- Joined
- Apr 18, 2015
- Messages
- 817
- Reaction score
- 696
If I don't hear a "Oops that's right" or "Yes" or something of that nature, then I will literally roll on the floor...
Start rolling my Harvard acceptee friend!
If I don't hear a "Oops that's right" or "Yes" or something of that nature, then I will literally roll on the floor...
A pretty absurd stance (i.e. are there any US MD schools at risk for not filling their classes?),
Sorry, you can't have this one. Schools, as some do, can very clearly state "We DO NOT accept LOIs. DO NOT send them."
I actually do agree that it probably isn't 99% although I think that number was just meant to convey a message.I navigated the medical school application some years back, so I certainly understand the feeling of powerless that comes with being a candidate. Now I have been on the other side of the process, and I have spent my share of time working the phones in order the ensure the people we want will come here. I have high-fived colleagues when we get a strong commit, and I have shared the moments of dejection when strong candidates choose to attend a school other than ours. Being able to fill a class does not mean we have 99% of the power.
If I don't hear a "Oops that's right" or "Yes" or something of that nature, then I will literally roll on the floor...
None of this would happen IF they simply acknowledged that perhaps some schools consider or want LOIs and some focus on the highest MCAT while still emphasizing their opinion/expertise that most do not.
Yes, my SDN version has been upgraded to provide several features such as: Ability to post acceptance of opposing arguments.Your SDN makes noise?
Not to reharp that thread but I dont think gyngyn denies some schools use the highest score. I think his point is things arent always as they appear. "Some schools use the highest score only wehn reporting" or "You cant unsee scores" are his big points. People I talk to I know on the other side of the process basically confirm this and everything he's said so me personally I buy it. If you dont want to buy it that's fine and I can see why you dont. But even if you dont agree to with his bottom line point there are valuable things to consider such as "no school can unsee scores" or "different evaluators on a committee view whether or not to average differently".
It reminds me of something else he said a while ago.
"Our school doesnt consider TX applicants becuase we've seen they never attend. But if someone were to call our school, I 100% expect them to tell that caller "we havent heard of such a policy. We consider all applicants"".
The power of being anonymous is you can say things that your school wouldnt want you to say as long as long as we dont know where you are talking about or who you are and I think that power is very valuable for applicants to consider. He gets nothing out of telling us these thinsg that dont sound true at first glance. The only motivation someone might have being annonymous is to perhaps trash their own school. Obviously he never does that. He literally has no motivation to lie to us on an anonymous forum. Even if you dont agree with him, it's relevant to think about why he is telling us this stuff.
We all have egos (including you and me).
You mean if they explicitly ask for one, right?
If these things have become part of some school's culture, go right ahead and do whatever they ask and you want.Unreal. So if you say nothing, or say that you do take them, why would that reduce phone calls (which was your argument).
In the name of what virtue are you defending against this to the wall, and in the face of very specific and direct evidence that at least some schools actually want them?
I think we're really stretching and distorting things if we are concluding he is telling us these thinks about MCAT retakes nobody would tell an applicant publicly because it fulfills concerns about his ego. I dont really mean disrespect but my first thought reading something like this is its someone trying to use their intellect(and you certainly have alot of it) to justify a pre-determined position not using their intellect to decide a position.
Not ignoring your post, but hesitant about exactly how I'd like to respond while also mindful that this edition of the "weekly debate" no doubt has run its course.
