Reapplying with (mostly) the same application? Is this frowned upon?

[lNVlNClBLE]

---

Members do not see this ad.

For instance, if you receive an interview to school X, and do not make it in that cycle, can you reapply the next cycle with the same application? Obviously you would need to update with any new activities / scores, but as far as personal statement goes, does it need to be changed in fear of being seen as "lazy"?

 

[GrapesofRath]

If you really have to ask this question that says alot about what your chances will be as a reapplicant.

Your essays are a big part of you making your "sales pitch" to a school. It didnt work once already. Why would it work in a different cycle

This is a good read for any reapplicant. Note the way they emphasize needing to make significant improvement before reapplying and how the biggest mistake made is reapplying too soon.
http://admissions.med.miami.edu/md-programs/general-md/reapplicants

 

[lNVlNClBLE]

It shows lack of motivation and commitment and raises a red flag. You didnt get in for a reason, review and refresh the application

You're not looking at this the proper way.

Any reapplicant faces this

a) Any school you apply to as a reapplicant knows that not only did they not want you, no other school wanted you. To some taking you on with that caveat might make you "riskier", especially if you have rather competitive stats. The chances that you have flaws not readily apparent on the application are real in this case. That will make many uneasy. You really have to make a school "want" you as a reapplicant.

b) Youve already generated an impression at a school. And if a school forgets about that reputation, many if they are seriously considering a reapplicant will pull up your app from the first time you applied. So no matter what, theyll remember their first impression of you and it wasnt good enough. You have to change that impression. How do you expect to do that using the same essays? Your essays are a big part of your sales pitch. You already gave that sales pitch for yourself once; it didnt work. Dont use it again.

This is a good read for any reapplicant
http://admissions.med.miami.edu/md-programs/general-md/reapplicants

This is a good link that summarizes what you face. Perhaps the biggest thing to highlight is "The biggest mistake reapplicants make is reapplying too soon". Often times, changing essays is the first of many things a reapplicant will have to do to generate real interest if they apply again.

Thanks for both of your responses. I am still under consideration so this is just a hypothetical situation.

In my case, my interviewers responded very well to my PS and essays. They were the major talking points in my interview and I feel they very well explain my desire to practice medicine. If I were to reapply I would make some changes, of course, but I'm not certain I would completely rewrite these sections. If anything, it is my stats that are holding me back.

 

[GrapesofRath]

Thanks for both of your responses. I am still under consideration so this is just a hypothetical situation.

In my case, my interviewers responded very well to my PS and essays. They were the major talking points in my interview and I feel they very well explain my desire to practice medicine. If I were to reapply I would make some changes, of course, but I'm not certain I would completely rewrite these sections. If anything, it is my stats that are holding me back.

If the stats are the issue then reapplying again in a few months with similar stats might not be the best idea. It's probably better before reapplying to try to address issues you might have numerically, which isnt likely to be done in the span of several months.

 

[whatever5]

FWIW, I'm a reapplicant that was succesful the second time around. For my activities section, most of what I said stayed the same. If anything, I edited out some unecessary "flourish" in the description of my activities to make it more concise. Obviously, I updated it with new activities and had different "most meaningful activities" selected the second time around.

Secondly, I completely rewrote my PS - though my reasons for wanting to be a doctor didn't change, my experiences did and I included some more recent anecdotes to show it in a fresh perspective (many schools save your old app and will compare the two).

 

[bananafish94]

If I have to reapply I intend on writing an entirely new personal statement. I'm not even going to consult my old application except to look at the hours I listed. Everything I write will be brand new. What's the definition of insanity again?

 

[Lawpy]

If I have to reapply I intend on writing an entirely new personal statement. I'm not even going to consult my old application except to look at the hours I listed. Everything I write will be brand new. What's the definition of insanity again?

 

[halodos]

Yeah, you can do that. My friend got an interview one year, was rejected, submitted the same app, got 0 interviews and went DO, but yeah, you can definitely do it!

Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk

 

[Officer Farva]

For instance, if you receive an interview to school X, and do not make it in that cycle, can you reapply the next cycle with the same application? Obviously you would need to update with any new activities / scores, but as far as personal statement goes, does it need to be changed in fear of being seen as "lazy"?

I recycled my PS. Same body, different opening. Worked out for me. My first PS was pretty awesome and I didn't want to change my new one too much.

 

[Law2Doc]

The collective wisdom is that as a reapplicant, you really need to show "substantial improvement" to have your application regarded differently. I actually think it's a much higher standard because it's an expectation that wasn't there the first time you applied, hence being a reapplicant is a harder road. There's a whole reapplicant board filled with people who can give some insight, but what you really don't want to do is assume there was nothing to fix and keep throwing the same bricks. You should also probably skew your target range down -- don't bother with the long shots, and realize that what you considered the low end of your list last time probably should be the high end this time around - consider this a reality check- you weren't competitive for the places you targeted last time.

