Skipping Pre-Health Committee

[samrocks342]

Hello Everyone,
I am currently a senior in my last semester of undergrad. I am a Human Biology major who took every single pre-requisite for med school. I have a 3.8 GPA. I only recently decided that I want to apply to med school, and unfortunately I will not have time to be evaluated by the pre-health committee. The deadline was in January and I want to apply by this fall. I will be taking the mcat this summer. Will I be ok if I obtain letter of recommendations on my own without receiving one from the pre-medical committee? Can I just explain that I did not decide on medical school until the end of my undergraduate career? Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[LizzyM]

Don't do this. Chances are that you have so many holes in your application that you'll be back this time next year thinking about another application cycle.

Have you shadowed physicians for at least 40 hours?
Have you had at least 200 hours of exposure to the sick/injured in a clinical setting through employment or volunteering?
Have you been of service to the needy in your community in some capacity?
Have you had some research experience, even a semester of research for credit or something similar?
Do you have something you do for fun that you can list on an application?
Have you been involved in campus or off-campus activities such as performing arts, athletics, student life (RA or similar leadership role in a fraternity/sorority), or a social club?
When do you expect to have time to write your personal statement and the descriptions of your activities?

I would urge you to plan on a 2 year gap and to work with your pre--med committee next Fall. Most will do that for an alumnus. Also, ask for LORs before the end of the school year. Talk with the pre-med committee about how to make this work for an application in Summer 2018.

 

[efle]

Can I just explain that I did not decide on medical school until the end of my undergraduate career?

It is going to be pretty obvious on your app that you only became interested in med school three months before applying, not a good thing

 

[Meeehai]

Hello Everyone,
I am currently a senior in my last semester of undergrad. I am a Human Biology major who took every single pre-requisite for med school. I have a 3.8 GPA. I only recently decided that I want to apply to med school, and unfortunately I will not have time to be evaluated by the pre-health committee. The deadline was in January and I want to apply by this fall. I will be taking the mcat this summer. Will I be ok if I obtain letter of recommendations on my own without receiving one from the pre-medical committee? Can I just explain that I did not decide on medical school until the end of my undergraduate career? Thanks!

I'm gonna go against the grain and say you should skip the pre-health committee IF the rest of your application is strong (activities, LoRs, MCAT, etc.). In fact, I would skip it even if you decide to wait it out another year or two to strengthen your app. The way I see it is a committee letter is only significantly advantageous if your individual letters are not strong, otherwise you are just putting yourself through another round of judgement by people who may not even be experienced or knowledgeable about what admissions committees look for. If it ever comes up in the interview tell them you did enough research on your own to understand what is considered a good candidate for the program and that you believe your letter writers speak about your competencies and qualities well. This is my opinion and a lot of people here will disagree and flame me, so take that as you may. Although, I have spoken to members of admissions committees personally and was told that not a lot of emphasis is placed on the committee as long as your individual letters are strong.

 

[cactusman]

I'm gonna go against the grain and say you should skip the pre-health committee IF the rest of your application is strong (activities, LoRs, MCAT, etc.). In fact, I would skip it even if you decide to wait it out another year or two to strengthen your app. The way I see it is a committee letter is only significantly advantageous if your individual letters are not strong, otherwise you are just putting yourself through another round of judgement by people who may not even be experienced or knowledgeable about what admissions committees look for. If it ever comes up in the interview tell them you did enough research on your own to understand what is considered a good candidate for the program and that you believe your letter writers speak about your competencies and qualities well. This is my opinion and a lot of people here will disagree and flame me, so take that as you may. Although, I have spoken to members of admissions committees personally and was told that not a lot of emphasis is placed on the committee as long as your individual letters are strong.

The majority of med schools require or prefer a committee letters if it is available. People will disagree with your opinion because it directly contradicts the information available on many medical schools' websites.

 

[kb1900]

I'm gonna go against the grain and say you should skip the pre-health committee IF the rest of your application is strong (activities, LoRs, MCAT, etc.). In fact, I would skip it even if you decide to wait it out another year or two to strengthen your app. The way I see it is a committee letter is only significantly advantageous if your individual letters are not strong, otherwise you are just putting yourself through another round of judgement by people who may not even be experienced or knowledgeable about what admissions committees look for. If it ever comes up in the interview tell them you did enough research on your own to understand what is considered a good candidate for the program and that you believe your letter writers speak about your competencies and qualities well. This is my opinion and a lot of people here will disagree and flame me, so take that as you may. Although, I have spoken to members of admissions committees personally and was told that not a lot of emphasis is placed on the committee as long as your individual letters are strong.

This is so wrong

 

[LizzyM]

If I have 20 applications from students at a specific school (e.g. one of the Ivies, Hopkins,Duke, Emory, WashU, etc) and all but one has a committee letter, I wonder why this applicant did not go through the committee which provides a LOR that is very informative and puts the application in context. Omit the committee letter at your own risk.

 

[FutureDr.Sigma!]

I didn't use a pre health committee letter and I got into two schools. I believe this is a case by case basis. I do agree with the LizzyM and think you should have someone take a thorough look over your application because 3 months is a little quick to change gears. But if you're all good with a strong application then you should be good.
As long as you can explain why you don't have a committee letter then you're good.

In my case I didn't get a committee letter because I was a biochemistry major (in Chem department) and the pre health committee were all biology profs. Didn't exactly take a whole bunch of bio courses. So everyone's different
Good luck

 

[Meeehai]

The majority of med schools require or prefer a committee letters if it is available. People will disagree with your opinion because it directly contradicts the information available on many medical schools' websites.