Perhaps 'ego' was too strong and/or the wrong wording. Perhaps I mean something more along the lines of investment in maintaining a certain online persona and/or maintaining a perception of consistency regarding stances that have been reaffirmed over and over. By and large, we know we the participants on this site are very bright and certainly very capable of following the data and arguments presented in any given thread. When I see people ignore, dismiss, or rationalize very clear data suggesting at least the partial truth of a minority view or practice I typically feel compelled to ask what that resistance (and recalcitrance) is really all about. We seem to agree that what you nicely described as a now almost weekly event (across multiple topics) must reflect or mean something. One of the elements that seems to be constitutive for these debates is resistance to very clearly presented data that goes against the grain of the majority view. Mind you, acknowledging and at least to some extent accepting that the majority view or practice (whether with regard to MCAT re-takes or LOIs or whatever) doesn't necessarily apply in all cases would by no means negative the relative "truth" of the majority view. In other words, an adcom here could reaffirm the importance and implications of the majority view while still allowing that applicants should consider that there may be cases and situations where, for example, a re-take or a LOI may in fact be appropriate and even recommended. This is also a visceral thing (more than a poor use of intellect as you conjectured above). I'm sure you have experienced this as well....when you're in the trenches in the middle of a thread, you can literally feel posters pull towards you or a view or against you or a view. When that dynamic gets played out over and over (and yes, the same question can be directed at me), it seems to natural to wonder what a particular resistance is about. Maybe it's not ego at all. Maybe it's consciously strategic....like acknowledging that the minority thing does in fact sometimes apply would be an overall negative in terms of mentoring applicants and potential future applicants. Maybe it's something else. I don't know. But I do know that it's something.
What I find annoying and in some instances disturbing is when posters deny very explicit statements from schools about their policies and practices, creating scenarios noted numerous times already in this thread alone where posters insist that the statements from schools aren't real or don't mean what they appear to mean. In these denials, logic gets strained to extremes with suggestions like saying Mayo only makes reference to accepting LOIs to cut down on phone calls (and even when posters very specifically have stated that the school's Dean has very demonstrably underscored the importance of LOIs for his/her school....do we really think these posters are lying or not smart enough to understand what they heard?). I can't help but believe that the tenacious refusal to give an inch even in the face of very clear minority data is about something.
I give you credit for not dismissing my posts out of hand. I started out on the wrong foot with you quite a while back, and that was 99% my fault. I also credit you with being willing to push adcoms to elaborate or clarify when you come across something that doesn't make sense to you. The difference between us (I think) is that you seem to accept their answers after you challenge them while stopping short of ever really disagreeing with them. I will disagree with them (while, like you, often also agreeing with them). I'm guessing that difference has to do with our different reasons for being on the site, our different ages, and different calculations about how much weight to give to the adcoms in particular. I do give them a ton of weight, but I think they also are regular human beings who are susceptible to emotions, defensiveness, strategic posting, ego, competitiveness, etc, etc. I don't think they are infallible or presume that when they speak, sometimes intentionally cryptically, that they always have corrected everyone with the last word. I don't think 5 or 6 or even 10 adcoms can speak without exception for the hundreds of adcoms across the country and across schools that may have some different dynamics in terms of how they operate than others. Again, though, my main gripe is when they fly in the face of very obvious and clear counter-data. You, to take one good example, always seem to read arguments and data very carefully, and pretty much without fail you will try to account for different data and different views. I don't always agree, but I've come to appreciate that you generally don't avoid or continually resist strong minority data. The latter is what really gets under my skin, and I find myself wondering why they don't at least sometimes respond more like you do, quite frankly, accounting for the alternative data in a way that isn't just cryptic and isn't just an almost flippant batting away of data instead of genuine and more generous consideration and accounting of that data.
Not ignoring your post, but hesitant about exactly how I'd like to respond while also mindful that this edition of the "weekly debate" no doubt has run its course.
