Why do students get rejected?

[MedicalAuthor]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

This isn't a thread asking about the obvious reasons, in terms of unoriginal essays, lack in extracurriculars, poor interview skills, etc, etc.

I'm talking about what makes applying for medical school such a crapshoot. Imagine the perfect candidate. This doesn't have to be 4.0, 45 student. By perfect I mean every aspect is impressive. GPA to MCAT to essay to interview. Yet I think we can agree that person shouldn't expect to get into all schools, or even 75%. Why? I guess my question is, when it comes down to each school, what makes them pass over 'perfect' candidates? Is it diversity? Not in terms of race, but extracurriculars, grades, etc. What makes schools reject great people, those better, overall, than some they do accept?

For the record, this isn't a thread to fuel some ensuing panic I have, or to prep for future interviews or something. Totally just curious.

 

[moneytree]

This isn't a thread asking about the obvious reasons, in terms of unoriginal essays, lack in extracurriculars, poor interview skills, etc, etc.

I'm talking about what makes applying for medical school such a crapshoot. Imagine the perfect candidate. This doesn't have to be 4.0, 45 student. By perfect I mean every aspect is impressive. GPA to MCAT to essay to interview. Yet I think we can agree that person shouldn't expect to get into all schools, or even 75%. Why? I guess my question is, when it comes down to each school, what makes them pass over 'perfect' candidates? Is it diversity? Not in terms of race, but extracurriculars, grades, etc. What makes schools reject great people, those better, overall, than some they do accept?

For the record, this isn't a thread to fuel some ensuing panic I have, or to prep for future interviews or something. Totally just curious.

Numbers. There are too many qualified applicants for too few spots.

 

[hizziaips]

This isn't a thread asking about the obvious reasons, in terms of unoriginal essays, lack in extracurriculars, poor interview skills, etc, etc.

I'm talking about what makes applying for medical school such a crapshoot. Imagine the perfect candidate. This doesn't have to be 4.0, 45 student. By perfect I mean every aspect is impressive. GPA to MCAT to essay to interview. Yet I think we can agree that person shouldn't expect to get into all schools, or even 75%. Why? I guess my question is, when it comes down to each school, what makes them pass over 'perfect' candidates? Is it diversity? Not in terms of race, but extracurriculars, grades, etc. What makes schools reject great people, those better, overall, than some they do accept?

For the record, this isn't a thread to fuel some ensuing panic I have, or to prep for future interviews or something. Totally just curious.

A "perfect" applicant at one school may be a poor fit at another.

 

[PreMedOrDead]

Numbers. There are too many qualified applicants for too few spots.

Done in one.

 

[Girly X]

A "perfect" applicant at one school may be a poor fit at another.

+1
I strongly believe that they pick applicants who best fit their specific mission regardless of stats (or at least after a stat threshold has been cleared).

 

[Neuronette]

Can also totally depend on the mood of admission officers that day or the profile of students accepted from the day before throughout the review process. Read the book Gatekeepers and you will understand.
The book is mostly for undergrad schools but im sure med schools operate the same way.

 

[mimelim]

A "perfect applicant" would get a few rejections from a couple of disbelieving adcoms that don't think that applicant is serious about coming to their institution. But they would for the most part get interviews at virtually every school and assuming they were a good interviewer, they would get into every school as well. Medical school admissions are not a crapshoot. Just because you don't understand the logic that adcoms use doesn't mean that there isn't a pretty systematic process in place and it tends to work pretty well.

As with everything in life, there is some luck. Who happens to read your application, who you end up interviewing with, that you don't feel sick on your interview day, that no disasters happen that stop you from showing up etc etc. But when people say, "It is a crap shoot" they normally don't understand the process or think their LOR or ECs are better than they are. I started counting at one point, but stopped after a while, but just guessing, 90%+ of people think they have "good" LOR or ECs.

As someone else pointed out, there are a lot of good students (good MCAT and GPA). More than enough to fill all of the US medical schools. What differentiates them is the rest of the application, which historically pre-meds treat as jumping through hoops rather than what it really is: a place to show off how you are better than the other people with your scores.

As a last aside, there is the issue of "fit", but assuming you aren't applying to schools based solely on US News ranking and because you are picking schools that will fit what you want, this shouldn't really be an issue.