I'm not stubborn. If you show me some kind of statistic or evidence that omitting the committee letter significantly lowers your chance of acceptance with all other things controlled for I'll be convinced. Keep in mind that a lot of pre-health committees are assembled with random professors that might have very little insight about what actually makes a student a strong candidate. What do you think is worse? Making faculty wonder why you omitted an optional process (for those schools that don't require it) even though your application speaks very well for your strengths? Or a negative comment on your committee letter because you struggled with some trap question during the committee interview? Some members of these committees are vengeful rejects that focus really hard on pointing out whatever weaknesses they can in your application and you better believe they will write it down in their letter - which you will never get to see. Of course schools and faculty members prefer it, I would too. Their interest is to evaluate applicants with as much information as possible to make their selection process easy. Your interest is to get accepted. I'm sure the faculty would also like to know a lot of other information that you choose to omit on purpose. You say it's a risk to omit the letter, I say it's a bigger risk to let them write the letter unless the committee has a good reputation at your school or you know the members of the committee are knowledgeable and fair about the process. Omitting the letter is strategy and it's one that shifts the advantage in favor of the applicant over the faculty and this is why members of the admissions committee on here will vehemently guide you away from it, although they accept plenty of non-committee letter applicants each cycle.

This is so wrong

Got any proof bud?

 

[cactusman]

I'm not stubborn. If you show me some kind of statistic or evidence that omitting the committee letter significantly lowers your chance of acceptance with all other things controlled for I'll be convinced. Keep in mind that a lot of pre-health committees are assembled with random professors that might have very little insight about what actually makes a student a strong candidate. What do you think is worse? Making faculty wonder why you omitted an optional process (for those schools that don't require it) even though your application speaks very well for your strengths? Or a negative comment on your committee letter because you struggled with some trap question during the committee interview? Some members of these committees are vengeful rejects that focus really hard on pointing out whatever weaknesses they can in your application and you better believe they will write it down in their letter - which you will never get to see. Of course schools and faculty members prefer it, I would too. Their interest is to evaluate applicants with as much information as possible to make their selection process easy. Your interest is to get accepted. I'm sure the faculty would also like to know a lot of other information that you choose to omit on purpose. You say it's a risk to omit the letter, I say it's a bigger risk to let them write the letter unless the committee has a good reputation at your school or you know the members of the committee are knowledgeable and fair about the process. Omitting the letter is strategy and it's one that shifts the advantage in favor of the applicant over the faculty and this is why members of the admissions committee on here will vehemently guide you away from it, although they accept plenty of non-committee letter applicants each cycle.

So your advice is to ignore medical schools' actual recommendations because you're paranoid about "vengeful rejects." Brilliant.

 

[efle]

Or a negative comment on your committee letter because you struggled with some trap question during the committee interview?

There's a story here. Let's hear it.

 

[Meeehai]

So your advice is to ignore medical schools' actual recommendations because you're paranoid about "vengeful rejects." Brilliant.

My advice is to be smart and think for yourself.

There's a story here. Let's hear it.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

My advice is to be smart and think for yourself.

Your advice is to ignore the advice of an adcom, which is to not throw together an application in a hurry when you clearly decided on medicine 3 months before applying? Because that's what you're saying ITT.

 

[Meeehai]

Your advice is to ignore the advice of an adcom, which is to not throw together an application in a hurry when you clearly decided on medicine 3 months before applying? Because that's what you're saying ITT.

No, my advice was to omit the committee letter on purpose in certain circumstances. It's okay though, I don't expect people to actually read my posts and try to make a case, people will just circle jerk and attack me because I said the opposite of what two or three adcoms say. I actually had a very positive experience with my committee back when I used their letter (luckily), but I can't say the same for other people.

 

[Meeehai]

You can go to a majority of medical school websites still clearly state that they require, recommend or prefer the letter. Indeed many require an explanation on their secondary application if you dont have one. A few random examples below

Request Rejected
A committee letter is preferred, but not required. If your school does not offer a committee letter, it is not a problem. If your school offers a committee letter and you DO NOT have one, you may wish to provide a brief explanation in your supplemental application under question 4. If you have already submitted your supplemental application, you may upload an explanation using the applicant portal.

https://www.einstein.yu.edu/educati...ication-procedure/recommendation-letters.aspx
Recommendation Letters
Einstein requires letters of recommendation from each applicant. Applicants who have completed their pre-medical coursework as an undergraduate or postbaccalaureate student, at a college or university where there is a Pre-Professional Advisory committee, are required to submit a letter of recommendation from that Committee. Students who do not submit such a letter should explain, in writing, why they have opted not to do so.

Albany Medical College: Admissions
Submission of letters of recommendation. The Admissions Committee prefers a composite letter from a premedical advisor or committee. For students attending schools that do not provide this service, individual letters from faculty may be substituted.

http://smhs.gwu.edu/academics/md-program/admissions/application-process
To complete their file, applicants are required to submit either:

• A Pre-Health or Pre-Medical Committee Letter (required if available to you) OR
• Three individuals letters, at least one of which must be from a science faculty member familiar with your academic work.

Admissions | Stony Brook University School of Medicine
A letter of evaluation from the applicant's premedical advisor is also required. If no such official exists, letters from two instructors, one of whom is in a science field, should be submitted. No other letters are solicited.

Yes, I'm aware that a few schools require the committee letter no matter what. Unfortunately, that doesn't prove that someone who has purposely omitted the committee letter and provided the explanation is at a significant disadvantage from making this choice alone. Yet I'm willing to bet there have been plenty of committee letters that influenced the readers decision toward rejecting an applicant.

 

[efle]

Yes, I'm aware that a few schools require the committee letter no matter what. Unfortunately, that doesn't prove that someone who has purposely omitted the committee letter and provided the explanation is at a significant disadvantage from making this choice alone. Yet I'm willing to bet there have been plenty of committee letters that influenced the readers decision toward rejecting an applicant.

I don't think "they asked tricky questions at the committee interview" is going to be a satisfactory explanation for lacking the committee letter.

 

[cactusman]

I don't think "they asked tricky questions at the committee interview" is going to be a satisfactory explanation for lacking the committee letter.

