rediscovered when they reapply next year.

Certainly applicants who have multiple acceptances with strong reasons and/or ties may benefit from LOIs, perhaps mores than their counterparts. However, it is not true to say that LOIs sent from others are a useless act. It really is school and dean specific. There was one girl on here a long whiles back that sent a LOI to UCIrvine Post rejection and was granted an II before finally being accepted. Other schools the WL and LOIs are largely handled through deans. While you have certainly had a diverse and in-depth experience, I would once again caution that it is but that--a diverse, in-depth experience--and that it is a strong but not absolute perspective. Contrary to your lengthy experience, I can only base my prior posts on what I directly heard from the schools I interviewed at, some which you may or may not have worked with. Nobody on here is wrong and it is ultimately up to OP to decide the best course of action; yet, it is important for me to offer my knowledge/advice, whatever little it may be, in case it helps the OP, even if what I say goes against that preached by those with more experience and established positions.

I think this thread is just going in circles:
Adcoms: LOIs don't help; source: we are adcoms
Me: Some top schools seem to value LOIs; source: my interview days

tl;dr there are multiple perspectives and OP should decide what to do as I believe he has enough info on this thread now

 

[Med Ed]

If a person has no acceptance to begin with, there is nothing he would lose. If in the astronomically small chance that both the adcom somehow has decided to pull OP from the WL and then decides not to based on an off-putting LOI, OP still does not "lose" anything. He had nothing to begin with.

Scenario 1: Applicant on wait list, does nothing, eventually gets called up, attends medical school, becomes physician.
Scenario 2: Applicant on wait list, sends annoying LOI, gets passed over, ends up working at bus station concession stand.

In essence you are saying there is no difference between those two scenarios because they begin the same way.

 

[Goro]

I submit, colleague, that you are dealing with a classic case of cognitive dissonance.

Scenario 1: Applicant on wait list, does nothing, eventually gets called up, attends medical school, becomes physician.
Scenario 2: Applicant on wait list, sends annoying LOI, gets passed over, ends up working at bus station concession stand.

In essence you are saying there is no difference between those two scenarios because they begin the same way.

 

[Med Ed]

I think this thread is just going in circles:
Adcoms: LOIs don't help; source: we are adcoms
Me: Some top schools seem to value LOIs; source: my interview days

If I were a dean of admissions at a top school I would consider requesting LOI's from applicants. Not because I find them particularly insightful, mind you, but because they would provide a means of identifying students who don't really want to attend. A blunt instrument of negative self-selection, if you will. Might be helpful in culling the herd each year.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Scenario 1: Applicant on wait list, does nothing, eventually gets called up, attends medical school, becomes physician.
Scenario 2: Applicant on wait list, sends annoying LOI, gets passed over, ends up working at bus station concession stand.

In essence you are saying there is no difference between those two scenarios because they begin the same way.

Scenario 3: Applicant on wait list, does nothing, gets passed over.
Scenario 4: Applicant on wait list, sends annoying LOI, gets In.

In essence, you are putting words out there because you godly adcoms cannot accept that there are possibilities outside your own experiences. Sorry but what you said above is just ridiculous lmao. Are you getting mad or something lol?

 

[MaxPlancker]

I submit, colleague, that you are dealing with a classic case of cognitive dissonance.

I would use a bit more brainpower before making statements.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Honestly this thread and these adcoms responding are hilarious. What do you not understand that your experience has nothing on actually hearing from the admissions staff themselves at the top schools?

 

[Ismet]

Let's keep the discussion professional, please.


If a school tells you on interview day or elsewhere, or you find out from several trusted sources, that they are receptive to letters of interest, then send one if you so desire. Yes, there are schools out there that are receptive to them. Note that these are letters of interest and not intent. Intent means nothing. If you write this letter, show your interest in the school and demonstrate how you would fit at the school and how the school fits your wants and needs. Don't talk about the reapplicant thing. That stinks of desperation and begging, will not help you, and may harm you.

Take notice if a school says they do NOT want to receive these letters. Sending one anyway will result in a rejection because you can't follow simple rules.

In general, these letters mean nothing, because someone can send out 15 letters or just 1, and someone's mind can change at any time. Don't think that your acceptance hinges on a letter, likely it'll move you up in the stack or get you looked at sooner, if anything.

If you don't know a school's stance on letters, then err on the side of not sending one. It does have the potential to do more harm than good if you don't know what you're in for.

 

[Med Ed]

Honestly this thread and these adcoms responding are hilarious. What do you not understand that your experience has nothing on actually hearing from the admissions staff themselves at the top schools?

Ever heard of the GSA?

