SDN Culture

[bananafish94]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Are SDNers brutally honest

Often, yes. However, I don't consider this to be a bad thing, as direct answers are helpful and can spare somebody from making a mistake that might cost them time and money.

or excessive

I see this too, and this one does rub me the wrong way. It seems that sometimes people will answer questions (especially questions from particularly naive/new posters with little experience in the medical school process) with more intent to show off or entertain other long-time SDN members than to actually answer the question. I'm sure I've been guilty of this myself because it's admittedly fun to give a sarcastic answer to a question that's ridiculous or obvious to someone "in the know." But I see why that could potentially drive people away from the site.

Overall, SDN is a good resource. The good stuff outweighs the toxicity. But there is some toxicity.

 

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Did you read the conversation? I am talking about a specific set of threads the previous commentor described.

By "previous commentor" you're talking about me. So yes, I did read the conversation. Just so that I'm clear, you'd prefer pre-meds cheerfully give second-hand info to other pre-meds rather than having an adcom members tersely answer. That's basically asking this to turn into r/premed. I believe the presence of people who have actually gone through this experience and have seen both sides of it are the only part of this site that make it valuable. You can have your own opinion on it but I don't think asking them to spend less time helping people-because, whether they do it nicely or not, they are helping-improves the forum experience.

I would also like to point out that in a thread on the culture of this website that was a fun, lighthearted discussion you chose to single out and personally attack another user and make snide responses to two others.

 

[7331poas]

Or when you ask a question that is answered by plugging the exact text into the search bar and 20 threads pop up.
I will say-for the record-I don't recall seeing any real toxicity on the WAMC pages. There it is understood that each person is in their own unique situation. It is more when "I got a C, does that mean my application is tanked?" "Alcohol IA from 3 years ago. Oh no!" or "Ross seems awesome, why would anyone go USMD" threads recur that things get a bit nasty.

So let me get this straight. These threads about "alcohol IAs" and "carib schools" are too frequently posted for goro and gonnif to respond in good faith, but not frequently posted enough for power users like Wedgedawg and others to respond to. Is that a correct interpretation of your comments?

 

[On_The_Way_Up]

I am brutal, honest and excessive. I recently have come to the conclusion that to get these applicants really solidly ready for the challenge of applying to medical school, the actual mechanics of applying, of how to think, of how to communicate, I have to really "slap" them about their attitude and ideas that are: far too optimistic; far too pessimistic; naive, based on conjuncture, rumor and myth, and just plain ignorant. So I view myself as the meanest, loudest Marine Drill Instructor screaming at raw green recruits until they piss themselves and soil their pants in order to save their asses when applying.

One of the best SDN posts of all time.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

So let me get this straight. These threads about "alcohol IAs" and "carib schools" are too frequently posted for goro and gonnif to respond in good faith, but not frequently posted enough for power users like Wedgedawg and others to respond to. Is that a correct interpretation of your comments?

This thread is a perfect microcosm of SDN. A user asks a question in good faith. Most of the users respond in kind. One of the posters who has a reputation for being blunt and rough around the edges makes a hyperbolic post that has a kernel of truth wrapped in a lot of humor. Another user comes into thread and uses said post to lament the toxicity of SDN while simultaneously insulting and antagonizing half the posters in the thread.

 

[libertyyne]

premed: Should I apply to medical school with 2.0 gpa and 490 mcat?

SDN : I dont think that is a great idea, it is unlikely you will get an II.

Premed: Do you think I should wait six months and apply after i get back from my mission trip to mallorca?

SDN: I dont think that would make a difference to your app you need a post bac and a higher mcat.

Premed: Alright, so mission trip was awesome got an LOR from a local street pharmacist , we did some amazing work there. I am definately going to apply.

SDN: Reapplicants are looked upon poorly. you should really strengthen your app.

Premed: Alright , finished shadowing the local shaman and got another LOR, I will have my app in by december and secondaries in by april.

SDN: There is a high chance you will get zero interviews.

Premed: Triggered, who are you to stand in the way of my dreams. SDN is soo toxic.

Three months later.

Premed: Guys I got accepted I will be going to Ross in the US!

 

[7331poas]

Premed: Triggered, who are you to stand in the way of my dreams. SDN is soo toxic.

