Interview Invites & Regrets (2015/2016 App. Cycle)

[Redpill]

This was the format for last years interview invites

 

Monday: Rejections

Tuesday: ---

Wednesday: Early IP & OOP

Thursday: Regular Deadline IP & OOP

Friday: ---

 

Hopefully we can assume we're safe at this point!

 

That's what it was for the last several years I think, except for that one year where they didn't know what they were doing (it was the year they changed to standardizing scores).

[nick]

I guess we're in the clear for another 15 hours, 58 minutes!

[HighDive]

Congrats to all who have made it to this point. Hopefully tomorrow brings some good news!!

[HighDive]

Congrats to all who have made it to this point. Hopefully tomorrow brings some good news!!

[MedToBe]

Congrats survivors! Hopefully early deadliners receive very good news tomorrow. 

[Chaplin]

Have their ever been any notifications after 4:30 PST.?

[PremedToronto]

Thats the problem that I have with UBC admissions. Why are they forcing us to chase after cookie cutter experiences? people are naturally better at certain things over others. 

I don't think UBC is forcing or encouraging anyone to go after cookie cutter activities.  Instead, although biased, I think they want you to be all-rounded as many people have noted in this thread.  Apart from volunteering at a local hospital for 6 years, I don't think any of my other experiences were "cookie cutters."

 

To those who didn't receive the news they'd hoped for, don't give up - bounce back in the game stronger.  Good luck with the rest of your applications!

[medafter30]

Congrats people who have survived the last 2 days! The next 2 days should be better days for most of you

[RKsf]

What do y'all think...more rejections tomorrow (OOP?) or no?

[Lothrandir]

What do y'all think...more rejections tomorrow (OOP?) or no?

I dont think there has ever been a gap in sending regrets. Except 2013/2014 where they totally messed up

[RKsf]

I dont think there has ever been a gap in sending regrets. Except 2013/2014 where they totally messed up

So we might be safe??

[Agent47]

TIME STAMP: 5:00pm December 07

Interview Invite: Regret

Early/Regular Deadline: Regular

OGPA: 87%

AGPA (Applicable): 90%

MCAT: PS/CARS/BS/PSYC: 130/125/130/127

ECs: President of a club, tutor, volunteered with diverse organizations, undergrad research, abstract publication etc

Year: BSc complete 2015

Geography: OOP

Non-academic evaluation: 29.6

Academic evaluation:31

TFR: 60.6 (cut off for OOP this cycle, 61.36)

 

Wish I was an in-province applicant
Best of luck to the remaining applicants who haven't been rejected.

[Lothrandir]

So we might be safe??

I wish. But who knows what devilry ubc med might be up to

[meekika91]

Hi guys, 

 

My scores for this year,

 

Non-academic evaluation: 26.60

Academic evaluation: 16.62

TFR: 43.22

 

My scores fro last year, 

 

Non-academic evaluation: 37.47

Academic evaluation: 17.83

TFR: 55.30

 

I just couldn't believe how a exact same application with more activities added could result in about 11 points lower NAQ mark. After emailing UBC admission teams, I got the following reply:

 

A 10-point fluctuation from year to year is possible. For some applicants it increases by 10 points, while others, the score is lower. Scores are dependent on the quality of the applicant pool from year to year, and influenced by adjustments made to the standard applicant profile to which we measure each application.

I can appreciate how challenging it must be to work with these types of unknowns. My suggestion to you is to focus on the areas that are within your control. Re-read the evaluation criteria that we provide on the website and in the Help Guide and focus on what is considered important during evaluation. Continue to add to and enhance your experiences. As well, reread your entries and consider if there is a better, more accurate way to communicate your experiences in line with the evaluation criteria.

 

If any of you possibly experienced this, please let me know, because they are basically telling me I have to prepare for 33% fluctuation in my NAQ score. This also means that they really don't care much about NAQ scores because AQ rarely changes.  I have basically filled out every single slot for the application with each activity being minimum a year. 

 

Thanks in advance. 

[mokkzzz]

Hi guys, 

 

My scores for this year,

 

Non-academic evaluation: 26.60

Academic evaluation: 16.62

TFR: 43.22

 

My scores fro last year, 

 

Non-academic evaluation: 37.47

Academic evaluation: 17.83

TFR: 55.30

 

I just couldn't believe how a exact same application with more activities added could result in about 11 points lower NAQ mark. After emailing UBC admission teams, I got the following reply:

 

A 10-point fluctuation from year to year is possible. For some applicants it increases by 10 points, while others, the score is lower. Scores are dependent on the quality of the applicant pool from year to year, and influenced by adjustments made to the standard applicant profile to which we measure each application.

