Nontraditional/older student-friendly schools

[Trader56]

Hi,

Surely this has been asked before, and I DID do a search, but it didn't come up with much. So...

Can anyone provide a list of loder student-friendly M.D. programs in the U.S.?
Are there any that actively encourage older students to apply?

I'm thinking non-ivy, private schools, with state schools probably a distant second as they favor state residents.

Thanks for any help!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[humuhumu]

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=219513

 

[Scottish Chap]

Hi,

Surely this has been asked before, and I DID do a search, but it didn't come up with much. So...

Can anyone provide a list of loder student-friendly M.D. programs in the U.S.?
Are there any that actively encourage older students to apply?

I'm thinking non-ivy, private schools, with state schools probably a distant second as they favor state residents.

Thanks for any help!

George Washington in DC and the University of Rochester in NY are two I know of.

 

[Trader56]

Thank you both for the replies and info!

Can anyone else add to the list?

 

[Law2Doc]

Thank you both for the replies and info!

Can anyone else add to the list?

I wouldn't limit your applications to those schools which you perceive are older friendly. In the name of diversity, virtually every school will take a few to a handful of older candidates. No one school will fill a major portion their class with them, as that defeats the diversity of experience goals.
Plus if all nontraditionals were to apply to eg. CWRU/Pitt/Rochester/GW etc. due to their nontraditional friendly perception, suddenly there would be significantly tighter competition for the handful of spots they tend to give to nontraditional candidates. Thus it is to your benefit to apply broadly, focus on where you want to end up, and not to try and publicly label schools as nontrad friendly.

 

[humuhumu]

I wouldn't limit your applications to those schools which you perceive are older friendly. In the name of diversity, virtually every school will take a few to a handful of older candidates. No one school will fill a major portion their class with them, as that defeats the diversity of experience goals.
Plus if all nontraditionals were to apply to eg. CWRU/Pitt/Rochester/GW etc. due to their nontraditional friendly perception, suddenly there would be significantly tighter competition for the handful of spots they tend to give to nontraditional candidates. Thus it is to your benefit to apply broadly, focus on where you want to end up, and not to try and publicly label schools as nontrad friendly.

Wow, do adcoms really have a "quota" mentality about non-trads? I think they'd want to select the most qualified applicants regardless of their age....

 

[MsEvolution]

I can't tell you *enough* about my school. It's awesome! They really value life experience. We have several people above 40 yrs old... I would say at least 10 in our class. And many, many in their thirties (including me). What you went through to get here now scores you BIG points at DMU. It tells them you're committed to go through with this.

Campus is beautiful.

The OMM program is arguably the best in the country.

The school is VERY student-centered.

The staff is extremely friendly, helpful and approachable.

If you have any more questions, PM me!

 

[Law2Doc]

Wow, do adcoms really have a "quota" mentality about non-trads? I think they'd want to select the most qualified applicants regardless of their age....

No schools explicitly have a quota per se. But many think in terms of putting together a diverse class, and in such thinking they want a certain, nonoverwhelming percentage of nontraditionals. Thus no -- if they saw 200 super qualified candidates all over forty years old, I doubt they would create a class of 40+ year olds. Nor would they likely create a class of half forty+ year olds. But since every school will take "some", your best bet is always going to be to apply broadly. That's my personal view.

 

[Sundarban1]

Apply broadly yes, but like I've said before while every school appreciates non-traditional applicants and diversity, etc. there ARE schools that go out of their way and specifically say that they encourage older applicants to apply, which not all schools do.

Being an older non traditional student myself I would want to know which schools do this so that I dont omit them on my application, which is what I think the OP is getting at.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

Wow, do adcoms really have a "quota" mentality about non-trads? I think they'd want to select the most qualified applicants regardless of their age....

