Probability of getting into one of these three schools.

[inoffensivepersona]

Hi! So I have been very fortunate to get interviews at Harvard, Stanford and UCSF this cycle, and after interviewing and learning about each of them, they are my top choices. I was wondering what the probability was that I would get into at least one of these three schools. I would be so eternally grateful if I got into even one of these schools. I interviewed at Harvard in December as well as at Stanford and UCSF in early February. I think most of my application is pretty decent. However, I have an MCAT around the 25th percentile at these schools.

Thank you for your help. I’m sorry if this is a dumb question. It just has been really stressful waiting on school decisions.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[chzsux]

not sure how accurate this is, but I've been referring to this document to get a rough idea for my interviews. Keep in mind that these are just guidelines and will probably be affected by interview timing, which state you're from, etc

 

[inoffensivepersona]

Do you think any of these are from the pandemic? Because I’m a bit anxious that schools may be interviewing more people since they are all online, and, therefore, waitlisting more.

 

[chzsux]

Not sure. That's why I said this is a guideline, not an absolute rule.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

If you got interviews at all three, you will probably get into 1. I’d set the even money over under at 1.5 rather than .5 (which would mean equally likely accepted to one or not)

 

[deleted1114112]

If your MCAT was at the 25th and you got II's, there was probably a strong reason. In any case it really depends on you. I feel like if you have gotten other A's and know that your baseline interview ability is at least up to par, then I would assume at least 1 out of 3 A.

 

[LizzyM]

I'd need to know far more about you including whether you are a legacy at those 3 schools and/or if you are URM. It would also be useful to know your GPA, major, undergrad school and whether you are a non-trad with work experience that brings something unusual to the class. Were any of your letter writers on faculty at any of those schools? Do you have an academic record or work experience (including summer programs) at any of those schools?

I don't expect you to answer those questions in this thread but those would certainly factor in when determining if you actually have a high likelihood of being admitted or if your invitations were courtesy interviews.

 

[inoffensivepersona]

I'd need to know far more about you including whether you are a legacy at those 3 schools and/or if you are URM. It would also be useful to know your GPA, major, undergrad school and whether you are a non-trad with work experience that brings something unusual to the class. Were any of your letter writers on faculty at any of those schools? Do you have an academic record or work experience (including summer programs) at any of those schools?

I don't expect you to answer those questions in this thread but those would certainly factor in when determining if you actually have a high likelihood of being admitted or if your invitations were courtesy interviews.

Can I PM you?

 

[inoffensivepersona]

If your MCAT was at the 25th and you got II's, there was probably a strong reason. In any case it really depends on you. I feel like if you have gotten other A's and know that your baseline interview ability is at least up to par, then I would assume at least 1 out of 3 A.

I haven’t received an A yet. I interviewed at 8 schools, 5 of which were interviews conducted in late January/early February. I’ve only heard from one school (not one of these three) post interview, which was a waitlist.

 

[allseasons]

Do you think any of these are from the pandemic? Because I’m a bit anxious that schools may be interviewing more people since they are all online, and, therefore, waitlisting more.

The post pandemic numbers release in about a month when US News updates with the 2023 rankings. I'm guessing by then though you will already have your decision, so maybe not the most useful. These numbers are for 2020 cycle.

I haven’t received an A yet. I interviewed at 8 schools, 5 of which were interviews conducted in late January/early February. I’ve only heard from one school (not one of these three) post interview, which was a waitlist.

Have you received WLs or Rs or just all your schools have late decisions.

 

[JohnJacobJingleheimer]

assume these schools average out to 50/50 odds post interview (most schools linger around these odds, so averaged out we should be close) .5^3 = .125 or 12.5% chance you don’t get in to any of the 3. There is far more nuance than this, such as interview skills, for one. This is relying on oversimplified averages, but I think it’s a sound approach.

 

[bonedoc5576]

Of course, it depends on how you interviewed.
But the statistical calculation is as follows:
Assume post interview acceptance rates for Harvard, Stanford, and UCSF are .24, .36, and .63 respectively, then odds of getting into one is represented by 1 minus odds of getting rejected by all 3: 1- (.76)(.64)(.37) = .82

I’d say odds are in your favor!

