Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

dk3what

Members
  • Content Count

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from karussell in Need to submit undergrad grades for neurology, will they share with other programs at same school? And if I apply to my undergrad school do they have access to transcript?   
    Agreed. Programs already have enough things to look and and way too many applicants to review. As such, no they likely won't share it and no the program won't look for marks/transcripts unless its part of their requirement for all applicants. 
  2. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from medlotteryticketholder in Western interview invites/regrets 2019   
    I agree. The responses in this thread are pretty indicative of perhaps why those individuals were not selected.
    There is a reason why lots of traditional interviews ask an applicant to discuss their failures and how they have dealt/coped with it. It matters.
  3. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from xiphoid in Cap in number of Electives   
    As a M4 who just finished the CaRMS tour, I would dare to say that some programs are VERY disconnected from what is going on at the UGME level. They have no idea how electives are obtained (i.e. that we have to apply through the portal, spending hundreds, sometimes thousands of dollars per block). They have no idea that different schools have different elective times/schedules, they unfortunately assume that every school follows something similar to their home school. Obviously I'm not familiar with most programs, so this may not apply everywhere. 
    Programs are already have trouble keeping up with the +++ number of applications they are receiving due to most applicants backing up or "parallel planning". This change makes it much easier to apply to multiple specialties and I 100% agree with Aetherus in that I believe this will only make things worse for competitive specialties where now any person can try their luck and shoot an application to these programs, as opposed to doing some due diligence and showing commitment via X number of electives.
    See my response above. In my opinion, it will hurt applicants first choice specialty IF its a competitive one. Maybe I'm biased, because I am applying to a relative competitive specialty but I already find that programs struggle to figure out who to invite for interviews, and increasing the number of applicants to these small competitive programs will not help things.
    Do you really want to force applicants to jump through even more hoops like publications, site visits, unofficial electives, etc to demonstrate interest? Most PDs will agree that its very hard to determine how interested an applicant is in a particular specialty and its unfortunate they use elective time a substitute measure. They realize its possible to have many different interests, but unfortunately they have to be pragmatic to cut down and sort through applications and elective time is one such way to do so. I'm not arguing that this is right or wrong, but simply trying to convey that this is the way it is, and I personally would rather commit to 1/2 specialties rather than find new and expensive ways to demonstrate my interest in a specialty. 
     Don't we have enough stress? Don't we already spend a considerably amount of money on the entire elective and CaRMS process?
  4. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from COMMANDO in Cap in number of Electives   
    As a M4 who just finished the CaRMS tour, I would dare to say that some programs are VERY disconnected from what is going on at the UGME level. They have no idea how electives are obtained (i.e. that we have to apply through the portal, spending hundreds, sometimes thousands of dollars per block). They have no idea that different schools have different elective times/schedules, they unfortunately assume that every school follows something similar to their home school. Obviously I'm not familiar with most programs, so this may not apply everywhere. 
    Programs are already have trouble keeping up with the +++ number of applications they are receiving due to most applicants backing up or "parallel planning". This change makes it much easier to apply to multiple specialties and I 100% agree with Aetherus in that I believe this will only make things worse for competitive specialties where now any person can try their luck and shoot an application to these programs, as opposed to doing some due diligence and showing commitment via X number of electives.
    See my response above. In my opinion, it will hurt applicants first choice specialty IF its a competitive one. Maybe I'm biased, because I am applying to a relative competitive specialty but I already find that programs struggle to figure out who to invite for interviews, and increasing the number of applicants to these small competitive programs will not help things.
    Do you really want to force applicants to jump through even more hoops like publications, site visits, unofficial electives, etc to demonstrate interest? Most PDs will agree that its very hard to determine how interested an applicant is in a particular specialty and its unfortunate they use elective time a substitute measure. They realize its possible to have many different interests, but unfortunately they have to be pragmatic to cut down and sort through applications and elective time is one such way to do so. I'm not arguing that this is right or wrong, but simply trying to convey that this is the way it is, and I personally would rather commit to 1/2 specialties rather than find new and expensive ways to demonstrate my interest in a specialty. 
     Don't we have enough stress? Don't we already spend a considerably amount of money on the entire elective and CaRMS process?
  5. Like
    dk3what reacted to Aetherus in Cap in number of Electives   
    In theory this change will force programs to reconsider how they select candidates. Unfortunately, every new initiative makes each applicant seem more homogenous and makes it harder for the program to select the best candidates.
    We now have a system with no objective way of ranking candidates. We haven’t had grades for a long time. Electives were at least a way for programs to infer commitment to the specialty. Now we take this away. I’m quite concerned this will force applicants to show commitment to the specialty by other means. I expect site visits will become more and more necessary to show interest to programs you were unable to do electives at. Possibly people will book laid back electives with a lot of free time to try and then take call shifts with their specialty of choice as a way to circumvent the cap. People will fudge electives to make them seem like another specialty: Neurology elective with a Neuro-Ophthalmologist, Burn ICU with a Plastic Surgeon etc.
    I think this will also put more pressure on applicants to be productive in research in the field of choice to show commitment.
    Overall, I think this will not have the intended results. This will have little effect for students going for general specialties and will make life way more difficult for people going for competitive specialties. This will have the unintended consequence of leveling the field for the Quebec school which will lead to a greater efflux out of Quebec which will further worsen the ratio of spots per candidate in the rest of Canada. 
  6. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from God in Western interview invites/regrets 2019   
    I agree. The responses in this thread are pretty indicative of perhaps why those individuals were not selected.
    There is a reason why lots of traditional interviews ask an applicant to discuss their failures and how they have dealt/coped with it. It matters.
  7. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from IMislove in Western interview invites/regrets 2019   
    I agree. The responses in this thread are pretty indicative of perhaps why those individuals were not selected.
    There is a reason why lots of traditional interviews ask an applicant to discuss their failures and how they have dealt/coped with it. It matters.
  8. Like
    dk3what reacted to betterlattethannever in Western interview invites/regrets 2019   
    I don’t usually post, but seeing what you’ve said thus far, I think you need a reality check.
    You’ve vented about how unfair the system is, how you’re tired of applying for 3 cycles. Yet you’ve applied with your 125 CARS for multiple cycles now, obviously banking solely on your SWOMEN status and being admitted into western. This year you didn’t get an interview (which I know, is a horrible feeling and I’m sorry for that), yet I find it somewhat ironic that you’re complaining about the unfair Canadian med system with your 125 CARS, while the non-SWOMEN cutoff is a 128.
    You’ve also said that you don’t know how to improve your app. I think the answer is pretty clear here - rewrite your MCAT. You said it yourself, your score precludes you from queens and Mac. I know it sucks right now, but seriously, stop feeling sorry for yourself and grind harder if this is truly what you want.
  9. Haha
    dk3what reacted to tavenan in Western interview invites/regrets 2019   
    Western's previous over-reliance on quantitative objectives has resulted in some barely-functioning manchildren being in my class since year 1, and judging from the replies in this thread (legal action l.o.l), the new system is keeping many such people out, so I'm all for it.
     
