"Well rounded applicants"

  • Thread starter Thread starter deleted239798
  • Start date Start date
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
D

deleted239798

Does anyone else find it bizarre that medical schools supposedly want well rounded applicants (ie. not people who are only interested in sciences), yet the med school curriculum supposedly drains you and leaves you no time to do anything? Why do they want people who also play ultimate frisbee and sing in a choir, when such hobbies aren't going to be possible to pursue?

On a related note: has anyone looked at the residency forums? Supposedly, some programs don't want people with any social life. Why the dichotomy? Personally, I think it would be great if all doctors were nerds with an immense amount of dedication who excelled in the sciences.

I don't mean to communicate that I think doctors shouldn't have people skills. But I do think it's possible to be someone who has a narrow set of academic interests and has communicative skills.

Note: I didn't apply this cycle.
 
Does anyone else find it bizarre that medical schools supposedly want well rounded applicants (ie. not people who are only interested in sciences), yet the med school curriculum supposedly drains you and leaves you no time to do anything? Why do they want people who also play ultimate frisbee and sing in a choir, when such hobbies aren't going to be possible to pursue?

On a related note: has anyone looked at the residency forums? Supposedly, some programs don't want people with any social life. Why the dichotomy? Personally, I think it would be great if all doctors were nerds with an immense amount of dedication who excelled in the sciences.

I don't mean to communicate that I think doctors shouldn't have people skills. But I do think it's possible to be someone who has a narrow set of academic interests and has communicative skills.

Note: I didn't apply this cycle.


Thats not necessarily true. Rarely have I talked to a student who says he/she has no time for ANYTHING. In fact, most talk about the balanced lives that they live. Yes they study hard (and often) but they also express their interests in other things that they do unrelated to medicine. Ive seen choir clubs, acting clubs, frisbee leagues, intramural sports, and what not on med school campuses. I plan on being that same type of student.
 
Thats not necessarily true. Rarely have I talked to a student who says he/she has no time for ANYTHING. In fact, most talk about the balanced lives that they live. Yes they study hard (and often) but they also express their interests in other things that they do unrelated to medicine. Ive seen choir clubs, acting clubs, frisbee leagues, intramural sports, and what not on med school campuses. I plan on being that same type of student.

I was kind of exaggerating. I know that they have time, but it will be very limited when compared to all of the down time that you have in undergrad. More importantly, many specialties don't have free time - period. You definitely won't have free time (in the same way that's had in undergrad) when you're a resident.
 
In my opinion a person who is successful in their studies and has outside interests is more "attractive" than someone who has a one tract mind. I think that's where the well-rounded request stems from.
 
It contributes to the diversity of your class. You could learn a lot from your classmates. Being well rounded doesn't mean that it has to be from clubs or hobbies. It could be life experiences or doing majors that aren't the norm for medical school (business, philosophy, for example). These can help you while you're practicing later on.

It also shows them that you can analyze a situation from a different perspective like msb1190 said.
 
I was kind of exaggerating. I know that they have time, but it will be very limited when compared to all of the down time that you have in undergrad. More importantly, many specialties don't have free time - period. You definitely won't have free time (in the same way that's had in undergrad) when you're a resident.

Yea residency will be busy, no doubt. But if having free time and a social life is imortant to you, then dont choose a specialty where you know that wont happen. Lifestyle - its a huge factor to consider when choosing a specialty (and a career for that matter).
 
It contributes to the diversity of your class. You could learn a lot from your classmates. Being well rounded doesn't mean that it has to be from clubs or hobbies. It could be life experiences or doing majors that aren't the norm for medical school (business, philosophy, for example). These can help you while you're practicing later on.

But how? I don't understand how majoring in History and joining the poetry slam club is going to make you a good doctor. I know that it sounds nice to say that having a broad worldview makes you a better doctor, but I just don't see how it's true. And I don't think that you need to be well rounded to be able to communicate with people effectively.

Quote: Yea residency will be busy, no doubt. But if having free time and a social life is imortant to you, then dont choose a specialty where you know that wont happen. Lifestyle - its a huge factor to consider when choosing a specialty (and a career for that matter).

