When to start worrying as a high-stat applicant?

[wx18225500]

LM 82. , Applied broadly and turned in all my secondaries in mid to late July - received 3 II July/early august from NYU, Yale, Jefferson. Since then, it’s been down hill, my last II was 2 months ago, and Ive just gotten holds (2) and Rs (4, 3 in the span of the last week lol).

My concern, based on the consensus here on here, is that schools tend to review high stat applicants first. So are these the only ones I should look forward to? I’m especially worried since I feel like I megabotched my shot at NYU recently.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[KnightDoc]

Nice first post! Welcome to SDN.

I don't think you're going to get a lot of love for asking a question like this in early/mid October with 2 T10 IIs plus one more. That said, an important point you seem to have ignored is that you can take nothing for granted until you have an A by asking about starting to worry now, as opposed to be constantly working to make yourself a better candidate, at least until you score your first A.

Beyond that, even though it is still early, and you definitely can, and probably will, receive a few more IIs, you have my permission to start worrying. You haven't told us anything beyond your LM score, which works out to around a 4.0/520. Based on that alone, the fact you are not doing better looks like a combination of resource protection at lower tier schools and not enough going on with your application beyond stats for most of the top tiers.

You probably have been reviewed and put aside at many of the schools you haven't heard from (silent holds). They might yet come around with an II after they get further into their piles. Also, as @LizzyM posted a few days ago, some other schools might have you queued up for an II that they won't release until closer to the date. Aside from that, yes, your understanding of the SDN consensus is correct. As the cycle progresses from here (really, from the end of October, since lots of IIs are still going out), the majority of the remaining IIs won't be going to LM 82 candidates who were reviewed and passed over in August/September.

Sorry you got prematurely excited in early August and are now crashing back down to earth, but you have to realize that you are doing far better than the vast majority of applicants, and that "worrying" accomplishes nothing, so it's really not a great question. If you want to tell us more about yourself and your application, maybe some of the experts (as well as the rest of us) can point you in the right direction in case you end up being a reapplicant. With 3 IIs, the odds are still good that you will receive an A. OTOH, if there is something deficient in your application, and if you really did blow one interview (keeping in mind we are terrible judges of our own performances), then your high stats alone might not be enough to push you over the top.

 

[Zuggelder]

LM 82. , Applied broadly and turned in all my secondaries in mid to late July - received 3 II July/early august from NYU, Yale, Jefferson. Since then, it’s been down hill, my last II was 2 months ago, and Ive just gotten holds (2) and Rs (4, 3 in the span of the last week lol).

My concern, based on the consensus here on here, is that schools tend to review high stat applicants first. So are these the only ones I should look forward to? I’m especially worried since I feel like I megabotched my shot at NYU recently.

What's your WARS score? This provides important information, beyond your stats, on the competitiveness of your app at the top schools.

 

[LizzyM]

"Interviews three, a doctor you'll be" holds true most of the time.

Just as I say that no one can worry about not having any interview invitations until after we've gotten past (American) Thanksgiving (shout out to all our Canadian friends celebrating today), you can't worry about not having any offers of admission until after Mardi Gras (March 1 this year). Sit back, distract yourself with something entertaining or edifying, and enjoy the trip to Mars.

 

[wx18225500]

Nice first post! Welcome to SDN.

I don't think you're going to get a lot of love for asking a question like this in early/mid October with 2 T10 IIs plus one more. That said, an important point you seem to have ignored is that you can take nothing for granted until you have an A by asking about starting to worry now, as opposed to be constantly working to make yourself a better candidate, at least until you score your first A.

Beyond that, even though it is still early, and you definitely can, and probably will, receive a few more IIs, you have my permission to start worrying. You haven't told us anything beyond your LM score, which works out to around a 4.0/520. Based on that alone, the fact you are not doing better looks like a combination of resource protection at lower tier schools and not enough going on with your application beyond stats for most of the top tiers.