    Perhaps it's time for an attitude adjustment and self reflection if you think you're entitled to anything in this game. 
  10. Haha
    dk3what reacted to Instagrammar in Western interview invites/regrets 2019   
    If people are wanting to take legal action regarding a single medical school rejection, then I think admissions is doing their job correctly in keeping you out. 
  11. Like
    dk3what reacted to JohnGrisham in Western interview invites/regrets 2019   
    Problem with your logic is that you think the system is goofed up or that the incoming class is somehow "screwed".
    They aren't. The wheels will keep turning and those that get in will continue along the process with zero functional difference. Just so happens John Doe took a seat instead of you. Got in on slightly different requirements/process but equally as qualified and capable of doing well in medicine.
    Dont get sucked into a false sense of superiority by having a marginally better GPA or MCAT score.  
  12. Like
    dk3what reacted to erythrocyte in Western interview invites/regrets 2019   
    I very much doubt 1 single individual read all 8 of your essays. It was likely divided among 8 people, with the average of your responses being taken as your final score. This is how it works in CASPer, for UoT, MMI, etc. 
    The admissions office of every school has the right to change their admission criteria from one year to the next. Western is not unique in this circumstance. To be honest, I actually admire Western for changing their criteria to allow character elements to shine through compared to the archaic method of using only GPA and MCAT. As I mentioned to you before in a previous post, possessing a good MCAT or GPA, while important, are not the sole factors that determine whether or not someone is good enough for med school.
    IMO, focus on your other interviews at those Ivy schools. Perhaps take a little bit of time to reflect. Likening yourself to a 'Syrian refugee' screams to me that your line of thinking needs to come down a notch. 
     
