E
Emil Chuck, PhD
The Student Doctor Network publishes articles weekly. Check out this article or other pre-medical articles at Student Doctor Network.
As thousands of aspiring health professional students seek credible advice about crafting their best possible profile, they are overwhelmed with guidance from their peers, advisors, admissions officers, and the internet that promises to give their application an advantage. This article addresses some prehealth application myths commonly raised in the Student Doctor Network forums for those gauging their chances for application success.
We previously debunked common Prehealth Preparation Myths about the steps you need to take before you start your application.
Most health professions programs are focused on teaching students the basics required of all general practitioners in their field. You may want to be a nuclear pharmacist, an oral maxillofacial surgeon, or an exotic animal veterinarian, but having those strong interests does not make you a “better” applicant. For many medical and dental school applicants, expressing a solely-focused interest in “gunner” specialties can raise questions about your expectations for professional school.
You can be interested in specializing if a clinical experience sparked your interest in medicine. Make sure your interest in one area (such as mental health) extends to other areas as part of your overall narrative. You can express interest through research opportunities, networking, or special interest groups.
In general, admissions committees want to know that your pursuit of a health professional career is grounded in service to the sick and suffering, a strong academic foundation, and a professional commitment to integrity. Furthermore, they want assurance that their program will give you the resources to be the professional you aspire to be.
Every year, panicked members on the forums ask about the consequences of a rushed application containing minor unforced mistakes, such as miscalculating hours, unfilled text boxes, or errors in essays. Expert advice warns all applicants to do a complete review before submitting.
Admissions offices may pre-screen applications in the order received to make sure all required information is ready for formal screening. Most pre-screens will verify GPAs, exam results, and data integrity (for example, the personal statement isn’t missing). Every program’s pre-screening process is unique: some may further filter applications based on GPA thresholds or prerequisite grades before sending out secondary applications. This is mostly applicable for MD/DO programs.
If any item on the pre-screen checklist is incomplete, your file will be relegated until all items are received. Some programs may wait for SJT results or recommendation letters before moving your application forward; others may want them later.
I advise applicants that essay questions should be approached like written interview questions. Any optional questions should be answered if you have a strong answer (learn more about Medical School Application Secondary Essays).
The full admissions committee may not view the optional essays. Some essays may be read after matriculation by subcommittees comprising a few faculty and student services administrators. Questions that focus on your specific interest in a scholarly track or a second degree may only be read by the designated program directors who advise the admissions committee.
While holistic review helps admissions committees better understand the context behind a qualified applicant who may have had to surmount various challenges, most committee members are focused on your preparation for their program and fit with their student body. Applicants who feel they gain an advantage by disclosing their struggles and traumas to elicit sympathy may ultimately present a less-than-professional image. They also risk disclosing items that would likely be better kept confidential about themselves.
While applicants can indicate whether future scores may be pending, some programs may conduct a preliminary screening based on past scores that came with your application. In these cases, your new score may not affect your priority standing for an interview. Furthermore, multiple scores may be averaged during initial candidate screening, and only if your most recent score is significantly higher than the average (by at least 10 percentiles) could your file be reassessed with your most recent or best score.
More schools are clarifying how they manage multiple exam scores, so don’t hesitate to ask (and please let your peers on Student Doctor Network forums know what you find out).
Most admissions committees will give overall scores the most significant amount of attention. Each admissions committee may pay closer attention to some subscores based on how they inform them about your academic preparation. For example, the Perceptual Ability Test (PAT) for the DAT has value as the only acceptable standardized assessment of spatial ability. In contrast, quantitative Reasoning scores may not. For non-native English speakers, it is unclear how much value is given to Reading Comprehension (DAT) or CARS (MCAT), especially if the candidate has a high GPA in coursework mainly taught in English.
Applicants who use the LiaisonCAS platform (AACOMAS, AADSAS, VMCAS, PharmCAS) can send academic updates to report grades earned during summer terms and the concurrent fall term (Understanding the Academic Update (AU) Process – Liaison). Consequently, applicants can still report pending prerequisites or recommended courses with the opportunity to verify grades and adjust GPAs. Admissions committees may still review applications with those pending grades on the record.
Institutional committee letters comprise a minority of letters received by medical and dental schools, and most other health professions programs do not expect their candidates to have them. While some admissions committees ask why candidates forego their institutional evaluation, no evidence exists that shows candidates with committee letters have a higher chance of acceptance at medical or dental school compared to similar applicants who rely on a dossier of individual letters.