I sincerely doubt they do becaues they don't need to -- they get so few nontrad applicants, that it's not an issue. If you check out the MSAR, you'll see that applicants over 28 are incredibly rare. In fact, there are so few of us that we're potentially statistically insignificant. The graph (chart 5-L if anyone is curious) in the latest msar shows that there are about 500 30-year-old applicants in 2004. Of those 500, about 250 were accepted. That puts us in the same ball park as the younger applicants. In 2003-2004, there were 35,735 applicants, 3,281 of which were over 28. So, no, by in large we're not discriminated against -- we're just a really small group.

 

[bigdan]

I'm 27, if that's non-traditional enough for you.

I got in at Jefferson, UMDNJ-NJMS and RWJ, SUNY Upstate and Stony Brook, EVMS, Emory, and Rochester. There non-trad friendly in my book.

Good luck.

dc

 

[humuhumu]

I sincerely doubt they do becaues they don't need to -- they get so few nontrad applicants, that it's not an issue. If you check out the MSAR, you'll see that applicants over 28 are incredibly rare. In fact, there are so few of us that we're potentially statistically insignificant. The graph (chart 5-L if anyone is curious) in the latest msar shows that there are about 500 30-year-old applicants in 2004. Of those 500, about 250 were accepted. That puts us in the same ball park as the younger applicants. In 2003-2004, there were 35,735 applicants, 3,281 of which were over 28. So, no, by in large we're not discriminated against -- we're just a really small group.

Thanks for the data! It would be interesting to see a breakdown by school to determine if there are any adcoms that, during the past few years, clearly have had a bias for (or against) non-trads. Of course, the sample size may be too small to show anything statistically significant....

 

[Law2Doc]

I sincerely doubt they do becaues they don't need to -- they get so few nontrad applicants, that it's not an issue. If you check out the MSAR, you'll see that applicants over 28 are incredibly rare. In fact, there are so few of us that we're potentially statistically insignificant. The graph (chart 5-L if anyone is curious) in the latest msar shows that there are about 500 30-year-old applicants in 2004. Of those 500, about 250 were accepted. That puts us in the same ball park as the younger applicants. In 2003-2004, there were 35,735 applicants, 3,281 of which were over 28. So, no, by in large we're not discriminated against -- we're just a really small group.

First, nontraditionals could include everyone over age 22, so the number of nontrads isn't that small. But if we limit it to the 28+ crowd, you have to bear in mind that of those 3000+ individuals, you will find a disproportionate amount of advanced degrees, publications and other significant EC credentials (the virtue of having lived a longer life). As a group the older applicants have done more -- and so by some yardsticks are better credentialed applicants. Given the fact that no school has more than a handful, and that according to your numners they have the same 50% acceptance rate of the general applicant pool at large, notwithstanding having more advanced degrees, work experience, publications, etc. etc. per capita than the applicant pool at large, it suggests to me a somewhat harder road. Apply broadly.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

First, nontraditionals could include everyone over age 22, so the number of nontrads isn't that small. But if we limit it to the 28+ crowd, you have to bear in mind that of those 3000+ individuals, you will find a disproportionate amount of advanced degrees, publications and other significant EC credentials (the virtue of having lived a longer life). As a group the older applicants have done more -- and so by some yardsticks are better credentialed applicants. Given the fact that no school has more than a handful, and that according to your numners they have the same 50% acceptance rate of the general applicant pool at large, notwithstanding having more advanced degrees, work experience, publications, etc. etc. per capita than the applicant pool at large, it suggests to me a somewhat harder road. Apply broadly.

Why am I not surprised by your response? One thing I learned by law school and hanging out with lawyers is that they're generally the most negative people around. You seem to exemplify that. Also, you have no numbers or anything to back up your negative assertions -- if you do, please share them. The numbers I posted showed that we're accepted at about the same rate as traditional applicants. I'm relying on those and choosing to buck my training and not see the world in some glass as half empty mindset.

 

[Law2Doc]

Why am I not surprised by your response? One thing I learned by law school and hanging out with lawyers is that they're generally the most negative people around. You seem to exemplify that. Also, you have no numbers or anything to back up your negative assertions -- if you do, please share them. The numbers I posted showed that we're accepted at about the same rate as traditional applicants. I'm relying on those and choosing to buck my training and not see the world in some glass as half empty mindset.

