What Makes a Great Top-Tier Applicant?

[Planes2Doc]

Are you saying that it is very unlikely that many applicants are passionate about getting clinical exposure, research, teaching/tutoring, etc? Because I don't think that's the case, nor should it be.

Pre-meds aren't a special group of people that are different from other college students in any way. Therefore, when you see pre-meds pursuing so many things that any other regular student wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole, it kind of gives you the impression that people are doing a bunch of stuff they would rather not do.

Of course there are exceptions, but I have a hard time believing that pre-meds are so much more involved than any other student.

On the other hand, I feel very frustrated that it seems I must have unique passions and hobbies to stand out. I am passionate about medicine -- that's why I want to pursue it as a career. So, naturally, I WANT to spend my time in a hospital. Yet that makes me look like a cookie cutter, and makes people point fingers and say I'm not following my passions. But I am.

You should blame other people for that. If most pre-meds actually wanted to be volunteering in a hospital or other settings, then they wouldn't have such a piss poor reputation EVERYWHERE. You gotta wonder why the hospital staff are so rude to pre-med volunteers despite their "sacrifice," while being nice to the elderly volunteers. That just doesn't seem right to treat people who are doing you a favor bad like that, yet we accept it for what it is.

So even though you're passionate about the activity, other pre-meds ruined its validity for you. Also, I don't think a pre-med will write in their PS or talk at an interview about how much they hated doing ECs, so that's another strike against you unfortunately. It's hard to be credible when we know what most pre-meds are actually up to.

I don't feel like it's fair to expect me to have fabulously unique outside interests. I am preparing for a medical career. Why is it not enough that I engage in medical activities that I genuinely love and enjoy?

You don't have to technically have ADCOM-approved outside interests. People get into medical school with ED volunteering and shadowing. Luckily though, since people actually enjoy doing certain things outside of medicine, like being a normal person, those things can go on the application as well. With the insane demand to embellish during this process, I'm sure applicants put on a ton of activities that you wouldn't ever consider to fill up those 15 spaces.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[aspiring20]

Oh wait, I meant to say that no matter what you'll end up doing a bunch of stuff you don't want to do, so there's no way around it. But yes, it is "good" to have a mix of activities.

Also the word "unique" should be used carefully.

absolutely.

 

[MaenadsDance]

Yup, nontrads have a lot more time to become incredible candidates. I may be biased as a nontrad, but I think some can have WAY more impressive feats than simply completing undergrad with good grades. Think extensive research, americorp, peace corp, teach for america, clinical professional experience, etc...

I know a guy who got into a top 10 MD school this cycle... after working for NASA, spending 20 years in the military as a pilot, summiting Everest, and teaching engineering at a university level (Harvard turned him down "because he didn't have enough research")

I also know a girl who got into a top 3 US MD school this cycle, ORM, who had totally normal ECs/undergrad curriculum and a middle-tier state school, great stats, and an awesome personality.

Med school admissions are weird.

 

[Spinach Dip]

I also know a girl who got into a top 3 US MD school this cycle, ORM, who had totally normal ECs/undergrad curriculum and a middle-tier state school, great stats, and an awesome personality.

LOL. Getting in with only good stats and a great personality. You really cracked me up.

But it's a problem when what you're passionate about isn't exactly what the ADCOMs want you to be passionate about.

Let's see... I've read 200 books and written 5 novels in the past 6 years....

Not much I can do to change my activities at this point... So I guess the trick is figuring out which schools are passionate about unpublished authors?

 

[MaenadsDance]

LOL. Getting in with only good stats and a great personality. You really cracked me up.

The point was that the nontrad with the "leap off the page" life experiences and the traditional student with traditional activities faired just about as well - that one does not need to be an astronaut, self-made millionaire, Rhodes Scholar, or inventor to get into a famous medical school.

 

[aspiring20]

LOL. Getting in with only good stats and a great personality. You really cracked me up.





Let's see... I've read 200 books and written 5 novels in the past 6 years....

Not much I can do to change my activities at this point... So I guess the trick is figuring out which schools are passionate about unpublished authors?

you can self-publish your books.

 

[Spinach Dip]

The point was that the nontrad with the "leap off the page" life experiences and the traditional student with traditional activities faired just about as well - that one does not need to be an astronaut, self-made millionaire, Rhodes Scholar, or inventor to get into a famous medical school.

I got you.

Sometimes I wonder if this whole "have to be the next Gandhi" thing is a construct of the internet and urban myth... or if adcoms really do care how many times you gave one-on-one tutoring to autistic children...

you can self-publish your books.

Trust me, I have considered it.

I have also decided against it for reasons that would take hours to describe fully, so I will not do so here. Forgive me.

 

[aspiring20]

I got you.

Sometimes I wonder if this whole "have to be the next Gandhi" thing is a construct of the internet and urban myth... or if adcoms really do care how many times you gave one-on-one tutoring to autistic children...





Trust me, I have considered it.