But it's not important to me, that's why it's frustrating to see so much weight put on having extracurricular activities that are not science related. Who do you think will perform neurosurgery on you? I'll bet that it's not the same person who was in a billion clubs at school. I would imagine that it's the guy (or gal) that was very focused on academics and didn't get bogged down in the social scene in college (or in medical school). But that's just my unfounded opinion, so if any medical students want to correct me, I would welcome it.
 
There are a number of schools who are actively working to make your lives more well-rounded. Vanderbilt is one school that comes to mind. They give you the option of taking a "wellness class" (read: You can do anything you want, inside or outside of school) for credit. My interviewer suggested that I could take brazilian Jiu-Jitsu for that block. I kind of just stared at her blankly and fell in love. :laugh:
 
But how? I don't understand how majoring in History and joining the poetry slam club is going to make you a good doctor. I know that it sounds nice to say that having a broad worldview makes you a better doctor, but I just don't see how it's true. And I don't think that you need to be well rounded to be able to communicate with people effectively.

Honesly I think it might just be that well rounded people are interesting. One-track-mind people are BORING. Simple as that. Med schools are looking for intelligent students who are committed to medicine but who also are INTERESTING people. And also, part of communicating with people is being able to relate to them. Part of relating to people is having common experiences/interests. If you, as a physician, have been science science medicine since you wre 12 years old and have done NOTHING else, how are you going to relate/communicate with your patients? I dunno, just my opinion!
 
But how? I don't understand how majoring in History and joining the poetry slam club is going to make you a good doctor. I know that it sounds nice to say that having a broad worldview makes you a better doctor, but I just don't see how it's true. And I don't think that you need to be well rounded to be able to communicate with people effectively.

So you think only "nose in the book" science nerd drones make the best doctors?

Medical education has shifted a great deal in the last 30 or 40 years. Med schools seek achievers from all academic areas and from a diversity of backgrounds to fill the seats in their schools.

Are you really puzzled by all of this, or just pissed off that you have had your nose buried in the books for your college years with nothing else to show for it?
 
But it's not important to me, that's why it's frustrating to see so much weight put on having extracurricular activities that are not science related. Who do you think will perform neurosurgery on you? I'll bet that it's not the same person who was in a billion clubs at school. I would imagine that it's the guy (or gal) that was very focused on academics and didn't get bogged down in the social scene in college (or in medical school). But that's just my unfounded opinion, so if any medical students want to correct me, I would welcome it.

Dont kid yourself. Being in a billion clubs is not going to get you in to medical school. You need to have the brains as well.

Applicant A: 3.8 GPA and a 35 MCAT - no ECs, just studied day and night. 😴

Applicant B: 3.7 GPA and 31mcat - good ECs, varied interests, has had a LIFE throughout college.


I woudl choose applicant B every time. You cant seriously think there will be a difference in the way they practice medicine just becaus applicant A has a slight higher GPA nad MCAT.
 
Honesly I think it might just be that well rounded people are interesting. One-track-mind people are BORING. Simple as that. Med schools are looking for intelligent students who are committed to medicine but who also are INTERESTING people. And also, part of communicating with people is being able to relate to them. Part of relating to people is having common experiences/interests. If you, as a physician, have been science science medicine since you wre 12 years old and have done NOTHING else, how are you going to relate/communicate with your patients? I dunno, just my opinion!

I would have a boring, smart guy diagnose me or cut into me over a sociable, average doc any day of the week.

Dont kid yourself. Being in a billion clubs is not going to get you in to medical school. You need to have the brains as well.

Applicant A: 3.8 GPA and a 35 MCAT - no ECs, just studied day and night. 😴

Applicant B: 3.7 GPA and 31mcat - good ECs, varied interests, has had a LIFE throughout college.


I woudl choose applicant B every time. You cant seriously think there will be a difference in the way they practice medicine?

You're using a very extreme example. When they have a .1 difference in GPA they so similar that it's not really a contrast on paper. In fact, App B was able to get a very high GPA while having a life. I'm talking more about the kid with a 3.5 who has varied interests who's up against the 3.8 kid who studies all the time.
 
Also, doing other ECs means that you may have explored other options besides medicine as a career path. If you have only ever done science and know no other world, then how can you know that some other career that might be a better fit isn't hiding from you? I think that "know thyself" is a requirement of med schools. Also just a thought.
 