  13. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from Amy97 in Same cut-offs next year?   
    No one can answer this...
    1. Apply every year, as the cutoffs can and may change every year.
    2. Re-writing the MCAT is a very personal decision. As you can see, cutoffs can vary and not everyone can afford (time, money) to rewrite. If you feel that you were far below your average practice tests, then sure go for it. If you are hoping for an increase just because, then base it on your individual situation. 
    Good luck with your future applications. 
  14. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from ChemPetE in Ontario's 53 extra residency spots   
    Yes he's referring to his experience as a Canadian grad. I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment that medicine is not all that its made out to be. If you absolutely love it, and know what you are getting yourself into (extremely hard to gauge until you are in) then go for it, but otherwise find a different career. 
  15. Like
    dk3what reacted to doubledip in Western Interview Invites/regrets 2016   
    Time stamp: 1:35 PM (EST)
    Invite: Yes
    IP/OOP: Non-SWOMEN, IP
    GPA: 3.95 2YGPA
    MCAT: 33 (11/11/11)
    ECs: Vanilla
     
    Was expecting a rejection (MCAT) and am pleasantly surprised I decided to throw money at this application... congrats to all invited!!
  16. Like
    dk3what reacted to snacks in Acceptance Chance With 3.93 Wgpa?   
    OK, I'm thinking uwopremed has been misunderstood here. Firstly, I think their point is specifically about Ottawa. If you've been interviewed at Ottawa Anglo stream, from out of Ottawa, you probably have a GPA between 3.91-4.0, because GPA is a big consideration in their process. It's also possible that the median is on the high side of that range (speculation).
     
    Post-interview, the consensus is that you're ranked in terms of interview scores in increments of 0.5, on a 4.0 scale, plus your GPA, out of a total of 8.
     
    Since 0.5 is a bigger jump than any differences between GPAs (ie. no one has a GPA lower than 3.5), everyone with a given interview score can be considered to be in a ranking group. (ie those who got a 4.0 interview could range from 8.0 to 7.91 total score, and those with a 3.5 interview could range from 7.5-7.41; inevitably the lowest-GPA 4.0-interviewee will be ranked higher than the highest-GPA 3.5-interviewee).
     
    So as they go down the list of ranked scores, GPA will not determine an acceptance/rejection until the list reaches an "interview group" that has more applicants than there are remaining seats in the class (for the sake of argument, 3.0-interview). Say there are 100 applicants with a 3.0 interview and only 50 seats left. At this point, having a higher GPA is a huge advantage, and if you have a lower GPA in this group, the chances that they will reach your name are smaller.
     
    If the range of 3.91-4.0 is correct, then 3.93 is near the bottom of interviewees (applicants who are still being considered for admission).
     
    Of course, by chance they may just barely reach the end of the 3.0 group, and in that case, if you're in the 3.0 group, your GPA doesn't matter. Also, maybe a preponderance of interviewees have GPAs on the low end (3.91-3.93) of the range, in which case a 3.93 may be above the median. There are too many unknown variables to say for sure. I think uwopremed is just making an educated guess that 3.93-or-lower is not too common for interviewees based on stats posted on the forum this year and in the past.
     
    Once again, this is Ottawa-specific, due to their unique focus on GPA. Remember, they don't have an MCAT requirement so this is all they have to rank your academic ability! Other schools in Canada and the USA focus on other things, which one could argue are more or less important than GPA, and GPAs further from 4.0 are up for consideration.
     
    Let me know if I've got it wrong!
  17. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from ralk in Pre-Med Volunteer Opportunity In London   
    Signed up
  18. Like
    dk3what got a reaction from brinehog in Accepted/Rejected/Waitlisted??? (for current applicants)   
    Timestamp: 12:01 pm
    Result: Accepted to unspecified campus
    Program: MD
    wGPA: 3.95
    MCAT: 11/12/12
    Interview: Went really well, really connected with all members but especially with the community member.
     
    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
×
×
  • Create New...