Volunteering / research - how important?

[SickOfLaw]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I have noticed that many of the applicants over on the "regular" side of the board have significant amounts of volunteer experience and some have research experience.

How much weight does this hold in an application? With a very high undergrad GPA (3.9+) and a decent MCAT score (yes, yes, I know that making any kind of prediction about an MCAT score is foolish at best), would a lack of substantial research/volunteer/shadowing experience be a huge problem? I can understand that a marginal application in terms of raw figures might be boosted by stellar volunteering and research experiences, but for an application showing solid academics and test scores already, do schools really care whether I spent 10 hours in clinic helping out, or whether I spent 1000 hours in a clinic helping out?

Or to put it another way, do nontrads get any credit for (i) having prior careers and knowing from experience that they want to become doctors (whereas 20 year olds in college often use volunteering/shadowing to demonstrate that they have actually researched their career choice), and (ii) not having hours and hours and hours of free time each day like most college students have?

 

[Howzat]

I have noticed that many of the applicants over on the "regular" side of the board have significant amounts of volunteer experience and some have research experience.

How much weight does this hold in an application? With a very high undergrad GPA (3.9+) and a decent MCAT score (yes, yes, I know that making any kind of prediction about an MCAT score is foolish at best), would a lack of substantial research/volunteer/shadowing experience be a huge problem? I can understand that a marginal application in terms of raw figures might be boosted by stellar volunteering and research experiences, but for an application showing solid academics and test scores already, do schools really care whether I spent 10 hours in clinic helping out, or whether I spent 1000 hours in a clinic helping out?

Or to put it another way, do nontrads get any credit for (i) having prior careers and knowing from experience that they want to become doctors (whereas 20 year olds in college often use volunteering/shadowing to demonstrate that they have actually researched their career choice), and (ii) not having hours and hours and hours of free time each day like most college students have?

MCAT and uGPA are most important in terms of getting into medical school. Beyond that, you need to demonstrate that you know what you're getting yourself into. This can be done through medical-related volunteer work or shadowing experience. You don't need 5000 hours but just need good 50 to 100 hours to know what it is like. Remember, its quality >> quantity.

However, that being said, can you really get anything out of 10 hours volunteering? A good solid 50 (quality) hours are more than enough, IMO. At the same time, you need to show commitment. Don't volunteer for a short period of time in order to have a "check-off" in your AMCAS application.

The experience that you gain through volunteer work or shadowing might come up in your interviews. You should be prepared to answer these questions with enthusiasm. Adcoms are looking for some sort of 'clinical' exposure where you are near patients and have a sense of what it is like as you decide to get into medicine. Good luck to you!

 

[SickOfLaw]

Thanks for the response. That puts me a little more at ease. I could probably fit in some substantial shadowing and volunteering during now and application time (which is, in reality, a couple of years for me). I just don't have the available time that the young'uns do and I can't compete in terms of raw hours.

 

[barasch]

Yeah, you've gotta have some type of volunteer 'clinical experience'. You can put in two or three hours a week, and if you're a few years away still, try to get two or three different places that you volunteered at.

I volunteered for one stretch at in patient othopedics, one stretch at at inpatient medicine, and one stretch (for a year) playing with kids at a domestic violence shelter.

Anyway, for better or worse, your former career counts for little.

I'm 'living the dream' in med school and now I find that I must participate in various medicine-related-pizza-distribution-societies to prove my 'leadership.' As if my nine year career as a systems analyst counted for nothing.....

 

[Law2Doc]

I have noticed that many of the applicants over on the "regular" side of the board have significant amounts of volunteer experience and some have research experience.

How much weight does this hold in an application? With a very high undergrad GPA (3.9+) and a decent MCAT score (yes, yes, I know that making any kind of prediction about an MCAT score is foolish at best), would a lack of substantial research/volunteer/shadowing experience be a huge problem? I can understand that a marginal application in terms of raw figures might be boosted by stellar volunteering and research experiences, but for an application showing solid academics and test scores already, do schools really care whether I spent 10 hours in clinic helping out, or whether I spent 1000 hours in a clinic helping out?

Or to put it another way, do nontrads get any credit for (i) having prior careers and knowing from experience that they want to become doctors (whereas 20 year olds in college often use volunteering/shadowing to demonstrate that they have actually researched their career choice), and (ii) not having hours and hours and hours of free time each day like most college students have?

Without clinical experience/exposure you will not gain admission to most US allo med schools. Nor should you apply if you haven't done this first. Med schools ideally want to see that you (1) know what you are getting yourself into, (2) actually can point to specific experiences where you have seen what doctors do for a living, and seen the doctor/patient relationship, and (3) have some experience dealing with patients. This is actually more, not less, important for nontrads because it is expected that someone making a career change has spent more time researching the change. You simply don't know what a doctor does for a living from the scant exposure you get from the outside of the field. So you volunteer and shadow and otherwise get yourself inside. This is important to do BEFORE you get to the application stage, because it may dissuade you from making the change in careers in the first place. And so I would say (and have been told) that this kind of exposure is at least, if not more important for the career changing nontrad as for the traditional college student (spare time notwithstanding). You have to be well thought out, and part of that is hands-on field research. there is no specific quantity required, but the expectation is that this isn't a quick and painless, minimal time, ordeal, it is a real experience.

In terms of whether research is important, all I can tell you is that several adcoms have indicated (to me, a career changer) that the ideal applicant will have some clinical experience and some research experience, with the former being more important than the latter, but both being the ideal.

Bottom line is that the expectations are not lessened because you are a nontrad. They are probably somewhat heightened because you are expected to make better thought out and more careful decisions. But you absolutely have to jump through all the same hoops.

 

[Law2Doc]

Anyway, for better or worse, your former career counts for little.

Well, it actually counts for a lot (if you package it right) but only if you have jumped through all the premed hoops on top of that.

 

[SickOfLaw]

I'm 'living the dream' in med school and now I find that I must participate in various medicine-related-pizza-distribution-societies to prove my 'leadership.' As if my nine year career as a systems analyst counted for nothing.....

That sounds rough. Off topic, but do those societies also have lots of beer? (In law school, the student societies ran off beer and pizza. I hope med student organizations aren't dry).

Your prior career - does it count for anything once you start dealing with residency applications and interviews and stuff like that? Surely, if all else was equal, a department would choose a guy with almost a decade of "real world" work experience (prior knowledge, organizational skills, customer skills, problem-solving skills, and plain old knowing how to be a reliable employee if nothing else) over a guy with no proven work background?