I have also decided against it for reasons that would take hours to describe fully, so I will not do so here. Forgive me.

if you dont mind, i would like to know your reason. i am also planning on self-publishing a novel, so i am genuinely curious. you can send me a PM if you want.

and no pressure or anything. i totally respect your decision if you dont want to talk about it.

 

[Spinach Dip]

if you dont mind, i would like to know your reason. i am also planning on self-publishing a novel, so i am genuinely curious. you can send me a PM if you want.

and no pressure or anything. i totally respect your decision if you dont want to talk about it.

I'll give one:

Time. In order to get any significant sales as a self-published author, you need to put in hours upon hours of 'busy-work' just to be noticed. Essentially, you have to make it your full-time job. And even then, nothing is guaranteed. You could make bank... or nothing.

Upon seeing how much most self-published authors earn, and how stable the career is, I decided to apply to med school.

 

[DNAdude120]

I'm still more in favor that following a passion is more important than checking all the boxes. That being said, it is still very important to be able to answer the question "why medicine" and have relevant examples to back it up. This is where many of the ECs may come into play.

 

[BlueDemForever]

Again, could someone try to answer my original post?

 

[Pons Asinorum]

Again, could someone try to answer my original post?

No, this is your actual question, as per the hSDN forum:

Hello everyone! First of all, I am new to this website, and this is my first post. Please excuse me if my thread is in the wrong location. Also, I will state that I am South Asian American because I am not sure if ethnicity is a factor in med school admissions like it is in college admissions. Okay, so I will be starting college next year and am probably going to end up going to Indiana University Bloomington for my undergraduate studies next year. I am interested in majoring in physics and biology, will take the toughest classes offered (organic chemistry, biochemistry, molecular biology, quantum physics, mathematical analysis) and hope to maintain a 3.9+ GPA. In college, I will probably participate in various activities such as debate, student newspaper, math/science club, culture clubs, volunteering at hospital and in impoverished countries, research in both biology and physics, etc. in which I hope to pursue leadership positions and achieve recognition. I am interested in getting a PhD in physics after college which will take around 5 years. I would like to know first of all what my chances would be of getting into one of the top 3 med schools (Harvard, JHU, and UPenn) if I applied to med school at the age of 21 as a top student from Indiana University with a 3.9+ GPA, 40+ MCAT (55+ New MCAT), with a lot of research experience, lots of volunteering, a variety of extracurricular activities, awards in science as well as in other clubs, excellent letters of recommendation, and genuine and good essays? Then, would I increase my chances of getting into one of the three medical schools that I mentioned, if I had the same undergraduate credentials, pursued a PhD in physics after college from a prestigious program, re-took the MCAT in my last year of grad school, and still volunteered throughout grad school? I would really appreciate any input.

If you did all that, you would get into one of those schools unless you interview like an idiot .

 

[BlueDemForever]

Since it has become obvious, I will ask outright if I followed the 10 rules I stated in my op, went to Indiana University for my 4 years of undergrad, and applied as a traditional applicant in the summer after junior year, what would my chances be at getting into each of these schools individually: Harbard, JHU, Penn, Columbia, and WashU?

 

[911 Turbo]

Since it has become obvious, I will ask outright if I followed the 10 rules I stated in my op, went to Indiana University for my 4 years of undergrad, and applied as a traditional applicant in the summer after junior year, what would my chances be at getting into each of these schools individually: Harbard, JHU, Penn, Columbia, and WashU?

You aren't going to have a 3.9 double majoring in physics and biology. Not a 3.8 either. Not a 3.7. You will probably have a < 3.6 gpa.

 

[487806]

Since it has become obvious, I will ask outright if I followed the 10 rules I stated in my op, went to Indiana University for my 4 years of undergrad, and applied as a traditional applicant in the summer after junior year, what would my chances be at getting into each of these schools individually: Harbard, JHU, Penn, Columbia, and WashU?

The same. It's a crapshoot.

 

[Cynicalbrit]

Since it has become obvious, I will ask outright if I followed the 10 rules I stated in my op, went to Indiana University for my 4 years of undergrad, and applied as a traditional applicant in the summer after junior year, what would my chances be at getting into each of these schools individually: Harbard, JHU, Penn, Columbia, and WashU?

Medical school admissions are not ruled by probability. No one is pulling AMCAS ID numbers out of a hat. We can't give you a probability because there is no probability. You seem to be misunderstanding the difference between randomness and unpredictability. We have no idea what's going on in the ADCOMs mind as they read one of the thousands of applications sent to the school - which means that the process is unpredictable, but it isn't random. Otherwise, everyone's odds of getting in would simply be equal to the schools acceptance rate.


Make your application as good as possible, then apply to a broad range of schools with LizzyM scores both above and below your own. It's that simple.

