Perfect Applicant from the school's point of view

[GoodSamaritan]

Is there a perfect applicant from the medical school's point of view? The applicant that they are willing to fight for with a scholarship or by rushing their acceptance letter out?

Or is there really no such thing, seeing how there manages to be hundreds of kids applying with a 4.0 each year with a 37+ MCAT?

I suppose my question is, is there anything an applicant can do to make themselves "irresistible" to a med school? (assuming you are don't suck at interviewing) Or will there always be someone just as good as you that they are willing to pass you up for?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[HumidBeing]

There is no such thing as a single perfect profile for an applicant.

There are key ingredients that go into being a highly competitive applicant, but no standard mold you can squeeze yourself into and pop out as THE irresistible applicant.

 

[fizzle]

There is no such thing as perfection. Medical school admissions is completely competition-based, which means that even if most applicants are qualified and highly desirable, only a few will get in.

 

[Nevadanteater]

another thing to keep in mind is that different people are going to get acceptances for different reasons. two people might get into top schools, one because of the amazing research they did, another for their work at a medical clinic for undocumented immigrants.

both 'perfect' (they got in to a great school), but 'perfect' for completely different reasons.

 

[usermike8500]

There manages to be hundreds of kids applying with a 4.0 each year with a 37+ MCAT?

This is something I never understood. There must be hundreds if not thousands of applicants who have near 4.0 GPAs and 37+ MCAT scores. Sometimes, I swear this is the average premed at my medicine-obsessed university. Anyway, With so many applicants with high numbers, why are the average stats at even top schools usually so much lower.

For example, (according to U.S. News)

Stanford: 3.76 GPA 34.8 MCAT
Yale: 3.72 GPA 33.9 MCAT
UCSD 3.75 GPA 33 MCAT


These average stats aren't even in the ballpark of the 4.0 GPA, 37+ applicant range. Yet, I'm sure these schools get hundreds of applicants with scores that high. Perhaps med schools have a quota system, where they have to accept a certain amount of lower scoring applicants as well as the "gunner" students. Therefore, the average stats are lower than expected.

 

[Narmerguy]

These average stats aren't even in the ballpark of the 4.0 GPA, 37+ applicant range. Yet, I'm sure these schools get hundreds of applicants with scores that high. Perhaps med schools have a quota system, where they have to accept a certain amount of lower scoring applicants as well as the "gunner" students. Therefore, the average stats are lower than expected.

Well when you imagine that a good portion of those 4.0 GPA 37+ MCAT students did nothing else in college besides get those stats, they seem a lot less impressive. Then consider that many of them are socially awkward people that haven't seen the sun or had a good conversation in weeks and that's another chunk. Then also consider that some other students have done things that can't necessarily be quantified so easily and you have your average.

 

[GoSpursGo]

This is something I never understood. There must be hundreds if not thousands of applicants who have near 4.0 GPAs and 37+ MCAT scores. Sometimes, I swear this is the average premed at my medicine-obsessed university. Anyway, With so many applicants with high numbers, why are the average stats at even top schools usually so much lower.

I would actually bet that there are actually a fairly small number of applicants who get both of those numbers; it's far more common for someone to get an outstanding number in one of those areas (say 3.95 or 40) and then an average one in the other (say 3.6 or 32). Getting a near pristine GPA or top 2-4%MCAT are both incredibly long-odds results, so achieving just one of those is unusual; managing both is rare. Then, as someone else pointed out, there will be a subset of these who are disqualified for various other reasons: either they haven't shown that they can interact with patients (clinical experience), or they can't express why they want to go into the profession (bad PS), or they severely rubbed a key person the wrong way during undergrad (assassin LOR), or it turns out they're an arrogant prick (bad interview).

Furthermore, realize that those top schools DO probably still get a fairly large number of these applicants with "dream numbers." Say there's 100-200 out there. The catch is that they are ALL applying to the same top schools, and so they'll probably be spread out so that about 10 of them each go to about 10-20 various top-flight schools. That still leaves around 190 spots for other applicants.

Finally, in regards to the question of what makes the "perfect applicant," I'd say that at the end of the day there's really seven attributes that a med school cares about when examining an applicant: GPA, MCAT, clinical experience, research experience, strength of personal statement, strength of LORs, and (sadly) URM status. So the "perfect applicant" would have a 3.9+ GPA, 39+ MCAT, 3+ years clinical AND research experience, write passionately about medicine, get rave reviews, AND be Mexican.

