Stanford

[ptiger]

Does anyone know when Stanford MSTP will send out their letters? I know that they are on some type of rolling admissions process and that some people have already heard positively, but I had a later interview date (Feb 3rd) and still haven't heard anything.

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[jmed]

Hey ptiger- my MSTP interview at Stanford is not until April 8th , so I hope they will not be making final decisions until after that!... Jim

 

[ptiger]

Wow ... I can't believe they are interviewing so late. The good news is that you'll have a quick turn-around on a response

My friend called Marjorie Weesner, who informed her that we should all hear after the last interview date -- so some time after April 8th. This is even later than UCSF (I've heard them quoted as April 7th). Why is it that the CA schools are so much later than the rest of the world?

 

[badger03]

I've been eagerly waiting for the end of March with the hope of good news from Stanford. After running across this post, I emailed Marjorie Weesner to request an update on the MSTP admissions process. She confirmed that the final decisions will not be made until early April, following the last interview date. It's unfortunate that the interviews weren't completed earlier (while not excluding any of the April interviewees) but I suppose it can't be helped. This waiting game is a real test of patience .

Good luck everyone!

 

[bakaFOB]

hey guys, i def. feel ur pain. I interviewed sometime in feb and was told that decisin will be made in late march (cuz they had to add an extra "late" interview date in march). Then i was told by Marjorie last week that decision will be made on april 8th. Well I guess it'll be a bit longer still...

enough grippin.. now a question

for those of u serious about stanford, what are u doing with the rest of the MSTPs that want a decision from YOU by a certain day? I know they're not supposed to do that, but a few programs does. What are we supposed to do while waiting for Stanford? accept 1 offer? or tell them to wait?

thnx

 

[surge]

Generally speaking, I would suggest accepting your #2 offer (this might include sending in the deposit). You can withdraw and get your deposit back until May 15. This is what I did.

That's what the schools get when they only give us a few weeks to respond. The way I see it, it's fine, but my acceptance is meaningless anyway (until May 15).

 

[ptiger]

I wanted to bump this post back up towards the top. When you guys start to hear from Stanford, will you let us know? I'm looking forward to finally finishing this waiting process and start making some decisions. Thanks!

 

[surge]

Uh, not to cause panic, but I met a guy at the WashU revisit last weekend who said he got into Stanford MSTP. So is Stanford rolling or not? How could've he known? Or was he pulling my chain?

 

[badger03]

Stanford operates on a modified rolling basis which means that they can accept students into the MSTP throughout the process. If you noticed on the acceptances thread, Mozart was already notified of his acceptance to their program. I think that the bulk of the decisions will be made following this final interview session, but there have been several acceptances offered to date.

Please let me get in !

 

[surge]

Ooooops. Of course. Never mind.

That makes sense. I hope you guys get in!

 

[magpie]

In a post on another thread, Habari mentioned that the NIH had just put Stanford's MSTP on probation. My understanding is that the NIH gives schools on probation 3 years to clean up their act, but they cut the number of NIh-funded slots during those 3 years. Has anybody heard whether this means that Stanford will cut back on the number of people they will accept this year?

 

[jmed]

Greetings from sunny Palo Alto, CA-
OK, Greg Barsh told us during the interview de-briefing this afternoon that Stanford has only offered a few spots out of what will probably be 7 or 8 offered to extramural applicants. I didn't hear anything about a reduction in the number of MSTP spots (2 or 3 will go to in-house applicants, for ~10 total spots). He said it'll be 2-3 weeks before we hear from the adcom. He was pretty vague about a waitlist and the significance of May 15. June was mentioned as a probable time for the admissions dust to settle. I think I am going to be shelling out some deposit money at my back-up school...
--Jim

 

[Euterpe]

this is PREPOSTEROUS! why are they taking so long? sigh ...

does anyone know why they are on probation?

is there a place where we can find out what other programs are on probation or is it basically by word of mouth that we can find out? i guess ucsf and harvard are, mainly because their programs were taking too long.

how can we find out the "official" (as opposed to the things program directors might say to us to paint everything in a better light) reasons for why they were put on probation? (sorry if this was already discussed in another thread ...)

 

[Habari]

i don't believe that ucsf or harvard are still on probation. the best source for this is bert shapiro at nih/nigms - you can find him on their website and e-mail him.

stanford is apparently on probation because it pushes poeple out of their phd year too fast - for the sake of their averages - not allowing a 'quality phd', and some other stuff [someone better e-mail him for the 'real deal' to cut down on the heresay]. this is what the site review committee reported. they will be on probabation for 3 years, and i bet they will take care of the issue - but something to watch out for.

once schools are put on their 3 year probations, they usually work hard to fix the problem, and get approved on the next cycle. these programs are extremely dynamic and still developing. because mstp is a young institution, there are lots of adjustments and improvements to be made - and most programs are receptive to them. some programs, on the other hand, are expanding slots and funding is increasing.

 

[2003Applicant]

I suggest that you find out from the real source whether this is true about Stanford. A while back, something else was suggested by one of the posters above about Stanford that was totally false. The only way you can know the truth is asking the Admissions Office or current students. I aksed the Admissions Office, and there was no basis for the claim. I'm always wary of rumors started by a few people and then passed on to many. Just a heads up. The person above probably heard this through the grapevine, but it's doubtful that it is true.

 

[MacGyver]

2003applicant,

You are incorrect. The regular MD admissions office wouldnt know one way or hte other about Stanford MSTP anyways.