 

[911 Turbo]

Medical school admissions are not ruled by probability. No one is pulling AMCAS ID numbers out of a hat. We can't give you a probability because there is no probability. You seem to be misunderstanding the difference between randomness and unpredictability. We have no idea what's going on in the ADCOMs mind as they read one of the thousands of applications sent to the school - which means that the process is unpredictable, but it isn't random. Otherwise, everyone's odds of getting in would simply be equal to the schools acceptance rate.


Make your application as good as possible, then apply to a broad range of schools with LizzyM scores both above and below your own. It's that simple.

Yeah - medical school admission is a crapshoot. I have even heard that your chances depend greatly on the mood of the adcom at that moment. The admission system is very broken and puts a lot of emphasis on things that it shouldn't.

 

[NickNaylor]

Yeah - medical school admission is a crapshoot. I have even heard that your chances depend greatly on the mood of the adcom at that moment. The admission system is very broken and puts a lot of emphasis on things that it shouldn't.

The people reviewing your app are people, not machines. It would be hyperbolic to say your chances "depend greatly on the mood of the adcom at that moment." The admissions process is unfair and not ideal, but I don't think it's "broken."

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717

 

[Cynicalbrit]

Actually, I'm going to try to be helpful for a moment.

OP, your best bet is to go on MDApps and try to find people with similar applications to your own. Unfortunately, most people don't even mention their ECs, which makes the profile much less useful. You should, however, be able to find at least a few people in your [predicted?] stat range and you will be able to see where they got interviews and where they were accepted. Just bear in mind that MDApps has absolutely zero predictive capability, so don't assume that you'll get into X Y and Z top schools just because someone else got in with your stats.

 

[Mt Kilimanjaro]

Since it has become obvious, I will ask outright if I followed the 10 rules I stated in my op, went to Indiana University for my 4 years of undergrad, and applied as a traditional applicant in the summer after junior year, what would my chances be at getting into each of these schools individually: Harbard, JHU, Penn, Columbia, and WashU?

Harbard?

Yale = Amherst > Community college >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Indiana University

Check the MSAR for your overall "chances" and the average numbers and experiences of successful applicants.

 

[NickRiviera MD]

Since it has become obvious, I will ask outright if I followed the 10 rules I stated in my op, went to Indiana University for my 4 years of undergrad, and applied as a traditional applicant in the summer after junior year, what would my chances be at getting into each of these schools individually: Harbard, JHU, Penn, Columbia, and WashU?

You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the admissions process, which is not unusual for a high school student. Do not set your heart on any one school as nobody in the world has any idea how the person who happens to read your application will interpret your application at that point in time. You are asking questions that do not have answers; listen to those who have been through the process.

 

[Planes2Doc]

The people reviewing your app are people, not machines. It would be hyperbolic to say your chances "depend greatly on the mood of the adcom at that moment." The admissions process is unfair and not ideal, but I don't think it's "broken."

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717

It depends on what you consider broken.

Rightly so, people with very high stats will get into medical school. But then again, what exactly are the ADCOMs looking for? So in the sense that they can fill up every single seat with high stat applicants, then it's not broken. If the ADCOMs want great leaders in medicine that become well-known in competitive specialties? Then the system is not broken.

But, if they are trying to accomplish something, like solving the shortage of physicians in underserved areas, then indeed the process is as broken as can be. ADCOMs have been ushering in applicants who make great claims of wanting to help the underserved for years, yet the areas still go underserved. I think that, as circulus vitios would say, the pony show that applicants put on is what's wrong with the system. It's gotten to the point where you can't tell where anyone's passions even lie, because it has become nothing more than a game of extreme conformity. Therefore, deciding who is genuine and who is putting on a facade is like playing eenie, meenie, miney, mo.

And that is why the system is so broken. If anyone was actually themselves or did what they were genuinely passionate about, then they would not be competitive for medical school admissions.

Since the current phrase is "beefing up" your ECs, I feel like I should leave you with this as helpful advice.

 

[Pons Asinorum]

It depends on what you consider broken.

Rightly so, people with very high stats will get into medical school. But then again, what exactly are the ADCOMs looking for? So in the sense that they can fill up every single seat with high stat applicants, then it's not broken. If the ADCOMs want great leaders in medicine that become well-known in competitive specialties? Then the system is not broken.

But, if they are trying to accomplish something, like solving the shortage of physicians in underserved areas, then indeed the process is as broken as can be. ADCOMs have been ushering in applicants who make great claims of wanting to help the underserved for years, yet the areas still go underserved. I think that, as circulus vitios would say, the pony show that applicants put on is what's wrong with the system. It's gotten to the point where you can't tell where anyone's passions even lie, because it has become nothing more than a game of extreme conformity. Therefore, deciding who is genuine and who is putting on a facade is like playing eenie, meenie, miney, mo.

And that is why the system is so broken. If anyone was actually themselves or did what they were genuinely passionate about, then they would not be competitive for medical school admissions.

Since the current phrase is "beefing up" your ECs, I feel like I should leave you with this as helpful advice.

