Post-II R Reason?

[Blank-account8]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Just got a post-ii R from a school I felt I had a great shot at. Stats were similar to their averages, post-ii acceptance was around 60%. I've been told that I have good interview skills, and I can't think of any major red flags on my application. However, they are very service-oriented, and while I am as well, I don't think I expressed it properly during the interview. Any estimation on how often a direct post-ii R (rather than waitlist) occurs from lack of perceived mission fit? I feel like this is the only thing that it could have been, or if people have any other ideas I would love to hear it as I have another one coming up soon, so trying to not repeat mistakes. Just wracking my brain at this point.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

Since we don't have a WAMC profile, it's hard to say what the issues could have been. Every admissions committee though has the right to do a full review of an application after interview (nothing redacted) and reject an applicant. For most circumstances, it is because of the interview, but if you didn't have enough of a mission alignment, you could be rejected too.

Read

From Waitlist to Offer: Inside an Admissions Committee | SDN

You are finally done with your interviews, so let the waiting games begin! In March, health professions programs will begin securing seats for the next

www.studentdoctor.net

 

[LizzyM]

Hard to say. Some schools reject almost no one and leave you in the purgatory that is the waitlist even if there is only a 1 in 300 chance that you'll get off that list. Other schools just rip the bandaid off quickly and put you out of your misery with a "R" so you can move on. It could be your non-verbal communications (we had someone who really found nervous giggling offensive), other ways you expressed yourself, the feeling that you would not be a good fit with the school's ethos. In any case, you now have the freedom to move on and not think about them again.

 

[Goro]

Most likely it was your interview skills.

I've seen people nod off during the interview, as an example. Others roll their eyes or look distracted when someone else was talking. Still others were looking at their phones or a cheat sheet of answers

 

[Blank-account8]

It was via zoom, but at the last wrap-up session which included all interviewees and some students/adcoms, I was texting for a moment that I had basically finished, so now looking back can definitely see how this could have led to the R. Honestly embarrassing to say, since if this was the reason it was such a silly mistake, which is phrasing it lightly. They offered to provide feedback at the end of the cycle, so if it was this I wonder if they will mention it.

 

[LindaAccepted]

It was via zoom, but at the last wrap-up session which included all interviewees and some students/adcoms, I was texting for a moment that I had basically finished, so now looking back can definitely see how this could have led to the R. Honestly embarrassing to say, since if this was the reason it was such a silly mistake, which is phrasing it lightly. They offered to provide feedback at the end of the cycle, so if it was this I wonder if they will mention it.

That mistake could have tipped the scales and it is certainly wise to examine what you could improve or could have done differently. However, it's hard to know for sure why you were rejected, unless they candidly tell you.

Remember that even if the post-II acceptance rate is 60%, almost half are not accepted and some of those rejected didn't make mistakes and had OK interview skills. The school can't accept everyone and you may have been a victim of the numbers.

 

[Mr.Smile12]

It was via zoom, but at the last wrap-up session which included all interviewees and some students/adcoms, I was texting for a moment that I had basically finished, so now looking back can definitely see how this could have led to the R. Honestly embarrassing to say, since if this was the reason it was such a silly mistake, which is phrasing it lightly. They offered to provide feedback at the end of the cycle, so if it was this I wonder if they will mention it.

We aren't there. You can torture yourself in your own recollections. However...

If it was a distraction that disrupted the session (since we're talking online), then I'll agree with LindaAccepted, it could have tipped the scales. However, I posit you probably already were a borderline candidate regardless of that mistake (since we don't have your WAMC to suggest otherwise). If you fell below the cutoff, you were chopped.

You're competing in the Olympics. It can take one minor mistake (but more likely a few since we're not giving away gold medals... just placement in the "finals").