Perhaps 'ego' was too strong and/or the wrong wording. Perhaps I mean something more along the lines of investment in maintaining a certain online persona and/or maintaining a perception of consistency regarding stances that have been reaffirmed over and over. By and large, we know we the participants on this site are very bright and certainly very capable of following the data and arguments presented in any given thread. When I see people ignore, dismiss, or rationalize very clear data suggesting at least the partial truth of a minority view or practice I typically feel compelled to ask what that resistance (and recalcitrance) is really all about. We seem to agree that what you nicely described as a now almost weekly event (across multiple topics) must reflect or mean something. One of the elements that seems to be constitutive for these debates is resistance to very clearly presented data that goes against the grain of the majority view. Mind you, acknowledging and at least to some extent accepting that the majority view or practice (whether with regard to MCAT re-takes or LOIs or whatever) doesn't necessarily apply in all cases would by no means negative the relative "truth" of the majority view. In other words, an adcom here could reaffirm the importance and implications of the majority view while still allowing that applicants should consider that there may be cases and situations where, for example, a re-take or a LOI may in fact be appropriate and even recommended. This is also a visceral thing (more than a poor use of intellect as you conjectured above). I'm sure you have experienced this as well....when you're in the trenches in the middle of a thread, you can literally feel posters pull towards you or a view or against you or a view. When that dynamic gets played out over and over (and yes, the same question can be directed at me), it seems to natural to wonder what a particular resistance is about. Maybe it's not ego at all. Maybe it's consciously strategic....like acknowledging that the minority thing does in fact sometimes apply would be an overall negative in terms of mentoring applicants and potential future applicants. Maybe it's something else. I don't know. But I do know that it's something.
What I find annoying and in some instances disturbing is when posters deny very explicit statements from schools about their policies and practices, creating scenarios noted numerous times already in this thread alone where posters insist that the statements from schools aren't real or don't mean what they appear to mean. In these denials, logic gets strained to extremes with suggestions like saying Mayo only makes reference to accepting LOIs to cut down on phone calls (and even when posters very specifically have stated that the school's Dean has very demonstrably underscored the importance of LOIs for his/her school....do we really think these posters are lying or not smart enough to understand what they heard?). I can't help but believe that the tenacious refusal to give an inch even in the face of very clear minority data is about something.
I give you credit for not dismissing my posts out of hand. I started out on the wrong foot with you quite a while back, and that was 99% my fault. I also credit you with being willing to push adcoms to elaborate or clarify when you come across something that doesn't make sense to you. The difference between us (I think) is that you seem to accept their answers after you challenge them while stopping short of ever really disagreeing with them. I will disagree with them (while, like you, often also agreeing with them). I'm guessing that difference has to do with our different reasons for being on the site, our different ages, and different calculations about how much weight to give to the adcoms in particular. I do give them a ton of weight, but I think they also are regular human beings who are susceptible to emotions, defensiveness, strategic posting, ego, competitiveness, etc, etc. I don't think they are infallible or presume that when they speak, sometimes intentionally cryptically, that they always have corrected everyone with the last word. I don't think 5 or 6 or even 10 adcoms can speak without exception for the hundreds of adcoms across the country and across schools that may have some different dynamics in terms of how they operate than others. Again, though, my main gripe is when they fly in the face of very obvious and clear counter-data. You, to take one good example, always seem to read arguments and data very carefully, and pretty much without fail you will try to account for different data and different views. I don't always agree, but I've come to appreciate that you generally don't avoid or continually resist strong minority data. The latter is what really gets under my skin, and I find myself wondering why they don't at least sometimes respond more like you do, quite frankly, accounting for the alternative data in a way that isn't just cryptic and isn't just an almost flippant batting away of data instead of genuine and more generous consideration and accounting of that data.
1) One of the elements that seems to be constitutive for these debates is resistance to very clearly presented data that goes against the grain of the majority view. In these denials, logic gets strained to extremes with suggestions like saying Mayo only makes reference to accepting LOIs to cut down on phone calls. Again, though, my main gripe is when they fly in the face of very obvious and clear counter-data. I can't help but believe that the tenacious refusal to give an inch even in the face of very clear minority data is about something.
2) The difference between us (I think) is that you seem to accept their answers after you challenge them while stopping short of ever really disagreeing with them. I will disagree with them (while, like you, often also agreeing with them). I'm guessing that difference has to do with our different reasons for being on the site, our different ages, and different calculations about how much weight to give to the adcoms in particular. I do give them a ton of weight, but I think they also are regular human beings who are susceptible to emotions, defensiveness, strategic posting, ego, competitiveness, etc, etc.
Maybe I give more weight to what I hear from ADCOMs than you do, but I think there's more to it than that.
Some folks on SDN may have to forgive me, and possibly some other adcoms, for not prefacing every response with "n=1" or "YMMV", but I hold that truth to be self-evident.