"I don't trust vengeful med school rejects" is probably the sort of answer that turns you into a vengeful med school reject.

 

[LizzyM]

I'm not stubborn. If you show me some kind of statistic or evidence that omitting the committee letter significantly lowers your chance of acceptance with all other things controlled for I'll be convinced. Keep in mind that a lot of pre-health committees are assembled with random professors that might have very little insight about what actually makes a student a strong candidate. What do you think is worse? Making faculty wonder why you omitted an optional process (for those schools that don't require it) even though your application speaks very well for your strengths? Or a negative comment on your committee letter because you struggled with some trap question during the committee interview? Some members of these committees are vengeful rejects that focus really hard on pointing out whatever weaknesses they can in your application and you better believe they will write it down in their letter - which you will never get to see. Of course schools and faculty members prefer it, I would too. Their interest is to evaluate applicants with as much information as possible to make their selection process easy. Your interest is to get accepted. I'm sure the faculty would also like to know a lot of other information that you choose to omit on purpose. You say it's a risk to omit the letter, I say it's a bigger risk to let them write the letter unless the committee has a good reputation at your school or you know the members of the committee are knowledgeable and fair about the process. Omitting the letter is strategy and it's one that shifts the advantage in favor of the applicant over the faculty and this is why members of the admissions committee on here will vehemently guide you away from it, although they accept plenty of non-committee letter applicants each cycle.



Got any proof bud?

Not sure about this year but for many years, the author of the committee letter for applicants from Notre Dame was a physician who was also pre-med advisor and a professor at the University. So, no, that letter is not being written by a "vengeful reject".

Pre-med advisors/committees at major feeder schools have experience with hundreds of medical school applicants per year. They see the applications, and the letters (which the applicant doesn't see), and they see how the results play out. They get to know what med school adcoms are looking for and those who are doing their job are going to show you in the best possible light because their success is measured in the proportion of applicants that they get into schools. This can create a perverse incentive to discourage weak applicants from applying but if they save you from your own ignorance and save you a year of expense and grief, that's a good thing.

If you can't be self-reflective and identify areas for improvement and can't tolerate anyone examining your record and writing down your weaknesses, you are going to have a hard time in medicine because for the next 7+ years of your training, that's going to be happening all.the.time.

 

[Lawpy]

If you can't be self-reflective and identify areas for improvement and can't tolerate anyone examining your record and writing down your weaknesses, you are going to have a hard time in medicine because for the next 7+ years of your training, that's going to be happening all.the.time.

Confused. I agree being self-reflective and identifying weaknesses is of major importance, but wouldn't a committee letter (or any letter for that matter) illustrating these weaknesses be considered a "bad letter"? It's confusing because adcoms apparently want positive, objective and evaluative letters, and any mention of weakness is automatically dismissed as a bad letter that sinks the applicant.

 

[deleted781806]

Not sure about this year but for many years, the author of the committee letter for applicants from Notre Dame was a physician who was also pre-med advisor and a professor at the University. So, no, that letter is not being written by a "vengeful reject".

He's still writing the committee letters, alongside a couple other pre-med advisors. An IM/ID doc who later became a priest and serves as one of the assistant deans, I do not believe that he is a professor currently though.

But yes, in agreement with the others above, not getting a committee letter from a school that traditionally does committee letters is a rather significant red flag for an application, and you better have a really good reason for why you didn't go through the normal process like other applicants from your UG program. If the committee agrees to write you a letter, they are not going to write you a bad letter, it would hurt their statistics and reputation as an advising department. If they were going to write you a bad letter, they would just flat out refuse to give it to you, effectively barring you from applying in the upcoming cycle so that you can't bring down their success rate.

 

[LizzyM]

Confused. I agree being self-reflective and identifying weaknesses is of major importance, but wouldn't a committee letter (or any letter for that matter) illustrating these weaknesses be considered a "bad letter"? It's confusing because adcoms apparently want positive, objective and evaluative letters, and any mention of weakness is automatically dismissed as a bad letter that sinks the applicant.

I'm not saying that anything negative goes in the letter but I am saying that if you can't tolerate people telling you to your face what your weaknesses are, and if you are unwilling to point to your own weaknesses yourself and make a plan to address those areas of weakness, then you are going to have a hard time in medical training.

 

[Lawpy]

I'm not saying that anything negative goes in the letter but I am saying that if you can't tolerate people telling you to your face what your weaknesses are, and if you are unwilling to point to your own weaknesses yourself and make a plan to address those areas of weakness, then you are going to have a hard time in medical training.

Right I agree, but it can be concerning if the committee letter does include those weaknesses.

 

[LizzyM]

Right I agree, but it can be concerning if the committee letter does include those weaknesses.

I agree. But just because the committee points them out to the applicant and asks the applicant to talk about them and takes notes on what the applicant says, doesn't mean that it is going in the letter as a negative. Frankly, I'm a bit concerned about Meeehai and his viewpoint about administrators/faculty.

 

[Meeehai]

I don't think "they asked tricky questions at the committee interview" is going to be a satisfactory explanation for lacking the committee letter.

No, it's not, I provided a better example of a satisfactory explanation in one of my previous posts. The poster above who omitted the letter didn't really use a great explanation either, but it didn't really seem to impact her acceptance.

"I don't trust vengeful med school rejects" is probably the sort of answer that turns you into a vengeful med school reject.

What's your point? Are you trying to argue that inexperienced pre-health committees don't exist? You see threads pop-up all the time about advisers that offer poor advice to their students and they get called out by posters on this board, these are the same people that can potentially be part of your pre-health committee. Have you actually been through the committee letter process?

Not sure about this year but for many years, the author of the committee letter for applicants from Notre Dame was a physician who was also pre-med advisor and a professor at the University. So, no, that letter is not being written by a "vengeful reject".