Planes - I love a lot of your writing, and don't disagree with everything here, but I think you make a lot of generalization by extrapolating out from what you read on SDN, your application experience and your individual medical school class. You can't possibly see into the hearts and minds of the human beings who sit on adcomms and know why they choose the people they do. You're spreading some cynical sauce on a lot of applicants and people who select from those applicants about something you feel strongly about. There are problems, but I think the problems you are banging the drum about aren't exactly as you present them.

 

[Planes2Doc]

Planes - I love a lot of your writing, and don't disagree with everything here, but I think you make a lot of generalization by extrapolating out from what you read on SDN, your application experience and your individual medical school class. You can't possibly see into the hearts and minds of the human beings who sit on adcomms and know why they choose the people they do. You're spreading some cynical sauce on a lot of applicants and people who select from those applicants about something you feel strongly about. There are problems, but I think the problems you are banging the drum about aren't exactly as you present them.

That is why I would love to sit on an admissions committee. I would love to see how they reason through these things. You're right though, my views may be extreme in one way. Interestingly though, I think SDN is at a very extreme position alltogether. SDN is pretty much the opposite of what pre-med advisors in general say, yet applicants on both SDN and those who never saw the site get into medical school get in.

I think SDN overall has recurring themes that you see over and over again. I am cynical when it's obvious how fake it is, how much it consumes peoples' lives, and how people still get into school without performing the Greatest Show on Earth. I don't think this shouldn't be ignored either.

Also to reiterate, I have never once heard an applicant ask how they can help more people through their ECs. When someone actually says that, my views might change. But in the meantime, I think it's worth challenging the existing status quo that exists here.

 

[Mt Kilimanjaro]

I'll just leave this here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19202486

 

[Narmerguy]

It depends on what you consider broken.

Rightly so, people with very high stats will get into medical school. But then again, what exactly are the ADCOMs looking for? So in the sense that they can fill up every single seat with high stat applicants, then it's not broken. If the ADCOMs want great leaders in medicine that become well-known in competitive specialties? Then the system is not broken.

But, if they are trying to accomplish something, like solving the shortage of physicians in underserved areas, then indeed the process is as broken as can be. ADCOMs have been ushering in applicants who make great claims of wanting to help the underserved for years, yet the areas still go underserved. I think that, as circulus vitios would say, the pony show that applicants put on is what's wrong with the system. It's gotten to the point where you can't tell where anyone's passions even lie, because it has become nothing more than a game of extreme conformity. Therefore, deciding who is genuine and who is putting on a facade is like playing eenie, meenie, miney, mo.

And that is why the system is so broken. If anyone was actually themselves or did what they were genuinely passionate about, then they would not be competitive for medical school admissions.

Since the current phrase is "beefing up" your ECs, I feel like I should leave you with this as helpful advice.

This really doesn't defend the complaints about adcoms being "human" as a cause for the process being "broken."

In fact, your complaints about the broken nature of the admissions process are practically the same in every single field. Applicants to every graduate program say the same things, applicants for jobs complain about the same things, for college complain, etc etc. This is the collateral damage of trying to "select" a small number of "winners" from a massively large number of people. There's no perfect way to do it, and it would be a mistake to single out the medical admissions process as if it is somehow "broken."

Once again, do not assume that people cannot be genuine about their interests and activities. I hear people complain ad nauseum about how it is all a bunch of hoops to jump through, ignoring that many applicants (especially those that never hear about places like SDN) do not see these experiences as hoops but rather things they genuinely find interesting. Don't assume things you don't know just because it supports your position.

 

[911 Turbo]

I'll just leave this here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19202486

"Instead of treating premedical education as a mere prelude to medical school, we should encourage undergraduates to take full advantage of their college years as an opportunity to develop as human beings"

LOL

Yeah I always wanted to study something that really interests me - oops I can't my GPA will be too low for medical school.


Yeah I hate volunteering at the hospital because I am getting nothing out of it - oops I absolutely need > 100 hours for my application to medical school.


Yeah I hate how my GPA is lower because I majored in something more difficult - oops my GPA will be compared to people who majored in psychology or biology.


Yeah I love how the constraints of getting into medical school makes premeds the most friendly people in college - oops just kidding premeds are the most competitive neurotic people around.


and the list goes on and on

 

[Pons Asinorum]

"Instead of treating premedical education as a mere prelude to medical school, we should encourage undergraduates to take full advantage of their college years as an opportunity to develop as human beings"

LOL

Yeah I always wanted to study something that really interests me - oops I can't my GPA will be too low for medical school.


Yeah I hate volunteering at the hospital because I am getting nothing out of it - oops I absolutely need > 100 hours for my application to medical school.


Yeah I hate how my GPA is lower because I majored in something more difficult - oops my GPA will be compared to people who majored in psychology or biology.


Yeah I love how the constraints of getting into medical school makes premeds the most friendly people in college - oops just kidding premeds are the most competitive neurotic people around.


and the list goes on and on

I don't know you from Adam, but if you don't like learning science, hate altruism, don't like being around hospitals and can't stand neurotic people, you might want to reevaluate some things in your life. Every step along the way towards being an MD/DO just concentrates your exposure to those very things.

