UC school inside info

[arisunomori]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Is it true that the UC schools have a website that tells them which other UC schools an applicant has applied to/interviewed at/ and been accepted to??

I've heard that it's very unlikely to be interviewed at all the UC schools...
And that if you get an interview at UCSF, you're then unlikely to get one at Davis, for example...

 

[Shaz]

Is it true that the UC schools have a website that tells them which other UC schools an applicant has applied to/interviewed at/ and been accepted to??

I've heard that it's very unlikely to be interviewed at all the UC schools...
And that if you get an interview at UCSF, you're then unlikely to get one at Davis, for example...

I'm pretty sure they're ethical people, and would adhere to AAMC rules. But then again, everything's done differently in cali.

 

[Haybrant]

would seem like a good idea from their perspective; must be top secret kinda like the password for the U.S's nuclear weapons or something

 

[Spitting Camel]

Is it true that the UC schools have a website that tells them which other UC schools an applicant has applied to/interviewed at/ and been accepted to??

I've heard that it's very unlikely to be interviewed at all the UC schools...
And that if you get an interview at UCSF, you're then unlikely to get one at Davis, for example...

Don't you have anything better to do?

 

[Pinkertinkle]

I heard it is true and that the existence of the database was confirmed by an insider that is an adcom member at one of the southern cali UC's. It's kept very hush hush, of course, due to the sensitive nature of such a database. As to whether it's legal or not, I'm sure the UCs can make some sort of argument saying that they are one organization with many branches and thus have the right to create such a database. I think it's a way for them to save money (the UC Prime Directive) by not interviewing candidates with many other UC interviews or acceptances and thus not compete with each other. Also it keeps the top 250 cali applicants from interviewing everywhere and ending up at UCSF or UCLA, and leaving everyone else out in the rain AKA Drexel and NYMC.

I do not agree with the practice, however.

 

[striped sweater]

I heard it is true and that the existence of the database was confirmed by an insider that is an adcom member at one of the southern cali UC's. It's kept very hush hush, of course, due to the sensitive nature of such a database. As to whether it's legal or not, I'm sure the UCs can make some sort of argument saying that they are one organization with many branches and thus have the right to create such a database. I think it's a way for them to save money (the UC Prime Directive) by not interviewing candidates with many other UC interviews or acceptances and thus not compete with each other. Also it keeps the top 250 cali applicants from interviewing everywhere and ending up at UCSF or UCLA, and leaving everyone else out in the rain AKA Drexel and NYMC.

I do not agree with the practice, however.

hmmm... i sort of question this, and here's why. denying someone with a ucla and ucsf interview a chance at a less selective uc would/could mean in the long run that the most highly qualified students are left out in the cold as there would be more competition for the sf/la seats and thus fewer of the top students would get in at all if they don't have a shot at the other uc schools. also, a scan of these boards reveals that many students have multiple interviews and/or acceptances at uc schools.

that said, it "appears" to happen that some folks do only get certain schools and not others in some cases....

so who knows!!

 

[Law2Doc]

Is it true that the UC schools have a website that tells them which other UC schools an applicant has applied to/interviewed at/ and been accepted to??

I've heard that it's very unlikely to be interviewed at all the UC schools...
And that if you get an interview at UCSF, you're then unlikely to get one at Davis, for example...

I can't imagine they'd bother with a database. All the deans know each other and the telephone works fine...

 

[arisunomori]

I heard it is true and that the existence of the database was confirmed by an insider that is an adcom member at one of the southern cali UC's. It's kept very hush hush, of course, due to the sensitive nature of such a database. As to whether it's legal or not, I'm sure the UCs can make some sort of argument saying that they are one organization with many branches and thus have the right to create such a database. I think it's a way for them to save money (the UC Prime Directive) by not interviewing candidates with many other UC interviews or acceptances and thus not compete with each other. Also it keeps the top 250 cali applicants from interviewing everywhere and ending up at UCSF or UCLA, and leaving everyone else out in the rain AKA Drexel and NYMC.

I do not agree with the practice, however.

Does anyone know what this database would include?? Just hold/interview/waitlist status? Or might it include a schools interview impressions of you or tell other schools about your correspondence with one of the schools?


Also, what AAMC rules would prohibit this?

 

[Haybrant]

Does anyone know what this database would include?? Just hold/interview/waitlist status? Or might it include a schools interview impressions of you or tell other schools about your correspondence with one of the schools?


Also, what AAMC rules would prohibit this?

dont even speculate; not worth the time; I do agree with the above poster who says they prob just talk on the phone; why leave a paper trail

 

[Pinkertinkle]

Perhaps you guys are interpreting the purpose of this database in the wrong way. I assume it will be used as one of many criteria for whether you recieve an interview or not. Thus having an interview at UCLA or UCSF obviously will not preclude you from getting interviews from UCI or UCD. The more likely scenario is that if you have interviews at UCI, UCLA and UCSF, UCSD and UCD will be more reluctant to interview you. Also, deans probably aren't using this database to put dibs on an applicant, and thus it is not the equivalent of phoning each other and working out who gets who. Anyhow as to legality, I believe that the separate but not really separate UC system can share information.

