Top 10 schools and traditional students

[stine97]

Which top 10 schools are most friendly to traditional students?

I'm a traditional student (not even a gap year) and if I got into any top 10 school I'd be stoked.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[premedthrowaway]

Which top 10 schools are most friendly to traditional students?

I'm a traditional student (not even a gap year) and if I got into any top 10 school I'd be stoked.

If you have an app competitive at top 10 schools, they will seriously consider you, traditional or not.

 

[Oso]

.......

Be a competitive applicant and you'll get interviews.

How do you know if you're a competitive applicant? Start by looking at the MSAR.

 

[SpartanWolverine]

If you're asking what the 'top 10' medical schools are (by reputation, research funding, or whatever fun metric they use nowadays), you're looking at:
HMS
JHU
NYU
Stanford
Mayo
UCSF
UPenn
UCLA
WashU
Duke
Being 'traditional' or not makes no real difference as long as your numbers and credentials are up to par.

 

[Goro]

If you're asking what the 'top 10' medical schools are (by reputation, research funding, or whatever fun metric they use nowadays), you're looking at:
HMS
JHU
NYU
Stanford
Mayo
UCSF
UPenn
UCLA
WashU
Duke
Being 'traditional' or not makes no real difference as long as your numbers and credentials are up to par.

Ask 10 people what the Top 10 are, and you'll get 11 answers.

By my reckoning, there are at least 20-25 "Top 10 schools"

All med schools like traditional students, but some like non-trads more than others.

Now, what's the criteria for "traditional student"??????

 

[LizzyM]

Now, what's the criteria for "traditional student"??????

Rising college senior. (edit: who entered college right out of HS and is completing college in < 6 years)

 

[Phile98]

Now, what's the criteria for "traditional student"??????

When you get so used to accepting non-trads that you thought they were the trads now lol

 

[ADSigMel]

I actually felt like the top 10 (and by that I mean top 25-ish) schools skewed more traditional. I got pretty much zero love from the top-tier schools as a non-trad (except one where I interviewed and was waitlisted). That’s not to say that I would have done much better at those schools as a traditional applicant, as my application wasn’t exactly perfect, but the one top-tier school that waitlisted me had a median matriculant age of, like, 22.

 

[efle]

Depends on specifics of your app. If you have a 99-100th percentile MCAT, it will be WashU whether you have 0 gap years or several. If you have extensive service/social justice narrative and weaker score, best bet is now UCSF/UCLA. If you have decent numbers and extensive research during college with pubs, Stanford seems to especially like that. Mayo is a completely unpredictable wild card that looks for a quirky "fit" that nobody can really describe.

 

[Phile98]

extensive research during college with pubs

how many we talking?

 

[Lucca]

how many we talking?

something second or first author and 518+ fits the criteria of 3 (trad) ppl I know accepted at SMS

 

[efle]

how many we talking?

IIRC, I once read on one of their pages that 65% of their incoming class has already been published. I'm sure that's usually a single 1st or 2nd authorship during undergrad or else a bunch of middle authorships from doing a research gap year.

 

[skk_]

I actually felt like the top 10 (and by that I mean top 25-ish) schools skewed more traditional. I got pretty much zero love from the top-tier schools as a non-trad (except one where I interviewed and was waitlisted). That’s not to say that I would have done much better at those schools as a traditional applicant, as my application wasn’t exactly perfect, but the one top-tier school that waitlisted me had a median matriculant age of, like, 22.

My experience was honestly the opposite. If you define "traditional" using LizzyM's definition (rising college senior), almost every Top 10 interview I went to was dominated by "non-traditional" students taking 1 or more gap years. More than one interview I went to had zero "traditional" students even there.

Not that I think being a traditional student works against anyone at all...it just seems like its easier to get your ECs to the level expected at these schools if you take time off to broaden your existing experiences. Many people definitely are more than driven enough to accomplish everything that's needed prior to graduating, but I know at least for me, its doubtful that my ECs would have been strong enough to receive near the acceptances I ended up getting if I had applied prior to graduation.

 

[ADSigMel]

My experience was honestly the opposite. If you define "traditional" using LizzyM's definition (rising college senior), almost every Top 10 interview I went to was dominated by "non-traditional" students taking 1 or more gap years. More than one interview I went to had zero "traditional" students even there.

Not that I think being a traditional student works against anyone at all...it just seems like its easier to get your ECs to the level expected at these schools if you take time off to broaden your existing experiences. Many people definitely are more than driven enough to accomplish everything that's needed prior to graduating, but I know at least for me, its doubtful that my ECs would have been strong enough to receive near the acceptances I ended up getting if I had applied prior to graduation.