Pre-med advisors/committees at major feeder schools have experience with hundreds of medical school applicants per year. They see the applications, and the letters (which the applicant doesn't see), and they see how the results play out. They get to know what med school adcoms are looking for and those who are doing their job are going to show you in the best possible light because their success is measured in the proportion of applicants that they get into schools. This can create a perverse incentive to discourage weak applicants from applying but if they save you from your own ignorance and save you a year of expense and grief, that's a good thing.

If you can't be self-reflective and identify areas for improvement and can't tolerate anyone examining your record and writing down your weaknesses, you are going to have a hard time in medicine because for the next 7+ years of your training, that's going to be happening all.the.time.

I know there are great committees with members that know what they're doing and can write great letters for you guys to make the selection process even smoother. This is why I specified that applicants should look into their committee before making this decision. However, for the not-so-great committees at other schools using the committee letter can be a double-edged sword.

I think every applicant should be very self-reflective. This isn't so much about being sensitive to criticism but more so about strategically avoiding another round of judgement in the right circumstances.

 

[efle]

The poster above who omitted the letter didn't really use a great explanation either, but it didn't really seem to impact her acceptance.

Is this the kind of evidence we want to throw around? There were dozens of people admitted last year with an MCAT of 493 and below. Do you not think it's a bad idea to apply with a 493?

Have you actually been through the committee letter process?

I have and I agree with him. Have you already applied and gotten into US MD schools without your committee's support, from a school that is known to have committee letters?

I know there are great committees with members that know what they're doing and can write great letters for you guys to make the selection process even smoother. This is why I specified that applicants should look into their committee before making this decision. However, for the not-so-great committees at other schools using the committee letter can be a double-edged sword.

I think every applicant should be very self-reflective. This isn't so much about being sensitive to criticism but more so about strategically avoiding another round of judgement in the right circumstances.

I don't even understand this whole part of the discussion, you don't need a veteran physician writing your letter for that letter to talk about your performance relative to the class, highlight strengths of your LoRs, etc

 

[Goro]

If anything, the committee LORs I read go overboard on extolling thier candidate's virtues. It's extremely rare that they say anything negative. The only damning thing that they do is when they give less than a perfect vote. For example, the usual recommend schema is
5= Enthusiastically Recommend
4= Highly Recommend
3= Recommend
2= Cautiously Recommend
1= Cannot Recommend

I see 4s and 5s all the time, occasionally 3s, and rarely a 2. I have never once seen a 1.

Confused. I agree being self-reflective and identifying weaknesses is of major importance, but wouldn't a committee letter (or any letter for that matter) illustrating these weaknesses be considered a "bad letter"? It's confusing because adcoms apparently want positive, objective and evaluative letters, and any mention of weakness is automatically dismissed as a bad letter that sinks the applicant.

Meehai is dangerously ignorant about this process. The poor quality of pre-med advisors is not what we're discussing, which is a committee LOR. This is an evaluative process, not one that gives advice. To summarize LizzyM's points.

UG schools serve as feeders to med schools
Students from feeder schools are known commodities for academic excellence
Med schools rely on, and know the value of said feeder schools committee lORs
therefore, lacking an LOR immediately raises questions. This entire process is a subtractive one. Like Olympic athletes, those applicant with the fewest minuses win.

I'll also add that DO schools, at least at mine, are not as anal about the committee LOR.

What's your point? Are you trying to argue that inexperienced pre-health committees don't exist? You see threads pop-up all the time about advisers that offer poor advice to their students and they get called out by posters on this board, these are the same people that can potentially be part of your pre-health committee. Have you actually been through the committee letter process?

 

[Meeehai]

Is this the kind of evidence we want to throw around? There were dozens of people admitted last year with an MCAT of 493 and below. Do you not think it's a bad idea to apply with a 493?


I have and I agree with him. Have you already applied and gotten into US MD schools without your committee's support, from a school that is known to have committee letters?


I don't even understand this whole part of the discussion, you don't need a veteran physician writing your letter for that letter to talk about your performance relative to the class, highlight strengths of your LoRs, etc

I was just pointing it out, I know plenty of other students that were accepted without it. If you would like to throw relevant evidence in opposition, I would gladly accept it as I said earlier. That's a very poor analogy.

Yes. I respect your opinion but I disagree.

I don't understand what you don't understand. There are members of pre-health committees that can write negative things on the letter due to not being knowledgeable about the process. I know people who have had this experience and it is why I have argued against using the committee on this forum in the past.

If anything, the committee LORs I read go overboard on extolling thier candidate's virtues. It's extremely rare that they say anything negative. The only damning thing that they do is when they give less than a perfect vote. For example, the usual recommend schema is
5= Enthusiastically Recommend
4= Highly Recommend
3= Recommend
2= Cautiously Recommend
1= Cannot Recommend

I see 4s and 5s all the time, occasionally 3s, and rarely a 2. I have never once seen a 1.




Meehai is dangerously ignorant about this process. The poor quality of pre-med advisors is not what we're discussing, which is a committee LOR. This is an evaluative process, not one that gives advice. To summarize LizzyM's points.

UG schools serve as feeders to med schools
Students from feeder schools are known commodities for academic excellence
Med schools rely on, and know the value of said feeder schools committee lORs
therefore, lacking an LOR immediately raises questions. This entire process is a subtractive one. Like Olympic athletes, those applicant with the fewest minuses win.

I'll also add that DO schools, at least at mine, are not as anal about the committee LOR.

What's your point? Are you trying to argue that inexperienced pre-health committees don't exist? You see threads pop-up all the time about advisers that offer poor advice to their students and they get called out by posters on this board, these are the same people that can potentially be part of your pre-health committee. Have you actually been through the committee letter process?