Shapiro confirmed that Stanford MSTP is indeed on probation.

Ask him yourself

 

[2003Applicant]

Good, I'm glad you got the info from the horse's mouth.

It was just a head's up because I know many rumors are false

 

[Vader]

I believe that UCSF is no longer on probation. The program took numerous steps to shorten the length of training time. In fact, an additional 4 MSTP spots per year were opened last admissions cycle, to bring the total to 12 per year.

 

[giverny]

Alright, with fear of insulting someone, here is my 2 cents:

I think everyone is blowing this whole Stanford probation WAY out of proportion! Although it is nice that we now have the facts straight, the truth of the matter is that many "so-considerered" scientific powerhouses- Harvard, UCSF, Columbia, and now Stanford (to name the ones that I know of)- have been placed on probation in the recent past. However, the truth of the matter remains that these places are all still AWESOME places to do a MD-PhD... This just speaks to the ever-present complexity of merging clinical medicine and basic science, and the fact that the NIH made have a single ideal for a MSTP program. I don't know about you, but some of the programs I visited this year that were supposedly "ideal" MSTP programs weren't for me.

I would further argue that the MD-PhDs and MDs I have met from Stanford are some of the most inspired scientists that I have ever met. My current advisor did some of her training there and speaks very fondly of her time there! Stanford just had a change of directorship for their MSTP this year, and I think NIH-cited problems will be quickly addressed. Further, by examining the names of the schools that have recently been placed on probation, I would say that the extra attention that had to be placed on these programs to retain NIH has made for wonderful progress in their organization.

So, why not go to a place that may be receptive to change and that you can be a crucial part of shaping MD-PhD education? Stanford remains an excellent choice for your training... I would jump at the opportunity to attend... unfortunately, I didn't receive an interview.

Plus, the scientific community in N. California... Coupled with the weather, who could ever ask for more??

 

[ptiger]

A friend called Marjorie and informed me that Stanford should let us know sometime at the beginning of this week. They've been late before, though. I can't wait to have all of the cards finally on the table!

 

[magpie]

Originally posted by giverny

.... Further, by examining the names of the schools that have recently been placed on probation, I would say that the extra attention that had to be placed on these programs to retain NIH has made for wonderful progress in their organization.

So, why not go to a place that may be receptive to change and that you can be a crucial part of shaping MD-PhD education? Stanford remains an excellent choice for your training... I would jump at the opportunity to attend... unfortunately, I didn't receive an interview.

I would argue that the schools placed on probation are not so much receptive to change as reactive to it. After all, they are only moved to change when threatend with something short of a "shock and awe" campaign by the NIH. Typically, they react with a "regime change" and implement improvements to their program under the duress of losing all funding. It is doubtful that they would have made any changes on their own, institutional inertia and academic hubris being the sclerosis at the heart of many prestigious universities. This is not to say that pre-reformation Harvard, Stanford, et al, were not great places to do a MD or a PhD; it is just that they were not that great for doing a combined degree, at least not according to their peers. (It should be remembered that programs are evaluated by peer review; it's not just some Beltway bureaucrat with a an axe to grind that giving these programs a come-uppance.)

I agree that programs put on probation will do what it takes to address their failings. However, I am afraid that that is about all they will do. These programs are probably not innovators in combined degree training; rather, they are followers of places like Penn, Hopkins, & WashU, etc. (who manage to get a ton of money from the NIH and do not have to be coerced to set up a program that encourages the development of physician-scientists). If it were not for the Penn's, JHU's and WashU's setting the standard for MD/PhD training, most MD/PhD programs would probably feature totally separate medical and graduate curricula, a 10-year time to degree, and a heavy debt load for program graduates. If you want to go to a place that is active in shaping MD/PhD education you might take a look at the model programs, rather than the ex-cons.

 

[badger03]

Does anyone know when we might start hearing back from Stanford about admissions decisions? I sent an email to Dr. Barsh and Marjorie asking for some indication but never got a reply. To avoid appearing pushy by contacting them again, I was hoping that they accidentally let the "top secret" date slip out to someone else.

Probation or not, Stanford's still a great school with top-notch science and a relaxed atmosphere... just perhaps a bit too relaxed when it comes to making timely admissions decisions.

Giverny has the right idea, though. Stanford

 

[ptiger]

Badger,

I don't mean to break bad news to you, but I learned from a friend that Marjorie called tonight to tell her she was accepted. It's possible that they are still on a rolling basis, and they will call others in the days to come. I didn't receive a call either. I think it's appropriate to give Marjorie a call tomorrow.

Good luck!
ptiger

 

[jmed]

I emailed Seung Kim this afternoon and asked if he could give me a ballpark estimate so that I would have a better idea how to handle pressure to decide from backup MSTPs. Greg Barsh emailed me back saying I was on a 'very short' waitlist, but that I would not hear until after May 15. That sounded good enough for me, so I'm going to hold out for Stanford with crossed fingers! I think if you emailed them, you could get a general estimate of where you are at, badger.

 

[ptiger]

Jmed,
That's pretty funny. I e-mailed Greg Barsh, and Dr. Kim e-mailed me back telling me that I had been waitlisted. He told me that "I am one of about twenty or so on the waitlist." I've already withdrawn my application. Good luck, Badger and Jmed! That's one less on the waitlist for you guys (oh, and my friend who was accepted is withdrawing as well).