Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums
skittles124

Anyone ONLY being considered for NMP?

Recommended Posts

Are you trolling? There are also rural seats at IMP and SMP so seems odd they would single out NMP...just sayin. This practice you speak of seems odd, although “rural only” interviews have been mentioned in past in another thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Muffincups said:

Are you trolling? There are also rural seats at IMP and SMP so seems odd they would single out NMP...just sayin. This practice you speak of seems odd, although “rural only” interviews have been mentioned in past in another thread.

I don’t know exactly how the process works, but I’ve literally seen the email a current classmate got that said they were only being considered for NMP.

So there’s at least one person in my class who was accepted after receiving the same email :) good luck @bluewhale!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don’t understand the purpose of notifying someone that they are “exclusively” being considered for NMP. Does that mean that if we didn’t get that message that we are not in NMP running? Sad day for me if so. Applicants can submit their preferred sites after interview; what if their first choice was genuinely rural seats at IMP or SMP, not NMP? 

In the end, I guess it doesn’t really matter as I’m sure UBC has the best interests of B.C. residents in mind when they make their final choices. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Muffincups said:

I just don’t understand the purpose of notifying someone that they are “exclusively” being considered for NMP. Does that mean that if we didn’t get that message that we are not in NMP running? Sad day for me if so. Applicants can submit their preferred sites after interview; what if their first choice was genuinely rural seats at IMP or SMP, not NMP? 

In the end, I guess it doesn’t really matter as I’m sure UBC has the best interests of B.C. residents in mind when they make their final choices. 

No, it means that their scores are ineligible for admission to a ‘regular’ seat. The committee that oversees rural admissions can basically do whatever they want, so if someone has an amazing rural application but their scores are just below the regular cutoff, the committee can choose to interview them anyway.

Even if you didn’t get an email, you’re still hypothetically in the running for an NMP seat, if that’s what you want.

My hypothesis (unconfirmed) is that it is their method of filling the NMP with good quality rural candidates, since NMP is by far the least popular site and the rural seats in SMP and IMP are pretty easy to fill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, OwnerOfTheTARDIS said:

No, it means that their scores are ineligible for admission to a ‘regular’ seat. The committee that oversees rural admissions can basically do whatever they want, so if someone has an amazing rural application but their scores are just below the regular cutoff, the committee can choose to interview them anyway.

Even if you didn’t get an email, you’re still hypothetically in the running for an NMP seat, if that’s what you want.

My hypothesis (unconfirmed) is that it is their method of filling the NMP with good quality rural candidates, since NMP is by far the least popular site and the rural seats in SMP and IMP are pretty easy to fill.

This makes sense! I guess they would want to ensure a good pool of rural suitable candidates so seats can be filled appropriately. 

 

Sorry @bluewhale - good luck to you! I think I was surprised as this process is not transparently outlined on UBC website.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 11:10 AM, bluewhale said:

Prior to my interview I was informed I was exclusively being considered for NMP due to my high score in the rural suitability section. Wondering if anyone else is in the same boat :)

Last year a friend of mine got the exact same thing as you. For his case, his overall score was too low but since he grew up in Smithers he was also scored in the rural stream and got into the NMP. Hope that helps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, this_process_is_death said:

Out of curiosity, are people only considered for NMP included in the 673 people interviewed or are they supernumerary to the interim stats posted?

I was wondering this too - and also, does anyone know if people who submit the Rural supplementary application have a more rural-focused interview? I've heard a few speculations this may be the case but have no idea if it is true. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Lilly19 said:

I was wondering this too - and also, does anyone know if people who submit the Rural supplementary application have a more rural-focused interview? I've heard a few speculations this may be the case but have no idea if it is true. 

I submitted the rural/northern application. The interview was exactly the same as everyone else. They do not contact you to inform you if you are being considered as a rural applicant (except in the case being discussed in this thread).  I am confident I would qualify under the rural application, and so far ---- nothing is different. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Lilly19 said:

I was wondering this too - and also, does anyone know if people who submit the Rural supplementary application have a more rural-focused interview? I've heard a few speculations this may be the case but have no idea if it is true. 

I don’t think that the interviews would be different since we get to pick our interview slots. I’m just wondering if the stats they post include people who are only being considered for rural spots

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, this_process_is_death said:

I don’t think that the interviews would be different since we get to pick our interview slots. I’m just wondering if the stats they post include people who are only being considered for rural spots

Right, duh! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, this_process_is_death said:

I don’t think that the interviews would be different since we get to pick our interview slots. I’m just wondering if the stats they post include people who are only being considered for rural spots

Well, technically they say 673 people received an interview invitation in total.  So, this would include everyone I’d imagine.  There is no reason to separate out NMP-only applicants from other interviewees.  If you received an interview, then you received an interview and will be an interviewee regardless (and thus, part of the 673 that received an invite).

Now, what % of that 673 pool are NMP-only applicants?  — I’m not sure haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2019 at 8:58 AM, Lilly19 said:

I was wondering this too - and also, does anyone know if people who submit the Rural supplementary application have a more rural-focused interview? I've heard a few speculations this may be the case but have no idea if it is true. 

My interview was part of the regular track and I was able to choose any interview slot despite being told I was exclusively being considered for the NMP :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/30/2019 at 6:43 PM, i8aSS said:

Last year a friend of mine got the exact same thing as you. For his case, his overall score was too low but since he grew up in Smithers he was also scored in the rural stream and got into the NMP. Hope that helps.

Thanks for letting me know! I wasn’t sure if this was a regular practice of UBC as it isn’t outlined on their website at all yet my email clearly stated I was being solely considered for NMP. This makes sense for me because I grew up rural and lived in the Arctic for a while, yet I have a complete lack of research experience and only a 510 on the MCAT, so I might’ve been below regular cutoffs. This is just speculation though of course. Best of luck to everyone :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/29/2019 at 9:26 AM, Muffincups said:

This makes sense! I guess they would want to ensure a good pool of rural suitable candidates so seats can be filled appropriately. 