 

[Howzat]

Without clinical experience/exposure you will not gain admission to most US allo med schools. Nor should you apply if you haven't done this first. Med schools ideally want to see that you (1) know what you are getting yourself into, (2) actually can point to specific experiences where you have seen what doctors do for a living, and seen the doctor/patient relationship, and (3) have some experience dealing with patients. This is actually more, not less, important for nontrads because it is expected that someone making a career change has spent more time researching the change. You simply don't know what a doctor does for a living from the scant exposure you get from the outside of the field. So you volunteer and shadow and otherwise get yourself inside. This is important to do BEFORE you get to the application stage, because it may dissuade you from making the change in careers in the first place. And so I would say (and have been told) that this kind of exposure is at least, if not more important for the career changing nontrad as for the traditional college student (spare time notwithstanding). You have to be well thought out, and part of that is hands-on field research. there is no specific quantity required, but the expectation is that this isn't a quick and painless, minimal time, ordeal, it is a real experience.

In terms of whether research is important, all I can tell you is that several adcoms have indicated (to me, a career changer) that the ideal applicant will have some clinical experience and some research experience, with the former being more important than the latter, but both being the ideal.

Bottom line is that the expectations are not lessened because you are a nontrad. They are probably somewhat heightened because you are expected to make better thought out and more careful decisions. But you absolutely have to jump through all the same hoops.

Law2Doc, funny thing is that I wouldn't have known the importance of clinical experience through volunteer work/shadowing if I wasn't on SDN. I wonder how do students who are not on (or not aware of) SDN gain admission to US Allo school?

 

[echidna]

How important is the "volunteering" part of medical exposure? I have a ton of clinical experience, but none of it on a volunteer basis. As a former humanities major I feel I'm pretty well-rounded and have interesting extra-curriculars, but zero research and next to zero volunteering and leadership experience and no time now for either. Do I need to somehow prove a humanitarian side with relevant volunteer hours?

 

[Law2Doc]

How important is the "volunteering" part of medical exposure? I have a ton of clinical experience, but none of it on a volunteer basis. As a former humanities major I feel I'm pretty well-rounded and have interesting extra-curriculars, but zero research and next to zero volunteering and leadership experience and no time now for either. Do I need to somehow prove a humanitarian side with relevant volunteer hours?

Volunteering is but one way to get clinical experience. It tends to be easiest to get since most premeds lack marketable clinical skills. But sure, if you can get a healthcare job, that's great.

 

[prettyispink]

The best advice I ever heard was to not volunteer just to do it and put on your application. Volunteer doing something that you enjoy and will gain experience doing.

 

[Law2Doc]

Law2Doc, funny thing is that I wouldn't have known the importance of clinical experience through volunteer work/shadowing if I wasn't on SDN. I wonder how do students who are not on (or not aware of) SDN gain admission to US Allo school?

Actually most people on SDN are bringing their knowledge from other places. A lot of us didn't even find SDN until we were well into the process. This may be a clearinghouse for some, but it is not really the origin of any of the necessary info. Most people talk to advisors, peers, physicians familiar with the system, or med schools directly to get this kind of info. You certainly don't need SDN to get this kind of info, although I think it's a great resource.

 

[SickOfLaw]

How important is the "volunteering" part of medical exposure? I have a ton of clinical experience, but none of it on a volunteer basis.

That's my main issue. With a typical working nontrad's limited time, it's kind of pointless hanging around being useless in a clinic or hospital department or wherever for eight hours, only to talk to a couple of old ladies for a few minutes, do a little filing, and watch someone have some blood taken.

For me, getting actual clinical experience won't be difficult - I'm talking about one-on-one with a doctor friend who has agreed to have me shadow him on my own schedule. (That's one good thing about being a nontrad - at least I'm old enough to know people who are doctors who are my own age and who are friends of mine!)

If the medical school wants me to prove my humanitarian and giving side, I have plenty of first-hand experience in my current job of giving my time for free to help those less fortunate. That's not a problem.

Research? That's a dead loss. Not a chance, unless it's a subject in a study of fat people who like getting drunk once in a while. That said, I've never been convinced that an undergrad tacking his or her name onto a piece of cutting edge research is all that great. I think that med school admissions committees know that the undergrad's contribution wasn't vital to the research and was little more than cheap labor in return for a fourth-author credit in most cases. (Been there, done that in a non-medical field).

If research and long volunteer hours are vital for success (and on-par with good grades), then I'm screwed and might as well stop the process now. But if some quality one-on-one time with a doctor-mentor and seeing some interesting medical stuff is sufficient, then I should be good to go.

 

[kami333]

Will some schools be ok with you not having research/clinical exposure/community service/leadership if you are a non-trad? Yes

Will some schools hold it against you for not having research/clinical exposure/community service/leadership even if you are a non-trad? Yes.

One Dean told me is that the problem he sometimes sees with non-trad applications is that they think that they can skip some of the hoops traditional students have to go through, his advice was to wait a year and get that hoop taken care of if you really want to be competitive (he didn't use the word hoops though😛 and this school has the strictest EC and LOR requirements of any school I've looked at so probably not all schools share his view).

It's a matter of deciding what level of compromise you can live with if you never get in anywhere. (I hold the optimistic view that everyone can get in somewhere in the US, matter how deep a hole they start out in, if they try long and hard enough😉)

 

[Law2Doc]

Will some schools be ok with you not having research/clinical exposure/community service/leadership if you are a non-trad? Yes

Will some schools hold it against you for not having research/clinical exposure/community service/leadership even if you are a non-trad? Yes.

One Dean told me is that the problem he sometimes sees with non-trad applications is that they think that they can skip some of the hoops traditional students have to go through, his advice was to wait a year and get that hoop taken care of if you really want to be competitive (he didn't use the word hoops though😛 and this school has the strictest EC and LOR requirements of any school I've looked at so probably not all schools share his view).

It's a matter of deciding what level of compromise you can live with if you never get in anywhere. (I hold the optimistic view that everyone can get in somewhere in the US, matter how deep a hole they start out in, if they try long and hard enough😉)

Clinical exposure has pretty much become a prerequisite for med school. As I mentioned above it is even more important for nontrad career changers who have to better explain their though process and soul searching. So I actually disagree with Kami's first question/answer. The clinical stuff is a must for everyone and NO nontrads can safely expect to be exempt from this.