 

[Officer Farva]

The collective wisdom is that as a reapplicant, you really need to show "substantial improvement" to have your application regarded differently. I actually think it's a much higher standard because it's an expectation that wasn't there the first time you applied, hence being a reapplicant is a harder road. There's a whole reapplicant board filled with people who can give some insight, but what you really don't want to do is assume there was nothing to fix and keep throwing the same bricks. You should also probably skew your target range down -- don't bother with the long shots, and realize that what you considered the low end of your list last time probably should be the high end this time around - consider this a reality check- you weren't competitive for the places you targeted last time.

I don't want to give the OP bad advice, but the only thing different about my reapplication was an extra year of research, ~100 hours in a soup kitchen, and an extra ~50 hours of shadowing and clinical volunteering each. How would you define substantial improvement?

 

[bananafish94]

The collective wisdom is that as a reapplicant, you really need to show "substantial improvement" to have your application regarded differently. I actually think it's a much higher standard because it's an expectation that wasn't there the first time you applied, hence being a reapplicant is a harder road. There's a whole reapplicant board filled with people who can give some insight, but what you really don't want to do is assume there was nothing to fix and keep throwing the same bricks. You should also probably skew your target range down -- don't bother with the long shots, and realize that what you considered the low end of your list last time probably should be the high end this time around - consider this a reality check- you weren't competitive for the places you targeted last time.

How successful do you think the following strategy will be:

I reapply next year with the same numbers (3.83 +/- .03 depending on this semester) and a 31 MCAT.
I've continued all the activities on my AMCAS, so most of them will have about 100 more hours.
If I'm lucky, another publication.
TA Job that was not on my application.
Two big additional leadership opportunities on campus that were not on my application before.
A scribe position that I would have held 2-3 months prior to submitting AMCAS on June 1.
Completely overhauled personal statement and secondaries.

 

[Law2Doc]

I don't want to give the OP bad advice, but the only thing different about my reapplication was an extra year of research, ~100 hours in a soup kitchen, and an extra ~50 hours of shadowing and clinical volunteering each. How would you define substantial improvement?

N=1. In other words you got real lucky. Most of the people who don't make bigger fixes will get passed over. Just because someone survives a game of Russian roulette doesn't mean everyone should play.

 

[Law2Doc]

How successful do you think the following strategy will be:

I reapply next year with the same numbers (3.83 +/- .03 depending on this semester) and a 31 MCAT.
I've continued all the activities on my AMCAS, so most of them will have about 100 more hours.
If I'm lucky, another publication.
TA Job that was not on my application.
Two big additional leadership opportunities on campus that were not on my application before.
A scribe position that I would have held 2-3 months prior to submitting AMCAS on June 1.
Completely overhauled personal statement and secondaries.

Honestly I think you need to do some soul searching as to why you really didn't get in last time and fix THAT, not just make a few minor essay tweaks. If your issues were ECs, then sure, a few more will help. If you applied late to the wrong schools and with mediocre essays, then fixing some of this will help. If your issues were lukewarm LORs, or if your MCAT was unbalanced or something you aren't telling us about, then none of this will help. Substantial improvement doesn't mean continuing what you were doing for a few more hours. If a place felt something on your application was lacking, you need to find that out and fix it. Not do a few minor tweaks, log a couple more hours in the same activities and throw the same application out there again. Which is why so many of us on here advocate getting all your ducks in a row first before applying. It's actually harder to show big improvement in an application that is already mostly there.

 

[GrapesofRath]

How successful do you think the following strategy will be:

I reapply next year with the same numbers (3.83 +/- .03 depending on this semester) and a 31 MCAT.
I've continued all the activities on my AMCAS, so most of them will have about 100 more hours.
If I'm lucky, another publication.
TA Job that was not on my application.
Two big additional leadership opportunities on campus that were not on my application before.
A scribe position that I would have held 2-3 months prior to submitting AMCAS on June 1.
Completely overhauled personal statement and secondaries.

You just created a thread the other day about how you have 4 IIs, are waiting to hear back from 3 schools and still have 2 more interviews to go. You arent at any stage where you should be asking about "what do I need to do as a reapplicant". You still have 3 schools to hear from.

If anything what L2D has said about the need to show substantial improvement and not some minor tweaks should motivate you to be on top of everything for those last 2 interviews and giving it all you have there, instead of making (semi)-daily panic threads about a situation that hasnt even arisen yet.

 

[Officer Farva]

N=1. In other words you got real lucky. Most of the people who don't make bigger fixes will get passed over. Just because someone survives a game of Russian roulette doesn't mean everyone should play.

I'm no admissions expert but I truly believed I had awesome ECs the first time around. Fraternity brother, ~2.5-3 years of research, 2 publications, a decent amount of clinical volunteering, decent amount of shadowing, played 2 instruments. The only way I could have improved significantly was if I pulled off a first author nature pub.

 

[bananafish94]

I'm no admissions expert but I truly believed I had awesome ECs the first time around. Fraternity brother, ~2.5-3 years of research, 2 publications, a decent amount of clinical volunteering, decent amount of shadowing, played 2 instruments. The only way I could have improved significantly was if I pulled off a first author nature pub.

Why do you suspect you didn't get in the first time?