You probably have been reviewed and put aside at many of the schools you haven't heard from (silent holds). They might yet come around with an II after they get further into their piles. Also, as @LizzyM posted a few days ago, some other schools might have you queued up for an II that they won't release until closer to the date. Aside from that, yes, your understanding of the SDN consensus is correct. As the cycle progresses from here (really, from the end of October, since lots of IIs are still going out), the majority of the remaining IIs won't be going to LM 82 candidates who were reviewed and passed over in August/September.

Sorry you got prematurely excited in early August and are now crashing back down to earth, but you have to realize that you are doing far better than the vast majority of applicants, and that "worrying" accomplishes nothing, so it's really not a great question. If you want to tell us more about yourself and your application, maybe some of the experts (as well as the rest of us) can point you in the right direction in case you end up being a reapplicant. With 3 IIs, the odds are still good that you will receive an A. OTOH, if there is something deficient in your application, and if you really did blow one interview (keeping in mind we are terrible judges of our own performances), then your high stats alone might not be enough to push you over the top.

Appreciate the welcome and insight Mr KnightDoc

What's your WARS score? This provides important information, beyond your stats, on the competitiveness of your app at the top schools.

My WARS is ~91. No gaping holes from what I can tell (although as KnightDoc says its hard to judge yourself), but it leans very heavily towards research (~4000 hours across 3 labs). On that note, I may have a little less "to show" relative to others with similar dedication to research - 2 poster presentations, and 3 peer-reviewed article co-authorships that are in the "submitted/under review" phase (which I understand don't mean too much).

 

[KnightDoc]

Appreciate the welcome and insight Mr KnightDoc

My WARS is ~91. No gaping holes from what I can tell (although as KnightDoc says its hard to judge yourself), but it leans very heavily towards research (~4000 hours across 3 labs). On that note, I may have a little less "to show" relative to others with similar dedication to research - 2 poster presentations, and 3 peer-reviewed article co-authorships that are in the "submitted/under review" phase (which I understand don't mean too much).

Your research is great, and more than adequate. Research productivity at the UG level is greatly over rated by the SDN crowd, and plenty of people are very successful without first author pubs in Nature. What might be glaring here is your failure to mention the other checked "boxes." If they're on the light side, that might be your answer. Otherwise, the only other potential culprits are your writing or school list, if, by "broad," you meant T20 in addition to T10. 🙂

Bottom line -- it's definitely too soon to panic, and, in any event, there is nothing you can do at this point to fix whatever is wrong. 3 IIs with probably a few more before we are done is pretty good, and will likely lead to at least one A.

Finally, and this falls into the "good news, bad news" category, don't waste you time beating yourself up over a NYU interview. As you probably know, NYU offers a unique value proposition for applicants not eligible for need-based aid. Moreover, they interview a crazy amount of applicants relative to the number of As they have to issue to fill their class.

As a result, they have what is probably the lowest post-II rate in the country, at around 15%. Given that anyone interviewing there has an 85% of not being accepted, either up front or off the WL, getting accepted there is like winning the lottery, no matter well you do on the interview.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

How many schools did you apply to? Did you get post II hold, R, or acceptance at NYU (they’ve began giving them out)

I was having a similar feeling towards the beginning of October after getting 3 in august/September and the not getting any for four weeks. But then in the past two weeks I’ve gotten 4 more. There’s really no rhyme or reason to when IIs get sent and I do believe that they’re somewhat behind this year and or sending them in smaller spurts (because it’s easier to give applicants less notice if they don’t have to travel)

What is the post II acceptance rate of Jefferson? I know that Yale and NYU are fairly low (and Yale doesn’t release until the spring)

 

[wx18225500]

How many schools did you apply to? Did you get post II hold, R, or acceptance at NYU (they’ve began giving them out)

I was having a similar feeling towards the beginning of October after getting 3 in august/September and the not getting any for four weeks. But then in the past two weeks I’ve gotten 4 more. There’s really no rhyme or reason to when IIs get sent and I do believe that they’re somewhat behind this year and or sending them in smaller spurts (because it’s easier to give applicants less notice if they don’t have to travel)

What is the post II acceptance rate of Jefferson? I know that Yale and NYU are fairly low (and Yale doesn’t release until the spring)

Submitted 36 secondaries. Interviewed a week ago at NYU, so haven't heard back yet (fingers crossed).