Look at it this way. Med schools now are getting as many as 10,000 applications per year. Literally thousands of those are amazing. To compete at this level, you need to jump through all the hoops AND have something else going for you. A prior career experience can be that something else, but you still need to have jumped through the hoops.

 

[QofQuimica]

Assuming you are applying for MD programs, clinical experience (paid or volunteer) is a must. If you are applying for DO programs, spending time with a DO is a must. (Some DO programs require a LOR from a DO.) Volunteering (clinical or nonclinical) is not a must, but adcoms like to see that you serve the community in some capacity, because medicine is a service profession.

Research, however, is *not* a must for medical school applicants, unless you are applying to MD/PhD or 5-year research MD (MD/MS) programs. Even schools that are highly research-focused (those would be the ones at the top of the USNWR list) do not require research from their applicants for successful admissions.

So, if you have no time or interest for research, then don't do it. Spend that time getting clinical experience, and choose a cause to volunteer for that matters to you. You don't have to go through a formal program or spend 10,000 hours on it; come up with your own service ideas if you want. It's great if you can pick something that correlates to your skills and interests, because then it will really be fun for you, too. When I was a grad student, I used to go do chemistry demonstrations for inner city elementary school children. This was something I just started doing on my own because it was fun. I'd do things like make ice cream for the kids using liquid nitrogen, and talk to them about chemistry concepts like, what is a gas versus a liquid? It only took a couple of hours of my time maybe once or twice a semester, and I went back every year until I graduated.

 

[Howzat]

Actually most people on SDN are bringing their knowledge from other places. A lot of us didn't even find SDN until we were well into the process. This may be a clearinghouse for some, but it is not really the origin of any of the necessary info. Most people talk to advisors, peers, physicians familiar with the system, or med schools directly to get this kind of info. You certainly don't need SDN to get this kind of info, although I think it's a great resource.

In that case, without SDN, I would've been at a major disadvantage. My advisors, peers, professors never once mentioned to me importance of clinical experience. It was only after being on SDN, I realized I need to get more clinical experience. Perhaps, it is just my experience. I always wondered about this.

People on SDN always stress why we need to get more clinical exposure and I was never once told this by my advisor or my peers in college. Again, maybe it is just the school I attended.

 

[kami333]

Clinical exposure has pretty much become a prerequisite for med school. As I mentioned above it is even more important for nontrad career changers who have to better explain their though process and soul searching. So I actually disagree with Kami's first question/answer. The clinical stuff is a must for everyone and NO nontrads can safely expect to be exempt from this.

Look at it this way. Med schools now are getting as many as 10,000 applications per year. Literally thousands of those are amazing. To compete at this level, you need to jump through all the hoops AND have something else going for you. A prior career experience can be that something else, but you still need to have jumped through the hoops.

No, I agree with you. It was more of quick missing one, still get in list. Many schools seem willing to count physican shadowing as clinical exposure and having physician shadowing seems to be pretty much a requirement so I was more talking about seperate experience working/volunteering at a clinic/hospital.


Just for reference's sake, this is an excerpt of my state school's requirement (it's the strictest list I've seen, but it's been useful to me for preparing since it pretty much lists everything that other schools look at, and they don't like it when you try to use one activity to cover multiple things):

We evaluate applications against minimum and average standards in 8 specific areas. Applicants must achieve at least the minimum level of performance in all 8 areas and be average or above in 5 out of the 8 areas in order to proceed in the admissions process.

1. Grade Point Average (GPA)

The minimum acceptable GPA is 3.0.

2. Medical College Admission Test (MCAT)

The minimum acceptable score for each section, (physical science, biological science and verbal reasoning) of the MCAT examination is 7. The average score for entering freshmen is 10 in each section.

3. Extracurricular Activities

Extracurricular activities are defined as activities outside the usual duties of a full-time job and/or school.

• The minimum requirement is some involvement in outside activities.
• The average applicant devotes 20 hours per week during each of the 4 years prior to entering medical school to activities such as work, volunteer service, research, athletics, student government and family obligations.

4. Community/Volunteer Service

• The minimum requirement is 36 hours.
• The average applicant devotes 48 hours during each of the 4 years prior to entering medical school.

5. Leadership Ability

• The minimum leadership requirement is 1 leadership experience lasting 3 months during the 4 years prior to matriculation.
• The average applicant has 3 different leadership experiences each lasting 3 months during the 4 years prior to matriculation.

6. Research

• The minimum requirement is 4 hours per week for 2 months or the equivalent of 32 hours.
• The average experience is 4 hours per week for 3 months or the equivalent of 48 hours.

7. Physician Shadowing

• The minimum requirement is 8 hours shadowing a physician(s) through all the activities of an average day.
• The average applicant spends 24 hours with a physician(s).

8. Patient Exposure

Patient exposure is defined as direct interaction with patients and hands-on involvement in the care of patients. Patient contact must include patients other than family members and friends and does not include indirect patient care such as housekeeping (cleaning operating rooms or patient rooms) working at the hospital information desk, or working in a pharmacy. Time spent shadowing a physician cannot be used to meet the patient exposure requirement

• The minimum patient exposure requirement is 4 hours per week for a period of 2 months or the equivalent of 32 hours.
• The average applicant spends 4 hours per week in patient exposure for 3 months or the equivalent of 48 hours.

 

[SickOfLaw]

Extracurricular activities are defined as activities outside the usual duties of a full-time job and/or school.

• The minimum requirement is some involvement in outside activities.
• The average applicant devotes 20 hours per week during each of the 4 years prior to entering medical school to activities such as work, volunteer service, research, athletics, student government and family obligations.

If I read this correctly, family obligations and work are acceptable EC activities? For god's sake, if tossing a basketball around after class or "student government" counts...

Community/Volunteer Service

• The minimum requirement is 36 hours.
• The average applicant devotes 48 hours during each of the 4 years prior to entering medical school.

Right now, in my current profession, I donate about 100 hours a year to volunteer work - pro bono legal services, etc. Not medical related, but does that matter?

Physician Shadowing

• The minimum requirement is 8 hours shadowing a physician(s) through all the activities of an average day.
• The average applicant spends 24 hours with a physician(s).

That's one solid weekend shadowing a doctor for two long shifts. That's not a whole lot when you think about it. Enough to make an informed decision about becoming a doctor? I'm guessing absolutely not.