 

[arisunomori]

Perhaps you guys are interpreting the purpose of this database in the wrong way. I assume it will be used as one of many criteria for whether you recieve an interview or not. Thus having an interview at UCLA or UCSF obviously will not preclude you from getting interviews from UCI or UCD. The more likely scenario is that if you have interviews at UCI, UCLA and UCSF, UCSD and UCD will be more reluctant to interview you. Also, deans probably aren't using this database to put dibs on an applicant, and thus it is not the equivalent of phoning each other and working out who gets who. Anyhow as to legality, I believe that the separate but not really separate UC system can share information.

It does seem that way... I don't think it's very common to interview at all of the UC schools, and don't know of anyone that has... although there may be some out there who have had the opportunity. I have interviewed at 3 of the UCs and have been complete for a really long time at the other two. Depsite sending letters of interest, I haven't heard anything from them... My case doesn't really mean anything, but if it's the experience of many of us, then there's probably some truth in the existence of a database.
I suppose it could be a good way of assuring that the classes get filled at all of the UCs. If all of the UCs only interviewed the top 400 or whatever applicants, then not enough CA students would get interviews to fill all of the slots at UC med schools...or there could be a big rush to interview more people when acceptances come out and applicants who got accepted to many of the UCs have to pick only one of them.
Thanks for your ideas pinkertinkle! Do you think that interview information is the only thing that's shared between the schools?

 

[Pinkertinkle]

I think that the database contains information on interviews rejections acceptances and waitlists. My personal experience is that I was accepted to a UC by October, but haven't been offered an interview at any other UC since. I suspect that there is some sort of high dibs being placed on me by one of the UCs.

 

[opinionkitten]

I think that the database contains information on interviews rejections acceptances and waitlists. My personal experience is that I was accepted to a UC by October, but haven't been offered an interview at any other UC since. I suspect that there is some sort of high dibs being placed on me by one of the UCs.

this all seems like speculation to me. at my ucla interview there were three first years that mentioned they were accepted to all uc's. seeing as the schools all have different student profiles they are looking at, it doesnt strike me as odd that people dont get all or the ones they want or whatnot. davis is reputed to heavily weight clinical experience and intent to practice clinical med. sf is hypercompetitive, so who knows what they want. la and sd struck me as clinical/research focused, with each focused a little more on one or the other. irvine, ok i dont know what irvine is, its in irvine, i guess thats its niche.

its hard to make accurate statements about ones interview potenital at one school let alone five, and i dont see any difinitive evidence of a database being used to put dibs on people or restrict interview potential after one or many uc invites.

 

[calcrew14]

I believe that they share the info but probably use it especially for final decision. The pattern doesn’t seem to be different from the undergrad level when the top tier of a large high school class got in both Berkley and LA while the majority of the next tier could only get in either UCLA or Berkley. Yet this second tier students don’t seem to have problem getting in other UC schools. The same thing happened in medical school matriculation. I know an applicant who was interviewed at every UC medical school. He was accepted by (USC,) UCSD, UCD, UCI and UCLA respectively. He was taken off the wait list at UCLA in June. That was a few weeks after UCSF rejection. I still can’t help wondering what UCLA had learned. And the acceptance at UCI, it came much later than those from UCSD, UCD and USC. As a matter of fact, it came about the same time as UCSF rejection. For someone who had declined an interview invite at Harvard, some school needs some assurance that she has a chance to matriculate him. Only gods know whether or not it was only a coincidence. If they really do it, they do it behind closed doors and curtains.

 

[curiouslygeorge]

I believe that they share the info but probably use it especially for final decision. The pattern doesn’t seem to be different from the undergrad level when the top tier of a large high school class got in both Berkley and LA while the majority of the next tier could only get in either UCLA or Berkley. Yet this second tier students don’t seem to have problem getting in other UC schools. The same thing happened in medical school matriculation. I know an applicant who was interviewed at every UC medical school. He was accepted by (USC,) UCSD, UCD, UCI and UCLA respectively. He was taken off the wait list at UCLA in June. That was a few weeks after UCSF rejection. I still can’t help wondering what UCLA had learned. And the acceptance at UCI, it came much later than those from UCSD, UCD and USC. As a matter of fact, it came about the same time as UCSF rejection. For someone who had declined an interview invite at Harvard, some school needs some assurance that she has a chance to matriculate him. Only gods know whether or not it was only a coincidence. If they really do it, they do it behind closed doors and curtains.

just curious... are you a cal (as in bears) student? because if so, your spelling of berkeley is rather, well, surprising.

 

[Long Dong]

If I tell you about it I have to kill you. 😀

 

[DrYo12]

Wow people. Secret databases? Conspiracy theories? 🙄

Reality time.

The atmosphere and environment created at each UC campus is different. With that, each campus will be looking for something different and each will have their own criteria for selecting people to interview and accept. While some factors are easy to generalise on, ie grades, MCATs, ECs, others will vary between schools.

