Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
TBF UW seems to have a big discrepancy between the numbers for the same statistics that they report to AAMC. When you show the MSAR numbers to UWSOM staff, a lot of times the answer is "well those aren't the numbers that I've been shown" and you'll get blown off. For the life of me, I've never been able to reconcile two separate statistics for the same thing in the same year from different parts of the AAMC's tables/data for UW.*sigh* I think we're beginning to talk past each other here. Plus I don't know where you're getting your stats from but I'm getting mine from MSAR.
Let's define "lucky state". Psicorps did this in the 2nd post of this thread. My definition of a lucky stats is one that highly favors IS vs OOS. The odds of someone from CT getting into a seat at U Conn is > 15%. the odds of someone from OOS getting in is < 1%. And Rutgers accepts OOsers in the single digits.
I don't care how many Nutmeggers or Garden Staters have to go OOS to med school. CT, NJ and WA are NOT CA. Hence, to me, they are lucky states. CA is not. VA (for VCU) or VT aren't either,
They are states where residents have a higher chance of getting accepted to medical school. They typically have a larger number of seats available for in-state students compared to the number of applicants they get. You can look at this table for data on each state.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321466/data/factstablea5.pdf
And c'mon, PossibleDOC I was discussing odds, period. Not the caliber of applicants, or applicant pools.