Beautiful strawman. I am admitted. I have received great advice on this forum by certain individuals. That does not prevent me from recognizing the two players at hand here.

One of the posters who has a reputation for being blunt and rough around the edges makes a hyperbolic post that has a kernel of truth wrapped in a lot of humor.

You say blunt and rough around the edges, I say manufacturer of a toxic environment. Its all about framing. There are LM 70-ers on reddit and other platforms who specifically avoid this forum because of the dialogue and tone. Why do you think that is? Do you honestly believe it is because they are insecure about their application?

Good luck on your cycle

 

[libertyyne]

Beautiful strawman. I am admitted. I have received great advice on this forum by certain individuals. That does not prevent me from recognizing the two players at hand here.



You say blunt and rough around the edges, I say manufacturer of a toxic environment. Its all about framing.

Good luck on your cycle

1) You missed the point. The point was that people and premeds in particular do not listen or understand the reality of their application until someone hits them over the head with it. The straight forward and blunt advice of SDN provides that.

2)Furthermore, why complain about it? If you want to change it, be the change you want to see. Walk the walk . go into every thread and answer with kindness, instead of attacking other memebers. Provide the information that these "toxic" members are providing in a kinder fashion. And show them kindness when interacting with them.

3) you are in for quite the experience in medicine and beyond if you think the culture of SDN is too toxic.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Beautiful strawman. I am admitted. I have received great advice on this forum by certain individuals. That does not prevent me from recognizing the two players at hand here.



You say blunt and rough around the edges, I say manufacturer of a toxic environment. Its all about framing. There are LM 70-ers on reddit and other platforms who specifically avoid this forum because of the dialogue and tone. Why do you think that is? Do you honestly believe it is because they are insecure about their application?

Good luck on your cycle

I think it’s more because of threads like this. The only one making this thread toxic is you.

 

[7331poas]

I think it’s more because of threads like this. The only one making this thread toxic is you.

This particular thread is not my primary concern

 

[7331poas]

3) you are in for quite the experience in medicine and beyond if you think the culture of SDN is too toxic.

I am sure this is a fallacy. I also consider medicine too toxic. There is a plethora of evidence to support this. Just ask the multiple suicides coming out of NYC programs in just this year.

While working as a tech, I once saw an attending walk into a room and simply state "he has lung cancer, I wouldnt expect him to live much longer. I will check back in later", then walk out.

Was that blunt and appropriately to the point? Or was that a symptom of a culture of indifference to the person "on the other side of the screen"?

who knows. But why should we accept doctors (or posters) like that? Is "walking the walk" enough? Or should people speak up?

 

[libertyyne]

I am sure this is a fallacy. I also consider medicine too toxic. There is a plethora of evidence to support this. Just ask the multiple suicides coming out of NYC programs in just this year.

While working as a tech, I once saw an attending walk into a room and simply state "he has lung cancer, I wouldnt expect him to live much longer. I will check back in later", then walk out.

Was that blunt and appropriately to the point? Or was that a symptom of a culture of indifference to the person "on the other side of the screen"?

who knows. But why should we accept doctors (or posters) like that? Is "walking the walk" enough? Or should people speak up?

I personally dont find moral outrage particularly convincing. Especially when the person showing the moral outrage is displaying the same thing they are criticizing. Hypocrisy is the word that comes to mind.

Delivering a life altering diagnosis is hardly the same as calling someone an idiot on an anonymous internet forum. Why didnt you call that physican out at that time? I hope you retain that idea of that physican, because training may well turn you into that person one day. That is why walking the walk is necessary. Because we cant control everyone's behavior , but we can control our behavior and our perception.

 

[libertyyne]

I am sure this is a fallacy. I also consider medicine too toxic. There is a plethora of evidence to support this. Just ask the multiple suicides coming out of NYC programs in just this year.

While working as a tech, I once saw an attending walk into a room and simply state "he has lung cancer, I wouldnt expect him to live much longer. I will check back in later", then walk out.

