Now this is getting out of hand...

[novastorm]

I disagree with the high application fees, the fees are higher then undergraduate programs for less applicants. How does that make sense?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[riceman04]

The more concrete reasons an admissions committee gives an applicant to explain why he or she was rejected, the more likely it is that a litigious student with his or her parents' lawyers in tow would be knocking on that school's door.

very good point

 

[novastorm]

Because of certain responses in this thread I'll shed a little light on the whole process. Now I'll completely make up a scenario with medical school X.

Student pays the AAMC a flat fee to apply. This is the cost for support and to process your transcripts etc. You then pay a fee per school. This fee is a black hole of god only knows what because the entire process is automated and done by computer.

(Right here I'll assume that AMCAS uses a similar tool to ERAS). The admissions staff loads up the AMCAS tool and their database is updated with all the student info. Now if they have their act together they run a simple report and load that data into an electronic database for their online secondary automatically creating your user name and password.

You then log in and fill out whatever nonsense they want you too and that updates another database that they either get a paper report from or can simply view online (it may even be possible for it to feed back into the AMCAS tool, AMAZING). Lets assume the school doesn't screen and wont consider your application until you submit your secondary, lets take school X for example, who's secondary is a joke. Fill out the few click boxes, pay 100 dollars, done.

They run their filter and put everyone into three groups. And for integrity sake lets say they review every application . The most qualified applications will be reviewed first, then the normal applicants, and the auto-rejects may hardly receive a glance.

So the most desirable applicants get reviewed RIGHT away, the rest get put on hold and some wont even be reviewed until after all interviews have been given out, if at all. Remember boys and girls they said you will be reviewed they never said they wouldn't review your application until after they are done giving out interviews.

How difficult would it be to create 3 form letters and filter by GPA send GPA Letter, MCAT send mcat letter, both send both letter? How do schools get away with not sending anything at all? The whole process needs to be regulated but its never going to happen.

 

[LizzyM]

I disagree with the high application fees, the fees are higher then undergraduate programs for less applicants. How does that make sense?

Economy of scale. It does cost something to run an admissions office and the fixed costs are the same whether you have 3,000 applications or 15,000.

What amazes me is that some of the schools with the highest fees have the most applications. How many more applications would it get if it cut the fee by 50%? I think that in that case, they charge a fortune to winnow the applicant pool.

There are many costs associated with running an admissions office that you might not imagine such as the cost of managing, storing and destroying documents to avoid inappropriate disclosure (invasions of privacy, including but not limited to identy theft, are an issue), trips to pre-med fairs and recruiting visits to undergrad institutions, events for pre-med advisors including visits the medical school, legal counsel, travel by deans of admissions to annual AAMC meetings.

 

[novastorm]

Economy of scale. It does cost something to run an admissions office and the fixed costs are the same whether you have 3,000 applications or 15,000.

What amazes me is that some of the schools with the highest fees have the most applications. How many more applications would it get if it cut the fee by 50%? I think that in that case, they charge a fortune to winnow the applicant pool.

There are many costs associated with running an admissions office that you might not imagine such as the cost of managing, storing and destroying documents to avoid inappropriate disclosure (invasions of privacy, including but not limited to identy theft, are an issue), trips to pre-med fairs and recruiting visits to undergrad institutions, events for pre-med advisors including visits the medical school, legal counsel, travel by deans of admissions to annual AAMC meetings.

I do realize how silly my comment sounded. You are correct and I'm not saying all medical school gouge on secondary fees but I'm sure that some do.

 

[geogil]

Some food for thought.

I applied to a school last June (for Fall 08 admission) that was at the top of my list. I recieved the secondary (which they screen for) and filled it and was complete in August. I was rejected 1 week later.

I called 1 week later to talk about my app, and the admissions lady politely helped go over what I needed to review. She said it wasn't my GPA or MCAT but that I did not have enough clinical experience. I spent the next 4-5 months volunteering in a clinic and appealed the interview decision. I just had my interview at said school last week.

