Rejection from UMDNJ-SOM?

[jerome79]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I was just curious to know. I know that this year UMDNJ-SOM interviewed 315 applicants. I was wondering if anybody actually got rejected after the interview. By the way, I wasn't rejected... just waitlisted 🙂

 

[Amaranthan]

GREAT QUESTION!!!! I was interviewed and subsequently waitlisted at SOM.

 

[Nate]

It is very rare that anyone gets flat out rejected after an interview; usually if you get to the interview, which as you can see is a very tough feat in itself, you are past the point of being rejected and will be waitlisted or accepted short of you punching your interviewer in his face.

 

[jerome79]

It is very rare that anyone gets flat out rejected after an interview; usually if you get to the interview, which as you can see is a very tough feat in itself, you are past the point of being rejected and will be waitlisted or accepted short of you punching your interviewer in his face.

Yeah, that is what I hear. But I was doing the math to myself. So check out my reasoning. 315 interviews, and as I heard from admissions, you have to offer double the amount of applicants to fill the class. Which means you offer 200 acceptances. That leaves you with 115 left. Would that mean that 115 students would be on the waitlist or would you reject some of this 115?

 

[wildsimmer]

Yeah, that is what I hear. But I was doing the math to myself. So check out my reasoning. 315 interviews, and as I heard from admissions, you have to offer double the amount of applicants to fill the class. Which means you offer 200 acceptances. That leaves you with 115 left. Would that mean that 115 students would be on the waitlist or would you reject some of this 115?

hmmmm very interesting question! I have NO idea but I'd love to know what my chances are on the WL!!

great math jerome79! 😉

 

[Tones24]

While there remains hope to those on the waitlist, obviously not everyone gets in. I know a smart fellow who got rejected (yes – NOT everyone whom is interviewed gets waitlisted). Oh, and his stats were quite good too.

 

[FutureDocHopefl]

While there remains hope to those on the waitlist, obviously not everyone gets in. I know a smart fellow who got rejected (yes – NOT everyone whom is interviewed gets waitlisted). Oh, and his stats were quite good too.

Having good numbers is definitely a big factor in selection, but if you don't have the personality that comes with being a physician, the numbers don't mean diddily.

Although I am still puzzled as to why some DO schools accept "robots" (people that study all the time and have no personality). I would definitely admit someone who has a great personality rather than a robot thats smart.

 

[jerome79]

Having good numbers is definitely a big factor in selection, but if you don't have the personality that comes with being a physician, the numbers don't mean diddily.

Although I am still puzzled as to why some DO schools accept "robots" (people that study all the time and have no personality). I would definitely admit someone who has a great personality rather than a robot thats smart.

Great point.

 

[sayoc]

Having good numbers is definitely a big factor in selection, but if you don't have the personality that comes with being a physician, the numbers don't mean diddily.

Although I am still puzzled as to why some DO schools accept "robots" (people that study all the time and have no personality). I would definitely admit someone who has a great personality rather than a robot thats smart.

Good point! Have personality is important but it is not vital. The only thing I can say about "robots" is under the "assumption" that personality does not = to knowledage. I will rather go to a physican who have no personality, but study well, knows his med, and does not make any mistake. A doctor can be an ass, and i might dislike him/her, however if he/she makes an excellent treatment plan and have a great diagnosis skills i will go to him. after all, i am there for my illness not making new firends.

 

[mastamark]

Good point! Have personality is important but it is not vital. The only thing I can say about "robots" is under the "assumption" that personality does not = to knowledage. I will rather go to a physican who have no personality, but study well, knows his med, and does not make any mistake. A doctor can be an ass, and i might dislike him/her, however if he/she makes an excellent treatment plan and have a great diagnosis skills i will go to him. after all, i am there for my illness not making new firends.

Caring about your patients and having a good relationship is key in making decisions in their best interests. Sure their is a medicine or procedure for many diseases, but from your people experience will this be the best treatment for your patient?

 

[sayoc]

Caring about your patients and having a good relationship is key in making decisions in their best interests. Sure their is a medicine or procedure for many diseases, but from your people experience will this be the best treatment for your patient?

Hmmm... I always understands this point...
Sure, doctor should have excellent personality. There are many advantages to that: patients are likely to trust you and therefore, more likely to share personal information – and this information can be useful to determine medical history and making correct diagnosis. However, as for me, doctors are not out there to make friends with patient – loosely speaking.

And you ask “Sure there is a medicine or procedure for many diseases, but from your people experience will this be the best treatment for your patient?”

My answer is not the best treatment, but it will work. For example: which one will you pick?

A) A doctor who has a great personality but poor medical knowledge, always wrong on the treatment
B) A doctor who has great medical knowledge, always make a correct diagnosis and treatment, but awful personality.

I’ll pick B) at anytime.

In pratice, many docs have both qualities.

Most med school likes to accept students who are competent and nice. That is what interview is for – very primitive way of determine personality. But if the school is force to pick between two qualities, it will be safer for the med school to accept students who is competent ie robot.

 

[jerome79]

Hmmm... I always understands this point...
Sure, doctor should have excellent personality. There are many advantages to that: patients are likely to trust you and therefore, more likely to share personal information – and this information can be useful to determine medical history and making correct diagnosis. However, as for me, doctors are not out there to make friends with patient – loosely speaking.

And you ask “Sure there is a medicine or procedure for many diseases, but from your people experience will this be the best treatment for your patient?”

My answer is not the best treatment, but it will work. For example: which one will you pick?

A) A doctor who has a great personality but poor medical knowledge, always wrong on the treatment
B) A doctor who has great medical knowledge, always make a correct diagnosis and treatment, but awful personality.

I’ll pick B) at anytime.

In pratice, many docs have both qualities.

Most med school likes to accept students who are competent and nice. That is what interview is for – very primitive way of determine personality. But if the school is force to pick between two qualities, it will be safer for the med school to accept students who is competent ie robot.

Although I appreciate the comments that have been posted, it is actually straying away from my original question. I am assuming that the slim slim minority of people who may have gotten rejected if any are not sharing.. 🙄