Was that blunt and appropriately to the point? Or was that a symptom of a culture of indifference to the person "on the other side of the screen"?

who knows. But why should we accept doctors (or posters) like that? Is "walking the walk" enough? Or should people speak up?

also an aside, but age adjusted suicide rates among residents are lower compared to the general population.
Causes of Death of Residents in ACGME-Accredited Programs 2000 Through 2014: Implications for the Learning Environment

Yaghmour, Nicholas A. MPP; Brigham, Timothy P. MDiv, PhD; Richter, Thomas MA; Miller, Rebecca S. MS; Philibert, Ingrid PhD, MBA; Baldwin, DeWitt C. Jr MD; Nasca, Thomas J. MD

Academic Medicine: July 2017 - Volume 92 - Issue 7 - p 976–983
doi: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001736

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

This particular thread is not my primary concern

Woosh.

 

[Goro]

For those who think that some SDNers are toxic, there's always the Ignore function. I've applied it 2x today, including a loose cannon posting in this thread.

Or one can mimic two of SDN's nicest members, gyngyn, and Doctor-S.

 

[Lawpy]

For those who think that some SDNers are toxic, there's always the Ignore function. I've applied it 2x today, including a loose cannon posting in this thread.

Or one can mimic two of SDN's nicest members, gyngyn, and Doctor-S.

Don’t forget about @HomeSkool and his comedy!

 

[HomeSkool]

For those who think that some SDNers are toxic, there's always the Ignore function. I've applied it 2x today, including a loose cannon posting in this thread.

Or one can mimic two of SDN's nicest members, gyngyn, and Doctor-S.

I'm the nicest person on here, and I'll kill anyone who disagrees.

 

[Robin-jay]

I do my part.

 

[Goro]

I'm the nicest person on here, and I'll kill anyone who disagrees.

My pal @HomeSkool is also super nice, and is only somewhat salty.

 

[de Ribas]

My pal @HomeSkool is also super nice, and is only somewhat salty.

"Salt is good... "

 

[Lucca]

Y’all are being way too harsh on @7331poas . His criticism is legit and was presented in a reasonable manner (I.e. not in all caps, or accompanied with a proclamation that they are leaving SDN forever even though they are going to watch their thread like a hawk to see if people agree with them).

Not *everything* said on these boards has to somehow be related to one’s ability to make it in medicine or not. Let’s get a grip.

 

[Robin-jay]

I already wrote extensively above in response to this basic statement. To reiterate, schools often engage in misleading advertising to premeds regarding the standards necessary to gain admission. From a basic understanding of capitalism, students should not trust individual medical school's websites because their primary goal is to 1) attract a full class of quality students and 2) maximize the number of applications to their program in order to drive secondary fee revenue.

This phenomenon is fully displayed in the predatory practice of "holistic admissions" whereby schools attract low-stat applicants to apply to their schools (using encouraging statements on their own websites!) and then subsequently reject the applicant, sometimes via computerized screening.

"Research" is not equivalent to getting peer advice. What schools and the AAMC state on their official documents may not be truthful and may be framed in such a way to drive revenue. Even if this is not true, it is prudent for an applicant to ask SDN for confirmation and advice. At least, that should be the aim of the administration on this site.

Regardless of everything else this user said, I do agree with this specific point 100%.

Medical schools falsely advertise "holistic", for $$$$$$$$$.

What they really should be saying is "you have a chance with the following GPA/MCAT stats, and then we will consider your EC's afterwards".

But "honesty" would kill the cash cow, which is optimistic pre-meds with poor guidance from most medical schools advertisements.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

"Salt is good... "

Tell that to the Navy.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Regardless of everything else this user said, I do agree with this specific point 100%.

Medical schools falsely advertise "holistic", for $$$$$$$$$.

What they really should be saying is "you have a chance with the following GPA/MCAT stats, and then we will consider your EC's afterwards".

But "honesty" would kill the cash cow, which is optimistic pre-meds with poor guidance from most medical schools advertisements.

Maybe I just don’t understand what h o l i s t i c means, but I thought it just meant that the school will look at your whole application. So if you have 1000 apps for 100 seats, and 300 of those apps are people with great stats who also have unique and/solid ECs, why wouldn’t you take them? Just because they take the applicants with the best stats and good ECs doesn’t mean they aren’t looking at it holistically.

Of course, I know that someone with minimum ECs and a 4.0/528 probably gets a lot of leeway, but ultimately aren’t they also looking for people they know will excel in med school?

