Rejected from ucsf

[PreDent08]

just got the rejection letter from ucsf today anyone else get rejected after getting interviewed? i guess i don't belong there with my 15 RC, but i wonder why they interviewed me in the first place?? maybe they saw potential in me lol...

oh wellz...

 

[osims]

how did you receive the rejection, email or snail mail?

 

[PreDent08]

snail

 

[osims]

man sorry to hear that, i hope i dont find one in my mailbox today.

 

[hurley987]

just got the rejection letter from ucsf today anyone else get rejected after getting interviewed? i guess i don't belong there with my 15 RC, but i wonder why they interviewed me in the first place?? maybe they saw potential in me lol...

oh wellz...

Hey predent what city u live in?

 

[xpheene]

i need to survive 11 more days...PLEASE !!!!

i think OP is from Location: Cerritos/Irvine

 

[hurley987]

i need to survive 11 more days...PLEASE !!!!

Technically only 7 more mail days in november, good luck dude this is torture

 

[xpheene]

Technically only 7 more mail days in november, good luck dude this is torture

thanks dawg.. torture is pleasant than this waiting period

 

[Jabbawockeez]

Sorry to hear about the news. Hang in there.

just got the rejection letter from ucsf today anyone else get rejected after getting interviewed? i guess i don't belong there with my 15 RC, but i wonder why they interviewed me in the first place?? maybe they saw potential in me lol...

oh wellz...

 

[PreDent08]

yea i'm from cerritos.
good luck everyone...

 

[bcdds09]

To the OP, if you don't mind me asking, how did the interview itself go?

 

[Bruinlove]

Based on what Mr. Betbeze told us, it seems that the school had already established some kind of ranking of applicants before giving out interviews. After an interview, its score is added to the total evaluation, but most applicants do well on their interview. Therefore, the interview only plays a role of catching those who are ranked high, but do not match their AADSAS or secondary application.

 

[Valleyfornia]

Based on what Mr. Betbeze told us, it seems that the school had already established some kind of ranking of applicants before giving out interviews. After an interview, its score is added to the total evaluation, but most applicants do well on their interview. Therefore, the interview only plays a role of catching those who are ranked high, but do not match their AADSAS or secondary application.

Do you know the breakdown of the pre-interview rankings? is it strictly GPA, and DAT scores?

 

[Bruinlove]

Do you know the breakdown of the pre-interview rankings? is it strictly GPA, and DAT scores?

No, the previous post is all we've been told. But, using common sense, I think it should 60~70% stats + 30~40% EC.

 

[DuffMan01]

Based on what Mr. Betbeze told us, it seems that the school had already established some kind of ranking of applicants before giving out interviews. After an interview, its score is added to the total evaluation, but most applicants do well on their interview. Therefore, the interview only plays a role of catching those who are ranked high, but do not match their AADSAS or secondary application.

So does that mean its possible to get rejected after an interview based on your stat? But I thought thats how you got the interview in the first place?

What do you mean do not match their ADDSAS? Like they want to see if its the person they say they are?

Sorry every sentence I have ended in a question hahaha (Except this one )

 

[xpheene]

Very interesting post by bruinlove. However I think grades are only 30-40% while ECs and LORs are ~60%. That is what I am banking on. I hope I am right.

 

[bcdds09]

I've heard in the past (not sure if true) that UCSF puts more emphasis on your secondary application relative to other schools.

A person who derives an equation to figure out an exact "chance percentile" would be genius. Too many factors to even think about..

 

[DuffMan01]

I've heard in the past (not sure if true) that UCSF puts more emphasis on your secondary application relative to other schools.

A person who derives an equation to figure out an exact "chance percentile" would be genius. Too many factors to even think about..

Very true...I believe there is no "true formula" on predicting what your chances are for acceptance. I mean, there are a lot of people with HIGH GPA and DAT scores that dont get it while people with low/mediocre do! However, there is one factor or one particular characteristic that the admission committee look for in an applicant. What is it? Dont we wish we know the answer to that! But I do believe your stats is what gets you interview (foot in the door) and your EC/PS/Etc. is what gets you a seat!

Someone correct me if I am wrong!

 

[xpheene]

Very true...I believe there is no "true formula" on predicting what your chances are for acceptance. I mean, there are a lot of people with HIGH GPA and DAT scores that dont get it while people with low/mediocre do! However, there is one factor or one particular characteristic that the admission committee look for in an applicant. What is it? Dont we wish we know the answer to that! But I do believe your stats is what gets you interview (foot in the door) and your EC/PS/Etc. is what gets you a seat!

Someone correct me if I am wrong!

I concur my friend. Stats get you to the door, but your whole applicant gets you a seat. I hope so too. I am banking on that hehe

 

[Bruinlove]

So does that mean its possible to get rejected after an interview based on your stat? But I thought thats how you got the interview in the first place?

What do you mean do not match their ADDSAS? Like they want to see if its the person they say they are?