I would have a boring, smart guy diagnose me or cut into me over a sociable, average doc any day of the week.


You dont get it. You dont just get accepted to medical school by participating in ECs and being sociable. YOU HAVE TO BE INTELLIGENT. Look, if these people with average stats but amazing ECs really arent smart enough to cut it, they'll never pass step 1 and theyll never make it to 3rd/4th year.
 
I would have a boring, smart guy diagnose me or cut into me over a sociable, average doc any day of the week.


You're using a very extreme example. When they have a .1 difference in GPA they so similar that it's not really a contrast on paper. In fact, App B was able to get a very high GPA while having a life. I'm talking more about the kid with a 3.5 who has varied interests who's up against the 3.8 kid who studies all the time.


Fine, whatever..... 3.5 GPA. I still stand by what I said. A 3.5 GPA does not mean you are unintelligetn and/or unable to be a doctor. Get out of SDN world. And you cant just compare 3.8 with 3.5.....no school accepts students like that (my example was hypothetical to go along with what you were saying). They evaluate each application individually and decide whether or not the student is qualified. Its not like "Okay we have this kid with a 3.8....o wait, this kid with a 3.5 has good ECs...reject the 3.8er"

Well the problem is that there are so many smart people wandering around that they can pick ones who are both interesting and smart.

EXACTLY. Well said. End of discussion.
 
Another thought: if you're a person who spends all of his/her time studying and never do anything else, your patient will probably pick up on that. I personally find that I relate better to my physicians who I can talk to about books, travel, etc. and that I am thus more likely to ask them what I consider silly questions. Maybe in a specialty where the diagnosis relies on tests instead of talking to the patient you would want more science bookworms, but many specialties require a rapport with the patient throughout a long-term treatment.
 
Does anyone else find it bizarre that medical schools supposedly want well rounded applicants (ie. not people who are only interested in sciences), yet the med school curriculum supposedly drains you and leaves you no time to do anything? Why do they want people who also play ultimate frisbee and sing in a choir, when such hobbies aren't going to be possible to pursue?
So they know you are capable of keeping your sanity. Having a social life and varied interests shows that you have outlets in case things get tough. Also, medicine is a service field. More personality + social competence = better patient compliance, adherence, fewer malpractice suits and overall better health care. Allegedly.
 
Last edited:
You dont get it. You dont just get accepted to medical school by participating in ECs and being sociable. YOU HAVE TO BE INTELLIGENT. Look, if these people with average stats but amazing ECs really arent smart enough to cut it, they'll never pass step 1 and theyll never make it to 3rd/4th year.

Look, I really didn't want this thread to turn into this. I just thought it would be an interesting discussion. But not all doctors are intelligent. I've been to some that don't seem like they should have ever been accepted into medical school.

Flip: I'm not upset about anything. I'm actually pretty well rounded. This was just supposed to be a discussion. I wasn't trying to insult anybody, and I sure wasn't intending to start anything inflammatory.

It's also gone extremely off topic. I was initially talking about the futility of choosing well rounded applicants when the life will get largely sucked out of them during residency and when they're an attending - especially if they choose one of the life consuming specialties (which comprise a very large set).
 
Well the problem is that there are so many smart people wandering around that they can pick ones who are both interesting and smart.

Again, I'm trying to say that you won't have time for much of a life if you commit to certain specialties in this field. I know I sound like sour grapes, but I didn't even apply this cycle.
 
I kinda see where the OP is coming from. Personally, I don't think you have to DO interesting things to BE interesting.

Maybe outside interests indicate a certain willingness to try new things and an ability to pick up areas that aren't science? After all, being a doctor isn't all science.

Just speculating.
 
Look, I really didn't want this thread to turn into this. I just thought it would be an interesting discussion. But not all doctors are intelligent. I've been to some that don't seem like they should have ever been accepted into medical school.

agreed.
 
Look, I really didn't want this thread to turn into this. I just thought it would be an interesting discussion. But not all doctors are intelligent. I've been to some that don't seem like they should have ever been accepted into medical school.

Flip: I'm not upset about anything. I'm actually pretty well rounded. This was just supposed to be a discussion. I wasn't trying to insult anybody, and I sure wasn't intending to start anything inflammatory.

