post-match feedback from #1 where did not match

[psychdoc111]

---

Members don't see this ad.

how doable do you think is it to obtain feedback as to what mediated being ranked lower than perhaps makes sense objectively I really would just like to undersand what factor(s) as an applicant I did not appreciate/mentalize which played a role in being ranked lower.

In my case I think there was a concerning pattern of board scores that I did not explicitly address which may have been worth effort to explain ' truthful acceptable extenuating circumstance' to give better context to a negative trend (above avg Step 1, below avg step 2, failed 1st attempt on CS) that may have caused me be ranked lower. Not that I'm terribly convinced it would have made a difference, hehe

Current AMG, no overt red flags (except possibly 1st CS attempt fail), multiple posters/publications, Bottom 50% class ranking, Strong letters, HP in psych clerkship, H multiple 4th year psych subI/electives.

Seems like futile effort, but any experienced ppl's .02 cents/subjective input on my circumstances would be appreciated.

 

[Rogue Penguin]

how doable do you think is it to obtain feedback as to what mediated being ranked lower than perhaps makes sense objectively I really would just like to undersand what factor(s) as an applicant I did not appreciate/mentalize which played a role in being ranked lower.

In my case I think there was a concerning pattern of board scores that I did not explicitly address which may have been worth effort to explain ' truthful acceptable extenuating circumstance' to give better context to a negative trend (above avg Step 1, below avg step 2, failed 1st attempt on CS) that may have caused me be ranked lower. Not that I'm terribly convinced it would have made a difference, hehe

Current AMG, no overt red flags (except possibly 1st CS attempt fail), multiple posters/publications, Bottom 50% class ranking, Strong letters, HP in psych clerkship, H multiple 4th year psych subI/electives.

Seems like futile effort, but any experienced ppl's .02 cents/subjective input on my circumstances would be appreciated.

I know of a situation among my friends where a poorer performing student with below average grades, a barely passing step 1, and a CS failure was ranked above someone with better grades and above average scores. After talking with both people, I think the match result had to do with three things. 1) The guy who got the spot made a conscious effort on his interview day to present himself as someone who meshes perfectly with that program's culture. 2) He contacted the program extensively afterwards expressing his interest. 3) The guy who didn't match with the program took a year off 4 years ago after a traumatic experience for mental health reasons, and the program didn't appear to take kindly to that. Maybe he shouldn't have been honest about that? Idk if a psych program would have been more understanding.

Another friend of mine who matched low on his list did email a program to ask why he wasn't ranked higher. The response he got was about what you'd expect: we liked you but it was an exceptionally competitive year... ranking applicants was a challenge for us.

It seems to me that clerkship grades are incredibly important for some reason... Even though the evaluation portion is subjective to the crazy of the evaluator. Personal hardship, even in the relatively remote past, seems to be a problem if it caused an interruption that prevented you from finishing med school or even college in 4 years.

Of course this is all just anecdotal. Hopefully, someone with more knowledge on the ranking process will get back to you. I'm sorry to hear you didn't get what you wanted.

 

[OldPsychDoc]

...
Another friend of mine who matched low on his list did email a program to ask why he wasn't ranked higher. The response he got was about what you'd expect: we liked you but it was an exceptionally competitive year... ranking applicants was a challenge for us.....

Pretty much this...

We had a ton of really good applicants this year. All immensely likable people, too. It was very difficult to tell the difference between our #25 and our #60, and generally came down to 1-2 small things. If applicants were essentially equal, as most of them were, the ones with a failed attempt on any step were just not going to stack up as well against those who didn't. Doesn't mean they're bad people, or that they aren't going to be good residents somewhere--it's just that programs are going to give preference to those whose credentials are a bit cleaner. It's a competitive marketplace out there, and that's just how it's going to work.

So I guess it's most instructive for you all starting the process now: the Steps are important. Don't leave programs in doubt.

 

[675015]

how doable do you think is it to obtain feedback as to what mediated being ranked lower than perhaps makes sense objectively I really would just like to undersand what factor(s) as an applicant I did not appreciate/mentalize which played a role in being ranked lower.

In my case I think there was a concerning pattern of board scores that I did not explicitly address which may have been worth effort to explain ' truthful acceptable extenuating circumstance' to give better context to a negative trend (above avg Step 1, below avg step 2, failed 1st attempt on CS) that may have caused me be ranked lower. Not that I'm terribly convinced it would have made a difference, hehe

Current AMG, no overt red flags (except possibly 1st CS attempt fail), multiple posters/publications, Bottom 50% class ranking, Strong letters, HP in psych clerkship, H multiple 4th year psych subI/electives.

Seems like futile effort, but any experienced ppl's .02 cents/subjective input on my circumstances would be appreciated.

To what end? Or I guess, if you matched somewhere else where they wanted you and will be training you for four years, what's the point?

 

[flower power mike]

To what end? Or I guess, if you matched somewhere else where they wanted you and will be training you for four years, what's the point?

I'm unhappy with the match too, but I agree. There's no point. It's like asking someone why they dumped you. Unlikely to be helpful and a real answer will probably just hurt more. Plus, maybe their reason is garbage anyway.

 

[psychdoc111]

Pretty much this...

We had a ton of really good applicants this year. All immensely likable people, too. It was very difficult to tell the difference between our #25 and our #60, and generally came down to 1-2 small things. If applicants were essentially equal, as most of them were, the ones with a failed attempt on any step were just not going to stack up as well against those who didn't. Doesn't mean they're bad people, or that they aren't going to be good residents somewhere--it's just that programs are going to give preference to those whose credentials are a bit cleaner. It's a competitive marketplace out there, and that's just how it's going to work.

So I guess it's most instructive for you all starting the process now: the Steps are important. Don't leave programs in doubt.

thank you, having some insight into 'how things work' is all I would like to have. The point (bub/flower) is getting feedback on one's performance on a significant trial such as the match where one puts forth epic effort towards effecting a specific outcome (matching at #1). I prefer the 'pain' of knowing where I screwed up, for me it definitely feels important for further 'self improvement'. Thanks rogue for your input 🙂