Pre-med Advising **might** = Stats Gatekeeping

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

ekmf27050

Full Member
5+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
521
Reaction score
1,115
Just putting some advice out into the pre-med stratosphere, to be taken with a LARGE grain of salt (I'm still salty about it personally).

Some undergrad schools will tout their pre-med program strength by advertising that "X % of students get accepted after advising". For me, as a relatively uninformed high school student, those high percentages were impressive. Look at all those kids who got in! They could help me get in too with their great advising!

In reality, I went to one of those schools, and was pre-med there, and as many of you are already guessing the reality of the situation hit me real quick. Basically, those schools have great pre-med acceptance stats because they actively and strongly discourage applicants who they do not think are guaranteed an acceptance. In some cases they will withhold or write poor committee recommendations to prevent you from applying.

Now. Here is the saltiness. I very much DO understand the point of advising. Med school is hard, apps are expensive, etc, etc. I think conveying these realities is imperative particularly for young undergrads. But for seniors and post-grads who have shown dedication to the path, overcome early stumbling blocks to build an impressive resume, have unique life experiences, etc--> at some point advising should switch to giving actual, actionable advice on how to present your story and where to apply, rather than sticking to the discouragement train.

This is very much N=1, but the premed committee at my school (with only one doctor, who did not personally advise students) was pretty consistently discouraging and generally unhelpful during my 6+ years of interaction with them. Thanks to internet research (and threads on here!) I pulled together my own post-bac, polished my own personal statement, and have, as of last week, received two acceptances to med school. Both were received with champagne and a LOT of happy tears, because my premed committee pretty thoroughly convinced me that I likely would not get in.

So, TLDR; when picking a university/college for a "strong pre-med program", do not just rely on the stats. Try to speak to students there about who the committee is and what they do. Are they simply gatekeepers for the school reputation? Or are they actually willing to work with you to give you a good shot? Something to consider for the rising pre-meds out there. <3
 
Yeah, this happens. I've heard of schools that only write the committee letters and whatnot if you have certain stats. I also officially give my own undergrad's advising program a vote of no confidence after discovering that they've invited Caribbean and naturopathy schools to campus to advertise to students. Overall, I wouldn't put too much stock into pre-med advising when choosing a school because all of the valuable information is easily obtainable online for free.
 
When I was touring ugrad schools a good chunk of them had criteria that they used define “premeds” into their statistics. For example, one session I attended for a school stated they defined their medical school successes based on the minimum criteria of 3.4 GPA + 28-29 MCAT (might be off on that). Their “success” rate was something in like the low 80s if memory serves me correct.
 
yes, my undergrad has gpa and mcat requirements and you have to attend every single workshop held by them since the moment you identify yourself as premed to them. if your gpa fell below a minimum one semester, you'd get disqualified. no reentry even if you got a 4.0 the next semester. this caused a lot of sucking up to the advisor with students bringing lunch to her every week or so. at the end, the advisor and committee would go and make letter for about 60 students. however, these 60 consists of premed, pre-dent, pre-vet and all the the other pre-health that requires such letters. recently, the school celebrated its "increase" in med school acceptances from 82% to 87%. the more of a "pre-med" college, the more likely the existence of strongest requirements.
 
Being older and more cynical now, I'm not surprised by the realities of pre-med "advising" out there.

But as a rising college freshman, I thought that pre-med advising meant that they literally helped/guided/encouraged students who wanted to become physicians.

It's a sticky situation, because med school applications are not something you want students to go into casually, or under-prepared, or for the wrong reasons.

However, I think that going on about the strength of your pre-med program while downplaying the realities of the gatekeeping purpose of the committee is disingenuous at best. 🙁
 
also I think it's no secret to premed advising that at nearly any given college only 1/3 to 1/4 of students will get an acceptable GPA. some students won't even make it to committee.
 
Last edited:
My school, in similar fashion, internally ranks the applicants that apply through their advising program.