 

I can appreciate how challenging it must be to work with these types of unknowns. My suggestion to you is to focus on the areas that are within your control. Re-read the evaluation criteria that we provide on the website and in the Help Guide and focus on what is considered important during evaluation. Continue to add to and enhance your experiences. As well, reread your entries and consider if there is a better, more accurate way to communicate your experiences in line with the evaluation criteria.

 

If any of you possibly experienced this, please let me know, because they are basically telling me I have to prepare for 33% fluctuation in my NAQ score. This also means that they really don't care much about NAQ scores because AQ rarely changes.  I have basically filled out every single slot for the application with each activity being minimum a year. 

 

Thanks in advance. 

 

Sorry to hear your situation. I highly doubt the average quality of the applicant pool has increased so dramatically that it gave you a 10 point reduction. More like they're not addressing the main issue which is standardization of NAQ scoring between profile reviewers. 

[RKsf]

I dont think there has ever been a gap in sending regrets. Except 2013/2014 where they totally messed up

btw...what happened in 2013-2014??

[Agent47]

Hi guys, 

 

My scores for this year,

 

Non-academic evaluation: 26.60

Academic evaluation: 16.62

TFR: 43.22

 

My scores fro last year, 

 

Non-academic evaluation: 37.47

Academic evaluation: 17.83

TFR: 55.30

 

I just couldn't believe how a exact same application with more activities added could result in about 11 points lower NAQ mark. After emailing UBC admission teams, I got the following reply:

 

A 10-point fluctuation from year to year is possible. For some applicants it increases by 10 points, while others, the score is lower. Scores are dependent on the quality of the applicant pool from year to year, and influenced by adjustments made to the standard applicant profile to which we measure each application.

 

I can appreciate how challenging it must be to work with these types of unknowns. My suggestion to you is to focus on the areas that are within your control. Re-read the evaluation criteria that we provide on the website and in the Help Guide and focus on what is considered important during evaluation. Continue to add to and enhance your experiences. As well, reread your entries and consider if there is a better, more accurate way to communicate your experiences in line with the evaluation criteria.

 

If any of you possibly experienced this, please let me know, because they are basically telling me I have to prepare for 33% fluctuation in my NAQ score. This also means that they really don't care much about NAQ scores because AQ rarely changes.  I have basically filled out every single slot for the application with each activity being minimum a year. 

 

Thanks in advance. 

 

Sorry to hear your situation. I highly doubt the average quality of the applicant pool has increased so dramatically that it gave you a 10 point reduction. More like they're not addressing the main issue which is standardization of NAQ scoring between profile reviewers. 

Also the number of applications dropped this year for OOP by almost 200. I'm not sure if the number of IP applications changed. 

[cotedeazur]

Reading UBC's response has confirmed my understanding of UBC's NAQ evaluation process, here are my two cents

 

"Activities and achievements are reported and evaluated using the following categories: leadership, service ethic, capacity to work with others, diversity of experience, and high performance in an area of human endeavor. Within each category, a variety of factors are considered when assigning a score. Generally, higher scores are assigned to activities that demonstrate significant levels of responsibilities, initiative, and commitment over activities with minimal duration or degree of responsibility."

 

NAQ is evaluated using 5 categories, each category is 10%. Then they sum up, then standardize.

 

It is WRONG to think: I have work experience, research, volunteer, clubs, so my NAQ should be fine.  Do you actually have different activities for each category, and they have certain degree of duration AND responsibility?

 

For example:

For service ethic, a 200 hour hospital reception desk volunteer, is probably evaluated less than a student who volunteer for the local community and organize events every season with a total number of 100 hours.

For capacity to work with others, a student club exe or university orientation leader probably won't get as much score as a part time customer service representative.

 

Putting the right activity in the right category is important. And have something to fill in each category is also important: even you have published on CNS, you will still only get 10 out of 50 if without other categories.

 

---

I am really sorry for your NAQ score, if the NAQ follow a normal distribution, with mean 25, SD of 8,  you were in top 10% and now you are only in the top 40%...

Did you change the wording?

Did you change the categorization?

 

 

 

Hi guys, 

 

My scores for this year,

 

Non-academic evaluation: 26.60

Academic evaluation: 16.62

TFR: 43.22

 

My scores fro last year, 

 

Non-academic evaluation: 37.47

Academic evaluation: 17.83

TFR: 55.30

 

I just couldn't believe how a exact same application with more activities added could result in about 11 points lower NAQ mark. After emailing UBC admission teams, I got the following reply:

 

A 10-point fluctuation from year to year is possible. For some applicants it increases by 10 points, while others, the score is lower. Scores are dependent on the quality of the applicant pool from year to year, and influenced by adjustments made to the standard applicant profile to which we measure each application.