I hope they're indeed proceeding slower lol, perhaps they are scheduling them close to the last invitation date because of the point you mentioned.

Not sure what the post II rate is, I think according to that one excel its ~60% but I'm not sure how accurate that doc is since the number Dean Rivera gave for NYU was fairly different (lower) than the number on that spreadsheet.

 

[KnightDoc]

Submitted 36 secondaries. Interviewed a week ago at NYU, so haven't heard back yet (fingers crossed).

I hope they're indeed proceeding slower lol, perhaps they are scheduling them close to the last invitation date because of the point you mentioned.

Not sure what the post II rate is, I think according to that one excel its ~60% but I'm not sure how accurate that doc is since the number Dean Rivera gave for NYU was fairly different (lower) than the number on that spreadsheet.

The number varies widely, from around 15% at a school like NYU to over 70% at a few places. 33% is an overall, conservative estimate, which is where @LizzyM's "Interviews three, a doctor you'll be" comes from. Of course, it's not totally random, so a person starting our higher on her ladder, or being a naturally excellent interviewee will have better results, while the converse will also be true.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

The number varies widely, from around 15% at a school like NYU to over 70% at a few places. 33% is an overall, conservative estimate, which is where @LizzyM's "Interviews three, a doctor you'll be" comes from. Of course, it's not totally random, so a person starting our higher on her ladder, or being a naturally excellent interviewee will have better results, while the converse will also be true.

Do you know which schools accept a supermajority post II. I’ve looked at the spreadsheets but they seem to vary tear to year

 

[KnightDoc]

Do you know which schools accept a supermajority post II. I’ve looked at the spreadsheets but they seem to vary tear to year

I haven't studied every school, and I really don't trust the web sourced spreadsheets due to the lack of QC. The real numbers don't vary much at a particular school from year to year, unless something crazy happens, like NYU going tuition free, or there being a sudden, COVID induced 20% spike in applications, while reported numbers on publicly sourced spreadsheets are all over the place depending on who is reporting and how much of the reporting is pure BS.

Michigan is the one that always comes to mind for me. It's incredibly difficult to get an II from them, and then actually pretty difficult not to receive an A, either straight up or from the WL (straight from their 5 year tracker -- 1,222 IS apps, 6,130 OOS, resulting in 123 IS IIs and 372 OOS, leading to 100 IS As and 281 OOS).

There aren't a ton of other nationally ranked schools with such impressive numbers, but, which might be of interest to you, UVA happens to be another one! 🙂 According to my numbers, their IS II -->A rate is around 80% and something like 65% OOS. As said before, 35-50% is more typical, with the IS numbers somewhat higher than OOS at most schools, not just the public ones.

 

[Goro]

LM 82. , Applied broadly and turned in all my secondaries in mid to late July - received 3 II July/early august from NYU, Yale, Jefferson. Since then, it’s been down hill, my last II was 2 months ago, and Ive just gotten holds (2) and Rs (4, 3 in the span of the last week lol).

My concern, based on the consensus here on here, is that schools tend to review high stat applicants first. So are these the only ones I should look forward to? I’m especially worried since I feel like I megabotched my shot at NYU recently.

Thanksgiving

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

What is the thanksgiving equivalent for acceptances?

 

[KnightDoc]

What is the thanksgiving equivalent for acceptances?

May. Seriously. Schools are all over the place, between rolling and non-rolling, and aggressively issuing As up front based on projected yield, or making liberal use of the WL after being very conservative with initial As.

If you look at last year's threads, in particular the WL support thread, you'll see plenty of people, including some with very high stats, freaking out because they had zero As heading into the end of April and ending up with several by the end of May.

By the end of November, a lot, although not all, of IIs have gone out, so if you have none it's a decent time to start planning on a reapplication, although things could still change. There really is no equivalent for As, since you really are alive at every school you interview at and are not rejected from, right up until the classes begin.

