What improvements would you like to see in the Application/Interview Process?

[LittleLuck]

I for one believe there can be some changes implemented in the entire process that would make it better for both applicants and admission committee members/schools in the whole process. I'm curious to see if anyone has any ideas on how to improve the system.

For starters, I think schools should hand out rejections as soon as possible, I think silent rejections give students hope and deter them from improving their application for the upcoming cycle. Please don't point out all the errors and short comings of my ideas as I know changes aren't easy to implement, it is just an idea. For example, if a school goes reviews your app, they should immediately make a decision whether to interview, or accept you, based on certain criteria. All this re-review and placing on hold doesn't really benefit anyone.

Anyone else care to share some ideas they have on how to improve the system?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[kg062008]

AMCAS verification time killed me. I had to wait like 5 weeks!

 

[kkuhn]

Anyone else care to share some ideas they have on how to improve the system?

1. Financial assistance/options for interviews. I am super lucky in that my parents are footing all the bills for med school apps. But that's not the case for everyone... and while there's Fee Assistance for primaries/secondaries, airfares and hotels for interviews can really add up and be quite prohibitive for many. No idea how this could be executed practically, however.

2. Get rid of anything rolling. What with rolling interview invites, (many) rolling admissions, the deceptively late deadlines, all that "update letter" B.S. you gotta do... the process basically selects for neurotic, obsessive premeds (like me), which doesn't necessarily correlate with success as a physician.

BAM. I look forward to the first snarky comment. This is a very promising thread for such things.

 

[NatrixCaelicola]

More openness on selection factors. If they use an algorithm for automatic rejections or interviews, why not let us know it? That way we know if we have a shot or if we would be wasting money applying.

More openness on where you are in the review process. I'm sure that all of it is on a computer so have the status pages say something like "initial review 0/3 members complete." Or "initial review 3/3 members complete, on hold for a month." The programs probably have all of this built in so why not let us know where we stand?

More openness on why you were rejected. I assume that the reviewers make comments on the files as they read them. In rejection letters, why not include a one liner that says the reason why you were rejected (if there are red flags) or why you weren't moved on (like you simply didn't stand out). Again, on a computer-based system, this can't be that difficult.

I second the interview financial assistance.

 

[sibitrum]

I agree that more openness would improve the process.

I think this is especially true for interviews. There are so many different ways schools can carry out interviews and so many different ways for applicants to choose to approach them. It seems like a process that will certainly generate a ton of variance, and possibly use suspect selection criteria. How can the interview process be improved? To answer this question, I think we have to better define what the goal of interviewing should be.

Now, as for financial support for interviews, I am not 100% sure. If schools are directly responsible for this, it could bias their interview offers against lower-income applicants.

 

[kkuhn]

Now, as for financial support for interviews, I am not 100% sure. If schools are directly responsible for this, it could bias their interview offers against lower-income applicants.

True, but as it stands, the process itself biases against lower-income applicants... what good is an offer if you can't go? Or, what good is anything if your finances prevent you from even applying?

One thought: the Fee Assistance comes from the AAMC, so possibly they could add on some sort of interview assistance program you could apply to? Well, it's all pie-in-the-sky.

 

[kduck]

I would like to see more schools screen for secondaries, so application fees can be minimized if schools truly aren't interested, and so applicants won't be kept hanging thinking they have a chance when there is none.

 

[candav]

Perhaps not financial assistance for interviews, but I'd like to see schools more fully embrace alternate forms of interviewing, e.g. phone, Skype, etc.

Tying into that, I'd also like to see schools become more selective in granting interview invites. I don't see any particular need to interview 1000+ people for 150 seats in the class. I'm also a bit confused by schools that grant interviews a day or two after an application is complete, or before reading the letters of recommendation. Have they really reviewed the applicant's file well enough to know that they are a likely candidate for admission?

