Which age group/status has the highest chances to getting in?

[chongli04us]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi all,

Which age group/status has the highest chances to getting into MD schools?

Junior?
Senior?
People who took a year or two off?
People who are employed for 3+ years?
Above 25 yrs old?

I am sure the older you are, the more stellar your CV needs to be. But just in terms of % of acceptances given to those groups, which one has the advantage? Personally, I would give it to juniors, maybe just because the medical schools like to see hard workers who are unafraid to work through their busy, hectic junior year, which is always the hardest year of college.

Thoughts?

 

[gobigorgohome22]

So.. I assume you are a junior? 🙄🙄

I would go with Senior because most people accepted will be seniors.

 

[Mt Kilimanjaro]

Hi all,

I am sure the older you are, the more stellar your CV needs to be. But just in terms of % of acceptances given to those groups, which one has the advantage? Personally, I would give it to juniors, maybe just because the medical schools like to see hard workers who are unafraid to work through their busy, hectic junior year, which is always the hardest year of college.

Thoughts?

CV is or needs to be? How are you sure?

Also, lol at the bolded. Initially choosing a career other than medicine means someone is not a hard worker? You would benefit by spending some time away from your college campus.

 

[gmcguitar4]

My sophmoreyear was way harder than junior. Also,if you ask a 20-21 year old what they want to do with their life and then ask them again in 3-4 years, a majority probably give different answers...especially pre-meds. With this, older candidates are probably look better because a lot more thought and planning went into the decision to pursue medicine, usually.

 

[chongli04us]

So.. I assume you are a junior? 🙄🙄

I would go with Senior because most people accepted will be seniors.

Well played sir.

Where did you find that most acceptees are seniors?

 

[gobigorgohome22]

Well played sir.

Where did you find that most acceptees are seniors?

Majority of people apply the summer before or during their senior year. So they would be considered senior when they receive their acceptance.

 

[chongli04us]

So maturity is definitely important. But what if you apply with conviction? Well, I guess it also depends on whoever is reading your personal statement or looking at your app...

 

[Mt Kilimanjaro]

So maturity is definitely important. But what if you apply with conviction? Well, I guess it also depends on whoever is reading your personal statement or looking at your app...

Conviction trumps maturity hopefully never.

 

[LiveLoveLearn]

So maturity is definitely important. But what if you apply with conviction? Well, I guess it also depends on whoever is reading your personal statement or looking at your app...

How strong can you say that conviction is when it is fairly untested? By that, I mean that the only sacrafices that traditional students have to make are those that are shared by everyone applying to medical school (difficult classes, studying for/taking the MCAT, spending time on ECs, etc.). On the other hand, older non-traditional students have likely given up a career, downgraded thier lifestyles, turned their lives upside down and went back to sit in classes with 18 year olds for 2-3 years of thier lives (in addition to all of the other stuff that everyone has to do) before being able to even apply to medical school.

I'm not saying that traditional students don't work hard and don't have conviction, I'm just saying that it would be pretty difficult for one to show that said conviction is greater than that of a non-trad.

 

[LiveLoveLearn]

Conviction trumps maturity hopefully never.

👍

 

[foster033]

I had one interviewer who flat out stated that if it were up to her she would not let anyone into her medical school directly out of college. She said she thinks students need real world experience and to hold down a job, live on their own, pay bills, etc. before coming to medical school.

 

[487806]

I had one interviewer who flat out stated that if it were up to her she would not let anyone into her medical school directly out of college. She said she thinks students need real world experience and to hold down a job, live on their own, pay bills, etc. before coming to medical school.

What a waste of time and a rather stubborn assertion. If anything, 1 or 2 gap years simply suffice.

 

[Anathema]

What a waste of time and a rather stubborn assertion. If anything, 1 or 2 gap years simply suffice.

Agreed, I'm having a hard enough time getting over the fact that my peak years are right now.

 

[Loveless]

What a waste of time and a rather stubborn assertion. If anything, 1 or 2 gap years simply suffice.

Can't everything bolded be satisfied by a gap year or two? I think that's what the interviewer was suggesting.

 

[DrSolus]

This is quite possibly one of the most naive and immature threads I have ever...

My biased answer: 1-2 years out of college. Alot can change in 1 or 2 years after graduating and being thrown out into the real world to deal with real world problems.