I stand corrected, then. And I agree with your assessment - I think I was a stronger candidate after my *ahem*-teen gap years than I would have been coming right out of undergrad, from the "bulking up the application" standpoint as well as the fact that I needed those years to mature enough to be entrusted with other people's health.

 

[efle]

Gap years are def more common at the competitive research centers, in some cases like Penn it's something like 75% of the class has at least one gap year.

 

[skk_]

Gap years are def more common at the competitive research centers, in some cases like Penn it's something like 75% of the class has at least one gap year.

Yeah, I agree. For anyone interested in actual stats, here's the chart Penn gave us during interview day last year, where they define non-traditional using the same definition that LizzyM uses (anyone who isn't matriculating straight out of college). The student body composition of the school I'm attending (similarly competitive research school) skews even more strongly towards non-traditional students by this definition too.

I feel that due to how common gap years are now, this definition of "non-traditional" that most schools use is a little different from the perception of what many people consider "non-traditional" though. These days, it really feels like taking at least one gap year is more of a "typical" pathway to medical school than matriculating straight through.

 

[Saifa]

Honestly being "non-trad" simply increases the likelihood that the applicant acquired desirable experiences.

 

[LizzyM]

Honestly being "non-trad" simply increases the likelihood that the applicant acquired desirable experiences.

It is a double edged sword. Some non-trads are first time applicants and have had very desirable experiences, including some who have had interesting careers prior to pursuing medicine. Other non-trads are quixotically pursuing medicine and have applied three times or more without success. Many of those applicants may be carrying too much baggage to ever be desirable candidates.

 

[Saifa]

It is a double edged sword. Some non-trads are first time applicants and have had very desirable experiences, including some who have had interesting careers prior to pursuing medicine. Other non-trads are quixotically pursuing medicine and have applied three times or more without success. Many of those applicants may be carrying too much baggage to ever be desirable candidates.

Right, I've just been hearing a lot (off boards) echoing the sentiment that being "traditional" is somehow inherently disadvantageous which I don't think is really the case, it's all in the applicant's track record.

 

[sunshinefl]

Yeah, I agree. For anyone interested in actual stats, here's the chart Penn gave us during interview day last year, where they define non-traditional using the same definition that LizzyM uses (anyone who isn't matriculating straight out of college). The student body composition of the school I'm attending (similarly competitive research school) skews even more strongly towards non-traditional students by this definition too.

I feel that due to how common gap years are now, this definition of "non-traditional" that most schools use is a little different from the perception of what many people consider "non-traditional" though. These days, it really feels like taking at least one gap year is more of a "typical" pathway to medical school than matriculating straight through.

By that definition I was a “traditional” applicant because I applied as a rising senior and was accepted during my senior year. But I was a high school drop out->GED with many gap years until I started college. And then I matriculated at 31.

 

[LizzyM]

By that definition I was a “traditional” applicant because I applied as a rising senior and was accepted during my senior year. But I was a high school drop out->GED with many gap years until I started college. And then I matriculated at 31.

Yes, that's non-trad. I should have said, attending college right out of HS and applying to med school as a rising senior.

 

[Goro]

Yeah, I agree. For anyone interested in actual stats, here's the chart Penn gave us during interview day last year, where they define non-traditional using the same definition that LizzyM uses (anyone who isn't matriculating straight out of college). The student body composition of the school I'm attending (similarly competitive research school) skews even more strongly towards non-traditional students by this definition too.

View attachment 237361

I feel that due to how common gap years are now, this definition of "non-traditional" that most schools use is a little different from the perception of what many people consider "non-traditional" though. These days, it really feels like taking at least one gap year is more of a "typical" pathway to medical school than matriculating straight through.

20% with a post-bac??? Is that people with MS or PHD or SMP???? It would be good to know if U Penn rewards reinvention.

 

[efle]

20% with a post-bac??? Is that people with MS or PHD or SMP???? It would be good to know if U Penn rewards reinvention.

I suspect they don't mean postbac as in a year of grade repair or taking classes along side medical students, rather the NIH research gap year program which is technically the "Postbac IRTA Program"

 

[skk_]

20% with a post-bac??? Is that people with MS or PHD or SMP???? It would be good to know if U Penn rewards reinvention.

