. I happen to be a first year medical student in a CA school, and many of my classmates should NOT be doctors, yet are still in my class. This goes to show that the admissions process is far from perfect and the unfortunate reality is that deserving candidates are rejected, while far from deserving ones end up matriculating.quote]
What are your reasons for judging that MANY of your classmates SHOULD NOT be medical studednts?...I think that is pretty presumptious and arrogant to say!👎
An apology for the vagueness of my comment above, which is stimulating much questioning from other posters. I'm not much of a responder to posts, but to address the antagonistic accuation that I'm "arrogant" and "presumptious," I'd like to make the following points:
I believe that we all have judgements and make judgements, and to pretend this doesn't exist in the world is simply impractical. Thus, to say that many of my classmates don't "deserve" to enter medical school is still, nonetheless a judgement on my part. While it may seem extremely unjust, there are practical reasons (through first hand interactions with my peers) that warrent me stating this.
If you believe that the definition of "deserving" entails high GPA and MCAT scores, then yes, many (if not all) of my peers do deserve to enter medical school. However, I believe that "deserving" implies so much more than these factors; to me, a deserving individual is kind, culturally competent, tolerant...one who exerts little judgement upon peers, professors, staff, and most importantly the patients he or she is entrusted care over. There have been many regretable instances where I have interacted with classmates who scorn their patients' (and their classmates') socio-economic status, sexuality, sexual orientation, diet, lifestyle habits, "ignorance," etc. I have classmates who essentially believe that medicine is a venue to exert power and knowledge upon individuals (aka patients) who intrinsically are "stupider" and "less educated." Rather than seeking to educate patients on how to acheive the best possible state of health, I have witnessed many of my classmates publically ridicule patients (for example, by using inappropriate racial terms).
Though these attributes are definitely not the norm, I think that as medical school applicants / re-applicants, you absolutely cannot say that everyone who gets into medical school will be at least an "ok" doctor. While that may
not be your criteria in defining the word "deserve," I feel that entering medical school means that you respect your peers and patient first; you're an advocate for your patient (and for your colleges, too). If a person can't handle that responsibility (and believe me, many can go through a primary, secondary, and interview masking these negative attributes), then that person doesn't deserve to be in medical school, no matter how amazing the resume is.
I believe that essentially, the overall determinant of being "deserving" is one's commitment towards care and humanism. Tying this back into the OP, I feel that its a bit presumptuous to think that he or she needs to "improve," because sometimes the process is so random / flawed such that good people get excluded and poor candidates make it through. Since I have seen that latter already occur (please see above for the abbreviated examples), I believe that the former can occur as well.
To the OP: I think that yes, you should go back and re-evaluate your resume and application and think things through practically. However, if you feel strongly about one particular school (and that your resume is viable there), then by all means I'd write that letter. It seems that you've been getting interviews at other places, so that means you're doing something right!
