My idea for med school admissions - critique me

[TheDeadrok]

I've been thinking about how each school has a different approach for med school admissions and I couldn't fall asleep last night so I jotted down some ideas for how I would do it if I was running things:

- Each applicant receives a secondary if they fulfilled all the basic requirements and submitted a primary.
- The primary and secondary apps are graded by two independent graders. The grades for the application are determined by a bucket approach with each category of the application having a set weight (i.e. research graded on a scale from 1-10, makes up 15% of total app grade, etc.) The graders also have the power to add up to ten points to an application score for any exceptional activities, this can account for x factors. MCAT and GPA most significant buckets, making up total of 40% of application weight. This will pump out a score similar to an admit or WARS score (maximum score out of 100).
- The average of the two independent grades is taken.
- Interview invites are sent to the top 10% of application scores each week, this incentivizes applying early as you will be considered in every single week of top scores, so even if you are not a top 10% scorer in the first week this may change in future weeks. Interview Invites are sent out until they are sent to 7x the class size applicants.
- Two independent interviewers (open file) who also grade the applicant solely on their interview experience. These grades are also averaged to give an Interview grade for each applicant (out of 100).
- After the interview, the scores are combined to generate a total applicant score (Application score x .67 + Interview score x .33) that is out of 100.
- Top 15 scorers are sent acceptances every week until 1.5x class size has received initial acceptances. The next 100 scorers at the last admissions date are offered waitlist spots.
- Ties in score are decided by interview score.
- Any interview score <25 is issued a rejection
- bottom 20% of scores are sent rejections each admissions date
- Submitting updates can directly improve your chances of getting off waitlist by changing your application score (i.e. new pub will lead to research category being re-graded to a higher score)

I know there are holes and other things I haven't thought of, but what do you all think? I also recognize this is a very cut and dry, mechanical way of going about admissions but I feel like it would be effective???

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Goro]

You have too much weight given to the app. The interview is what should determine whether the interviewee matriculates or not.

 

[AJS59]

For what purpose would this matter? Personally I think it is good for each school to do things a little bit different, that way they're recruiting the right type of students for their school. I'd say it's impossible to assign scores in such a mechanical fashion

 

[TheDeadrok]

You have too much weight given to the app. The interview is what should determine whether the interviewee matriculates or not.

So would you suggest an opposite approach with a 67% interview to 33% app score? I was just trying to take the LizzyM staircase into effect! Thanks for the info

 

[TheDeadrok]

For what purpose would this matter? Personally I think it is good for each school to do things a little bit different, that way they're recruiting the right type of students for their school. I'd say it's impossible to assign scores in such a mechanical fashion

No purpose at all really, just decided to jot down some thoughts! I know I have 0 experience with med school admissions so I’m not claiming any of this makes sense or would be effective 🙂.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

You should read

From Waitlist to Offer: Inside an Admissions Committee - SDN

The Student Doctor Network provides free tools, resources, and advising services to help students become health professionals.

www.studentdoctor.net

and

The End of Average — Todd Rose

www.toddrose.com

Not spilling any secrets online, and I've left enough breadcrumbs. So I'll share a different and more transparent scoring scheme. I like it because it acknowledges management of conflicts of interest and statistical adjustments (and why).

Cleveland International Piano Competition

View the complete set of rules and regulations governing the Cleveland International Piano Competition. Click here to read the full bulleted list.

www.pianocleveland.org

Here are some rubrics to use to score candidates:

How to Assess Your Academic Competencies - SDN

The Student Doctor Network provides free tools, resources, and advising services to help students become health professionals.

www.studentdoctor.net

How to Assess Your Pre-Professional Competencies - SDN

The Student Doctor Network provides free tools, resources, and advising services to help students become health professionals.

www.studentdoctor.net

Contingencies to cover:
* Process for scorers to confer. Some of my committees don't let the screeners confer and let the "executive committee" be the final arbiter, especially if the screening scores are vastly different. Some allow the scorers to justify in a small meeting.
* Process to resolve wide disparities in scoring, especially with interviews. How do you handle high-ball and low-ball evaluators?
* Adjustments for "preferred factors". Read

Finding Your Greatest Common Factors with Successful Students - SDN

The Student Doctor Network provides free tools, resources, and advising services to help students become health professionals.

www.studentdoctor.net

* Define holistic review and weigh mission alignment beyond "performance scores." What is said is important as how it is delivered and demonstrated.
* How do you adjust for bias? What information should be blinded? By doing so, are you disadvantaging people with unconventional journeys, or are you giving non-traditional applicants too much credit?

Most importantly, how are you going to manage the composition of the class? Maybe your school is one where we want everyone to go into primary care, but it's a bit more interesting if you want a balanced class that can get into all specialties.

Admissions is an art, not a science, though it does demand evidence and data. That's what will impress me for a process.

This week we are highlighting Carle Illinois' program, and I find they have a good explanation of their process.