I'm trying to say that a nontraditional can go to ANY SCHOOL -- not just the few that advertise to nontrads. I'm also saying that it is a disadvantage to every nontrad to have older applicants all apply to the same places -- especially since the really good ones can get in anywhere. So people should really apply where they want to go -- not to a school that has a bigger handful of us old timers.
I didn't mean to be negative -- but I actually dispute your view of the legally trained as being more negative or any different than medicine. Legal troubleshooting is a skill that translates into medicine -- they just call it differential diagnosis -- making a long list of everything bad a set of symptoms could be -- always trying to see every possible negative.

As to your comment about numbers -- I'm not sure what assertion I made that needs backing up -- I'm using your numbers, and pointing out that nontrads in my opinion should really do better if the same criteria were used. I mean, eg., by definition all people applying to med schools with advanced degrees are nontraditionals, so nontraditionals compose 100% of that criteria. And so on...

 

[majikbob]

hey a couple things to remember. just because we are non-trads and have advanced degrees, longer lives, and more experience doesn't mean we have better base scores than the rest of the population. I have yet to see a GPA/MCAT breakdown of the 28+ crowd. Any analysis of non-trad success/failure in the process is incomplete (and pointless in my opinion w/o it)

Face it, alot of use might have Undergrad GPA's that are in the toilet, or not so stellar MCATs. As these are the over riding control factors in the process, our life of experience is of little good with out a good foundation.

If I had to make an assumption about GPA/MCATs of older applicants I would bet it looks a lot like the curves for the kids. GPA average around 3.6/MCAT maybe alittle higher than the average so say 27-28. If we assume 3,300 or so non-trads than at least HALF are what I would call challenged applicants. If so, then an acceptance rate of 50% for us looks about the same as everyone else, or maybe a little better if we beat the 50% acceptance rate.

A real good test would be to get 2 people about the same age with scores that put them in different classes (a 3.5er/27-28 mcat) and a (3.7er/34-35 mcat) see if they applied to some of the same schools an see how they both do in the process. Any takers?

bob

 

[njbmd]

Hi there,
I got into GW, UVa, VCU, EVMS, UMD, and Howard. I guess that makes them willing to accept qualified non-traditional students. In the years since I have graduated from medical school, I have found no school that was not willing to take a qualified non-traditional applicant. Get a good competitive application in place and figure out where you want to attend.

njbmd

 

[humuhumu]

hey a couple things to remember. just because we are non-trads and have advanced degrees, longer lives, and more experience doesn't mean we have better base scores than the rest of the population. I have yet to see a GPA/MCAT breakdown of the 28+ crowd. Any analysis of non-trad success/failure in the process is incomplete (and pointless in my opinion w/o it)

Face it, alot of use might have Undergrad GPA's that are in the toilet, or not so stellar MCATs. As these are the over riding control factors in the process, our life of experience is of little good with out a good foundation.
bob

Good thoughts here. Having advanced degrees and more life experience doesn't necessarily make you a more competitive applicant. I imagine that quality counts at least as much if not more than quantity.

Does your record -- whether in school or in the workforce or in other activities -- indicate that you are likely to succeed in medical school and beyond? Are you generally successful at what you've chosen to do? What have you learned from your life experience? These are questions that adcoms ask about any applicant, regardless of age...

 

[eccles1214]

I ran the search function on mdapplicants.com for each age group shown, looking for all applicants, and then only accepted applicants. It appears that the older one gets the lower their MCATs and GPA is. Younger age groups had higher MCATs and higher GPAs than older groups. Of course, this says nothing about other factors.

 

[atrovariousg]

Hi there,
I got into GW, UVa, VCU, EVMS, UMD, and Howard. I guess that makes them willing to accept qualified non-traditional students. In the years since I have graduated from medical school, I have found no school that was not willing to take a qualified non-traditional applicant. Get a good competitive application in place and figure out where you want to attend.

njbmd

Howard? are you a URM?

