Low yield question

[Nietzschelover]

Couple of questions about low yield schools.....

1) In many of the WAMC responses, applicants are advised to avoid (i.e. not waste their time/money) on certain schools like GWU and G'town (to name a couple) while other very low yield schools are recommended on virtually every list I've seen (Rosalind Franklin, Albany, NYMC, Drexel, etc). Franklin had 9779 OOS apps and only interviewed 431. Netter had 4750 and only interviewed 294. EVSM 5548 and 396. And yet one finds the latter three suggested on almost every list for applicants in the slightly above average to less than average categories. In short, why are some low yields recommended so often and others not? What am I missing?

2) How do the mid- to lower tier low yield schools decide who to interview? Stats that fit their ranges? Location of applicants and likelihood of possibly attending? Other factors beyond random throwing darts at a board?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ChrisMack390]

I think the "problem" with Tufts, BU, the Georges, etc is that they are very unpredictable. People with 31/3.2 get in and people with 37/3.8 don't even get interviews.

The highly quantitative hive mind of SDN simply cannot handle this.

I am very close with a lot of Tufts med students. It seems that at least at that school, what they are interested in above anything else is your "story" and what drove you toward medicine. Career changers, people who faced a ton of adversity, people with success in very bizarre EC, and other intangible things have an advantage.

 

[Goro]

Gtown, being a Jesuit school, likes service to others. Ditto SLU

Couple of questions about low yield schools.....

1) In many of the WAMC responses, applicants are advised to avoid (i.e. not waste their time/money) on certain schools like GWU and G'town (to name a couple) while other very low yield schools are recommended on virtually every list I've seen (Rosalind Franklin, Albany, NYMC, Drexel, etc). Franklin had 9779 OOS apps and only interviewed 431. Netter had 4750 and only interviewed 294. EVSM 5548 and 396. And yet one finds the latter three suggested on almost every list for applicants in the slightly above average to less than average categories. In short, why are some low yields recommended so often and others not? What am I missing?

2) How do the mid- to lower tier low yield schools decide who to interview? Stats that fit their ranges? Location of applicants and likelihood of possibly attending? Other factors beyond random throwing darts at a board?

 

[Nietzschelover]

I get why some low yields aren't frequently recommended, but I'm less clear about why other similarly low or even lower yield schools ARE consistently recommended.
Which also gets to what factors these schools do use in selecting who to interview. The comments on Tufts and Jesuit orientation appreciated.

 

[ieatshrimp24]

Two questions
1) I just want a clarification: low-yield schools indicates medical schools that have high applicant numbers but low interview invites?
2) I'm a California resident. I'll be applying to medical schools OOS. Should I avoid these low-yield schools, or do I have no choice but to do so?
Thanks!

 

[aalamruad]

2) I'm a California resident. I'll be applying to medical schools OOS. Should I avoid these low-yield schools, or do I have no choice but to do so?
Thanks!

Probably depends how much guap you can throw at apps

 

[ChrisMack390]

I get why some low yields aren't frequently recommended, but I'm less clear about why other similarly low or even lower yield schools ARE consistently recommended.
Which also gets to what factors these schools do use in selecting who to interview. The comments on Tufts and Jesuit orientation appreciated.

I think there are a lot of positive feedback loops of advice on this website. Not saying the advice is wrong, but there is a reason every single person recommends against GT and GW, for example.

 

[md-2020]

Two questions
1) I just want a clarification: low-yield schools indicates medical schools that have high applicant numbers but low interview invites?
2) I'm a California resident. I'll be applying to medical schools OOS. Should I avoid these low-yield schools, or do I have no choice but to do so?
Thanks!

1. Yes, b/c they literally have multiples the amount of apps that some other schools get...not enough resources/need to interview the same multiple of people
2. You have no choice

 

[DKMA]

I get why some low yields aren't frequently recommended, but I'm less clear about why other similarly low or even lower yield schools ARE consistently recommended.
Which also gets to what factors these schools do use in selecting who to interview. The comments on Tufts and Jesuit orientation appreciated.

I got into schools from both categories of low yield schools, so I can give you my ~impression~.
Schools like Rosy, Albany, and NYMC have less of a set culture. I got the impression that their choice of interviewees were based a little more on a mix of specific traits the school is looking for and just a formula on how likely that student would be to attend (like Albany interviews a lot of Californians because they know CA residents usually have less options). I think it's more of a crapshoot who they will interview, so you might as well try.

The other low yield school I got into was Tulane (they interview 500 out of over 10K applicants). That interview, I could look around and tell you why almost each one of the other interviewees was selected to interview. They have a very clear culture and mission. Many things about me and my application, down to my hobbies, gelled well with the class and New Orleans (Tulane's interview was just sitdown lunch with a student to see that your personality went well with the school and the faculty interview was like 10 minutes). And, if you include Tulane undergrad in the mix, I would say at least 60 students in the entering class comes from top 50 schools, so I think they consider that. I think Tufts, GW, and Georgetown also have a specific culture/mission they are hoping to fulfill


Edit: didnt realize how old this post was.

 

[medic86]

Gtown, being a Jesuit school, likes service to others. Ditto SLU

But not to your classmates... because **** your classmates.

 

[Goro]

Correct. But outside of state schools, all med schools are low yield. Gtown is just harder to get into than Harvard statistically because it gets more apps. Yes, I know the applicant pools are different!