 

[Irish Football]

A "perfect applicant" would get a few rejections from a couple of disbelieving adcoms that don't think that applicant is serious about coming to their institution. But they would for the most part get interviews at virtually every school and assuming they were a good interviewer, they would get into every school as well. Medical school admissions are not a crapshoot. Just because you don't understand the logic that adcoms use doesn't mean that there isn't a pretty systematic process in place and it tends to work pretty well.

As with everything in life, there is some luck. Who happens to read your application, who you end up interviewing with, that you don't feel sick on your interview day, that no disasters happen that stop you from showing up etc etc. But when people say, "It is a crap shoot" they normally don't understand the process or think their LOR or ECs are better than they are. I started counting at one point, but stopped after a while, but just guessing, 90%+ of people think they have "good" LOR or ECs.

As someone else pointed out, there are a lot of good students (good MCAT and GPA). More than enough to fill all of the US medical schools. What differentiates them is the rest of the application, which historically pre-meds treat as jumping through hoops rather than what it really is: a place to show off how you are better than the other people with your scores.

As a last aside, there is the issue of "fit", but assuming you aren't applying to schools based solely on US News ranking and because you are picking schools that will fit what you want, this shouldn't really be an issue.

I liked this explanation. 👍

 

[BABSstudent]

This isn't a thread asking about the obvious reasons, in terms of unoriginal essays, lack in extracurriculars, poor interview skills, etc, etc.

I'm talking about what makes applying for medical school such a crapshoot. Imagine the perfect candidate. This doesn't have to be 4.0, 45 student. By perfect I mean every aspect is impressive. GPA to MCAT to essay to interview. Yet I think we can agree that person shouldn't expect to get into all schools, or even 75%. Why? I guess my question is, when it comes down to each school, what makes them pass over 'perfect' candidates? Is it diversity? Not in terms of race, but extracurriculars, grades, etc. What makes schools reject great people, those better, overall, than some they do accept?

For the record, this isn't a thread to fuel some ensuing panic I have, or to prep for future interviews or something. Totally just curious.

I would assume it would be because the student will not fit in at that school. When you go on interviews, you will notice that the student populations all have very similar student populations (not in terms of diversity but in terms of personalities). You may be able to tell right away if you will fit in or if another school seems like a better fit for you.

I interviewed at Creighton last month and I will say that they were some of the nicest people I have ever met. Every single student (even the ones studying anatomy in the lab) were happy to meet us and show us what they were doing. I was shocked by how every student seemed to have that "nicest person in the world" type of personality. Granted, these were mostly first and second year students and had not been exposed to the horrors of patients lying to get medication, the disillusionment of medicine, etc. but our limited exposure to the third and fourth year students demonstrated the same. Obviously the admissions staff was attempting to find these qualities in applicants and selecting the class to have those qualities.

 

[kdavidlee25]

Med Schools are like the pretty girl that everyone wants to date. You have to show the girl i) who you are; ii) why you're interested in her; iii) what you have to offer; and iv) why she should pick you over other competitors.

I just totally made this up. Back to Bio 2. ugh.

 

[BABSstudent]

Med Schools are like the pretty girl that everyone wants to date. You have to show the girl i) who you are; ii) why you're interested in her; iii) what you have to offer; and iv) why she should pick you over other competitors.

I just totally made this up. Back to Bio 2. ugh.

Ignore this, you just have to show the pretty girl your "stats." If your stats are better than another guy's, then you're in!

Just make sure you are using the correct method for finding the T.M.I.

From the South Park website:

According to the U.S. Surgeon General, the correct equation for T.M.I. is "Length times Girth over Angle of the Shaft (aka YAW) divided by mass over WIDTH."

However, there are a few followers of the Marsh Method who still belief the Surgeon General's formula is flawed."Length times Diameter plus Weight over Girth divided by Angle of the Tip squared."

 

[kdavidlee25]

If your "stats" are better....or bigger, than the other guy's.

 

[Freesia88]

Ignore this, you just have to show the pretty girl your "stats." If your stats are better than another guy's, then you're in!

Just make sure you are using the correct method for finding the T.M.I.