It's also gone extremely off topic. I was initially talking about the futility of choosing well rounded applicants when the life will get largely sucked out of them during residency and when they're an attending - especially if they choose one of the life consuming specialties (which comprise a very large set).

First, medicine is a "social" profession. When you are being evaluated for med school, residency, and beyond, people want to know that you have the smarts, but immediately after that, they want to know if they could stand to be around you for more than 5 minutes at a time, and there is a greater likelihood that a more fully developed intellectual person would be the person they would choose to be with, all else being equal...

Finally, with regard to the underlined above, the people who are best equipped to handle that stress are the ones who have a life or interests outside of work...man does not live by bread alone.
 
First, medicine is a "social" profession. When you are being evaluated for med school, residency, and beyond, people want to know that you have the smarts, but immediately after that, they want to know if they could stand to be around you for more than 5 minutes at a time, and there is a greater likelihood that a more fully developed intellectual person would be the person they would choose to be with, all else being equal...

Finally, with regard to the underlined above, the people who are best equipped to handle that stress are the ones who have a life or interests outside of work...man does not live by bread alone.

I think that not having many outside interests will make you less stressed; because it won't be as much of a lifestyle change when you are suddenly working continuously. I think that it's hard to comprehend just how much residents work, and a lack of information is the reason that medicine has such a high rate of job dissatisfaction.

I never advocated for medical schools accepting weird bookworms. People who love research and only have interests in science aren't necessarily socially inept. In fact, I find such people more interesting to be around, and I would definitely be more comfortable being around a physician who knew his stuff and is bookish.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It'd be kind of interesting if LizzyM commented on this thread.
 
some people tell me they have more free time in med school than they did in undergrad.
 
This 2007 Newsweek article might be of some interest:

Well-Rounded Docs
That's the goal as medical schools seek out and admit more nonscience students. English majors welcome.

One week into his premed classes at Washington University in St. Louis, Ryan Jacobson was rethinking his plan to become a doctor. His biology and chemistry classes were large, competitive and impersonal—not how he wanted to spend the next four years. "Sitting in a chemistry class, I knew it wasn't the right place for me," he says. Jacobson found the history department, with its focus on faculty interaction and discussion, a better fit. But he had no intention of leaving his medical aspirations behind. So Jacobson majored in history while also taking the science and math courses required for medical school. When he graduated last spring, he won the departmental prize for undergraduate thesis for his work on the history of race relations in Tulsa, Okla. He started medical school at the University of Illinois last month. "Historians are supposed to integrate information with the big picture," he says, "which will hopefully be useful as a physician."

Even as breakthroughs in science and advances in technology make the practice of medicine increasingly complex, medical educators are looking beyond biology and chemistry majors in the search for more well-rounded students who can be molded into caring and analytic doctors. "More humanities students have been applying in recent years, and medical schools like them," says Gwen Garrison, vice president for medical-school services and studies at the Association of American Medical Colleges. "The schools are looking for a kind of compassion and potential doctoring ability. This makes many social-science and humanities students particularly well qualified."

The number of science majors applying to medical school has been steady for the past decade—about 65 percent of applicants major in biology or another physical science. What's changing is who gets in. When Gail Morrison, who runs admissions at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, sorts through the school's 6,500 yearly applicants, she is not looking for students who spent their undergrad years hunched over biology and physics textbooks. "It doesn't make you a better doctor to know how fast a mass falls from a tree," she says. Approximately 40 percent of the students that Penn accepts to its medical school now come from nonscience backgrounds. That number has been rising steadily over the past 20 years. "They've got to be happy and have a life outside of medicine," says Morrison, "otherwise they'll get overwhelmed. We need whole people."

In 1999, a national survey of first-year medical students found that 58 percent took a social-science class for personal interest. In last year's entering class, the number was more than 70 percent. Humanities students also fare better on the MCAT, the standardized test for medical-school admissions. Among the 2006 applicants to medical school, humanities majors outscored biology majors in all categories.

Michael Sciola, who's been advising premed students at Wesleyan University for the past 13 years, has seen liberal-arts majors become more attractive to medical schools. And he's not surprised that those who stray from science are finding success. "Medical schools have really been looking for that scholar-physician in the past few years," he says. "We're living in an increasingly complex world, and the liberal arts give you the skills to understand that better."

The Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York has a program designed to attract nonscience majors. Each year, Mount Sinai accepts about 30 college sophomores from around the country through its humanities and medicine program. The students do not have to take the MCAT, but they are required to pursue a humanities major as undergrads before starting at Mount Sinai. "The students who come in with a humanities background see patients more as a whole patient," says Miki Rifkin, the program's director. She says that these students often outperform their peers, with higher rates of competitive residency placements.

Andrea Schwartz, a third-year medical student in the Mount Sinai program, attended Columbia University and the Jewish Theological Seminary and has a dual degree in history and Bible studies. "Having such a varied experience has given me the opportunity to appreciate different angles," says Schwartz, who is interested in geriatrics. "The intense text study I did as an undergrad helps me when I'm taking patients' histories. It taught me to be a better listener." That sort of training may be just what the doctor ordered.
 
They did? My impression was that applicants have improved over the years.

No, I mean for many years medical school admissions were based almost solely on grades, specifically science majors with the highest GPAs possible. Eventually somebody realized that medicine is just as much art as science, and decided the generation of insufferable nerd physicians we'd trained wasn't going to do.
 
They did? My impression was that applicants have improved over the years.

haha, larp. I dont know if you are doing it intentionally, but you are doing it in almost every post. You are associating intelligence and commitment to medicine with lack of social life and ECs. Thats not how it works.

Applicants have IMPROVED because not only do they have better GPAs and MCATs but they have more interesting ECs. People are continuosuly succeeding while jugglingl many other medicine and/or non-medically related activities.
 
med school and residency are temporary periods, and account for a short time period of your career. when we are sitting around that table discussing applicants, we're looking not just for who's going to be a good student, or a good physician but who is going to do great things in medicine...people who can assume a leadership role, staff committees, run things, etc...

granted, tough thing to assess in a couple of 30 minute interviews...so we need other proxies to try and gauge someone's potential and ECs are a part of that; not so much the number of ECs but in the depth, the level of involvement/commitment...

that along with things other people mentioned, like Flahless, flip and a couple of others.
 
This 2007 Newsweek article might be of some interest:

Since this is a new trend, it's still to be proven whether it will yield better doctors. I don't really see how it could. In my opinion, majoring in the humanities is akin to wearing a pinstripe suit to an interview - it's an attention grabber but not much more.

Rysser: Look at the statistics. The average GPA has increased significantly. I've seen no evidence that premeds have more extracurricular activities than they used to. Again, just look at the surgical residency forums. There are stories of being rejected from programs for having too much of a social life. You seem to sidestep this part of what I'm saying in every post. Look at most of the groundbreaking discoveries that have been made in the last century. Most do not come from family oriented people who have tons of interests outside of science.

edfig99: maybe you can clear this up for me. Why is a leadership position in a science related extracurricular activity less desirable than one in a sport or a nonscience club?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The number of science majors applying to medical school has been steady for the past decade—about 65 percent of applicants major in biology or another physical science. What’s changing is who gets in. When Gail Morrison, who runs admissions at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, sorts through the school’s 6,500 yearly applicants, she is not looking for students who spent their undergrad years hunched over biology and physics textbooks. “It doesn’t make you a better doctor to know how fast a mass falls from a tree,” she says. Approximately 40 percent of the students that Penn accepts to its medical school now come from nonscience backgrounds. That number has been rising steadily over the past 20 years. “They’ve got to be happy and have a life outside of medicine,” says Morrison, “otherwise they’ll get overwhelmed. We need whole people.”


YES!!! THANK YOU!!!!! 😍😍😍
 
I think being well rounded shows that you can take the pressures life throws at you and you dont let them drastically break you down.

Alot of people can get a high gpa if all they do is study, but its those who can manage their time and juggle everything perfectly and successfully that will succeed in life, because life throws unexpected twists and hardships at you and if you were able to manage yourself in college then your skills will only get better and you will be able to manage the hardships you face as a doctor.