1) I just want a clarification: low-yield schools indicates medical schools that have high applicant numbers but low interview invites?


Your call. How close to their medians are your numbers?

2) I'm a California resident. I'll be applying to medical schools OOS. Should I avoid these low-yield schools, or do I have no choice but to do so?

 

[GrapesofRath]

No stat or way of doing this is going to be perfect. Using % of IIs for IS vs OOS doesnt tell you about who actually goes there or amount who gets in. And % of OOS vs IS matriculants suffers from the same flaws. But if I were going to look at "lowest yield" schools, I might stick with matriculant data and while Im probably missing a school or two here here are the top 10 in worst "OOS matriculant/app ratio" amongst popularly recommended OOS schools

10) Hofstra: 4194 OOS apps 49 OOS matriculants: 86 apps/matriculant

9) Wake Forest: 7767 OOS apps 86 OOS matriculants: 90 apps/matriculant

8) Tie between
Temple 9899 OOS apps 108 OOS matriculants: 92 OOS apps/matriculant AND
GW: 15590 OOS apps 17o OOS matriculants: 92 apps/matriculant

7) Keck: 3993 OOS apps 43 OOS matriculants: 93 apps/matriculant

6) Tie between
Quinnipac: 7259 OOS apps 77 OOS matriculants: 94 apps/matriculant
NYMC: 10816 OOS apps 115 OOS matriculants: 94 apps/matriculant

5) Penn State: 8128 OOS apps 86 OOS matriculants: 95 apps/matriculant

4) Albany: 7975 OOS aps 83 OOS matriculants: 96 apps/matriculant

3) Mayo: 4233 OOS apps 42 OOS matriculants: 101 apps/matriculant

2) RFU: 9447 OOS apps 118 OOS matriculants: 79 apps/matriculant. It's alot worse though because about 1/3 of the class comes through their SMP. So really you might say 9447 OOS apps 80 OOS matriculants for 118 apps/matriculant

1) Rush: 8970 OOS apps 73 OOS matriculants: 123 apps/matriculant. Keep in mind avg matriculant here has 800 service hrs 1600 clinical so if dont at least have a good bit of both regardless of overall total it's even more low yield.

Surprisingly for G-town: 12646 OOS apps 192 OOS matriculants: 66 apps/matriculant. Not even close to the worst. Keep in mind this includes people they take from their SMP(ie 30 per year) and they are mission oriented. But if you fit the mission, this isnt a bad option really.

Edit: One I did forget was Va Tech. 2825 OOS apps 26 OOS matriculants: 106 apps/matriculant. Theyd be number 3 on this list.

 

[ieatshrimp24]

No stat or way of doing this is going to be perfect. Using % of IIs for IS vs OOS doesnt tell you about who actually goes there or amount who gets in. And % of OOS vs IS matriculants suffers from the same flaws. But if I were going to look at "lowest yield" schools, I might stick with matriculant data and while Im probably missing a school or two here here are the top 10 in worst "OOS matriculant/app ratio" amongst popularly recommended OOS schools

Then which 10 medical schools would you say are OOS friendly? I'm a California resident and looking into the numbers really in depth is so depressing/saddening/distressing LOL. I was planning on applying to many of those schools you just listed. I'll still apply to some since I don't have any other choice. Just wondering which medical schools are OOS friendly.

 

[DKMA]

Then which 10 medical schools would you say are OOS friendly? I'm a California resident and looking into the numbers really in depth is so depressing/saddening/distressing LOL. I was planning on applying to many of those schools you just listed. I'll still apply to some since I don't have any other choice. Just wondering which medical schools are OOS friendly.

I went to 12 interviews and there was not a single interview where there wasn't at least 1 CA student and where we didn't meet at least 1 current student from CA. Y'all are everywhere.

Albany said that most of it's OOS matriculants are from MA, NJ, and CA. I think it's the same at many other schools. The OOS acceptance rates are likely lower than the CA acceptance rates for all those schools. Apply where you want to apply and where you feel you would be happy

 

[ed*26]

Rush: 8970 OOS apps 73 OOS matriculants: 123 apps/matriculant. Keep in mind avg matriculant here has 800 service hrs 1600 clinical so if dont at least have a good bit of both regardless of overall total it's even more low yield.

I keep seeing this stat, but I can't find it on their website. Any idea where it comes from?

 

[Germanicus89]

I keep seeing this stat, but I can't find it on their website. Any idea where it comes from?

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/2015-2016-rush-medical-college-application-thread.1135554/

Check out post #435 in that thread as well as the ensuing conversation.

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

I keep seeing this stat, but I can't find it on their website. Any idea where it comes from?

If I recall correctly, it's something they put in their rejection email lol. I could be wrong though, not 100% sure


As for low yield, I think there's some people who need those schools and many that dont. People with good state school options or high stats + ECs don't need to be applying to low yield places. The people that need places like the DC schools, Tulane, etc are those with an app deficiency that would benefit from the "flexible" admission requirements. People with a low Stats but other redeeming qualities basically.

 

[ieatshrimp24]

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/2015-2016-rush-medical-college-application-thread.1135554/

Check out post #435 in that thread as well as the ensuing conversation.

Are there any other sneaky requirements/minimums (not related to GPA/MCAT) that other schools have but may not have published to the masses? Thanks by the way. That was really helpful to know.