From the South Park website:

According to the U.S. Surgeon General, the correct equation for T.M.I. is "Length times Girth over Angle of the Shaft (aka YAW) divided by mass over WIDTH."

However, there are a few followers of the Marsh Method who still belief the Surgeon General's formula is flawed."Length times Diameter plus Weight over Girth divided by Angle of the Tip squared."

 

[yuiness]

A "perfect applicant" would get a few rejections from a couple of disbelieving adcoms that don't think that applicant is serious about coming to their institution.

You know, this is something that is often repeated, but I really wonder whether this actually happens. It's one thing if the applicant thinks he/she is too good for the school and comes off as an arrogant jerk in his/her interviews or application essays, and that's more of an issue with not wanting to admit a jerk. But I really doubt that sincere applicants are often turned away because they were "too good" and the adcoms didn't think they would come if offered admission.

 

[mimelim]

You know, this is something that is often repeated, but I really wonder whether this actually happens. It's one thing if the applicant thinks he/she is too good for the school and comes off as an arrogant jerk in his/her interviews or application essays, and that's more of an issue with not wanting to admit a jerk. But I really doubt that sincere applicants are often turned away because they were "too good" and the adcoms didn't think they would come if offered admission.

I never said the words, "too good" and have never implied it. Perhaps I should have phrased things better. Schools have only one objective: recruit the best possible class that they can. Contrary to level 1 thinking, this isn't as straight forward as simply inviting the best of the best to interview. That works for the top top schools, but becomes sub-optimal as you go down in the ranks. It isn't about being "too good". That makes no sense. It runs contrary to the purpose of the adcom (see singular objective above). It is about likelyhood of acceptance of admission.

This is not a function of MCAT score or GPA. This is about location of school, where the applicant grew up and went to school among other factors. If it looks like (from what you have written in your application) that you are applying to a school purely based on US News rank schools will look at you with at least a little skepticism.

 

[LizzyM]

I would guess that one of the reasons not yet mentioned is being OOS where in-state students get preference. Many excellent candidates are passed over at schools with an IS preference. I knew a guy who was admitted to Harvard and Hopkins about 6 yrs ago but who couldn't get an interview at UWashington.

Failing to demonstrate in sufficient interest in the school (treating it as a safety),and lack of fit with the school's mission (Mr. 4.0/40 with 3 years of research and an interest in neurosurgery applies to a school founded to produce primary care providers for rural areas) would be other reasons someone who seems perfect for some schools wouldn't be interviewed (and therefore rejected rather than waitlisted) elsewhere.

 

[Barcu]

A "perfect applicant" would get a few rejections from a couple of disbelieving adcoms that don't think that applicant is serious about coming to their institution. But they would for the most part get interviews at virtually every school and assuming they were a good interviewer, they would get into every school as well. Medical school admissions are not a crapshoot. Just because you don't understand the logic that adcoms use doesn't mean that there isn't a pretty systematic process in place and it tends to work pretty well.

As with everything in life, there is some luck. Who happens to read your application, who you end up interviewing with, that you don't feel sick on your interview day, that no disasters happen that stop you from showing up etc etc. But when people say, "It is a crap shoot" they normally don't understand the process or think their LOR or ECs are better than they are. I started counting at one point, but stopped after a while, but just guessing, 90%+ of people think they have "good" LOR or ECs.

As someone else pointed out, there are a lot of good students (good MCAT and GPA). More than enough to fill all of the US medical schools. What differentiates them is the rest of the application, which historically pre-meds treat as jumping through hoops rather than what it really is: a place to show off how you are better than the other people with your scores.

As a last aside, there is the issue of "fit", but assuming you aren't applying to schools based solely on US News ranking and because you are picking schools that will fit what you want, this shouldn't really be an issue.

This is a great response. I always want to post and say "it's not a crapshoot" but it has become such SDN dogma. Just because there is a small amount of luck involved does not mean that everything is out of control and random. ECs are really the place to distinguish yourself as an applicant. Contrary to popular belief, it may actually be beneficial to sacrifice numbers a bit to get better ECs (only to an extent of course). The major luck involved is not during the application process itself but your luck in getting into the right lab or stumbling upon a great volunteer opportunity. That takes time and effort to get the right blend of ECs and so many people just treat it like a checklist instead. As long as your numbers are decent, having good ECs and being able to talk about them in interviews WILL get you into med school.