So yes, they CAN give you information to help your application and improve it. Mine worked in the same app cycle. Do we have a "right" to a review? No. But when they take 60-$100, do the 5% of the applicants who actually want a few minutes of help, deserve one? Absolutely. Especially when it pays off like it did for me.

LIke I said, we at least deserve a rejection letter all teh time.

Again, no you don't deserve anything. Deserving implies that you have a right to something, which, as I delineated already, you don't. You were very fortunate to have someone who was helpful, but they didn't owe you that help. I understand the frustration on this thread, I once applied too. The thing you guys seem to be missing is that nobody promised you guys guidance from the school you applied to. I think that a lot of you are conflating the ideas of "I really want feedback" with "I have a right to feeback because I 'paid' for it with my fee."

 

[Kaustikos]

No, the problem here is that you refuse to accept a difference of opinion. Every time someone posts the contrary view you pick it apart and paragraph by paragraph tell us why they are wrong and why your view is the only worthy one. You belittle them, swear at them, and use inflammatory sarcasm at every turn. You ignore all the great points of Lizzy's post and instead shout back the same points you've been making all a long. I'm afraid you and a few others have shown a great deal of immaturity on this thread. You would be surprised just how easily interviewers can see right through you. You weren't accepted because you weren't as good as other applicants this cycle. Your only recourse is to become a better applicant- and you shouldn't need anyone to tell you how to do that.

By the way- what if they did tell you to try for a higher MCAT, add in some more shadowing, and raise your GPA a little bit. You do that, and you're still rejected next year because there are still better candidates out there. You would be the exact same person who comes back here and says "I did exactly what they told me to do and I still didn't get in. They LIED to me!!!!!!!!!!!!!" It's a loose-loose situation for them; the only way to make you happy in the long run is to put an acceptance letter in your hand, but you know, your satisfaction with their "service" is one thing they care about least in this world. You're easily outnumbered 5 or 10 to 1 on this thread. The only reason you're shouting is because it's against the reason of so many other voices. Just take a step back and consider that you might not actually have the best, most impartial view about this issue.

Ha. Sorry I upset you so much with my posts. I apologized for what I said already. I had no idea I was "yelling". If I was, sorry.
Outnumbered? Am I being bullied? Do you want my wallet or just the cash? I realized the predicament before it got out of hand and stopped, go yell at someone else.

For the record, my opinion stemmed from admissions staff, not adcoms who review applicants. So, I suppose I should have clarified that.

 

[Doctor]

Have any of you ever applied for a real job? Did you get a personalized message telling you that you'd not been hired and what you could do to make yourself a better applicant?

Hmmmm. This would be a better analogy if anyone had ever paid $50 or $100 to apply for a real job. Job applicants aren't usually expected to help underwrite each company's human resources staff and hiring process.

That being said, even in industry $50 probably wouldn't pay for a personalized phone call explaining why one was rejected unless such a call would be quite succinct.

 

[Doctor]

I disagree with the high application fees, the fees are higher then undergraduate programs for less applicants. How does that make sense?

What?! That's the only thing that does make sense about the fees. In a simplified example, say you had to hire 1 staff member for 2 months to run admissions for your tiny, tiny college. It would cost you what, maybe $15,000 in salary and benefits to do this.

So you could pay for this 1 adcom member with A) 1000 applicants paying $15 each, B) 500 applicants paying $30 each, or C) 200 applicants paying $75 each. That's obviously far over-simplified, but hopefully it helps you to consider economies of scale... many of your costs are going to be fixed like that, so you can either cover your costs with lots of applicants paying a little money, or a few applicants paying a lot of money.

Now whether applicants should be helping to underwrite these costs is another question... as I alluded to above, obviously you wouldn't help pay for DuPont's HR department if you applied there as a chemist.

 

[Kaustikos]

What?! That's the only thing that does make sense about the fees. In a simplified example, say you had to hire 1 staff member for 2 months to run admissions for your tiny, tiny college. It would cost you what, maybe $15,000 in salary and benefits to do this.