Patient Exposure

Patient exposure is defined as direct interaction with patients and hands-on involvement in the care of patients. Patient contact must include patients other than family members and friends and does not include indirect patient care such as housekeeping (cleaning operating rooms or patient rooms) working at the hospital information desk, or working in a pharmacy. Time spent shadowing a physician cannot be used to meet the patient exposure requirement

• The minimum patient exposure requirement is 4 hours per week for a period of 2 months or the equivalent of 32 hours.
• The average applicant spends 4 hours per week in patient exposure for 3 months or the equivalent of 48 hours.

48 hours - still not a whole lot really.

I guess these are stats for average applicants, rather than average people who were admitted, but still - if these stats are coming straight from the medical school itself, it really says that their standards are pretty low in terms of time spent volunteering and watching doctors at work etc.

Theoretically, one could knock out all these requirements and vastly exceed the minimum levels (or even average levels) in a year of very, very casual effort.

That said, I guess my goal should be to shoot for greatly exceeding the averages in all aspects of my application. Since I'm not getting any younger, I don't think I have five years to set aside to reapply and reapply. It's probably a one-shot deal.

(I'm just trying to get a feel for what's typical of normal, regular people admitted to medical school in terms of these ECs - not the laziest undergrads who do the bare minimum, and not the guys and girls who focused their lives on getting into medical school from the age of 12 either. In essence, I'm trying to put forth a good effort that balances the other things going on in my fairly busy life right now.)

Perhaps I'm still in law school admissions mode where it's very clear that while schools claim they like to see volunteer work, community service, prior exposure to law, leadership, great personal statements and essays etc., in reality almost all students are admitted or rejected based upon their grades and standardized test scores, even at the good schools where there's thousands of qualified applicants to choose from who would all be great lawyers. I'm trying to figure out how similar med school admissions are to law school, and whether it's really a "numbers game" rather than a "rounded student" game. I'm thinking about the regular state medical schools here, not places like Harvard or JH. Just an average medical school.

 

[flip26]

48 hours - still not a whole lot really.

That was 48 hours per year for 4 years, or around 200 hours...

 

[SickOfLaw]

That was 48 hours per year for 4 years, or around 200 hours...

I was referring to the patient exposure, not the volunteer work.

200 hours over four years is nothing. It's less than one hour a week, which is my whole point. Adding up the volunteer work I've regularly done over the past four years is closer to 500 hours, and that's without even trying. It's a really low standard.

 

[flip26]

I was referring to the patient exposure, not the volunteer work.

200 hours over four years is nothing. It's less than one hour a week, which is my whole point. Adding up the volunteer work I've regularly done over the past four years is closer to 500 hours, and that's without even trying. It's a really low standard.

If 200 hours is "nothing" as you say, then you have your answer. But the value of volunteer work is not just the gross number of hours - the length of service matters, too - better 200 hours over a couple of years than 200 hours obtained in one marathon month...I also doubt if your pro bono legal work will "count" for much in this process, especially if it is the only volunteer work you can cite...

And if you think "48 hours of patient exposure" is the right number, then make that your goal.

If you approach these activities as a "checklist" of things to get out of the way, it may come across that way to the Adcoms...there is no checklist, no minimal number of hours...

 

[RubberSoul65]

I'm curious about community service.

I have coached youth basketball in my small rural community for the past 9 years. Two years was on a volunteer basis, but the last seven have been paid. Would that be considered community service? I do get paid, but it works out to something like $2.50 an hour and, obviously, I'm not doing it to become rich.

Any thoughts?

 

[flip26]

I'm curious about community service.

I have coached youth basketball in my small rural community for the past 9 years. Two years was on a volunteer basis, but the last seven have been paid. Would that be considered community service? I do get paid, but it works out to something like $2.50 an hour and, obviously, I'm not doing it to become rich.

Any thoughts?

Paid is a job - unpaid is a volunteer - "community service" implies volunteer. It may be a worthwhile activity, but in reality it is a job. List it as such, I guess...

Just be sure to have clinical experiences, true volunteer activities, and some physician shadowing. The "community service" you describe is OK, but not having it will not hurt you...and having it will not really help you if you don't have the clinical, etc...

 

[Law2Doc]

Perhaps I'm still in law school admissions mode where it's very clear that while schools claim they like to see volunteer work, community service, prior exposure to law, leadership, great personal statements and essays etc., in reality almost all students are admitted or rejected based upon their grades and standardized test scores, even at the good schools where there's thousands of qualified applicants to choose from who would all be great lawyers. I'm trying to figure out how similar med school admissions are to law school, and whether it's really a "numbers game" rather than a "rounded student" game. I'm thinking about the regular state medical schools here, not places like Harvard or JH. Just an average medical school.

They are as different as night and day. If you have the stats you will get into a good law school. But you need something more to get into med school. There are plenty of folks with high numbers who don't get in because other aspects of their applications are lacking. People get rejected for lacking clinical experience. People get rejected for non-compelling or poorly thought out essays. People get rejected for lackluster interviews.

Also, there is no such thing as an "average medical school" (in the same way that there are, in fact, very average law schools). It doesn't matter whether you are talking about Harvard or a state school -- because there are only 120 US allo schools, and each of them are getting as many as 10,000 applications, they are all uber competitive and are looking for reasons to nix applicants from consideration. So while great numbers might get you into law school, (and there are many more law schools to choose from) that merely gets you past a consideration hurdle for med school. It's a very different, and harder process, plain and simple. You would be well served to forget about the law school application process because it simply bears no resemblance to what goes on here.

FWIW, the minimums and averages listed in the above post are quite low for what I have observed. It may be that the average applicant is in no way competitive for med school. Or it may be that the school doesn't want to scare away potential applicants until they pay their application fee. I would plan to significantly exceed all of those categories because believe me, most of your competition will.

 

[SickOfLaw]

I also doubt if your pro bono legal work will "count" for much in this process, especially if it is the only volunteer work you can cite...

Pro bono work is not simply regular legal work for free. It's specifically providing legal services to those who are mentally incompetent, sick, hopelessly poor, or to charities, non-profits etc. It's a vitally important service to society, particularly to the underprivileged.

And if you think "48 hours of patient exposure" is the right number, then make that your goal.

If you approach these activities as a "checklist" of things to get out of the way, it may come across that way to the Adcoms...there is no checklist, no minimal number of hours...

I knew this thread would take this turn as I penned the opening post. To be honest, I feel like Jennifer Aniston in "Office Space" where she's asking how many pieces of "flair" are required, and the manager won't give her an answer without suggesting that she's putting in the least possible effort. The mere asking of the question implies, to some people, that it's an attempt to find out the bare minimum that needs to be done.