 

[Gnomes]

I think it would be nice if it were replaced with a "match" for premedical students. You rank the schools that interviewed you, they rank the applicants that interviewed, a computer assigns students to schools on one day in the Winter or early Spring, and it's over with. No rolling admissions, no shuffling around throughout the season as people get better acceptances and free up slots.

 

[kduck]

Perhaps not financial assistance for interviews, but I'd like to see schools more fully embrace alternate forms of interviewing, e.g. phone, Skype, etc.

Tying into that, I'd also like to see schools become more selective in granting interview invites. I don't see any particular need to interview 1000+ people for 150 seats in the class. I'm also a bit confused by schools that grant interviews a day or two after an application is complete, or before reading the letters of recommendation. Have they really reviewed the applicant's file well enough to know that they are a likely candidate for admission?

Yes! Or regional interviews, or pretty much anything to eliminate the crazy amount of traveling that goes on...

 

[Morzh]

One thought: the Fee Assistance comes from the AAMC, so possibly they could add on some sort of interview assistance program you could apply to? Well, it's all pie-in-the-sky.

That could work, but everyone else who isn't FAPing would have to be OK with 2-3 times (maybe even more?) the current application fee. Airfare and housing is expensive and the money's got to come from somewhere.

I think it would be nice if it were replaced with a "match" for premedical students. You rank the schools that interviewed you, they rank the applicants that interviewed, a computer assigns students to schools on one day in the Winter or early Spring, and it's over with. No rolling admissions, no shuffling around throughout the season as people get better acceptances and free up slots.

That's more or less what Texas does already. Yes, it's awesome.

 

[Stumpyman]

I'd like to see them accept me before I even apply please.

 

[Morzh]

Also, it's probably not feasible, but I'd like to see more filters for social competency besides just a couple 30 minute interviews.

Maybe with the 2015 MCAT changes they could replace the current writing section with a section that has short "social" vignettes that you respond to in short answers. Those responses are not scored, but rather sent as a part of your MCAT report the schools you apply to.

 

[liveoak]

I'd like to see them accept me before I even apply please.

TTT

 

[EBTrailRunner]

Yes! Or regional interviews, or pretty much anything to eliminate the crazy amount of traveling that goes on...

I agree that traveling expenses can add up quickly and deter applicants from attending interviews at certain schools. Yet, there's really no substitute for spending a day exploring a school and experiencing what life as a med student there is like.

Honestly, I'd like more schools to start screening for secondaries so that I don't waste my time and money filling out a loooong secondary for a school that plans to reject me immediately after they cash my check. Unfortunately, I don't see schools running away from "free money" any time soon.

 

[MegMurry]

I for one believe there can be some changes implemented in the entire process that would make it better for both applicants and admission committee members/schools in the whole process. I'm curious to see if anyone has any ideas on how to improve the system.

For starters, I think schools should hand out rejections as soon as possible, I think silent rejections give students hope and deter them from improving their application for the upcoming cycle. Please don't point out all the errors and short comings of my ideas as I know changes aren't easy to implement, it is just an idea. For example, if a school goes reviews your app, they should immediately make a decision whether to interview, or accept you, based on certain criteria. All this re-review and placing on hold doesn't really benefit anyone.

Anyone else care to share some ideas they have on how to improve the system?

this is actually a USC secondary question, if i'm not mistaken.... nice.

 

[kpcrew]

I would like to see more schools screen for secondaries, so application fees can be minimized if schools truly aren't interested, and so applicants won't be kept hanging thinking they have a chance when there is none.

no one is forced to apply to a school

 

[NatrixCaelicola]

no one is forced to apply to a school

This is absolutely irrelevant...

If they tell you that everyone has a chance because they have a holistic approach to file review BUT they just have a cutoff and your secondary doesn't even matte, then they might as well just have screened you from the beginning.

 

[kduck]

This is absolutely irrelevant...

If they tell you that everyone has a chance because they have a holistic approach to file review BUT they just have a cutoff and your secondary doesn't even matte, then they might as well just have screened you from the beginning.

yep

 

[kpcrew]

This is absolutely irrelevant...