All applicants are evaluated on their application’s merits. Admissions committees may welcome support letters from current students, including those who are siblings or other family members (such as engaged partners), but admissions committees want to make sure students without those relationships are considered fairly.
Most admissions committees have rules regarding additional letters of support from their community members, including current faculty members, university officers (like deans, chancellors, or vice presidents), alumni, or donors. In general, letters from political leaders who only provide a character assessment may not be favorably received; each evaluator should have direct knowledge of the candidate’s capabilities as a future professional and not leverage their authority or title.
Getting reference letters is a required step in the application process, but you want to make sure you are strongly recommended. Make sure your letters support your application with these tips:
Not all admissions committees give more weight to graduate coursework, and not all graduate coursework is valued. For example, applicants who receive graduate training in public health may not be able to overcome a poor undergraduate academic record in science prerequisites or upper-level biomedical sciences. The most valued graduate degrees for “GPA reinventor” applicants are special master’s postbaccalaureate programs whose courses are designed to closely mirror the rigor seen at professional schools.
While application GPAs do not recognize grade forgiveness policies, many admissions committees may internally calculate GPAs that reflect most recent course attempts. Some admissions committees leverage different GPAs calculated by the application services, such as prerequisite vs. recommended coursework, or the last 30-60 credit hours of science courses. The admissions committees can also exclude grades from courses that may be run by science departments but may not be considered informative for science preparation (such as science writing, science history, or independent research credits).
If you are a low-GPA prospective applicant, show how your overall GPA is not an indication of your preparedness for graduate school (4 Ways to Get Accepted With a Low GPA). Non-traditional applicants can also look into policies about retroactive withdrawals before applying (GPA Repair and Management for Pre-Health Applicants).
Most schools offer experiences that affirm both service-oriented and research-focused missions, so few schools are focused on only one area. To maximize their eligibility, strong applicants should have experiences that connect them to the values and expectations of the schools on their list, knowing that more hours in one category do not compensate for having fewer in the other.
It is good practice for faculty to disclose in their course syllabi how they use plagiarism detectors and AI tools to advance learning and establish academic integrity. One should look at the admissions websites of each program for similar policies for applicant review.
For now, admissions offices are using genAI to encourage applicants to complete their applications. Many schools use an AI chatbot to field questions about their program before meeting with a counselor or recruiter. AI tools help admissions committees identify bottlenecks and incentives to process as many applications as possible for their admissions committees. GenAI tools can summarize key highlights of your entire application, including how well each applicant has demonstrated critical competencies or align with their program’s mission and values (AMP AI – ZAP Solutions, Slate AI – Artificial Intelligence — Technolutions, Integrating AI Into the College Admissions Process | Liaison, AI-Based admission software for U.S. higher education). The role of AI tools in applicant selection for interviews or offers should be researched and conducted with proper oversight by the admissions committee leadership; furthermore, such experimental use should be publicly and transparently disclosed to applicants and their advisors.
Premed and predental applicants neurotically believe that being an alternate for an admissions offer is the same as a rejection. The application processes field many more candidates than there are available spots, and many schools know that the most desirable applicants likely have options (From Waitlist to Offer: Inside an Admissions Committee). Over the years, many forum posters get offers after waiting months on waitlists, so keep engaged and keep improving. It’s not over until it’s over.
Are there other prehealth myths that need to be called out? Join the discussion on the forums!
The post Debunking Prehealth Application Myths: What Really Matters When You Apply appeared first on Student Doctor Network.
Continue reading...
As thousands of aspiring health professional students seek credible advice about crafting their best possible profile, they are overwhelmed with guidance from their peers, advisors, admissions officers, and the internet that promises to give their application an advantage. This article addresses some prehealth application myths commonly raised in the Student Doctor Network forums for those gauging their chances for application success.
We previously debunked common Prehealth Preparation Myths about the steps you need to take before you start your application.
Myth #1: You must show an interest in specific specialties.
Most health professions programs are focused on teaching students the basics required of all general practitioners in their field. You may want to be a nuclear pharmacist, an oral maxillofacial surgeon, or an exotic animal veterinarian, but having those strong interests does not make you a “better” applicant. For many medical and dental school applicants, expressing a solely-focused interest in “gunner” specialties can raise questions about your expectations for professional school.