My goal was to find out where most people draw the line and decide they have enough volunteer work to take a shot at medical school. One hour is too few. A thousand hours is probably excessive. But in between those values - 10, 50, 100, 200, 500 - it's anyone's guess what is appropriate, or what raises eyebrows, or what causes an application to be tossed.

Everyone here has a "checklist", whether they admit it or not. How else would one determine that enough had been done to submit a competitive application? There's no other way to draw a line in the sand and decide that your application is competitive enough unless you're checking things off.

Especially for people who have families, careers, and other life commitments that are important, it's a valid question since they (we) have but a finite amount of time to put into volunteering and community service. For an applicant who is a single mother, for example, the difference between 50 and 100 hours of volunteer work could be the difference between applying this year or next year.

Perhaps if the question was rephrased, it wouldn't draw so much flak. How much volunteer work (and what type of work) did you do before you applied?

 

[SickOfLaw]

Also, there is no such thing as an "average medical school" (in the same way that there are, in fact, very average law schools).

Agreed on the average law schools. 😉

By average medical school, I meant those medical schools that accept the average medical student. Good GPA, good MCAT, but those schools without a student body consisting largely with 3.97 GPAs, MCATs of 36 and five years of shadowing a neurosurgeon whilst working in a clinic in Africa. Sure, they're all hard to get into. But some are significantly harder than others (places such as Yale, Harvard etc. where most of us simply don't have the stats, backgrounds and experiences to have a realistic shot). I didn't mean a medical school that the average person on the street would consider "average."

It sounds like I'm asking "how little can I do to get in" again. But I'm really trying to get a feel for how things balance out. With a solid MCAT and a decent GPA (already in the bag), is the importance of volunteer work and research diminished? I assume, of course, that clinical experience is always important.

 

[foster033]

FWIW, the minimums and averages listed in the above post are quite low for what I have observed. It may be that the average applicant is in no way competitive for med school. Or it may be that the school doesn't want to scare away potential applicants until they pay their application fee. I would plan to significantly exceed all of those categories because believe me, most of your competition will.

If you read the original post it says applicants must at least meet these minimum requirements and be at least average in 5 of the categories to even be given a secondary application. If you have average in all categories then you probably aren't going to get in...unless of course you have some amazing essays...

This particular school only counts grades as 10% of the acceptance equation, so these other activities must be fairly important.

 

[barasch]

That sounds rough. Off topic, but do those societies also have lots of beer? (In law school, the student societies ran off beer and pizza. I hope med student organizations aren't dry).

Your prior career - does it count for anything once you start dealing with residency applications and interviews and stuff like that? Surely, if all else was equal, a department would choose a guy with almost a decade of "real world" work experience (prior knowledge, organizational skills, customer skills, problem-solving skills, and plain old knowing how to be a reliable employee if nothing else) over a guy with no proven work background?

Nah, it's harder to get the school to pay for beer - you need to hire licensed bartenders, etc. Mostly it's a lot of free pizza. Every once in a while they give out free beer, but at one of our events last year, someone got too trashed, talked some smack about the dean, and now we have a limited amount of tickets issued at the beginning of freebeer events that we can trade for drinks.

As far as my previous career helping with the residency process, I plan to mention it during interviews and include it as one line on my medical CV/resume. Even though I worked with a lot of people solving computer problems, I don't want to come off as someone who is 'too technical' and 'not a people person.' Also, I wouldn't want someone to think that I would value my experience from my past career over experiences I have yet to gain. I also wouldn't want someone to think that I would have trouble taking direction from someone who is younger than me (as I undoubtedly will in my first year after medschool).

OTOH, I know a lot more about how organizations work, and I realize that coming in to an organization, I need to work hard, understand the rules, and take it for granted that people with more knowledge and experience have made these rules to be appropriate. Hopefully, that kind of general life experience will be found valuable at the resident level. Stay tuned to see.....

 

[barasch]

Another important hoop: you need a story.

"I want to end diarrheal illness in 3rd world countries" (sorry for the imperialist terminology)

"My brother died of cancer when I was twelve"

"I want to cure diabetes ."

Whatever......

 

[SickOfLaw]

Another important hoop: you need a story.

"I want to end diarrheal illness in 3rd world countries" (sorry for the imperialist terminology)

"My brother died of cancer when I was twelve"

"I want to cure diabetes ."

Whatever......

Ah, the "story". I have memories of this from law school admissions. Almost every personal statement tells a story of overcoming massive adversity, having some kind of revelation, then wanting to dedicate their lives to public service. Then once they get into school, all of that altruism suddenly disappears and it's all about the jobs with the money or the prestige. Or being lazy.

 

[gman33]

As a working adult, it can be hard to find time to gain significant clinical experience. You still need to do it.
I had about 250 hours when I applied and some admissions people told me this was on the low side and I should try to get more.

I found that I enjoyed being in the hospital and being around sick people. I volunteered in a busy academic Level I ED. They gave us a lot of stuff to do. The best part for me was getting comfortable interacting with sick people. In all honesty, I didn't really know if I would like being around sick people before I started volunteering. I learned that I did, and I also figured out that I really liked emergency medicine, which was the furthest thing from what I originally thought I would end up doing.

Personally, I wouldn't accept anyone into med school who hadn't spent a good chunk of time interacting with patients. I think a lot of schools feel the same way.

You may get in somewhere without much experience, but I wouldn't count on it.

 

[QofQuimica]

I knew this thread would take this turn as I penned the opening post. To be honest, I feel like Jennifer Aniston in "Office Space" where she's asking how many pieces of "flair" are required, and the manager won't give her an answer without suggesting that she's putting in the least possible effort. The mere asking of the question implies, to some people, that it's an attempt to find out the bare minimum that needs to be done.

My goal was to find out where most people draw the line and decide they have enough volunteer work to take a shot at medical school. One hour is too few. A thousand hours is probably excessive. But in between those values - 10, 50, 100, 200, 500 - it's anyone's guess what is appropriate, or what raises eyebrows, or what causes an application to be tossed.

Everyone here has a "checklist", whether they admit it or not. How else would one determine that enough had been done to submit a competitive application? There's no other way to draw a line in the sand and decide that your application is competitive enough unless you're checking things off.

Especially for people who have families, careers, and other life commitments that are important, it's a valid question since they (we) have but a finite amount of time to put into volunteering and community service. For an applicant who is a single mother, for example, the difference between 50 and 100 hours of volunteer work could be the difference between applying this year or next year.

