My BEST interview became my first rejection

[cooliodoctor]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Many interviews so far. What I thought was so-so, I got accepted. What I thought was EXCELLENT became a rejection. You dumba** DREXEL! Damn it!

 

[da me ka don]

Many interviews so far. What I thought was so-so, I got accepted. What I thought was EXCELLENT became a rejection. You dumba** DREXEL! Damn it!

When did you become complete at Drexel and when did you get the interview and ...sadly rejection (uh I shoulda said final decision made)?

 

[LikeClockWork]

Many interviews so far. What I thought was so-so, I got accepted. What I thought was EXCELLENT became a rejection. You dumba** DREXEL! Damn it!

This just further shows the subjective nature of both interviews themselves and the interviewees opinion of interviews.

 

[Booyah85]

Same kind of thing happened to me. I interviewed at Case and the interviewer seemed like me a lot, we even ended up spending two and a half hours together when the interview was only scheduled for 30 minutes! Three weeks later I was waitlisted. 😕

 

[slipstream99]

This just further shows the subjective nature of both interviews themselves and the interviewees opinion of interviews.

Couldn't it also show that not everyone in the interview seat is equal? As in, even after you get an interview they're still taking into account other aspects of your application so that a superb interview doesn't necessarily equate to an acceptance.

To the OP: Best of luck with future decisions!

 

[hawk126]

Same kind of thing happened to me. I interviewed at Case and the interviewer seemed like me a lot, we even ended up spending two and a half hours together when the interview was only scheduled for 30 minutes! Three weeks later I was waitlisted. 😕

maybe you would have been rejected were are it not for the great interview?

 

[Creightonite]

Interviews do not matter much. They can break your app, but they cant make it.

 

[Hell and Back]

maybe you would have been rejected were are it not for the great interview?

Agreed. I know some folks who have no interviews and no acceptances, and they'd kill to even be on the WL right now. 😀


Regards,
HAB

 

[etf]

Interviews do not matter much. They can break your app, but they cant make it.

yup.

 

[nabeel76]

Could it also be partly attributed to the op 1) either misinterpreting how well the interview went or 2) other applicants also had interviews that went just as well if not better than the OP's?

 

[MassTransport]

I'm sure most of the explanations all partially contribute.

 

[Phoenix.]

Interviews do not matter much. They can break your app, but they cant make it.

You may be right, but I believe that they can at least give you some impression of your chances (although this may depend on how good a judge you are of your interview performance/rapport). I walked out of my first five interviews feeling like I had a great shot at an acceptance based on those interviews, the questions asked and the general tone of the interview. My last inteview, at UVM, I'm a little more hesitant about, primarily given some of the questions that really put me on defense regarding my MCAT score. Ditto on the emphasis they put in person on how they view OOS applicants and the higher odds that we'd be waitlisted rather than accepted. I won't hear back from UVM for a few more weeks, but based on my interview and what they said (regardless of statistics, which were equally unlikely at some of the other OOS schools I interviewed at) I'd be much more inclined to think it'll be a waitlist.

I think for applicants with stellar stats, at certain schools, you're right about the lessened impact of an interview. But at schools that value fit, or for average applicants, I think that a stellar interview just might "make" your app. But that's just my perspective, and I'm sure it varies by the school.

 

[hp540]

Interviews do not matter much. They can break your app, but they cant make it.

I don't believe that for a second.

Interviews can MAKE or BREAK your application. Medical schools don't put on a big show and waste their faculty time if it was just a big charade.

 

[TheRealMD]

I don't believe that for a second.

Interviews can MAKE or BREAK your application. Medical schools don't put on a big show and waste their faculty time if it was just a big charade.

Because of the massive volume of people that will be interviewed at any one school and the fact that you should not trust how you feel about an interview, I'd say it's easier to break an app by far than make it, especially if your interviewer is skilled in not causing butterflies in your stomach!

Regardless, my suggestion to everyone after an interview is to totally forget about it. Worrying yourself sick does you no good!

 

[theNEWgirl]

I'm beginning to think that the more those interviewers seem to like you, the more likely you'll get rejected. It's like they're thinking, "The poor kid, I'm gonna feel bad about rejecting him, so let's try to be nice to him"

 

[Ian1223]

I have a Drexel interview 11/12

Hope I do OK, but guess it doesnt really matter...

 

[Law2Doc]

Interviews do not matter much. They can break your app, but they cant make it.

Most adcoms will tell you the exact opposite. But you can believe what you will.

 

[Law2Doc]

Couldn't it also show that not everyone in the interview seat is equal? As in, even after you get an interview they're still taking into account other aspects of your application so that a superb interview doesn't necessarily equate to an acceptance.

