-

[BernieMac]

-

[End Poverty]

From my understanding from talking to my professor who is a file reviewer at U of C is that the process is quite random. However, some reviewers flag certain activities/ extracurriculars if it seems fishy/ or untrue. I had friends who got into medical schools without their verifiers contacted, and ones who got their verifiers contacted but did not get in.   

 

E-mailing verifiers is essential because it deters applicants from lying on their application, and it allows the admission committee to red flag applicants who lie on their application. I have heard of a story of someone not getting an interview despite meeting the pre-interview score criteria because the verifiers did not confirm the number of hours they put on their application.   

 

Overall, I believe it is a good sign because the admission committee is taking their time to consider the validity of your application, and are reading your application carefully to assess your attributes

[squishy23456]

How personally invested on a scale of 1-10 are you in person getting into med?

What kind of question is that? My verifier told me they weren't sure what to put for that.

[neuralgal]

Same here! Verifiers for two of my longest activities were contacted (that I know of). 

 

I think the process is mostly random. Anecdotally, I've heard that it's a system generated verification request. 

 

Of course, if something someone puts down seems a bit too good to be true, I can definitely see them being contacted. 

[King74]

How personally invested on a scale of 1-10 are you in person getting into med?

What kind of question is that? My verifier told me they weren't sure what to put for that.

 

They are asking verifiers questions as well?? I have just been telling my people that I needed them to confirm numbers, and that's it.  Some basically just know I have applied, but I haven't talked to them about anything else beyond that.

[1994]

Also had one of mine contacted (OOP). The activity was not one of my more significant ones so I'd guess it's completely random.

[squishy23456]

They are asking verifiers questions as well?? I have just been telling my people that I needed them to confirm numbers, and that's it.  Some basically just know I have applied, but I haven't talked to them about anything else beyond that.

 

Not sure my verifier called me over and showed the email. It had a link to click for them to go to some website and verify it. They didn't click link in front of me but told me about it so I guess so??

[1994]

I asked my verifier what questions he was asked. As long as you were truthful on your application and did not give your verifier any reason to question your character I don't think you should have any reason to worry.

[King74]

I asked my verifier what questions he was asked. As long as you were truthful on your application and did not give your verifier any reason to question your character I don't think you should have any reason to worry.

Fair enough.  My concern moreso stems from the fact that some of my verifiers don't actually know me at all, other than the fact that I did things and they are able to verify that I did, if that makes sense?  Sport accomplishments for example, I just contacted someone at my provincial organization to ask them to confirm some records I hold.  They don't actually know who I am though, outside of my name and performances on paper.

[BoopityBoop]

How personally invested on a scale of 1-10 are you in person getting into med?

What kind of question is that? My verifier told me they weren't sure what to put for that.

 

 

What worries me about this question is that it can be interpreted and evaluated in two ways.

 

1. How much are you rooting for this person to get into medicine because you think they are a good candidate?

• This would assess how verifiers/references actually think about the applicant on a personal basis and how much they think you'll make a good doctor

2. How attached are you to this person to the point you may be potentially lie for them/exaggerate?

• This would assess how much the verifier likes you to the point that they will lie on your behalf (their bias)

It's hard to gauge what they are trying to get from this question, but it's vagueness is unfair to all applicants regardless. There can be a misunderstanding from how verifier's understand the question and how U of A is evaluating the questions leading to elimination of qualified applicants.

 

For instance: 

 

Scenario 1. Verifiers of applicants who knew the applicant only from high school may not know that the applicant was interested in med school and put it as 1. This may be interpreted by the school that the verifier doesn't think that the applicant is qualified and result in a lower pre-interview score. 

 

Scenario 2. Verifier of applicants who hold a very close supervisor/boss-student/employee relationship may put down 10, but have this interpreted as their bias and willingness to lie about the applicant. This can then also hamper the applicant's pre-interview score or potentially eliminate any score for that section of the EC's.

 

My immediate and initial interpretation of the question was of the 2nd interpretation, but that may just be my negative interpretation.

 

Will like to hear how other interpreted the question... Or other questions their verifier mentioned.

 

[BoopityBoop]

On another side note, my verifier who was contacted this year and last year told me that the e-mail this year is very different from last year.

They said that it was more comprehensive than last year and said that they were almost writing an additional reference letter. Hopefully this serves as a clue in piecing the puzzles/the new system.

I suspect that these new approaches (different way of verifying applicants and pre-interview computer assessment) are fresh implementations from the new associate dean/interim dean. It worries me as a past applicant that it'll negatively affect my chances at getting an interview, but I do understand what they are trying to do and the end-goal they are trying to achieve, something that I 100% support and believe in. 

[neuralgal]

The second question in particular was a bit worrying - one of the people who verified for me almost submitted it is as 10/10 before catching that it was talking about bias rather than how much they're hoping I get into med school. 