Real Answer: The age group/status that prepares and writes the best application.

Think college is hard? Good Luck, OP.

 

[PanRoasted]

older folks will almost always have the advantage, if they didn't totally slack off during UG. More experience, more maturity, more time to build up CV. etc.

 

[Espadaleader]

I can tell you I agree. I am 2 months into the real world and it has kicked my behind. I grew up disadvantaged and navigating the real world is tough when you make more on a stipend than both your parents.

 

[foster033]

What a waste of time and a rather stubborn assertion. If anything, 1 or 2 gap years simply suffice.

A waste of time, really? It's pretty valuable to get some perspective. I don't want to make assumptions about you but it's seems like you're the stubborn one if you don't see the value in gaining real world experience. I took 7 years off and my SO took 9, and we are definitely different(better) people than we were right out of college. Our experience is more on the extreme end and I don't think my interviewer or I were suggesting more than 1 or 2 years.

Agreed, I'm having a hard enough time getting over the fact that my peak years are right now.

If you're so worried about it, take a few years off. Get a job, do a little volunteering, go to happy hour with friends. A couple of years isn't a big deal, might even make you a better person, a better doctor. Maybe not, but do you really think a little experience will hurt? Keep up with your interest in medicine but enjoy your time off and go to school when you're ready.

 

[487806]

Can't everything bolded be satisfied by a gap year or two? I think that's what the interviewer was suggesting.

1 gap year doesn't work. That implies applying right after graduation. The interviewer is suggesting to take few/several years off, get a job in something, and then apply to medical school. I have a problem with that idea.

A waste of time, really? It's pretty valuable to get some perspective. I don't want to make assumptions about you but it's seems like you're the stubborn one if you don't see the value in gaining real world experience. I took 7 years off and my SO took 9, and we are definitely different(better) people than we were right out of college. Our experience is more on the extreme end and I don't think my interviewer or I were suggesting more than 1 or 2 years.

I don't have a problem with real world experience, which can be obtained via summer (or any other) type of internships, while in college. However, the interviewer seems to imply that several years need to be taken off and have a job just to have that professional experience. Sure, fine with me, but it should never be enforced regardless of the situation. Most of us entered college with a fixed mind on the future, namely to pursue medicine, although we do keep some alternative career options open. But taking even few (>3 years off) working in something that will give you professional experience for medical school is unnecessary. Professionalism will be easily stressed in medical school, so the best route is to apply directly after junior or senior years (or 2 gap years if necessary).

 

[somethingdeep]

older folks will almost always have the advantage, if they didn't totally slack off during UG. More experience, more maturity, more time to build up CV. etc.

I agree. It's easier for someone to be interesting (both in experiences and in perspective) when they're a couple years out of college. I also feel like people give older applicants more credit for being certain about the choice to pursue medicine, since they've gotten out and done something different in the world already. And I think that's pretty legitimate. If you're >25 and you're ready to take on a career that has 7+ years post-college training, you've probably given it some serious thought.

 

[foster033]

1 gap year doesn't work. That implies applying right after graduation. The interviewer is suggesting to take few/several years off, get a job in something, and then apply to medical school. I have a problem with that idea.

I don't have a problem with real world experience, which can be obtained via summer (or any other) type of internships, while in college. However, the interviewer seems to imply that several years need to be taken off and have a job just to have that professional experience. Sure, fine with me, but it should never be enforced regardless of the situation. Most of us entered college with a fixed mind on the future, namely to pursue medicine, although we do keep some alternative career options open. But taking even few (>3 years off) working in something that will give you professional experience for medical school is unnecessary. Professionalism will be easily stressed in medical school, so the best route is to apply directly after junior or senior years (or 2 gap years if necessary).