This assumes that the OP is a good judge of how well he is interviewing. Many people aren't. Given that he is getting in at his so so interviews and nixed at what he perceives as his good ones, he may simply be out of step with how he is coming across. There are definitely schools where the interview is the single most important component of the application if you make it to that stage. But your best interview still has to beat out the best interviews of a lot of others who your interviewer sees. Could thus also be that OP came up against better interviewers with his best and weaker interviewers during his so so day. At any rate you cannot conclude what you are saying above from the OP's post.

 

[Auron]

Most adcoms will tell you the exact opposite. But you can believe what you will.

Even if the interview went great and you got the impression that the interviewer liked you...its still up to the whole adcom to give an acceptance. So just because the interviewer liked you, doesn't necessarily mean the rest of the adcom will view you the same way.

Do most adcoms do a majority vote for giving acceptances?

 

[JayCRivera]

What is up with Drexel? LAst week, there was two others that got nixed from Drexel? One actually thought her interview went really well too? Can anyone explain?

 

[prettymonkey]

unfortunately it is basically impossible to know how your interviewer felt about you after your interview. even if you are sure how they felt, they may not be able to convey how fabulous they think you are to the entire committee. whenever anyone asks me how an interview went i am very neutral. my response is usually "eh. who knows?" i think that summarizes the experience pretty well.

 

[Bartelby]

whenever anyone asks me how an interview went i am very neutral. my response is usually "eh. who knows?" i think that summarizes the experience pretty well.

Same here. I think it is hard to draw any real conclusions from your interviews, and they can definitely be misleading.

I think, though, that interviews are not something that can only break but not make your application. If that were the case, why would they invite out applicants who have no shot (the people who thought they nailed their interview but got rejected)? I think they may grant borderline applicants interviews, and for these applicants it is probably especially important. It is probably reasonably important for everyone, though.

 

[cooliodoctor]

What is up with Drexel? LAst week, there was two others that got nixed from Drexel? One actually thought her interview went really well too? Can anyone explain?

Drexel is harsh this year!

 

[dogsnme2]

Hi,

I'm a first-year student at DUCOM. I love the school, otherwise I would not have chosen it over one of my state schools. Case in point, the tuition at Drexel is 2x as much as my NY state school. I love Drexel, and it was my first choice, after interviewing. Faculty are awesome, students are friendly, and Philly is great.

Re: DUCOM's tougher stance this year, if you recall on the forums from last year, zero people got in from the waitlist, and the class was still over-enrolled. This will not happen again. Additionally, according to stats presented during orientation, apps to DUCOM went up 20%, interview offers went down, and so did the number of acceptances.

So, if you want to go to med school, DUCOM is hardly a place of last resort. I love it here, and many of the other students will attest to that.

You should consider yourself lucky if you get into DUCOM. In fact, you'd be just as lucky to get into DUCOM as you would be to get into any American medical school. Don't knock it.

 

[MDRus]

Even if the interview went great and you got the impression that the interviewer liked you...its still up to the whole adcom to give an acceptance. So just because the interviewer liked you, doesn't necessarily mean the rest of the adcom will view you the same way.

Do most adcoms do a majority vote for giving acceptances?

i doubt if it is majority rule. for example, to be admitted to Yale undergrad, 13 people look at your application and all 13 have to say "yes."

and med school is harder to get into than an ivy undergrad.

 

[Yourmother]

This just further shows the subjective nature of both interviews themselves and the interviewees opinion of interviews.

so profound, yet so obvious.

 

[PatriotsForever]

Interviews do not matter much. They can break your app, but they cant make it.

If you get the interview, you are good enough to make in med school by the stats... the interview is everything at most schools. I have seen people with 37 MCATs rejected a week after the interview and people with 27-28's getting accepted. The interview is key in most cases! My humble opinion!

 

[Gospe1]

Pretty sure interviews can make your application. I know people who have 5 interviews 0 acceptances and 4 interviews and 4 acceptances.

 

[majik1213]

Re: DUCOM's tougher stance this year, if you recall on the forums from last year, zero people got in from the waitlist, and the class was still over-enrolled. This will not happen again. Additionally, according to stats presented during orientation, apps to DUCOM went up 20%, interview offers went down, and so did the number of acceptances.

****

 

[TIGIBedHead]

maybe you would have been rejected were are it not for the great interview?