 

[EaglesontheWarpath]

Congratulations on your retirement. Sounds like you had quite a successful company. While it is interesting to hear that few schools have formal processes available for adding updates to an application, it is to my knowledge that at the many schools that do emphasize LOIs the dean her/himself that takes care of that aspect. Furthermore, more and more schools have recently adopted online portals where material can be uploaded though whether this material is actually seen and taken into account is unknown.



As you mention, it seems very school-specific.



Agreed, but I was not basing my position upon an interpretation of offices implying that maybe a LOI matters through welcoming updates.



Certainly applicants who have multiple acceptances with strong reasons and/or ties may benefit from LOIs, perhaps mores than their counterparts. However, it is not true to say that LOIs sent from others are a useless act. It really is school and dean specific. There was one girl on here a long whiles back that sent a LOI to UCIrvine Post rejection and was granted an II before finally being accepted. Other schools the WL and LOIs are largely handled through deans. While you have certainly had a diverse and in-depth experience, I would once again caution that it is but that--a diverse, in-depth experience--and that it is a strong but not absolute perspective. Contrary to your lengthy experience, I can only base my prior posts on what I directly heard from the schools I interviewed at, some which you may or may not have worked with. Nobody on here is wrong and it is ultimately up to OP to decide the best course of action; yet, it is important for me to offer my knowledge/advice, whatever little it may be, in case it helps the OP, even if what I say goes against that preached by those with more experience and established positions.

I think this thread is just going in circles:
Adcoms: LOIs don't help; source: we are adcoms
Me: Some top schools seem to value LOIs; source: my interview days

tl;dr there are multiple perspectives and OP should decide what to do as I believe he has enough info on this thread now

For this UCIrvine girl, that's great for her, but n=1. Odds are she's the exception to the exception to the rule. The only other point I'd like to make about this debate (since this thread has devolved enough) is that just because schools say they are open to LOI's doesn't mean that they want the LOI OP is sending-they may have said that to you when you interviewed implying that if you really like the school, immediately after your interview an LOI would be advantageous, as opposed to sending one out of desperation to get an admittance at the end of a cycle.
Also one thing I would also like to mention is this (in my view) the major problem with SDN-it's a forum made up, almost exclusively, of people who honestly don't know what they're talking about (including me-I think that because I got in this cycle I understand medical school admission, but the reality is closer to I still have no clue whats right/wrong), because they aren't the one's sitting in the drivers seat, they're simply commenters on other people's situations with having full knowledge of both the understanding and the process.

Honestly this thread and these adcoms responding are hilarious. What do you not understand that your experience has nothing on actually hearing from the admissions staff themselves at the top schools?

Yes, but if I want to know why the orange juice I am currently drinking tastes so good, I'm going to study other oranges, not go talk to someone else who tried orange juice. I would also explain why the bold is wrong. Lets say you need a knee replacement, and you go to an orthopedic surgeon. He recommends a specific surgery and type of recovery, but you aren't satisfied so you fly across the country to another surgeon, who recommends the same surgery and a slightly different recovery, because they believe in one study vs. the other. In this scenario, you are claiming that because they aren't the exact same treatment than each has no bearing on each other, and they are completely independent and separate etc., when in reality they're part of the same specialty, have gone through the same training, and are essentially the same 95+% of the time. But, because we can't say for certain exactly what OP's school's admissions wants, you are not necessarily wrong.

 

[TBV]

haha this f*cking guy

 

[MaxPlancker]

For this UCIrvine girl, that's great for her, but n=1. Odds are she's the exception to the exception to the rule. The only other point I'd like to make about this debate (since this thread has devolved enough) is that just because schools say they are open to LOI's doesn't mean that they want the LOI OP is sending-they may have said that to you when you interviewed implying that if you really like the school, immediately after your interview an LOI would be advantageous, as opposed to sending one out of desperation to get an admittance at the end of a cycle.
Also one thing I would also like to mention is this (in my view) the major problem with SDN-it's a forum made up, almost exclusively, of people who honestly don't know what they're talking about (including me-I think that because I got in this cycle I understand medical school admission, but the reality is closer to I still have no clue whats right/wrong), because they aren't the one's sitting in the drivers seat, they're simply commenters on other people's situations with having full knowledge of both the understanding and the process.

The UCI was simply an example; of course she is a 1 in a billion. It was an example to open the eyes of those who could not accept that the experiences and perspectives of the 5 adcoms is not the only way systems work and not necessarily the best advice for the OP. The core of the argument is extremely simple.

Adcoms say LOIs are useless.

I say that is not necessarily the case because of the information that I received from the admissions offices and interviewers.