Life goal?If some day I ever become an ADCOM and create an SDN account for it, you can bet n=1 will be the three letters consisting of my signature.
My goal is to move past this.Life goal?
Hope springs eternalMy goal is to move past this.
Life goal?
1) I think one theme that comes across when seeing how differently schools can view the most basic things like LOIs or MCAT retakes is just how clear you can take nothing for granted in the admissions process. Everybody has an opinion, everybody has a different interpretation. And I think the key from my perspective is to take this one step further when looking at these "rules from schools mouths" such as what they post or what they say online about "MCAT retakes "or "LOIs". Subjectivity doesnt just go away because a school publishes something on their site, even if it might sound counter intuitive.
Here are two examples of how someone saying something with 100% confidence not being failproof
1) Your interviewer tells you "I dont think medicine is right for you" in teh interview or "I guarantee youll get in, let me know when you get in if you have questions" only for you to get in with a full ride or not get in respectively. These stories happen ALL the time. Literally ALL the time, Im not exaggerating at all. These people in the interview arent trying to tell you bad info on purpose. It just shows how subjective things are and how people can say things that maybe perhaps others dont agree with.
2) I've used this example in the past to you how I've called the same school asking about multiple MCATs and Ive gotten completely different responses both times. Both of them werent stated without any hesitation, and stated something concrete(ie no lip serivce: one said we average other said we use the highest). Nobody is intentionally trying to give bad info. It's just nothing is concrete including what a school publishes or the hearsay they give at an interview. The more I talk to ADCOMs I know personally about this, the more this idea just becomes clearer and clearer.
This is the thing about LOIs. There is so much subjectivity, we saw that in how we all differed in how we interpreted what Mayo said. The odds Mayo ADCOMs differ amongst themselves vary in how they view LOIs to some extent is high. If you want to argue schools shouldnt give information so confidently that has a chance to not be unanimous at all, that's a separate discussion. But it does happen.
Why do these discussions always seem to go in one direction? The latter is the pattern that I see running across these different topics. The verdict is never in favor of the applicants. They're told they won't get the benefit, that their judgment and/or info are poor, etc, etc. That is the attitude that I pick up consistently in a visceral way.
That certainly makes sense in the case of MCAT scoring policy. However, the best interest of a school would be to recruit the best possible students to their school. How best is defined would be up to the institution's fit and other factors. The act of sending a LOI should then be considered as neutral and the merits/downfalls of the LOI should be of value. A school could even ignore the LOI from all applicants to make a consistent and fair policy. As one or more of the adcoms mentioned above, a school should trust their judgement of an applicant over that of other schools. Thus, following that logic, the fact that an applicant holds any acceptances or lack thereof should have a minimal impact on a school's WL & beyond decision anyways. To affirm your school's acceptance of an applicant if the applicant was accepted to Harvard and to state that another applicant (who your school rejected) was terrible and somehow accepted to a very fine school is contradictory. Coming back to the LOI and the original scenario mentioned by the adcoms, I don't see how the logic behind claiming that they trust their judgement and then come across an applicant on the WL who has been favored to come off the WL, only to take that spot away from them for sending a letter or for the applicant not holding any acceptances when the committee (that school's own judgement) has determined that student is worthy.The direction of this debate always goes one way because it's about what's in the best interest of the school.
Why would a school mislead about averaging when they really take the highest? If you really want to come up with something perhaps to scare applicants into taking it once. Sounds like we're really reaching though and I doubt anybody has ever heard of such a thing happening. Now why would they mislead about saying they take the highest when alot average? Simple: they dont want to discourage applications. We had this discussion a few weeks ago but now that the new MSAR has come out and just highlights this following point so perfectly. Take this example: the median MCAT of an applicant to WashU is 508(30 on the old scale). The tenth percentile MCAT at WashU is a 34. Tenth percentile. This new MSAR data just gives you an idea of how much schools make off people who have absolutely no business applying. We all knew tons of applicants were clueless but to this extent is revealing. Only 5-10 percent of apps at WashU are coming in with 37+ MCATs. Even if WashU published "We have a cut off of 28 for applicants" theyd lose tons of applications. Now just imagine if a school publishes something less obvious like talking about MCAT retakes and how that might discourage apps?