 

[Law2Doc]

I ran the search function on mdapplicants.com for each age group shown, looking for all applicants, and then only accepted applicants. It appears that the older one gets the lower their MCATs and GPA is. Younger age groups had higher MCATs and higher GPAs than older groups. Of course, this says nothing about other factors.

MDApplicants is really not a credible source to look at for such data -- only a small self selecting portion of the applicant pool puts itself on MDApplicants (it is drastically skewed toward younger and higher credentialed individuals), and there are a ton of fake profiles on there - I wouldn't rely on anything on there as fact. However I suspect AMCAS collects and publishes data on various groups, as such. (At least I know they take surveys -- not sure what they do with the info). But I don't doubt the underlying suggestion that lots of older candidates are getting into med school (if at all) on the backs of their life experiences, not due to having better numerical grades. Fortunately these things do count in med school applications.

 

[efex101]

Non-trad tend to score less on the MCAT here is the link

http://www.aamc.org/students/mcat/examineedata/sum2004.pdf

 

[Doctor Bagel]

Non-trad tend to score less on the MCAT here is the link

interesting -- thanks for the link! i wonder why older applicants score lower. is is because of less recent coursework, or are non-trads actually less competitive applicants in general? maybe a lot of nontrads are people who traditionally had trouble in school and on standardized tests, which is why they didn't pursue medicine at a younger age. or, maybe my suspicion is correct that work just makes you stupid. dh and i both have a commitment to talking classes at night because it keeps us from turning into corporate zombies obsessed with things like branding and logos.

 

[efex101]

I think that it is due to a couple of reasons...many non-trads I think understimate the MCAT and assume (there is a thread about this on this forum) that they can take the McAT COLD w/o taking the classes duh of course they will not perform well. Also, many non-trads are not retaking the pre-reqs due to having them from eons ago and taking upper leves ones, well the MCAT asks questions based on the pre-reqs so unless you have a solid foundation from those you are SOL. I think that those factors make non-trads less competitive, also some non-trads assume that just by being non-trad and having "life experience" and some have worked in the health field that "they" will by merit of that alone get into medical school. There is a lot of misinformation about this process and non-trads assume things, of course the non-trads hanging out here are not part of that pool except for some few exceptions. This is okay though, it actually makes those non-trads that are WITH the ball stand out!

 

[ekydrd]

University of Missouri - Columbia

I am class of 2005 graduate and am 41 years old... and several members of my class are over the age of 30... so, you think this school is non-trad friendly or what?

 

[Sundarban1]

MDApplicants is really not a credible source to look at for such data -- only a small self selecting portion of the applicant pool puts itself on MDApplicants (it is drastically skewed toward younger and higher credentialed individuals), and there are a ton of fake profiles on there - I wouldn't rely on anything on there as fact

Agreed. 100% true.

As for non-trads having lower scores on average based on AMCAS data, I wish there was some way to capture what percentage completed their pre-reqs within a year of taking the MCAT (post-bacc, etc) versus those who had taken the pre-reqs in college, took time off, then just studied for the exam through a review course or just textbooks. You know what I'm suggesting.

 

[majikbob]

damm nice find on that link efex101, I think I saw that page once, and totaly missed the age break down. its a really good link. So if you are in the 28+ age group and pulled at 32+ be real happy with your self.


bob

 

[markt]

It seems to me that osteopathic schools in general are more open to nontraditional/older students. In his story, Bruce Stafford told of his many attempts to get into the medical school at his alma mater, the University of Oklahoma. Finally he realized he would not get in there, and applied to OSUCOM. He was accepted there and started medical school at the age of 48.

Here's the link to his inspiring story:
http://members.cox.net/docstafford/Mystory.htm

 

[JamieMac]

It seems to me that osteopathic schools in general are more open to nontraditional/older students. In his story, Bruce Stafford told of his many attempts to get into the medical school at his alma mater, the University of Oklahoma. Finally he realized he would not get in there, and applied to OSUCOM. He was accepted there and started medical school at the age of 48.