That said, the bulk of WL movement occurs when people reduce from unlimited As to 3 in the middle of April (a guideline that is unenforceable by the schools, although many people do voluntarily comply) and again when people reduce to one PTE school on 4/30 while remaining on unlimited WLs. As a result, a LOT of As actually go out to people on WLs from the middle of April through the end of May, as people drop multiple As, and then create successive cascading waves of WL movement as people trade up, until all offers off WLs end up in the hands of people who did not previously hold an A. This process takes 6-8 weeks to play out, beginning in the middle of April.

 

[MyOdyssey]

I haven't studied every school, and I really don't trust the web sourced spreadsheets due to the lack of QC. The real numbers don't vary much at a particular school from year to year, unless something crazy happens, like NYU going tuition free, or there being a sudden, COVID induced 20% spike in applications, while reported numbers on publicly sourced spreadsheets are all over the place depending on who is reporting and how much of the reporting is pure BS.

Michigan is the one that always comes to mind for me. It's incredibly difficult to get an II from them, and then actually pretty difficult not to receive an A, either straight up or from the WL (straight from their 5 year tracker -- 1,222 IS apps, 6,130 OOS, resulting in 123 IS IIs and 372 OOS, leading to 100 IS As and 281 OOS).

There aren't a ton of other nationally ranked schools with such impressive numbers, but, which might be of interest to you, UVA happens to be another one! 🙂 According to my numbers, their IS II -->A rate is around 80% and something like 65% OOS. As said before, 35-50% is more typical, with the IS numbers somewhat higher than OOS at most schools, not just the public ones.

Have you compiled your own list of post interview acceptance rates for different schools based on your own research?

Apart from med school websites, how do you research post interview acceptance rates?

 

[Zuggelder]

Have you compiled your own list of post interview acceptance rates for different schools based on your own research?

Apart from med school websites, how do you research post interview acceptance rates?

Here:

 

[MyOdyssey]

Here:

Thank you. How were these numbers derived?

Do these numbers include MD/PhD applicants?

 

[LizzyM]

Thank you. How were these numbers derived?

Do these numbers include MD/PhD applicants?

Are you a MD/PhD applicant? That information would be very relevant to have known when this conversation began!

 

[Zuggelder]

Thank you. How were these numbers derived?

Do these numbers include MD/PhD applicants?

These numbers come from the annual U.S. News & World Report which is who medical schools submit their data to every year. I'm not sure if these numbers include MD/PhD, but it would be safe to assume that they do.

Are you a MD/PhD applicant? That information would be very relevant to have known when this conversation began!

I believe @MyOdyssey is not the OP.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Here:

Not all schools are on here for some reason. Is it safe to assume that the average school needs to accept 2x-3x more applicants than matriculants?

This sheet may actually make a good input for supervised learning program

 

[Zuggelder]

Not all schools are on here for some reason. Is it safe to assume that the average school needs to accept 2x-3x more applicants than matriculants?

This sheet may actually make a good input for supervised learning program

From the looks of it almost all M.D. schools need to accept around 1.5X-3X more applicants than seats, not just the average ones.

U.S. News does not rank D.O. schools, so it would be harder to draw conclusions for them, unless there is another database that houses such info.

 

[MyOdyssey]

Are you a MD/PhD applicant? That information would be very relevant to have known when this conversation began!

I haven't made a final decision yet. I'm about to start a two year research fellowship and will decide after a year or so of that experience.

I'm also not the OP.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

I haven't made a final decision yet. I'm about to start a two year research fellowship and will decide after a year or so of that experience.

I'm also not the OP.

MD/PhD acceptance rates are lower and I don’t think that the spreadsheet factors those applications

 

[wx18225500]

MD/PhD acceptance rates are lower and I don’t think that the spreadsheet factors those applications

I would actually guess it does, but this is based on guessing from N=1 info from NYU, we were told that there are ~150-160 total As for MD applicants out of ~900 IIs and ~40/50 total As for MSTP (wasnt paying attention to IIs). Would align more closely with the 20% (of 1000) from that spreadsheet from what I understand.

 

[KnightDoc]

Have you compiled your own list of post interview acceptance rates for different schools based on your own research?