Myth #2: You cannot show an interest in specific specialties.
You can be interested in specializing if a clinical experience sparked your interest in medicine. Make sure your interest in one area (such as mental health) extends to other areas as part of your overall narrative. You can express interest through research opportunities, networking, or special interest groups.
In general, admissions committees want to know that your pursuit of a health professional career is grounded in service to the sick and suffering, a strong academic foundation, and a professional commitment to integrity. Furthermore, they want assurance that their program will give you the resources to be the professional you aspire to be.
Myth #3: You must submit your application on the first available day since they are considered in the order of submission.
Every year, panicked members on the forums ask about the consequences of a rushed application containing minor unforced mistakes, such as miscalculating hours, unfilled text boxes, or errors in essays. Expert advice warns all applicants to do a complete review before submitting.
Admissions offices may pre-screen applications in the order received to make sure all required information is ready for formal screening. Most pre-screens will verify GPAs, exam results, and data integrity (for example, the personal statement isn’t missing). Every program’s pre-screening process is unique: some may further filter applications based on GPA thresholds or prerequisite grades before sending out secondary applications. This is mostly applicable for MD/DO programs.
If any item on the pre-screen checklist is incomplete, your file will be relegated until all items are received. Some programs may wait for SJT results or recommendation letters before moving your application forward; others may want them later.
Myth #4: You must have an answer for every essay prompt, including the optional essays.
I advise applicants that essay questions should be approached like written interview questions. Any optional questions should be answered if you have a strong answer (learn more about Medical School Application Secondary Essays).
The full admissions committee may not view the optional essays. Some essays may be read after matriculation by subcommittees comprising a few faculty and student services administrators. Questions that focus on your specific interest in a scholarly track or a second degree may only be read by the designated program directors who advise the admissions committee.
Myth #5: When asked about who I am, admissions committees only want to know about how I overcame being disadvantaged.
While holistic review helps admissions committees better understand the context behind a qualified applicant who may have had to surmount various challenges, most committee members are focused on your preparation for their program and fit with their student body. Applicants who feel they gain an advantage by disclosing their struggles and traumas to elicit sympathy may ultimately present a less-than-professional image. They also risk disclosing items that would likely be better kept confidential about themselves.
Myth #6: Admissions committees only consider your most recent exam score. And they’ll wait for your pending score to be released.
While applicants can indicate whether future scores may be pending, some programs may conduct a preliminary screening based on past scores that came with your application. In these cases, your new score may not affect your priority standing for an interview. Furthermore, multiple scores may be averaged during initial candidate screening, and only if your most recent score is significantly higher than the average (by at least 10 percentiles) could your file be reassessed with your most recent or best score.
More schools are clarifying how they manage multiple exam scores, so don’t hesitate to ask (and please let your peers on Student Doctor Network forums know what you find out).
Myth #7: Subscores carry as much weight as overall scores for the MCAT or DAT.
Most admissions committees will give overall scores the most significant amount of attention. Each admissions committee may pay closer attention to some subscores based on how they inform them about your academic preparation. For example, the Perceptual Ability Test (PAT) for the DAT has value as the only acceptable standardized assessment of spatial ability. In contrast, quantitative Reasoning scores may not. For non-native English speakers, it is unclear how much value is given to Reading Comprehension (DAT) or CARS (MCAT), especially if the candidate has a high GPA in coursework mainly taught in English.
Myth #8: I must have all my prerequisites completed and graded before submitting my application.
Applicants who use the LiaisonCAS platform (AACOMAS, AADSAS, VMCAS, PharmCAS) can send academic updates to report grades earned during summer terms and the concurrent fall term (Understanding the Academic Update (AU) Process – Liaison). Consequently, applicants can still report pending prerequisites or recommended courses with the opportunity to verify grades and adjust GPAs. Admissions committees may still review applications with those pending grades on the record.
Myth #9: Committee letters are more valuable than individual letters.
Institutional committee letters comprise a minority of letters received by medical and dental schools, and most other health professions programs do not expect their candidates to have them. While some admissions committees ask why candidates forego their institutional evaluation, no evidence exists that shows candidates with committee letters have a higher chance of acceptance at medical or dental school compared to similar applicants who rely on a dossier of individual letters.
Myth #10: Having a sibling or family member attending a different school at the same university can help my application.
