What is the big deal with applying early?!!

[makennacompton]

RE: "In the first interviews they are not sure of the quality of later applicants; they are only sure of the current applicants. Hence, they are naturally going to accept a lot of people in the beginning a"

This is nuts. After years of evaluating applications and receiving thousands of applications, the schools ABSOLUTELY KNOW what the profile of their class is generally going to look like. I don't see any reason for them to be unsure of the quality of the applicants they are likely to receive. It is totally nuts to me that under rolling admissions the schools end up giving IIs and admits to low GPAs and low MCATs because, somehow, they are afraid that no one will show up at the end of the day? There are at least 7,000 applicants with 35+ MCATs, more than enough to go around and, indeed, wait for. Why roll with low stats? What are these schools thinking? They just allow the low stat applicant to level the playing field or indeed get a leg up on a high stat applicant merely by the quirk of applying early? Since when is an early app and indication of anything in the field of medicine? Excuse the rant, but goro or someone has to really come up with a substantive explanation as to why rolling schools knowingly devalue their status with low stat admits because the low stats are what dominates the early field? Help me make sense of this folly!!!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[NotASerialKiller]

I think you're misunderstanding this. They aren't taking people with terrible stats, they're taking strong applicants who are applying early. Therefore if similarly strong applicants apply later they are at a disadvantage, and if you're a great applicant but you apply really late you can't expect them to be holding a spot for you.

Remember that you're not amazing and unique and your mother was wrong. You are extremely replaceable and medicine is competitive. Even with a strong application there are still a ton of other people with equally strong applications for them to take, so why would they wait around for you?

 

[MerciMerci]

Late in the application season, with few seats remaining, I am sure the sorting process looks something like this:

Look at GPA/MCAT --> if below certain numbers, toss app out and disregard ECs.

 

[MrLogan13]

What @NotASerialKiller said. It's not like they're scraping the bottom of the barrel. They're still selecting high quality applicants. It's just that similar applicants won't stand out as much later in the cycle.

 

[Oncie]

At the end of the day, there's not much of difference between a 3.6 and a 3.8. If a 3.6 applied early, then good on him because he's punctual. Might suck for the 3.8 guy though if he's getting in to it late in the season.

 

[rocklobstr]

Easy solution. Apply early and quit whining.

 

[johnnytest]

There are strong applicants throughout the application cycle. Unless you are the top 1% then applying early will ensure you have a better chance at rolling schools.

 

[gyngyn]

There are strong applicants throughout the application cycle. Unless you are the top 1% then applying early will ensure you have a better chance at rolling schools.

A strong early application is just as important at non-rolling schools.
Half the interview slots are gone by now and decisions are getting made every day.
The only difference is when they tell you!

 

[IlDestriero]

Ultimately a school or residency or fellowship is only going to offer a limited number of interviews and a limited number of offers. As they fill up later in the cycle, competition for the much more limited spots increases. When the job hunt rolls around if a group plans to hire one person, as soon as a great candidate, who wants to come to that group, and seems like a good fit comes along, the offer will go out and they'll be done looking.
The early bird gets the worm.

 

[makennacompton]

RE: "In the first interviews they are not sure of the quality of later applicants; they are only sure of the current applicants. Hence, they are naturally going to accept a lot of people in the beginning a"

This is nuts. After years of evaluating applications and receiving thousands of applications, the schools ABSOLUTELY KNOW what the profile of their class is generally going to look like. I don't see any reason for them to be unsure of the quality of the applicants they are likely to receive. It is totally nuts to me that under rolling admissions the schools end up giving IIs and admits to low GPAs and low MCATs because, somehow, they are afraid that no one will show up at the end of the day? There are at least 7,000 applicants with 35+ MCATs, more than enough to go around and, indeed, wait for. Why roll with low stats? What are these schools thinking? They just allow the low stat applicant to level the playing field or indeed get a leg up on a high stat applicant merely by the quirk of applying early? Since when is an early app and indication of anything in the field of medicine? Excuse the rant, but goro or someone has to really come up with a substantive explanation as to why rolling schools knowingly devalue their status with low stat admits because the low stats are what dominates the early field? Help me make sense of this folly!!!

 

[canttellmenothin]

I think the reasoning behind applying early is that interview invites are always given out on a rolling basis and by applying early you have a higher chance of getting one because all or most of them are still available. Think about it from the school's perspective, it is easier to justify/take a risk on a candidate with lower stats when all your interview spots are open as opposed to when there are just a few remaining. But hey what do I know, go ahead and submit your app in october and see what happens.