You can use the same logic for LOIs. The reasons a school has for saying "we dont want LOIs" when they do are pretty much non-existent. For the latter, I can see some. Alot of this discussion just comes down to what's in the best interest of the school and that shapes the direction of the debate.
As for "these things never favoring applicants" plenty of things involve giving applicants the benefit of the doubt. It's again hard to comment on them because if you dont work for the school you dont really know. There are schools that specifically weigh your last 2 years of college heavier for example. People have gotten into med schools in the past despite some fairly checkered records(including things even like DUIs): that involves a benefit of the doubt that favors applicants.
That would be a relevant update not a letter of intent, even if you added the latter as part of the update. That would be the best thing to do. Unfortunately, most people probably don't have useful and relevant updates.Edit: Also, imagine that you have an applicant who had a serious family problem etc come up post-interview, pre-decision and he decides to let the school know. If that applicant were one of the best a school had, flagging that applicant as being "desperate" and rejecting them would not be in the best interest of a school.
I see, but most applicants are (perhaps wrongly) informed that updates are accomplishments, not personal issues. That's why a lot of people use the LOI, to explain circumstances such as that.That would be an relevant update not a letter of intent, even if you said added the latter as part of the update. That would be the best thing to do. Unfortunately, most people probably don't have useful and relevant updates.
--
Il Destriero
Doubt they would care as they are unrelated. PhD admissions is also much less competitive in general.If someone got waitlisted for medical school but got an acceptance for a PhD program? Should that person inform the school? Would they take that into consideration or is it apples and oranges?
Doubt they would care as they are unrelated. PhD admissions is also much less competitive in general.
TruuuuuReally depends on the school. Some of the top 10 PhD programs in the biomedical sciences are just as selective as top med schools
If someone got waitlisted for medical school but got an acceptance for a PhD program? Should that person inform the school? Would they take that into consideration or is it apples and oranges?
Lol dood you are gonna have one helluva bad time doing a PhD if you don't want to be doing it. Why "grind" through it if medicine is what you really want to do? You can reinvent yourself over time and get back at it, it's not a sprint.This is a reapplication. I do want to become a physician. The PhD program is a plan B for this year. The PhD program is with the PI that I did my Masters in. Since I have a good relation with the people there, I felt like I can could grind through the program.
It is not like I hate doing it. I enjoyed doing research but I prefer choosing medicine if given the choice.Lol dood you are gonna have one helluva bad time doing a PhD if you don't want to be doing it. Why "grind" through it if medicine is what you really want to do? You can reinvent yourself over time and get back at it, it's not a sprint.
This is a reapplication. I do want to become a physician. The PhD program is a plan B for this year. The PhD program is with the PI that I did my Masters in. Since I have a good relation with the people there, I felt like I can could grind through the program.
That is what i am pondering right now. If this cycle doesn't work out, I plan to get my PhD. Is the passion is going to be there 4+ years later, I don't know. I know someone who is getting her PhD and plans to apply for medical school afterwards. I'm keeping an eye on her progress.Would you be doing the PhD with the intention of applying to medical school again in the future?
That is what i am pondering right now. If this cycle doesn't work out, I plan to get my PhD. Is the passion is going to be there 4+ years later, I don't know. I know someone who is getting her PhD and plans to apply for medical school afterwards. I'm keeping an eye on her progress.
I do know what the cause is my MCAT scores. I know that it would take a miracle to bring it up to levels that are acceptable for most schools, which is why I've applied to the PhD program. I believe that most likely this cycle would not work out. I also understand that getting a PhD doesn't act like a band-aid for things like substandard standardized test performance.It sounds like you could have two unsuccessful cycles. What are the reasons?
Going down the PhD route should not be taken likely, you are effectively committing 6+ years toward an entirely different career path. If that's what you want, then fine, but in no way is it an appropriate way to fix or enhance a medical school application.