Rate your undergrad's medical school placement.

[efle]

My undergraduate institution's prehealth committee won't write a committee letter for us unless we scored in or above the 88th percentile on the MCAT with a c/sGPA of 3.6 or above.

Wow, that's evil. I'm sure it gives them insanely nice placement rate numbers to brag about, but leaving 31 / 3.6 students out to dry is messed up

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[efle]

not too much competition, and the weedout rate is not terrible

Hahahah things must be different for you underclassmen, I did hear Kit Mao retired...but for my batch of premeds the weedout rate was ~2/3rds from ~950 to 300. Not the best odds if you're a high schooler interested in premed.

 

[DrayDaze]

Hahahah things must be different for you underclassmen, I did hear Kit Mao retired...but for my batch of premeds the weedout rate was ~2/3rds from ~950 to 300. Not the best odds if you're a high schooler interested in premed.

Current freshman, thank goodness Kit Mao is gone... I've heard too many horror stories! Also, Orgo might be looking better next year, since Ponder might not be teaching it.

 

[efle]

Current freshman, thank goodness Kit Mao is gone... I've heard too many horror stories! Also, Orgo might be looking better next year, since Ponder might not be teaching it.

Ponder gave us an exam with a median in the mid 30s (passing grade was a 12) and then told us he was disappointed in our performance. Hope you dodge that bullet, it was rough

 

[Lost in Translation]

When you said Ponder I thought you meant look at the first 3 questions, answer them in any order. You may choose to change your exam for a new problem set. Take a test.

I'm so bored

 

[Dr. Retractor]

Premed committee was/is a joke at my school and no one in the department has any experience with med school, aside from some failed premeds that needed jobs. Placement includes ~30% DO, ~20% Carib or international, and then the rest are to mostly low-tier MDs.

 

[justadream]

My undergraduate institution's prehealth committee won't write a committee letter for us unless we scored in or above the 88th percentile on the MCAT with a c/sGPA of 3.6 or above.

I'm of the belief that going to schools with NO premed committee (so those that don't provide committee letters) is usually beneficial for most applicants.

The committee letter is only good for med school adcoms (gives them another data point to differentiate applicants) but it is not that great for most students because:

Best case: You get ranked well relative to your peers. Hooray! However, this benefit is minimal. If you didn't have this committee letter, you would have been in great shape anyways.

Worst case: You are a competitive applicant but get ranked negatively relative to your peers. Let's say you go to MIT and you have an application that is competitive for top 20 admissions (e.g., 99th percentile MCAT, 3.8 GPA, decent ECs). But it is possible that you might only be in the "second quartile" in the committee ranking simply because of how strong the other students at your school are (or alternatively, the criteria used by committees could be highly flawed and/or unfair/ and/or arbitrary). So now with this "second quartile" ranking, you might be less competitive for top 10 schools. If you didn't have the committee letter, each individual school would make the determination of how good you are (instead of having one body - namely, MIT's premed committee - broadcast to every school a determination that could very well be unrepresentative of your true merit RELATIVE to the national pool and not relative to your school).


In other words, you have little to gain but a lot to lose.

 

[poloboy]

Wow, that's evil. I'm sure it gives them insanely nice placement rate numbers to brag about, but leaving 31 / 3.6 students out to dry is messed up

I believe it's their way of getting good placement rate, though I don't have the specifics. I've seen pre-meds crying after meeting with the committee. It sucks, but I guess it does push you to your limit because I did work my ass off after finding out how my prehealth committee operates.

 

[poloboy]

I'm of the belief that going to schools with NO premed committee (so those that don't provide committee letters) is usually beneficial for most applicants.

The committee letter is only good for med school adcoms (gives them another data point to differentiate applicants) but it is not that great for most students because:

Best case: You get ranked well relative to your peers. Hooray! However, this benefit is minimal. If you didn't have this committee letter, you would have been in great shape anyways.

Worst case: You are a competitive applicant but get ranked negatively relative to your peers. Let's say you go to MIT and you have an application that is competitive for top 20 admissions (e.g., 99th percentile MCAT, 3.8 GPA, decent ECs). But it is possible that you might only be in the "second quartile" in the committee ranking simply because of how strong the other students at your school are (or alternatively, the criteria used by committees could be highly flawed and/or unfair/ and/or arbitrary). So now with this "second quartile" ranking, you might be less competitive for top 10 schools. If you didn't have the committee letter, each individual school would make the determination of how good you are (instead of having one body - namely, MIT's premed committee - broadcast to every school a determination that could very well be unrepresentative of your true merit RELATIVE to the national pool and not relative to your school).


In other words, you have little to gain but a lot to lose.

You're absolutely right, and I agree with you. My prehealth committee, after agreeing, does draft a great letter for everyone and tries their best to get students into med school. It's just getting pass their part that's difficult.