Sorry every sentence I have ended in a question hahaha (Except this one )

It seems that the school interviews people ranked from 1st to about 250th. But, most of the times, most people from 1st to 125th are given acceptances while only a few from 126th to 250th are accepted to replace those who were ranked high, but weren't the people they described themselves on the app. Does this make sense?

I know this could be confusing, but this is what I understood from Mr. Betbeze's comment on post-interview review.

 

[Bruinlove]

Very interesting post by bruinlove. However I think grades are only 30-40% while ECs and LORs are ~60%. That is what I am banking on. I hope I am right.

That would be an interesting breakdown. But, I think the grades should matter more than 40%, otherwise the school wouldn't have the 2nd (or 3rd) highest average board score in the nation.

 

[Dental4ever]

ah..my AADSAS changed from invited for interview to recieved/ under reviewed . I'm not sure if it's a good thing or bad. I read somewhere that people's status changed to underreview by december1 meant that they were not considered for the first round of acceptance. I dont know if my status change on AADSAS before December 1 means anything.

 

[LuckiLeigh]

ah..my AADSAS changed from invited for interview to recieved/ under reviewed . I'm not sure if it's a good thing or bad. I read somewhere that people's status changed to underreview by december1 meant that they were not considered for the first round of acceptance. I dont know if my status change on AADSAS before December 1 means anything.

My status changed to that too. There have been other posts about this and I think it just means that they review our applications again after the interview - which makes sense. Don't read into it too much.

 

[DuffMan01]

It seems that the school interviews people ranked from 1st to about 250th. But, most of the times, most people from 1st to 125th are given acceptances while only a few from 126th to 250th are accepted to replace those who were ranked high, but weren't the people they described themselves on the app. Does this make sense?

I know this could be confusing, but this is what I understood from Mr. Betbeze's comment on post-interview review.

Yea makes sense! But if its true, then its a sad story cuz those who are ranked from 126-250 are given "false hope" to an acceptance. Especially the 250th ranked person lol I believe if your ranked within 126-250 and made your interview stand out, they will sure to accept you...maybe...maybe not!

By the way, do all schools do this, or is this just UCSF?

And about the status change....yea dont look too much into it! I got the same thing...not from UCSF though...still waiting for an interview

 

[UCSF2012]

Those who are under review after the interview will either be accepted or are close to being accepted (pending the review of other students' files). If they know you're among the best of the pool, you'll be accepted. If you're borderline, they may want to review others' files first. If they know you're not among the top, you probably already've been rejected.

They made a mistake last year by letting us know early that we got in, by changing our status to Offer Made. This error won't be repeated this year.

 

[bcdds09]

It seems that the school interviews people ranked from 1st to about 250th. But, most of the times, most people from 1st to 125th are given acceptances while only a few from 126th to 250th are accepted to replace those who were ranked high, but weren't the people they described themselves on the app. Does this make sense?

I know this could be confusing, but this is what I understood from Mr. Betbeze's comment on post-interview review.

So if this is true, anyone who is interviewing post Dec. 1st (assuming they handed out 125 interviews pre-Dec.1) are the bottom half of the interview pool?

 

[xpheene]

If you interview the 2nd day, does that put u in 21st-40th ranked? If so thats 1337!

 

[Bruinlove]

So if this is true, anyone who is interviewing post Dec. 1st (assuming they handed out 125 interviews pre-Dec.1) are the bottom half of the interview pool?

No~ The date of interview should have nothing to do with post-review ranking. The dates are decided by your submission date because it's rolling admission. If you submitted earlier than others, you get an earlier interview date.

 

[PreDent08]

Those who are under review after the interview will either be accepted or are close to being accepted

not true...i was back to "under review" after interview.

 

[xpheene]

PreDent08, were you sitting on the right side of the room?

 

[PreDent08]

yea...

 

[Bruinlove]

Hm.... I thought we sat wherever we liked.

 

[bcdds09]

No~ The date of interview should have nothing to do with post-review ranking. The dates are decided by your submission date because it's rolling admission. If you submitted earlier than others, you get an earlier interview date.

I think you're right Bruinlove. Thanks .

 

[UCSF2012]

not true...i was back to "under review" after interview.

Your case was an administrative error. Those who havn't been rejected yet will either be accepted or screened against future applicants first before a decision.

 

[DuffMan01]

Your case was an administrative error. Those who havn't been rejected yet will either be accepted or screened against future applicants first before a decision.

lol omg dude that sucks!!

 

[PreDent08]

Your case was an administrative error. Those who havn't been rejected yet will either be accepted or screened against future applicants first before a decision.

wow...thx for making me feel better!!

yea...i'm sure mine was an admin error.

 

[UCSF2012]

wow...thx for making me feel better!!

yea...i'm sure mine was an admin error.

your status update is an error, not the rejection letter. you guys must get the general idea, eventhough you're overanalyzing these little administrative mistakes.

 

[telebeans]

.

 

[Bruinlove]

hey bruinlove. omg, i had the worst interview ever. i am sad.

p.s. good luck everyone!

It might not be as bad as you think. You nailed the writing exercise. Cheer up!