On the other hand, the 3.9, 35+ who only studied and didnt have to worry about anything doesnt really prove to Adcoms that they can really manage their lives when they become overwhelmed with alot of different difficult situations that may arise. These people May or May not be able to juggle everything, whereas well rounded students have some what shown that they are capable of it.

ex: studying and maintaining a 3.7+ gpa, while doing research, while volunteering, while doing all your EC's shows alot more then someone who got a 3.9 but thats all the responsibility they really had to deal with.
 
agree
(was gonna mention something like this with my other post...but my kid hit the submit button so i could go tuck her in)

I think being well rounded shows that you can take the pressures life throws at you and you dont let them drastically break you down.

Alot of people can get a high gpa if all they do is study, but its those who can manage their time and juggle everything perfectly and successfully that will succeed in life, because life throws unexpected twists and hardships at you and if you were able to manage yourself in college then your skills will only get better and you will be able to manage the hardships you face as a doctor.

On the other hand, the 3.9, 35+ who only studied and didnt have to worry about anything doesnt really prove to Adcoms that they can really manage their lives when they become overwhelmed with alot of different difficult situations that may arise. These people May or May not be able to juggle everything, whereas well rounded students have some what shown that they are capable of it.

ex: studying and maintaining a 3.7+ gpa, while doing research, while volunteering, while doing all your EC's shows alot more then someone who got a 3.9 but thats all the responsibility they really had to deal with.
 
Rysser: Look at the statistics. The average GPA has increased significantly. I've seen no evidence that premeds have more extracurricular activities than they used to.

weren't you complaining about applicants who get accepted with lower stats but "well rounded" ECs?
 
I find such people more interesting to be around, and I would definitely be more comfortable being around a physician who knew his stuff and is bookish.

For some reason the way you state things is REALLY self-centered, as evidented by the high usage of the word "I" and your attempt to justify positions by saying how "I" feel about things instead going around and see how other people think.

There can't be a discussion if all you can bring up are "I think such and such is true, etc"
 
weren't you complaining about applicants who get accepted with lower stats but "well rounded" ECs?

I was until you made the unsubstantiated claim that applicants have improved over the years in terms of ECs. Whatever, I think this thread has maxed out on its potential. I'm always shocked by the lack of civility and the abundance of hypersensitivity on these forums.

Also, I wasn't complaining about anybody getting accepted. If you get accepted, you obviously did something to deserve it. I'm complaining about the trouble that the people who are not accepted have for seemingly no reason.
 
For some reason the way you state things is REALLY self-centered, as evidented by the high usage of the word "I" and your attempt to justify positions by saying how "I" feel about things instead going around and see how other people think.

There can't be a discussion if all you can bring up are "I think such and such is true, etc"

Wow, how am I supposed to discuss things in a discussion that revolves around perspective without bringing up my perspective? I couldn't really say how you would feel about something. My use of the word "I" wasn't a justification for anything, it was just the addition of personal perspective into the discussion.

What's important to remember is that this is just an internet forum, and it's difficult to get a feel for if someone is "self centered" by reading something they post on a forum. And stating your opinion is never self centered, unless you make a sweeping declaration (which I didn't make).
 
Well the problem is that there are so many smart people wandering around that they can pick ones who are both interesting and smart.

I'd say it's mostly this.

when you have 10,000 applications for 170 positions in a medical school class you (the admissions people) can have your cake and eat it too.
-Roy
 
I'd say it's mostly this.

when you have 10,000 applications for 170 positions in a medical school class you (the admissions people) can have your cake and eat it too.
-Roy

The very last thing I'm going to post is that I'm not talking about having no ECs, just having only science oriented ones.
 
I don't think a leadership position in a science related EC less desirable than a nonscience or sports EC... and if all your ECs focus on science, that could be okay too -- it really depends on what you did, and what it meant to you. but at the same time, patients don't know so much science, so it does help to demonstrate some capability to be part of a non-science setting.

re: number of ECs...I'm not sure if that data would be published or not re the # of ECs...but certainly in the years I've been involved with med school or residency admissions, there are more varied and richer ECs that people are coming in with that makes them unique and attractive as applicants compared to someone who doesn't. but there's room for science only types and humanities types and everything in between...in the right setting, it really does enhance the richness of a class.