Same kind of thing happened to me. I interviewed at Case and the interviewer seemed like me a lot, we even ended up spending two and a half hours together when the interview was only scheduled for 30 minutes! Three weeks later I was waitlisted. 😕

This happened to me last year as well. I had a two hour interview that was scheduled for only 30 mins. The interviewer gave me lots of insider info on the school, I felt like we clicked. I was then waitlisted. It's possible that they ran out of spots, as the interview was in March. As for hawk's interpretation, I got into a better school where I had one great interview and one so-so interview, so I don't think that the strength of my interview at the above-mentioned school raised me from potential rejection to waitlist.

 

[honker]

Interviews should be taken in context. As a general rule, those who are early invites tend to be more competitive applicants, and their overall applications are strong. The interview tends to be less of an issue for admittance. If you are an early interview invitee and end up rejected, the interview probably didn't go well.
If you have a few weaknesses in your application, then the interview assumes greater importance, and how you do can definitely help your cause. You will need to make your case for why you should be accepted in preference to other candidates who are more evenly matched with you in terms of competitiveness.
Late interviewees are climbing a higher mountain in terms of gaining acceptance. You are probably among the weaker candidates on paper in terms of competitiveness, and the interview will truly make you or break you in terms of acceptance.

 

[TGUKids]

honker, wells said👍

 

[blargh]

This assumes that the OP is a good judge of how well he is interviewing. Many people aren't. Given that he is getting in at his so so interviews and nixed at what he perceives as his good ones, he may simply be out of step with how he is coming across. There are definitely schools where the interview is the single most important component of the application if you make it to that stage. But your best interview still has to beat out the best interviews of a lot of others who your interviewer sees. Could thus also be that OP came up against better interviewers with his best and weaker interviewers during his so so day. At any rate you cannot conclude what you are saying above from the OP's post.

AGREED. a lot of people think their interviews are stellar and are shocked when the rejection comes in the mail. sometimes this is because interviews don't hold a lot of weight, but i think very often it is because they can't gauge how well the interview actually went.

 

[shiftingmirage]

I believe they just draw your name out of a hat. Very scientific.

 

[PatriotsForever]

I don't believe that for a second.

Interviews can MAKE or BREAK your application. Medical schools don't put on a big show and waste their faculty time if it was just a big charade.

Exactly! I'm not sure the person who said interviews don't matter is going through the same process I am. What I have seen is that interviews matter in a big way and they do make or break or application. First, schools certainly would not interview someone they are not considering while for others with borderline stats can be pushed into an acceptance after a stellar interview while those with great stats may be rejected after the interview. Numbers are great and all but being a good physician is not made by them and the interview is the way of determining what qualities you possess in becoming a great physician.

 

[seraph524]

The medical school application process is the most political, dirty thing I have ever seen.

 

[mvenus929]

If you get the interview, you are good enough to make in med school by the stats... the interview is everything at most schools. I have seen people with 37 MCATs rejected a week after the interview and people with 27-28's getting accepted. The interview is key in most cases! My humble opinion!

I wouldn't go that far. I mean, at Colorado, they give you scores based on SOOO many things. Your interviewer gives you a score before they see your entire application, and then after they see your entire application. You get a score based on just your primary. You get a score based on just your LORs. All those scores factor in to where you get put on the waitlist, and where you get put on the waitlist makes all the difference of whether you get in or not. So the interview is not everything, though it is a heavy factor.

 

[njbmd]

Many interviews so far. What I thought was so-so, I got accepted. What I thought was EXCELLENT became a rejection.

This just further shows the subjective nature of both interviews themselves and the interviewees opinion of interviews.

You are in no position to be "objective" about any medical school interview. You don't know the criteria by which you are being judged and you are far too involved in the process to look at yourself and compare yourself to others who have been there before or after you. Your competition is yourself (you have to do your best) and the pool of applicants to that school. You may know yourself but you don't know the rest of the applicant pool.

Most applicant come out of an interview and try to replay the interview over and over. I would caution against this because your brain is pretty selective in terms of what you remember. You are nervous and that takes a toll on your subjectiveness. If you have been given a videotape of your interview session then you have the objective eye of the camera but it is unlikely that you get a video tape so you have to rely on your memory which is faulty at best.

Do your best and when it's over, it's over. The interview is what it is and you have no control over how the process will play out from there. What you thought was "best" likely was not especially in the minds of the interviewer. It's just the nature of the process. Finish the interview, go change into some comfortable clothes and find a good "establishment" that serves "spirited beverages and good entertainment" where you can unwind and relax. Celebrate that "it's in the can" and that's all you can do.

