UCSF Rejection Letter and Appeal

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
If only life were that simple. There will be insanely smart people who do pretty modestly on that test, and pretty dense people who test well. You will likely have classmates in both groups. And there are always folks who study as hard as they can and can't make that score budge. It is not an IQ test.

Of course it's not an IQ test. But certain parts of the test require reasoning ability that people with higher IQs will handle better. And of course you'll see smart people who do poorly, etc. That why it isn't a test of an individual's intelligence. Hence the word "correlation."


EDIT: As I sit here cramming the yummy goodness that is cranial anatomy into my brain [weird to think I am thinking about what I think with], I realized I am actually trying to convince people on the internet that smarter people do better on tests. This is probably the most ridiculous argument I have ever had with anyone!

Members don't see this ad.
 
That why it isn't a test of an individual's intelligence. Hence the word "correlation."

I'm not sure everyone on this thread has the same notion of what is meant by "correlation". There are several prior posters in this thread who weren't talking about some vague on average correlation -- they were actually saying higher MCAT equals more intelligent. (The poster I was reponding to said intelligence gives you a certain baseline.) While I have no problem with the notion that on average, smart people test better than not so smart people, which I assume you are getting at, I disagree that you can link intelligence to this test a whole lot tighter than that. For example a person with a 33 is not necessarilly more intelligent than someone who scores a 30 - there is simply no science supporting this.
 
EDIT: As I sit here cramming the yummy goodness that is cranial anatomy into my brain [weird to think I am thinking about what I think with], I realized I am actually trying to convince people on the internet that smarter people do better on tests. This is probably the most ridiculous argument I have ever had with anyone!
I don't think so. Different tests require different abilities. The MCAT is a critical reading/reasoning test, and most med school tests are brute memorization. I bet you that Rainman could ace most of my biochem and anatomy tests, but he'd have had a hard time with the MCAT. Obviously, some of my classmates are significantly better memorizers than I am.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I'm not sure everyone on this thread has the same notion of what is meant by "correlation". There are several prior posters in this thread who weren't talking about some vague on average correlation -- they were actually saying higher MCAT equals more intelligent. (The poster I was reponding to said intelligence gives you a certain baseline.) While I have no problem with the notion that on average, smart people test better than not so smart people, which I assume you are getting at, I disagree that you can link intelligence to this test a whole lot tighter than that. For example a person with a 33 is not necessarilly more intelligent than someone who scores a 30 - there is simply no science supporting this.

Oh, I absolutely agree with you on this post. In reality, there is probably no statistically significant link between intelligence and a 3 point increase on the MCAT. Either person could be smarter, depending on a number of factors [even luck]. And yeah, anyone that walks around claiming some sort of superior intelligence based on an MCAT score is a nerd and needs to get a life. I was just shocked with how many people seemed to argue that there was no link between high scores and intelligence....I had to even go so far earlier as to argue that a mentally handicapped person would probably not do so well on the test as an example of intelligence [or lack thereof] playing a role.
 
I don't think so. Different tests require different abilities. The MCAT is a critical reading/reasoning test, and most med school tests are brute memorization. I bet you that Rainman could ace most of my biochem and anatomy tests, but he'd have had a hard time with the MCAT. Obviously, some of my classmates are significantly better memorizers than I am.

Once again, I am talking about a correlation between intelligence and test performance. I am not pinpointing any specific individuals or types of tests [even though the MCAT is what is being discussed here], and I am ignoring all other factors. Obviously an idiot savant could learn things I can't. But if you average everyone together and look at overall performance, smarter people do better. There are probably a million examples people could give of where this is not true. And I agree with probably every one of them. But those are individual examples. The disappear into the mass of straightforward folks when you look at a huge sample size [like, um, say, everyone that takes the MCAT].
 
And yeah, anyone that walks around claiming some sort of superior intelligence based on an MCAT score is a nerd and needs to get a life.

We are close to on the same page.

I just am a bit amused by the numerous people these days in pre-allo who think they've actually got a big leg up in terms of intelligence and future success in med school based on this one test. Some are in for a really big surprise in med school. Most med schools have a fairly high MCAT average, and yet half of those admitted are still going to find themselves in the bottom of the med school class, perhaps even struggling. I hope they keep posting, it will be fun to see.
 
We are close to on the same page.

I just am a bit amused by the numerous people these days in pre-allo who think they've actually got a big leg up in terms of intelligence and future success in med school based on this one test. Some are in for a really big surprise in med school. Most med schools have a fairly high MCAT average, and yet half of those admitted are still going to find themselves in the bottom of the med school class, perhaps even struggling. I hope they keep posting, it will be fun to see.