I'm having a hard time believing this. What kind of evaluative insight can a bunch of random professors offer from viewing the same application that you view? Unless the committee members know the applicant personally they won't contribute anything extra that you can't evaluate yourself, they will just add another dilute opinion of "hey, look at this guys class rank and activities, he's great isn't he?" Strong individual LoRs can do this instead and they speak much better about the applicants strengths and competencies because the writer usually knows the applicant on a deeper level than just what's on a piece of paper. If the committee letter is such a crucial aspect for your evaluation of an applicant why is it not a strict recommendation at most schools? Why is it not a big deal at YOUR school? You can tell me about red flags all you want but I have spoken to a lot of accepted students that did not use the committee letter, so I'm inclined to believe that omitting the letter is more of a yellow flag than a red one.

 

[Goro]

I agree that not everyone is mandated to have the committee letter for success, but you can see from LizzieM's school as well as the examples provided by gonnif, that people who are applying without a committee letter are at a disadvantage

I was just pointing it out, I know plenty of other students that were accepted without it. If you would like to throw relevant evidence in opposition, I would gladly accept it as I said earlier. That's a very poor analogy.

Yes. I respect your opinion but I disagree.

I don't understand what you don't understand. There are members of pre-health committees that can write negative things on the letter due to not being knowledgeable about the process. I know people who have had this experience and it is why I have argued against using the committee on this forum in the past.



I'm having a hard time believing this. What kind of evaluative insight can a bunch of random professors offer from viewing the same application that you view? Unless the committee members know the applicant personally they won't contribute anything extra that you can't evaluate yourself, they will just add another dilute opinion of "hey, look at this guys class rank and activities, he's great isn't he?" Strong individual LoRs can do this instead and they speak much better about the applicants strengths and competencies because the writer usually knows the applicant on a deeper level than just what's on a piece of paper. If the committee letter is such a crucial aspect for your evaluation of an applicant why is it not a strict recommendation at most schools? Why is it not a big deal at YOUR school? You can tell me about red flags all you want but I have spoken to a lot of accepted students that did not use the committee letter, so I'm inclined to believe that omitting the letter is more of a yellow flag than a red one.

 

[efle]

I was just pointing it out, I know plenty of other students that were accepted without it. If you would like to throw relevant evidence in opposition, I would gladly accept it as I said earlier. That's a very poor analogy.

Yes. I respect your opinion but I disagree.

I don't understand what you don't understand. There are members of pre-health committees that can write negative things on the letter due to not being knowledgeable about the process. I know people who have had this experience and it is why I have argued against using the committee on this forum in the past.

This disagreement might be because we have a different understanding of adcom expectations. Does your alma mater send out hundreds of medical applicants per year? Like are you sure that it's glaringly obvious when someone from your school lacks the letter?

Can you give me an example of a negative LoR comment that a writer would only make if that writer had not gone to med school?

 

[TXMED_1695]

I went to one of my pre-health committee meetings and I never went back. They tried to tell me to take Calculus 2 and 3 to show medical schools just how smart I really am. Oh, man - those clowns... I think having a letter from them might actually hurt my chances of getting into medical school.

 

[LizzyM]

Each feeder school I know of has a letter template that they use. One school even has a rating of each student on 5 different attributes including research, academics, clinical experience, community service and leadership (or something like that) followed by a expository paragraph on the topic.
Another school describes which courses the student took for pre-reqs and points out if it was the more difficult sequence or if the courseload was exceptional (more difficult) than typical.
Some letter templates have a section about the applicant's family and their support of the applicant (particularly if the parents are physicians and emphasizing that the applicant was not pressured, or in some cases, was discouraged, by the parents).
One particular school that is known for post-bac and traditional undergrads writes beautiful letters that are biographical and go into greater detail than one can go into in the PS.
Another school always gives the class rank of the applicant as well as the GPA so that you see that the GPA while it may seem low, is in the top __% of the class.

many of the schools do have a categorization that goes something like:
Very highly recommend
Highly recommend
Recommend
Recommend with reservations
Cannot recommend

It is very rare to see the lowest two categories. Some schools will even tell you what proportion of applicants in each category were admitted in the previous cycle.

Overall, I know what I'm getting when I get one of these letters and I know that the committee is weighing an applicant against the other applicants that year and comparing the applicant to applicants of previous cycles to give me an idea of where this student falls on the spectrum of applicants from that school.

 

[Meeehai]

This disagreement might be because we have a different understanding of adcom expectations. Does your alma mater send out hundreds of medical applicants per year? Like are you sure that it's glaringly obvious when someone from your school lacks the letter?

Can you give me an example of a negative LoR comment that a writer would only make if that writer had not gone to med school?

Maybe. No they do not, although I did attend a large public university. I didn't mean to say that the committee members must be previous accepted applicants or involved in medicine in any way, but at least knowledgeable of what might make a strong candidate for medical programs. When I went to my committee review, I was greeted by three people I have never seen before in my life. Two of them were not even professors in the hard sciences. My overall experience was positive and the mock interview was good practice. However, there was absolutely nothing that group of people could have written about me to impress anybody that would review my application for themselves anyway. The committee members warned me that they will be fair in their assessment and include any weaknesses for the sake of writing a complete and unbiased letter. Why would I submit a letter that adds nothing beneficial to my profile but carries the potential risk of saying something bad about me? I think it can be beneficial to take the risk of suspicion of omission in this case, IF the individual LoRs are strong. I will admit that I think the committee letter can be beneficial if LoRs are weak.

Consider the following hypothetical scenario: you have a certain activity on your application that a member of the admissions would find unique and interesting but a member of the pre-health committee finds irrelevant. The committee letter comments on the irrelevancy of this activity as a weakness and all of a sudden it creates a thought in the mind of the reviewer that would have never been there. Or consider what a previous poster said about lacking a recommended calculus requirement - what if the committee decides to write that the applicant lacks critical thinking because they chose to not take the class? We don't know - I mean I'm sure you can agree that the members of some of these pre-health committees have very strange ideas sometimes.

