Post-Interview Acceptance Rates

[TheDeal93]

So I've noticed that some schools have post-interview acceptance rates of 25-30% and some schools have rates as high as 55-60%.

In the former case, as many as 70% or 75% of interviewed applicants are being rejected or waitlisted. It seems like those interviewees have to survive a large cut to get interviewed and then survive another large cut to get accepted, and I'm sure there are a handful of people in the rejected/interviewed pile who had good interviews.

In the latter case, more than half of interviewed applicants are accepted. I interviewed at a school late September (will find out October 15) and their post-interview acceptance rate is 55%, which strikes me as high.

So is it accurate to say that in the former case, you really have to wow them, and in the latter case it's more of a "don't screw up" kind of thing?

Also, are the accepted rates generally higher for people who interview earlier since they have more spots to work with, or is that not true at all?

Thanks for the input!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WedgeDawg]

Former case is usually at top schools, where everyone you're competing with is creme of the crop. It's anyone's guess what you need to do to get an acceptance at these schools, but it's usually a combination of strong academics, a stellar interview, and a solid EC/letter/essay package.

For other schools with 50%+ post interview acceptance rates, it's more of "are you @NotASerialKiller" type deal, so yes.

It's generally easier to be accepted the earlier you interview, but how much easier varies based on the school.

 

[WedgeDawg]

To add further, some of the top schools will interview up to 9 or more applicants per spot.

Eh, applicants/spot is a misleading statistic if you mean spot to be seat in the class. Applicants/spot is more useful if you mean spot to be acceptance, but then it reduces it from 1/9 at the school you're thinking of to somewhere around 1/5.

 

[Spector1]

To add further, some of the top schools will interview up to 9 or more applicants per spot.

wow and I thought a 1/5 out of interview acceptance rate was bad

 

[WedgeDawg]

wow and I thought a 1/5 out of interview acceptance rate was bad

That's the acceptance rate (and that is very low). It's 1:9 seats:interviewees, but 1:5 acceptances:interviewees.

 

[Spector1]

Former case is usually at top schools, where everyone you're competing with is creme of the crop. It's anyone's guess what you need to do to get an acceptance at these schools, but it's usually a combination of strong academics, a stellar interview, and a solid EC/letter/essay package.

For other schools with 50%+ post interview acceptance rates, it's more of "are you @NotASerialKiller" type deal, so yes.

It's generally easier to be accepted the earlier you interview, but how much easier varies based on the school.

Surely even for the more generous schools, it can't just be that 50% of the interviewees are literally serial killers. I mean 50% out of interview accept rate is good but its not a sure in or anything.

 

[WedgeDawg]

Surely even for the more generous schools, it can't just be that 50% of the interviewees are literally serial killers. I mean 50% out of interview accept rate is good but its not a sure in or anything.

No, you're right, but remember that applicants don't come into the interview on equal footing. At a school with a 50% post-interview acceptance rate, you have to establish yourself as an applicant in the top 50% of interviewed applicants (through interview + everything else) to be accepted. This generally means if your stats are around or above the school's median and you interviewed early, you're sitting pretty and more or less have to not be a sociopath, but if you interview very late, you have subpar stats, or something else that isn't as good as it should be, you have to really convince them to take a chance on you (though they are at least somewhat interested because they did invite you to interview).

I guess my point is that at these schools, your interview is rarely make or break. You probably come into the interview with the committee already leaning one way or the other and your interview is most likely to confirm that (so a decent interview will get an otherwise good applicant in but won't get an otherwise shaky applicant in), but on rare occasion, it might flip you (eg a good applicant interviews and sounds like draco malfoy or a weaker applicant interviews like robert california).

 

[cantankerous]

Surely even for the more generous schools, it can't just be that 50% of the interviewees are literally serial killers. I mean 50% out of interview accept rate is good but its not a sure in or anything.

People exaggerate and lie all the time on apps. Interviews weed out those who can't sell those lies, I mean those who can't effectively communicate their dedication to ethical conduct, service, and medicine.