Well, there's intelligence. Then there's the intelligence crusher we know as med school. You're right. Some people think gen chem and MCAT practice are tough. Medical school holds no hostages, not even if they have a fancy MCAT score.
 
lol k k k guys, notice my mcat score is not high, but lets not argue over this any more.
 
(Or maybe very annoyed original poster?)

Dear hc182,

What do you think about all this? Still reading?

Love,
Dr. Midlife
 
I want the time I spent reading this thread back. dammit.

The OP will get in somewhere and become a doctor solely because his gpa and ridic mcat dictates it. oh wait, there's such a thing as a PS and a little space on the AMCAS to put what you did outside the classroom? weird.

Also, Towelie, before this thread, I thought you were da bomb. now your comments just make me sad.
btw, 28Q on the big dance and 16 interviews to date. guess its a measure of my sub-par intelligence. someone should probably inform the med schools sending me the interview invites of that.

for the record, I don't think the OP was being a jerk about wanting an interview at ucsf...but i also think that things happen for a reason and he should move on graciously towards his goal of practicing medicine elsewhere.

...has he posted since the first page? :laugh:
 
And hence I believe UC should have an admissions policy that strongly emphasizes objective measures of aptitude (like all other state schools do). I've had this EXACT same conversation with some other dude earlier in the thread. Please read what I already wrote before responding :)
Your backpedaling is making me dizzy. You keep referring in this thread to these stated admissions policy that "all other state schools do". Aside from UWash and UPitt, what are these schools that have this policy of always granting interviews to those of a certain GPA and MCAT? Where do you see this? A lack of specific examples make the sweeping generalization a bit suspect.

I'm not arguing that those with high stats usually get interviews at their state schools, but I don't know of many that have advertised cut-offs. I'm sure some do, but all state schools? Where are these policies?

Your argument that these explicit auto-interview policies for certain stats should exist is very valid. I just dont see any evidence backing the statement that they already exist at all non-UC state schools.
 
I want the time I spent reading this thread back. dammit.

The OP will get in somewhere and become a doctor solely because his gpa and ridic mcat dictates it. oh wait, there's such a thing as a PS and a little space on the AMCAS to put what you did outside the classroom? weird.

Also, Towelie, before this thread, I thought you were da bomb. now your comments just make me sad.
btw, 28Q on the big dance and 16 interviews to date. guess its a measure of my sub-par intelligence. someone should probably inform the med schools sending me the interview invites of that.

for the record, I don't think the OP was being a jerk about wanting an interview at ucsf...but i also think that things happen for a reason and he should move on graciously towards his goal of practicing medicine elsewhere.

...has he posted since the first page? :laugh:

No. He doesnt want to get burned with all this flamming!:laugh: :sleep:
 
No. He doesnt want to get burned with all this flamming!:laugh: :sleep:
No doubt. I wonder why this issue gets folks so touchy?

Whether we like the way schools decide on who interviews and who doesn't, it doesn't much matter at the end of the day. It is what it is. It's far from the greatest injustice you come across in the average week...
 
Also, Towelie, before this thread, I thought you were da bomb. now your comments just make me sad.
btw, 28Q on the big dance and 16 interviews to date. guess its a measure of my sub-par intelligence. someone should probably inform the med schools sending me the interview invites of that.

Sorry if I offended you. Just a touchy issue for me I guess. Congrats on your interviews :)
 
btw, 28Q on the big dance and 16 interviews to date. guess its a measure of my sub-par intelligence. someone should probably inform the med schools sending me the interview invites of that.
Congrats on the 16 interviews. That's great to see. Hope you like travel...
 
Thanks Towelie and notdeadyet...reading my post back today, i sounded like a snob and a half..but this thread was ridiculous.

It's good to know that this application process is not solely based on numbers because we are entering a field based on human interaction and empathy but that said, obviously i wish i got a 42 on the mcat. um, duh- who wouldn't? i can def see how someone who scored so high would be like, wtf ucsf interview? but the OP has got to know that he'll get an interview somewhere..he's a smart guy.

good luck to everyone in this process- i can't wait to just be in school already (maybe with some of you)!!
 
UCSF is very random. I would not take it personally. I was a very good candidate and got into a lot of other places but weirdly not there and heard the same from a lot of other applicants. It sounds like you will get many other choices. I was actually so surprised by my outright rejection (since I had spent a lot of time out there working as an undergrad) that I wrote them a polite letter and they responded with a polite letter with my name mispelled basically saying "sorry! sucks to be you!" All of this is coming back to me since I just interviewed out there for residency. So, I finally did get an interview!
 
Top