 

[Officer Farva]

I'm of the belief that going to schools with NO premed committee (so those that don't provide committee letters) is usually beneficial for most applicants.

The committee letter is only good for med school adcoms (gives them another data point to differentiate applicants) but it is not that great for most students because:

Best case: You get ranked well relative to your peers. Hooray! However, this benefit is minimal. If you didn't have this committee letter, you would have been in great shape anyways.

Worst case: You are a competitive applicant but get ranked negatively relative to your peers. Let's say you go to MIT and you have an application that is competitive for top 20 admissions (e.g., 99th percentile MCAT, 3.8 GPA, decent ECs). But it is possible that you might only be in the "second quartile" in the committee ranking simply because of how strong the other students at your school are (or alternatively, the criteria used by committees could be highly flawed and/or unfair/ and/or arbitrary). So now with this "second quartile" ranking, you might be less competitive for top 10 schools. If you didn't have the committee letter, each individual school would make the determination of how good you are (instead of having one body - namely, MIT's premed committee - broadcast to every school a determination that could very well be unrepresentative of your true merit RELATIVE to the national pool and not relative to your school).


In other words, you have little to gain but a lot to lose.

The premed committee at my school has an awful reputation. I graduated last year so it might have changed, but that exactly might be why we have such high Caribbean placement relative to our rank! I didn't think of that.

 

[Mansamusa]

I'm of the belief that going to schools with NO premed committee (so those that don't provide committee letters) is usually beneficial for most applicants.

The committee letter is only good for med school adcoms (gives them another data point to differentiate applicants) but it is not that great for most students because:

Best case: You get ranked well relative to your peers. Hooray! However, this benefit is minimal. If you didn't have this committee letter, you would have been in great shape anyways.

Worst case: You are a competitive applicant but get ranked negatively relative to your peers. Let's say you go to MIT and you have an application that is competitive for top 20 admissions (e.g., 99th percentile MCAT, 3.8 GPA, decent ECs). But it is possible that you might only be in the "second quartile" in the committee ranking simply because of how strong the other students at your school are (or alternatively, the criteria used by committees could be highly flawed and/or unfair/ and/or arbitrary). So now with this "second quartile" ranking, you might be less competitive for top 10 schools. If you didn't have the committee letter, each individual school would make the determination of how good you are (instead of having one body - namely, MIT's premed committee - broadcast to every school a determination that could very well be unrepresentative of your true merit RELATIVE to the national pool and not relative to your school).


In other words, you have little to gain but a lot to lose.

I think my committee is very positive towards all applicants. I am very much at the bottom of the gpa pile from my school. I'm at 12IIs now (including top 40-50 schools) and interviewers have specifically commented on how good the committee letter was. My committee writes letters for anyone who asks (they leave it up to the applicant to decide if they are competitive) and do what they can to portray that applicant in the best light possible. It depends on the school.

 

[justadream]

I think my committee is very positive towards all applicants. I am very much at the bottom of the gpa pile from my school. I'm at 12IIs now (including top 40-50 schools) and interviewers have specifically commented on how good the committee letter was. My committee writes letters for anyone who asks (they leave it up to the applicant to decide if they are competitive) and do what they can to portray that applicant in the best light possible. It depends on the school.

I don't really understand how that helps most applicants from your school.

If the committee is positive toward all applicants, then it is basically a rubberstamp and you are not helped (since all med schools will see that everyone from this school is talked about in the same light).

Now if you are talking about different DEGREES of positivity, then this situation is similar to the "code words" used in MSPE's for residency applications (where "good" actually means the bottom of the class, "great" means average, and "excellent" means top of the class). In this case, your school is still ranking you.

You clearly have a strong application and you probably would have had the same success if you didn't have this committee letter. Pretty much all the same features that made the committee like you would likely have become apparent to medical schools throughout the entire process (AMCAS primary, secondary, interview).

Also, I would venture that most committee letters do try to rank applicants relative to each other. Sure, nobody is likely to write negative stuff. This is similar to asking a professor for a LoR. It's unlikely that s/he will write something negative - it's just that the letter might not be absolutely glowing. So what ends up happening is people trying to "read between the lines" (in order to see where you really stand relative to your peers at the school).

 

[Officer Farva]

I don't really understand how that helps most applicants from your school.

If the committee is positive toward all applicants, then it is basically a rubberstamp and you are not helped (since all med schools will see that everyone from this school is talked about in the same light).

Now if you are talking about different DEGREES of positivity, then this situation is similar to the "code words" used in MSPE's for residency applications (where "good" actually means the bottom of the class, "great" means average, and "excellent" means top of the class). In this case, your school is still ranking you.

You clearly have a strong application and you probably would have had the same success if you didn't have this committee letter. Pretty much all the same features that made the committee like you would likely have become apparent to medical schools throughout the entire process (AMCAS primary, secondary, interview).