 

[mrspecialist]

So I've noticed that some schools have post-interview acceptance rates of 25-30% and some schools have rates as high as 55-60%.

In the former case, as many as 70% or 75% of interviewed applicants are being rejected or waitlisted. It seems like those interviewees have to survive a large cut to get interviewed and then survive another large cut to get accepted, and I'm sure there are a handful of people in the rejected/interviewed pile who had good interviews.

In the latter case, more than half of interviewed applicants are accepted. I interviewed at a school late September (will find out October 15) and their post-interview acceptance rate is 55%, which strikes me as high.

So is it accurate to say that in the former case, you really have to wow them, and in the latter case it's more of a "don't screw up" kind of thing?

Also, are the accepted rates generally higher for people who interview earlier since they have more spots to work with, or is that not true at all?

Thanks for the input!

Good Metric would be: Top schools (1.5-2x admission offers), Bottom schools (2-2.5x offers)

 

[calisurfer19]

Good Metric would be: Top schools (1.5-2x admission offers), Bottom schools (2-2.5x offers)

Respectfully, I think this might be reversed. Top schools go after top candidates, and top candidates are more likely to have multiple acceptances; therefore top schools would need to give out a higher number of admissions offers per seat. I'm applying to mid and lower tier schools, and all of them have ~1.5 - 2x acceptances per seat.

 

[starlite911]

Respectfully, I think this might be reversed. Top schools go after top candidates, and top candidates are more likely to have multiple acceptances; therefore top schools would need to give out a higher number of admissions offers per seat. I'm applying to mid and lower tier schools, and all of them have ~1.5 - 2x acceptances per seat.

I agree. I'm pretty sure LizzyM has said in the past that her school has to accept about 3X the number of seats, since someone who is accepted to her school, on average, holds ~6 other acceptances as well.

 

[GrapesofRath]

General rule I've seen on here posted by ADCOMs is assume that a school accepts 2-3X as many as there class can hold. You can try and reverse calculate the odds of getting accepted if you get an interview from there.

LizzyM has said at her school(top 20) they need to make 3 offers for every seat. Gyngyn has said for his school its over 2. Another top 20 school of where I know these stats directly it's between 2-2.5 offers for spot. As for State U's that only take people from their state that release the info publicly regarding this I think ECU makes 120 offers for 80 spots. Southern Illinois makes 140 offers for 70 spots. So as you can see there is a lot of variance; don't just assume by tier of school that they have to make more or less offers to fill their class.

Also each school specific thread on here has good input. On a number of them I've seen people who had an interview come back and said the medical students I interviewed or the data I got from the school showed X% of people who were interviewed were accepted.

1/5 is a rather low acceptance rate. That definitely is not the norm. And there are definitely a number of schools where the % of people accepted who are interviewed is clearly over 50%.

 

[WedgeDawg]

The 1/5 is a very specific case. Among most top schools, it's probably around 30-40% including waitlist acceptances. My school accepts about 1.8-1.9 our class size including waitlist acceptances.

Top schools usually have super long waitlists so they don't have to accept a huge number of people outright since there are always people they can poach.

 

[goldy490]

about how common is the post interview rejection vs waitlist? Are the rejected one the people who just interviewed terribly?

 

[musicalfeet]

I don't want to spread neuroticism...

but also keep in mind that the "acceptance" rate isn't "outright acceptance". They may only offer a few acceptances throughout the year, but accept off of the waitlist because a lot of people they accepted decided not to attend. At the very end of the cycle, when the numbers are crunched, it will come out to about 50%, but we don't know how many acceptances they will actually hand out throughout the main cycle vs the wait list. (and to me, the wait list is ALWAYS unpredictable)

 

[avgn]

about how common is the post interview rejection vs waitlist? Are the rejected one the people who just interviewed terribly?

Too general to be answered. See previous discussion on how widely the post-II acceptance rates differ.

 

[BphysDoc]

Numbers are just numbers. Try your best on every interview you have - then stop worrying about it.

 

[WedgeDawg]

about how common is the post interview rejection vs waitlist? Are the rejected one the people who just interviewed terribly?

