Should I have said more information about my background?

[datsa]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I recently had two very positive phone conversations with MD/PhD advisers at two good universities. Both had only positive things to say about my prospects for their program; in particular, both stated that I was the first prospective applicant with whom they had talked who had a clear idea of what s/he wanted out of her/his desired future dual degree (MD/PhD Anthropology) and had the work, scholastic, and experience to back up her/his endeavors.

Both advisers insisted that I finish my prereqs ASAP, take the MCAT & GRE this summer, and apply to their programs next spring of 2008.

However, I did not reveal to them two things about me:
First, my undergraduate record is fairly convoluted, for I started and left college several times (I worked my entire way through undergrad at a top 20 university).

Secondly, I am an older applicant (almost 43, 44-45 when I apply). I am well aware of the age bias that nearly all MSTP and dual degree programs exhibit. I fully understand the implications of the length of schooling and training on my future employability and research.

So, should I have mentioned these issues to the advisers? I felt that if I did, I would be shot down and dissuaded from pursuing my goals.

Case in point: When I attended an MD/PhD conference recently, several MD/PhDs did just that -- pointing out all the negative aspects of my potential and never once focusing on the positives that I have to offer. I understand that they were being "realistic" about my chances, but none gave me an opportunity to present those aspects of my background that would make me a decent candidate and a good, if older, student and medical scientist. I'd like to think that these recent phone conversations prove that, age and academic consistency aside, I do have some chance. Of course once these schools see my transcripts and figure out my age, then rejection is a real possibility; I can always reapply or I can still do sequential degrees (MD, then PhD, or PhD and then MD).
Any thoughts on these issues?

I have posted similar inquiries to this board (under both MD/PhD and Non-trad), but that was before these phone pre-"interviews."

Thanks. 😳

 

[QofQuimica]

I recently had two very positive phone conversations with MD/PhD advisers at two good universities. Both had only positive things to say about my prospects for their program; in particular, both stated that I was the first prospective applicant with whom they had talked who had a clear idea of what s/he wanted out of her/his desired future dual degree (MD/PhD Anthropology) and had the work, scholastic, and experience to back up her/his endeavors.

Both advisers insisted that I finish my prereqs ASAP, take the MCAT & GRE this summer, and apply to their programs next spring of 2008.

However, I did not reveal to them two things about me:
First, my undergraduate record is fairly convoluted, for I started and left college several times (I worked my entire way through undergrad at a top 20 university).

Secondly, I am an older applicant (almost 43, 44-45 when I apply). I am well aware of the age bias that nearly all MSTP and dual degree programs exhibit. I fully understand the implications of the length of schooling and training on my future employability and research.

So, should I have mentioned these issues to the advisers? I felt that if I did, I would be shot down and dissuaded from pursuing my goals.

Case in point: When I attended an MD/PhD conference recently, several MD/PhDs did just that -- pointing out all the negative aspects of my potential and never once focusing on the positives that I have to offer. I understand that they were being "realistic" about my chances, but none gave me an opportunity to present those aspects of my background that would make me a decent candidate and a good, if older, student and medical scientist. I'd like to think that these recent phone conversations prove that, age and academic consistency aside, I do have some chance. Of course once these schools see my transcripts and figure out my age, then rejection is a real possibility; I can always reapply or I can still do sequential degrees (MD, then PhD, or PhD and then MD).
Any thoughts on these issues?

I have posted similar inquiries to this board (under both MD/PhD and Non-trad), but that was before these phone pre-"interviews."

Thanks. 😳

I think you already know the answer to this question. I mean, the quality of advice you get out of an advisor is only as good as the quality of information you give to him or her. If you didn't tell those advisors about these "tiny" details, you basically rendered their advice useless IMO. You are who you are, including all of your warts and blemishes. (Not that I think being 43 is a horrible thing, mind you; I'm a nontrad myself!) But the reality of the matter is that this information probably would have changed their assessment of your chances, which you know yourself, because that was why you chose to withhold the info. You also know that you won't be able to hide your age or academic record when you apply for school. So if I were you, I would re-contact these people if you can and tell them everything, good and bad. That way, you can get some REAL advice for the real applicant that you are going to be.