Q&A with Carle Illinois College of Medicine: Developing Innovation and Entrepreneurship as Health Professionals - SDN

The Student Doctor Network provides free tools, resources, and advising services to help students become health professionals.

www.studentdoctor.net

 

[porpoise]

I'm all for creative suggestions but I'm not sure which of the many problems with the admissions process your idea is trying to fix.
Under the current system, early applicants benefit and so do high stat applicants, with both groups receiving earlier interview invites and acceptances.

 

[Nontrad_FL_LGBT]

It seems kind of pointless to fantasize about your ideal med school admissions system unless you're up for a Dean of Admissions job. Don't you have a hobby or something you could do instead of you have that much free time?

 

[eigen]

really? I thought LM said interview mostly just shifts position on staircase

And position on the staircase determines who gets in and who doesn't.

I know there are holes and other things I haven't thought of, but what do you all think? I also recognize this is a very cut and dry, mechanical way of going about admissions but I feel like it would be effective???

This seems to be pretty much the opposite of holistic review. Can you explain why you think a cut and dry, mechanical process will lead to better physicians in the long run?

 

[LizzyM]

You can be great on paper and be shifted to the bottom of the staircase after an interview. I think that's what @Goro is talking about when he says that the interview should have more weight. You can really flunk an interview and have no prayer of getting admitted. It is rare but it has happened.

 

[LunaOri]

This is sort of how we screen applications, but don’t forget that when we interview an applicant, and during committee review, we assign a lot of value to characteristics like communication skills, empathy, service orientation, teamwork, etc. GPA and MCAT don’t carry as much weight once an applicant has passed the screening threshold.

 

[TheDeadrok]

You can be great on paper and be shifted to the bottom of the staircase after an interview. I think that's what @Goro is talking about when he says that the interview should have more weight. You can really flunk an interview and have no prayer of getting admitted. It is rare but it has happened.

That was my thought with the 25> interview score being an automatic screen out but I guess that could be too broad! Thanks for your insights

 

[TheDeadrok]

And position on the staircase determines who gets in and who doesn't.



This seems to be pretty much the opposite of holistic review. Can you explain why you think a cut and dry, mechanical process will lead to better physicians in the long run?

I don't feel like it's the opposite of a holistic review, seeing as every single part of the application will be scored and factor into consideration as well as every part of the interview. What elements of a holistic review are missing? I guess I kinda thought this was just a way to assign objective values to subjective impressions and feelings but I hear you

 

[TheDeadrok]

It seems kind of pointless to fantasize about your ideal med school admissions system unless you're up for a Dean of Admissions job. Don't you have a hobby or something you could do instead of you have that much free time?

This comment seems kind of pointless. As mentioned in the post, I took 10 mins to jot this down before bed, but I appreciate your concern!

 

[TheDeadrok]

I'm all for creative suggestions but I'm not sure which of the many problems with the admissions process your idea is trying to fix.
Under the current system, early applicants benefit and so do high stat applicants, with both groups receiving earlier interview invites and acceptances.

That makes sense! I guess the one thing I thought this might address would be the opacity of the current admissions process by making it a lot more clear what steps are taken, but I also wanna reemphasize that this was not an effort by me to overhaul a system I know little to nothing about, just a fun 10 minute thought

 

[eigen]

I don't feel like it's the opposite of a holistic review, seeing as every single part of the application will be scored and factor into consideration as well as every part of the interview. What elements of a holistic review are missing? I guess I kinda thought this was just a way to assign objective values to subjective impressions and feelings but I hear you

Not really. Holistic admissions is supposed to take into account uniqueness in each applicant and look at the whole rather than breaking it up and scoring it. See, for example, this overview from AAMC (Holistic Review), especially this point:

Programs consider the context of each applicant to understand how their unique educational opportunities, financial resources, communities, and lived experiences may contribute to the program and the practice of medicine.

You might be able to do it with a process like you describe, but I think you'd lose some things as well if the goal is "mechanical and objective".

 

[Mr.Smile12]

I don't feel like it's the opposite of a holistic review, seeing as every single part of the application will be scored and factor into consideration as well as every part of the interview. What elements of a holistic review are missing? I guess I kinda thought this was just a way to assign objective values to subjective impressions and feelings but I hear you

I'm following your thought experiment (since I've spent a lot more than 10 minutes 🙂 ), but seriously there are things that are subjective and would introduce some bias if one assigns a value to an attribute or an experience. You can't assign points to life events without some judgment or bias. Go through some of the non-trad WAMC's and profiles as a start, especially the re-inventors.

 

[Hollow Knight]

I much more prefer the vibes system, even though it is much more prone to racism/sexism/classism unfortunately.

When I read an app, I basically ask myself "Can they?" (smart enough), "Should they?" (are they honest with a servant's heart), and "Will they?" (Do they actually know what they're getting into and will they stick it out through the years of dedication to become an attending).

I also try to contextualize peoples' experiences. I give more credit to the kid with a 512 who grew up on welfare than the doctor's kid who went to an Ivy on daddy's money who got a 516. If that makes sense.

But I don't know how to really come up with numbers for this stuff. My institution came up with numbers, but I don't know where they did it. I just follow the instructions.........