 

[OneTwoThreeFour]

Y’all are being way too harsh on @7331poas . His criticism is legit and was presented in a reasonable manner (I.e. not in all caps, or accompanied with a proclamation that they are leaving SDN forever even though they are going to watch their thread like a hawk to see if people agree with them).

Not *everything* said on these boards has to somehow be related to one’s ability to make it in medicine or not. Let’s get a grip.

I agree that his some of his feelings about this site on the whole are fair. I don't believe his singling out and insulting of users is fair.

 

[deleted804295]

Woah. This thread really blew up. I'll read it during my break.

 

[863168]

@Matthew9Thirtyfive Honestly, this is still another derivative comment about the fact that his master's concentration is in Chemistry and if he had chosen a Biology major he wouldn't have half the problems he had to go through because he would have a higher GPA. I called him out on this B.S. when he superimposed his own cynicism on another premed who hadn't even started taking classes in college by telling him to just pursue a Biology major instead of giving them any chance to foster their growth via intellectual curiosity.[1,2]

If premeds are complaining about the holistic admissions process, then they are clearly not speaking from a historical perspective when admissions were heavily biased against certain racial groups and ethnic categories. In the 1920s to 1940s which was coined Holistic Admissions, there was a heavily anti-semitic and anti-immigrant sentiment which blocked notable people who attended local institutions and still ended up becoming Nobel Prize laureates and multi-millionaires.

The contemporary issue right now is with competition & scrutiny, where too many applicants are stellar and in honesty there are no single special snowflakes. I believe that the last time I looked at an MSAR around 10%-20% of students who matriculate into medical school already have a master's degree in another field or higher. Certain students who apply have perfect test scores, viral videos, play an instrument, and do other extracurriculars with populations in need and the homeless while also doing research. The issue isn't that holisticism isn't looked at, it's that a lot of quality students have holisticism and a killer GPA/MCAT so students with only one or the other need to figure out what they can do to maximize their chances of getting in.

 

[7331poas]

If premeds are complaining about the holistic admissions process, then they are clearly not speaking from a historical perspective when admissions were heavily biased against certain racial groups and ethnic categories. In the 1920s to 1940s which was coined Holistic Admissions, there was a heavily anti-semitic and anti-immigrant sentiment which blocked notable people who attended local institutions and still ended up becoming Nobel Prize laureates and multi-millionaires.

The contemporary issue right now is with competition & scrutiny, where too many applicants are stellar and in honesty there are no single special snowflakes. I believe that the last time I looked at an MSAR around 10%-20% of students who matriculate into medical school already have a master's degree in another field or higher. Certain students who apply have perfect test scores, viral videos, play an instrument, and do other extracurriculars with populations in need and the homeless while also doing research. The issue isn't that holisticism isn't looked at, it's that a lot of quality students have holisticism and a killer GPA/MCAT so students with only one or the other need to figure out what they can do to maximize their chances of getting in.

That was not my argument. My submission was that schools are not being transparent and instead marketing "holistic admissions" to applicants who clearly have no chance at admission. I have no problem with the consideration of ECs facially. My contention was that schools have a profit motive in increasing the number of applicants to their schools. And therefore, students should absolutely post questions on this forum that are already explicitly addressed in official documents from the AAMC and individual school websites. My statements about holistic admissions were only an example.

 

[Lee]

Y’all are being way too harsh on @7331poas . His criticism is legit and was presented in a reasonable manner (I.e. not in all caps, or accompanied with a proclamation that they are leaving SDN forever even though they are going to watch their thread like a hawk to see if people agree with them).

Not *everything* said on these boards has to somehow be related to one’s ability to make it in medicine or not. Let’s get a grip.

Agree. @7331poas is making a solid argument that a few people on this forum treat others in a way that ends up driving away students.

This behavior, while perhaps intended to 'toughen-up' students, diminishes the value of SDN's nonprofit mission to provide free and unbiased advice and information.

The narrative of 'SDN is toxic, don't use it' plays directly to those that prey on students by selling unnecessary services or peddling unsound or unrealistic educational 'opportunities.'

To be true to our mission to help students and fight those who prey on the dreams of desperate students, we must treat everyone with dignity and respect.