I hope that things work out for you going the MD/PhD route, but if they don't, you can always try applying MD-only and then taking a leave for your PhD or apply to transfer into the MD/PhD program. It's not so unusual to do separate degrees; I'm doing mine separately myself, and one of my classmates is, too. 🙂

 

[gbwillner]

I recently had two very positive phone conversations with MD/PhD advisers at two good universities. Both had only positive things to say about my prospects for their program; in particular, both stated that I was the first prospective applicant with whom they had talked who had a clear idea of what s/he wanted out of her/his desired future dual degree (MD/PhD Anthropology) and had the work, scholastic, and experience to back up her/his endeavors.

Both advisers insisted that I finish my prereqs ASAP, take the MCAT & GRE this summer, and apply to their programs next spring of 2008.

However, I did not reveal to them two things about me:
First, my undergraduate record is fairly convoluted, for I started and left college several times (I worked my entire way through undergrad at a top 20 university).

Secondly, I am an older applicant (almost 43, 44-45 when I apply). I am well aware of the age bias that nearly all MSTP and dual degree programs exhibit. I fully understand the implications of the length of schooling and training on my future employability and research.

So, should I have mentioned these issues to the advisers? I felt that if I did, I would be shot down and dissuaded from pursuing my goals.

Case in point: When I attended an MD/PhD conference recently, several MD/PhDs did just that -- pointing out all the negative aspects of my potential and never once focusing on the positives that I have to offer. I understand that they were being "realistic" about my chances, but none gave me an opportunity to present those aspects of my background that would make me a decent candidate and a good, if older, student and medical scientist. I'd like to think that these recent phone conversations prove that, age and academic consistency aside, I do have some chance. Of course once these schools see my transcripts and figure out my age, then rejection is a real possibility; I can always reapply or I can still do sequential degrees (MD, then PhD, or PhD and then MD).
Any thoughts on these issues?

I have posted similar inquiries to this board (under both MD/PhD and Non-trad), but that was before these phone pre-"interviews."

Thanks. 😳

First off, there are always special cases. I would agree that your age and inability to go right through college may (and will) hurt your application, but that does not mean you will not be accepted into an MD/PhD program. But you do have to be realistic, and by this I mean not thinking you will magically be accepted to any one particular program. You will need extra work, and extra patience. You should probably apply to lots of programs (by lots I mean dozens), and hopefully you will find one that will sympathize with your background and admit you.

As far as telling them in advance about your "convoluted" history and age- I really think you did the right thing by NOT bringing it up. Don't give the administration a priori negative information that could bias them towards you. Let them consider you for your credentials or be excited about your application, then balance that with negatives.

That aside, understand that you could be 53 before you even start residency (if you choose to go that way). Schools that invest in you will have a very limited return. In that light you'd BETTER have a clear idea about your future plans! I know.... OK, I know just one person who was older than you when he started medical school, although he was not MSTP. But he was literally an astronaut. No Joke. Now he's an attending in pediatrics. So there are always special cases.

 

[Circumflex]

I recently had two very positive phone conversations with MD/PhD advisers at two good universities. Both had only positive things to say about my prospects for their program; in particular, both stated that I was the first prospective applicant with whom they had talked who had a clear idea of what s/he wanted out of her/his desired future dual degree (MD/PhD Anthropology) and had the work, scholastic, and experience to back up her/his endeavors.

Just out of curiosity, why do you want to do an MD/PhD with the PhD in Anthropology? What do you see as your future career (residency)?

 

[IgnisDU]

Thanks for making sure I'm not the old man in the program :-D

I worry about being too old to enter when I'm 29....