 

Sorry @bluewhale - good luck to you! I think I was surprised as this process is not transparently outlined on UBC website.

Yeah I was just as confused at first as the process isn’t discussed at all on their website haha. Best of luck to you too :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 12:10 PM, bluewhale said:

Prior to my interview I was informed I was exclusively being considered for NMP due to my high score in the rural suitability section. Wondering if anyone else is in the same boat :)

In your initial application was NMP your first choice?? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm going to add my story on this. I recently got the same email from UBC med admissions stating that I was only eligible for the NMP for the 2024 graduating cycle. Firstly, the lack of transparency is incredibly frustrating. Secondly, I'm not convinced it's based on anything other than your RRSS score. My application GPA was ~89% and my ECs were stellar (part of Team Canada, two years of research including a publication, chemistry tutoring, etc totalling thousands of hours ) supplemented by a 517 MCAT. Under normal circumstances this would get an unconditional interview, but as my RRSS was "exceptionally high" I get the impression that the rural sub-committee has taken to searching for applicants they feel they can bully into the north. The NMP was my last (non-existent choice) so I'm just terribly confused. 

Does anyone want to try forcing UBC to make its processes more transparent? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, LoneyGayBoy said:

I'm going to add my story on this. I recently got the same email from UBC med admissions stating that I was only eligible for the NMP for the 2024 graduating cycle. Firstly, the lack of transparency is incredibly frustrating. Secondly, I'm not convinced it's based on anything other than your RRSS score. My application GPA was ~89% and my ECs were stellar (part of Team Canada, two years of research including a publication, chemistry tutoring, etc totalling thousands of hours ) supplemented by a 517 MCAT. Under normal circumstances this would get an unconditional interview, but as my RRSS was "exceptionally high" I get the impression that the rural sub-committee has taken to searching for applicants they feel they can bully into the north. The NMP was my last (non-existent choice) so I'm just terribly confused. 

Does anyone want to try forcing UBC to make its processes more transparent? 

I can see why that would be extremely frustrating for you.

My understanding is that individuals who were told that they were only being considered for the NMP would have missed the regular cutoff for an interview, but due to their high RRSS they received an invite to potentially join the NMP. The NAQ portion of the application is very subjective, and although you may have thought your score should have been much higher, it likely wasn't, and had you falling below the cutoff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A little off topic but similar train of thought that I think some of you may have insight on:

I haven't applied yet, but when I do, I'm really interested in a rural seat - anywhere. If I had my first choice, it would be a rural seat in the IMP, however, I know there are only 2 seats there compared to 32 in the NMP and I would prefer a rural seat in the NMP than a non-rural seat in IMP. So... if somebody is more interested in a rural seat than being at their primary choice of location, would it improve the chances of getting a rural seat if they selected NMP as their first choice of campus?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, scott said:

A little off topic but similar train of thought that I think some of you may have insight on:

I haven't applied yet, but when I do, I'm really interested in a rural seat - anywhere. If I had my first choice, it would be a rural seat in the IMP, however, I know there are only 2 seats there compared to 32 in the NMP and I would prefer a rural seat in the NMP than a non-rural seat in IMP. So... if somebody is more interested in a rural seat than being at their primary choice of location, would it improve the chances of getting a rural seat if they selected NMP as their first choice of campus?

I might be totally off, but as far as I know non-rural and rural seats are the same. The only difference is that to get the rural seats you must be ‘rural’ and have a high rural suitability score from the application. So, as you said, 2 seats are reserved at IMP for students with rural backgrounds. Once you get the seat there should be no difference between the education of a rural seat/non-rural seat. I don’t think there is any way of knowing if you even got the rural seat.. 

I hope that makes sense! And feel free to correct me if I have this wrong, anyone:) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, keiko88 said:

I might be totally off, but as far as I know non-rural and rural seats are the same. The only difference is that to get the rural seats you must be ‘rural’ and have a high rural suitability score from the application. So, as you said, 2 seats are reserved at IMP for students with rural backgrounds. Once you get the seat there should be no difference between the education of a rural seat/non-rural seat. I don’t think there is any way of knowing if you even got the rural seat.. 

I hope that makes sense! And feel free to correct me if I have this wrong, anyone:) 

Oh really! I was under the impression that there was certain rural training/opportunities only available to the "rural-seat students" - though, now that I think about it, that may have just been my assumption rather than having actually read that. Hmmm.. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scott said:

Oh really! I was under the impression that there was certain rural training/opportunities only available to the "rural-seat students" - though, now that I think about it, that may have just been my assumption rather than having actually read that. Hmmm.. 

The training is the same. There are some rural opportunities in 3rd year via the integrated community clerkships, but these aren't tied to the rural seats. A minimum of students from NMP/IMP/SMP have to go (because of capacity restrictions at the sites), but it's an application process, and anyone in any seat can apply. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/8/2020 at 4:05 PM, scott said:

A little off topic but similar train of thought that I think some of you may have insight on:

I haven't applied yet, but when I do, I'm really interested in a rural seat - anywhere. If I had my first choice, it would be a rural seat in the IMP, however, I know there are only 2 seats there compared to 32 in the NMP and I would prefer a rural seat in the NMP than a non-rural seat in IMP. So... if somebody is more interested in a rural seat than being at their primary choice of location, would it improve the chances of getting a rural seat if they selected NMP as their first choice of campus?

Ranking of sites will not make any difference in if you are granted admission or not. As stated on their website, they are blind to your site preferences when making admissions decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...