 

[625233]

I've always said, submit in November, because you've gotta let them know that you're exceptional.

 

[625233]

Exceptionally stupid

 

[MangoPotato]

If you have the stats that fit the school's profile, why did it take you 3 months to fill in an application and write a few essays?

 

[MrLogan13]

What happened to the original thread?

 

[tenblackalps]

RE: "In the first interviews they are not sure of the quality of later applicants; they are only sure of the current applicants. Hence, they are naturally going to accept a lot of people in the beginning a"

This is nuts. After years of evaluating applications and receiving thousands of applications, the schools ABSOLUTELY KNOW what the profile of their class is generally going to look like. I don't see any reason for them to be unsure of the quality of the applicants they are likely to receive. It is totally nuts to me that under rolling admissions the schools end up giving IIs and admits to low GPAs and low MCATs because, somehow, they are afraid that no one will show up at the end of the day? There are at least 7,000 applicants with 35+ MCATs, more than enough to go around and, indeed, wait for. Why roll with low stats? What are these schools thinking? They just allow the low stat applicant to level the playing field or indeed get a leg up on a high stat applicant merely by the quirk of applying early? Since when is an early app and indication of anything in the field of medicine? Excuse the rant, but goro or someone has to really come up with a substantive explanation as to why rolling schools knowingly devalue their status with low stat admits because the low stats are what dominates the early field? Help me make sense of this folly!!!

Go ahead and apply late then

 

[LizzyM]

One year, my school received 25% of all the application received for the entire season on day #1. We could have filled the class many times over with the applications from that one day. There is no need to settle for low priority applicants early in the season. If anything, you try to interview those who will be most highly sought after because odds are they'll have an offer by Oct 15-Nov 1 and after that may be much more picky about accepting interview invites.

 

[musicalfeet]

One year, my school received 25% of all the application received for the entire season on day #1. We could have filled the class many times over with the applications from that one day. There is no need to settle for low priority applicants early in the season. If anything, you try to interview those who will be most highly sought after because odds are they'll have an offer by Oct 15-Nov 1 and after that may be much more picky about accepting interview invites.

It's crazy but I think I'm finally understanding this reasoning after realizing that if 2/4 of the IIs I have this month end up in an acceptance in October, the only schools I'd still consider going to interviews if invited after that point are the CA schools and one other OOS that is arguably my top OOS school. And of course, I'm hoping and wishing that Oct 15-Nov1 will yield an acceptance so I don't have to worry anymore...

 

[Ismet]

Merging duplicate threads.

 

[Goro]

Read this thread carefully:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/are-half-of-the-interviews-slots-already-given-out.1162142/

RE: "In the first interviews they are not sure of the quality of later applicants; they are only sure of the current applicants. Hence, they are naturally going to accept a lot of people in the beginning a"

This is nuts. After years of evaluating applications and receiving thousands of applications, the schools ABSOLUTELY KNOW what the profile of their class is generally going to look like. I don't see any reason for them to be unsure of the quality of the applicants they are likely to receive. It is totally nuts to me that under rolling admissions the schools end up giving IIs and admits to low GPAs and low MCATs because, somehow, they are afraid that no one will show up at the end of the day? There are at least 7,000 applicants with 35+ MCATs, more than enough to go around and, indeed, wait for. Why roll with low stats? What are these schools thinking? They just allow the low stat applicant to level the playing field or indeed get a leg up on a high stat applicant merely by the quirk of applying early? Since when is an early app and indication of anything in the field of medicine? Excuse the rant, but goro or someone has to really come up with a substantive explanation as to why rolling schools knowingly devalue their status with low stat admits because the low stats are what dominates the early field? Help me make sense of this folly!!!

 

[Whats up Doc!]

I cant speak for adcoms but I believe applying early also shows a few qualities of the individual applying like commitment and punctuality which I can imagine will probably be good skills for any physician. Also some schools dont like it when students apply to them late because in many cases it says "Hey I didnt get into any other schools so now im applying to you even though I dont really like you". I knocked out my primary app as soon as I could (with extreme thoroughness) and the turnaround time on my secondaries was about 2-4 days and I received a very early interview no doubt because of my quick turnaround.

 

[Goro]

Bingo! You'd be surprised how many people think that they can get into Harvard or Yale.