Rysser: Look at the statistics. The average GPA has increased significantly. I've seen no evidence that premeds have more extracurricular activities than they used to. Again, just look at the surgical residency forums. There are stories of being rejected from programs for having too much of a social life. You seem to sidestep this part of what I'm saying in every post. Look at most of the groundbreaking discoveries that have been made in the last century. Most do not come from family oriented people who have tons of interests outside of science.

edfig99: maybe you can clear this up for me. Why is a leadership position in a science related extracurricular activity less desirable than one in a sport or a nonscience club?
 
Does anyone else find it bizarre that medical schools supposedly want well rounded applicants (ie. not people who are only interested in sciences), yet the med school curriculum supposedly drains you and leaves you no time to do anything? Why do they want people who also play ultimate frisbee and sing in a choir, when such hobbies aren't going to be possible to pursue?

On a related note: has anyone looked at the residency forums? Supposedly, some programs don't want people with any social life. Why the dichotomy? Personally, I think it would be great if all doctors were nerds with an immense amount of dedication who excelled in the sciences.

I don't mean to communicate that I think doctors shouldn't have people skills. But I do think it's possible to be someone who has a narrow set of academic interests and has communicative skills.

Note: I didn't apply this cycle.

God I hope not.. there's nothing worse than a doctor with absolutely no people skills who cannot communicate to patients.. i see it in shadowing and such all the time and it drives me crazy.

I kind of take offense to this as well.. I feel I excel way more than the average person in the sciences, and I wouldn't be considered a "nerd" in the least.. Just because you're one doesn't mean you're the other, you know.

ps i didnt read all the replies, just the OPs post.
 
The very last thing I'm going to post is that I'm not talking about having no ECs, just having only science oriented ones.

I know, I mean there are enough people out there with a 30+ MCAT, 3.7+ GPA, research, clinical, volunteer AAAAND some other really interesting stuff like awesome at ballroom dancing or akido or speaking 3+ languages, or have written a novel, etc.

On the interview trail I have been profoundly impressed with people's non medical experiences. I have talked to people who have worked in the white house, completed iron mans, speak five languages, and a decent amateur MMA fighter. If they have been invited to interview you can assume the "Stats/ECs" are up to snuff.
-Roy
 
If you are interested solely in the sciences and science-related ECs, then why not go into research...? :shrug:

The biggest reason I want to become a doctor is not out of interest in biology but for the patient relationships I hope to form and for the ability and position I will be in to help people on a really personal level.

ETA: Basically, science classes are very interesting and I enjoy them, but they are more of a means to the end rather than the end itself.
 
Since this is a new trend, it's still to be proven whether it will yield better doctors.

That depends on your definition of "new." Things began shifting back in the 1980's, concurrent with increasing acceptance of females in medicine. That was over 20 years ago. There has been ample time to demonstrate what this "trend" didn't do: create a swath of personable but inept doctors.

larpleston said:
I don't really see how it could. In my opinion, majoring in the humanities is akin to wearing a pinstripe suit to an interview - it's an attention grabber but not much more.

Tall words from someone who has not even applied.
 
not all residents are worked to the point where they cannot even do the things they liked outside of academics and work life. the point is to see if you could go through college while doing other things (EC's) and hopefully continue doing them in med school, find new interesting things to do, and maybe even later on in life.

there is no dichotomy here between pre med weeding out and residents/professionals. all candidates are after the same thing, but some are better suited at being doctors with a life. like normal people - i hope that i can continue cycling in med school and maybe keep up with reading like i have been in college. they look for that, its just a part of your character and what you think makes a person complete.

well roundedness was something my parents (asian) never understood. they thought grades were everything, and they were right of course, but that doesnt make me satisfied if i cannot do other things on the side. so i still got into college and graduated but not at the top of my class. sacrifices like that are what they look for, because there is always a difference in the people who do nothing and those who do something.
 
That depends on your definition of "new." Things began shifting back in the 1980's

70's, not 80's. I was there.😛

It's been an evolving process during the last 30 years since I applied, but the big changes began with the cultural changes of the late 60's that hit the field of medicine gradually during the 70's. By the late 70's, it was well-recognized that physicians needed more "people skills" (think Marcus Welby) and that admissions processes needed to reflect that. I was grilled (and this was in the 70's) during my interviews about non-medical activities, etc.
 
70's, not 80's. I was there.😛

Thanks for the clarification. I was born when Nixon was still in the White House, but that decade is a bit of a blur (too much time in Studio 54).
 
Top