My personal opinion is that, of the six attributes you can affect (not URM status, obv), you can be a strong applicant if you have average to above-average stats in five of those categories even if the sixth is a bit weak. There's really only a handful of "perfect applicants" out there, and you certainly don't need to be one to get in. I'd say if you can get 5 of those categories nailed, you should feel pretty good about your chances.

 

[flaahless]

This is something I never understood. There must be hundreds if not thousands of applicants who have near 4.0 GPAs and 37+ MCAT scores. Sometimes, I swear this is the average premed at my medicine-obsessed university. Anyway, With so many applicants with high numbers, why are the average stats at even top schools usually so much lower.

For example, (according to U.S. News)

Stanford: 3.76 GPA 34.8 MCAT
Yale: 3.72 GPA 33.9 MCAT
UCSD 3.75 GPA 33 MCAT


These average stats aren't even in the ballpark of the 4.0 GPA, 37+ applicant range. Yet, I'm sure these schools get hundreds of applicants with scores that high. Perhaps med schools have a quota system, where they have to accept a certain amount of lower scoring applicants as well as the "gunner" students. Therefore, the average stats are lower than expected.

Of course because PS and LORs have absolutely no meaning. To quote UCSF's Dean:

"For about 1 out of 5 strong applicants, their PS keeps them out."

"A student with strong #s and few interviews should evaluate their LORs."

His advice: "If your LOR writer says they don't know you well and/or suggests you get someone else, DO NOT USE THEM."

Don't know how it is for other schools, I just know it isn't entirely numerical.

 

[cpants]

This is something I never understood. There must be hundreds if not thousands of applicants who have near 4.0 GPAs and 37+ MCAT scores. Sometimes, I swear this is the average premed at my medicine-obsessed university. Anyway, With so many applicants with high numbers, why are the average stats at even top schools usually so much lower.

There aren't a lot of pre-med students with 37 MCATS. There are a lot of pre-med bull****ters.

In 2007, a 37 was the 97th percentile with only 1.1% achieving that score. Only 1.5% achieved better than a 37. So, only 2.6% of examinees received a 37+ on the MCAT.

 

[SDN2013]

0.026 multiplied by 50,000 or however many people that took it in 2007 is a fairly large number.

with CBT, I wouldn't be surprised if there were 1000 people with 37+ each year

 

[cpants]

0.026 multiplied by 50,000 or however many people that took it in 2007 is a fairly large number.

with CBT, I wouldn't be surprised if there were 1000 people with 37+ each year

Actually in '07 67,828 students took the MCAT. Multiplying by .026 gives you roughly 1750 examinees in the whole nation receiving a 37 or better. In the applicant and even the matriculant pool this is a very small number. There is no way that the average for pre-meds at his school approaches 37.

From the AAMC data for 2007:

Examinees receiving a 37 or better: 2.6%
Applicants receiving a 37 or better (assuming they all applied): ~4%
Matriculants receiving a 37 or better (assuming they all matriculated): ~10%

So, 97.4% of pre-meds, 96% of med school applicants, and 90% of this year's first-year med students got lower than a 37 on the MCAT.

 

[RSAgator]

Well when you imagine that a good portion of those 4.0 GPA 37+ MCAT students did nothing else in college besides get those stats, they seem a lot less impressive. Then consider that many of them are socially awkward people that haven't seen the sun or had a good conversation in weeks and that's another chunk. Then also consider that some other students have done things that can't necessarily be quantified so easily and you have your average.

This is entirely untrue. Have you been on any interviews yet?

Of the four interviews I've been on so far I would have to say that perhaps 2 or 3 people in TOTAL came across as odd or "socially awkward," and the rest of them were incredibly normal.

I think that one of the other posters hit the nail on the head. The truth is that there are far fewer people with BOTH these stats than everyone is led to believe. Not all of those those 1750 people with 37+ MCATs are going to have stellar or even average GPAs. At the end of the day the perfect applicant is someone who not only has good scores and the required amount of clinical experience, but has been involved in something to a significant degree that sets them apart from other applicants. This can be an immense commitment to volunteering whether it be clinical or otherwise, incredible research experiences, or incredible life experiences.