Also, I would venture that most committee letters do try to rank applicants relative to each other. Sure, nobody is likely to write negative stuff. This is similar to asking a professor for a LoR. It's unlikely that s/he will write something negative - it's just that the letter might not be absolutely glowing. So what ends up happening is people trying to "read between the lines" (in order to see where you really stand relative to your peers at the school).

A lot of professors at my undergrad are lazy and will email students a fill in the blank LOR. Like so and so has X GPA, always asked questions, insert name, you get the idea. Everyone gets this who asks, whether they are that premed who went to office hours once or the teachers' pet.

LORs are likely what sink people from my school now that I think about it.

 

[MD_Hopeful_2020]

Hahahah things must be different for you underclassmen, I did hear Kit Mao retired...but for my batch of premeds the weedout rate was ~2/3rds from ~950 to 300. Not the best odds if you're a high schooler interested in premed.

Sloppy joe no get into med school

 

[justadream]

A lot of professors at my undergrad are lazy and will email students a fill in the blank LOR. Like so and so has X GPA, always asked questions, insert name, you get the idea. Everyone gets this who asks, whether they are that premed who went to office hours once or the teachers' pet.

LORs are likely what sink people from my school now that I think about it.

What I particularly dislike about committees it not only do they sometimes bar people from applying (or at the very least, sabotage) by sometimes limiting who can receive a letter, but then try to make determinations about whether student X is a good applicant for medical school.

Medical schools are so varied in their goals/mission some are research focused, others are service focused, etc.) and it is ultimately the purpose of the adcom at each individual medical school to make this decision about an applicant - not a bunch of random people making up the committee.

Even disregarding that, you still have the problem of a small sample size of people making judgments about applications with committee letters. If person X at HMS doesn't like your application particularly much, well then yeah you are probably rejected from HMS. But that info (about HMS person not liking your application) is not broadcast to, say, person Y at Yale or person Z at UCSF. Thus, persons Y and Z can make a judgement for themselves about the merits of your application.

But if you have a committee (of say n=5) making a judgement and they dislike your application, well then that negative information is broadcast to ALL your schools. Now everyone gets to hear about how your committee thought you were average. But maybe the committee's opinion is unrepresentative (for example, maybe you had a bad day for your committee interview, maybe the particular committee people just didn't click with you, maybe the committee has no idea what to look for, maybe the committee is biased by the accomplishments of the peers at your schools). Too bad. You are still screwed for all your schools.

If you didn't have a committee letter and just bombed the HMS interview, you just get rejected by HMS. But it won't affect everything else.

 

[Officer Farva]

What I particularly dislike about committees it not only do they sometimes bar people from applying (or at the very least, sabotage) by sometimes limiting who can receive a letter, but then try to make determinations about whether student X is a good applicant for medical school.

Medical schools are so varied in their goals/mission some are research focused, others are service focused, etc.) and it is ultimately the purpose of the adcom at each individual medical school to make this decision about an applicant - not a bunch of random people making up the committee.

Even disregarding that, you still have the problem of a small sample size of people making judgments about applications with committee letters. If person X at HMS doesn't like your application particularly much, well then yeah you are probably rejected from HMS. But that info (about HMS person not liking your application) is not broadcast to, say, person Y at Yale or person Z at UCSF. Thus, persons Y and Z can make a judgement for themselves about the merits of your application.

But if you have a committee (of say n=5) making a judgement and they dislike your application, well then that negative information is broadcast to ALL your schools. Now everyone gets to hear about how your committee thought you were average. But maybe the committee's opinion is unrepresentative (for example, maybe you had a bad day for your committee interview, maybe the particular committee people just didn't click with you, maybe the committee has no idea what to look for, maybe the committee is biased by the accomplishments of the peers at your schools). Too bad. You are still screwed for all your schools.

If you didn't have a committee letter and just bombed the HMS interview, you just get rejected by HMS. But it won't affect everything else.

Come to think of it, it is so weird that 5 people I never met are considered more qualified to judge me than my professors, PI, and work references.

 

[prehealthadvisor55]

My school has ~40/45% placement. Actual numbers because I've actually seen them. But the premed advisors are the best in the country

 

[DominusAnulorum]

My school has a 48-49% placement rate, which is not terrible considering that we have about 1000 applicants each year. We are a huge feeder school for my area just through sheer volume, but it very much is a sink or swim type thing. The school has the resources necessary, you just have to take advantage of them.

 

[Gingy]

My UG inflated their statistics. They boasted high (85-90%) acceptance rates of students with 30+ MCAT alone, 3.6+ GPA alone, or a combination of a 30+ MCAT and 3.6+ GPA. Yet the asterisk next to these numbers led to fine-print at the bottom; the stats included students accepted to MD or DO, as many as 5 years out from graduation, and a small number of students over a relatively short time period. Average GPA for applicants was ~3.50 and average MCAT for applicants this past cycle was 505.5.

Rating = meh.