Has Anyone Here Got In After a Rural-Only Interview?

[Excel-erate Your Breath]

Title

Seen some threads before about rural only interviews or NMP only interviews. Our basic understanding of this (as the public i.e. not on UBC's adcoms) is that people falling below the TFR cutoff can still receive an interview invite if the rural subcommittee chooses to extend that invite.

So I was just wondering if anyone has got in after one of these interview offers, it feels like it'd be an uphill battle to try and put on an interview performance that outscores people with 60ish TFR scores by so much that it puts oneself (with a 50ish TFR) on par with them

Not being negative legitimately curious!!! + wondering why the rural subcommittee has this level of power if people going through rural-only interviews aren't getting in (if that is the case)

[Rosiglitazone]

I was doing research with a resident last year, and he was in the NMP program. He got in back in 2011, and if I recall correctly I think he got the same condition where he fell below the TFR cutoff but was still invited to an interview and ended up getting in (because he grew up in PG). However, I'm not too sure if he was talking about himself or if he was mentioning other people. In any case, I do think that people end up getting in with below TFR if they have a high-rural suitability score.

I think the rural subcommittee has this level of power because of UBC's social accountability. The NMP was created back in 2005 mainly because of an extreme doctor shortage in PG and there was a dire need for people to practice in the North. Back then, BC literally had to attract doctors from other provinces and provide them incentives to work in the North and there were only ~120 students being graduated each year in BC. By creating the NMP (and increasing the number of students being graduated each year to 288), the intent was to train students born and bred in the North, who have an interest in practicing there in the future.

However, my best friend's sister (who grew up in Vancouver all her life) is doing med school in the NMP right now so I think there are a couple of ppl in the NMP each year who do end up getting in to the program with little to none rural connections.

TL;DR : No one knows how the AdCom at ubc really makes their decisions, its a huge black box

[Excel-erate Your Breath]

Yeah 'course man we know the folklore about the Multiplex rally and everything, still gets spoken about to this day. I understand that the NMP was created due to UBC's social responsibility, and I guess the power of the rural subcommittee falls under the same bracket too. Nice to know one can still get in to NMP even if below TFR cutoff though (sign me up! LOL)

[anonrural]

I think you'll find that the way the question is framed that applicants in this position will likely elect to not disclose that information. The connotation being that receiving a rural-only invite indicates that they are not in some way 'good enough' for the other sites:

2 hours ago, Vancouver Premed said:

ended up getting in (because he grew up in PG)

I will say that I did receive an NMP-only interview and that I was accepted this year. Further, I do know that the subcommittee does have a great deal of say, but that applicants are ultimately selected by UBC.

I'm not so sure about the TFR thing - if you're accepted, you obviously don't know where you fell (for all I know, I was right below the cutoff). I will say that I know of people with significantly stronger NAQs and TFRs of 75-100 who did not get in and did not interview well according to their own accounts. Personally, I do feel that I performed quite well in my interview - maybe that's what made the difference and likely pulled my application up. Hard to say.

[Excel-erate Your Breath]

55 minutes ago, anonrural said:

I think you'll find that the way the question is framed that applicants in this position will likely elect to not disclose that information. The connotation being that receiving a rural-only invite indicates that they are not in some way 'good enough' for the other sites:

I will say that I did receive an NMP-only interview and that I was accepted this year. Further, I do know that the subcommittee does have a great deal of say, but that applicants are ultimately selected by UBC.

I'm not so sure about the TFR thing - if you're accepted, you obviously don't know where you fell (for all I know, I was right below the cutoff). I will say that I know of people with significantly stronger NAQs and TFRs of 75-100 who did not get in and did not interview well according to their own accounts. Personally, I do feel that I performed quite well in my interview - maybe that's what made the difference and likely pulled my application up. Hard to say.

Ah okay I see what you're saying. That's probably why a couple people DM'd me instead of putting it here (thank you guys for your help again if you're reading!) Didn't mean to word the question in any offensive way at all - an interview is still an interview in my books! We all know the TFR cutoff is arbitrary and changing year-to-year; no one who receives a rural only interview is incapable of receiving an all-sites interview! Didn't mean to sound like that at all.

And for what it's worth I'm not super confident in getting an all-sites interview this cycle either, so I'd be super happy and proud of a rural-only interview, that's why I'm interested in the topic. No shame in falling below the cutoffs assigned by people sitting on an Adcom who have never met you before is how I look at it, we don't rely on Adcoms to provide us with self-value or to tell us we are intrinsically 'good enough' for our goals in life or not.

Thank you for bringing this up though @anonrural - my apologies to all future people reading this topic! Offence was not the intention whatsoever, purely curiosity and interest