You're showing a real lack of understanding here....Were you at my interview? No? Well, I was and 1 or 2 years off is exactly what she was talking about. Holding down a job, living on your own without the security of college or parents, paying bills, cooking dinner, etc., etc. No one said this takes more than a year or two and no one said these aren't experiences you can have in college or during the summer. But as someone who did both of these things, it wasn't even remotely the same. And I knew that while I was in college which is why I did both and I was right, they don't really compare. I took time off bc I didn't want to regret my decision and wanted to make it for the right reasons. I tend to be a little over-analytically which is why it took me so long to decide. I'm not saying that's the right decision for you personally, but it is for many people and it was for me. I really learned valuable things in my career and during my time off and wouldn't change it for anything. With all that said, I think you are reading into my comment just a little too much. Clearly she was expressing a blanket exaggeration that time off after graduation leads to more maturity, leads to better students/doctors. As an employee of the medical school who interacts with students everyday she was speaking to her general experience with these different categories of students. Are there exceptions? Lots, this is not the case for everyone as not everyone is the same, and I don't think any reasonable person would imply or assume otherwise. Also, no one said anything about strictly enforcing this, but the average age of medical students has been creeping up, think it's around 25/26 now, so obviously this isn't an unpopular opinion in admissions.

Again, no one is saying that you need professional experience for medical school, in fact, the interviewer even specifically mentioned working at McDonalds or something similar would be fine with her. It's not about checking a box off to get into school or having a stronger application, you're looking at it all wrong.

 

[487806]

You're showing a real lack of understanding here....Were you at my interview? No? Well, I was and 1 or 2 years off is exactly what she was talking about.

Well, that point essentially clarifies it. Rest all is out-of-scope, though it's a pretty useful summary of a non-trad's life before applying.

 

[mcloaf]

I took a year off before applying to take the MCAT and pad my resume. I'm glad I did it but I think it had zero effect on my personality or readiness for medical school (beyond helping me get in). I'd consider most people taking one to two years off as essentially traditional students.

 

[aspiring20]

I had one interviewer who flat out stated that if it were up to her she would not let anyone into her medical school directly out of college. She said she thinks students need real world experience and to hold down a job, live on their own, pay bills, etc. before coming to medical school.

i get the benefit of real world experience (aka a paying job), but live on our own?

right now i am working a semi-full time job IN my parents house. I have real responsibilities and I get paid by my boss/supervisor (who is NOT a parent or family friend, of course). however, i work and live at home because it's convenient for both me, my boss, and our clients/students.

i hold that adcoms dont explicitly want students to live on their own just for the sake of living on their own...

lastly, what if you live in an expensive part of the country (such as the San Francisco Bay Area) and you can't afford to completely live on your own?

 

[487806]

i get the benefit of real world experience (aka a paying job), but live on our own?

right now i am working a semi-full time job IN my parents house. I have real responsibilities and I get paid by my boss/supervisor (who is NOT a parent or family friend, of course). however, i work and live at home because it's convenient for both me, my boss, and our clients/students.

i hold that adcoms dont explicitly want students to live on their own just for the sake of living on their own...

lastly, what if you live in an expensive part of the country (such as the San Francisco Bay Area) and you can't afford to completely live on your own?

You're overanalyzing the main point.

 

[aspiring20]

You're overanalyzing the main point.

i know, but it is troubling that "live on their own" should be part of the expectation.

 

[SixStringPsych]

i know, but it is troubling that "live on their own" should be part of the expectation.

Yea I don't think that's what they meant. Basically just financial independence and being out of a full time academic program.

 

[aspiring20]

Yea I don't think that's what they meant. Basically just financial independence and being out of a full time academic program.

see that's also the thing. while i do have a job, i am not "paying the bills" because i am living with my parents.

how will adcoms measure degrees of financial independence? making, say, 30k a yr in san francisco is different than 30k in kansas. you can be fully independent in kansas, but not in san fran.

 

[mcloaf]

see that's also the thing. while i do have a job, i am not "paying the bills" because i am living with my parents.

how will adcoms measure degrees of financial independence? making, say, 30k a yr in san francisco is different than 30k in kansas. you can be fully independent in kansas, but not in san fran.

Stop stressing about it. You are not in college and you are productively engaged. End of conversation. Nobody is going to ask to see your tax returns or apartment lease

 

[chongli04us]

thanks for replaying guys I just wanted to know your thoughts...

I would also like to add that taking some years off would drastically change your thinking/maturity, but that can also mean decreasing your drive to go to med school, then residency, then match, etc. I personally know a few people who took some years off, then got sucked into the real world and never again had the time/energy to resurface and apply to med school. These are some very smart, wonderful people too, and I would never doubt their abilities as physicians EVEN if they get admmited right after college. Something to think about, you know.

 

[DrEnderW]

This is ridiculous.

Refer to this chart:

https://www.aamc.org/download/321468/data/2012factstable6.pdf

The average age for matriculated men in 2012 was 24 and 23 for women. The median age was 23.