[tinyowl]

-

[Sanctaphrax]

I think it might be random or potentially based on what reviewer was handed your file. I've heard some people who have only one verifier contacted, while there were some who've had all their verifiers contacted. 

[tinyowl]

-

[End Poverty]

Let's say I don't hear back from my verifiers by this Friday, should I see if something went wrong? Or just let it go, and assume they'll be contacted at some point between now and May. I guess what I'm asking is: are all verifiers being contacted now? Or is it spread out, with some now, others in a month, and so on? 

 

 

 

Last year, one of my verifier was contacted ONE day before interview invites for U of C , and few weeks  before interview invites for U of A ( through e-mail).    I noticed that the latter they contact you in the process the higher the chance that you will get interview invites or admission offers  ( I am not sure if this observation is valid or not, but I have noticed that personally and in my circle of friends, n=6).  A friend of mine was accepted at U of A this year, and had his verifiers contacted after interview invites, few weeks before they sent admission offers.

 

 

It seems that this year they are doing more comprehensive verifiers check to check the validity of applications. They are probably doing verifiers checks this year BEFORE the reviewers had the chance to read applications.  Traditionally, file reviewers start reading files in the middle of November and it goes all the way to the end of January. From my perspective, having your verifiers checked that EARLY in the process is NO indication on whether you will get interview invites or not.  

[squishy23456]

It's always random who gets verifier contacted isn't it? And this early in the admission process doubt it wold have anything to do with getting an interview or not.

 

Side note the people who got contacted for me were for activities I put down in my volunteer section. Has any else's other sections been contacted?

[BernieMac]

-

[tinyowl]

-

[BernieMac]

-

[squishy23456]

someone said the Dean was changed.....slightly off topic but does anyone else have a feeling that admissions got an overhaul??

 

1) This year there is going to be an new online component to the interview

2) It seems like they are spending more time/effort to verify activities than before? Maybe they finally realized that giving everyone a super low EC score only meant that they differentiated applicants based on GPA/MCAT. Maybe the new Dean is shifting his thinking towards UofC's methods of looking at EC/experiences more closely and not just looking for crazy high GPA/MCAT. Could this give hope tot hose of us with strong ECs and not so strong MCAT/GPA to get an interview this year??

That's the thing though. You don't know how those super low ECs are counted. The 12 or whatever the highest EC score they gave out could give you full 30%. And we already have one school in Alberta that focuses on EC, we should have one that focuses on academics so that those of us with strong MCAT/GPA and not so strong EC get an interview.

[macd]

Fair enough.  My concern moreso stems from the fact that some of my verifiers don't actually know me at all, other than the fact that I did things and they are able to verify that I did, if that makes sense?  Sport accomplishments for example, I just contacted someone at my provincial organization to ask them to confirm some records I hold.  They don't actually know who I am though, outside of my name and performances on paper.

 

I also have some verifiers that don't know me. For instance, I worked at one job, however my boss when I was there is no longer with the company. I decided to ask the person that took over her job to verify the activity. 

I called MD admissions about this and they said there is some way they account for verifiers that don't know you but wouldn't reveal to me what that was.

 

Also, one of my verifiers received this email and told me he received a reference to fill out for me. I was confused, because I never put him down as one of my references. I wish they had told us ahead of time that there are going to question the verifiers, as it would've been nice to warn the verifiers so they aren't confused (essentially one of my verifiers thought I put him as a reference without even asking him).

[jaloobi]

So far, it seems that only one of my verifiers was contacted for employment. Should they not be contacting more?

Does anyone  know if they continue to verify throughout the months or is it right now?

 

I am unsure of why they would not contact the verifiers at the same time...

[King74]

I also have some verifiers that don't know me. For instance, I worked at one job, however my boss when I was there is no longer with the company. I decided to ask the person that took over her job to verify the activity. 

I called MD admissions about this and they said there is some way they account for verifiers that don't know you but wouldn't reveal to me what that was.

 

Also, one of my verifiers received this email and told me he received a reference to fill out for me. I was confused, because I never put him down as one of my references. I wish they had told us ahead of time that there are going to question the verifiers, as it would've been nice to warn the verifiers so they aren't confused (essentially one of my verifiers thought I put him as a reference without even asking him).

 

100% agree with this.  I actually told my people that they were not references, just that I needed someone to confirm that I had in fact done the things I was claiming to have done. Hopefully it works out okay in that regard,  I had to recontact a few people already.  It's not the end of the world, but it would be nice if things were laid out a little more clearly ahead of time (With regard to the online interview portion as well). 

[End Poverty]

@ Jaloobi:  

I am unsure of why they would not contact the verifiers at the same time...

 

 

 

Maybe they will contact only one of your verifiers. So far, for me they have contacted the verifiers for 3 of my major activities all on the same day. It seems that they changed the system significantly.  Last year,  they only checked one verifier in my application few weeks before interview invites. I believe the verifier checks are automated checks, before reviewers have the chance to read our files.