That is doubly true for those who are clueless or naive. These are the students most likely to be fleeced by unscrupulous individuals and organizations. By treating them poorly, we drive these students right into their hands.

We as a community should agree that we will no longer contribute to the culture of harassment, hazing and disrespect that is still present within the medical education system. Nowhere is this more important than at the early exploratory step of the education process, which occurs here.

We're all better than that and need to serve as agents of change. I believe that's why so many educators and docs are active here - because they want to make things better than when they went through. So, let's continue this effort -- let's make things better by agreeing to no longer tolerate hazing, disrespect or harassment.

 

[ciestar]

Maybe I just don’t understand what h o l i s t i c means, but I thought it just meant that the school will look at your whole application. So if you have 1000 apps for 100 seats, and 300 of those apps are people with great stats who also have unique and/solid ECs, why wouldn’t you take them? Just because they take the applicants with the best stats and good ECs doesn’t mean they aren’t looking at it holistically.

Of course, I know that someone with minimum ECs and a 4.0/528 probably gets a lot of leeway, but ultimately aren’t they also looking for people they know will excel in med school?

I really believe that at least one school looked at my app holistically when I applied and granted me an interview. My stats were..average. So, it does happen. Is it better to have the stats? Absolutely, but it isn’t impossible.

 

[mindlight1]

We as a community should agree that we will no longer contribute to the culture of harassment, hazing and disrespect that is still present within the medical education system. Nowhere is this more important than at the early exploratory step of the education process, which occurs here.

We're all better than that and need to serve as agents of change. I believe that's why so many educators and docs are active here - because they want to make things better than when they went through. So, let's continue this effort -- let's make things better by agreeing to no longer tolerate hazing, disrespect or harassment.

This is the kind of community I want to be a part of...I've been lurking but now I'm joining.

 

[Goro]

Maybe I just don’t understand what h o l i s t i c means, but I thought it just meant that the school will look at your whole application. So if you have 1000 apps for 100 seats, and 300 of those apps are people with great stats who also have unique and/solid ECs, why wouldn’t you take them? Just because they take the applicants with the best stats and good ECs doesn’t mean they aren’t looking at it holistically.

Of course, I know that someone with minimum ECs and a 4.0/528 probably gets a lot of leeway, but ultimately aren’t they also looking for people they know will excel in med school?

This. To many people, "holistic review" means "get out of GPA jail for free".

It's not that.

What it means is, human eyeballs will look over your app to mine for diamonds in the rough instead of going into an auto-screen.

This process is not a bye for people failing to do their homework about what med schools want. It's not an excuse for people too lazy to read the admissions webpages at schools, which tell you what they want! Here is just one of them: Admissions Recommendations - U of U School of Medicine - | University of Utah

So spare us the "they're exploiting the naive with holistic review!" meme

 

[863168]

@7331poas I wasn't referencing you or anything you directly posted. I'm intentionally ignoring you, especially after you called an adcom toxic.

 

[Robin-jay]

Maybe I just don’t understand what h o l i s t i c means, but I thought it just meant that the school will look at your whole application.

That's what it means, but not how its used.

o if you have 1000 apps for 100 seats, and 300 of those apps are people with great stats who also have unique and/solid ECs, why wouldn’t you take them?

EC's are not weighed equally. GPA and MCAT come first.

There's a reason computerized systems don't automatically turn down poor EC's, but reject low GPA/MCAT without a human even looking over the application.

but ultimately aren’t they also looking for people they know will excel in med school?

Yes, too much so in my opinion, because excelling in med school is not the same thing as "looking for applicants to become great doctors".

 

[Robin-jay]

Honestly, this is still another derivative comment about the fact that his master's concentration is in Chemistry and if he had chosen a Biology major he wouldn't have half the problems he had to go through because he would have a higher GPA.

I never said that (that I reget my major). I don't regret earning my masters degree in chemistry in the slightest.

But please do feel free to put as many words into my mouth as you can. The world is your oyster.

I think telling someone to be very aware of their GPA is helpful, and not harmful in any conceivable way.

What is your status anyway? Pre-med? Med student? Physician? Other healthcare?

 

[Robin-jay]

I really believe that at least one school looked at my app holistically when I applied and granted me an interview. My stats were..average. So, it does happen. Is it better to have the stats? Absolutely, but it isn’t impossible.