 

[tf2medic]

Interviews do not matter much. They can break your app, but they cant make it.

dude, what are you smoking!? interviews are HUGE for ppl who are just average fits for the school. they probably only do not matter too much for way over qualified applicants to a particular school. in fact, my friend from KS was waitlisted and then rejected twice by KU when he had a 31 and 3.8 while KU's averages are 28 and 3.67. he got interviews both times, was wailisted and then never made the cut. the second time he applied to more schools so he settled with another school. for him i have no doubt the interviews killed him and he had stats above the school's averages. i can see the interviews being a problem for him too because he isn't the most talkative person. so in that case they had above the average stats and interviews were still very significant.

 

[seeker073180]

i'd have to agree - interviews are just as important. numbers are important too, but ultimately you have to be able to communicate to your patients. That's why they have interviews.

OP probably a) had some institutional action that was unacceptable b) had some strange stuff in his personal statement, or most likely c) pissed off the student interviewer somehow....i heard some schools take them just as seriously as faculty interviews - sometimes moreso. i wish i could be a fly on the wall at adcom meetings. 😛

 

[Cegar]

Nevermind.

 

[seraph524]

My worst interview (WashU) became one of my best acceptances...everything is so random.

 

[bubbylover]

this is making me depressed. had a wonderful interview at drexel and loved the school. i guess i will expect the worst!

 

[MossPoh]

I don't believe that for a second.

Interviews can MAKE or BREAK your application. Medical schools don't put on a big show and waste their faculty time if it was just a big charade.

Actually they would waste their faculty time. There was a research article a number of years back that essentially showed that interviews are worthless and one doesn't get any true indicator of the person or how they will perform with the interviews.

 

[seraph524]

Actually they would waste their faculty time. There was a research article a number of years back that essentially showed that interviews are worthless and one doesn't get any true indicator of the person or how they will perform with the interviews.

I agree.

 

[hp540]

Actually they would waste their faculty time. There was a research article a number of years back that essentially showed that interviews are worthless and one doesn't get any true indicator of the person or how they will perform with the interviews.

good job 🙄 The efficacy of 1on1 interviews is irrelevant to my point. Whether it's 1on1, panel, or the multiple-mini-interview format, schools will not invite students for an interview unless they are considering them.

 

[Bananas Foster]

I don't believe that for a second.

Interviews can MAKE or BREAK your application. Medical schools don't put on a big show and waste their faculty time if it was just a big charade.

i owned a hp540

i hated that piece.

 

[bcat85]

This would be a GREAT post for someone with a good understanding of this process.. Cough.LizzyM.Cough to ring in on.

 

[dogsnme2]

This would be a GREAT post for someone with a good understanding of this process.. Cough.LizzyM.Cough to ring in on.

Hi,

The weight of the interview varies tremendously at every medical school, so there is no one blanket statement that can really describe how much weight is given to them. One thing you can say is that they are considered in your application. Some schools screen applicants by GPA and MCATs, etc, and then invite all the people who meet those criteria. In those cases, the interview will carry more weight, because they will show how you stand out. In other words, for some schools, making it to the interview round means you have a 50-50 shot of getting in, while at other schools, it means you have a 10% chance of getting in.

So, as confusing as my post is, just remember this---the interview counts, so don't blow it off.

Best of luck.

 

[LizzyM]

Interviews should be taken in context. As a general rule, those who are early invites tend to be more competitive applicants, and their overall applications are strong. The interview tends to be less of an issue for admittance. If you are an early interview invitee and end up rejected, the interview probably didn't go well.
If you have a few weaknesses in your application, then the interview assumes greater importance, and how you do can definitely help your cause. You will need to make your case for why you should be accepted in preference to other candidates who are more evenly matched with you in terms of competitiveness.
Late interviewees are climbing a higher mountain in terms of gaining acceptance. You are probably among the weaker candidates on paper in terms of competitiveness, and the interview will truly make you or break you in terms of acceptance.

Honker has it right, for the most part. The interview is less on an issue for admission early in the season if it is at least OK but if it is horrible, no amount of 4.0/40/research/volunteerism/leadership/walks-on-water is going to help. What often kills the chances of these "superstars" is ego and arrogance and a sense of being entitled to admission for being above average for that school.

There are some instances where strings are pulled to get someone an interview that would not have otherwise happened. These applicants might squeek through with a stellar interview but some can not make up for an application that is so subpar that it is worrisome. You'd know (I think) if you are in that group.

Like letters of recommendation, most interviews are expected to be pretty good, some are excellent and make a very favorable impression on the adcom, and some are shockingly bad. (Fortunately, the shockingly bad are very rare.) Finding the shockingly bad is, I think, one of the real reasons for doing interviews.