If they tell you that everyone has a chance because they have a holistic approach to file review BUT they just have a cutoff and your secondary doesn't even matte, then they might as well just have screened you from the beginning.

how is it irrelevant?
you know which schools are reach schools when you apply. if not, you're either a stellar applicant or deluding yourself.

 

[mipp0]

Interviewers who actually care about interviewing...That would be a nice change. Some folks actually pay for all or part of the application process themselves...

 

[imymemine]

a match system would be a horrible. it works for ISers in texas because the tuition at each school is roughly the same (and dirt cheap). and texans are free to apply to amcas schools as well. if a national match was implemented applicants wouldn't have a chance to negotiate merit scholarships nor even compare financial aid packages among schools that have very different sticker prices, the way a person holding multiple acceptances can. what incentive would a school have to offer scholarships or keep their tuition prices competitive if they can lock up students they want through a match? furthermore, an early rolling acceptance allows one to cancel any pending interviews at schools they don't like as much as the one that accepted them--why would you be willing to give up that power?

 

[moodle]

Really the process is dripping with BS...

Things that rub me the wrong way -- just off the top of my head:

Top-20 schools spamming applicants (with obviously below average numbers) to complete secondaries. Way to collect that cash.

Schools that have rather preposterous interviewee:acceptance ratios. A school that only accepts 20% of those it interviews is "doing it wrong". That rate is preposterous, plain and simple. They should screen better whether it be via more essays or harsher number screens -- hell, even call them on the phone and conduct a 5 minute mini-interview to whittle the pool down -- do it before wasting the time and money of all those students. I think 40% is barely acceptable, a school like Virginia that has a near 80% rate is "DOING IT RIGHT"!

All schools need to be more open about what they are really looking for... Yes, they all have a mission statement - so what? Hell, there are only like 2 versions: "We want to make great community physicians" and "We want to make physician leaders that are interested in research, too". Great.

Be more specific, with your unwritten "pre-reqs" beyond the classroom... Do you accept very few students that have below a 34 MCAT? Say so. [None of this "We recommend that applicants have above a score of 26 on the MCAT" garbage] Do you accept very few students that have not been involved in meaningful research? So so. Do you accept very few students that haven't taken initiative to come up with a novel means to serve the poor/underserved? Say so!

I don't like interviews that are so short. If I am going to spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars to miss class, get on an airplane, battle lay-overs and delays, sit in taxis, and get dressed up all pretty - you better interview me longer than a measly 30 minutes. Harvard was delightful with its interview times: one was 45 minutes and the other was over an hour. I got my money's worth. If my interviewers don't "recommend me for admission", fine - with close to 2 hours of interview time, I feel that they can fully draw a valid conclusion if I am "right" for them. Inversely, at another school, we only spoke for 25 minutes (shyt, there was a timer ticking down for pete sakes! 25 minutes?!)... We could have just had a conversation via text message.

EDIT: that idea of a "match system" for med school admissions is immensely awesome in concept.

Honestly, I don't think anyone could have said it any better than this.

Let us know what you are looking for! If you don't take any students with MCATs under 31, then say so. Or if you don't take any MCAT subsection under 8, then say so. What the hell is the reason for withholding this information? If you really do a "holistic review" then a student with a 34 MCAT (15 BS, 15 PS and 4 Verbal) should be in the "clear"....but as we all know, they aren't.

This whole system wreaks of bull****. I mean look at Georgetown's application process....Their secondary fee was, I think, $135 and they accept 35% of their applicants....!! Jesus, they can't screen better before they call students to interview?

Make this process a wee bit better on the applicants. Let us know exactly what you are looking for. If, for example, you don't accept students with less than a years worth of non clinical volunteering, then let us know so we don't enrich your wallets and waste all that time writing your lame ass secondary essays....