Apart from med school websites, how do you research post interview acceptance rates?

US News offers a paid service that has the data for many, but not all, schools. MSAR is the gold standard for accurate data, but they hide yields by only showing matriculants.

 

[KnightDoc]

I would actually guess it does, but this is based on guessing from N=1 info from NYU, we were told that there are ~150-160 total As for MD applicants out of ~900 IIs and ~40/50 total As for MSTP (wasnt paying attention to IIs). Would align more closely with the 20% (of 1000) from that spreadsheet from what I understand.

It does. This was debated extensively on another thread last spring. NYU is the only school I know of for which the difference was significant, however, since its yield diverges wildly between MD only and MD/PhD. For the record, for most other schools, the differences are insignificant since MD/PhD is a small fraction of their total class size, and the yields are pretty much the same between the two programs.

 

[Goro]

Not all schools are on here for some reason. Is it safe to assume that the average school needs to accept 2x-3x more applicants than matriculants?

That's the rule of thumb.

 

[DoctorFate]

LM 82. , Applied broadly and turned in all my secondaries in mid to late July - received 3 II July/early august from NYU, Yale, Jefferson. Since then, it’s been down hill, my last II was 2 months ago, and Ive just gotten holds (2) and Rs (4, 3 in the span of the last week lol).

My concern, based on the consensus here on here, is that schools tend to review high stat applicants first. So are these the only ones I should look forward to? I’m especially worried since I feel like I megabotched my shot at NYU recently.

Hey, I just wanted to chime in as I went through this last cycle. I was a high stat applicant, LM 77, and complete in July most place, early August at a few. My first II came mid October, then another in November, and a third in December. There's a prevailing sentiment on here that later IIs go to weaker candidates, and perhaps that is generally true. I certainly don't have the data to confirm or deny that. All I can say is that I know plenty of applicants with high stats, myself included, who received IIs in the latter half of the admissions cycle. Wish you the best though, regardless.

 

[Proudfather94]

LM 82. , Applied broadly and turned in all my secondaries in mid to late July - received 3 II July/early august from NYU, Yale, Jefferson. Since then, it’s been down hill, my last II was 2 months ago, and Ive just gotten holds (2) and Rs (4, 3 in the span of the last week lol).

My concern, based on the consensus here on here, is that schools tend to review high stat applicants first. So are these the only ones I should look forward to? I’m especially worried since I feel like I megabotched my shot at NYU recently.

How many volunteering and clinical hours do you have? If you don't have a decent amount medical schools will think you're better suited for grad school with that much research.

 

[wx18225500]

How many volunteering and clinical hours do you have? If you don't have a decent amount medical schools will think you're better suited for grad school with that much research.

100 total, 500 clinical/500 non clinical, + ~900 more clinical hours in clinical research

 

[Proudfather94]

100 total, 500 clinical/500 non clinical, + ~900 more clinical hours in clinical research

Yeah that should be more than enough. Did you have people proof read your primary or secondary application essays? That's where I messed up last year and got into the school I'm going to go to this year when I fixed it.

 

[MyOdyssey]

Yeah that should be more than enough. Did you have people proof read your primary or secondary application essays? That's where I messed up last year and got into the school I'm going to go to this year when I fixed it.

In what way did you mess up your primaries and secondaries last year?

 

[Proudfather94]

In what way did you mess up your primaries and secondaries last year?

I spent all of my effort addressing the weaknesses in my application that I didn't form an organized and concise narrative. My essays were too all over the place for schools to get an idea about who I was. I also answered some of the questions incorrectly. I answered diversity said by stating that my friend group was diverse instead of saying something unique about me.

 

[DoctorFate]

Just chiming in here for an opinion from the adcoms. Last year, when I applied, I had one mediocre to negative letter of rec.

Basically, my prof noted everything amazing about me, that I was in the top 1% of his 400 person class, then proceeded to list everything negative about me, even hypothesizing potential negatives he had not personally observed. This prof almost always denied to write rec letters, but personally told me he would love to write me one as I was among the best students he ever had. He was very old and retired later that year, so I just think he used a different style of rec letter. No one he wrote a rec letter for that year (top 2% of class) was accepted to med school. Thankfully, I contacted medical schools to determine what could have gone wrong with my application last year, and one of them mentioned it.