 

[somethingdeep]

This is ridiculous.

Refer to this chart:

https://www.aamc.org/download/321468/data/2012factstable6.pdf

The average age for matriculated men in 2012 was 24 and 23 for women. The median age was 23.

That clarifies the question "What is the most common age to enter medical school?" not the question "What age group has the highest probability of an individual getting in?" There are far more 23-24 year olds applying to medical school, which explains the average matriculant age.

 

[Anathema]

thanks for replaying guys I just wanted to know your thoughts...

I would also like to add that taking some years off would drastically change your thinking/maturity, but that can also mean decreasing your drive to go to med school, then residency, then match, etc. I personally know a few people who took some years off, then got sucked into the real world and never again had the time/energy to resurface and apply to med school. These are some very smart, wonderful people too, and I would never doubt their abilities as physicians EVEN if they get admmited right after college. Something to think about, you know.

Your experiences and relationships do not translate to the larger scope of things.

 

[kami333]

thanks for replaying guys I just wanted to know your thoughts...

I would also like to add that taking some years off would drastically change your thinking/maturity, but that can also mean decreasing your drive to go to med school, then residency, then match, etc. I personally know a few people who took some years off, then got sucked into the real world and never again had the time/energy to resurface and apply to med school. These are some very smart, wonderful people too, and I would never doubt their abilities as physicians EVEN if they get admmited right after college. Something to think about, you know.

Is that such a bad thing though? Getting sucked into real life?

Obviously they have found something that makes them happy enough and fulfilled enough not to try to attend at all costs like some non-trads. Ultimately it comes down to what you want out of your one and only life, is it to be a physician or to be happy/fulfilled/whatever. I think most people would go for the latter, while I personally think that becoming a physician is that path that will take me there, I don't doubt that there are other paths that I could take. I would even argue that not having the opportunity to explore if there are other paths that could make you happy is the reason why some people get burned out and end up looking for the greener pasture.

 

[LiveLoveLearn]

thanks for replaying guys I just wanted to know your thoughts...

I would also like to add that taking some years off would drastically change your thinking/maturity, but that can also mean decreasing your drive to go to med school, then residency, then match, etc. I personally know a few people who took some years off, then got sucked into the real world and never again had the time/energy to resurface and apply to med school. These are some very smart, wonderful people too, and I would never doubt their abilities as physicians EVEN if they get admmited right after college. Something to think about, you know.

This is exactly why ADCOMs prefer students that take time off - they have given themselves an opportunity, outside of the academic community, to really question whether medicine is the best path. Additionally, they have put themselves into situations where choosing that path means giving up a lot of the perks that come with being a financially independent adult that isn't in school (money, free time, traveling, feeling of value in a career, etc.). If a couple years off results in not going to medical school, than that is probably the best decision for that individual, anyway.

This is ridiculous.

Refer to this chart:

https://www.aamc.org/download/321468/data/2012factstable6.pdf

The average age for matriculated men in 2012 was 24 and 23 for women. The median age was 23.

This doesn't say anything about who has the best chances when they apply. The vast majority of medical school applicants are in or just out of college, so would therefore be the majority of matriculants. Much fewer non-traditional students apply, so they make up a smaller portion of the class, but that doesn't mean that a larger propotion of them don't get in. What would be valuable for this discussion would be a comparison of applying vs. matriculating student numbers by age.

 

[LizzyM]

Going to my old MSAR 2011-2012, table 10-M Age distribution, year 2009 applicants shows that at ages 21 and 22 the accepted applicants outnumber the "not accepted", the chances of being accepted are 50-50 at age 23, and that "not accepted" outnumber accepted at every age from 24 onward. It goes counter to what I'd wish for but the data don't lie.

 

[aspiring20]

Going to my old MSAR 2011-2012, table 10-M Age distribution, year 2009 applicants shows that at ages 21 and 22 the accepted applicants outnumber the "not accepted", the chances of being accepted are 50-50 at age 23, and that "not accepted" outnumber accepted at every age from 24 onward. It goes counter to what I'd wish for but the data don't lie.

that's not a good sign. to me, it means two things.

1) ADCOMS prefer traditional, 21-22 year olds.