Here's the link to his inspiring story:
http://members.cox.net/docstafford/Mystory.htm

I agree...this is an inspiring story for the non-trad. It was posted previously, and I found it to be both informative, and interesting. It is a must read for those believing themselves to be too old.

 

[Flopotomist]

interesting -- thanks for the link! i wonder why older applicants score lower. is is because of less recent coursework, or are non-trads actually less competitive applicants in general? maybe a lot of nontrads are people who traditionally had trouble in school and on standardized tests, which is why they didn't pursue medicine at a younger age. or, maybe my suspicion is correct that work just makes you stupid. dh and i both have a commitment to talking classes at night because it keeps us from turning into corporate zombies obsessed with things like branding and logos.

I think a few reasons we tend to score lower are 1) the material tested on the MCAT is material covered in courses that most of us have not seen for many many years 2) the amount of time available to non-trads with careers/families is less than the amount of time available to a full time student

 

[powerbooki]

Please anyone, some translations.

UMDNJ-NJMS
RWJ
OSUCOM
CWRU
UMDNJ-NJMS
UVa (Univ of Virginia?)
VCU (Virginia Commonwealth Univ?)
UMD (Univ of Maryland?)

 

[humuhumu]

Check out one of my favorite sites: http://www.acronymfinder.com/

 

[Law2Doc]

Please anyone, some translations.

UMDNJ-NJMS
RWJ
OSUCOM
CWRU
UMDNJ-NJMS
UVa (Univ of Virginia?)
VCU (Virginia Commonwealth Univ?)
UMD (Univ of Maryland?)

You got the last three right yourself. The first two are NJ state schools (Univ of medicine and dentristry of New Jersey (which you listed twice), and Robert Wood Johnson, respectively). CWRU is case western reserve university.

 

[1Path]

Can anyone provide a list of loder student-friendly M.D. programs in the U.S.?

After MANY years of observing the med schools admissions process, it seems to me that a high MCAT (30>) is key. And when combined with productive life experiences, admission to MD programs at most ANY school for the nontrad is a sure thing, if there is such a thing for premeds.

 

[humuhumu]

After MANY years of observing the med schools admissions process, it seems to me that a high MCAT (30>) is key. And when combined with productive life experiences, admission to MD programs at most ANY school for the nontrad is a sure thing, if there is such a thing for premeds.

I hope you're right.

 

[nontrad314]

1Path,

Tell me what you think of the following (I'm sort of thinking out loud here)

It strikes me that there are many factors involved: 1. MCAT, 2. GPA, 3. CLINICAL, 4. RESEARCH, 5. LORS, 6. PS, 7. 2NDRY, 8. INTRVW. Presummably these factors are weighted in various ways at various places.

In general then, ad comms are using multi factored metrics.

Consequently, it is possible that there is not a 'silver bullet' in general. And instead, because the metrics are multi-factored the lack of any 'silver bullets' could really be good news for the system and for applicants.

Some examples of what I mean:

1. In the pre allo forum there is a discussion of the effect of grad schools / PhD degrees etc as factors in the selection criteria. The consensus seems to be that a PhD is good for research and evidence for handling course load; but not much beyond that.

2. Elsewhere there are many discussions by many people that address how someone with 4.0 GPA + 40 MCAT was rejected. So, it's not just the numbers. [Although, there are a couple schools documented here at SDN that offer automatic admission based only on these 2 numbers!]

3. Someone with a web page around here forwards that the LORS are instrumental. But, LORS alone...in and of themselves can't do the trick. You can easily imagine GPAs and MCATs matched with the greatest LORS in the world that won't deliver.

4. Particular schools place more or less emphasis on the 'clinical exposure'. Some schools can be very particular about what they mean by this in terms of duration etc.

5. The variance in the secondaries can be pretty large: Some schools have no secondaries, some schools have massive secondaries, some schools screen, some don't. This suggests that different schools are weighting the secondaries in different ways.

The above points have many sorts of sampling bias in them; so are not worth much beyond basic circumstanial / anecdotal evidence. However, the examples suggest that maybe all of these factors together are contributing.