As has always een said before, there is no formula for getting into medical school. The admissions committee for each school, each year, even each session will be different and there is no one way to determine the rhyme or reason for the decisions these schools make.

A more realistic assumption would be this: Let's say you're from Southern Cal and you say that you want to stay in CA because your family is here. It is likely that you will attract the attention of the UCs down in the south (because you're likely to want to go there) and may or may not get anything from the UCs in the North (because if you want to stay in CA due to family, why would you want to come all the way up North and be that far?).

Trying to figure out how and why and what about admissions is futile and not worth your time. Instead, spend time making your application as sound as possible, and present yourself as the kind of person that you would want to see as a doctor. Stop trying to guesstimate your chances and just put your best foot forward!

 

[striped sweater]

A more realistic assumption would be this: Let's say you're from Southern Cal and you say that you want to stay in CA because your family is here. It is likely that you will attract the attention of the UCs down in the south (because you're likely to want to go there) and may or may not get anything from the UCs in the North (because if you want to stay in CA due to family, why would you want to come all the way up North and be that far?).

wait, i am confused. i agree with you that a secret database is pretty far out on the reality scale. but how is what you have suggested here any more realistic? how would a UC know where you wanted to stay and why would they care? if you apply to sf from sd area, who are they to assume you would be better off near home? maybe you WANT to get away?

(or maybe i have misunderstood what you were trying to express.)

 

[DrYo12]

wait, i am confused. i agree with you that a secret database is pretty far out on the reality scale. but how is what you have suggested here any more realistic? how would a UC know where you wanted to stay and why would they care? if you apply to sf from sd area, who are they to assume you would be better off near home? maybe you WANT to get away?

(or maybe i have misunderstood what you were trying to express.)

Perhaps I was just rambing (go figure )

Often, people in their secondaries and personal statements will make reference to their desire to stay in California and be near their family as a way to demonstrate their committment to staying in CA. That's not to say that you would be required to stay in SD if your family is there, but if you say something in an interview, iin your statements or if your letter writers or anyone expresses that you would want to stay near your family and you are applying to a school far away (like UCD or UCSF), there is a chance that they would make the assumption that you would be less likely to attend a school farther away.

Part of the crapshoot about this admissions process is this: Schools have a limited number of positions that they can offer in any given year. They have to hedge their bets on who is likely to come to a school versus who is just applying because its in CA. With more ties to an area, the likelihood increases that you would want to stay in that area. I agree that it is presumptious on the part of the school to make those types of assesments, but THAT really does happen. And that is what I am saying is more likely to occur than the theories that are being espoused just now.

 

[calcrew14]

Thanks, believe it or not that was the first time I misspelled Berkeley. I don't know what made me do it. May be I've been away from Cali too long. (Anyone who suspects that I am not qualified to call the state Cali should check it out at basement559.com.)

Sorry, I forgot to answer whether or not I am a cal student. I just love your screen name the way it is. 😀

 

[striped sweater]

Perhaps I was just rambing (go figure )

Often, people in their secondaries and personal statements will make reference to their desire to stay in California and be near their family as a way to demonstrate their committment to staying in CA. That's not to say that you would be required to stay in SD if your family is there, but if you say something in an interview, iin your statements or if your letter writers or anyone expresses that you would want to stay near your family and you are applying to a school far away (like UCD or UCSF), there is a chance that they would make the assumption that you would be less likely to attend a school farther away.

Part of the crapshoot about this admissions process is this: Schools have a limited number of positions that they can offer in any given year. They have to hedge their bets on who is likely to come to a school versus who is just applying because its in CA. With more ties to an area, the likelihood increases that you would want to stay in that area. I agree that it is presumptious on the part of the school to make those types of assesments, but THAT really does happen. And that is what I am saying is more likely to occur than the theories that are being espoused just now.

gotcha!

 

[Haybrant]

Also, deans probably aren't using this database to put dibs on an applicant, and thus it is not the equivalent of phoning each other and working out who gets who. .

the deans do phone each other more than you think. this whole thing has parallels to an nba draft for example, only without all the photo-ops the day of acceptance. They should do that though; the deans could call the students up and give em a hat and a school jersey or something and they can smile with a 👍 for a photographer. Isnt match day at schools kinda like this?

 

[calcrew14]

..........nba draft .............

NBA draft? Talking about coincidence, that’s happens to be what I guessed. I decided to delete the analogy in order to keep it short. The only difference from the draft in pro sport is that every first rounder is drafted by every team before the conventional one person one team format begins from the second round on.

 

[Haybrant]

NBA draft? Talking about coincidence, that’s happens to be what I guessed. I decided to delete the analogy in order to keep it short. The only difference from the draft in pro sport is that every first rounder is drafted by every team before the conventional one person one team format begins from the second round on.

i think we can run with this nba draft analogy quite a bit; any sports buffs care to contribute

 

[Law2Doc]

i think we can run with this nba draft analogy quite a bit; any sports buffs care to contribute

I think I may have just been traded for two first round picks next year. 😱