:End Rant

 

[Victory4Zim]

I would like to see more schools screen for secondaries, so application fees can be minimized if schools truly aren't interested, and so applicants won't be kept hanging thinking they have a chance when there is none.

most definitely

 

[ksmajmudar]

I'd like to see an online interview system. Something akin to skype or something. Or at least, offer it as an option for people who cannot afford to pay the $500 per interview (airfare + taxi + hotel) that these interviews tend to cost.

To complement "skype" interviews, I believe each school should have a virtual tour of their campus prepared, something like ~1 hour long, including presentations that would normally be given + video and pictures of the campus.

Just to clarify, I don't think this should replace the interview system. I think this should be introduced as an alternative, a complement, to assist those with difficulties meeting the Interview Trail's costs.

 

[Nymphicus]

Hello USC

 

[MegMurry]

this is actually a USC secondary question, if i'm not mistaken.... nice.

Hello USC

i know. did any contributors to this thread realize they were doing other applicants' work for them? A+, SDN.

 

[kpcrew]

Really the process is dripping with BS...

Things that rub me the wrong way -- just off the top of my head:

Top-20 schools spamming applicants (with obviously below average numbers) to complete secondaries. Way to collect that cash.

Schools that have rather preposterous interviewee:acceptance ratios. A school that only accepts 20% of those it interviews is "doing it wrong". That rate is preposterous, plain and simple. They should screen better whether it be via more essays or harsher number screens -- hell, even call them on the phone and conduct a 5 minute mini-interview to whittle the pool down -- do it before wasting the time and money of all those students. I think 40% is barely acceptable, a school like Virginia that has a near 80% rate is "DOING IT RIGHT"!

All schools need to be more open about what they are really looking for... Yes, they all have a mission statement - so what? Hell, there are only like 2 versions: "We want to make great community physicians" and "We want to make physician leaders that are interested in research, too". Great.

Be more specific, with your unwritten "pre-reqs" beyond the classroom... Do you accept very few students that have below a 34 MCAT? Say so. [None of this "We recommend that applicants have above a score of 26 on the MCAT" garbage] Do you accept very few students that have not been involved in meaningful research? So so. Do you accept very few students that haven't taken initiative to come up with a novel means to serve the poor/underserved? Say so!

I don't like interviews that are so short. If I am going to spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars to miss class, get on an airplane, battle lay-overs and delays, sit in taxis, and get dressed up all pretty - you better interview me longer than a measly 30 minutes. Harvard was delightful with its interview times: one was 45 minutes and the other was over an hour. I got my money's worth. If my interviewers don't "recommend me for admission", fine - with close to 2 hours of interview time, I feel that they can fully draw a valid conclusion if I am "right" for them. Inversely, at another school, we only spoke for 25 minutes (shyt, there was a timer ticking down for pete sakes! 25 minutes?!)... We could have just had a conversation via text message.

EDIT: that idea of a "match system" for med school admissions is immensely awesome in concept.

actually i find myself agreeing with everything here, especially the whole spend hundreds of dollars and many hours of my time for 30 minutes thing.

but if you're using msar numbers for the 20% acceptance, it would be 20% matriculate. at least that's what i think since it seems to be the case that around 50% or so of interviewees receive acceptances eventually.

 

[sibitrum]

No, I look at US News data... # interviewed vs. # accepted.

One offender is Duke: interview 1200 students to then accept only 270 of them.

I agree some schools clearly go way overboard (e.g. there's no good reason to interview 1200 people lol). That said, if you look at a school like Harvard, their yield is so ridiculously high that if they tried to keep their post interview acceptance rate high, they would only get to interview like 300 people.

 

[alexandertg6]

I am pretty sure Hofstra is close, I heard it has around a 10% matriculation rate... so I extrapolate that it has about a 15%-20% acceptance rate max

schools really should do a little more diligence before asking us to spend $500 to fly out there. I realize we have the right to refuse an interview, but its just courteous to conduct interviews such that ~50% of interviewees gain acceptance.