One of my friends last year was accepted to med school off the waitlist. He ultimately got into med school, but his cycle was far poorer than he expected and even our affiliated med school declined to interview him. He later found out that two of his rec letters were very mediocre, with one even somewhat diminishing his role in an activity he had noted on AMCAS.

There's a few more examples I have, but in general I have seen that someone with a strong application and absolutely no idea what could have gone wrong has a bad or even mediocre rec letter. In future cycles when this rec letter was identified and removed, their application went much better. In fact, at half my interviews, my interviewers made a specific point to note how absolutely glowing my rec letters were, so it clearly made an impression on them. To the adcoms or anyone else on here, how often is it that if someone has a seemingly steller application, the problem is the one part they rarely see- rec letters?

 

[deleted1114112]

There's a few more examples I have, but in general I have seen that someone with a strong application and absolutely no idea what could have gone wrong has a bad or even mediocre rec letter. In future cycles when this rec letter was identified and removed, their application went much better. In fact, at half my interviews, my interviewers made a specific point to note how absolutely glowing my rec letters were, so it clearly made an impression on them. To the adcoms or anyone else on here, how often is it that if someone has a seemingly steller application, the problem is the one part they rarely see- rec letters?

I'm just one person, but I'm really quiet and shy in class (along with most of my friends) and I'm 100% positive my LoRs were completely mediocre apart from academic quantifiers (if listed). I've gotten a fair amount of II's with a 'good' application and decent stats including a few at 'top' schools. I have no giant hook or anything, either. I also think undergrad may affect this.

However, on the topic of the thread, I got almost all of mine early Aug-early sept and have gotten nothing since except 2 Rs.

 

[KnightDoc]

Just chiming in here for an opinion from the adcoms. Last year, when I applied, I had one mediocre to negative letter of rec.

Basically, my prof noted everything amazing about me, that I was in the top 1% of his 400 person class, then proceeded to list everything negative about me, even hypothesizing potential negatives he had not personally observed. This prof almost always denied to write rec letters, but personally told me he would love to write me one as I was among the best students he ever had. He was very old and retired later that year, so I just think he used a different style of rec letter. No one he wrote a rec letter for that year (top 2% of class) was accepted to med school. Thankfully, I contacted medical schools to determine what could have gone wrong with my application last year, and one of them mentioned it.

One of my friends last year was accepted to med school off the waitlist. He ultimately got into med school, but his cycle was far poorer than he expected and even our affiliated med school declined to interview him. He later found out that two of his rec letters were very mediocre, with one even somewhat diminishing his role in an activity he had noted on AMCAS.

There's a few more examples I have, but in general I have seen that someone with a strong application and absolutely no idea what could have gone wrong has a bad or even mediocre rec letter. In future cycles when this rec letter was identified and removed, their application went much better. In fact, at half my interviews, my interviewers made a specific point to note how absolutely glowing my rec letters were, so it clearly made an impression on them. To the adcoms or anyone else on here, how often is it that if someone has a seemingly steller application, the problem is the one part they rarely see- rec letters?

Not an adcom, but I play one on TV. My understanding is that prof is a pretty unique a-hole, and what he did to you is very rare.

People with bad LORs are typically clueless, and don't realize they are asking the wrong people. Your guy went out of his way to volunteer, actually liked you, and STILL screwed you over. It's rare.

Very few letters glow in a way that really stand out. Most are regular glowing, which is the norm and doesn't move the needle. What happened to you is an aberration and sure, with 10,000+ applicants per school, telling an adcom everything that is wrong with you makes it easy to toss you in favor of someone who does not come with a laundry list of negatives. TBH, stellar applications are not that rare. Having a prof in a class where you were in top 4 out of a 400 go out of his way to be brutally honest OTOH ....

 

[DoctorFate]

Not an adcom, but I play one on TV. My understanding is that prof is a pretty unique a-hole, and what he did to you is very rare.

