UCSF Rejection Letter and Appeal

[hc182]

Hi, I am new to SDN, but I joined because it looked like a friendly community of people who support each other.

So very quickly here's my profile:
CA resident
4th year senior at UC Irvine
Major: Biomedical Engineering Pre-med
MCAT 42P
GPA 3.931
Volunteer at Hospital: 1.5 years
Research:1.5 years
Letters of Rec: 5 (all of them knew me and we had talked)

I received a letter of rejection for an interview at UCSF and I was wondering if anyone else had received one as well with a similar profile as me. I was also wondering if anyone has any advice on appealing a rejection letter.

Thanks for any feedback I can get.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Robizzle]

Wow deja vous.. I could have sworn I read almost an identical thread about UCSF about a month or 2 ago... Dude was BioENG, UCSF undergrad, UCSF research, 3.9+, 38+ MCAT, lots of EC's... Weird. & Sorry to hear bout your rejection.

 

[notdeadyet]

Hi, I am new to SDN, but I joined because it looked like a friendly community of people who support each other.

Boy, you are new. Kidding. Kinda...

Sorry to hear about your denial, but I've never heard of an appeal working at a pre-interview stage.

Every now and then (rarely) you hear about someone having some success when there were extenuating circumstances surrounding the interview, but never pre-interview.

Your GPA is great. Your MCAT is great. At a school that gets over 6K applications, maybe your personal statement didn't do it for them, or you unknowingly didn't have the LORs you thought? Was your applicaton very late? Grasping at straws here.

The one positive point is that with your stats, you're bound to find a home at some truly great medical schools...

 

[lankan108]

Wow deja vous.. I could have sworn I read almost an identical thread about UCSF about a month or 2 ago... Dude was BioENG, UCSF undergrad, UCSF research, 3.9+, 38+ MCAT, lots of EC's... Weird. & Sorry to hear bout your rejection.

are sure about the undergrad, UCSF has no undergrad. maybe it was Berkeley

 

[babaghannough]

Boy, you are new. Kidding. Kinda...

Sorry to hear about your denial, but I've never heard of an appeal working at a pre-interview stage.

Every now and then (rarely) you hear about someone having some success when there were extenuating circumstances surrounding the interview, but never pre-interview.

Your GPA is great. Your MCAT is great. At a school that gets over 6K applications, maybe your personal statement didn't do it for them, or you unknowingly didn't have the LORs you thought? Was your applicaton very late? Grasping at straws here.

The one positive point is that with your stats, you're bound to find a home at some truly great medical schools...

I personally know someone who appealed a pre-interview rejection at UCSF and was granted an interview...anecdotal but it can happen..with your stats, it could easily work. good luck

 

[dr_90210]

Hi, I am new to SDN, but I joined because it looked like a friendly community of people who support each other.

So very quickly here's my profile:
CA resident
4th year senior at UC Irvine
Major: Biomedical Engineering Pre-med
MCAT 42P
GPA 3.931
Volunteer at Hospital: 1.5 years
Research:1.5 years
Letters of Rec: 5 (all of them knew me and we had talked)

I received a letter of rejection for an interview at UCSF and I was wondering if anyone else had received one as well with a similar profile as me. I was also wondering if anyone has any advice on appealing a rejection letter.

Thanks for any feedback I can get.

i think it's the same arrogance that made your rejection incomprehensible to you that led to ur rejection

 

[notdeadyet]

I personally know someone who appealed a pre-interview rejection at UCSF and was granted an interview...anecdotal but it can happen..with your stats, it could easily work. good luck

Wow, babaghannough, if you could find out from the person you know how s/he conducted that, it'd probably help hc182 out a lot.

The only thing that comes to mind to me is slapping the rejection notice down on the desk of someone in admissions and shouting "Do over!", but I doubt that would be all that effective.

 

[WhiteHatDoc]

Can't hurt, what's the worst that they can do? Reject you again?

No one believes me when I tell them that the Dean of Admissions for UCSF came to cal to talk about the admissions process. He's a very reasonable and fair man.

 

[Law2Doc]

Hi, I am new to SDN, but I joined because it looked like a friendly community of people who support each other.

