Possible reapplicant LizzyM~75

[benjamin94559]

So I’m probably going to end up having to reapply this cycle. I had a much better cycle (at least in terms of getting interviews) than I had expected but it looks like it wasn’t meant to be.


Some basic information:

Asian Male

Large Research University

Lizzy M ~75-76,

CA resident


ECs included ER volunteering, free clinic interpreting, pathology research with a few middle author pubs, policy research, a biotech internship, and a few other random things. My committee letter was the best possible “tier” that the committee writes.


My last application cycle I applied to basically everywhere in CA, NYC, Boston, Chicago, and Pitt and received II’s at

UCSF--> waitlist

UCSD--> waitlist

UCD-->reject

USC-->waitlist

Sinai-->waitlist

Chicago--> continued--> waitlist

Northwestern--> deferred-->waitlist

Cornell-->reject

Pitt-->First tier waitlist

Einstein-->Reject

Columbia-->waitlist


Obviously, I think my interviews didn’t go as well as ideal and for the most part my gut feeling of the interview matched my outcome, with the exception of Cornell. That being said, I know most people are pretty poor judges of their own interview experiences especially non-technical interviews that are given at med schools. However, I did quite a few mock interviews and my feedback was generally “you’ll be fine” but just tweak this or that.


Interview Things I noticed when I did mocks and videotaped myself etc.


I played with my hair a lot, I cut my hair for interviews to avoid this problem

I had a tendency to talk with my hands a lot in a wavy way when I talk about my research but not with other things. I either talked with my hands less or used them in ways that “made sense” to the people who mock interviewed me / watched the tape.

One mock interview in particular asked me a question about Obamacare and I gave a strongish answer on how it could have gone farther. I was told to tone it down and so I did.


During my senior year, I kept my grades up and continued volunteering and what not. I'm currently applying for jobs but I have the privilege of not necessarily having to worry too much about money, at least for the next year. My gap year plans are to continue volunteering and apply for medically/health policy related jobs and see what happens. Any sort of advice or suggestions is appreciated. I am hesitant about reapplying this cycle because how much can you really change in a year, but my MCAT expires after this cycle so its kind of do or die. Thank you for sifting through all of this late night rambling.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[GrapesofRath]

Cycle certainly isnt over yet, the season of waitlist movement hasnt ended. Some of those schools have had active waitlists from what Ive read.

Having said that you know where your problem is. This is all about the interview. It's clear as day. It takes a very strong app to get this many top schools interested. But to not have even one say yes, well that tells you everything about where your interviewing stands and you kind of recognize it yourself.

As for whether or not to reapply if this doesnt work out, there a couple things to consider.

1) First off, a reapplicant with these kinds of stats is going to be perceived as a riskier candidate to a number of evaluators. A number of these top schools that target applicants like you are especially averse to reapplicants. Some flat out very rarely if ever re-interview people.

2) Retaking the MCAT is more of a hassle than a real concern to your chances. Get a similar score, it's largely a non issue.

3) As for the interview issue there again is more than one way to look at this and to consider. If we are being honest you can probably train yourself if you work at it over several months to give the type of answers that can be sufficient for a med school interview with your stats and get someone to accept you next cycle. But at the same time, these issues with interviewing dont just disappear. Theyll just keep coming back again and again down the road. You might be able to just "Game" your way by some learning tricks of the trade and how to not answer certain questions for med school application process. But the flaws in poor interviewing dont just go away, they just get magnified more and more as you go along. It's hard to really change that over the course of several months. Many who interview poorly even over several years wont show major improvement. This doesnt mean apply or dont apply next cycle it's just something to consider.

The easy solution here is have one of these waitlists come through. And there's a fair chance when you have this many even as we get late into the year one might. But whatever ends up happening, key is just coming up with a plan for the next year and addressing your interviewing deficiencies. Dont just ignore them and forget about them if Columbia or UCSF comes calling Friday morning with an offer. In terms of what you do during your gap year its not all that relevant as long as its productive and you can tie it with your overall interests. Good luck.

 

[y123]

You definitely have a really strong application. Were you a first time applicant for the 2016 cycle?
You may get one acceptance off the waitlists before August. It's not even June 15th yet. Stay strong!
I think you can add one school in the 2017 cycle application to get your application verified, and later add some mid-tier/top-tier schools where you are not a reapplicant if you don't get off any waitlist. I highly recommend Vanderbilt, WashU, Mayo, UMichigan, Emory, case western and Cleveland clinic.
At this point, maybe it's worth it to pay some professionals to help you improve your interview skills.
Good luck!!!