 

[basedbear]

This is a great response. I always want to post and say "it's not a crapshoot" but it has become such SDN dogma. Just because there is a small amount of luck involved does not mean that everything is out of control and random. ECs are really the place to distinguish yourself as an applicant. Contrary to popular belief, it may actually be beneficial to sacrifice numbers a bit to get better ECs (only to an extent of course). The major luck involved is not during the application process itself but your luck in getting into the right lab or stumbling upon a great volunteer opportunity. That takes time and effort to get the right blend of ECs and so many people just treat it like a checklist instead. As long as your numbers are decent, having good ECs and being able to talk about them in interviews WILL get you into med school.

I disagree with this. My friend in my lab has nearly identical GPA, MCAT, we have identical research obviously, and volunteered in the same hospital. We did everything together and have completely different interview invites. I am inclined to believe the "SDN dogma" that there is a heavy luck factor at work

 

[NickNaylor]

I disagree with this. My friend in my lab has nearly identical GPA, MCAT, we have identical research obviously, and volunteered in the same hospital. We did everything together and have completely different interview invites. I am inclined to believe the "SDN dogma" that there is a heavy luck factor at work

I think you just exhibit a complete lack of knowledge about the admissions process. Even if you somehow did exactly the same activities, surely your applications aren't the same. How you describe your activities and interests in your primary is just as important (if not more so) than the activities themselves.

(sent from my phone)

 

[Barcu]

I disagree with this. My friend in my lab has nearly identical GPA, MCAT, we have identical research obviously, and volunteered in the same hospital. We did everything together and have completely different interview invites. I am inclined to believe the "SDN dogma" that there is a heavy luck factor at work

You missed my point. It's about ECs, but more importantly, about how you convey your ECs. Two people can have similar ECs and come out with a completely different experience. You and your friend may have drawn completely different lessons and motivations out of similar experiences.

Unless you and your friend submitted identical primary and secondary applications, I still say that there is no heavy luck factor.

It explains so much. You always see people on here with average numbers with tons of invites at great schools (and high numbers with no interviews). You also see people who get 5 or 6 interviews and get into all of the schools and you see the people that get that many interviews and get into none. There are patterns. The pattern is NOT luck. There are a number of factors at play, including primary and secondary essays, numbers, ECs, and interview. There may be some luck involved (usually who reads your app and the interviewer), but there are patterns for people who get in and who don't.

 

[ShenanigansMD]

You missed my point. It's about ECs, but more importantly, about how you convey your ECs. Two people can have similar ECs and come out with a completely different experience. You and your friend may have drawn completely different lessons and motivations out of similar experiences.

Unless you and your friend submitted identical primary and secondary applications, I still say that there is no heavy luck factor.

It explains so much. You always see people on here with average numbers with tons of invites at great schools (and high numbers with no interviews). You also see people who get 5 or 6 interviews and get into all of the schools and you see the people that get that many interviews and get into none. There are patterns. The pattern is NOT luck. There are a number of factors at play, including primary and secondary essays, numbers, ECs, and interview. There may be some luck involved (usually who reads your app and the interviewer), but there are patterns for people who get in and who don't.

I agree. It's pretty obvious in my current experience that so far, 2ndaries make or break the ii decision (depending on the prompts schools want me to respond to). Or my PS is absolutely horrendous in adcoms eyes; I can't tell which one is going on.

 

[Lollygag]

I think that luck can play a role to a certain extent, but I also think SDN overestimates it. I mean, you have to remember that ADCOM's are human beings with emotions, opinions etc. One member may have served in the military or had a family member that served and therefore favor applicants with military background more than the ADCOM member who never served in the military and has no close relatives/friends who have.

I wouldn't call it a crapshoot like others do, but I definitely would also say that there are other factors that can come into play that is beyond the control of the applicant depending on what ADCOM member you get/what kind of mood they are in. I am sure they try to be as objective as possible but to be totally objective 100% of the time is impossible.