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Of course, it depends on how you interviewed.
But the statistical calculation is as follows:
Assume post interview acceptance rates for Harvard, Stanford, and UCSF are .24, .36, and .63 respectively, then odds of getting into one is represented by 1 minus odds of getting rejected by all 3: 1- (.76)(.64)(.37) = .82

I’d say odds are in your favor!

This assumes independent outcomes.

 

[LizzyM]

This assumes independent outcomes.

Which they should be... but furthermore, it assumes random selection which we know if not at all true. No adcom is flipping a coin to come to a final decision on each applicant.

 

[allseasons]

Which they should be... but furthermore, it assumes random selection which we know if not at all true. No adcom is flipping a coin to come to a final decision on each applicant.

yea, I assume someone accepted to 4/5 T5s is much more likely to get the last one than someone that's only interviewed at 1.

 

[Goro]

Hi! So I have been very fortunate to get interviews at Harvard, Stanford and UCSF this cycle, and after interviewing and learning about each of them, they are my top choices. I was wondering what the probability was that I would get into at least one of these three schools. I would be so eternally grateful if I got into even one of these schools. I interviewed at Harvard in December as well as at Stanford and UCSF in early February. I think most of my application is pretty decent. However, I have an MCAT around the 25th percentile at these schools.

Thank you for your help. I’m sorry if this is a dumb question. It just has been really stressful waiting on school decisions.

Impossible to answer and getting in is 100% on you.

 

[inoffensivepersona]

Impossible to answer and getting in is 100% on you.

I got waitlisted last week at UCSD. While UCSD is an amazing school that I would’ve loved to attend, it seems to be less selective than these three schools.
It kinda hit my confidence, and now I’m second guessing my interview performance at all my interviews.

 

[deleted555445]

I got waitlisted last week at UCSD. While UCSD is an amazing school, it seems to be less selective than these three schools.
It kinda hit my confidence, and now I’m second guessing my interview performance at all my interviews.

If you look at the data posted earlier in the chat, UCSD is actually more selective post-II than UCSF (37.3% vs 63.5%, respectively).

 

[allseasons]

If you look at the data posted earlier in the chat, UCSD is actually more selective post-II than UCSF (37.3% vs 63.5%, respectively).

I mean it doesn’t really work directly like that haha.

 

[deleted555445]

I mean it doesn’t really work directly like that haha.

I mean none of this works like that, aggregate acceptance rates have little to no meaning to the individual, but some schools do more screening pre-interview. And when you take into account that you've already interviewed at these places, I'd feel better about my chances at a place that is more selective pre-interview (UCSF) than post-interview (UCSD). Same reason I'd feel better about my chances after interviewing at UMich than Georgetown, even though UMich is generally considered to be a more selective school.

 

[inoffensivepersona]

Just got into UCLA. I would’ve had that on this list, but I thought I messed up my interview so much that I had written it off.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Impossible to answer and getting in is 100% on you.

Not necessarily true. You can have really good interviews but if there is something that the committee doesn’t like they will vote you down. I mean I guess it’s still on you in that you could have avoided doing something or studied harder but you can give the interview your all, so well and still he rejected.

 

[deleted555445]

Just got into UCLA. I would’ve had that on this list, but I thought I messed up my interview so much that I had written it off.

Had the same thing happen to me earlier in the season, had completely shut off the idea of getting into a school I eventually got the A at because I thought I had said something deal-breaking during the interview. Congrats!

 

[Goro]

Not necessarily true. You can have really good interviews but if there is something that the committee doesn’t like they will vote you down. I mean I guess it’s still on you in that you could have avoided doing something or studied harder but you can give the interview your all, so well and still he rejected.

Once one gets to the interviews, the process can't be considered to be analogous to batting against right handed pitchers, or stealing against left or right-handed catchers, or winning on the road or at home.

 

[deleted555445]

Once one gets to the interviews, the process can't be considered to be analogous to batting against right handed pitchers, or stealing against left or right-handed catchers, or winning on the road or at home.

Billy Beane would not be pleased

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Once one gets to the interviews, the process can't be considered to be analogous to batting against right handed pitchers, or stealing against left or right-handed catchers, or winning on the road or at home.