I suspect they don't mean postbac as in a year of grade repair or taking classes along side medical students, rather the NIH research gap year program which is technically the "Postbac IRTA Program"

As far as I know, they actually do mean proper post-bacs - they have direct linkages with multiple elite post-bac programs (their own, as well as Bryn Mawr, Goucher, and a few others), and seem to accept a lot of students from them. All those post-bacs are incredibly competitive to get into though, and more aimed at career changers who need to get the pre-requisites done rather than people in need of grade repair.

 

[Goro]

As far as I know, they actually do mean proper post-bacs - they have direct linkages with multiple elite post-bac programs (their own, as well as Bryn Mawr, Goucher, and a few others), and seem to accept a lot of students from them. All those post-bacs are incredibly competitive to get into though, and more aimed at career changers who need to get the pre-requisites done rather than people in need of grade repair.

Good to know. Many thanks for sharing.

 

[efle]

As far as I know, they actually do mean proper post-bacs - they have direct linkages with multiple elite post-bac programs (their own, as well as Bryn Mawr, Goucher, and a few others), and seem to accept a lot of students from them. All those post-bacs are incredibly competitive to get into though, and more aimed at career changers who need to get the pre-requisites done rather than people in need of grade repair.

I would be shocked if 1 in 5 of their class did a "post bac" the way SDN uses the term. Unless they just didn't mention it when I interviewed there and they are an outlier compared to peers. I'm also at a similar school and I can't think of anybody here who did a post-bac to change career path, let alone 20% of the class. But I can think of tons who did NIH or other research programs intended for medical applicant gap years.

 

[skk_]

I would be shocked if 1 in 5 of their class did a "post bac" the way SDN uses the term. Unless they just didn't mention it when I interviewed there and they are an outlier compared to peers. I'm also at a similar school and I can't think of anybody here who did a post-bac to change career path, let alone 20% of the class. But I can think of tons who did NIH or other research programs intended for medical applicant gap years.

Maybe its because i'm originally from Philly, but I thought Penn's reputation for having strong linkages to many post-bac programs was pretty well known.

Goucher (one of four post-bac programs that link with Penn) sent 7 students to Penn last year directly via their linkage, with an additional 1-2 getting in from the post-bac via applying normally (source). This alone represents over 5% of their entering class.

JHU's post-bac program sent 33 students to Penn over the last 5 years, so about 7 a year, the same as Goucher. This accounts for another 5% of their entering class, bringing it to 10% just from those two programs (source). Both are traditional post bac programs in the same way SDN uses the term.

The other two post-bac programs they link with are Bryn Mawr and their own post-bac program, and I can't imagine both don't send students there in similar numbers. For what its worth, everything I wrote in my original post was mentioned multiple times to me, so its probably just complete random luck that we ended up having very different experiences.

 

[efle]

Maybe its because i'm originally from Philly, but I thought Penn's reputation for having strong linkages to many post-bac programs was pretty well known.

Goucher (one of four post-bac programs that link with Penn) sent 7 students to Penn last year directly via their linkage, with an additional 1-2 getting in from the post-bac via applying normally (source). This alone represents over 5% of their entering class.

JHU's post-bac program sent 33 students to Penn over the last 5 years, so about 7 a year, the same as Goucher. This accounts for another 5% of their entering class, bringing it to 10% just from those two programs (source). Both are traditional post bac programs in the same way SDN uses the term.

The other two post-bac programs they link with are Bryn Mawr and their own post-bac program, and I can't imagine both don't send students there in similar numbers. For what its worth, everything I wrote in my original post was mentioned multiple times to me, so its probably just complete random luck that we ended up having very different experiences.

Goro should probably make a note in his recommendation sheet about Penn loving high-stats career changers from those post bacs then! That is crazy to hear. I would have guessed only a few people would come from post bacs per year at any of the Penn type schools. Especially crazy that it's just a handful of programs sending so many people per year. For a random reference point, Vanderbilt undergrad has about 300 MD applicants per year and has had only 12 admits to Penn in 6 years. Goucher having 7-9 admits per year out of 30 people in the program is completely insane.

Edit: Looking at that Goucher page, Penn had 12 admits from them in the last couple cycles and my school had 1. Seems like they really are an outlier when it comes to post baccs.

 

[Lucca]

Goro should probably make a note in his recommendation sheet about Penn loving high-stats career changers from those post bacs then! That is crazy to hear. I would have guessed only a few people would come from post bacs per year at any of the Penn type schools. Especially crazy that it's just a handful of programs sending so many people per year. For a random reference point, Vanderbilt undergrad has about 300 MD applicants per year and has had only 12 admits to Penn in 6 years. Goucher having 7-9 admits per year out of 30 people in the program is completely insane.