People with bad LORs are typically clueless, and don't realize they are asking the wrong people. Your guy went out of his to volunteer, actually liked you, and STILL screwed you over. It's rare.

Very few letters glow in a way that really stand out. Most are regular glowing, which is the norm and doesn't move the needle. What happened to you is an aberration and sure, with 10,000+ applicants per school, telling an adcom everything that is wrong with you makes it easy to toss you in favor of someone who does not come with a laundry list of negatives. TBH, stellar applications are not that rare. Having a prof in a class where you were in top 4 out of a 400 go out of his way to be brutally honest OTOH ....

That's definitely true, but to make it more general, I was wondering if letters using very mediocre wording or seem to have little effort put into them can hurt too. For example, one of my friends had a short letter that basically just said "he had difficulty understanding the material but worked to overcome these issues, and ultimately finished an above average grade of B+". Nothing bad, but pretty much was just a transcript review.

 

[KnightDoc]

That's definitely true, but to make it more general, I was wondering if letters using very mediocre wording or seem to have little effort put into them can hurt too. For example, one of my friends had a short letter that basically just said "he had difficulty understanding the material but worked to overcome these issues, and ultimately finished an above average grade of B+". Nothing bad, but pretty much was just a transcript review.

My understanding from spending 2+ years here is no. LORs are used at the margin. Truly great ones are rare and can have a positive impact. What happened with you is the other extreme. Most are glowing and don't move the needle.

The B+ speaks for itself. I seriously doubt a writer describing how someone worked hard to overcome difficulties in a class would be perceived negatively by an adcom. A transcript review speaks more to the laziness of the writer than anything else. I doubt that would sink an application anywhere, because the letters just don't receive that much weight in the first place.

Of course, an adcom can speak more specifically with first hand knowledge, but that's my understanding as a fellow applicant.

 

[DoctorFate]

My understanding from spending 2+ years here is no. LORs are used at the margin. Truly great ones are rare and can have a positive impact. What happened with you is the other extreme. Most are glowing and don't move the needle.

The B+ speaks for itself. I seriously doubt a writer describing how someone worked hard to overcome difficulties in a class would be perceived negatively by an adcom. A transcript review speaks more to the laziness of the writer than anything else. I doubt that would sink an application anywhere, because the letters just don't receive that much weight in the first place.

Of course, an adcom can speak more specifically with first hand knowledge, but that's my understanding as a fellow applicant.

Ah got it. His other letter was likely a much bigger problem (he classified an activity as clinical- which it was by med school standards. However, the hospital classified it as non-clinical as it did not providing patients with treatment, and his supervisor specifically wrote in the rec letter that his activity was non-clinical. He classified this activity as "most significant" and it was his main source of clinical hours. I actually worked with the program to get them to change this designation for future volunteers).

Thank you for the info!

 

[aurevoir0711]

Could be your personal statement or volunteer experience description. How you present your experience is just as important, if not more important than what experiences you have accumulated.

 

[srirachamayonnaise]

Just chiming in here for an opinion from the adcoms. Last year, when I applied, I had one mediocre to negative letter of rec.

Basically, my prof noted everything amazing about me, that I was in the top 1% of his 400 person class, then proceeded to list everything negative about me, even hypothesizing potential negatives he had not personally observed. This prof almost always denied to write rec letters, but personally told me he would love to write me one as I was among the best students he ever had. He was very old and retired later that year, so I just think he used a different style of rec letter. No one he wrote a rec letter for that year (top 2% of class) was accepted to med school. Thankfully, I contacted medical schools to determine what could have gone wrong with my application last year, and one of them mentioned it.

One of my friends last year was accepted to med school off the waitlist. He ultimately got into med school, but his cycle was far poorer than he expected and even our affiliated med school declined to interview him. He later found out that two of his rec letters were very mediocre, with one even somewhat diminishing his role in an activity he had noted on AMCAS.