I can appreciate how challenging it must be to work with these types of unknowns. My suggestion to you is to focus on the areas that are within your control. Re-read the evaluation criteria that we provide on the website and in the Help Guide and focus on what is considered important during evaluation. Continue to add to and enhance your experiences. As well, reread your entries and consider if there is a better, more accurate way to communicate your experiences in line with the evaluation criteria.

 

If any of you possibly experienced this, please let me know, because they are basically telling me I have to prepare for 33% fluctuation in my NAQ score. This also means that they really don't care much about NAQ scores because AQ rarely changes.  I have basically filled out every single slot for the application with each activity being minimum a year. 

 

Thanks in advance. 

[meekika91]

Reading UBC's response has confirmed my understanding of UBC's NAQ evaluation process, here are my two cents

 

"Activities and achievements are reported and evaluated using the following categories: leadership, service ethic, capacity to work with others, diversity of experience, and high performance in an area of human endeavor. Within each category, a variety of factors are considered when assigning a score. Generally, higher scores are assigned to activities that demonstrate significant levels of responsibilities, initiative, and commitment over activities with minimal duration or degree of responsibility."

 

NAQ is evaluated using 5 categories, each category is 10%. Then they sum up, then standardize.

 

It is WRONG to think: I have work experience, research, volunteer, clubs, so my NAQ should be fine.  Do you actually have different activities for each category, and they have certain degree of duration AND responsibility?

 

For example:

For service ethic, a 200 hour hospital reception desk volunteer, is probably evaluated less than a student who volunteer for the local community and organize events every season with a total number of 100 hours.

For capacity to work with others, a student club exe or university orientation leader probably won't get as much score as a part time customer service representative.

 

Putting the right activity in the right category is important. And have something to fill in each category is also important: even you have published on CNS, you will still only get 10 out of 50 if without other categories.

 

---

I am really sorry for your NAQ score, if the NAQ follow a normal distribution, with mean 25, SD of 8,  you were in top 10% and now you are only in the top 40%...

Did you change the wording?

Did you change the categorization?

 

Nothing was changed. Since I got a very high NAQ mark, I decided to not change any of the descriptions.  I just added more activities, which are actually quite significant. 

[cotedeazur]

Nothing was changed. Since I got a very high NAQ mark, I decided to not change any of the descriptions.  I just added more activities, which are actually quite significant. 

 

Do you mind sharing your EC?

 

It is quite impossible this year all applicants have so much stronger EC.... now I am nervous...

[medrock]

You know you have to feel just a LITTLE bit sorry for the application team, getting hundreds of emails and calls from very disgruntled and nervous applicants, particularly concentrated in a single day after rejections...Id call in sick lol 

[CD.flamy]

You know you have to feel just a LITTLE bit sorry for the application team, getting hundreds of emails and calls from very disgruntled and nervous applicants, particularly concentrated in a single day after rejections...Id call in sick lol 

 

That's what Tuesday today was for lol

[JohnGrisham]

I think you are right, it is just very hard to get work experience where you are really working toward one of the evaluation areas. For some people they have connections into healthcare for some of us this isn't the case.

Just IMO i think it is much easier to find volunteer experiences where you are exhibiting leadership than it is to find a managerial type job, and the same goes for the other areas as well.

 

 

 

Well i don't mean to spread false assumptions but just because you scored a high NAQ doesn't mean that it came from your work experience per se. Did you have really strong ECs?

I don't mean that it isn't weighted at all or even equally, just that the majority of jobs (at least up here in the north) don't tend to be ones that lend themselves toward one of the five areas they are looking for.

I think that someone who works let's say at a coffee shop or a department store or in a warehouse probably won't end up with the same NAQ score as someone who volunteers with aimhi or BC cancer agency etc.

All of my jobs and work experience were things opposite of volunteering bc cancer agency and hospital premed items. One thing that they did all have in common was customer service, relating with people, being humble and managing responsibilities. Those are all very valuable skills, that UBC does value - CANMEDS competencies come to mind.  You do not need to have any health care experience - do many people have it? yes, because thats what they like and/or think they need. 

 

I agree that it is easier to find volunteer experiences in some cases than jobs that align the same way, but it takes time and experience to do anything well.