Absolutely depends on the school. Harvard for example takes a tiny waitlist (like 50 or something, I forget the exact number) while Columbia has a 600-800 person waitlist, even though they're fairly similar schools. It's a difficult thing to generalize.

 

[GrapesofRath]

about how common is the post interview rejection vs waitlist? Are the rejected one the people who just interviewed terribly?

I think LizzyM said at her top 20 only about 10% of people who they interview are truly bad interviewers to the point that is the main force behind a rejection post-interview.

 

[TheDeal93]

Thanks for all the input guys! Definitely very insightful.

The school at which I interviewed accepts ~54-57% and the last 3 years they have not taken anyone off the deferment list. Crossing my fingers for good news!

 

[Goro]

At my school it takes work to be outright rejected. We see it maybe 1-2x/month over the cycle.

And yes, they're terrible at interviewing. Sometimes they're outright scary. LizzyM has talked about one who simply stared at the interviewer; gyngyn reported about one who yelled at the parking staff, and another who expected Admissions staff to go fetch coffee.

about how common is the post interview rejection vs waitlist? Are the rejected one the people who just interviewed terribly?

 

[Fedekz]

At my school it takes work to be outright rejected. We see it maybe 1-2x/month over the cycle.

And yes, they're terrible at interviewing. Sometimes they're outright scary. LizzyM has talked about one who simply stared at the interviewer; gyngyn reported about one who yelled at the parking staff, and another who expected Admissions staff to go fetch coffee.

Looks like I made a big mistake parking in the handicap space because I was running late then when the security popped an attitude I went ahead and put them in their place. Because I was running behind I couldn't stop at Starbucks, but I'm glad the admissions office was nice enough to fetch me some burnt coffee from the night before at my request.

Hoping for good news this Oct. 15th

 

[SteveRope123]

At my school it takes work to be outright rejected. We see it maybe 1-2x/month over the cycle.

And yes, they're terrible at interviewing. Sometimes they're outright scary. LizzyM has talked about one who simply stared at the interviewer; gyngyn reported about one who yelled at the parking staff, and another who expected Admissions staff to go fetch coffee.

LOL. Coffee Fetch is funniest followed by staring at interviewer.

 

[Glazedonutlove]

At my school it takes work to be outright rejected. We see it maybe 1-2x/month over the cycle.

And yes, they're terrible at interviewing. Sometimes they're outright scary. LizzyM has talked about one who simply stared at the interviewer; gyngyn reported about one who yelled at the parking staff, and another who expected Admissions staff to go fetch coffee.

You mean too much eye contact or just staring and no talking??

 

[Goro]

Lets ask @LizzyM!

You mean too much eye contact or just staring and no talking??

 

[LizzyM]

You mean too much eye contact or just staring and no talking??

Locking eyes and staring without blinking while answering. It was a weird and unnatural way of interacting with another human being.

 

[bumblebee611]

The 1/5 is a very specific case.

Which school is the 1/5?

 

[avgn]

Which school is the 1/5?

Not sure if there really is a school with a confirmed 1 in 5 post-II rate, but HMS/Penn both have 25% post-II acceptance rates with tiny waitlists (which implies high acceptance yield).

 

[bumblebee611]

Not sure if there really is a school with a confirmed 1 in 5 post-II rate, but HMS/Penn both have 25% post-II acceptance rates with tiny waitlists (which implies high acceptance yield).

Thanks!

 

[WedgeDawg]

Which school is the 1/5?

Columbia. ~300/~1200 after waitlist acceptances. It's like 250 pre waitlist.

 

[padfootmd]

It's generally easier to be accepted the earlier you interview, but how much easier varies based on the school.

Does this hold true for schools like Columbia and Yale where they release all decisions at once after everyone has interviewed? Especially given Yale insists that it doesn't matter when you interview, everyone has the same chance at acceptance?

 

[WedgeDawg]

Does this hold true for schools like Columbia and Yale where they release all decisions at once after everyone has interviewed? Especially given Yale insists that it doesn't matter when you interview, everyone has the same chance at acceptance?