The MSAR data discusses the statistical evidence for multiple factors and does so by pointing out that the right hand / high side of the MCAT and GPA data both contain significant numbers of rejected applicants.

If (hypothetically) it was multiple factors (which is not necessarily the case because there are a couple schools that will select only on the numbers) then the strategy of 'applying broadly' would make sense to the degree of 'averaging out the noise'.

Alternately, if it is multiple factors any one candidiate will have a dominant factor. The same is true of any school: Any school will have a dominant selection factor. Applying broadly then stands the chance of matching the dominant factor of a candidate to a school that is selecting for that factor.

Bottom line: IF it's multiple factors then the way to go seems to be to just 'be yourself' , do your best and apply to a lot of schools.

p.s. Sorry this ended up being such a long post.

 

[1Path]

It strikes me that there are many factors involved: 1. MCAT, 2. GPA, 3. CLINICAL, 4. RESEARCH, 5. LORS, 6. PS, 7. 2NDRY, 8. INTRVW. Presummably these factors are weighted in various ways at various places.

While I agree with this list in general, I think that a 30> MCAT is the most heavily weighed factor and here's why I think this is so:

1) Nontrads (of course depending on how you define them) are often changing course career wise when they apply to med school. Doing very well on the MCAT I think says to an adcom, "I'm not only good at what I currently do, but I can master this MCAT thing too".

2) Most nontrads haven't seen MCAT "material" in a while so doing very well says I haven't forgotten how to do well on standardized exams, a skill obvioulsy needed to finish med school and beocme a board certified physician.

3) Most nontrads are VERY limited in where they can apply yet despite this fact those that scored at/above 30 according to the many sources I've seen and heard from various adcoms, can get admitted to at least 1 of their "local" schools. Perhpas being so "grounded" in their local community gives tham an advantage when they have a solid app with very strong MCAT scores.

Of all this is given a strong overall application with the high MCAT leading the way.

Here's the thing. I can't think of one true nontrad with a solid overall app combined with a 30> MCAT that didn't get accepted to an MD program.

 

[QofQuimica]

After MANY years of observing the med schools admissions process, it seems to me that a high MCAT (30>) is key.

I think that there is something to this weighting of the MCAT for non-trads also, although I'm not sure admission with a high MCAT score is as much of a sure thing as 1path suggested. FWIW, though, when I went on my pre-application interviews, I was explicitly told by one admission director that I needed to score 30+ on the MCAT in order to be competitive at that school. A post-doc friend of mine who is now an MSI also was told the same thing.

 

[Law2Doc]

If (hypothetically) it was multiple factors (which is not necessarily the case because there are a couple schools that will select only on the numbers) then the strategy of 'applying broadly' would make sense to the degree of 'averaging out the noise'.

Yes -- This is what I've been saying.

 

[1Path]

I think that there is something to this weighting of the MCAT for non-trads also, although I'm not sure admission with a high MCAT score is as much of a sure thing as 1path suggested..

I'm betting you'll feel differently after you get your first acceptance.

I've "seen" your stats. There's no way you can say that you won't get accpeted to at least one (and probaby more) of the schools you applied to. Admitting this isn't being arrogant or presumptuous, it's just plain stating facts.

 

[nontrad314]

double post.

 

[nontrad314]

While I agree with this list in general, I think that a 30> MCAT is the most heavily weighed factor and here's why I think this is so:

1) Nontrads (of course depending on how you define them) are often changing course career wise when they apply to med school. Doing very well on the MCAT I think says to an adcom, "I'm not only good at what I currently do, but I can master this MCAT thing too".

2) Most nontrads haven't seen MCAT "material" in a while so doing very well says I haven't forgotten how to do well on standardized exams, a skill obvioulsy needed to finish med school and beocme a board certified physician.

3) Most nontrads are VERY limited in where they can apply yet despite this fact those that scored at/above 30 according to the many sources I've seen and heard from various adcoms, can get admitted to at least 1 of their "local" schools. Perhpas being so "grounded" in their local community gives tham an advantage when they have a solid app with very strong MCAT scores.

