I hate it when people perpetuate this nonsense. The interview is just as much for you to evaluate the school as it is for the school to evaluate you. I had no idea Drexel was such garbage until I saw it in person for myself.
Yes, you're right. And you should have IMMEDIATELY withdrawn instead of waiting for them to make a decision to accept you because now you look like a whiny, entitled brat who has intention to be a physician.
No offense to those who replied to this, but my question had nothing to do with asking you to evaluate my choice of turning down an acceptance. Turning down an acceptance being a black mark on your application is just another perpetuated myth on SDN, one of many. I've heard many, many things on SDN that are simply just not true, and this is one of them.
Umm... ok, don't listen to those of us who've been there, those of us who work for Admissions at our respective schools, those of us who have been close to AdComs prior to going to med school. Obviously, the Director of Admissions at CU and the one here are both wrong. You obviously know more than they do. You obviously understand this process better than
LizzyM or Catalystik (who are both active AdCom members at their schools). I get it. You know what's best. Well then ignore our ignorant advice.
If asked about it, I'll be completely honest and upfront about my desire to go to a school that I could see myself being happy at. I didn't do anything unethical; I attended their interview day and didn't like the school. I knew from 5 minutes into seeing it that I wasn't going to be happy there. You guys act like it's a gamble to offer me a spot now because I turned down one school - why? What does a school have to lose on me? I turn it down, they move on to the next person.
It's a gamble to offer you an interview. They are unlikely to interview you. You don't seem to get that. Schools usually interview about 10-15% of their applicants and you probably won't be in that <<20%. Further, it's not even a question of you turning them down. You're right, that won't matter beyond yield protection. What
does matter, though, is whether or not you are likely to persist to graduation. Your current track record says, "Anything's possible, but probably not."
I don't want to be cruel, but think about it from their perspective. As of now you're a below-average applicant with an MCAT score over a half-standard deviation below the mean for acceptees and a GPA about the same amount below the mean. That alone makes you mediocre. You have good ECs, but nothing struck me as stellar, which is what you need with those numbers. The result on your first cycle was ONE acceptance at a bottom-tier MD but nevertheless an MD program. A friend of mine goes there and likes it. Her description of the program sounds a little weak clinically and lacking research-wise compared to my experience here, but hey, she'll still finish as an AMG with an MD! You could have too.
Unfortunately, you chose to turn down the one program that had an interest in you. As a mediocre applicant, that was really your only chance and there's no chance in hell they'll consider you again after this year. Now when you reapply schools will all ask about your reapplicant status, many on their secondaries. When they look into it and find out you had an acceptance this past cycle, they will likely close your file with a recommendation to reject. Why consider you further/? What makes you worth their valuable time?
Even with a retake on the MCAT, your unbalanced 28 is going to haunt you to some degree and the poor GPA will absolutely haunt you. Even with an outstanding MCAT (say a 36+), you would have to convince someone that you're not going to flake again during med school or something when the going gets rough WHICH IT WILL!