I cant speak for adcoms but I believe applying early also shows a few qualities of the individual applying like commitment and punctuality which I can imagine will probably be good skills for any physician. Also some schools dont like it when students apply to them late because in many cases it says "Hey I didnt get into any other schools so now im applying to you even though I dont really like you". I knocked out my primary app as soon as I could (with extreme thoroughness) and the turnaround time on my secondaries was about 2-4 days and I received a very early interview no doubt because of my quick turnaround.

 

[Lawpy]

Bingo! You'd be surprised how many people think that they can get into Harvard or Yale.

Curious how both threads appeared within 5 hours apart.

 

[Goro]

Someone is either A) poor at time mgt, B) desperate.

Curious how both threads appeared within 5 hours apart.

 

[UCSDMember]

Would you guys consider being complete by the end of August or September late?
I'm really bummed because I didn't know being so early was this crucial. I submitted a few secondaries by the end of August, but submitted most by early to mid September.

Thanks!

EDIT: My GPA is ~3.5 (very strong upward trend and 4.0 DIY post-bacc) and my MCAT is over the 90th percentile.

 

[Holmwood]

Would you guys consider being complete by the end of August or September late?
I'm really bummed because I didn't know being so early was this crucial. I submitted a few secondaries by the end of August, but submitted most by early to mid September.

Thanks!

Hmm... If you're a top-notch applicant, I think you might be fine. If you're not a top-notch applicant and are likely to be put on the "re-review" status by some schools, then prospects are not that great. That's because by the time they re-review, it's bordering on the holidays and most interview invites should be given out already. As others have mentioned, it also depends on your school choices. . .

Either way, you're not in the danger zone. You're just not in the awesome zone. Better to keep working on your application so that you might have something to update schools to further your chances. This goes for those early applyers too...

 

[Terry Toma]

If I'm sitting at the bar with $1,000 in my pocket, I'll think nothing of spending $6 on a beer that I may or may not like just because I think I might like it and want to give it a try. If I'm at the bar with $6 in my pocket, I'm buying a beer that I know I like because I don't want to spend my last dollar on something that could turn out to suck.

Same principle applies to interview invites. If a school has several hundred IIs to give away, they'll be inclined to "spend" them a bit more liberally, and they might give a chance to a candidate who could be hit or miss. By the time the school is deciding who to give that last II to, they aren't feeling as adventurous and they want to go with the sure thing.

It's not like they're saying "this guy is clearly terrible, but let's bring him in for an interview anyway." They are just more willing to interview someone who seems like they could make a solid med student despite lacking in one stat or another. If a candidate did horribly in undergrad 10 years ago, but rocked a 4.0 GPA through 60 credits of postbach work, they might make a good med student even if they only ended up with a 3.2 GPA overall. That student might not be worth giving the last interview invite to, but while a school has 500 IIs left to give out, they might be interested in giving that student a chance to interview.

 

[p0gono]

If I'm sitting at the bar with $1,000 in my pocket, I'll think nothing of spending $6 on a beer that I may or may not like just because I think I might like it and want to give it a try. If I'm at the bar with $6 in my pocket, I'm buying a beer that I know I like because I don't want to spend my last dollar on something that could turn out to suck.

Same principle applies to interview invites. If a school has several hundred IIs to give away, they'll be inclined to "spend" them a bit more liberally, and they might give a chance to a candidate who could be hit or miss. By the time the school is deciding who to give that last II to, they aren't feeling as adventurous and they want to go with the sure thing.

It's not like they're saying "this guy is clearly terrible, but let's bring him in for an interview anyway." They are just more willing to interview someone who seems like they could make a solid med student despite lacking in one stat or another. If a candidate did horribly in undergrad 10 years ago, but rocked a 4.0 GPA through 60 credits of postbach work, they might make a good med student even if they only ended up with a 3.2 GPA overall. That student might not be worth giving the last interview invite to, but while a school has 500 IIs left to give out, they might be interested in giving that student a chance to interview.

Hmm but to make this metaphor a little more accurate -
There is only one visit to the bar, starting with $1000, and all the beers will come at the same time. Sure, they have to pour some before the others but you can't drink the beer until you've paid for it. Or is there a tab?

 

[LizzyM]

Hmm but to make this metaphor a little more accurate -
There is only one visit to the bar, starting with $1000, and all the beers will come at the same time. Sure, they have to pour some before the others but you can't drink the beer until you've paid poor it. Or is there a tab?

It's a beer festival.... there are dozens already poured and waiting, you can only try so many before the night is over. Some people go for the top notch beers, some stick with instate breweries and some go for the rare brews such as gluten free (under-represented). There is really no reason to settle for a flat, warm Bud light when there are far better choices, even if the night is still young.