Of all this is given a strong overall application with the high MCAT leading the way.

Here's the thing. I can't think of one true nontrad with a solid overall app combined with a 30> MCAT that didn't get accepted to an MD program.

I think that's very well said. Thanks for your thoughts on the matter.

 

[nontrad314]

Access to the MSAR data in a manner showing the correlations would be useful.

For example, the plots of GPA V MCAT, GPA V AGE and MCAT V AGE would be interesting.

I wonder if that data (the correlation data) is publically available somewhere. Maybe at PUBMED or something similar.

Anyone know?
---------------------------
addendum: this article is so old that it's probably completely irrelevant, but perhaps some might find interest in it

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3681914&dopt=Citation

the following is more recent and more interesting to the discussion here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...d&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=16078094&query_hl=3

 

[QofQuimica]

I'm betting you'll feel differently after you get your first acceptance.

I've "seen" your stats. There's no way you can say that you won't get accpeted to at least one (and probaby more) of the schools you applied to. Admitting this isn't being arrogant or presumptuous, it's just plain stating facts.

Well, I have to agree that, yes, I will definitely enjoy this armchair theorizing much more when and if I receive said acceptance.

I actually don't think that my MCAT score is the most interesting or impressive thing in my application. Maybe it would come in somewhere around fifth, after my clinical research, teaching, graduate research, and one of my volunteering activities. Of course, a good MCAT was important in my case because I took all of my pre-reqs P/F and over ten years ago. But those issues have been heavily mitigated b/c I have graduate grades now. Also, my state schools are familiar with my undergrad institution, and they have accepted students from there in the past. So far they have not given me any hassle about my unusual academic record.

I'm afraid that I'm not as familiar with your stats as you are with mine but I assume that you did very well on your MCAT, and I am curious as to what role you feel that it has played in your application process.

 

[1Path]

I actually don't think that my MCAT score is the most interesting or impressive thing in my application. Maybe it would come in somewhere around fifth, after my clinical research, teaching, graduate research, and one of my volunteering activities. Of course, a good MCAT was important in my case because I took all of my pre-reqs P/F and over ten years ago. But those issues have been heavily mitigated b/c I have graduate grades now. Also, my state schools are familiar with my undergrad institution, and they have accepted students from there in the past. So far they have not given me any hassle about my unusual academic record

The thing is that the overwhelmingly majority of the the nontrads I know have done some very cool and interesting things so I think for nontrads, this is a given. Doing very well on the MCAT as a nontrad, however is another issue I believe because of the time gap between completion of MCAT courses and taking the MCAT.

I'm afraid that I'm not as familiar with your stats as you are with mine but I assume that you did very well on your MCAT, and I am curious as to what role you feel that it has played in your application process.

My stats:
Undergrad GPA - VERY poor, 20 years old
Graduate GPA - Excellent, MS in Chemistry top 5 department
Research/volunteer/health experience - Extensive includes NIH, publications
MCAT - Can I answer this one when I get my scores back in October???

The one thing holding me back from top 25 schools (as an MD/PhD applicant) is my MCAT and I've been told this specifically by more than a few adcoms. But trust me, I'll be happy with ANY MD/PhD acceptance I can get.

 

[QofQuimica]

My stats:
Undergrad GPA - VERY poor, 20 years old
Graduate GPA - Excellent, MS in Chemistry top 5 department
Research/volunteer/health experience - Extensive includes NIH, publications
MCAT - Can I answer this one when I get my scores back in October???

The one thing holding me back from top 25 schools (as an MD/PhD applicant) is my MCAT and I've been told this specifically by more than a few adcoms. But trust me, I'll be happy with ANY MD/PhD acceptance I can get.

Wow, I didn't realize that along with being a chemist that you want to go MD/PhD as a nontrad. Good for you! I hope that you get your 30+ next month and several MD/PhD acceptances to boot. If you don't, would you consider doing your degrees separately? I found that grad schools were a lot more forgiving of bizarre applications than med schools seem to be.