 

[basedbear]

Yes what you are all saying is very very true and certainly strong applicants have a pattern of getting more acceptances. But I just feel the impact of "factors outside your control" i.e. the person reading your app, the interviewer you get, etc. is a lot larger than what you are saying. I'd like you to explain why a student accepted at Harvard was denied at another top 5 and don't give me a vague "because he doesn't fit." Did he somehow express himself poorly on his essays? No, clearly not. You might do everything "correct" and still get unexpected results because of factors that you did not or could not possibly have known about. This is what I mean by "crapshoot," not that the whole admissions process is completely random and anyone can get in anywhere and it doesn't matter what they did on their application. I simply mean that like in gambling, the "correct" decisions don't always give you consistent results. For example, I bet that if I could somehow send in my identical app without changing a damn thing under a different name, that account would get different results.

 

[mimelim]

Yes what you are all saying is very very true and certainly strong applicants have a pattern of getting more acceptances. But I just feel the impact of "factors outside your control" i.e. the person reading your app, the interviewer you get, etc. is a lot larger than what you are saying. I'd like you to explain why a student accepted at Harvard was denied at another top 5 and don't give me a vague "because he doesn't fit." Did he somehow express himself poorly on his essays? No, clearly not. You might do everything "correct" and still get unexpected results because of factors that you did not or could not possibly have known about. This is what I mean by "crapshoot," not that the whole admissions process is completely random and anyone can get in anywhere and it doesn't matter what they did on their application. I simply mean that like in gambling, the "correct" decisions don't always give you consistent results. For example, I bet that if I could somehow send in my identical app without changing a damn thing under a different name, that account would get different results.

Again, you don't seem to grasp a couple of concepts. First, you have this homogenous, "top 5 schools" mentality. Just because schools are ranked close together doesn't mean that they are overly similar. They aren't all looking for the same thing. Just because someone get into #1 on USNews and doesn't get into #2 or #3 or #4 is not illogical. If anything it speaks to the stupidity of those rankings.

Second, the people who interview at a couple of top schools and are flat out rejected at others likely have deficiencies or things that those schools didn't particularly care about. The "perfect applicant" students interview at all the top schools that they applied to. It really is that simple. Yes, there is some variation, but to be honest, it really isn't very substantial.

There isn't much anyone can say that can convince you. Many of us have a lot more experience and exposure to adcoms and how they work than you. This isn't something that can be "proven". All I can really say is that through out every aspect of school, work and life people will claim that 'luck' plays a disproportionate roll in how things turn out. If you insist on thinking this way, then I'll quote a faculty Wash U adcom, "Great students put themselves in a position to get lucky in the same way every Nobel laureate was a great scientist who got lucky."

 

[Barcu]

Yes what you are all saying is very very true and certainly strong applicants have a pattern of getting more acceptances. But I just feel the impact of "factors outside your control" i.e. the person reading your app, the interviewer you get, etc. is a lot larger than what you are saying. I'd like you to explain why a student accepted at Harvard was denied at another top 5 and don't give me a vague "because he doesn't fit." Did he somehow express himself poorly on his essays? No, clearly not. You might do everything "correct" and still get unexpected results because of factors that you did not or could not possibly have known about. This is what I mean by "crapshoot," not that the whole admissions process is completely random and anyone can get in anywhere and it doesn't matter what they did on their application. I simply mean that like in gambling, the "correct" decisions don't always give you consistent results. For example, I bet that if I could somehow send in my identical app without changing a damn thing under a different name, that account would get different results.

My point is not that there is no luck involved. There are going to be different reactions at an individual school that could affect if an applicant gets an interview or an acceptance. But that's only looking at one school. But if you look more broadly, you see the patterns that I was referring to. That's why knowing to apply broadly really helps out applicants.

So you can point to specific instances where luck plays a role, but GENERALLY, luck is not a the determining factor for getting into med school or not. Hence, the application process is not a "crapshoot."

You can play this process right and not have to rely on luck to get in.

 

[MedPR]

Again, you don't seem to grasp a couple of concepts. First, you have this homogenous, "top 5 schools" mentality. Just because schools are ranked close together doesn't mean that they are overly similar. They aren't all looking for the same thing. Just because someone get into #1 on USNews and doesn't get into #2 or #3 or #4 is not illogical. If anything it speaks to the stupidity of those rankings.