 

[Spector1]

RE: "In the first interviews they are not sure of the quality of later applicants; they are only sure of the current applicants. Hence, they are naturally going to accept a lot of people in the beginning a"

This is nuts. After years of evaluating applications and receiving thousands of applications, the schools ABSOLUTELY KNOW what the profile of their class is generally going to look like. I don't see any reason for them to be unsure of the quality of the applicants they are likely to receive. It is totally nuts to me that under rolling admissions the schools end up giving IIs and admits to low GPAs and low MCATs because, somehow, they are afraid that no one will show up at the end of the day? There are at least 7,000 applicants with 35+ MCATs, more than enough to go around and, indeed, wait for. Why roll with low stats? What are these schools thinking? They just allow the low stat applicant to level the playing field or indeed get a leg up on a high stat applicant merely by the quirk of applying early? Since when is an early app and indication of anything in the field of medicine? Excuse the rant, but goro or someone has to really come up with a substantive explanation as to why rolling schools knowingly devalue their status with low stat admits because the low stats are what dominates the early field? Help me make sense of this folly!!!

if you think its so nuts, then don't apply early. Apply as late as you want. Tell us how it works come May.

 

[makennacompton]

I think it's nuts for the schools, but the beer argument speaks to me: schools will take risk with IIs early in the cycle but not later (when they have fewer to give out). Thus the low stat applicant, who may by definition be "risky," gets a shot early where they would be discarded late. Now makes sense.

 

[piii]

I think it's nuts how often you are throwing around the "stats" buzzword like "high stats" applicants automatically have better life experience, letters, essays and interview skills than "low stats" applicants. It's incredibly short sided. Schools aren't interviewing these "low stats" applicants because they are early, but because they have other intangibles that you've failed to account for.

At the end of the day, having a 35/3.8 won't make you a better doctor than someone with a 3.5/32 based on stats alone and most schools see that. So they aren't "devaluing" anyone... The people they chose, while they may have lower stats, are still fit and deserving to be physicians or at least given the chance to prove it during an interview.

 

[moisne]

If I'm sitting at the bar with $1,000 in my pocket, I'll think nothing of spending $6 on a beer that I may or may not like just because I think I might like it and want to give it a try. If I'm at the bar with $6 in my pocket, I'm buying a beer that I know I like because I don't want to spend my last dollar on something that could turn out to suck.

Same principle applies to interview invites. If a school has several hundred IIs to give away, they'll be inclined to "spend" them a bit more liberally, and they might give a chance to a candidate who could be hit or miss. By the time the school is deciding who to give that last II to, they aren't feeling as adventurous and they want to go with the sure thing.

It's not like they're saying "this guy is clearly terrible, but let's bring him in for an interview anyway." They are just more willing to interview someone who seems like they could make a solid med student despite lacking in one stat or another. If a candidate did horribly in undergrad 10 years ago, but rocked a 4.0 GPA through 60 credits of postbach work, they might make a good med student even if they only ended up with a 3.2 GPA overall. That student might not be worth giving the last interview invite to, but while a school has 500 IIs left to give out, they might be interested in giving that student a chance to interview.

Omg, are you still alive? You have an amazing liver - 1k worth of beer lol

 

[BluMist]

So that's what you got out of the passage? What did you get on CARS?

Omg, are you still alive? You have an amazing liver - 1k worth of beer lol

 

[LizzyM]

With 10, or 20 or 50 applicants for every seat to be filled, if they are looking for high stats applicants, a school can find applicants with high stats and other great attributes. Some schools operate under different values and will selectively choose instate applicants, applicants with extensive community service and so forth. As we've been saying, schools have so many applicants to choose from that they never have to settle for what they would consider "low quality".

 

[Goro]

To follow up on my learned colleague's comment, there's more to applicants than merely their stats. A combat veteran with a 3.4 GPA is just as "high quality" as the lab rat with a 3.99.

With 10, or 20 or 50 applicants for every seat to be filled, if they are looking for high stats applicants, a school can find applicants with high stats and other great attributes. Some schools operate under different values and will selectively choose instate applicants, applicants with extensive community service and so forth. As we've been saying, schools have so many applicants to choose from that they never have to settle for what they would consider "low quality".

 

[moisne]

What's CARS?
lol

So that's what you got out of the passage? What did you get on CARS?

 

[Mr Magpie]

What's CARS?
lol

The verbal for the new mcat basically

 

[moisne]

So that's what you got out of the passage? What did you get on CARS?

The verbal for the new mcat basically

Lol VR = 6