So very quickly here's my profile:
CA resident
4th year senior at UC Irvine
Major: Biomedical Engineering Pre-med
MCAT 42P
GPA 3.931
Volunteer at Hospital: 1.5 years
Research:1.5 years
Letters of Rec: 5 (all of them knew me and we had talked)

I received a letter of rejection for an interview at UCSF and I was wondering if anyone else had received one as well with a similar profile as me. I was also wondering if anyone has any advice on appealing a rejection letter.

Thanks for any feedback I can get.

It's not all about the numbers or how you look on paper. Comparing profiles with others is thus meaningless. Maybe they didn't like something in your essays, your motivation as to "why medicine, why UCSF" etc. If you came off with the same air of entitlement I'm gathering by reading this post (ie "with my stats I should be a shoo - in" ), it's not a great mystery. No one has a right to expect an acceptance at a given school. UCSF is actually notorious for not just going strictly by the numbers -- looking for folks who achieve in totally different areas. So apparenly UCSF didn't choose you out of the thousands of applicants with what they considered interview worthy credentials. Your stats are strong but apparently you didn't make them think you were a "good fit". Happens to lots of people lots of places. I wouldn't waste time with an appeal - you have no reason to believe that anything went awry in the process, other than they decided they weren't interested. Get a bit more humble and cross your fingers for the next school down your list. And good luck.

 

[Towelie]

Hi, I am new to SDN, but I joined because it looked like a friendly community of people who support each other.

So very quickly here's my profile:
CA resident
4th year senior at UC Irvine
Major: Biomedical Engineering Pre-med
MCAT 42P
GPA 3.931
Volunteer at Hospital: 1.5 years
Research:1.5 years
Letters of Rec: 5 (all of them knew me and we had talked)

I received a letter of rejection for an interview at UCSF and I was wondering if anyone else had received one as well with a similar profile as me. I was also wondering if anyone has any advice on appealing a rejection letter.

Thanks for any feedback I can get.

I'm very surprised with your rejection--there must be something bad in your LORs. Otherwise, with your stats, you should at least get an interview.

I have similar stats and was also rejected, but I am out of state. An appeal would be stupid, for either of us. If they don't want you, it's their loss. With those numbers, you will definitely get in somewhere. Work hard, and make UCSF regret their decision. That's my plan

 

[Towelie]

It's not all about the numbers or how you look on paper. Comparing profiles with others is thus meaningless. Maybe they didn't like something in your essays, your motivation as to "why medicine, why UCSF" etc. If you came off with the same air of entitlement I'm gathering by reading this post (ie "with my stats I should be a shoo - in" ), it's not a great mystery. No one has a right to expect an acceptance at a given school. UCSF is actually notorious for not just going strictly by the numbers -- looking for folks who achieve in totally different areas. So apparenly UCSF didn't choose you out of the thousands of applicants with what they considered interview worthy credentials. Your stats are strong but apparently you didn't make them think you were a "good fit". Happens to lots of people lots of places. I wouldn't waste time with an appeal - you have no reason to believe that anything went awry in the process, other than they decided they weren't interested. Get a bit more humble and cross your fingers for the next school down your list. And good luck.

The strange thing to me is that he/she didn't even get an interview. I could totally understand a rejection post-interview. But no interview? With those numbers, that's strange, regardless of "achievement in totally different areas" or "fit" with the school. Usually, things like "fit" are best determined in the interview process.

 

[Law2Doc]

The strange thing to me is that he/she didn't even get an interview. I could totally understand a rejection post-interview. But no interview? With those numbers, that's strange, regardless of "achievement in totally different areas" or "fit" with the school. Usually, things like "fit" are best determined in the interview process.

I don't dispute this point but there are certainly things that can send a school running for the hills. Bad essays could tank it. A bad LOR could too. I've seen folks with great numerical stats such as the OP not getting an interview at one or more of their top choices -- it's not a rarity..

 

[Towelie]

I don't dispute this point but there are certainly things that can send a school running for the hills. Bad essays could tank it. A bad LOR could too. I've seen folks with great numerical stats such as the OP not getting an interview at one or more of their top choices -- it's not a rarity..