2) non-trad applicants are weaker overall than traditional applicants, hence the lower percentage of acceptance. now, non-trads might be stronger EC wise, but their stats are weaker than those of trads than their ECs are stronger, leading to an overall weaker application.

EDIT: but then again, those data is from 2009, maybe things have changed somewhat since.

 

[Narmerguy]

that's not a good sign. to me, it means two things.

1) ADCOMS prefer traditional, 21-22 year olds.

2) non-trad applicants are weaker overall than traditional applicants, hence the lower percentage of acceptance. now, non-trads might be stronger EC wise, but their stats are weaker than those of trads than their ECs are stronger, leading to an overall weaker application.

EDIT: but then again, those data is from 2009, maybe things have changed somewhat since.

Well it's worth considering that many of the people applying older are doing so because they're reapplicants or they felt their app was not strong enough straight out of college. I would expect that their average successes are lower than for most students that decide to go straight through college.

I'm taking two "gap years" and I think this has been one of the best choices that I've made. I support the idea of rewarding students who have taken time to explore other options or gain real world experiences.

 

[darkjedi]

that's not a good sign. to me, it means two things.

1) ADCOMS prefer traditional, 21-22 year olds.

2) non-trad applicants are weaker overall than traditional applicants, hence the lower percentage of acceptance. now, non-trads might be stronger EC wise, but their stats are weaker than those of trads than their ECs are stronger, leading to an overall weaker application.

EDIT: but then again, those data is from 2009, maybe things have changed somewhat since.

In my experience, it's definitely the latter. The 'older' age group tend to include re-applicants who were already rejected. I would say if the stats between a trad and a non-trad were equivalent, the increased (generally) amount of experience of the non-trad would bolster their application.

I am also a very strong advocate for those who have taken years out from college. There is a very real and distinct divide between those who are straight from undergrad, and those who have had real-world experience.

 

[LizzyM]

that's not a good sign. to me, it means two things.

1) ADCOMS prefer traditional, 21-22 year olds.

2) non-trad applicants are weaker overall than traditional applicants, hence the lower percentage of acceptance. now, non-trads might be stronger EC wise, but their stats are weaker than those of trads than their ECs are stronger, leading to an overall weaker application.

EDIT: but then again, those data is from 2009, maybe things have changed somewhat since.

There aren't enough non-trads to fill all the classes at all the schools. The young (mostly college seniors during the admission cycle) are the overwhelming majority of applicants. We might prefer strong non-trads but there aren't enough of them.

 

[OhHey]

There aren't enough non-trads to fill all the classes at all the schools. The young (mostly college seniors during the admission cycle) are the overwhelming majority of applicants. We might prefer strong non-trads but there aren't enough of them.

I really admire these juniors who applied. How the heck did they take the MCAT and apply while managing school? Must've been geniuses. Many of them are great in personality and mature. One of the things I wonder about is though how much of a true self-identity they have.. it seems so hectic going school to school without a break in and between them .. did they ever sit down and think about life? How did they always feel so sure about medicine? I don't doubt some did.. but for me, I seriously learned so much and did a lot soul searching during my college and gap years... i think it's because i had the time to reflect on my experiences, explore a lot of different interests, meet all kinds of people, reevaluate my values. I worked hardddd throughout all of college and post college.. but the difference is that I worked hard in a lot of different fields as opposed to just bio premed.. and that i took seriously the immaterial areas of my life.

 

[somethingdeep]

Going to my old MSAR 2011-2012, table 10-M Age distribution, year 2009 applicants shows that at ages 21 and 22 the accepted applicants outnumber the "not accepted", the chances of being accepted are 50-50 at age 23, and that "not accepted" outnumber accepted at every age from 24 onward. It goes counter to what I'd wish for but the data don't lie.

Interesting! I'd be curious to see how that changed if GPA and MCAT were controlled for. (Since (a) 21-22 year olds are still in the "mode" of doing well on difficult exams when they take the MCAT, and (b) people who are pre-med as undergrads probably work harder for high GPAs than people who don't become pre-med until several years after college.)

 

[Anathema]

Maybe the non-trads are non-trads b/c they had low GPA/MCATs which led to their initial rejection or hesitation to submit.

I've been told that ECs can only do much for sub-par or abysmal numbers. Also like LizzyM said, less non-trads apply b/c it just take a lot of time to do all of these things compared to the people that apply straight up.