There's a few more examples I have, but in general I have seen that someone with a strong application and absolutely no idea what could have gone wrong has a bad or even mediocre rec letter. In future cycles when this rec letter was identified and removed, their application went much better. In fact, at half my interviews, my interviewers made a specific point to note how absolutely glowing my rec letters were, so it clearly made an impression on them. To the adcoms or anyone else on here, how often is it that if someone has a seemingly steller application, the problem is the one part they rarely see- rec letters?

Don't understand why anyone agrees to write something that's going to negatively impact someone's chance.... Completely pathetic and sociopathic.

 

[Proudfather94]

Don't understand why anyone agrees to write something that's going to negatively impact someone's chance.... Completely pathetic and sociopathic.

At my uni, there were profs who openly expressed their disdain for pre meds. I bet this guy would fit right in. Unfortunately, some people get a rush out of gaining someone's trust and then stabbing them in the back.

 

[srirachamayonnaise]

At my uni, there were profs who openly expressed their disdain for pre meds. I bet this guy would fit right in. Unfortunately, some people get a rush out of gaining someone's trust and then stabbing them in the back.

applying to med school is hard enough.. now you have to watch out for backstabbers...

 

[Proudfather94]

applying to med school is hard enough.. now you have to watch for backstabbers...

Yeah there are people like that out in the world. That's why if someone is "too nice" to me I don't trust them. People with the whole "I'll be happy to help you with anything you need!" personality tend to be hiding something about themselves.

 

[DoctorFate]

Tbh I dont even think this professor actually meant harm. I'm pretty sure he loved me, and he was very enthusiastic about writing me a rec letter. I've been told that in older times, rec letters used to be more balanced to provide a truthful perspective rather than just one-sided positive. He was a very old prof. Regardless of his intentions, I expect it had a negative effect on my application.

 

[jhmmd]

Just chiming in here for an opinion from the adcoms. Last year, when I applied, I had one mediocre to negative letter of rec.

Basically, my prof noted everything amazing about me, that I was in the top 1% of his 400 person class, then proceeded to list everything negative about me, even hypothesizing potential negatives he had not personally observed. This prof almost always denied to write rec letters, but personally told me he would love to write me one as I was among the best students he ever had. He was very old and retired later that year, so I just think he used a different style of rec letter. No one he wrote a rec letter for that year (top 2% of class) was accepted to med school. Thankfully, I contacted medical schools to determine what could have gone wrong with my application last year, and one of them mentioned it.

One of my friends last year was accepted to med school off the waitlist. He ultimately got into med school, but his cycle was far poorer than he expected and even our affiliated med school declined to interview him. He later found out that two of his rec letters were very mediocre, with one even somewhat diminishing his role in an activity he had noted on AMCAS.

There's a few more examples I have, but in general I have seen that someone with a strong application and absolutely no idea what could have gone wrong has a bad or even mediocre rec letter. In future cycles when this rec letter was identified and removed, their application went much better. In fact, at half my interviews, my interviewers made a specific point to note how absolutely glowing my rec letters were, so it clearly made an impression on them. To the adcoms or anyone else on here, how often is it that if someone has a seemingly steller application, the problem is the one part they rarely see- rec letters?

Rather/somewhat rare. There aren't that many bitter, backstabbing people in this world, despite what some would lead you to believe. It takes too much time and energy to write a bad letter of rec, unless the student really did something wrong that stood out.

 

[DoctorFate]

Rather/somewhat rare. There aren't that many bitter, backstabbing people in this world, despite what some would lead you to believe. It takes too much time and energy to write a bad letter of rec, unless the student really did something wrong that stood out.

His rec letter was also about 10 sentences long lol. So much for that enthusiasm he displayed.

 

[MyOdyssey]

His rec letter was also about 10 sentences long lol. So much for that enthusiasm he displayed.

I gather that this bad LOR was more than just damning with faint praise.

 

[nimbus]

His rec letter was also about 10 sentences long lol. So much for that enthusiasm he displayed.

A short letter can be very strong. He was accepted.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

A short letter can be very strong. He was accepted.


View attachment 344543

“perhaps the most perfect example I have ever known of genius as traditionally conceived, passionate, profound, intense and dominating.”

Bertrand Russell on Wittgenstein