So you could pay for this 1 adcom member with A) 1000 applicants paying $15 each, B) 500 applicants paying $30 each, or C) 200 applicants paying $75 each. That's obviously far over-simplified, but hopefully it helps you to consider economies of scale... many of your costs are going to be fixed like that, so you can either cover your costs with lots of applicants paying a little money, or a few applicants paying a lot of money.

Now whether applicants should be helping to underwrite these costs is another question... as I alluded to above, obviously you wouldn't help pay for DuPont's HR department if you applied there as a chemist.

Ah, I get it. So if I instead pay $2000, they'll give me a "complete" review?

 

[LizzyM]

Now whether applicants should be helping to underwrite these costs is another question... as I alluded to above, obviously you wouldn't help pay for DuPont's HR department if you applied there as a chemist.

The people who buy DuPont's products pay for the HR department as it is folded into the cost of the product.

Schools aren't selling a product, they are selling educational opportunities. Would you like to see your tuition rise to cover the cost of recruiting and screening the next generation? Do you think that a free application process (send your check for $0 along with the supplemental which has no redundancy with the AMCAS) would be attractive. BTW, unless you were called for an interview, you would not hear from the office and unless you were offered a spot, you would not hear from the office. And, BTW, no phone calls, please. And, btw, the tuition is $1,000/yr more than schools with an application fee, because we still need to pay the salary of the people who run the office.

 

[Doctor]

The people who buy DuPont's products pay for the HR department as it is folded into the cost of the product.

Schools aren't selling a product, they are selling educational opportunities. Would you like to see your tuition rise to cover the cost of recruiting and screening the next generation? Do you think that a free application process (send your check for $0 along with the supplemental which has no redundancy with the AMCAS) would be attractive. BTW, unless you were called for an interview, you would not hear from the office and unless you were offered a spot, you would not hear from the office. And, BTW, no phone calls, please. And, btw, the tuition is $1,000/yr more than schools with an application fee, because we still need to pay the salary of the people who run the office.

Well your product is the educational opportunity, but as you say it would be the current students paying more to make up the difference.

It would seem surprising though that some rich alumni hasn't thought to subsidize applications at a given school and make it $0 to apply. If a typical medical school charges $100 an app and has 10,000 applications, that is a mere $1 million per year that it raises from application fees.

In a world where the top hedge fund managers are making several billion per year in fees, I'm surprised one of them hasn't thought to establish a $60 million bank account (which would be enough to pay for twice as many applications) for the medical school, paying all those costs with the interest each year. Then the school could double its applicants and potentially have a more qualified entering class each year.

But the alumni money is certainly out there at most private schools with a medical school... so the idea probably has been considered. Yet why hasn't this ever happened?

I'm going to guess that the real reason schools have application fees it to protect their "yields". I suspect there is a strong correlation between (higher) application fees and higher yields... it's the best way short of something drastic like an Early Decision program to ensure that people who apply have a serious desire to attend. (And I don't think ED programs are very popular with graduate schools, but I haven't applied to med schools yet so I'll have to see when I get there.)

 

[LizzyM]

I'm going to guess that the real reason schools have application fees it to protect their "yields". I suspect there is a strong correlation between (higher) application fees and higher yields... it's the best way short of something drastic like an Early Decision program to ensure that people who apply have a serious desire to attend. (And I don't think ED programs are very popular with graduate schools, but I haven't applied to med schools yet so I'll have to see when I get there.)

Yes, it may weed out those who aren't as interested in attending and thus protect the yield.

I think it would be very difficult to underwrite the cost of the admissions office with donor dollars when there are so many more pressing needs including scholarship programs for med students and pre-med summer programs for students from disadvantaged backgrounds.

We have thousands of applicants for dozens of seats. We hardly need or want more applicants and it is unlikely that a lower cost of applying would bring in more talented applicants unless they were applying as an additional "safety" which goes back again to yield.