True. I think it's more likely to be an LOR--UCSF has no secondary essays.

OP, how is your AMCAS personal statement? Did you have friends and pre-medical advisors read it? If not, you should, to make sure there isn't a problem. You also might want to do everything you can to insure that all of your letters are good.

 

[nekrogg]

Comparing profiles with others is thus meaningless. Maybe they didn't like something in your essays, your motivation as to "why medicine, why UCSF" etc. If you came off with the same air of entitlement I'm gathering by reading this post (ie "with my stats I should be a shoo - in" ), it's not a great mystery.

im reading his post over and over again and no where does it say anything about a sense of entitlement. you guys inferred that from his scores. hey he got a 42, call out the wolves.

 

[Jiantkwazi]

I appealed UCSF (I'm CA in-state and have gotten interviews at Harvard HST, Upenn, Hopkins, all other UC's, Wash U, etc.) The dean sent me back a letter saying I was still rejected.

 

[i'm the map]

Hey, perhaps you were done in by mediocre writing. After all, the P on your MCAT is nothing really to be proud about - in fact, it's the only glaring deficiency in your numerical stats. Perhaps your AAMC essay just didn't have it? In my experience, UCSF responded better to pretty and idealistic prose than to get-to-business essays.

 

[Law2Doc]

im reading his post over and over again and no where does it say anything about a sense of entitlement. you guys inferred that from his scores. hey he got a 42, call out the wolves.

The post itself suggests it. He's giving his stats and asking if anyone else similar got rejected and how he can appeal. People don't appeal (challenge) something without evidence of a wrong, uless they believe they are entitled to something. Nor are his stats relevant unless the OP was suggesting that he shouldn't have been rejected. Anyhow that's how I read it.

 

[DrMidlife]

im reading his post over and over again and no where does it say anything about a sense of entitlement. you guys inferred that from his scores. hey he got a 42, call out the wolves.

Nobody's entitled to a UCSF interview. Or any other interview.

 

[nekrogg]

The post itself suggests it. He's giving his stats and asking if anyone else similar got rejected and how he can appeal. People don't appeal (challenge) something without evidence of a wrong, uless they believe they are entitled to something. Nor are his stats relevant unless the OP was suggesting that he shouldn't have been rejected. Anyhow that's how I read it.

if his mcat score was 30, you wouldn't think the same. it may also mean he really wants to go to ucsf and would like a shot at an interview. pessimism much?

Nobody's entitled to a UCSF interview. Or any other interview.

hence he is appealing to try to get one.



premeds are just too much. im done hijacking the thread.

 

[goodfella]

yea. i agree with nekrog. give the guy a break. wats with the negative feedback. we're here to support each other, not to call each other out

 

[dr_90210]

im reading his post over and over again and no where does it say anything about a sense of entitlement. you guys inferred that from his scores. hey he got a 42, call out the wolves.

with reading/interpretation skills such as urs, let me guess ur VR score...

7?

 

[Robizzle]

^ ew

 

[Stolenspatulas]

Hi, I am new to SDN, but I joined because it looked like a friendly community of people who support each other.

So very quickly here's my profile:
CA resident
4th year senior at UC Irvine
Major: Biomedical Engineering Pre-med
MCAT 42P
GPA 3.931
Volunteer at Hospital: 1.5 years
Research:1.5 years
Letters of Rec: 5 (all of them knew me and we had talked)

I received a letter of rejection for an interview at UCSF and I was wondering if anyone else had received one as well with a similar profile as me. I was also wondering if anyone has any advice on appealing a rejection letter.

Thanks for any feedback I can get.

im not a california resident. i was rejected post-secondary with similar stats ( 40, 3.8, 1.5 yrs clinical volunteering, 4+ yrs other volunteering, 2+ yrs research, good rec's)

but again OoS.

 

[Misfit!]

with reading/interpretation skills such as urs, let me guess ur VR score...

7?

Ouch. No need to get nasty over this!

To the OP: It can't hurt. Just be sincere in your reasons for wanting UCSF so badly, and don't sound arrogant or come off having a sense of entitlement. Keep your fingers crossed, but don't keep your hopes up too high, because these things are rare.

good luck!!