 

[bananafish94]

You just created a thread the other day about how you have 4 IIs, are waiting to hear back from 3 schools and still have 2 more interviews to go. You arent at any stage where you should be asking about "what do I need to do as a reapplicant". You still have 3 schools to hear from.

If anything what L2D has said about the need to show substantial improvement and not some minor tweaks should motivate you to be on top of everything for those last 2 interviews and giving it all you have there, instead of making (semi)-daily panic threads about a situation that hasnt even arisen yet.

Agree completely, I just want to make sure I have a feasible Plan B.

 

[Officer Farva]

Why do you suspect you didn't get in the first time?

I was a lowish GPA (but not abnormally low) paired with a very high MCAT. I believe I got yield protected at low-mid tiers and couldn't compete with the 4.0/40s at the top 20 (although I was accepted to one of them). The same thing almost happened to me in my second cycle. Also, I was missing Non-clinical volunteering the first time since my school never advised me that it was necessary, only clinical volunteering. The low tier/state school interviews I did receive, I was painted as a research geek with no concern of the community by the interviewer (all holier than thou people), even in the second cycle.

 

[ChrisMack390]

I was a lowish GPA (but not abnormally low) paired with a very high MCAT. I believe I got yield protected at low-mid tiers and couldn't compete with the 4.0/40s at the top 20 (although I was accepted to one of them). The same thing almost happened to me in my second cycle. Also, I was missing Non-clinical volunteering the first time since my school never advised me that it was necessary, only clinical volunteering. The low tier/state school interviews I did receive, I was painted as a research geek with no concern of the community by the interviewer (all holier than thou people), even in the second cycle.

You got into a top 20 med school and then reapplied anyway?

 

[deleted407021]

There's also the problem of people not getting any acceptances simply because they applied very late. I would assume that applying Day 1 next cycle with a few updated ECs plus PS would essentially address the problem you had before -- not early enough.

 

[Officer Farva]

You got into a top 20 med school and then reapplied anyway?

Nope, got in the second time. 3/4 of my first cycle was WLs, the rest were post interview rejections lol. Definitely in the caliber of applicants with very competitive application, but cannot consistently compete with top-20 caliber students.

 

[Law2Doc]

There's also the problem of people not getting any acceptances simply because they applied very late. I would assume that applying Day 1 next cycle with a few updated ECs plus PS would essentially address the problem you had before -- not early enough.

While that certainly happens, most of the time when someone says they didn't get in because they "applied late" they are seizing at this as a convenient excuse to avoid having to fix the real problem in their application. It's much easier to say I didn't get in because I applied a few weeks after applications opened, than that my essays suck or my ECs are a joke or that my LOR writers didn't know me at all or that with a 3.1/26 I probably really needed to work on my numerical stats rather than rush to apply this cycle. So yes it happens but it's far less frequently the reason than what you hear.

I had a number of classmates in med school who applied pretty late in the cycle and they still got in.

 

[Doug Underhill]

I think that this would be a bad strategy for anyone except an otherwise well-qualified applicant who made the mistake of applying late (September-October).

 

[Law2Doc]

I think that this would be a bad strategy for anyone except an otherwise well-qualified applicant who made the mistake of applying late (September-October).

See my post above. The well qualified applicant sometimes still gets in late-- don't jump at the easiest most painlessly fixable problem and assume it's the real one. think long and hard about whether there's another, less "easy" area you need to fix. And fix it.

 

[bananafish94]

While that certainly happens, most of the time when someone says they didn't get in because they "applied late" they are seizing at this as a convenient excuse to avoid having to fix the real problem in their application. It's much easier to say I didn't get in because I applied a few weeks after applications opened, than that my essays suck or my ECs are a joke or that my LOR writers didn't know me at all or that with a 3.1/26 I probably really needed to work on my numerical stats rather than rush to apply this cycle. So yes it happens but it's far less frequently the reason than what you hear.

I had a number of classmates in med school who applied pretty late in the cycle and they still got in.

There are some people I know in real life with that mentality even though they submitted in early August at the latest (not the best option, obviously, but not a deal-breaker).
Hypothetically, if there is one clear issue with your application (i.e. your essays are terrible or you MCAT is way too low) is it sufficient to completely rectify that one problem, or does improvement need to be demonstrated on all fronts?

 

[bananafish94]

Improving the academic piece but still submitting the same application again shows lack of motivation. Imagine you apply to a school and they pull your old application and look thru it. Then they look thru your current application and it is the same, except for an improved MCAT score, what kind of impression does that make?

That makes sense! I would obviously try to improve everything if I had to reapply, just wondering exactly what they're looking for. Hopefully it doesn't come to that though!

 

[DokterMom]

There are some people I know in real life with that mentality even though they submitted in early August at the latest (not the best option, obviously, but not a deal-breaker).
Hypothetically, if there is one clear issue with your application (i.e. your essays are terrible or you MCAT is way too low) is it sufficient to completely rectify that one problem, or does improvement need to be demonstrated on all fronts?

Your ECs should ALWAYS improve. You've had an extra year, and if you did nothing good for the community in that year, that says something you do not want to say...

The rest? Identify the holes and fix them. Convincingly.