@gyngyn can answer this question better than I can

 

[avgn]

Does this hold true for schools like Columbia and Yale where they release all decisions at once after everyone has interviewed? Especially given Yale insists that it doesn't matter when you interview, everyone has the same chance at acceptance?

I've always felt that schools have no reason to lie about their practices. Like, what do they gain from doing so? So when Yale for example says everyone has the same CHANCE at getting in regardless of date, I believe them. HOWEVER, this does not mean everyone is on equal footing at the interview, which many premeds assume to be the case at non-rolling schools. A superstar interviewing late is still more likely accepted than a take-a-chance applicant interviewing on the first day.

The real crystal ball area is whether top schools invite top applicants earlier than other applicants. Anecdotally we think it's a yes, but anything beyond that is just a guessing game.

 

[begoood95]

Which school is the 1/5?

IIRC, I believe Mayo Medical School (MN) is another one of those low post-II acceptance schools as well.

 

[Porkloins]

IIRC, I believe Mayo Medical School (MN) is another one of those low post-II acceptance schools as well.

Mayo is indeed quite low (though they're a little better than 1/5) if this data compiled from US News is to be trusted.

 

[begoood95]

Or we could go to the Mayo Website to verify the 22% rate
M.D. Program - Admissions and Application Process
2017 application stats
For the M.D. Program at our Minnesota and Arizona campuses and the Medical Scientist Training Program (M.D.-Ph.D.):

• Total applications received: 8,068
  • Male: 4,497
  • Female: 3,571
• On-campus interviews: 798
• Acceptances issued: 176
• New M.D. matriculates: 102
  • Male: 51
  • Female: 51
• Median cumulative GPA: 3.89
• Median MCAT score: 516 (95th percentile)

Right, but I believe you'd have to halve the statistics on interviews if you're looking for a particular Mayo, because they have an Arizona campus as well as one in Minnesota (assuming the class sizes are equal), so the numbers reported above are the total applicants to the Mayo system.

 

[infectiousdisease101]

I didn't read any replies, so forgive me if this is repeat. Typically if an applicant is interviewed for one school they are interviewed for several, assuming they cast a wide net. That's why medical schools interview 5x as many applicants as spots they have available because they also have to play it smart and cast a wide net of interviewees just like how we cast a wide net of schools to apply to.

Statistics is actually very tricky. If you look at the acceptance rate for 1 medical school, it is discouraging, 3% to 5% give or take. However, if you take into accept all medical schools in AMCAS since students obviously cannot matriculate to 2 medical schools, the matriculation rate is like 39%.

https://www.aamc.org/download/321442/data/factstablea1.pdf

 

[calivianya]

One of my friends used to be an adcom at Wake and he said their interviews were more just proving the person isn't a serial killer than a weed out... however, it's been a few years since he was there. Can't say for sure if this is still their practice.

 

[infectiousdisease101]

One of my friends used to be an adcom at Wake and he said their interviews were more just proving the person isn't a serial killer than a weed out... however, it's been a few years since he was there. Can't say for sure if this is still their practice.

I believe it. Also, the questions have a purpose. "What do you do for fun?" is for example a question to see how you cope with stress because let's be honest. Medicine is stressful.

I was told that by a mock interviewer.

 

[workaholic181]

Anecdotal, but I felt I did absolutely miserable my first interview. Was clearly a little nervous and not as articulate as I wanted to be. Ended up getting in anyway. I think that at most schools, if your project decently, make eye contact, and address the substance of the questions being asked of you you'll be fine. Especially this early in the cycle.

 

[Mr.Monster]

Like Hannibal Lechter

This deserves far more likes than it has received.

 

[mbio2015]

@WedgeDawg What counts as early? I have an interview at a top 10 late next month cause that was the only date available when I got my II in September. Now I'm slightly worried cause people who recently got IIs are saying dates popped up for this month haha.

 

[WedgeDawg]

@WedgeDawg What counts as early? I have an interview at a top 10 late next month cause that was the only date available when I got my II in September. Now I'm slightly worried cause people who recently got IIs are saying dates popped up for this month haha.

I wouldn't worry