Its very common for people to have a great interview, but not get an acceptance. That should not happen. They should not interview you if regardless of what you say they will not accept you.

 

[kpcrew]

No, I look at US News data... # interviewed vs. # accepted.

One offender is Duke: interview 1200 students to then accept only 270 of them.

oh i haven't looked at those
that's pretty sucky =/

 

[MayoorBust]

Really the process is dripping with BS...

Things that rub me the wrong way -- just off the top of my head:

Top-20 schools spamming applicants (with obviously below average numbers) to complete secondaries. Way to collect that cash.

Schools that have rather preposterous interviewee:acceptance ratios. A school that only accepts 20% of those it interviews is "doing it wrong". That rate is preposterous, plain and simple. They should screen better whether it be via more essays or harsher number screens -- hell, even call them on the phone and conduct a 5 minute mini-interview to whittle the pool down -- do it before wasting the time and money of all those students. I think 40% is barely acceptable, a school like Virginia that has a near 80% rate is "DOING IT RIGHT"!

All schools need to be more open about what they are really looking for... Yes, they all have a mission statement - so what? Hell, there are only like 2 versions: "We want to make great community physicians" and "We want to make physician leaders that are interested in research, too". Great.

Be more specific, with your unwritten "pre-reqs" beyond the classroom... Do you accept very few students that have below a 34 MCAT? Say so. [None of this "We recommend that applicants have above a score of 26 on the MCAT" garbage] Do you accept very few students that have not been involved in meaningful research? So so. Do you accept very few students that haven't taken initiative to come up with a novel means to serve the poor/underserved? Say so!

I don't like interviews that are so short. If I am going to spend hundreds and hundreds of dollars to miss class, get on an airplane, battle lay-overs and delays, sit in taxis, and get dressed up all pretty - you better interview me longer than a measly 30 minutes. Harvard was delightful with its interview times: one was 45 minutes and the other was over an hour. I got my money's worth. If my interviewers don't "recommend me for admission", fine - with close to 2 hours of interview time, I feel that they can fully draw a valid conclusion if I am "right" for them. Inversely, at another school, we only spoke for 25 minutes (shyt, there was a timer ticking down for pete sakes! 25 minutes?!)... We could have just had a conversation via text message.

EDIT: that idea of a "match system" for med school admissions is immensely awesome in concept.

An hour and forty-five minute interview is not worth $400 plane ticket + cab fare+hotel+food+missing school. It is only worth it if you get an acceptance IMO.

I think once you get an acceptance in hand things really start to be put in perspective. I think it is sad that you thought you got your "money's worth" for less than 2 hours of their time. What is your chances of getting in from that interview day 20%? This whole process is messed up, but with the supply of premeds rushing to shell out the money they can continue to do this.


In addition, with these top tier schools they know who they want well before they interview. I am almost positive of it.

 

[elblackwell]

No, I look at US News data... # interviewed vs. # accepted.

One offender is Duke: interview 1200 students to then accept only 270 of them.

In Duke's defense, they changed to MMI and are supposedly interviewing a lot less, but as an applicant that has to fly from Hawaii for each interview (much more than 500$) I totally agree that it is unfair. It would be great if we could send the AAMC a collective letter with our thoughts on the matter. It probably wouldn't help in the short term, but you never know. If anyone wants to write that letter, I'll sign!

 

[NeuralNetwork]

i know. did any contributors to this thread realize they were doing other applicants' work for them? A+, SDN.

That was my first thought before I even clicked on this thread..I was hoping someone would've called it out earlier

 

[MegMurry]

That was my first thought before I even clicked on this thread..I was hoping someone would've called it out earlier

i was hoping people would STOP BUMPING IT. whatever, too late now. i submitted my secondary in july anyways and did my part to attempt to stop it. it's not my problem anymore.

late applicants + c/o 2017: if you're interested in USC, subscribe to this thread. some really special people inadvertently decided to help you out!