Edit: Looking at that Goucher page, Penn had 12 admits from them in the last couple cycles and my school had 1. Seems like they really are an outlier when it comes to post baccs.

@darkjedi did one of these IIRC so he may have more to say about it

 

[skk_]

Looking at that Goucher page, Penn had 12 admits from them in the last couple cycles and my school had 1. Seems like they really are an outlier when it comes to post baccs.

Data on that page actually underplays it, since the stats there cover two years (2015-2016 and 2016-2017), even though 2016-2017 was the first year they had a formalized linkage with Penn. It will definitely be much higher once two full years of linkage can be looked at instead.

And yeah, its sort of weird. They're definitely an outlier compared to other top schools, and my experience matches yours - at the school I choose to go to there are some people who went through these type of programs, but nowhere close to 1 in 5. Its bewildering too that JHU's own post-bac sends over 50% more people to Penn than their own medical school, especially when JHU is still 2nd in terms of their accepts.

 

[efle]

So...what motivates Penn to do this? Why would they carve out 20% of their class only for the dozens of applicants per year from a handful of post bac programs? How do they benefit from favoring these programs so heavily, instead of filling that 20% with the best candidates from their thousands and thousands of un-linked applicants?

 

[dodolol21]

So...what motivates Penn to do this? Why would they carve out 20% of their class only for the dozens of applicants per year from a handful of post bac programs? How do they benefit from favoring these programs so heavily, instead of filling that 20% with the best candidates from their thousands and thousands of un-linked applicants?

If you read the Goucher page, they say its for people who havent taken more than 1-2 of the science pre requisities. So basically they probably accept people who did amazing during their undergrad in a different field, and will do similarly well at the post-baacc (like 3.9-4.0). Thats why their students have a 99.7% acceptance rate and at places like Chicago, Penn, etc. Becuase they actually have an amazing GPA and MCAT.

 

[dodolol21]

Personally, I do not understand why applicants do research the school by exploring these websites in depth for their target schools to the point they know verbatim

Haha, I think many of us actually do. The thing is though that while many of us high stat applicants love all 20 or so schools were applying to, deep down we only have 1 or 2 true loves whose websites weve been reading since sophomore year of high school.

 

[Goro]

I find this as example of how myths, rumors, and hearsay cause neurosis and paranoia among high-achieving, highly-intelligent premeds. The nontraditional students all think the regular students have an advantage while the traditional students think the older nontrads have the advantage.

20 years ago most medical schools barely knew about nontrads and applying near 30 would would really raise eyebrows. Now, no one really cares. This has to do more with: changing age demographics which directly affects college class size and thus the applicant pool; changes in the economy, particularly cost of going to college and post college job market; and the complexity of applying to medical school, which is mostly due to schools moving from a rigid Flexnor model of premed for all candidates to a wide variance in what they look for in applicants.

As for the questions here, 60% of first year matriculants report starting med school being 1 year or more from earning UG degree. This could someone applying as a senior (hardly a non trad) to some earning an advanced degree (One ivy had 30% of incoming class with advanced degree) to someone doing SMP/post bacc.

Schools look for qualified candidates period. Everytime I hear a school is friendly or not friendly to non trads, I can always find opposite example. And most medical schools have a class profile page, as well as much other information on their websites that most applicants never bother to read, that might give you a good idea of what their classes are like. Most school websites also have selection criteria and admission committee documents that go into detail about what they are looking for. Personally, I do not understand why applicants don't research the school by exploring these websites in depth for their target schools to the point they know verbatim

Haha, I think many of us actually do. The thing is though that while many of us high stat applicants love all 20 or so schools were applying to, deep down we only have 1 or 2 true loves whose websites weve been reading since sophomore year of high school.

Based upon posts here in SDN, gonnif is on the mark, dodo. You'd be surprised how many people with literally 1000s of hours of research can't be bothered to look at either MSAR to find out that you can't get into U ND if you're OOS, or ask about their chances to the HBCs when they are clearly not persons of color and have zero ECs helping communities of color, which is the mission of the HBCs!

 

[efle]

If you read the Goucher page, they say its for people who havent taken more than 1-2 of the science pre requisities. So basically they probably accept people who did amazing during their undergrad in a different field, and will do similarly well at the post-baacc (like 3.9-4.0). Thats why their students have a 99.7% acceptance rate and at places like Chicago, Penn, etc. Becuase they actually have an amazing GPA and MCAT.