Billy Beane would not be pleased

Good thing there are no lockouts in med school admissions.

 

[KanekiS1E12]

I'd need to know far more about you including whether you are a legacy at those 3 schools and/or if you are URM. It would also be useful to know your GPA, major, undergrad school and whether you are a non-trad with work experience that brings something unusual to the class. Were any of your letter writers on faculty at any of those schools? Do you have an academic record or work experience (including summer programs) at any of those schools?

I don't expect you to answer those questions in this thread but those would certainly factor in when determining if you actually have a high likelihood of being admitted or if your invitations were courtesy interviews.

What might be a situation where someone would receive a courtesy interview at these schools? Also what is the point of extending courtesy interview invites? I’m in a similar situation at 2 of these schools and a few other peer institutions w/ a mcat in the 10-25th percentile for them. Just waiting on post interview decisions, so I’m curious.

 

[LizzyM]

You might be invited for a courtesy interview if you have a relative who is

• a graduate of the school
• a faculty member of the school
• the chair of a department of the school
• a dean at the school
• a trustee or other high ranking official at the school

That's pretty much a rank order (from least to most) of the likelihood of a courtesy interview if you wouldn't otherwise be eligible for an interview. I will say that I have seen admitted students in each of these categories so it is not automatically a courtesy rather than a serious possibility that you will be admitted.

 

[allseasons]

What might be a situation where someone would receive a courtesy interview at these schools? Also what is the point of extending courtesy interview invites? I’m in a similar situation at 2 of these schools and a few other peer institutions w/ a mcat in the 10-25th percentile for them. Just waiting on post interview decisions, so I’m curious.

You're also URM + FAP, so within those two categories which are highly recruited for, you are likely at least median. Definitely not courtesy interview imo.

 

[KnightDoc]

What might be a situation where someone would receive a courtesy interview at these schools? Also what is the point of extending courtesy interview invites? I’m in a similar situation at 2 of these schools and a few other peer institutions w/ a mcat in the 10-25th percentile for them. Just waiting on post interview decisions, so I’m curious.

You've received 19 IIs and 7 As. You are not receiving courtesy interviews anywhere!

That said, just like OP, you are asking about the odds of acceptance at the highest ranked, most selective schools in the country, with a far below median MCAT. That's impossible for anyone here to say, even the great @LizzyM, without having access to your complete file, in addition to having years of adcom experience.

Your results to date indicate your chances are far above 0, and yet the same could be said for everyone else who has made it to this stage at those schools, and, when all is said and done, many will be disappointed. Other than that, you are clearly having a great cycle, so, congratulations and good luck!!

 

[KanekiS1E12]

You might be invited for a courtesy interview if you have a relative who is

• a graduate of the school
• a faculty member of the school
• the chair of a department of the school
• a dean at the school
• a trustee or other high ranking official at the school

That's pretty much a rank order of the likelihood of a courtesy interview if you wouldn't otherwise be eligible for an interview. I will say that I have seen admitted students in each of these categories so it is not automatically a courtesy rather than a serious possibility that you will be admitted.

Thank you, that makes sense and was something I hadn’t considered. I couldn’t imagine other situations where a courtesy interview wouldn’t just be a waste of time and resources.

You're also URM + FAP, so within those two categories which are highly recruited for, you are likely at least median. Definitely not courtesy interview imo.

Thank you. Yeah, I was mostly curious about the existence of courtesy interviews as common practice. Seems like its more out of the ordinary though and not something to be too concerned about. Also if they were, its all good. I love some of the programs I’m accepted at.

You've received 19 IIs and 7 As. You are not receiving courtesy interviews anywhere!

That said, just like OP, you are asking about the odds of acceptance at the highest ranked, most selective schools in the country, with a far below median MCAT. That's impossible for anyone here to say, even the great @LizzyM, without having access to your complete file, in addition to having years of adcom experience.

Your results to date indicate your chances are far above 0, and yet the same could be said for everyone else who has made it to this stage at those schools, and, when all is said and done, many will be disappointed. Other than that, you are clearly having a great cycle, so, congratulations and good luck!!

Thank you, I appreciate the congratulations and good luck!