Average stats are not enough to ignore EC's at all. It's the people with low stats and decent EC's who medical schools advertise as having a possible chance, to increase their $$$ pockets.

 

[de Ribas]

That's what it means, but not how its used.

That's how I always understood it works. Holistic, for me, means that ADCOMS will look over whole app and consider anything that might stand out above average GPA. But if after holistic review you are still not above average, your chances are slim.

 

[Robin-jay]

That's how I always understood it works. Holistic, for me, means that ADCOMS will look over whole app and consider anything that might stand out above average GPA. But if after holistic review you are still not above average, your chances are slim.

To me, Holistic seems to be "if the applicant has a good GPA/MCAT, we will consider their EC's".

 

[de Ribas]

To me, Holistic seems to be "if the applicant has a good GPA/MCAT, we will consider their EC's".

Sums up my idea.

 

[OneTwoThreeFour]

To me, Holistic seems to be "if the applicant has a good GPA/MCAT, we will consider their EC's".

I know that's how it can feel from your side. But (at least at my school) every application gets two sets of eyeballs-typically one student and one faculty member. Sure, MCAT is important and GPA is important. But they are literally weighted equally to things like leadership, community service, and "distance traveled". When people with amazing life experiences but poor stats don't get interviews it isn't because they weren't evaluated holistically. It is because people with amazing life experiences AND good stats get the spots.

 

[Goro]

To me, Holistic seems to be "if the applicant has a good GPA/MCAT, we will consider their EC's".

That's not how it works

 

[Lucca]

That's not how it works

Aye. There are ways to convince yourself of this anyways. The UCSD Pre-Med youtube channel has many, many adcom panels where adcoms from all over the country go into explicit detail about how they evaluate applications, to give one example.

I also have my suspicions that @WedgeDawg 's WARS system was not revealed to him in a dream mysteriously after he started medical school...

 

[Robin-jay]

I know that's how it can feel from your side. But (at least at my school) every application gets two sets of eyeballs-typically one student and one faculty member. Sure, MCAT is important and GPA is important.

I can see this happening sure.

Sure, MCAT is important and GPA is important. But they are literally weighted equally to things like leadership, community service, and "distance traveled".

I don't see how they are weighted "equally" though. I know a close friend who had a Harvard interview with a 520 and 4.0 GPA, with almost 0 EC's.

However, you will never see someone at a Harvard interview with phenomenal top 1% of EC's and a poor GPA and MCAT.

I think admission committees do an ok job once the GPA/MCAT barrier is passes in terms of being "holistic", but not before that barrier has been passed.

 

[Lucca]

I can see this happening sure.



I don't see how they are weighted "equally" though. I know a close friend who had a Harvard interview with a 520 and 4.0 GPA, with almost 0 EC's.

However, you will never see someone at a Harvard interview with phenomenal top 1% of EC's and a poor GPA and MCAT.

I think admission committees do an ok job once the GPA/MCAT barrier is passes in terms of being "holistic", but not before that barrier has been passed.

yah but passing the barrier and then evaluating the full app *is* holistic. One can argue that the particular qualities which are currently valued in a "well-rounded" app are not necessarily the best at choosing successful doctors, but that's another argument altogether. That said, if you're WashU and you can pick you're entire class from the top 5% of MCAT test takers then you might just go ahead and do that. *That's* the part I have an issue with, because making the decision that this is either A) harmless or B) good does not seem more reasonable, to me at least, than making arbitrary decisions on which apps to toss out or not. The number of schools that actually function that way are, however, very small.

 

[OneTwoThreeFour]

I can see this happening sure.



I don't see how they are weighted "equally" though. I know a close friend who had a Harvard interview with a 520 and 4.0 GPA, with almost 0 EC's.

However, you will never see someone at a Harvard interview with phenomenal top 1% of EC's and a poor GPA and MCAT.

I think admission committees do an ok job once the GPA/MCAT barrier is passes in terms of being "holistic", but not before that barrier has been passed.

Literally a 0-10 score for GPA. A 0-10 score for MCAT. A 0-10 score for leadership. Etc. All the way down. I can't address your anecdote because I don't know what was on his application. I also don't know how Harvard does their admissions. I will certainly say that my (top 20) institution had several interviews with people in the 505 range and 3.5ish GPAs who have phenomenal life experiences.