All applicants are evaluated on their application’s merits. Admissions committees may welcome support letters from current students, including those who are siblings or other family members (such as engaged partners), but admissions committees want to make sure students without those relationships are considered fairly.
Myth #11: Having a strong letter of recommendation from a distinguished faculty member at the school or an impactful leader can help my application.
Most admissions committees have rules regarding additional letters of support from their community members, including current faculty members, university officers (like deans, chancellors, or vice presidents), alumni, or donors. In general, letters from political leaders who only provide a character assessment may not be favorably received; each evaluator should have direct knowledge of the candidate’s capabilities as a future professional and not leverage their authority or title.
Strong Letters
Getting reference letters is a required step in the application process, but you want to make sure you are strongly recommended. Make sure your letters support your application with these tips:
- 7 Top Tips to Get Stellar Letters of Recommendation
- Strategies To Obtain Strong Letters of Recommendations
- Get A Better Letter: An Insider’s Guide to Letters of Recommendation
- Letters of Recommendation for Medical School: Everything You Need to Know
- A Strategic Guide to Letters of Recommendation
Myth #12: My upper-level graduate coursework carries more weight than my undergraduate coursework.
Not all admissions committees give more weight to graduate coursework, and not all graduate coursework is valued. For example, applicants who receive graduate training in public health may not be able to overcome a poor undergraduate academic record in science prerequisites or upper-level biomedical sciences. The most valued graduate degrees for “GPA reinventor” applicants are special master’s postbaccalaureate programs whose courses are designed to closely mirror the rigor seen at professional schools.
Myth #13: My bad grades during my first year of college doom me from ever becoming a health professional.
While application GPAs do not recognize grade forgiveness policies, many admissions committees may internally calculate GPAs that reflect most recent course attempts. Some admissions committees leverage different GPAs calculated by the application services, such as prerequisite vs. recommended coursework, or the last 30-60 credit hours of science courses. The admissions committees can also exclude grades from courses that may be run by science departments but may not be considered informative for science preparation (such as science writing, science history, or independent research credits).
If you are a low-GPA prospective applicant, show how your overall GPA is not an indication of your preparedness for graduate school (4 Ways to Get Accepted With a Low GPA). Non-traditional applicants can also look into policies about retroactive withdrawals before applying (GPA Repair and Management for Pre-Health Applicants).
Myth #14: Service-oriented programs do not value research accomplishments, and research-oriented programs do not favor applicants with a significant amount of community service.
Most schools offer experiences that affirm both service-oriented and research-focused missions, so few schools are focused on only one area. To maximize their eligibility, strong applicants should have experiences that connect them to the values and expectations of the schools on their list, knowing that more hours in one category do not compensate for having fewer in the other.
Myth #15: Admissions committees can use detection software to discover if I plagiarized my essay or to determine how much generative AI was involved in my essays.
It is good practice for faculty to disclose in their course syllabi how they use plagiarism detectors and AI tools to advance learning and establish academic integrity. One should look at the admissions websites of each program for similar policies for applicant review.
For now, admissions offices are using genAI to encourage applicants to complete their applications. Many schools use an AI chatbot to field questions about their program before meeting with a counselor or recruiter. AI tools help admissions committees identify bottlenecks and incentives to process as many applications as possible for their admissions committees. GenAI tools can summarize key highlights of your entire application, including how well each applicant has demonstrated critical competencies or align with their program’s mission and values (AMP AI – ZAP Solutions, Slate AI – Artificial Intelligence — Technolutions, Integrating AI Into the College Admissions Process | Liaison, AI-Based admission software for U.S. higher education). The role of AI tools in applicant selection for interviews or offers should be researched and conducted with proper oversight by the admissions committee leadership; furthermore, such experimental use should be publicly and transparently disclosed to applicants and their advisors.
Myth #16: Getting on a waitlist is the same as getting rejected.
Premed and predental applicants neurotically believe that being an alternate for an admissions offer is the same as a rejection. The application processes field many more candidates than there are available spots, and many schools know that the most desirable applicants likely have options (From Waitlist to Offer: Inside an Admissions Committee). Over the years, many forum posters get offers after waiting months on waitlists, so keep engaged and keep improving. It’s not over until it’s over.
Are there other prehealth myths that need to be called out? Join the discussion on the forums!
The post Debunking Prehealth Application Myths: What Really Matters When You Apply appeared first on Student Doctor Network.
Continue reading...