Perhaps if the question was rephrased, it wouldn't draw so much flak. How much volunteer work (and what type of work) did you do before you applied?

This post exemplifies why the rest of society despises lawyers.

Your question has no hard and fast answer, and you aren't going to get a better answer by continuing to ask the same question, no matter how you word it. Again, you need to get *some* clinical experience. There is no "minimum" requirement at most schools. You should get enough clinical experience so that when you go to write your PS and talk to physicians at your interviews, you come across as someone who is making an informed decision about why you're making a switch to medicine. There is no requirement for volunteering. But you ideally should be involved in some kind of community service, because medicine is a service profession, and adcoms like seeing applicants who have a record of serving others.

Just as an FYI, many medical students do continue volunteering extensively at free clinics, community screenings, educating children about health issues, working for the admissions office, etc. If you do want to volunteer, there are tons of opportunities for meaningful volunteering in med school.

 

[HanginInThere]

Another important hoop: you need a story.

"I want to end diarrheal illness in 3rd world countries" (sorry for the imperialist terminology)

"My brother died of cancer when I was twelve"

"I want to cure diabetes ."

Whatever......

Ah, the "story". I have memories of this from law school admissions. Almost every personal statement tells a story of overcoming massive adversity, having some kind of revelation, then wanting to dedicate their lives to public service. Then once they get into school, all of that altruism suddenly disappears and it's all about the jobs with the money or the prestige. Or being lazy.

The good news here is that for us non-trads, this is generally an easy hoop to jump through - you have a good story pretty much by definition.

The personal statement for med school doesn't need to be some save-the-world fantasy or a tale of X relative who died of Y disease, it's just an honest and thought out explanation of who you are, why you're taking this crazy step, how you've prepared, etc. That 22-year old biochem major from Cornell might have a hard time sounding original, but as long as you can write well you already have plenty of interesting material to draw from.

 

[SickOfLaw]

This post exemplifies why the rest of society despises lawyers.

Society "despises" lawyers because it's fashionable to do so. The percentage of a**holes in law is about the same percentage of a**holes in medicine.

Your question has no hard and fast answer, and you aren't going to get a better answer by continuing to ask the same question, no matter how you word it. Again, you need to get *some* clinical experience. There is no "minimum" requirement at most schools. You should get enough clinical experience so that when you go to write your PS and talk to physicians at your interviews, you come across as someone who is making an informed decision about why you're making a switch to medicine. There is no requirement for volunteering. But you ideally should be involved in some kind of community service, because medicine is a service profession, and adcoms like seeing applicants who have a record of serving others.

To be honest, your response exemplifies why the rest of society despises doctors. Condescending and somewhat arrogant. I'm well aware of the need to gain clinical experience and service to the community, and I'm well aware that minimum hourly levels are not set forth by medical schools - I don't need the sermon, but if it makes you feel better... Repeating the stock, uninformative answer is probably the reason the question needs to be re-asked.

Actually, asking the question again will help because the majority in this thread, yourself included, seem to think I'm after an objective response. The question, in fact, is seeking a range of subjective answers. I was trying to get a feel for approximately what quality time commitment others in the same boat feel is appropriate, not what a fixed definite medical-school-endorsed level is. Of course there's no fixed answer, but by asking others to share what they did will give me an idea of what I should be aiming for.

Anyone else want to deliberately misread the question and give me an unnecessary lecture about medical school admissions 101? Or is anyone actually willing to share what amounts of CS/V/shadowing they listed on their applications?

 

[HanginInThere]

Here are my thoughts on a few of your questions. I'm not an admissions committee member (an adcom, in case you haven't seen that term yet) or an ex-lawyer, so there are others here with better credentials, but here goes:

As people have said, some clinical experience is VERY important, even with your pro-bono work. I'd suggest you start now. Look for a hospital where you could volunteer for a few hours a week in the evening or on weekends. You don't need thousands of hours, but an long-term ongoing experience that gives you exposure to hospital/clinic life and to patients reassures adcoms that you (a) have some idea of what you're getting into and (b) aren't jumping into this on a whim. Just as important, it actually does give you more information about what you're getting into and gives you another chance to change your mind. (And in my case, it also helped me reassure my wife that I wasn't making a mistake. If I remember right from another thread, the family consensus is one of your considerations too.)

The pro-bono work will help, but I don't have a sense of how much. Is it something you actively chose to do, or was it kind of an unwritten job requirement? Did you find it rewarding, and could you make interesting conversation about it in an interview?

The shadowing you mention is good too - do that, and also just spend time talking about all this with your physician friends. Get as much information as possible, from as many people as you can. As QofQ put it, you want to come across as making an informed decision when you apply. (And when you talk to your wife about how miserable you'd be doing what you're doing now for the next 30-odd years and why medicine is the only move that makes sense to you. Again, been there done that!)

Yes, there are some schools that are harder to get into than others. But if anything, I think the most competitive schools are the ones where numbers alone are least helpful. They'll have plenty of applicants with near-4.0 GPAs and high-30s MCATs, so they're going to pick and choose based on everything else people bring to the table. At a less competitive school [relatively less competitive - none of them are easy to get into], you might have a better chance of getting by with one or two weaker points if the rest of your application stands out.

Good luck.


Edit: I just saw your response to Q, and you might want to offer an apology. People here are taking their time to offer you thoughtful, candid responses to your questions, and they're honestly trying to give useful information. Don't take offense too quickly, and don't insult people who want to help.

But since you ask, here's a summary of what I did: ~10 years after undergrad, I started taking my prereqs. While working full time, I did two years of classes two or three evenings a week, then one of four evenings a week, and then one of one or two a week. For the last two years of that, I volunteered in a hospital 3 or 4 hours a week. My wife and I also had our two kids during those four years. I shadowed two doctors one 8-hour day each, which was probably a weak part of my app. I had non-medical/non-science research in undergrad, a strong MCAT and decent GPA, a good personal statement, strong (I'm assuming) letters of rec, and an interesting non-trad story that made the interviews easy. The only things I'd change about my app if I could start over would be to get a few more shadowing days in, and start the shadowing and volunteering earlier to sanity-check my plan at the beginning. Result? I was rejected without an interview from Harvard, withdrew a few applications after my first acceptances, and had a nice mix of acceptances and waitlists from the rest.