Even if the adcoms have more experience, it does not discount what I heard directly from the schools themselves. In fact, even if the adcoms had worked at 100 schools out of the >140, if they were not part of the schools that I was referring to (the top 20) for the OP, then their experience is second to the direct evidence provided by the medical schools in discussion. This is akin to one saying because they have a PhD and 40 years experience purifying proteins, that the difference in buff of HEPES vs Tris will not be a determinant of protein aggregation without any doubts. I say this because it actually happened to me that my PI told me to shelf a project . For whatever unknown reason, it was not the salt, pH, etc but the actual HEPES that played the role. I tested it and voila project moves on. The point is you have to think critically, not just take advice because of the power/influence/experience effect. You have to learn to be critical about not only information you read but also information you put out. A degree and/or position lends credibility but that is not immune to being wrong or the absolute voice of reason.

I agree that is a major problem with SDN, but it is certainly an excellent resource if you take everything with a grain of salt and sift through carefully.

Yes, but if I want to know why the orange juice I am currently drinking tastes so good, I'm going to study other oranges, not go talk to someone else who tried orange juice. I would also explain why the bold is wrong. Lets say you need a knee replacement, and you go to an orthopedic surgeon. He recommends a specific surgery and type of recovery, but you aren't satisfied so you fly across the country to another surgeon, who recommends the same surgery and a slightly different recovery, because they believe in one study vs. the other. In this scenario, you are claiming that because they aren't the exact same treatment than each has no bearing on each other, and they are completely independent and separate etc., when in reality they're part of the same specialty, have gone through the same training, and are essentially the same 95+% of the time. But, because we can't say for certain exactly what OP's school's admissions wants, you are not necessarily wrong.

I believe you didn't comprehend my post correctly. What I am saying is that no amount of experience in the entire world is going to be better than the words of the target itself. A court will always take the eye witness account over an expert's hypothesis or model on what likely happened.

 

[Med Ed]

Scenario 3: Applicant on wait list, does nothing, gets passed over.
Scenario 4: Applicant on wait list, sends annoying LOI, gets In.

In essence, you are putting words out there because you godly adcoms cannot accept that there are possibilities outside your own experiences. Sorry but what you said above is just ridiculous lmao. Are you getting mad or something lol?

Not quite. You left out:

Scenario 5: Applicant on wait list, goes camping, gets eaten by bear.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Not quite. You left out:

Scenario 5: Applicant on wait list, goes camping, gets eaten by bear.

And Scenario 6: Applicant on wait list, gets in, rejects school.

 

[Ismet]

And Scenario 6: Applicant on wait list, gets in, rejects school.

Which is why letters of intent are typically taken with a grain of salt.

 

[EaglesontheWarpath]

The UCI was simply an example; of course she is a 1 in a billion. It was an example to open the eyes of those who could not accept that the experiences and perspectives of the 5 adcoms is not the only way systems work and not necessarily the best advice for the OP. The core of the argument is extremely simple.

Adcoms say LOIs are useless.

I say that is not necessarily the case because of the information that I received from the admissions offices and interviewers.

Even if the adcoms have more experience, it does not discount what I heard directly from the schools themselves. In fact, even if the adcoms had worked at 100 schools out of the >140, if they were not part of the schools that I was referring to (the top 20) for the OP, then their experience is second to the direct evidence provided by the medical schools in discussion. This is akin to one saying because they have a PhD and 40 years experience purifying proteins, that the difference in buff of HEPES vs Tris will not be a determinant of protein aggregation without any doubts. I say this because it actually happened to me that my PI told me to shelf a project . For whatever unknown reason, it was not the salt, pH, etc but the actual HEPES that played the role. I tested it and voila project moves on. The point is you have to think critically, not just take advice because of the power/influence/experience effect. You have to learn to be critical about not only information you read but also information you put out. A degree and/or position lends credibility but that is not immune to being wrong or the absolute voice of reason.

I agree that is a major problem with SDN, but it is certainly an excellent resource if you take everything with a grain of salt and sift through carefully.



I believe you didn't comprehend my post correctly. What I am saying is that no amount of experience in the entire world is going to be better than the words of the target itself. A court will always take the eye witness account over an expert's hypothesis or model on what likely happened.

I may be wrong here, but I didn't take it as the adcoms saying LOIs are useless-I took it as them saying to the best of their knowledge, in this specific example, an LOI is useless and might be detrimental.

I would agree that you need to think critically and a degree and/or position lends credibility but that is not immune to begin wrong or the absolute voice of reason, but in each case you have presented you keep taking these extreme examples/outliers stating "since this is possible, all the other knowledge that you have is wrong since you were wrong this one time" (I'm not a big molecular biology guy so I can't tell with your HEPES example, but it feels that way to me). Just because you have experience doesn't mean you are always correct, but if I had to bet 50/50 on the Golden State Warriors playing any other NBA team, I'd bet on them based on their experience and track record. Sure I might lose occasionally, but the majority of the time I'm going to win. Believing in your own opinion isn't wrong, but being able to take the advice of people who have more experience and have been through it all before is also extremely important.

 

[MaxPlancker]

Lol I was wondering when someone would catch what I did there 😀