Members of the faculty on this board will never admit it because it would be hypocritical to advise against something that's probably on their school website and they will cherry pick examples of how a few committees write great letters that work really well in the applicant favor. That's awesome and like I've said before, if you think your school has a reputable pre-health committee that does this, go right ahead. However, from my personal experience I'm more inclined to believe that a majority of these letters are just fluff that contribute very little to nothing in terms of speaking toward the applicant's strengths. I understand where you are coming from and I'm willing to bet your alma mater sends a lot of competitive applicants each cycle and has a good committee. But this is not the case for a lot of other people.

 

[Meeehai]

Overall, I know what I'm getting when I get one of these letters and I know that the committee is weighing an applicant against the other applicants that year and comparing the applicant to applicants of previous cycles to give me an idea of where this student falls on the spectrum of applicants from that school.

Right, but what if I don't want you to know where I fall on this spectrum?

 

[candbgirl]

Wow!! Meeehai what in the heck happened with your Committee letter? Don't say you didn't get one because you have way too
many feelings about the whole subject to be just a casual observer.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[deleted781806]

This is some conspiracy theorist level stuff ITT.

"However, there was absolutely nothing that group of people could have written about me to impress anybody that would review my application for themselves anyway. [...] from my personal experience I'm more inclined to believe that a majority of these letters are just fluff that contribute very little to nothing in terms of speaking toward the applicant's strengths."

Ah yes, the personal experience of an *applicant* who has no clue as to how the blackbox of admission decisions works should be taken over the advice of people who sit on these committees and just might have a better idea of how this all works than you or me. Makes perfect sense. In all seriousness, I do not understand how you can so easily dismiss the opinion and insight of those intimately involved in the process and who have wide-ranging institutional preferences on their side.

 

[LizzyM]

Right, but what if I don't want you to know where I fall on this spectrum?

If you don't want me to have the information I prefer when making a decision, my decision will be to not grant you an interview.

 

[Meeehai]

Wow!! Meeehai what in the heck happened with your Committee letter? Don't say you didn't get one because you have way too
many feelings about the whole subject to be just a casual observer.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

I went through the process and decided against using it because I felt as if it didn't contribute anything positive and I didn't want to risk it potentially harming me.

I have this same argument every year with some stubborn, "I-know-better" premed. The vast majority of medical schools publicly state that they require, recommend, or prefer committee letters, a large fraction requiring explanation if you do not have a committee letter, and you choose to ignore the clear intent and obvious partiality that adcoms have towards committee letters. You want proof that an adcom decided against those with individual letters, even letters are confidential and adcom deliberations are confidential,. You are so fearful of what an premed committee would say about you, yet that will be based on the same letters from your campus that you would send to into the committee.

So what you want is validation for your neurotic, fearful and egotistical decision to apply in self-admittedly late, and thus rushed, fashion, to maintain your belief that you will a great applicant and that lacking any absolute, iron-clad, proof to the contrary, your are smugly correct about letters and will ignore the several weaknesses that people here have pointed out. Since evidence is what you want, lets lay out the case in legal fashion it this heavily circumstantial case.

1) From the leading competent authority of in the area, namely AMCAS as the representative of all American medical colleges via AAMC
https://www.staging.aamc.org/initiatives/admissionsinitiative/letters/
Medical schools value committee letters because they provide an integrated and institutional perspective on an applicant’s readiness for medical school. They provide a comprehensive evaluation of applicants based on direct observation and the synthesis of information provided by faculty and others at an institution. This integrated perspective provides unique and valuable information about applicants.

2) So what is a medical school's intent here? Intent legally defined as determination to perform a particular act or to act in a particular manner for a specific reason; an aim or design; a resolution to use a certain means to reach an end. Intent is a mental attitude with which an individual acts, and therefore it cannot ordinarily be directly proved but must be inferred from surrounding facts and circumstances. Intent refers only to the state of mind with which the act is done or omitted. So what in the "intent" of medical schools that require, recommend, or prefer committee letters. It is clear inference that the intent is to have applicants send utilize committee letters

3) The preponderance of evidence, that the majority of medical schools are official listed as preferring committee letters as compiled by the AAMC
https://aamc-orange.global.ssl.fast...d4e1d/msar_medical_school_letter_policies.pdf
Out of 106 schools listed, 70 either require or prefer committee letters or two-thirds of the total

lol.

I never meant to be smug or egotistical, I just wanted to express my opinion on the committee letter and potentially bring up an important discussion on an aspect of the application process. I clearly stated in my first post a disclaimer that my opinion is contrary to what the majority recommend, but I ask that people at least hear me out. I'm sorry I offended you so much that you had to resort to using such a condescending tone in your reply. I never said anything about applying late or having a rushed application, not sure where you pulled out this argument but it's a straw man. Again, I'm quite aware that almost every school "recommends" using the committee letter - my point is that omitting it does not significantly hurt an applicants chances given everything else being on par despite what schools say they recommend. My point is that the committee letter can say negative things about an applicant and given my previous point, it is better to purposely omit the letter in certain circumstances. My point is that you are full of it and I have a very hard time believing most committee letters play a crucial part in your evaluative process. I make this argument in confidence because no such proof exists that will demonstrate a significant or strong bias against applicants that have chosen to omit the letter given everything else being on par. Everything you say will be anecdotal and like I said before, I have personally spoken to members of faculty that told me most committee letters contain the same repetitive, dilute dribble and therefore don't contribute much to the final decision (although, there are exceptions). And for the record, I'm no pre-med.

This is some conspiracy theorist level stuff ITT.

"However, there was absolutely nothing that group of people could have written about me to impress anybody that would review my application for themselves anyway. [...] from my personal experience I'm more inclined to believe that a majority of these letters are just fluff that contribute very little to nothing in terms of speaking toward the applicant's strengths."