 

[benjamin94559]

Cycle certainly isnt over yet, the season of waitlist movement hasnt ended. Some of those schools have had active waitlists from what Ive read.

Having said that you know where your problem is. This is all about the interview. It's clear as day. It takes a very strong app to get this many top schools interested. But to not have even one say yes, well that tells you everything about where your interviewing stands and you kind of recognize it yourself.

As for whether or not to reapply if this doesnt work out, there a couple things to consider.

1) First off, a reapplicant with these kinds of stats is going to be perceived as a riskier candidate to a number of evaluators. A number of these top schools that target applicants like you are especially averse to reapplicants. Some flat out very rarely if ever re-interview people.

2) Retaking the MCAT is more of a hassle than a real concern to your chances. Get a similar score, it's largely a non issue.

3) As for the interview issue there again is more than one way to look at this and to consider. If we are being honest you can probably train yourself if you work at it over several months to give the type of answers that can be sufficient for a med school interview with your stats and get someone to accept you next cycle. But at the same time, these issues with interviewing dont just disappear. Theyll just keep coming back again and again down the road. You might be able to just "Game" your way by some learning tricks of the trade and how to not answer certain questions for med school application process. But the flaws in poor interviewing dont just go away, they just get magnified more and more as you go along. It's hard to really change that over the course of several months. Many who interview poorly even over several years wont show major improvement. This doesnt mean apply or dont apply next cycle it's just something to consider.

The easy solution here is have one of these waitlists come through. And there's a fair chance when you have this many even as we get late into the year one might. But whatever ends up happening, key is just coming up with a plan for the next year and addressing your interviewing deficiencies. Dont just ignore them and forget about them if Columbia or UCSF comes calling Friday morning with an offer. In terms of what you do during your gap year its not all that relevant as long as its productive and you can tie it with your overall interests. Good luck.

Thank you! I just had a mock interview with the school premed counselor but she didnt have any super harsh criticisms or anything like that -.-. I will certainly not neglect my interviewing, esp since we have to do this same old dance again for residency.

 

[benjamin94559]

You definitely have a really strong application. Were you a first time applicant for the 2016 cycle?
You may get one acceptance off the waitlists before August. It's not even June 15th yet. Stay strong!
I think you can add one school in the 2017 cycle application to get your application verified, and later add some mid-tier/top-tier schools where you are not a reapplicant if you don't get off any waitlist. I highly recommend Vanderbilt, WashU, Mayo, UMichigan, Emory, case western and Cleveland clinic.
At this point, maybe it's worth it to pay some professionals to help you improve your interview skills.
Good luck!!!

I applied to Vandy and they were like nahhhhhhh
I intend on adding Mich and Emory. I am hesitant about WashU because I feel my numbers are on their low side.

 

[DokterMom]

It does look like it was the interview... But in my opinion, playing with your hair or giving a strong-ish answer on Obamacare wouldn't be sufficient to derail 11/11 interviews. Those are "tree" issues - details. What's the "forest" ?

AdCom members here have stated that 4.0 / 36 applicants who are 'robotic' are a dime a dozen. Could this be you? As an Asian male, stereotypes could feed into this perception if you are calm, rational and professional but not necessarily animated and engaging. If you are not a social extrovert, that may be how you're coming across.

If it sounds like this shoe might fit, I'd work on becoming more social, more outgoing, more visibly 'warm' and on enhancing ways to make you seem like someone who would be fun to work with -- hobbies, etc.

If that's not it, more information about what the "forest issue" might be would be helpful --

 

[Goro]

Based upon a sentence in the OP, I suspect that the OP's issue is that he projected the air of being more passionate about research than Medicine.

This seems to be one of the more common failings of high stat high quality candidates.

It does look like it was the interview... But in my opinion, playing with your hair or giving a strong-ish answer on Obamacare wouldn't be sufficient to derail 11/11 interviews. Those are "tree" issues - details. What's the "forest" ?

AdCom members here have stated that 4.0 / 36 applicants who are 'robotic' are a dime a dozen. Could this be you? As an Asian male, stereotypes could feed into this perception if you are calm, rational and professional but not necessarily animated and engaging. If you are not a social extrovert, that may be how you're coming across.

