this year's applications

[Arctic Char]

from those who feel they have a perspective, does this year's applicant pool seem to have any remarkable characteristics? (e.g. more or less apps than usual, higher step 1, lower step 1, historical average, etc etc).

or is it too early to tell on the whole? i guess i'm just impatient for the match data to come out

thanks all

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[lokobo]

bump i want to know too!

 

[Tideguy]

For what its worth, a program director at one of the NYC programs said that they received more applications this year than they'd ever gotten in years past. Not sure what that says about the match as a whole...

 

[CaptKirk]

For what its worth, a program director at one of the NYC programs said that they received more applications this year than they'd ever gotten in years past. Not sure what that says about the match as a whole...

Which is difficult to interpret since it could just represent an increase in the number of programs to which applicants are applying... perhaps due to a perceived increase in competitiveness?

Probably we won't know anything until people start discussing the match and/or AAMC releases this year's match characteristics (total number of applicants, average Step 1's of those who matched, etc).

 

[getinthehole]

Agree with the Captain. Never know until all is said and done and the stats come out. Keep in mind that in general everybody always thinks their match was more competitive than usual. It's most likely the same. We'll see.

 

[Imaged Prostate]

Just giving you my insight from about a top third school, take it for what it's worth...

I had a meeting with my advisor this week who is also the head of the radiology department. He was telling me that the radiology program...

--- Had the most applicants they've ever had this year

--- About 800 apps for 8 spots, 100 interviewed.

--- Used a Step I minimum of 240 to screen applicants. (This is in contrast to 2005 when he told me to score greater than 230 because that's what they used to consider applicants.)

 

[getinthehole]

--- Had the most applicants they've ever had this year

--- About 800 apps for 8 spots, 100 interviewed.

--- Used a Step I minimum of 240 to screen applicants. (This is in contrast to 2005 when he told me to score greater than 230 because that's what they used to consider applicants.)

Here's my thoughts on that.

I think it is pretty clear that people of all "calibers" are overapplying more, hence each program gets more applications than previous. On the interview trail you will realize it is essentially the same group of people going to programs on a certain level/location. As a result of the overapplying, relatively average programs are getting some great applicants that can essentially go wherever they want. I think the programs realize this too, but what are they really to do? My guess is that this would likely make it harder to get an interview (more people to compete against), but easier to actually match there since those interviews they give to those with great stuff will not likely rank them high enough to actually match there. So, of those interviewed (assuming that number stays the same) you are actually competing against less people who will rank the program in a position they may match at.

Let's just see where everyone ends up matching on their ROL before any conclusions are made.

 

[TexPre-Med]

Apprx. 1200 or so people apply radiology each year. Give or take.

Could it be that your top 3rd program became more highly recognized. It would seem very likely that a top 3rd program would get 2/3 or so of applications. Just my thoughts though.

 

[CaptKirk]

Used a Step I minimum of 240 to screen applicants. (This is in contrast to 2005 when he told me to score greater than 230 because that's what they used to consider applicants.)

Egh... dammit. Why couldn't I get those two extra points... *sigh*