All those extra curricular things (Choir, music etc) will NOT matter at all to admissions. Focus more of your time on getting good exposure to the medical field. Dont spend a few hours here and there but spend a good amount of quality time at one place.
Stay focused and get to know as many people as you can and use them as mentors and think of them as assets that you might use later in life.
Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
I also disagree. For top schools, your ECs unrelated to medicine matter just as much, if not more. Why? Top schools want leaders, people that will change medicine and the world. How do you find those people? Well, great question. The best they can do is to use an indirect means of assessing who have the best potential to be those leaders. You start with academics, and rightfully so. That leaves ~2,000 students who are the cream of the crop numerically (>= 36, 3.80). That's far more than the number of seats at top 10s, not to mention the top 5. Of those people, the majority will be "well-rounded" with volunteering (clinical,non), some club involvement, shadowing, research, and usually some hobby. So then how do you decide who to pick out of the 2,000 students PLUS the exceptional students with lower numbers? You look for the pointy candidates. As someone in a recent post phrased quite nicely, many of the ECs you put are marked by participation. You need to distinguish yourself and the only way to do that is through results--productivity. Looking at MDapps, my own app, and that of my friends, it is obvious that most acceptees to these top programs are not well-rounded in the traditional sense. Yes, they have most things from clinical exposure to research; yet, the amount and caliber of these things are extremely lackluster i.e. average or even below average. What gets them in (beyond the LORs, interviews) is some aspect that really sticks out, something maybe only a handful of applicants have each cycle. Furthermore, it is my impression that most schools do not put numbers as the main criteria after a certain point; it so just happens that many high stat applicants are the ones with ECs that fit an institution.
If OP really wants to go to Stanford, the best hope is to try and stick out like a sore thumb somehow. There is no guarantee OP can make it specifically to Stanford, but if she develops a pointy app, she has a very nice chance of getting to a top 5 assuming LORs, stats, interview are up to par.
So how does OP do that? Looking at her original post, it seems as if she is passionate about classical music and opera. If OP can develop that to a high level (also dependent on her current level) that is recognised, that is exactly the point thing she needs. I would advise OP to forget about piano for the app; there is almost no chance you will develop piano skills to a pointy level in 3-4 years. Also, pointy doesn't have to necessarily mean you are the national champion at something. An Asian who plays football at a high level stands out because of how few Asians play football let alone at a high level. Furthermore, certain activities stand out by themselves; examples would be like people who tight rope walk between canyons, someone who could play an uncommon instrument (perhaps from the medieval times), etc.
Knowing all that leads to how someone could manage the time to become pointy.
Trying to be well-rounded is the pitfall to developing an app for the top schools (top 5 in particular). If you try to be well-rounded, you devote little chunks of time to everywhere. These little chunks add up and you aren't able to excel in a particular area. Forget about volunteering a few hours each week or doing more shadowing than you need or doing a bit of research here and hopping labs or changing projects. Focus almost exclusively on that one area that you want to make pointy while maintaining your academics. Can you develop something pointy in 3-4 years? Possibly but definitely even if you worked on it full-time, it is not a guarantee. You can imagine that many applicants who have these pointy things are just ordinary people who picked up that activity a long long time ago.
Yes, research is very important and commonplace for these applicants because it is one of the most readily accessible activities at many institutions. The qualities you derive from research is also very important. However, don't get the wrong impression that you must have exceptional research to be admitted at these schools. Standing out in research is a hit or miss for many factors, ranging from how many pre-meds pursue it to your specific project and lab.
Lastly, try to have a theme to your application. Forget the volunteering at the hospital, free clinic, etc (in most instances). Tailor these things to your passion. If you excel at a sport, volunteer with disabled children that play that sport or at a special olympics camp, etc. If you excel at singing, coordinate something with patients in the hospital to put that voice to use. Don't do a random grab bag of stuff just to check the boxes. If you love cancer research, try to do some volunteering or shadowing in the oncology department so you can paint a face to the work you do in an isolated room. Link your activities so you have a theme and you will actually
like doing them.
P.S. if you try to develop a pointy part just for the sake of it and you aren't actually passionate about it, you are in for a very very long road. The amount of dedication and work that is required to truly stand out will test you.