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

You might be invited for a courtesy interview if you have a relative who is

• a graduate of the school
• a faculty member of the school
• the chair of a department of the school
• a dean at the school
• a trustee or other high ranking official at the school

That's pretty much a rank order (from least to most) of the likelihood of a courtesy interview if you wouldn't otherwise be eligible for an interview. I will say that I have seen admitted students in each of these categories so it is not automatically a courtesy rather than a serious possibility that you will be admitted.

Deans/trustees only get courtesy interviews rather than auto admission? I know at the UG level anybody from the second bullet point and down would be automatically admitted.

 

[KnightDoc]

Deans/trustees only get courtesy interviews rather than auto admission? I know at the UG level anybody from the second bullet point and down would be automatically admitted.

She already said some courtesy interviews ultimately become regular interviews, depending on the quality of the applicant.

Beyond that, I'm sure that any school that doesn't value its LCME accreditation can engage in blatant favoritism and implement an auto admit policy for referrals from deans and trustees. But, in a world in which VIPs are removed from powerful positions all the time due to abuse of their power, it's pretty unlikely that any school would risk its ability to function to appease a VIP, beyond the granting of the courtesy interview. It's actually more likely that a VIP that attempted to throw their weight around to implement such a demand would cease to be a VIP.

And, just how do you "know" what you "know" about UG? My family personally knows several so-called VIPs from bullets 2 and 3 who are absolutely beside themselves over the fact that their kids were rejected from multiple prestigious UGs, including but not limited to their home institutions. It's not 1960 anymore, especially after Operation Varsity Blues! Limited pockets of corruption will always exist, but, no, auto admit seats are not set aside anywhere for VIP referrals when there are 20+ applicants for every available seat, there are only around 100-200 spots at every school, and schools are required to have admissions policies that conform to standards set by an external accrediting body.

 

[allseasons]

Deans/trustees only get courtesy interviews rather than auto admission? I know at the UG level anybody from the second bullet point and down would be automatically admitted.

She already said some courtesy interviews ultimately become regular interviews, depending on the quality of the applicant.

Beyond that, I'm sure that any school that doesn't value its LCME accreditation can engage in blatant favoritism and implement an auto admit policy for referrals from deans and trustees. But, in a world in which VIPs are removed from powerful positions all the time due to abuse of their power, it's pretty unlikely that any school would risk its ability to function to appease a VIP, beyond the granting of the courtesy interview. It's actually more likely that a VIP that attempted to throw their weight around to implement such a demand would cease to be a VIP.

And, just how do you "know" what you "know" about UG? My family personally knows several so-called VIPs from bullets 2 and 3 who are absolutely beside themselves over the fact that their kids were rejected from multiple prestigious UGs, including but not limited to their home institutions. It's not 1960 anymore, especially after Operation Varsity Blues! Limited pockets of corruption will always exist, but, no, auto admit seats are not set aside anywhere for VIP referrals when there are 20+ applicants for every available seat, there are only around 100-200 spots at every school, and schools are required to have admissions policies that conform to standards set by an external accrediting body.

There was actually a story about this just today:

I think it's also about plausibility of a candidates. If an otherwise unremarkable candidate has stats around your 25th percentile or even 10th percentile at least, the bare minimum of ECs, then connections can lead to admission because eyebrows won't really be raised. Meanwhile, if your school averages 3.8/516, then even if someone is son of the dean and #1 donor, you can't really admit them if they have a 3.0/500 and bare bones ECs as there's not really a plausible reason to do so. Two friends of mine had no interview at their UG's med school, and had a close contact with an adcom member. At the very end of last cycle, this member gave an internal recommendation for them that ultimately led to an interview and later admission (candidate went elsewhere though). For my other friend, decision is still pending. However, in both these cases, my friends were very plausible candidates with stats above the median, they just "got lost" in a sea of similar looking candidates.