 

[Robin-jay]

yah but passing the barrier and then evaluating the full app *is* holistic.

Yes, this is all I'm trying to illustrate. The GPA/MCAT barriers are a real thing and do take way more precedence over EC's.

That said, if you're WashU and you can pick you're entire class from the top 5% of MCAT test takers then you might just go ahead and do that. *That's* the part I have an issue with, because making the decision that this is either A) harmless or B) good does not seem more reasonable, to me at least, than making arbitrary decisions on which apps to toss out or not. The number of schools that actually function that way are, however, very small.

Yea, I'm not a fan of schools picking high stats to just look better. But I digress, it doesn't really influence me much now that I've been accepted somewhere. "Holistic" has a lot of asterisks to its definition though, from medical schools.

 

[CCresearcher]

Yes, this is all I'm trying to illustrate. The GPA/MCAT barriers are a real thing and do take way more precedence over EC's.


Yea, I'm not a fan of schools picking high stats to just look better. But I digress, it doesn't really influence me much now that I've been accepted somewhere. "Holistic" has a lot of asterisks to its definition though, from medical schools.

I think the bigger problem with holistic reviews is that VERY few premeds seem to know what the word "holistic" actually means. This is easily seen in many cases, as I have read multiple threads where premeds referred to themselves as "more holistic applicants." Holistic refers to a philosophy/process; it's not a quality or a trait that a premed can possess.

So many premeds seem to think that holistic means that schools shouldn't consider their GPA or MCAT. In reality, holistic means that the schools are looking at your whole application--they are considering the whole package, and that package DOES include GPA and MCAT. Mostly I find that those complaining about holistic review just want the "holistic" process to mean that they get accepted regardless of their stats. They think that they should get into Harvard in spite of their sub 500 MCAT scores just because they also happen to have "exceptional ECs" (aka a few hundred hours of research and volunteering and they play the violin). That's just not how it works.

I do think the whole process is overly numbers focused, but to say schools aren't holistic in their reviews of applications is just wrong. Most are, it's just that holistic doesn't mean what you want it to.

 

[Robin-jay]

I do think the whole process is overly numbers focused, but to say schools aren't holistic in their reviews of applications is just wrong. Most are, it's just that holistic doesn't mean what you want it to.

I agree with 90% of what you say, but medical schools are advertising "holistic" to mean something its not.

Medical school: We are holistic, we look at the whole applicant!
Applicant: Awesome, I'll apply here with a 2.99 GPA because my EC's are top 1% (1000+ hours volunteering, science publications, 1000+ research hours, etc.).
Medical school: *proceeds to screen out application due to sub 3.0 GPA*
Applicant: I thought this was a holistic process
Medical school: It is, just increase your GPA before we consider you, and thank for your primary and secondary fees!

Its not that I'm saying that their "holistic" definition doesn't fit mine, its that they "advertise" it to maximize primary and secondary fees from applicants, withholding truth from the process.

So overall, its because they advertise the word "holistic" as a different definition than what they use in practice.

 

[863168]

I never said that (that I reget my major). I don't regret earning my masters degree in chemistry in the slightest. But please do feel free to put as many words into my mouth as you can. The world is your oyster.

I never typed that you regretted your major. I'm sorry if you think that I'm putting words in your mouth when I have never typed those words on the forum in any of the two threads where we have interacted. If you want to PM me about this matter then I'm open, however I have no recollection of typing anything to that effect.

 

[Robin-jay]

I never typed that you regretted your major. I'm sorry if you think that I'm putting words in your mouth when I have never typed those words on the forum in any of the two threads where we have interacted. If you want to PM me about this matter then I'm open, however I have no recollection of typing anything to that effect.

Honestly, this is still another derivative comment about the fact that his master's concentration is in Chemistry and if he had chosen a Biology major he wouldn't have half the problems he had to go through because he would have a higher GPA. I called him out on this B.S. when he superimposed his own cynicism on another premed who hadn't even started taking classes in college by telling him to just pursue a Biology major instead of giving them any chance to foster their growth via intellectual curiosity.