 

[TunaSub]

In Duke's defense, they changed to MMI and are supposedly interviewing a lot less, but as an applicant that has to fly from Hawaii for each interview (much more than 500$) I totally agree that it is unfair. It would be great if we could send the AAMC a collective letter with our thoughts on the matter. It probably wouldn't help in the short term, but you never know. If anyone wants to write that letter, I'll sign!

We are the 99%

 

[Slowpoke]

We are the 99%

Occupy SDN

 

[Osakhomen]

I agree with most of you guys. I am lucky enough to have parents that have funded a lot of expenses for interviews, but not everyone is as lucky as I am, so I think alternatives should be available for interviews.
Silent rejections are a little annoying. If you don't want me, fine, just let me know!

 

[Quicksilver005]

Great thread.

Honestly, I think that this selection system is much like our tax system. It is overly complicated and just needs to be thrown out. We should start from scratch. Little band aids like switching to the MMI system doesn't fix the overall failing system.

And I disagree. I think medical schools should interview more people instead of less. There are those who would actually have a shot if they get an interview because their resume doesn't do them justice.

 

[LittleLuck]

i was hoping people would STOP BUMPING IT. whatever, too late now. i submitted my secondary in july anyways and did my part to attempt to stop it. it's not my problem anymore.

late applicants + c/o 2017: if you're interested in USC, subscribe to this thread. some really special people inadvertently decided to help you out!

Seriously if you come to SDN to look for answers for your secondaries, that's a pretty depressing issue in itself. When I originally made this thread I had no idea it was a question on any secondary, let alone do I care. I was going for more of a let's actually have a decent thread with some brain storming instead of trolling and demeaning others because you can through the internet.

With that said, looks like the biggest issue people have is a financial one. Sadly, everything is a factor of capitalism, and I see applications getting only more expensive as the years pass tbh.

I also agree with the more selective process, but actually I like more interviews. Let's face it, if you study enough you can get a good MCAT score and GPA, and many people can go to medschool based on just stats. But the interview should weed that out. I think the actual interview should be extremely selective in it's choices, numbers are one thing, but can ADCOM really see who has the ability and personality to be a physician and care for others, or are they just someone who locked themselves in for 4 years and did nothing but study.

 

[pdxjazz]

I'd like to see an online interview system. Something akin to skype or something. Or at least, offer it as an option for people who cannot afford to pay the $500 per interview (airfare + taxi + hotel) that these interviews tend to cost.

To complement "skype" interviews, I believe each school should have a virtual tour of their campus prepared, something like ~1 hour long, including presentations that would normally be given + video and pictures of the campus.

Just to clarify, I don't think this should replace the interview system. I think this should be introduced as an alternative, a complement, to assist those with difficulties meeting the Interview Trail's costs.

I agree. I really don't understand why medical schools aren't trending into some type of technology based interviews. Considering far fewer are accepted than interviewed, it just makes sense. Many schools do have "second look" days already so it's not unreasonable to add a few more dates to allow accepted/waitlisted students the option to visit schools if it helps them with choosing between schools.

If you did all interviews that way (yes replace the current system), the roughly 55% of medical school applicants that don't receive an acceptance would not have needed to travel. Those with only one acceptance would probably not go (why would you, you are going), so only the remaing applicants with multiple acceptances could choose which school(s) to visit to help them with their final decision (or as EBTrailRunner said- explore and experience).

Think of all the time and money that could be saved by the vast majority.

 

[SellerAl]

I would like to see more schools screen for secondaries, so application fees can be minimized if schools truly aren't interested, and so applicants won't be kept hanging thinking they have a chance when there is none.

yeah for sure. but largely so I dont have to write 75 250 word essays

 

[MegMurry]

Seriously if you come to SDN to look for answers for your secondaries, that's a pretty depressing issue in itself. When I originally made this thread I had no idea it was a question on any secondary, let alone do I care. I was going for more of a let's actually have a decent thread with some brain storming instead of trolling and demeaning others because you can through the internet.