Yes, we're talking about a lot of hours. But med school, residency, and medical practice are going to be lots of hours too, so it makes sense to jump in now and make sure the workload is reasonable while you can still turn back.

 

[HanginInThere]

Anyone else want to deliberately misread the question and give me an unnecessary lecture about medical school admissions 101? Or is anyone actually willing to share what amounts of CS/V/shadowing they listed on their applications?

Okay, I've got to respond again. You really need to rethink the tone you took here if you want to get any useful feedback. I reread this post after my last response, and I have to say that based on this, I'll be less likely to contribute next time you ask for advice.

The people who've been responding on this thread are long-term sdn members with strong histories of providing valuable information and opinions. There are sdn regulars who are condescending and arrogant, but not the people on this thread. Nobody here is deliberitely misreading anything. Nobody is trying to give unnecessary lectures. [Well, I may be lecturing now. But that's a different issue, and I don't think it's unnecessary.]

If these people didn't answer your question the way you wanted, the problem was either what you asked or how you asked it.

 

[SickOfLaw]

Okay, I've got to respond again. You really need to rethink the tone you took here.

I appreciate your very helpful post - it was exactly what I was hoping to read.

I'd rather not apologize to QofQuimica since it was the pathetic, tedious and ill-informed jab at lawyers that prompted my response, but since he or she is a moderator, I don't think I have too much of a choice, do I?

Apologies, QofQuimica.

If these people didn't answer your question the way you wanted, the problem was either what you asked or how you asked it.

You're right - the problem was that the question was not asked correctly in the first place. You'll notice that I re-asked it in a clearer way. This, however, according to QofQuimica in his or her post immediately following mine, "exemplifies why the rest of society despises lawyers", since "you aren't going to get a better answer by continuing to ask the same question, no matter how you word it."

Oh well. Good luck guys, but I think this is one journey that I'll be better off taking alone.

 

[kami333]

The way I see it, it's not necessary a matter of how many hours you shadow/volunteer or how many "cool" procedures you see but more of a matter of what you learn during that time.

This is where I think many premeds go wrong with their experiences, while I do agree it is useful to a certain level to make sure that you are ok with blood and surgeries, but the main focus of shadowing/volunteering should not seeing procedures and such, there is ample time for that once you get into medical school. I think there are more important lessons to learn in the interaction that goes on in providing healthcare.

Medicine is not a solo game just for the doctors, everyone (including the premed volunteer stocking the linen closest) needs to be doing their job competently for the system to work. Even if the doctor makes a good diagnosis, if it gets delayed or forgotten or etc, its not going to make a difference.

Often times the difference between ok care and good care is not dependent on the skill of the doctor but on the interaction the patient has with the doctor and the other staff. Medicine has some aspects of science but the main part of it is pure customer service. Was the physician hurried/stressed/etc while seeing the patient or did he take a deep breathe before going in to calm down and act like they were the only patient being seen that day?

There also isn't much room for prima donnas in good healthcare (no matter what is going on on House). Even if the doctor is the best in the world, if they don't comminicate or get along well with the other staff, the system won't work.

The same goes with communication with the patient. If they don't understand what is going on (I think one good example is the difference good diabetes education makes), no matter what treatment is done nothing is going to improve.

Medicine, for the most part, is routine. It may be interesting in the beginning but for most physicians, you are going to be seeing the same symptoms everyday for the next couple decades, it's just the people presenting them will be different.

I think the biggest question you learn to answer from shadowing/clinical exposure is that you are going to be seeing the sick people with the disgusting symptoms on what could possibly be one of the worst days of their lives, how are you going to handle it.

 

[grotto]

Hey everyone, this is my first post in the non-trad forum - I have posted a few times in the military forum as I am an active duty officer hoping to transition to med school.

I volunteer at the local ER, which is over 40 beds and pretty busy, and I shadow both a DO (FP) and an MD (surgeon). I think the most important aspect of volunteering, for me at least, is building empathy for patients. Yeah, volunteering is not glamourous and you are the low man on the totem pole cleaning beds and moving people around the hospital. For me, putting on my volunteer smock everyweek for 4 or so hours is a total paradigm shift - going from being a bossman to someone trying to help out. I like that aspect of volunteering and I truly look forward to it every week.

I think you gain a valuable skill volunteering - learning to speak with people who are in pain or sick, and are not always pleasant. I can relate when I hear (usually younger) pre-meds say that volunteering is useless, but I find it extremely valuable and worth a few hours a week of my busy schedule. The worst doctors I have ever had are the real academics who don't know how to associate with people, so I believe volunteering provides an extra chance to learn social interaction with people in different states of pain or disease.

However, I do not interact with the doctors much as a volunteer. I only interact with nurses, patients, and techs and of course the patients. My hospital has a scribe program (filled with college students) and I let them have their time with the doctors because they are working 12 hour shifts to do so. Scribe programs seem interesting, but those spots are better left to college pre-meds who need the money and can't afford to volunteer.

I have developed relationships with the physicians I shadow so that I can do it frequently. The real world experience this provides is great - but you have to understand that you are somewhat of a liability as a shadow wheras you are an asset to the team as a volunteer.

I enjoy both, and it definitely provides some motivation to hit the books seeing what can be done with medicine.

 

[QofQuimica]

To be honest, your response exemplifies why the rest of society despises doctors. Condescending and somewhat arrogant. I'm well aware of the need to gain clinical experience and service to the community, and I'm well aware that minimum hourly levels are not set forth by medical schools - I don't need the sermon, but if it makes you feel better... Repeating the stock, uninformative answer is probably the reason the question needs to be re-asked.

Oh, lighten up, Counselor. I was teasing you. I know that people think beakers have no sense of humor (I was a chemist before I went to medical school), but amazingly, on admittedly rare occasions, we do.

Actually, asking the question again will help because the majority in this thread, yourself included, seem to think I'm after an objective response. The question, in fact, is seeking a range of subjective answers. I was trying to get a feel for approximately what quality time commitment others in the same boat feel is appropriate, not what a fixed definite medical-school-endorsed level is. Of course there's no fixed answer, but by asking others to share what they did will give me an idea of what I should be aiming for.