Second, the people who interview at a couple of top schools and are flat out rejected at others likely have deficiencies or things that those schools didn't particularly care about. The "perfect applicant" students interview at all the top schools that they applied to. It really is that simple. Yes, there is some variation, but to be honest, it really isn't very substantial.

There isn't much anyone can say that can convince you. Many of us have a lot more experience and exposure to adcoms and how they work than you. This isn't something that can be "proven". All I can really say is that through out every aspect of school, work and life people will claim that 'luck' plays a disproportionate roll in how things turn out. If you insist on thinking this way, then I'll quote a faculty Wash U adcom, "Great students put themselves in a position to get lucky in the same way every Nobel laureate was a great scientist who got lucky."

+1000

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

 

[basedbear]

My point is not that there is no luck involved. There are going to be different reactions at an individual school that could affect if an applicant gets an interview or an acceptance. But that's only looking at one school. But if you look more broadly, you see the patterns that I was referring to. That's why knowing to apply broadly really helps out applicants.

So you can point to specific instances where luck plays a role, but GENERALLY, luck is not a the determining factor for getting into med school or not. Hence, the application process is not a "crapshoot."

You can play this process right and not have to rely on luck to get in.

Well I don't even know why we're wasting time disagreeing since I agree with all the practical things you and everyone else has said. Yes, good applicants will make it to medical school and poor applicants will not. Most factors are in the applicants' control including experiences, essays, etc. Failing to get accepted is not an excuse to blame it on luck and it is your own fault. It is just that in those small, "specific instances" that you brought up, I feel have been very important in my own experience. I honestly believe some stroke of luck has given me interview invites at my top choices while resulting in rejections at the top choices for so many friends and colleagues with equally strong applications. But looking at it broadly though? Yeah, they will all get in somewhere if they did everything right.

 

[stitchesNYC]

I disagree with this. My friend in my lab has nearly identical GPA, MCAT, we have identical research obviously, and volunteered in the same hospital. We did everything together and have completely different interview invites. I am inclined to believe the "SDN dogma" that there is a heavy luck factor at work

well, I think it is easier on the ego to assume luck has something to do with who gets in. I do not disagree, that it does play a role, but not to the extent people like to believe.
after all, the adcom's are people, too. If you have the choice between two candidates (with similar background) you are likely to choose someone, you like over someone you don't. Many interviewees underestimate the importance of body language and the simplest communication device of all- a smile!

 

[MedPR]

I disagree with this. My friend in my lab has nearly identical GPA, MCAT, we have identical research obviously, and volunteered in the same hospital. We did everything together and have completely different interview invites. I am inclined to believe the "SDN dogma" that there is a heavy luck factor at work

well, I think it is easier on the ego to assume luck has something to do with who gets in. I do not disagree, that it does play a role, but not to the extent people like to believe.
after all, the adcom's are people, too. If you have the choice between two candidates (with similar background) you are likely to choose someone, you like over someone you don't. Many interviewees underestimate the importance of body language and the simplest communication device of all- a smile!

Like others have said, the best applicants put themselves in a position where luck is on their side.. a well rounded applicant will have something everyone can identify with.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

 

[wanderer]

At the end of the day a lot of the process comes down to look (when other factors are roughly equal). Different people have different perspectives and even the same person can have different perspectives at different points in time. When you get to the interview stage the luck aspect is even more true. How some people managed to get into my school while others couldn't boggles my mind. (Although not really since standard interviews are terrible at picking the most qualified people.)

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

Because they suck.

The only sure things in life are death and taxes bud.

 

[MedPR]

Because they suck.

The only sure things in life are death and taxes bud.

Wrong. Homeless = no taxes. Just sayin 😉

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

Wrong. Homeless = no taxes. Just sayin 😉

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

Damn I knew someone was gonna say that

 

[quitethenovelty]

I've read on admissions pages or someplace before, that the really top schools, since they have such a great applicant pool to select from, will literally CREATE each class so that there is a broad, inspiring, and politically correct DIVERSITY. So if twenty applicants are very similar, perhaps chances are that maybe only a few of them will be selected. I think this makes sense. So, the best way to prepare for this situation is to discover something different about yourself and explore it.

 

[Lollygag]

Like others have said, the best applicants put themselves in a position where luck is on their side.. a well rounded applicant will have something everyone can identify with.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

hmmm never thought of it this way 👍