 

[911 Turbo]

I don't know you from Adam, but if you don't like learning science, hate altruism, don't like being around hospitals and can't stand neurotic people, you might want to reevaluate some things in your life. Every step along the way towards being an MD/DO just concentrates your exposure to those very things.

I never said that I didn't like my science classes - I love most of them. But adcoms should not compare the gpa of a psyc major and the gpa of a physics or engineering major. And I don't hate altruism - I just feel as though I don't do any good in my volunteering position. Fake altruism is a lot worse than admitting that you are not getting anything out of a position. But you are correct in saying that I can't stand neurotic people.

 

[Narmerguy]

"Instead of treating premedical education as a mere prelude to medical school, we should encourage undergraduates to take full advantage of their college years as an opportunity to develop as human beings"

LOL

Yeah I always wanted to study something that really interests me - oops I can't my GPA will be too low for medical school.


Yeah I hate volunteering at the hospital because I am getting nothing out of it - oops I absolutely need > 100 hours for my application to medical school.


Yeah I hate how my GPA is lower because I majored in something more difficult - oops my GPA will be compared to people who majored in psychology or biology.


Yeah I love how the constraints of getting into medical school makes premeds the most friendly people in college - oops just kidding premeds are the most competitive neurotic people around.


and the list goes on and on

None of these things are required. People on here like to assume that you need a lot of things that you don't.

Why does majoring in something that interests you mean that you can't get a good GPA? Unless your interests are in Arts/Music Performance, Mathematics, Physics, or Engineering, almost all other degrees are pretty accessible to hardworking individuals. That's a total cop out to pretend that medical school is somehow keeping you from doing and studying what interests you.

You don't have to volunteer 100 hours at a hospital. I only did 60. I'm sure it'll be fine. Even if you wanted to meet this (arbitrary) 100 hour goal, that would take literally two semesters of 3 hrs a week. I can't imagine that this substantially changes anyone's week or is depriving them from some important engagement. It's 3 hours.

What are these super hard majors that put applicants at such a disadvantage compared to bio majors? What happened to majoring in something interesting? Again, unless you're really passionate about the performance arts of rigorous mathematical majors, there's pretty much no major that you can't perform well in. Even assuming that you won't do well just because the major is harder is a cop out. I majored in Biophysics and did just fine in it. Did I work harder than I perhaps would have had I majored in Biology? Maybe, but isn't this supposed to be the field that you're so interested in anyway? If you don't enjoy it, then don't do the extra work and major in that field, it's not that hard.

Medical school doesn't make premeds neurotic. Neurotic premeds decide to apply to medical school. There are numerous grueling, ambitious goals out there that aren't riddled with a bunch of crazy neurotic applicants (Goldwater winners, Fulbright scholars, Marshall scholars, NSF scholars, Truman scholars, etc etc). Not to mention, there are tons of premeds that aren't neurotic and are very successful and accomplished. Medical schools aren't twisting premeds arms to act like lunatics.

People need to take a lot more ownership of their actions and stop trying to blame everything on someone else. You are grown adults, you are autonomous, sentient beings. You are potty trained. Take responsibility for your own success and own up to your shortcomings. I promise you that if you take this viewpoint you will unlock a huge amount of success. If the system bothers you so much, the way to fix it isn't by complaining and flailing about, but by dominating the system and earning a seat at the big boys' table where the decisions are made.

 

[Planes2Doc]

I never said that I didn't like my science classes - I love most of them. But adcoms should not compare the gpa of a psyc major and the gpa of a physics or engineering major. And I don't hate altruism - I just feel as though I don't do any good in my volunteering position. Fake altruism is a lot worse than admitting that you are not getting anything out of a position. But you are correct in saying that I can't stand neurotic people.

You hit the nail dead on the head. I thought my science classes, well at least biology, were fascinating. I like helping people. I enjoyed my sporadic non-clinical work quite a bit. I hated being taken advantage of as a hospital volunteer where I mostly did the work of the orderly. I agree that fake altruism is bad.

 

[487806]

You hit the nail dead on the head. I thought my science classes, well at least biology, were fascinating. I like helping people. I enjoyed my sporadic non-clinical work quite a bit. I hated being taken advantage of as a hospital volunteer where I mostly did the work of the orderly. I agree that fake altruism is bad.

But it's necessary. True altruism is a minority among med school applicants.

 

[BlueDemForever]

So you are saying Indiana University is worse than a community college?

 

[Narmerguy]

But it's necessary. True altruism is a minority among med school applicants.

This is an unnecessarily cynical view. It may not be that applicants are Mother Teresas, but I'm willing to believe that many applicants actually are interested in volunteer work and find it interesting or even valuable. Most of the time students are just too lazy or aren't motivated enough to go spend their free time actually doing said volunteer work. Medical Admissions provides the extra incentive for these applicants that would otherwise do nothing.