 

[thirdunity]

The thing is that the overwhelmingly majority of the the nontrads I know have done some very cool and interesting things so I think for nontrads, this is a given. Doing very well on the MCAT as a nontrad, however is another issue I believe because of the time gap between completion of MCAT courses and taking the MCAT.

I'm a 31-year-old college sophomore so the "time gap between completion of courses and taking the MCAT" isn't an issue since I won't have any more of a time gap than a 21 year old sophomore would have.

The thing is, though, what if you DIDN'T do anything cool, prior to focusing on pre-med studies? I was basically a total slacker. After I dropped out of high school, all I really did was work a variety of itinerant graphics and computer jobs, dye my hair funky colors, hang out in night clubs, play AD&D, collect comic books, and party.

 

[1Path]

If you don't, would you consider doing your degrees separately? I found that grad schools were a lot more forgiving of bizarre applications than med schools seem to be.

I'm pretty sure (as much as you can be) I can get another 3rd tier MD/PhD acceptance (I didn't matriculate years ago for personal reasons). So I think an issue I may face is do I go MD only at a higher ranked school and try to transfer MD/PhD the following year, or MD/PhD at a tier 3 school. I HATE the town the 3rd tier school is located in, in addition to this school NOT being a research school, so I'll have to think (and pray) about this should I have this option.

Finishing the PhD, I was actually doing that recently but stopped because my concern is that:
1) PhD only has NEVER been my goal so I just feel that life is short and I should go for what I truly want.

2) You NEVER know how long it will take you to finish. If I didn't finish in at max 4 years, I'd be highly upset.

3) I think after 20 years of "maturing", I'm ready to handle med school. My taking classes toward the PhD while in a full-time research appointment has allowed me to kinda work out the kinks in my study habits (so has taking the MCAT a zillion times ).

So besides spreading my business all over the internet, I hope that other nontrads out there realize that there's more than one way to skin a cat!!!

 

[mamadoc]

Access to the MSAR data in a manner showing the correlations would be useful.

For example, the plots of GPA V MCAT, GPA V AGE and MCAT V AGE would be interesting.

I wonder if that data (the correlation data) is publically available somewhere. Maybe at PUBMED or something similar.

Anyone know?

You know what, someone has probably done this and it still isn't going to help. Having worked on the AdCom of one of the schools with HUGE numbers of applications, I can tell you that it is an art much more than a science. I have heard of some schools that apply complicated scoring formulae to different parts of an application, but my impression from years of talking to other non-trads is that it is almost never so cut-and-dried. If it were, there wouldn't be all the threads in pre-allo whining about "I got a 32, my roommate got a 29, but I got waitlisted and she got accepted," for example.

Guys, just do your very best to put together an impressive application in every aspect that you can. For those of you with glaring deficiencies in one aspect (usually old grades), make sure you've done something to make up for it (new grades and kick-ass MCAT). Get help with your PS to make sure it does the best possible job of selling you. Be sure your LORs are glowing. You KNOW all the things to do, they're discussed endlessly here and at lots of other spots on the net, and there's no magic or mystery to it.

Bottom line is there are no guarantees for either getting in or getting rejected. The person whose app looks stellar may get denied, who knows why? The person with what you might think is a mediocre app just happens to strike a chord with someone during interview day, and gets in.

Medicine itself is at LEAST as much art as science, so get used to it!

 

[1Path]

The thing is, though, what if you DIDN'T do anything cool, prior to focusing on pre-med studies? I was basically a total slacker. After I dropped out of high school, all I really did was work a variety of itinerant graphics and computer jobs, dye my hair funky colors, hang out in night clubs, play AD&D, collect comic books, and party.

I believe there's a few people on oldpremeds.com that had a similar background as you. I know for sure 1 of them is a resident now and I believe the other is in med school.

Personally, I think it's all about being the master of the "spin". For you it may boil down to what you're doing now and how you "spin" your past in your personal statement.