 

[stiffany]

with reading/interpretation skills such as urs, let me guess ur VR score...

7?

Wow, that was rude dude.


OP, I think you should concentrate on wowing the other schools that will end up wanting you in this process instead of objecting to the fact that UCSF didn't want to interview you even if you think your experience and stats entitled you to an interview (I agree that there's no entitlement in this process, like it or not). That being said, if it's going to repeatedly knaw at you/UCSF was honestly your top choice, you might as well spend the fifteen minutes writing an appeal letter and see where it gets you. After all, you won't really know until you yourself try and the worse thing that can happen is you get the same letter back from the dean.

 

[etf]

im reading his post over and over again and no where does it say anything about a sense of entitlement. you guys inferred that from his scores. hey he got a 42, call out the wolves.

that's exactly what i was thinking.

 

[supahdren]

i think it's the same arrogance that made your rejection incomprehensible to you that led to ur rejection

You're a big jerk. There is not one thing in his post that is unreasonable or arrogant. The only concrete things we have in the admission process are stats, so when an outcome is worse than stats would predict, it's upsetting, and it's totally normal to want to know why it happened and if it can be changed. I'm sorry if your admission season is going worse than you would like, but please don't take it out on other people here, especially new ones.

 

[dt84]

I don't believe he is being arrogant at all and has a right to be concerned.

I personally know the guy. In fact, I am also a biomedical engineering premed major at UCI with similar stats. Here is what is strange. We both received secondaries very late in the process on the same day despite us turning in applications at very different points in time. I turned my secondary in right away while he waited for a little bit and we both get rejected pre-interview at the same exact time. We obviously are not lacking in the stats department and at least for me, I was priviledged to have read some of my letters of recommendations.

I do feel as if we were unfairly profiled somehow. I think each applicant should be evaluated on his own merit instead of a school deciding, ok, we should have a certain number of this major and one student from this school and one student from that school for the sake of "diversity."

There is no sense of entitlement here. UCSF is our dream school for different reasons and we can't help but feel something we were never given a chance based on the only objective data we have: great numbers, great LoR's, great activities (we both have very different activities by the way.

 

[dt84]

On the other hand, having spoken to UCSF students and med school faculty while doing research, UCSF is notorious for being an insiders club. It is to my understanding that a lot of it is who you know. This is why a good percentage of the UCSF class is from Berkeley/Stanford as there is a great degree of faculty connections in the area. I suppose I mistakenly believed that my stats and activities would outweigh that but humbly, I guess they do not.

 

[west nile]

race?

 

[RokChalkJayhawk]

Down to the thousandths??? Wow.

But honestly- UCSF could fill their class with 4.0s and 40+ MCATs. At some point they say enough is enough. I think they are the most finnicky of the UCs. At UCSD those numbers get you in every year. At UCSF they get you thrown in the hat with the other number crunchers.

 

[blargh]

Down to the thousandths??? Wow.

But honestly- UCSF could fill their class with 4.0s and 40+ MCATs. At some point they say enough is enough. I think they are the most finnicky of the UCs. At UCSD those numbers get you in every year. At UCSF they get you thrown in the hat with the other number crunchers.

yup... i know an MD who was on the Stanford admissions board for 10 years. when i told him i was really worried about my chances there, he said they can easily fill their classes with 4.0s and 40 MCATs and yet they don't.....

 

[Law2Doc]

if his mcat score was 30, you wouldn't think the same.

Of course I would. Thinking you have a right to an interview is a mistake no matter the credentials.

 

[Towelie]

Of course I would. Thinking you have a right to an interview is a mistake no matter the credentials.

Why? Given his GPA and major, he probably worked harder than most students that UCSF accepts. Given his MCAT, he is almost certainly smarter than the average UCSF student. If his essay and LORs were as good as his stats, why shouldn't he get an interview? What other factors could they have to consider? He earned it.

I guess this is why medical school admissions are so weird--you would never see a student with a 179 LSAT and 3.93 GPA rejected from any law school. Yet, it seems like some medical schools take pride in rejecting people with great stats, essays, and LORs, if only just for the sake of rejecting them.