Of course, one may argue that altruism without accompanying motivation to act is hardly a useful brand of altruism. That's certainly reasonable, but it's very different from the cynical view that the majority of applicants are just toiling away at things that they hate, are completely apathetic about, or fundamentally disagree with.

 

[BlueDemForever]

Could someone just answer the freaking questions I ask and not go off on a personal tangent/rant?

 

[Cynicalbrit]

So you are saying Indiana University is worse than a community college?

He was being sarcastic. Yale != Amherst, community college !> Indiana, etc.

Could someone just answer the freaking questions I ask and not go off on a personal tangent/rant?

I for one think it's awesome that a relatively uninteresting thread has become a very serious, meaningful discussion about the issues in today's medical school admissions process. This discussion is completely relevant, and is probably more important than the standard "How do I get into Harvard?" type questions that were the subject of your original post. Stop complaining and listen to the discussion, it's important.


Besides, there is no magic formula for top ten admissions. No one has the answers you're looking for. Just make the best application you can, and try to avoid hubris.

Cheers

 

[Pons Asinorum]

Could someone just answer the freaking questions I ask and not go off on a personal tangent/rant?

Yes, he was saying that it is better to go to a CC than to IU. Question answered, now stop complaining that the open internet forum, for which you don't pay the server hosting fees, isn't bending to your will.

 

[BlueDemForever]

Well at least this guy answered my questions.

 

[Cynicalbrit]

Well at least this guy answered my questions.

If you don't quote, nobody knows what you're talking about.

 

[911 Turbo]

Well at least this guy answered my questions.

Why do you want to go to Harvard so badly?

 

[Pons Asinorum]

Why do you want to go to Harvard so badly?

Guessing?

 

[mcloaf]

Could someone just answer the freaking questions I ask and not go off on a personal tangent/rant?

hSDN misses you.

 

[Planes2Doc]

This is an unnecessarily cynical view. It may not be that applicants are Mother Teresas, but I'm willing to believe that many applicants actually are interested in volunteer work and find it interesting or even valuable. Most of the time students are just too lazy or aren't motivated enough to go spend their free time actually doing said volunteer work. Medical Admissions provides the extra incentive for these applicants that would otherwise do nothing.

Of course, one may argue that altruism without accompanying motivation to act is hardly a useful brand of altruism. That's certainly reasonable, but it's very different from the cynical view that the majority of applicants are just toiling away at things that they hate, are completely apathetic about, or fundamentally disagree with.

People can care about a lot of things. For example, I love animals. But does that mean that I would spend my Saturday mornings volunteering at an animal shelter rather than doing other things that are important to me? To say that everyone is completely apathetic is a ridiculous statement, because people do indeed care about things, but it's a whole other level when they take action.

For instance, can you honestly tell me that you're not impressed by people who are not pre-med and are doing extensive volunteer work for the sake of being altruistic? It's strange that whenever I meet people who do volunteer like this, which are few and far between, I'm very impressed by what they do. For instance, I used to work with a guy who would have average to above-average ECs by SDN standards. I was extremely impressed and thought very highly of him when I saw the work he does. I do not get that warm fuzzy feeling inside when I see an applicant with a laundry-list equivalent or greater than his in WAMC forum.

Also, tell me that you're not impressed by people who do amazing things for children because they genuinely want to. How about Lenny Robinson who visits sick children dressed as Batman? I'm sure that people on the WAMC forum and elsewhere on SDN do more activities and hours on a weekly basis than Mr. Robinson. But does reading about their volunteering in a hospital, tutoring underprivileged children, ladling soup in a soup kitchen, volunteering in a free clinic, or do the millions of other ECs you see over and over again give you that better feeling on the inside when you compare it to people like Mr. Robinson?

I hope that someone can explain to me why I feel such admiration for the "helpers" in society that help because they genuinely want to, versus that empty feeling when you gloss over an applicant's laundry-list of ECs. I think that there's so much more when something is genuine.

Mr. Rogers said, “When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, "Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping.” It means so much more when it's genuine. I'm sorry, but I can't help to not be impressed by people who are most likely not genuine. I realize that you are correct when you say you can't judge everyone like this. But considering the bad reputation that pre-meds have, it really does show you the true intentions of the good majority. It kind of sucks for the real "helpers" whose good work is overshadowed by the poor reputation pre-meds have in the volunteer world.

 

[487806]

Could someone just answer the freaking questions I ask and not go off on a personal tangent/rant?

Who are you even talking to? Use the quote feature next time. This discussion is more relevant and really quite useful. If you actually adhered to this rather than looking to satisfy your own desires, it's worthwhile.

This is an unnecessarily cynical view. It may not be that applicants are Mother Teresas, but I'm willing to believe that many applicants actually are interested in volunteer work and find it interesting or even valuable. Most of the time students are just too lazy or aren't motivated enough to go spend their free time actually doing said volunteer work. Medical Admissions provides the extra incentive for these applicants that would otherwise do nothing.