Ah yes, the personal experience of an *applicant* who has no clue as to how the blackbox of admission decisions works should be taken over the advice of people who sit on these committees and just might have a better idea of how this all works than you or me. Makes perfect sense. In all seriousness, I do not understand how you can so easily dismiss the opinion and insight of those intimately involved in the process and who have wide-ranging institutional preferences on their side.

If you pay attention you will realize there's a theme about faculty being conspicuously passionate about challenging my viewpoint on this, more so than usual. Yes, I do have personal experience, but making the argument that a bunch of random people that read the same application as the reviewer will not contribute anything groundbreaking in an application is common sense. Let me ask you this, do you seriously think I am looking to convince any faculty members on here? Do you seriously think I am surprised by the disagreement I am receiving from the faculty? I mention in my first post that I am not. Like I said before, omission of the letter is a strategy and it is one that plays in favor of the applicant if done under the right circumstances - of course faculty don't want you to shortcut your way around the letter. Why would faculty advise against something that withholds information? Anyone who keeps repeating that the adcoms are disagreeing with me are missing the point, I know they are disagreeing with me and I expected them to disagree with me. Conspiracy? You're welcome to think that if you want, I just want to throw my opinion out there for anyone who is interested in reading. But if you block out the screaming of the adcoms for a second, maybe it will become clear that if you talk to an accepted matriculating class, a lot of them were accepted without the committee letter.


Anyway, I'm done discussing this, it's just going in circles and it seems as if some people are getting a bit irritated for no reason. I think it was a very good discussion and if anything I'm glad I was able to show my viewpoint among a sea of disagreement. I will agree to disagree as always.

 

[01923847]

If you don't want me to have the information I prefer when making a decision, my decision will be to not grant you an interview.

I've got a related question. What about when your undergrad does not have pre-medical committee? Would medical schools know this and be ok with just receiving letters from professors? If they don't how would you indicate in an application that your school does not have a pre-medical committee?

 

[cactusman]

I've got a related question. What about when your undergrad does not have pre-medical committee? Would medical schools know this and be ok with just receiving letters from professors? If they don't how would you indicate in an application that your school does not have a pre-medical committee?

Some schools have an optional secondary prompt where you can explain the lack of committee letter. Adcoms at schools that don't offer space for an explanation will probably figure it out.

 

[deleted781806]

You're welcome to think that if you want, I just want to throw my opinion out there for anyone who is interested in reading. But if you block out the screaming of the adcoms for a second, maybe it will become clear that if you talk to an accepted matriculating class, a lot of them were accepted without the committee letter. [...] Anyway, I'm done discussing this, it's just going in circles and it seems as if some people are getting a bit irritated for no reason. I think it was a very good discussion and if anything I'm glad I was able to show my viewpoint among a sea of disagreement. I will agree to disagree as always.

I just hope that future pre-meds who stumble across this thread are able to see through your malicious advice and don't end up shooting themselves in the foot in the application process.

@01923847 : If your school does not have a committee then almost all medical schools have a protocol where you can send in individual letters from professors, they'll generally require a couple science faculty and a non-science faculty member, but it depends on the school and you would have to check their website for the exact requirements.

 

[01923847]

@Écureuil I was planning on having individual letters be submitted from science and non-science professors, in addition to others who have seen me work. But based on what I'm seeing in this thread, it seems that people who don't submit a committee letter are at a disadvantage. Does that hold true for applicants who went to schools that do not have a committee?

 

[candbgirl]

@Écureuil I was planning on having individual letters be submitted from science and non-science professors, in addition to others who have seen me work. But based on what I'm seeing in this thread, it seems that people who don't submit a committee letter are at a disadvantage. Does that hold true for applicants who went to schools that do not have a committee?

Of course not. If your school doesn't have a committee letter it doesn't have one. Just get outstanding letters as directed by the schools.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

 

[deleted781806]

@Écureuil I was planning on having individual letters be submitted from science and non-science professors, in addition to others who have seen me work. But based on what I'm seeing in this thread, it seems that people who don't submit a committee letter are at a disadvantage. Does that hold true for applicants who went to schools that do not have a committee?

The comments above around the issue of any application disadvantages are for those applicants who come from a school that traditionally has a pre-med committee and refuse to take advantage of their letter/packet. If you're school does not have a committee, then it really is impossible to get a committee packet, and medical schools will understand. The only problems come from when the option is available and the applicant recuses themselves from the opportunity.

If your school does not have a pre-med committee, you are by no means expected to have a committee letter, and it will not be held against you.

 

[WGSgrad]

1) I found @LizzyM initial response post, post #2, to be very helpful in helping to establish a baseline or minimum level of preparedness in applying to medical school. That is not to say anyone should strive for the minimum but that if you haven't at minimum done these things, then you should seriously reconsider the strength of your application. Very useful.

2) Something I took away from @Meeehai post, that I think is worth considering, is the idea that there might be valid reasons for why an applicant might avoid the medical school application committee AND that if one has a valid reason for doing so, that it might be in one's best interest.* It seems like regardless of whether or not medical schools have stated preferences for receiving committee letters, that the underlying reasons for why a student might want to avoid a committee letter are worthy of address. This might also help applicants who believe they have one of theses reasons...