If it sounds like this show might fit, I'd work on becoming more social, more outgoing, more visibly 'warm' and on enhancing ways to make you seem like someone who would be fun to work with -- hobbies, etc.

If that's not it, more information about what the "forest issue" might be would be helpful --

 

[benjamin94559]

Based upon a sentence in the OP, I suspect that the OP's issue is that he projected the air of being more passionate about research than Medicine.

This seems to be one of the more common failings of high stat high quality candidates.

I am pretty certain that I didn't project the air of being more passionate about research than Medicine. While I obviously have research experience, my primary "angle" for applications was a healthcare disparities/policy type and I majored in a social science.

Edit: If you were talking about the handwavy part, my personal opinion on why I waved my hands more when talking about research was to cover up my relative lack of confidence in discussing my research when compared to other parts of my application. That being said, I admit that I have come across as being more committed to health policy than actually practicing clinical med.

 

[benjamin94559]

It does look like it was the interview... But in my opinion, playing with your hair or giving a strong-ish answer on Obamacare wouldn't be sufficient to derail 11/11 interviews. Those are "tree" issues - details. What's the "forest" ?

AdCom members here have stated that 4.0 / 36 applicants who are 'robotic' are a dime a dozen. Could this be you? As an Asian male, stereotypes could feed into this perception if you are calm, rational and professional but not necessarily animated and engaging. If you are not a social extrovert, that may be how you're coming across.

If it sounds like this show might fit, I'd work on becoming more social, more outgoing, more visibly 'warm' and on enhancing ways to make you seem like someone who would be fun to work with -- hobbies, etc.

If that's not it, more information about what the "forest issue" might be would be helpful --

Those interview issues were issues I noticed before the real ones and took steps to correct them. I am actually told I am quite socially extroverted and generally have little trouble striking up conversations with other people. That being said, I do know I can come off as "low energy" because I am also very laid back as a personality type.

 

[Goro]

I suggest more practice interviews and videotaping yourself to see what else is going wrong. Something is...unless you have a red flag in your app, like a bad LOR.

Those interview issues were issues I noticed before the real ones and took steps to correct them. I am actually told I am quite socially extroverted and generally have little trouble striking up conversations with other people. That being said, I do know I can come off as "low energy" because I am also very laid back as a personality type.

 

[benjamin94559]

I suggest more practice interviews and videotaping yourself to see what else is going wrong. Something is...unless you have a red flag in your app, like a bad LOR.

Will definitely be doing that! I just did another mock today and we noticed I can give long winded answers at times.

It is a little puzzling though as there was an interview for the committee letter and I obviously did at least somewhat well on that to get the letter I received. I talked to my premed advisor and she told me that my LORs were ok. One letter she mentioned didn't really say anything useful other than I volunteered for x hours but that was because the committee required a letter that certifies that you completed 150+ hours of volunteering. If I had any red flags, wouldn't schools just reject instead of waitlist though? Or not even give the II?

 

[DokterMom]

Will definitely be doing that! I just did another mock today and we noticed I can give long winded answers at times.

It is a little puzzling though as there was an interview for the committee letter and I obviously did at least somewhat well on that to get the letter I received. I talked to my premed advisor and she told me that my LORs were ok. One letter she mentioned didn't really say anything useful other than I volunteered for x hours but that was because the committee required a letter that certifies that you completed 150+ hours of volunteering. If I had any red flags, wouldn't schools just reject instead of waitlist though? Or not even give the II?

Your letters were "OK" ? Can you clarify? Did she mean your letters were excellent -- so "OK" as in what is expected, which is excellent. Or did she mean your letters were just OK -- as in "not excellent". That's an important distinction, so if there's any doubt, please get that clarified. If you're having trouble getting a clear answer, ask her if you should get some different letters for your next cycle.

 

[benjamin94559]

Your letters were "OK" ? Can you clarify? Did she mean your letters were excellent -- so "OK" as in what is expected, which is excellent. Or did she mean your letters were just OK -- as in "not excellent". That's an important distinction, so if there's any doubt, please get that clarified. If you're having trouble getting a clear answer, ask her if you should get some different letters for your next cycle.

Her recommendations were to swap out the letter that says that i only volunteered for x hours and that the rest of my letters were "strong" and to add a letter from something that I did this past year, I was thinking about my portuguese professor.