- Joined
- Feb 13, 2008
- Messages
- 948
- Reaction score
- 10
I've finished pre-writing my PS, and have a pretty good idea of my arguments for 'why medicine', but I'm still torn between two...structural strategies I guess you could say?
I'm aiming to frame my arguments with a clinical experience that really sold me on medicine as a career. I've got two options: An ongoing patient experience with the PCP I shadowed for 5 months, or the time I spent in Africa playing second fiddle to a bunch of relief docs.
Not to sound self-important, but the stories from Africa are pretty intense (lots of death, injury, suffering), and I feel like I could spin up my experience to be pretty a effective attention-getter/argument in itself.
Then there's my PCP experience, where I got to know a patient over the course of a few months, got a sense for the importance of extended care/family medicine and why I think it's an amazing fit (I wouldn't sell this too hard, just as a context for relating my talents and interests to medicine). Now, as far as storytelling goes, it wouldn't at all be an attention-getter, but I feel like I'd be writing from the heart, since this experience had a pretty profound impact on me (patient started seemingly healthy, wound up dying of CA, wrote the tearjerking-est thank-you letter ever to the doc before he passed).
My stats aren't exactly stellar, which is why I feel like I really have to grab my reader's attention in addition to making a strong case for myself. I know I have the writing skills to put together something that does that, but I feel like incorporating my time overseas would make a much more interesting read (Hopefully prompting a "This guy may not have a 4.0, but he sounds interesting"-->invite?)
My concern in using the "shock and awe" technique is that adcoms have seen it before, and if I don't deliver just right, my shock and awe will come off as nothing but a smokescreen/attempt to draw attention away from my somewhat ordinary app.
Assuming that each PS made arguments of equal strength, would it be advisable for a below-average applicant to use their extraordinary and somewhat meaningful experience to stand-out/grab attention, or use a less extraordinary, but MUCH more meaningful experience that speaks more to their interest/passion for medicine.
Input on which sounds like a better strategy?
I'm aiming to frame my arguments with a clinical experience that really sold me on medicine as a career. I've got two options: An ongoing patient experience with the PCP I shadowed for 5 months, or the time I spent in Africa playing second fiddle to a bunch of relief docs.
Not to sound self-important, but the stories from Africa are pretty intense (lots of death, injury, suffering), and I feel like I could spin up my experience to be pretty a effective attention-getter/argument in itself.
Then there's my PCP experience, where I got to know a patient over the course of a few months, got a sense for the importance of extended care/family medicine and why I think it's an amazing fit (I wouldn't sell this too hard, just as a context for relating my talents and interests to medicine). Now, as far as storytelling goes, it wouldn't at all be an attention-getter, but I feel like I'd be writing from the heart, since this experience had a pretty profound impact on me (patient started seemingly healthy, wound up dying of CA, wrote the tearjerking-est thank-you letter ever to the doc before he passed).
My stats aren't exactly stellar, which is why I feel like I really have to grab my reader's attention in addition to making a strong case for myself. I know I have the writing skills to put together something that does that, but I feel like incorporating my time overseas would make a much more interesting read (Hopefully prompting a "This guy may not have a 4.0, but he sounds interesting"-->invite?)
My concern in using the "shock and awe" technique is that adcoms have seen it before, and if I don't deliver just right, my shock and awe will come off as nothing but a smokescreen/attempt to draw attention away from my somewhat ordinary app.
Assuming that each PS made arguments of equal strength, would it be advisable for a below-average applicant to use their extraordinary and somewhat meaningful experience to stand-out/grab attention, or use a less extraordinary, but MUCH more meaningful experience that speaks more to their interest/passion for medicine.
Input on which sounds like a better strategy?