Reason's one might avoid and/or may not get a committee letter:

A) One is rejected by the medical application committee (i.e. they refuse to write you a letter) - Many schools have cutoffs for GPA (cumulative or science), MCAT, and other factors that determine whether or not the committee will write you a letter; at some schools, the GPA cutoff can be as low/high as 3.5. While there are certainly numerous cases of students getting accepted after not getting recommended by their committee (I will link to a thread in a moment) what is the best course of action for a student who finds themselves in such a position?
B) One has a poor or unequipped medical application committee and believes their individual recommendation letters might be stronger - As someone who attended an Ivy and medical school "feeder school" and now attends a small state school for my graduate/post-bacc work, I will offer that there is a marked difference in resources and support faculty have from the administration greatly impacts the advising students receive. Faculty are often stretched very thin and serving on ancillary committees is often in addition to their full time responsibilities. This not to say that they do not try their best but that there can certainly be a marked difference in the quality of advisers and committees across schools.
C) Committees are made up of people. Advisers, often spread thin, can be fallible and/or carry with them their own inherent biases and beliefs - At some schools, like the university I attended as an undergrad, to get a committee letter, you have to be recommended for it by the medical school applications adviser. One of the "unofficial" requirements for my undergraduate adviser recommending you to the committee was that you had to take calculus...despite the fact that the majority of medical schools don't require calculus.

Again, I am not suggesting that any of the above reasons apply to the OP but that these might be possible reasons applicants don't have a committee letter/are not inclined to get one and that they seem worthy of address. I genuinely hope this post was taken in the productive and non-combative tone that is meant.

*I am not suggesting that any of these reasons apply to the OP but that simply that they are worth consideration.

 

[deleted781806]

A: There's probably a legitimate reason why the committee thinks that the applicant would be unsuccessful with their application and are advising them against applying this cycle. Those concerns should not be taken lightly, and should be addressed by the applicant so that the committee believes they have a fighting chance at admission and will receive a committee letter in a later cycle.

B: Individuals letters are still a part of the letter packet sent out by the committee (generally), and the committee letter is a cover letter that emphasizes aspects of the letters contained within the packet (this is how it works at my UG). While the cover letter might not add anything spectacular in-and-of itself to the application, the other individuals letters will still be able to shine through regardless.

C: This might be the only legitimate reason to avoid the committee, although jumping through some arbitrary hoops is the name of the game in a way, and can probably just be done so that the committee letter can be obtained (one calculus class is not going to kill you). But I'd defer to the opinions of LizzyM/gonnif/goro/etc. in that matter of the "villainous pre-med advisor" scenario.

 

[WGSgrad]

A: There's probably a legitimate reason why the committee thinks that the applicant would be unsuccessful with their application and are advising them against applying this cycle. Those concerns should not be taken lightly, and should be addressed by the applicant so that the committee believes they have a fighting chance at admission and will receive a committee letter in a later cycle.

B: Individuals letters are still a part of the letter packet sent out by the committee (generally), and the committee letter is a cover letter that emphasizes aspects of the letters contained within the packet (this is how it works at my UG). While the cover letter might not add anything spectacular in-and-of itself to the application, the other individuals letters will still be able to shine through regardless.

C: This might be the only legitimate reason to avoid the committee, although jumping through some arbitrary hoops is the name of the game in a way, and can probably just be done so that the committee letter can be obtained (one calculus class is not going to kill you). But I'd defer to the opinions of LizzyM/gonnif/goro/etc. in that matter of the "villainous pre-med advisor" scenario.

A: Fair enough. But there are certainly a number of GPA comebacks/redemption folks that would never get recommended by a committee. For example, after GPA "redemption" or "repair" at best my cumulative GPA will be a 3.2. That will not be high enough to get me a letter from my committee, but I will apply anyway.
B: Didn't know this. This is helpful.
C: "(one calculus class is not going to kill you)" - I will disclose that I went to Cornell and yeah it might have ;-) Their anti-grade inflation policy is pretty brutal. And when you, as a humanities student, would be sitting in a calculus class that is not required for medical school (or your degree) but required for the brilliant engineering students sitting next to you, it is definitely something to be avoided. I would refrain from referring to anyone as "villainous" as it leads to the sort of thread-spiral we see too often on SDN and say that different advisers have different opinions and beliefs as to what they think is necessary to apply to medical school...we certainly see that diversity even in the advisers that regularly contribute here.

 

[deleted781806]

And when you, as a humanities student, would be sitting in a calculus class that is not required for medical school (or your degree) but required for the brilliant engineering students sitting next to you, it is definitely something to be avoided. I would refrain from referring to anyone as "villainous" as it leads to the sort of thread-spiral we see too often on SDN and say that different advisers have different opinions and beliefs as to what they think is necessary to apply to medical school...we certainly see that diversity even in the advisers that regularly contribute here.

That's pretty terrible about Cornell, I would have thought there would be a non-engineering calculus course option, which is what we do at my UG (there's different physics/calculus/etc tracks for each sub-set of majors. But we do all generally have our set of awful courses that we trudge through, although they should definitely revise their course options in that case.

As for the second part, I forgot that sarcasm doesn't travel well through electrons. It was more of a comical portrayal than anything, not meant to actually describe an advisor as villainous. More of a jab at the mindset of "the world is out to get me" that some pre-meds have demonstrated on SDN.

 

[efle]

And for the record, I'm no pre-med

You should update your status to med student because of situations like this. I think everyone reading your posts at first assumes you have not applied and gotten into US MD schools.

 

[deleted781806]

I agree that there are legitimate reasons for not using a committee letter. I just wanted to make it perfectly clear in general, the are preferred and should always be considered the first option. [...] So reducing flags, unanswered questions and risk, like not having a committee letter from a school with a strong history of them, should be done

Yes, this is what I was trying to get across, my apologies if something didn't come off quite right in my previous posts. Any exception to the advice that applicants should get committee letters if they are available to them should be pretty extreme to merit consideration.

 

[Ayahuasca]

Hijacking this thread for a moment, kinda related Q. If my undergrad did not offer a committee letter would that keep me from applying to certain schools? Or is it more like, if your undergrad offers a committee letter then you should definitely get one, but if it doesn't then individual letters will suffice?


To OP: I would suggest doing the gap years. You just decided that you want to apply to medical school. There is a lot that goes into your application to show you're ready for it. Take the time and build a great app, you got the grades now get some clinical experience and shadow some doctors.