 

[notdeadyet]

hc182- If UCSF really is your dream school, write a letter expressing your passion and outline your stats and politely request for a second evaluation of your application and review for possible interview (Note: this is different from, here are my stats, I deserve an interview).

And keep in mind that UCSF is a notoriously atypical school in terms of medical acceptances. They have every right to be completely numbers driven, like many/most medical schools, but choose not to. This benefits some folks but doesn't benefit others.

And if the request doesn't work (and go into it knowing that it quite probably won't), be confident with the fact that many medical schools will be drooling over the prospect of a candidate like you. Let us know how it turns out.

PS: refer to your GPA as 3.93. That thousandths place might look like a red flag.

 

[IckeyShuffle]

i think it's the same arrogance that made your rejection incomprehensible to you that led to ur rejection

very well stated young sir

 

[swtiepie711]

On the other hand, having spoken to UCSF students and med school faculty while doing research, UCSF is notorious for being an insiders club. It is to my understanding that a lot of it is who you know.

hc182And keep in mind that UCSF is a notoriously atypical school in terms of medical acceptances.

Does anyone know anything more about this or is this just rumor? I mean, I have always thought that this process appears to be a crapshoot but I know it's not (if an applicant doesn't get an interview, I believe there's a solid reason why - maybe not a strong reason, but that the admissions pp didn't like something about the app or didn't think it was a good fit), but in reference to UCSF specifically? ::back to dreaming of my , ucsf ::
GL to us all, w/ UCSF, UCs in general & others

 

[desidr]

i think it's the same arrogance that made your rejection incomprehensible to you that led to ur rejection

 

[Law2Doc]

I guess this is why medical school admissions are so weird--you would never see a student with a 179 LSAT and 3.93 GPA rejected from any law school. Yet, it seems like some medical schools take pride in rejecting people with great stats, essays, and LORs, if only just for the sake of rejecting them.

I think admissions are only weird if you assume that the numerical stats are the only driving factor, or that there is a linear relationship between stats and acceptability. In fact, once you go above a certain "acceptable" threshhold, the non-numerical things have greater weight. For example someone with a 4.0/40 and someone with a 3.7/36 might be equally acceptable to a top school, and non-numerical factors may decide between the two who actually gets interviewed or in.

As for law schools, while I don't know if you are right about the top schools, in a more global sense you are likely correct because, unlike medical schools, law schools don't act as the gateway to the profession. Thus the screening is not as stringent, and they so can go more by the numbers. Law schools have significant attrition, as much as a quarter of all students fail the bar, and then some significant percentage do not get a job. By contrast, in medicine there is only a couple of percent attrition, 90+% of allo students pass the boards, and pretty much all allo grads get a residency someplace (although not always through the match).

 

[UIC Killa]

I am not sure how much history is viewed during the medical school process but maybe UCSF has had previous students with similar stats as the OP with similar major and similar undergrad and that student did not fit well and did poorly...I am not saying that the OP would do poorly but with so many applications they might not want to take a chance...sounds very unfair...just my opinion but anyone have an opinion on historical trends as a basis for admission?

 

[Law2Doc]

I am not sure how much history is viewed during the medical school process but maybe UCSF has had previous students with similar stats as the OP with similar major and similar undergrad and that student did not fit well and did poorly...I am not saying that the OP would do poorly but with so many applications they might not want to take a chance...sounds very unfair...just my opinion but anyone have an opinion on historical trends as a basis for admission?

History of success definitely plays a role with postbacs/SMPs -- schools develop their own impressions as to which ones prepare you well for their med school and which don't. I've never heard of schools doing this for undergrads (and can't imagine UCSF doesn't like UC Irvine in this manner.).

 

[Shake_yabooties]

Hi, I am new to SDN, but I joined because it looked like a friendly community of people who support each other.

So very quickly here's my profile:
CA resident
4th year senior at UC Irvine
Major: Biomedical Engineering Pre-med
MCAT 42P
GPA 3.931
Volunteer at Hospital: 1.5 years
Research:1.5 years
Letters of Rec: 5 (all of them knew me and we had talked)

I received a letter of rejection for an interview at UCSF and I was wondering if anyone else had received one as well with a similar profile as me. I was also wondering if anyone has any advice on appealing a rejection letter.

