Unsuccessful applicants with great stats: what went wrong?

[BicycleGuy]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Any high stat SDNers who weren't successful want to share some wisdom on what you think went wrong with your applications/interviews such that you didn't get any acceptances? If you re-applied and were successful, what did you change to lead you to that eventual acceptance?

 

[efle]

Unsuccessful applicants with great stats: what went wrong?

9 out of 10 times, it's going to be that they look great on paper but don't do well with interviewing. You'll see what I mean when you're on the interview trail. It's normal to be a little anxious, but some people are nervous wrecks, totally silent zombies, or just weird. It's very rare in my experience to see people with fantastic numbers and the boxes checked get denied interviews, usually they get a good number of IIs but then end up with a bunch of R and WL

 

[Saifa]

There are a lot of seriously problematic personal statements out there as well.

 

[Catalystik]

Any high stat SDNers who weren't successful want to share some wisdom on what you think went wrong with your applications/interviews such that you didn't get any acceptances?

I've seen a good number with inadequate clinical experience.

 

[Obnoxious Dad]

There is a very good chance that someone, who failed to get into medical school in spite of outstanding grades and MCAT scores, is from a state that either: 1) has no state owned medical school; 2) has too few seats at its own medical school: or 3) its state school is not terribly biased in favor of its own residents. If you look at the average GPA and MCAT scores among matriculants by state you will see significant variations in the averages by state. Compare Louisiana, West Virginia and Michigan with New Hampshire. Rhode island and California.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321502/data/factstablea20.pdf

 

[ndafife]

Poor interview skills, poor application in general (lacking clinical experience/research experience), poor personal statement, poor LOR, only applying to top schools, applying late in the cycle, application red flags (IA's/arrests).

Then I'm sure there are a handful every year who are actually just unlucky who had a 90% chance of getting in somewhere, but never were in the 5-10% that got accepted to any specific school.

 

[Lucca]

I have worked with 3.8+/520+ reapplicants on many occasions; I would say a third of the advisees I take on fall into this category.

-Many of these applicants present or are perceived as arrogant and entitled in their writing and in their school list. But many have the opposite issue where they view themselves as much less qualified or even in a negative light. And if called for interview, their personalities will come out.

-low or unbalanced clinical and/or community service: These are often seen with something like thousands of hours of research, hundreds of hours of shadowing with academic subspecialties that have little patient interaction, and little volunteer work.

-Just poor writing and expression like they havent written anything other than a lab report or a text message in their lives. No clear message or theme, incoherent story, nothing compelling, no personal info that can show motivation, commitment or achievement other than academic.

-Over written/arrogant (as opposed to confident): Write like its a PhD thesis, verbose, discuss medicine in ways like they already are a doctor.

-Just professional presentation, nothing personal in writing that gives any indication of personality or characteristic. Cant tell if they have ever interacted with anyone other in class or lab. I have had some who were genuinely surprised that they should anything but professional accomplishments, though this applicant had plenty. Occasionally you get the "Sheldon" types who seem brilliant on paper but never talk about social/interpersonal life. (I could imagine someone like this whose idea of a diversity essay was working with different varieties of fruit flies and lab rats during research).

-Along with overly academic or professional is no introspection. Never talk about about anything they learned from their experiences. No understanding, appreciation of what they have, done.

-The negative view types (which includes many applicants across the academic spectrum) often overly minimize their accomplishments or present them in a bad light. These are the type who school list is too low tier .

-Even with all the above, outstanding academic type will often get some interviews. And again, you get the
...arrogant/entitled types who know they belong in this school
...the impersonal/brilliant types who have nothing to talk about but academic activities with no feeling/introspection behind it.

The main take away from this post is that it is important to think about the way you present yourself on your application. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think this is something many applicants neglect or rush through in order to submit on day one.

 

[Goro]

There was a thread about rejections herenopt too long ago. Here's what and others have observed about people who get rejected after interviews. The wise @gyngyn could probably write several medical education (or psychiatric) papers on some of the aberrant personalities he's seen.


Being unprofessional for any reason. This would include addressing a faculty member by their first name, or being rude to staff. The Admissions Office staff aren't there to hang up your coat or run to Starbucks for you. Another is chewing gum during the interview. If you have a dry mouth, suck on a lozenge instead. Even worse: Not taking the interview seriously, like showing up poorly dressed. This is suit and tie time (and nice dress/outfit/suit for the ladies). You're going into character. Yes, if the airline loses your luggage, we understand that.


Not making eye contact is also a no-no (yes I'm aware that in some cultures, one does not look elders in the eye, but this is the USA and you need to look people in the eye here).

Any hints of immaturity will be lethal for your chances. We expect you to be thoughtful and self-aware.

Would you admit the gal who, when asked a hypothetical, "What would you do in this situation?" answers, "Oh, that wouldn't happen."

Showing that you're greedy.

Showing any hint of entitlement. This includes the “I was accepted to XSOM, so what are you going to do for me?” The answer will be “Good luck and have fun at X.”

Being clueless as to why you're choosing Medicine as a career.

Doing this because your mom/dad wants you to be a doctor (or don't think you can be doctor). Completely lacking people skills (4.0 automatons are a dime a dozen, really).

Showing that you're more interested in research than Medicine. This might be OK at Stanford, but it won’t fly at most other schools.

Still being the hyper-gunner...I rejected a 4.0 gal who wanted to answer the questions I asked of another person in the interview panel. I don't want to admit someone who will be in my office whining about how they got a 95 on an exam and deserved a 96.

Having a flat affect. This might be due to medication, or a mental or personality disorder. You ever meet someone who could never crack a smile? I don't want someone like that touching patients.

Copping an attitude. I asked a woman why she didn't have any volunteer experience. She replied that she was too busy working. Fair enough, some people have lives, but she copped an attitude while delivering this, and I just wrote down "reject".

Coming in with scripted answers and being unable to deviate from said script.

Being ill-prepared for fairly common interview questions (e.g. Why this school? Why Medicine?)

Thinking that always circling back to your accomplishments and how great you are impresses us.

Making excuses for misdeeds. We had rejected someone once who had some fairly benign misdemeanors, but chose to blame it on the policemen who gave him the tickets.

Being too shy or nervous.

Don’t do show and tell. I don’t want you pulling out a binder with your resume or portfolio. Let your application speak for you.

Being a babbling idiot. These are those people who can't answer a question concisely. I've sure you've met people like this...why bother using one word when ten will do? I suspect that these people are thinking for an answer while they're speaking, so the mouth is going while the brain tries to come up with something.

It’s OK to gather your thoughts, but it’s not OK to blank out. This group includes the people who do something like this (and I am NOT making this up!): goro: So tell me about this thing you did in Honduras? Interviewee: Well, we went there for a mission trip and...what was the question? goro: (thinking: reject!)
Or the guy who, when asked "How does your hobby relate to the practice of Medicine?", and can't even say "It doesn't", and definitely can't even BS an answer, but sits there in a coma?

A number of SDNers get rejected because they apply too late, have too few schools on their list, or a poorly thought out list to begin with.