I still struggle to see their angle. There are thousands of applicants every year with straight A's and top ~5% MCAT scores. It seems very odd that getting those A's at Goucher blows away Penn admissions members to the point that they admit 1/3rd of the postbac. Strange things are afoot at the Circle K.

Edit: And clearly, whatever logic is behind Penn's favoritism hasn't occurred to peers like Hopkins and Harvard either.

 

[Lucca]

I still struggle to see their angle. There are thousands of applicants every year with straight A's and top ~5% MCAT scores. It seems very odd that getting those A's at Goucher blows away Penn admissions members to the point that they admit 1/3rd of the postbac. Strange things are afoot at the Circle K.

Edit: And clearly, whatever logic is behind Penn's favoritism hasn't occurred to peers like Hopkins and Harvard either.

Maybe Penn likes them because they are a known quantity and if the postbacc has linkage then the matriculation yield will be 100% without having to offer anyone scholarship $$ (It's unknown to me if postbaccs from these programs receive scholarship $$ or not). I'm just speculating.

 

[skk_]

So...what motivates Penn to do this? Why would they carve out 20% of their class only for the dozens of applicants per year from a handful of post bac programs? How do they benefit from favoring these programs so heavily, instead of filling that 20% with the best candidates from their thousands and thousands of un-linked applicants?

Here are the admissions stats at Bryn Mawr's post-bac program for the last six years (2011 - 2016), I didn't have time to look it up last night. 85 people were admitted to Penn from them during this time-frame via their linkage too (again, the school they send the most people to by far), which works out to roughly 14 per year from a class size of 85.

As to why Penn does this, I don't know. Purely speculating, but I think its partly due to fitting with where their emphasis lies (they seem to be extremely big on non-traditionals / people with some life experience who have taken at least some time off after college, or at least that was my impression) and what @Lucca and @dodolol21 mentioned - getting into these post-bac programs is extremely difficult, and you're essentially getting a known quantity that's basically been already pre-screened for you that you know will excel. Even outside their Penn linkages, the Bryn Mawr, Goucher, and JHU post-bacs all have very close to a 100% medical school matriculation rate, and the schools their students go off to are dominated by top tier institutions .

 

[efle]

Wow, 14 admits per year from one small LAC's post bac! Last year my school gave 15 interviews to students from Williams, Wesleyan, Wellesley, Bowdoin, Swarthmore and Pomona combined.

Still weird to me that Penn's peer institutions aren't nearly so interested, but I guess it goes to show that the admissions committee members at a given school might collectively like some flavor that very similar schools don't pay as much attention to.

Do any of these post baccs post their admissions statistics, like SAT scores, or the MCAT scores of their recent MD applicants?

 

[Goro]

Here are the admissions stats at Bryn Mawr's post-bac program for the last six years (2011 - 2016), I didn't have time to look it up last night. 85 people were admitted to Penn from them during this time-frame via their linkage too (again, the school they send the most people to by far), which works out to roughly 14 per year from a class size of 85.

As to why Penn does this, I don't know. Purely speculating, but I think its partly due to fitting with where their emphasis lies (they seem to be extremely big on non-traditionals / people with some life experience who have taken at least some time off after college, or at least that was my impression) and what @Lucca and @dodolol21 mentioned - getting into these post-bac programs is extremely difficult, and you're essentially getting a known quantity that's basically been already pre-screened for you that you know will excel. Even outside their Penn linkages, the Bryn Mawr, Goucher, and JHU post-bacs all have very close to a 100% medical school matriculation rate, and the schools their students go off to are dominated by top tier institutions .

It's a feeder thing. Penn knows the quality of the Bryn Mawr grads

 

[darkjedi]

I did not directly link to Penn from my postbac, but my year had ~15 students from Bryn Mawr's program alone, plus many others from various postbacs including JHU, Goucher and Harvard Extension. Part of the reason is because programs like Bryn Mawr have become exceedingly selective in their own right, generally only accepting students who have top tier GPAs and high SATs/GREs to begin with. As some of you have already pointed out with Bryn Mawr's stats, this makes for already strong medical school applicants.

Penn also really loves non-traditional students in general. ~60% of my class took at least a year out from college to do something else. While I can't pretend to speak on behalf of the adcom, there is a strong emphasis on recruiting a diverse class as people from unique backgrounds tend to have unique career trajectories. A very large percentage (I think ~40%) of my class wound up taking an extra year to do either an extra masters, year of research, and a few even doing some startups. A lot of that "uniqueness" translates into incredible residency outcomes as residencies tend to look for similar traits in their trainees.