I actually didn't utilize SDN for answers to my secondaries, but once I started using SDN, I realized it's actually a pretty common phenomenon for applicants to do so, especially when you're looking for school-specific essays. It's not a method used exclusively by lazy people either. The internet is probably the first resource most applicants use to drum up answers.

I don't doubt you were unaware that this thread is the answer to a secondary question as OP. In fact, I would have been a little appalled if you HAD known that and posted this thread. I agree it's a worthwhile question to discuss because this system is definitely flawed. I was just shocked at how people continued to have this discussion even after Nymphicus and I pointed out that they were answering a secondary question for USC applicants.

I can assure you I'm not a troll and I certainly didn't mean to demean you, so I genuinely apologize if you or anyone else felt abased at all by my earlier post. But it is a fact that the content in this thread is a direct answer to a secondary question. If you don't care, I completely respect your decision to continue this discussion in a public forum. Carry on, guys.

 

[idonotcare]

Here are my $0.02
1. Make the process more fair. All school should announce a firm GPA/MCAT cut off standards that is reflective of the school, not one of those (3.2/26) type, that applies to everyone regardless of race, gender....etc

2. Make the process more transparent. Reveal the number of interview slots, number interviewed, number put on hold, number rejected... Give us an idea where we are in the process. Michigan does a good job with its twitter and tracker, and I'd like to see more schools follow suit.

3. Make the process less expensive on the applicants. Schools right now have no incentive to invite less people or pre-screen secondary because they are making $. If applicant and med school are sharing interview traveling/lodging costs 50/50, that may alter how school hands out interviews, I think.

 

[LittleLuck]

I actually didn't utilize SDN for answers to my secondaries, but once I started using SDN, I realized it's actually a pretty common phenomenon for applicants to do so, especially when you're looking for school-specific essays. It's not a method used exclusively by lazy people either. The internet is probably the first resource most applicants use to drum up answers.

I don't doubt you were unaware that this thread is the answer to a secondary question as OP. In fact, I would have been a little appalled if you HAD known that and posted this thread. I agree it's a worthwhile question to discuss because this system is definitely flawed. I was just shocked at how people continued to have this discussion even after Nymphicus and I pointed out that they were answering a secondary question for USC applicants.

I can assure you I'm not a troll and I certainly didn't mean to demean you, so I genuinely apologize if you or anyone else felt abased at all by my earlier post. But it is a fact that the content in this thread is a direct answer to a secondary question. If you don't care, I completely respect your decision to continue this discussion in a public forum. Carry on, guys.

I was by no means insulted or anything of that kind, there is no need to apologize. I was just talking about in general, and was not trying to point fingers nor was I pointing you out. I guess I can see that we are answering a question from a secondary, or it might be the other way around, where USC copied this question from a discussion lol. Anyways, thanks for contributing.

 

[235009]

i understand where all this frustration is coming from but many of you are only looking at one side of the equation here...i don't think the system is perfect but it certainly doesn't need the kind of overhaul you guys are suggesting. if you are a qualified candidate you will get in without having to spend too much money. unfortunately people from far off and midwest states and cali tend to get screwed over a bit because of their location.

to respond specifically to two "proposals" that i've seen repeated:

1. transparent cutoffs: this is ridiculous. the schools put out a sufficient amount of stats in the MSAR that you should already know that your 3.4/28 makes it very unlikely that you'll get an acceptance. you are free to apply and blow all your money on 40 secondaries...it is not the school's job to stop you...you should have more common sense. as far as i'm concerned thank god for the *****s who got 26 on the MCAT who apply every year....otherwise the secondary fees would be even higher!