Of course, one may argue that altruism without accompanying motivation to act is hardly a useful brand of altruism. That's certainly reasonable, but it's very different from the cynical view that the majority of applicants are just toiling away at things that they hate, are completely apathetic about, or fundamentally disagree with.

It probably seems cynical, but honestly, I just find it rare for majority of applicants to view volunteering as truly an altruistic passion. Many of them are using volunteering as a means to an end. Of course, this is subjective and depends on one's experiences, but I feel that this is more of a realistic view, as seen by the anti-volunteering threads on SDN.

 

[Narmerguy]

People can care about a lot of things. For example, I love animals. But does that mean that I would spend my Saturday mornings volunteering at an animal shelter rather than doing other things that are important to me? To say that everyone is completely apathetic is a ridiculous statement, because people do indeed care about things, but it's a whole other level when they take action.

For instance, can you honestly tell me that you're not impressed by people who are not pre-med and are doing extensive volunteer work for the sake of being altruistic? It's strange that whenever I meet people who do volunteer like this, which are few and far between, I'm very impressed by what they do. For instance, I used to work with a guy who would have average to above-average ECs by SDN standards. I was extremely impressed and thought very highly of him when I saw the work he does. I do not get that warm fuzzy feeling inside when I see an applicant with a laundry-list equivalent or greater than his in WAMC forum.

Also, tell me that you're not impressed by people who do amazing things for children because they genuinely want to. How about Lenny Robinson who visits sick children dressed as Batman? I'm sure that people on the WAMC forum and elsewhere on SDN do more activities and hours on a weekly basis than Mr. Robinson. But does reading about their volunteering in a hospital, tutoring underprivileged children, ladling soup in a soup kitchen, volunteering in a free clinic, or do the millions of other ECs you see over and over again give you that better feeling on the inside when you compare it to people like Mr. Robinson?

I hope that someone can explain to me why I feel such admiration for the "helpers" in society that help because they genuinely want to, versus that empty feeling when you gloss over an applicant's laundry-list of ECs. I think that there's so much more when something is genuine.

Mr. Rogers said, “When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, "Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping.” It means so much more when it's genuine. I'm sorry, but I can't help to not be impressed by people who are most likely not genuine. I realize that you are correct when you say you can't judge everyone like this. But considering the bad reputation that pre-meds have, it really does show you the true intentions of the good majority. It kind of sucks for the real "helpers" whose good work is overshadowed by the poor reputation pre-meds have in the volunteer world.

I certainly understand, it's always encouraging when you see someone do something great when they really stand nothing to gain. Many of these people you mentioned do great working helping others and we can tell that, for the most part, there's little to be gained besides their own joy of helping. That's commendable and even inspiring in some cases.

But that should not encourage us to look down on the work done by others whose futures do stand to gain from their service. I agree with you, altruism without action is weak stuff. But it is important to know that people's hearts are in the right place. It's also relieving to know that many people, through what was originally only the requisite service, will form personal connections with others or perhaps find an important issue that will linger with them long after the lights have shut off and the committees are no longer watching.

More importantly, as you've acknowledged, there are many premeds who do good work because they care, and it would be extremely unfair to cut these students down and doubt them simply because many will look favorably upon what they have done. I think our efforts should be towards strengthening adcoms' abilities to discern the difference between the two groups. There needs to be some tolerance for the BS of life and the simple fact that a perfect system can never be created, people will always be unfairly lost, and others will always unfairly slip through.

Who are you even talking to? Use the quote feature next time. This discussion is more relevant and really quite useful. If you actually adhered to this rather than looking to satisfy your own desires, it's worthwhile.

It probably seems cynical, but honestly, I just find it rare for majority of applicants to view volunteering as truly an altruistic passion. Many of them are using volunteering as a means to an end. Of course, this is subjective and depends on one's experiences, but I feel that this is more of a realistic view, as seen by the anti-volunteering threads on SDN.

This is a difficult call to make. Most reasonable premeds are probably aware that when they accomplish unique or impressive things, that this will have benefits down the line. It may even encourage the premed to do more than they would otherwise have done: take a leadership position when they ordinarily be content to simply follow, or go on the trip abroad when they'd normally be content to do something domestic.

I would say that an expectation of altruistic "passion" is perhaps expecting too much on your part of the average premed. Many people care deeply about others, and what to do what they feel is their "fair share" to try to help. I have (non premed) friends who think this way, and will go to the soup kitchens or even the hospitals to volunteer once a month or a few weeks over the summer. It would be wrong to say that these people did not do these actions out of genuine altruism, and it is unnecessary to determine if this altruism was a "passion" vs a general philosophy or orientation towards life. We don't need social workers, we need good citizens who are willing to sacrifice more than they are asked for the sake of others. This may be small or great, it's up to each individual.

 

[Lamel]

That list seems so excessive. 5-6 clubs? With volunteering, research, and a job? Is this amazing applicant allowed to relax once in a while too or no?