 

[KnightDoc]

There was actually a story about this just today:

I think it's also about plausibility of a candidates. If an otherwise unremarkable candidate has stats around your 25th percentile or even 10th percentile at least, the bare minimum of ECs, then connections can lead to admission because eyebrows won't really be raised. Meanwhile, if your school averages 3.8/516, then even if someone is son of the dean and #1 donor, you can't really admit them if they have a 3.0/500 and bare bones ECs as there's not really a plausible reason to do so. Two friends of mine had no interview at their UG's med school, and had a close contact with an adcom member. At the very end of last cycle, this member gave an internal recommendation for them that ultimately led to an interview and later admission (candidate went elsewhere though). For my other friend, decision is still pending. However, in both these cases, my friends were very plausible candidates with stats above the median, they just "got lost" in a sea of similar looking candidates.

Not so sure that a reddit post constitutes a "story"! It's just as likely to be total BS.

It's not about eyebrows being raised. It's about corruption, undue influence, an ethical process, and institutions valuing their franchise. Maybe I'm naive, but there are so many VIPs in the world, and so many candidates, that I believe if this were a thing, beyond courtesy interviews, then no one without a connection would ever manage to find themselves enrolled in medical school, given the relative scarcity of seats.

I'm not talking about viable candidates who get a look they might not otherwise receive because they know someone who makes sure an application is not just tossed aside, as so many inevitably are. I'm talking about auto admits like @voxveritatisetlucis was speculating about. I have no comment on reddit posts, but in general give them zero weight.

 

[allseasons]

Not so sure that a reddit post constitutes a "story"! It's just as likely to be total BS.

haha even BS is a story!

 

[KnightDoc]

haha even BS is a story!

True!!!

 

[proudofmykids]

You might be invited for a courtesy interview if you have a relative who is

• a graduate of the school
• a faculty member of the school
• the chair of a department of the school
• a dean at the school
• a trustee or other high ranking official at the school

That's pretty much a rank order (from least to most) of the likelihood of a courtesy interview if you wouldn't otherwise be eligible for an interview. I will say that I have seen admitted students in each of these categories so it is not automatically a courtesy rather than a serious possibility that you will be admitted.

Valid list. But, a likely match to the list is improbable when making a group of three schools

Numerically, the match above showing 0.86 seems correct until more data added. Especially if URM, military, high achieving athlete, etc.

An interesting question would be how are chances changed if rejected at say Harvard or Stanford assuming equal geographic ties? IOW, if a candidate fails to achieve and Acceptance it one of three similarly competi cue schools, would that indicate an unlikelihood of non acceptance at the other two?

OP - you can’t second guess, dig deep and wait for the formal notification. Good luck.

 

[LizzyM]

I wasn't suggesting that the OP had gotten courtesy interviews but merely giving examples of situations in which courtesy interviews are issued.

Each decision is independent. There may be situations where one school will find fault with an interview performance or not feel that the applicant is a good fit and choose to waitlist while a similarly ranked school will come to a different conclusion.

Of course, if something is systemic and persistent, all schools may draw the same conclusion. We really don't know, and can't easily predict what's going into these decisions.

 

[breastoncdoc]

I'd need to know far more about you including whether you are a legacy at those 3 schools and/or if you are URM. It would also be useful to know your GPA, major, undergrad school and whether you are a non-trad with work experience that brings something unusual to the class. Were any of your letter writers on faculty at any of those schools? Do you have an academic record or work experience (including summer programs) at any of those schools?

I don't expect you to answer those questions in this thread but those would certainly factor in when determining if you actually have a high likelihood of being admitted or if your invitations were courtesy interviews.

Legacy +/- faculty child makes a difference? I thought the AAMC frowned on that.

 

[breastoncdoc]

I'd need to know far more about you including whether you are a legacy at those 3 schools and/or if you are URM. It would also be useful to know your GPA, major, undergrad school and whether you are a non-trad with work experience that brings something unusual to the class. Were any of your letter writers on faculty at any of those schools? Do you have an academic record or work experience (including summer programs) at any of those schools?

I don't expect you to answer those questions in this thread but those would certainly factor in when determining if you actually have a high likelihood of being admitted or if your invitations were courtesy interviews.

So legacy +/- faculty child makes a difference? I thought the AAMC frowns on that.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

would be pretty awkward work environment after voting no on a colleague’s child

 

[LizzyM]

AAMC (or more relevantly, LCME, the accrediting agency) has nothing to say about who gets interviewed. You can interview someone as a courtesy to their parent/grandparent and then put them in a section of the waitlist where the sun don't shine.