I guess I just really don't buy your line of thinking, and that is why I don't agree with the premise of your question. What I've been trying to get across is that people do all kinds of different things. What matters is that you've done *something* meaningful, not the specific activity or how many hours you've spent. Everyone will have a different answer to this question. What I've done isn't really going to apply to you or vice versa. Like, I can't go do pro bono legal work for people, you know? So even if you've spent ten hours doing pro bono work, that's ten hours more than I spent. Likewise, all the time I've spent working with students in the lab, doing science demos, etc. probably isn't going to be something that you'll be doing. Is teaching students more or less valuable experience to adcoms versus doing pro bono legal work? I don't think there's any answer to that, beyond that the teaching was valuable for me since it took advantage of my skills and interests, and likewise the pro bono work would do that for you. It sounds like doing pro bono work has been something that means a lot to you. In that case, it's a significant volunteer experience for you, even though I got into medical school without ever doing a single hour of it. I mean, even if you held a gun to my head, I couldn't honestly tell you how many hours of pro bono work you "should" do to be competitive. I think adcoms want to see that you give back what you can, that's all.

Anyone else want to deliberately misread the question and give me an unnecessary lecture about medical school admissions 101?

Interesting ascription of my motives. See below.

Or is anyone actually willing to share what amounts of CS/V/shadowing they listed on their applications?

I honestly don't know how many hours I spent doing many of my activities.

I'd rather not apologize to QofQuimica since it was the pathetic, tedious and ill-informed jab at lawyers that prompted my response, but since he or she is a moderator, I don't think I have too much of a choice, do I?

Actually, you do have a choice. I'm not going to infract you just because you don't like my sense of humor, and I certainly don't want you to feel obligated to apologize to me because you think I'd retaliate against you if you didn't. I'll even edit the apology out of your post for you if you would like, and without repercussions or hard feelings.

I suppose I owe *you* an apology, Counselor. Clearly, I've stepped on a nerve. FWIW, I honestly wasn't intending to either misinterpret your question or to offend you. Please accept my (actually sincere) apology for upsetting you, and best of luck to you with your endeavors.

Oh, and just so that you can pick the proper epithets for me in the future, I'm a she.

 

[Law2Doc]

Is teaching students more or less valuable experience to adcoms versus doing pro bono legal work? I don't think there's any answer to that,

I actually do think there's an answer to that. Activities that are important to you and "give back" to the community are generally well regarded, whether it be teaching or pro bono work, or building houses for Habitat for Humanity. None of those addresses clinical experience which is something required for med school. But with all of these activities you have to keep in mind that it will be evaluated by a group of 50 year old medical clinicians, not lawyers or teachers etc. So when you ascribe value you have to realize that it is being evaluated through those lenses.

 

[QofQuimica]

I actually do think there's an answer to that. Activities that are important to you and "give back" to the community are generally well regarded, whether it be teaching or pro bono work, or building houses for Habitat for Humanity. None of those addresses clinical experience which is something required for med school. But with all of these activities you have to keep in mind that it will be evaluated by a group of 50 year old medical clinicians, not lawyers or teachers etc. So when you ascribe value you have to realize that it is being evaluated through those lenses.

I don't think you can pigeonhole an adcom like that. It's impossible to guess what any particular adcom will do with any given candidate. First, adcoms are not static entities, and they are not only composed of middle-aged physicians. Even at a single school, the adcom is constantly in flux. Not only do individual members serve for some time and then get replaced by others, but not all members attend all meetings. Then, there is the subjective element of how a specific committee member evaluates a particular applicant. A candidate could totally impress one interviewer who will go to bat for them, while the other interviewer could think that same candidate was average or even should be rejected. This is why being well-rounded is so important, as we've discussed on multiple occasions. You can't predict what about your app will appeal to whom.

I think my main points are more or less in agreement with yours:

1) Some type of clinical exposure is a must for MD and DO programs. How much is necessary? Enough that the applicant can make a convincing argument that s/he is making an informed decision to go into medicine.

2) Service to the community should be something that you personally find meaningful. Again, how much service to do and what type of service depends on the applicant. There is no amount of service that is going to inherently be "too much" or "too little" or "just the right amount" in all cases.

 

[Law2Doc]

they are not only composed of middle-aged physicians.

No, but in any voting entity the majority is all you have to worry about. So the handful of PhDs and student members don't negate the fact that these decisions are being made by and large by 50ish year old clinicians, at least at all the schools where I met adcom members.

We are in agreement with your numbered points.

 

[SickOfLaw]

QofQuimica: I must've misread your response above - sincere apologies for not picking up on what you were saying.

Guess I know now why people really do think lawyers are a**holes. Sometimes, we really can be.

Again, apologies.

 

[xanthines]

I think the reason you need to be very very careful about applications is that not every school works on a majority system. Some schools only allow X number of dissents on the committee for accepted students. One school only allows 2 dissents! Maybe that's why sometimes the process seems so random as well: One crank hates jocks and punishes all the athletes while another might hate musicians; good-bye 4.0/45 heisman music prodigy!

-X

No, but in any voting entity the majority is all you have to worry about. So the handful of PhDs and student members don't negate the fact that these decisions are being made by and large by 50ish year old clinicians, at least at all the schools where I met adcom members.

We are in agreement with your numbered points.

 

[QofQuimica]

No, but in any voting entity the majority is all you have to worry about. So the handful of PhDs and student members don't negate the fact that these decisions are being made by and large by 50ish year old clinicians, at least at all the schools where I met adcom members.

I suppose it depends on the school. At my school, the "majority" means whichever adcom members show up for adcom meetings. Which, unsurprisingly, tends to favor the students and the PhDs. 😛

We are in agreement with your numbered points.

Goodness, I hope the universe doesn't implode.

QofQuimica: I must've misread your response above - sincere apologies for not picking up on what you were saying.

Guess I know now why people really do think lawyers are a**holes. Sometimes, we really can be.

Again, apologies.

Forget it. I'm glad you came back. You have no idea how much it has made my day to now have not one, but *two* crotchety attorneys to spar with. And you're right that plenty of doctors can be pompous, condescending, arrogant derrieres. Unfortunately, I can't tell them that to their faces at this point in the game. 😉

I think the reason you need to be very very careful about applications is that not every school works on a majority system. Some schools only allow X number of dissents on the committee for accepted students. One school only allows 2 dissents! Maybe that's why sometimes the process seems so random as well: One crank hates jocks and punishes all the athletes while another might hate musicians; good-bye 4.0/45 heisman music prodigy!

-X

Yeah, we should keep in mind that every school is going to do things differently, which is why it's really best to make one's app as well-rounded as possible and apply as broadly as is feasible. In the end, you only need one adcom to come through for you. 🙂

 

[Law2Doc]

Goodness, I hope the universe doesn't implode.

It already did a few years back when I made my career change.