Why is it important to apply early???

[jackal head]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

They sort through the applications by GPA and PCAT when they got enough of them (I'm assuming)

its not like they go through them as they come in, someone here gave the analogy that its better to apply early because they are more likely to accept you when they have more seats, i dont see this is a valid point since WHEN you applied will not have an affect on when they see your application does it?

 

[angioletto]

its not like they go through them as they come in

Some (most? all?) of them actually do, and that is why it is better to apply early.

 

[Rumplestiltazepam]

They sort through the applications by GPA and PCAT when they got enough of them (I'm assuming)

its not like they go through them as they come in, someone here gave the analogy that its better to apply early because they are more likely to accept you when they have more seats, i dont see this is a valid point since WHEN you applied will not have an affect on when they see your application does it?

They sort through the applications by GPA and PCAT when they got enough of them (I'm assuming)

?.

Why is it not likely for them to look at a group of applications as they come in, that is exactly how rolling admission schools work. So in fact when you apply as everything to do with when they look at your application. 😉 The validity of the point seems crystal clear. I know my school looks at applications as they come in, that way they get a head start, makes sense, and they do not consider themselves an rolling admission institution.

When it comes down to it if you do not want to apply early, don't apply early, help other applicants out.

 

[drugdoc]

Rolling admissions schools do it on a rolling basis, hence the name. When the seats are filled, no seats are left.

Non-rolling schools are still somewhat rolling, though they do it in larger chunks of applications. For those, keep in mind that though they may have a 'deadline' of say Feb 1st, all the procrastinators may wait until Feb 1st to apply. So you're going to be in a pool of ?800? applicants vs. ?100? for an earlier date.

Best to apply early!!!

 

[corbomite]

Why is it important to apply early? Because admission isn't fair. I used to work with someone who had a 94 pcat score, a 4.0 science gpa, and a masters in English. They applied the last day possible to only one school and didn't get in.
A year later I applied early with an 84, and a 3.3 and I got an acceptance letter 48 hours after my interview. Is this fair? Of course not. He will be a better pharmacy student and probably a better pharmacist, yet I got in and he had to wait another year to get in somewhere. Why?
Pharmacy schools can't interview everyone at the same time. They have to interview some people earlier than others. In the first interviews they are not sure of the quality of later applicants; they are only sure of the current applicants. Hence, they are naturally going to accept a lot of people in the beginning and be much more selective later on when they have maybe 15 spots left. It sucks, but thats the way it is.

 

[drugdoc]

Don't sell yourself short, corbomate. You very well could have had a better application due to essays, recommendations, etc. PCAT and GPA isn't everything.

 

[confettiflyer]

its not like they go through them as they come in,

that's the definition of a "rolling admission" school.

schools that don't go through them like this are called "discrete admission" schools (ie UCSF, UCSD).

looks like someone didn't apply yet and wants to feel better about it 😕

 

[jackal head]

that's the definition of a "rolling admission" school.

schools that don't go through them like this are called "discrete admission" schools (ie UCSF, UCSD).

looks like someone didn't apply yet and wants to feel better about it 😕

lol thx for the heads up everyone, i wont be applying till 2011 so im good 👍

 

[rxgrl08]

I think it shows initiative and that you really want it. "The early bird gets the worm." The schools want ppl that are proactive.

 

[jackal head]

"The early bird gets the worm." .

i dont want worms, but its good to know that they review them as they come in because since most people dont apply early, its an easy way to get a good advantage

 

[UncertainRx]

Why is it important to apply early? Because admission isn't fair. I used to work with someone who had a 94 pcat score, a 4.0 science gpa, and a masters in English. They applied the last day possible to only one school and didn't get in.
A year later I applied early with an 84, and a 3.3 and I got an acceptance letter 48 hours after my interview. Is this fair? Of course not. He will be a better pharmacy student and probably a better pharmacist, yet I got in and he had to wait another year to get in somewhere. Why?
Pharmacy schools can't interview everyone at the same time. They have to interview some people earlier than others. In the first interviews they are not sure of the quality of later applicants; they are only sure of the current applicants. Hence, they are naturally going to accept a lot of people in the beginning and be much more selective later on when they have maybe 15 spots left. It sucks, but thats the way it is.

Ouch.

Personally I dont like this system either. Wheres the meritocracy thats supposed to exist?

 

[aboveliquidice]

Ouch.

Personally I dont like this system either. Wheres the meritocracy thats supposed to exist?

The ideal is the avoidance of mediocrity. As a general rule, people who are smart enough to not have to work hard, dont. Not that people with 4.0s are lazy, that's not what I am saying. What I am saying is: The person who puts the most effort into something, should get the most out of it.

Who put in more effort (in the application process)

1. The person who waits to the last day to turn in an app - Did not have his PS critiqued, chose the easiest LORs.

2. A person who turned in his app on the very first day, with a polished 5th-revision PS, and sparkling LORs that he worked 2 years to get.

These are extremes, but I have seen it now time and time again. The person who puts out more effort is going to do better than a person who just half-asses it - even if the person who half-asses is a more talented/intelligent person.

Work hard, get your stuff done early - and you can smile at the people with 99 PCATS that will be reapplying again next year.