 

[KnightDoc]

would be pretty awkward work environment after voting no on a colleague’s child

In that case, I'm sure every adcom in the country is an awkward work environment, since I'm sure they've all had to turn down many colleagues' children over the years.

 

[deleted1114112]

In that case, I'm sure every adcom in the country is an awkward work environment, since I'm sure they've all had to turn down many colleagues' children over the years.

I mean to be honest most of these people have money out the a$$, at least at my undergrad I would not be surprised if the entire top 1% of premed scores/ECs/apps are physician kids. Nearly all of the ones I meet are incredible. I mean they have all the resources in the world but still, they put in the work as I'm sure their parents have told them..etc. I think people overestimate how much of a strain it is to admit these kids but I might be wrong. Only they know.

Also as someone whose been in a lot of admitted groups at 'good schools' this cycle, you'd be surprised at the amount of people who openly flex (not really, but I guess to them) that their parent works at ___ department...even at that school. Why this is part of their introduction, I have no clue, but I thank them for it as I will definitely not be attending a school where literally 1 in 5 people I meet have this sort of connection.

 

[KnightDoc]

I mean to be honest most of these people have money out the a$$, at least at my undergrad I would not be surprised if the entire top 1% of premed scores/ECs/apps are physician kids. Nearly all of the ones I meet are incredible. I mean they have all the resources in the world but still, they put in the work as I'm sure their parents have told them..etc. I think people overestimate how much of a strain it is to admit these kids but I might be wrong. Only they know.

Also as someone whose been in a lot of admitted groups at 'good schools' this cycle, you'd be surprised at the amount of people who openly flex (not really, but I guess to them) that their parent works at ___ department...even at that school. Why this is part of their introduction, I have no clue, but I thank them for it as I will definitely not be attending a school where literally 1 in 5 people I meet have this sort of connection.

Fair enough, but still, considering how many people work at the schools and how many kids they all have, there is no way that many of them do not receive bad news, every year, at every school in the country. This is not to say no one with a conneciton gets in, and I have no idea whether the people who do get in all deserve it, but you are observing the survivors' bias of those who have been admitted. You are not privy to the awkward conversations the chair of every adcom has with their disappointed colleagues every cycle, as @voxveritatisetlucis speculated about without realizing how true it must be.

Maybe I'm the most naive applicant on SDN, but I honestly believe that if the process was as stacked as many fear, there would be no room for people like me to even receive interviews, let alone As.

 

[deleted1114112]

Fair enough, but still, considering how many people work at the schools and how many kids they all have, there is no way that many of them do not receive bad news, every year, at every school in the country. This is not to say no one with a conneciton gets in, and I have no idea whether the people who do get in all deserve it, but you are observing the survivors' bias of those who have been admitted. You are not privy to the awkward conversations the chair of every adcom has with their disappointed colleagues every cycle, as @voxveritatisetlucis speculated about without realizing how true it must be.

Maybe I'm the most naive applicant on SDN, but I honestly believe that if the process was as stacked as many fear, there would be no room for people like me to even receive interviews, let alone As.

I'm sure its a big spectrum, obviously my experience is just one. You could make the opposite argument for people who don't want to go to medical school but their doc parents have put them on that path since day 1, and now they just sound disingenuous and struggle to write up a good app. I would still think board of trustees/dean/administration kids are a different story though.

 

[LizzyM]

At my school the dean of admissions votes only to break a tie so when having an awkward conversation their hands are clean and they can say "they ", not "we", chose not to admit your darling and it was a very hard decision given the very strong pool of applicants and the very small number of available seats. (always true and meant to blunt the pain)

We recuse ourselves if we are assigned to interview the offspring of someone we know well or for whom we work. I have certainly had to explain to someone for whom I worked why someone he had pressed forward for an interview wasn't getting one (e.g. I just had to say that we get N applications and are able to interview only x% and our average GPA is 3.xx and the average MCAT is 5xx. I left it to the boss to find out what the applicant's stats were and connect the dots.)

I've been surprised sometimes to see applications from kids who had tons of resources, two parents in medicine, and quite obviously, either no effort on the part of the parents to direct the kid or a resistance of the part of the kid to take direction.