2. online interviews: there is a lot you can learn about a school by visiting. you won't get the same experience in an online interview. you won't be able to see the facilities, talk to students, get a feel for the school, the student body or the environment. someone mentioned that you will just see the school during second look but that will mean that schools will hand out way fewer acceptances off the bat and string along way more people on the wait list until second look when they find out how many will drop out because they are visiting for the first time and realizing that they hate the school. it will only serve to prolong the process even more.

 

[idonotcare]

I agree to a certain extent. However, here are some additional considerations:
1. Transparent cutoff removes certain degree of nepotism and arbitrary differentiation based on superficial characteristics of applicants from the process. I think for a school where the average accepted MCAT is 37 to admit people with 27 MCAT score is unfair to applicants who worked hard and those who may have come from equally difficult backgrounds. Numbers are objective and fair. While it shouldn't be the only factor in the admission process, there should be a standard that applies to everyone. If people are obligated to go into primary or rural care, or obligated to serve in military, there could be a separate admission track with different cutoff.

2. Campus visit should be optional. I think most people will interview at many places until they have a firm acceptance in hand. I think most school have the capability for tele-conference, and it doesn't involve expensive upgrade to offer that as an option. That way, students can only visit their top choices and cut down on the traveling costs.

i understand where all this frustration is coming from but many of you are only looking at one side of the equation here...i don't think the system is perfect but it certainly doesn't need the kind of overhaul you guys are suggesting. if you are a qualified candidate you will get in without having to spend too much money. unfortunately people from far off and midwest states and cali tend to get screwed over a bit because of their location.

to respond specifically to two "proposals" that i've seen repeated:

1. transparent cutoffs: this is ridiculous. the schools put out a sufficient amount of stats in the MSAR that you should already know that your 3.4/28 makes it very unlikely that you'll get an acceptance. you are free to apply and blow all your money on 40 secondaries...it is not the school's job to stop you...you should have more common sense. as far as i'm concerned thank god for the *****s who got 26 on the MCAT who apply every year....otherwise the secondary fees would be even higher!

2. online interviews: there is a lot you can learn about a school by visiting. you won't get the same experience in an online interview. you won't be able to see the facilities, talk to students, get a feel for the school, the student body or the environment. someone mentioned that you will just see the school during second look but that will mean that schools will hand out way fewer acceptances off the bat and string along way more people on the wait list until second look when they find out how many will drop out because they are visiting for the first time and realizing that they hate the school. it will only serve to prolong the process even more.

 

[centrigeugle]

You all know the rejected students subsidize the application fees for the strong/accepted ones, right? I'd rather not have a quarter of the applicants and quadruple the secondary fee.

You guys remind me of the students who get all butthurt when the professor doesn't tell them explicitly what's going to be on the midterm and complain that it isn't fair.

 

[Nymphicus]

I agree to a certain extent. However, here are some additional considerations:
1. Transparent cutoff removes certain degree of nepotism and arbitrary differentiation based on superficial characteristics of applicants from the process. I think for a school where the average accepted MCAT is 37 to admit people with 27 MCAT score is unfair to applicants who worked hard and those who may have come from equally difficult backgrounds. Numbers are objective and fair. While it shouldn't be the only factor in the admission process, there should be a standard that applies to everyone. If people are obligated to go into primary or rural care, or obligated to serve in military, there could be a separate admission track with different cutoff. .

no to #1 and no to bolded

 

[kansaskid]

1. Financial assistance/options for interviews. I am super lucky in that my parents are footing all the bills for med school apps. But that's not the case for everyone... and while there's Fee Assistance for primaries/secondaries, airfares and hotels for interviews can really add up and be quite prohibitive for many. No idea how this could be executed practically, however.
.

This. This is really the only thing that was difficult for me personally. I had to cancel interviews because I couldn't afford to get there. Student hosting saved me money on hotels, but air travel was impossible. Maybe students who get the fee waiver could be offered some sort of financial help in traveling. I'm lucky that my first choice school was my state school, but what if it wasn't? Or the closest school was over $200 to get to? That would suck.