They tout that about 70% of all applicants in their program matriculate; 99-100% of the “extremely and well qualified applicants” matriculate, 80% of the “qualified applicants” matriculate, and 50% of the “marginal” applicants matriculate. I have not seen these figures in a long time, so this is kind of a guess, but I know they’re published. My understanding is that it also plays a role in the committee letter: “_______ is an extremely qualified applicant...”.

EDIT: the stats are as follows:
'Exceptional' candidates: 100% matriculate, makes up 14% of the applicants
'Strong' candidates: 90% matriculate, makes up...like 30% of the applicants
'Average' candidates: 65% matriculate, makes up 38% of the applicants
'Marginal' candidates: 37% matriculate, makes up like 7% of the applicants

They used to boast about the 'exceptional' candidates, which...it's 14% of us. There's statistically a 86% chance that it won't be us.
 
Last edited:
I personally fell prey to this trap in high school. My undergrad had an acceptance twice the National average. I thought this was impressive and was eager to attend there. Once I got there I realized how they’ll talk students out of applying if their stats are not good. So many people were weeded out by the premed advisors. I also know my advisors wrote my committee letter and submitted it earlier than other applicants because they believed I had the best chance of getting accepted this year (one of them told me this). They spent more time on mine than the others.

TLDR; Statistics are easily manipulated.
 
My school, in similar fashion, internally ranks the applicants that apply through their advising program.

They tout that about 70% of all applicants in their program matriculate; 99-100% of the “extremely and well qualified applicants” matriculate, 80% of the “qualified applicants” matriculate, and 50% of the “marginal” applicants matriculate. I have not seen these figures in a long time, so this is kind of a guess, but I know they’re published. My understanding is that it also plays a role in the committee letter: “_______ is an extremely qualified applicant...”.

EDIT: the stats are as follows:
'Exceptional' candidates: 100% matriculate, makes up 14% of the applicants
'Strong' candidates: 90% matriculate, makes up...like 30% of the applicants
'Average' candidates: 65% matriculate, makes up 38% of the applicants
'Marginal' candidates: 37% matriculate, makes up like 7% of the applicants

They used to boast about the 'exceptional' candidates, which...it's 14% of us. There's statistically a 86% chance that it won't be us.

That's... just confusing :wideyed:
For the exceptional ones getting in 100% of the time, are they building orphanages with one hand while scoring 528 on the MCAT with the other hand? Do 14% of your premeds build orphanages??? :laugh:
 
I personally fell prey to this trap in high school. My undergrad had an acceptance twice the National average. I thought this was impressive and was eager to attend there. Once I got there I realized how they’ll talk students out of applying if their stats are not good. So many people were weeded out by the premed advisors. I also know my advisors wrote my committee letter and submitted it earlier than other applicants because they believed I had the best chance of getting accepted this year (one of them told me this). They spent more time on mine than the others.

TLDR; Statistics are easily manipulated.
Haha yup. Or take a bunch of high school students with a 3.9 and a 33, curve classes to a B-/C+, and watch those who make it through the competition magically build a good application
 
Yea my experience as well. My college advertised a 79% med school acceptance rate **with the fine print that they are only counting those who finished 4 years of C+ bell-curved science coursework with a 3.7+ and at least a 30 MCAT, and also applied for a committee letter, which has further requirements**.

My first year RA was told by my UG's committee that he would "never have a shot at medical school" (actual quote from a committee member via email). He was a really strong EC (tons of leadership and volunteering)/low stat candidate when he graduated, so he took a couple years to do post-bacc courses and crushed the MCAT. Earned 3 acceptances and currently at a really strong mid-tier in the top 10% of his class as a M3. When he got his first acceptance, he got on a bus, came back to campus, walked to the committee office, and handed them all a laminated copy of it lmao
 
Finally responded to the increasing number of emails and updated my committee on my progress-- they're "super happy about my success so far" :yeahright::yeahright::yeahright:

.... if I had listened to them, I definitely wouldn't be interviewing at Duke next month

#justsayin
 
Top