 

[sundays24]

you just have to be as close to william hwang as possible

 

[NickNaylor]

People can care about a lot of things. For example, I love animals. But does that mean that I would spend my Saturday mornings volunteering at an animal shelter rather than doing other things that are important to me? To say that everyone is completely apathetic is a ridiculous statement, because people do indeed care about things, but it's a whole other level when they take action.

For instance, can you honestly tell me that you're not impressed by people who are not pre-med and are doing extensive volunteer work for the sake of being altruistic? It's strange that whenever I meet people who do volunteer like this, which are few and far between, I'm very impressed by what they do. For instance, I used to work with a guy who would have average to above-average ECs by SDN standards. I was extremely impressed and thought very highly of him when I saw the work he does. I do not get that warm fuzzy feeling inside when I see an applicant with a laundry-list equivalent or greater than his in WAMC forum.

Also, tell me that you're not impressed by people who do amazing things for children because they genuinely want to. How about Lenny Robinson who visits sick children dressed as Batman? I'm sure that people on the WAMC forum and elsewhere on SDN do more activities and hours on a weekly basis than Mr. Robinson. But does reading about their volunteering in a hospital, tutoring underprivileged children, ladling soup in a soup kitchen, volunteering in a free clinic, or do the millions of other ECs you see over and over again give you that better feeling on the inside when you compare it to people like Mr. Robinson?

I hope that someone can explain to me why I feel such admiration for the "helpers" in society that help because they genuinely want to, versus that empty feeling when you gloss over an applicant's laundry-list of ECs. I think that there's so much more when something is genuine.

Mr. Rogers said, "When I was a boy and I would see scary things in the news, my mother would say to me, "Look for the helpers. You will always find people who are helping." It means so much more when it's genuine. I'm sorry, but I can't help to not be impressed by people who are most likely not genuine. I realize that you are correct when you say you can't judge everyone like this. But considering the bad reputation that pre-meds have, it really does show you the true intentions of the good majority. It kind of sucks for the real "helpers" whose good work is overshadowed by the poor reputation pre-meds have in the volunteer world.

No offense dude, but I really don't understand how any of this is limited or even relevant to medical school admissions? Are you upset that people who are "helpers" and like Mr. Rogers chose to do something else with their lives? Are medical schools supposed to go draft people from society to attend their school because we bow to their Altruism? Sure, I'd love it if people (myself included) were really Passionate about Real Volunteer Work, but people aren't, and applicants to medical school are no different.

Also, I'm not sure who you interacted with on the interview trail or who you interact with as classmates that made your view of the application process so jaded, but I met plenty of people and go to class with people that did some pretty amazing stuff. Yes, there are obviously people that brown nose and do only what might give them a boost, but there are also plenty of people - more I'd say - that are, for the most part, just normal people. I agree with Narmer in that i think you are really overgeneralizing based on some bad experiences and perhaps even misunderstanding people.

By no means do I think the medical application process is perfect. I think the inherent ways by which applicants are judged does, to some extent, select for people willing to go through the silliness of the whole thing. However, for every grubber there are 4-5 normal people and one Truly Passionate Individual that is just into some super awesome stuff.

I guess I don't really understand what you're so bothered about and what the medical admissions process has to do with that.

 

[mimelim]

No offense dude, but I really don't understand how any of this is limited or even relevant to medical school admissions? Are you upset that people who are "helpers" and like Mr. Rogers chose to do something else with their lives? Are medical schools supposed to go draft people from society to attend their school because we bow to their Altruism? Sure, I'd love it if people (myself included) were really Passionate about Real Volunteer Work, but people aren't, and applicants to medical school are no different.

Also, I'm not sure who you interacted with on the interview trail or who you interact with as classmates that made your view of the application process so jaded, but I met plenty of people and go to class with people that did some pretty amazing stuff. Yes, there are obviously people that brown nose and do only what might give them a boost, but there are also plenty of people - more I'd say - that are, for the most part, just normal people. I agree with Narmer in that i think you are really overgeneralizing based on some bad experiences and perhaps even misunderstanding people.

By no means do I think the medical application process is perfect. I think the inherent ways by which applicants are judged does, to some extent, select for people willing to go through the silliness of the whole thing. However, for every grubber there are 4-5 normal people and one Truly Passionate Individual that is just into some super awesome stuff.

I guess I don't really understand what you're so bothered about and what the medical admissions process has to do with that.

This was my experience as well. There are people who gamed the system and a reasonable number of people that did activities just for medical school. But, when you interview at the top schools and matriculate, you realize that there are a lot of people out there that simply ARE that amazing. The objective of medical school admissions is to make sure that you capture all of those people. The extras that get in and are gaming the system are simply a byproduct.

Then again, we are all colored by our different paths. I didn't know I was applying to medical school until the Summer between Sophomore and Junior year. I also sure as hell didn't do anything specifically for medical school because I had no idea that one 'could'. I just did what I wanted and knew that an medical school would be lucky to have me. *shrug*

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

brb going to get my batman costume