~above~

 

[confettiflyer]

I still don't like the notion that working hard makes you more qualified than the person who is smarter. Granted, as a former manager in a financial firm that has since gone bankrupt, I can attest to a preference for the former rather than the latter. With the right guidance and managerial style, over the long term, I'd pick the latter. I'd rather be able to mold someone smart than have a hard working idiot keep making mistakes.

 

[corbomite]

I still don't like the notion that working hard makes you more qualified than the person who is smarter. Granted, as a former manager in a financial firm that has since gone bankrupt, I can attest to a preference for the former rather than the latter. With the right guidance and managerial style, over the long term, I'd pick the latter. I'd rather be able to mold someone smart than have a hard working idiot keep making mistakes.

As much as I hate to say it you are absolutely right. Hard work is a virtue but in the end you want an employee who is the most qualified and the best at the job. Sometimes being exceptionally smart outweighs hard work. Wish that wasn't the case, but it is.

 

[UncertainRx]

What I am saying is: The person who puts the most effort into something, should get the most out of it.

Disagree.

I still don't like the notion that working hard makes you more qualified than the person who is smarter.
...
I'd rather be able to mold someone smart than have a hard working idiot keep making mistakes.

Agree.

 

[jpharm445]

Disagree.



Agree.

Agree. And there are pharmacy schools that agree with us as well. They take the best applicants, not the first. I suspect that even most rolling admissions schools simply accept the early applicants that they project would be competitive overall, and defer the others to a wait list. Results matter in the real world, not effort. Effort only matters insofar as one needs it to obtain results.

 

[jackal head]

I still don't like the notion that working hard makes you more qualified than the person who is smarter. Granted, as a former manager in a financial firm that has since gone bankrupt, I can attest to a preference for the former rather than the latter. With the right guidance and managerial style, over the long term, I'd pick the latter. I'd rather be able to mold someone smart than have a hard working idiot keep making mistakes.

but it is difficult to tell who is the hard worker and who is the smart one, usually the hard worker will do a better job, intelligence only gets you so far, an intelligent person wont mean much if they dont care about there work

of course im saying this assuming the hard worker is not a complete idiot and so the difference is not too extreme, "smart" is a vague word and success in real life is not based on high of an IQ you have

 

[confettiflyer]

there are ways to tell...in my opinion. here is just a sample at what i look for:

1) what kinds of questions do they ask
2) how quickly they pick up a workflow
3) when engaging them in conversation, are they able to "keep up?" and contribute? (doesn't necessarily show booksmarts, but shows off their communication skills...which takes a different type of intelligence).

While we're discussing this...what is intelligence anyway? I take it to mean the cognitive ability to absorb one's surroundings and integrate it into something meaningful quickly and efficiently. Just because you can bang out redox reactions doesn't necessarily make you smart....it's doing it quickly and integrating it into your understanding of the world that makes one smart.

I dunno, that is up for debate. I just know it when I see it.

 

[aboveliquidice]

Just to clarify - None of what I have said reflect "utopia" on the matter (in the sense of right and wrong).

They reflect what I have personally witnessed to be true. A person (typically the one personified as intelligent - but not putting out max effort) will have a very big issue with this.

I also think there may be an overestimate at the degree of intelligence the "intelligent" person possesses over the "hard working" person. The latter is not "unqualified" because he works hard, he has a greater success because of it.

The phrase "money talks, bullsh*t walks" is very useful in this particular example.

If a person wants into pharmacy school very much - they will work hard to get it. When a person decides to, and then does work hard - they can no longer be placed in the "intelligent / lazy" category - they immediately become the person who works hard, by nature of what the classification means.

So who is left in the former group? More times than not, its the people who complain about the "less intelligent" people being accepted over those that work hard. The people spending time to complain in the first place, rather than doing what is necessary to be accepted themselves.

If what I have said really ( and I mean deep seated here) bothers you - perhaps deep down you feel you haven't done enough - and you resent the people who have.

Wow - another long post - I like these deep questions concerning the mind and ego.

~above~

ps - in reading my post - I can see how it can be interpreted as a jab at those not accepted to school - That is NOT my intention. Rather, my goal was to explore why people feel this way about this particular subject. My post is developed from logic and reason - if you feel there is a false pretense - by all means share it - discussion breeds understanding.

 

[timbutt2]

Why is it important to apply early?

For peace of mind. It's much less stressful. If you can get everything done the month before school starts, why wouldn't you? I've been accepted into pharmacy school since mid December. After I matriculated--I got two interview requests for other schools--but now that I've been accepted into one I don't need to waste the money flying to other interviews. I can relax and focus on my studies.

As far as the would you rather be smart or a hard worker debate--pick up the latest edition of "Scientific American Mind" and read the article "The Secret to Raising Smart Kids."

"Our society worships talent, and many people assume that possessing superior intelligence or ability—along with confidence in that ability—is a recipe for success. In fact, however, more than 30 years of scientific investigation suggests that an overemphasis on intellect or talent leaves people vulnerable to failure, fearful of challenges and unwilling to remedy their shortcomings."

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=the-secret-to-raising-smart-kids

In other words the smart and talented are harder to mold than hard workers. Hard workers take crticism and use it to better their craft. The smart and talented tend to think they're the best and don't need teaching.

 

[makennacompton]

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

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