WLs, Holds and Interview performance

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
D

deleted887473

I’m thankful to have gone on 3 MD interviews so far, one which resulted in an acceptance. However, I got waitlisted/put on hold at the other 2 places that I thought I Interviewed better than the place that accepted me. Both of those schools are widely known for putting many people on hold/waitlist post-II. I was wondering how much of these decisions were because of my interview performance, as opposed to just how the schools do things?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You seem to be attributing a level of logic and coherence to this process that it does not merit.

From the perspective of the applicant, the outcome of an interview is determined by so many unknowable possible factors that it's no better than a random process. Two different interviewers looking at the exact same interview performance could come up with totally opposite ratings. Looking at the exact same interview, one interviewer could decide you're a "good fit" and another could decide you're not.

ADCOMs will tell you otherwise because to them, each of their own decisions is completely logical. The problem is, you don't get to appeal to just one ADCOM. In aggregate, the multiple perspectives are so contradictory and incoherent that it's literally just random.

Congratulations on getting an acceptance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I’m thankful to have gone on 3 MD interviews so far, one which resulted in an acceptance. However, I got waitlisted/put on hold at the other 2 places that I thought I Interviewed better than the place that accepted me. Both of those schools are widely known for putting many people on hold/waitlist post-II. I was wondering how much of these decisions were because of my interview performance, as opposed to just how the schools do things?
First, congrats for the one A. Be thanksful. You yourself said these schools are known for higher WL. Dif your interview performance get included in this decision - possibly and likely. Perhaps to gauge whether you are qualified or over-qualified?

Also, this year, I believe several schools are doing things like this to yield protect. I also believe there is going to be a lot more WL movement this cycle than ever.

Note: I am just another applicant.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
8thI’m thankful to have gone on 3 MD interviews so far, one which resulted in an acceptance. However, I got waitlisted/put on hold at the other 2 places that I thought I Interviewed better than the place that accepted me. Both of those schools are widely known for putting many people on hold/waitlist post-II. I was wondering how much of these decisions were because of my interview performance, as opposed to just how the schools do things?
Students aren't very good judges of their interview performance. Everybody they interview the school deems worthy, so everybody at the interview is a potential matriculant. Basically, the interviewer wants to know if they would want you as their doctor, or the doctor they would choose for their Mother in Law. Seriously, they want to know if you would be the one they would pick to be their doctor. Do you connect easily with people? Can you think, can you express yourself and explain complicated issues in an easily understandable fashion? This is how you excel at an interview. Face it, everyone interviewed is qualified to be admitted. Choosing is hard and the interview can nail things down for you or not. Congrats on your admission.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 3 users
Students aren't very good judges of their interview performance. Everybody they interview the school deems worthy, so everybody at the interview is a potential matriculant. Basically, the interviewer wants to know if they would want you as their doctor, or the doctor they would choose for their Mother in Law. Seriously, they want to know if you would be the one they would pick to be their doctor. Do you connect easily with people? Can you think, can you express yourself and explain complicated issues in an easily understandable fashion? This is how you excel at an interview. Face it, everyone interviewed is qualified to be admitted. Choosing is hard and the interview can nail things down for you or not. Congrats on your admission.
I definitely think I did better on the interviews after which I didn’t get the acceptance, or at least not worse than at the school that admitted me. Oh well!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Focus on the positive (your acceptance) and don't dwell on the negative (your waitlists), although I know it's easier said than done. It's impossible to know why you were waitlisted, but you can only attend one medical school anyway, so the truth is it doesn't matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
First, congrats for the one A. Be thanksful. You yourself said these schools are known for higher WL. Dif your interview performance get included in this decision - possibly and likely. Perhaps to gauge whether you are qualified or over-qualified?

Also, this year, I believe several schools are doing things like this to yield protect. I also believe there is going to be a lot more WL movement this cycle than ever.

Note: I am just another applicant.
This is going to sound like sour grapes but I’m thinking one school might actually waitlisted me for yield protection; they are low-yield (think Drexel) and my LM is about 80. Connected very well with the interviewer who repeatedly praised how great she thought I was.
 
This is going to sound like sour grapes but I’m thinking one school might actually waitlisted me for yield protection; they are low-yield (think Drexel) and my LM is about 80. Connected very well with the interviewer who repeatedly praised how great she thought I was.
Actually, it doesn't sound like sour grapes at all. As mentioned above, it sounds like you are tying to rationalize the irrational! :cool:

That said, as a mere pre-applicant, I think you are misunderstanding yield protection. Schools receive far more qualified applications than slots to interview them, so most schools other than those at the tippy top engage in some form of yield protection to avoid wasting IIs on people who are statistically highly unlikely to enroll.

Once you have an II, yield protection is no longer on the table, at least not until deciding who to take off the WL, when it will again come into play depending on where else you have WLs or As, how interested you seem, etc. To the extent it happens prior to a decision, it happens on the front end, before the II. Not after a great interview, when they wake up and say "Holy crap! LM 80 -- WL." That's just not how yield protection works.

For what it's worth, there are plenty of applicants with high stats and less than spectacular ECs who turn out to be great fits at so-called low yield schools. Based on my observations of friends who have gone through this last cycle and so far in this one, I really think adcoms know what they are doing, and can tell after a brief glance at an app which high stat applicants are going to be showered with love at T10 and T20, and which ones they actually have a shot at enrolling, and act accordingly. It's not perfect, since every year there are people who get into a single T5, T10, T20 and solicit no interest elsewhere in that group, and they can never figure out why, but, by and large, the adcoms know what they are doing and can figure out who is going to be in play and who isn't.
 
Last edited:
I’m thankful to have gone on 3 MD interviews so far, one which resulted in an acceptance. However, I got waitlisted/put on hold at the other 2 places that I thought I Interviewed better than the place that accepted me. Both of those schools are widely known for putting many people on hold/waitlist post-II. I was wondering how much of these decisions were because of my interview performance, as opposed to just how the schools do things?
Without being there, this is impossible to answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
This is going to sound like sour grapes but I’m thinking one school might actually waitlisted me for yield protection; they are low-yield (think Drexel) and my LM is about 80. Connected very well with the interviewer who repeatedly praised how great she thought I was.
Resource protection occurs prior to the interview
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Read about LizzyM's staircase analogy. Even though you did (think) great in the interview, your entire application is considered before granting A.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
honestly, i wouldn't even worry about it. this entire process is a complete **** show, and luck plays a massive role. as one interviewer told me, they could have tossed all the applications down the stairs and selected ones randomly to fill the class - and they still probably would have a class full of determined and devoted students.

as an applicant, you have no idea how well you actually did during your interview. just do your best, and don't ruminate or question yourself afterwards - it's not worth it.

i'm just an applicant too, but i tell myself that med schools aren't evaluating or rejecting ME per say, but what i've divulged on paper. we are more than numbers. i think this mentality helps when dealing with WLs and Rs. as the other posters stated, you already have one A. congrats! focus on that.
Also important to remember that the interview is just one component (albeit usually an important one) that an admissions committee looks at when deciding that final decision. Also many on the admissions committee had no say on if you got that interview or not!! New set of eyes, new opinions.... you just never know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Top