Thanks for any feedback I can get.

hey.. the guy they were talking about in this thread was me ..
I was thinking about appealing also, but I decided not to. I even work at a lab in UCSF plus my PI is a professor in the school of medicine.

 

[Towelie]

I think admissions are only weird if you assume that the numerical stats are the only driving factor, or that there is a linear relationship between stats and acceptability. In fact, once you go above a certain "acceptable" threshhold, the non-numerical things have greater weight. For example someone with a 4.0/40 and someone with a 3.7/36 might be equally acceptable to a top school, and non-numerical factors may decide between the two who actually gets interviewed or in.

I think most schools do have a pretty linear relationship. Obviously, if everything else is equal, the student with the better stats will get in. The student with the 3.7/36 would only beat the 4.0/40 student if he/she had some sort of major advantage in another area of the application.

No matter what, I find it strange for a 3.93/42 student to not get an interview at a state school in their state (even if it is UCSF). Something weird must be going on. With these stats, this student is almost guaranteed to get into a top 10 (more likely top 5) school, and yet will not have gotten an interview at UCSF. That's weird.

 

[Law2Doc]

Obviously, if everything else is equal, the student with the better stats will get in.

All else is never equal, and thus I'm not sure your "obviously" ever comes into play. Lots of places narrow the field with the numbers but then make the ultimate decision based largely on other factors. Thus the acceptance correlation with grades is linear to some point, but then levels off, and no additional increment of grades/numbers is going to make a difference -- it is the other factors that loom large. You will thus see people with a range of stats at all the top schools, and meet folks with higher stats than you who don't get as far as you did with certain schools. You will almost certainly meet classmates in med school with lower stats than friends of yours who got no interest in the school. They got over the necessary numbers threshhold and the rest of their application/personality did the rest.

 

[Towelie]

All else is never equal, and thus I'm not sure your "obviously" ever comes into play. Lots of places narrow the field with the numbers but then make the ultimate decision based largely on other factors. Thus the acceptance correlation with grades is linear to some point, but then levels off, and no additional increment of grades/numbers is going to make a difference -- it is the other factors that loom large. You will thus see people with a range of stats at all the top schools, and meet folks with higher stats than you who don't get as far as you did with certain schools. You will almost certainly meet classmates in med school with lower stats than friends of yours who got no interest in the school. They got over the necessary numbers threshhold and the rest of their application/personality did the rest.

Where do you get this information about how schools make their decisions? I'm asking out of curiousity--you sound very sure for someone who isn't an adcom member or a Dean.

Both of my pre-medical advisors told me this: great numbers will guarantee you an interview at most places, but that's it. Once you get the interview, the stats will help, but LORs and research (as well as how well the interview goes) will be equally important. This is why it seems so weird to me that the OP didn't even get an interview at UCSF.

My frustration with this issue is probably be due to some anger that I have for UCSF--they were my top choice, and rejected me post-secondary. I felt as if I were the perfect fit for their school (apart from being OOS), and have since wondered what it was with my application that they so strongly disliked.

 

[searun]

I have no idea, this is just a guess. I do think that some medical schools prefer applicants with a broad liberal arts background with lots of course work in the humanities, arts, and social sciences, as well as hard science. Someone from engineering is less likely to have the broad liberal arts background that some med schools prefer. Perhaps UCSF prefers applicants from the liberal arts...I could be wrong, this is just speculation.

Question to the OP; did you do much course work in english, literature, history, philosophy, political science, psychology, those kinds of courses?

 

[ADeadLois]

I think the only thing that would have led to the rejection would be the personal statement or bad LORs.

 

[Law2Doc]

Where do you get this information about how schools make their decisions? I'm asking out of curiousity--you sound very sure for someone who isn't an adcom member or a Dean.

As a career changer, I had sit downs with quite a few admissions folks before going down this road. That doesn't mean the folks I spoke with spoke for all schools, but they certainly spoke for some. I also now have the perspective of someone who is further down this road.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

race?

No. CA does not discriminate. Prop 209 forbids discrimination by race.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

i think it's the same arrogance that made your rejection incomprehensible to you that led to ur rejection

Lame.