 

Again, you don't need to approach it from that perspective. Many, many, many of my classmates have non-typical experiences, and I completely understand that where you are in the north it may be difficult to get a variety of experiences. That is completely understanding. Take it as an opportunity to think outside the box and develop your own programs or craft experiences that are unique to you in your local community. 

 

I know its tough, but do what you can do to keep moving forward and growing from your experiences. It will help, and you will get where you want to be.

 

[InstantRamen]

All of my jobs and work experience were things opposite of volunteering bc cancer agency and hospital premed items. One thing that they did all have in common was customer service, relating with people, being humble and managing responsibilities. Those are all very valuable skills, that UBC does value - CANMEDS competencies come to mind.  You do not need to have any health care experience - do many people have it? yes, because thats what they like and/or think they need. 

 

I agree that it is easier to find volunteer experiences in some cases than jobs that align the same way, but it takes time and experience to do anything well.

 

Again, you don't need to approach it from that perspective. Many, many, many of my classmates have non-typical experiences, and I completely understand that where you are in the north it may be difficult to get a variety of experiences. That is completely understanding. Take it as an opportunity to think outside the box and develop your own programs or craft experiences that are unique to you in your local community. 

 

I know its tough, but do what you can do to keep moving forward and growing from your experiences. It will help, and you will get where you want to be.

 

 

Thanks for giving me hope, as someone without a lot of healthcare and research related experiences...

[Neurophiliac]

To those of you who received regrets pre-interview this year, I know it can be very frustrating.  I know it can make you feel sick to your stomach.  I know and understand how you all feel.  As so many people might have told you, count me in as well:  You must not give up.  Why?  Because being a doctor is difficult.  Doctors have so many responsibilities that I can't even count.  Their job is to not give up; their job is to save the sick and not to give up on them until they're cured -- at least good doctors never give up.  So, my question for you is:  If you're going to give up now and become all negative and down, are you sure you want to be a doctor?  If your dream is to study and practice medicine, then you should never be a quitter.  So, hold your head up high.  It is not the end of the world, especially if you were a first-time applicant.  Do what you love, and love what you do.  Use your time carefully, and do the activities that you are passionate about.  Be a leader, and work hard; push yourself to your limits.  It is not going to be easy -- after all, entering medical school is difficult.  But careful planning and hard work will get you through.

 

So, as I have promised earlier, I will list some ways that I think may help re-applicants to potentially increase their NAQ scores for future applications.

 

Please, please note that the following are based on my thoughts on filling out the non-academic activities section.  These methods are NOT guaranteed to work, but will hopefully improve your perspectives and future application-filling skills.

 

(1)  Time:  If you are spending less than a month on your application, you are doing it wrong.  You should at least spend 1 month on your application, working hard on it almost every day of the week.

 

(2)  Plan Carefully:  Before you fill-out your non-academic activities, take the time to list out EVERY possible thing you've done and are doing.  Initially, they don't need to be in any order.  Later when you are done, roughly categorize your activities.  For example, if you have traveled to many parts of the world with your family, you would never put this under Leadership.  Always have the application Help Guide in handy -- check if some activity falls under Leadership or not, etc.

 

(3)  Spread the Goods:  This is the stage when you make a finalized list of which activity should go where.  "Spreading the Goods" means equally distributing your major activities across all categories of non-academic activities.  As best as you can, avoid putting major activities together.  By major activities, I am referring to your roles/responsibilities in your activity, your total hours, and time range of activity.

 

(4)  Write Your Description:  As UBC Admissions Team emphasize year after year, write EXACTLY what you did in your activities.  Skip the "I improved on my skills blah," or "I learned how to communicate blah."  Just stick to what you did, and explain in the best way that you can what you actually did.  You have only 350 characters, so make it count.  Yes, spelling matters, and yes, proper grammar is appreciated by the admissions committee.  In this little description, your job is to paint a clear picture for the person who will evaluate you.  Always ask yourself:  Is this a clear picture of my roles and responsibilities?

 

(5)  Repeat:  After writing your description, let a day pass, and then have a look at it again with fresh eyes.  Ask yourself the clarity question.  Then, try to make your description even better.  Do this as much as you can for every activity.  Here is what I did to give you an idea:  I literally spent 1 hour (sometimes 2) checking and improving a single entry's description -- that means I sometimes spent up to 2 hours writing 3-4 short sentences.

 

So that is it, 5 things to remember.

 

I wish all of you the best in your future endeavours.  I truly hope my thoughts has shed some light on the matter.  And I truly hope that each and every single one of you does not give up, if you are passionate about pursuing a career in medicine.