Interview as a Msc student, rejection as a Phd graduate ??

[Guest hippocrates]

Does this make sense?

 

Interview as a Msc student (no published papers, some in prep)

-few awards scholarships

 

PhD graduate rejection

(several first author published papers, several in prep, one or two co-authors all in very high impact journals)

- volunteering awards, prizes for presenting, many scholarships and awards.

- essay improved

-grades stayed the same

 

 

what gives? I know the process is based on people judging but the points I should have received for each section should have increased...i sense there is not much consistency in the way they judge the applications

 

by the way i received interviews from schools i was rejected from before in Canada which means they see an improved application but UofT does not???

 

is this a mistake in the process, politics or just due to more students? thes school I received interviews for also received many more applications.... any ideas?

[Guest ScoobyBill]

Seems odd..

Maybe they dramatically increased standards over your Ph.D. Schools are gettting many more applications nowdays.

[Guest Ollie]

Hi,

 

Sorry to hear about your rejection. I don't think that this necessarily means there is little consistency in evaluation (although I don't deny that's a possibility). Here's a few things to consider.

 

-different standards for PhD's vs MSc's

-did you have a new supervisor for your PhD? Perhaps their letter wasn't as strong

-non-academic sketch. Did you keep up with activites throughout your PhD? Generally it's good to maintain activities over time, or if that's not possible, start new ones. But conversly, it's not so good if you all of a sudden started a bunch of activities 2 months before applying to med school.

-a change in approach to evaluation since you applied before

 

Hope you have better luck at other schools!

[Guest peachy]

Hey, that really sucks. I agree with Ollie, there could be a million reasons. Also the fact that this year is more competitive than last year in terms of sheer numbers may play a role.

 

But also, with a couple thousand applicants for a couple hundred spots, there will always be great people who deserve a spot who don't get one. If tons of people who should be getting interviews don't, and tons of people who shouldn't be getting interviews do, then that's a problem with the consistency of the process. But to identify a small group of people who strongly feel they should have gotten interviews but didn't? That's just reality, not inconsistency. I don't think anybody could come up with a completely reliable process to rank applicants, or to discriminate between them. There are just too many variables.

 

For example (entirely made up! I have no more information than you about how the process actually works!), who's to say whether an award winning violin performance is 'worth more' than a first-author publication? Nobody can. So suppose one year the violin performance is graded higher, and the next year the first author is graded higher, depending on who is evaluating the apps. Yeah, I guess it's 'inconsistent' in a relative sense. But in an absolute sense it doesn't matter which someone arbitrarily chooses to be worth more, and there are a limited number of spots. The school is consistent in only accepting excellent people to become med students, even if it doesn't look consistent from the point of view of the applicant who was rejected.

[Guest avarrin2001]

hippocrates,

 

I feel your pain... i was not only given an interview last year, i made the short list - i received a letter last august saying i had been short-listed, and it wasnt until well into the first week of september that i was notified that the class was filled, and i would not be getting in.

 

Today, i got a pre-interview rejection letter. Honestly, i understand how upset you are... and it sucks. My application has only gotten better since last year - i graduated my MSc, was nominated for the dean of science thesis award, have been working as a volunteer fire-fighter, and received employment with the Ministry of Health as a 9-1-1 Ambulance Communications Officer... and now i dont even get an interview?? I honestly dont even know what to say, except that i am really disappointed, and I am sorry, because it only sucks more to know that this has happened to someone else... i know you feel really @#%$ too... I'm right there with you

 

btw, i was still judged as an MSc in both cases... so the no-interview cant be because of different standards

My letters came from the same ppl, and i know they were all strong, and only added the extra things I had been doing to the letters

And I did continue all of my long-standing volunteer positions, and the new things (i.e., firefighting) were just added when i moved back home to my community after I finished my graduate degree.

Sorry for the venting, this just really feels @#%$.

[Guest zeddy101]

Hearing this from you really makes me think what U of T wants. I'm just finishing up my master's this year. I have 2 first author papers submitted, a lots of abstracts and conference presentations, but got rejected from U of T just the same. I was thinking of doing a PhD and reapplying. But what are the chances of being admitted after hearing this from you?? This is so depressing!! What do I have to do in order to get into U of T med school??????

[Guest avarrin2001]

i would love to give you my opinion, but i am just a bitter cranky sour puss right now and will refrain becuase i dont want to insult anyone in any way :lol hehehe Gotta laugh, or else I'll cry

[Guest docbil]

avarin, I am sorry about your news.

 

I am waiting for my letter still. I am guessing it will come tomorrow.. saying NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooo. In your dreams!!!! Oh yeah and PFO or I like to say GFU

 

Zeddy, I will advise you against doing a PhD, cause you will not be able to re-apply for at least 2 years... cause they will not let you drop your PhD for medical school.

 

Also getting into a PhD is a whole different ball game than PhD. Definitely not something to do for admission.

 

Good luck

[Guest zeddy101]

Thanks for the advise. Problem is that my undergrad GPA is not that impressive (3.3). The only way I can think of to get into med school at the moment is to do a PhD, and try to make them look more heavily on things I'm doing now (not six years ago in first year undergrad). I guess if I still don't get into med after PhD, I'll just do my post doc and forget all about this med school stuff.

[Guest med10]

Hi everyone,

 

I have been reading this board for a while now, and find it very helpful that everyone so openly shares their experiences and insights. Thank you all.

 

I could not refrain from posting a reply this time, as I can completely relate. I haven't applied yet, but had the "privilage" of being an insider in the application process when I was collaborating with a reviewer. I was trusted so can't get into details, but boy was it subjective and inconsistent! How do you decide that someone is being over-ambitious and is not humble enough and hence should not be interviewed? While playing the violin would be dismissed as insignificant by this particular reviewer, having papers would do wonders; it is something that this person simply values very, very x 10 much, because of a particular background. And this is just one of the many reviewers out there with such diverese personal preferences, and I can imagine each having their own set of criteria (which probably overlap somewhat).

 

This is a reality, and unless there is careful selection of the reviewers, personal preferences will play a role in the process.

[Guest docbil]

Okay.. fine! But you missed the point of this threat.

 

With a MSc/MA they don't not want as many things as if you were a PhD students. The way to look at it, is a PhD is 3X an MSc.

 

I will not even comment on the part of doing a PhD and then a Post-doc etc... etc... cause I think someone should only do a post-doc if they wish to become a Prof.

 

If you really would like to do a doctorat degree I would suggest you consider this kind of program.

 

www.acp.edu/academics_pharmdaccel.html

[Guest hippocrates]

Thanks for the many comments and sorry to hear about your loss, i am taking it as a good thing now....:b

 

avarrin2001 thats really rough... :x

 

 

med10 hit it on the money...

 

as I know quite a bit about the interview process due to close people at UofT, i also know it is VERY subjective and basically different people are assigning scores every time you have a different application...

 

i know it is very biased also with people as low as a MCAT verbal 5 etc.. with family in the department getting in...

 

its nothing to do with increased numbers... blah blah. my application is 10X better and references are the same. its the application process and the way it is marked. it is the quotas for certain groups ie this many PhDs this many Msc this many undergrads.

 

How can you even compare an undergrad with basically nothing to a PhD with papers yada sports yada and 9 years to cram everything in....

 

oh and i do play violin (among other instruments) AND have papers... (got those covered...lol)

 

UofTs loss, brain drain is going south (or East) :b :b

[Guest matmac]

It is quite dissapointing to see overly qualified applicants not even getting interviews. One thing I truly don't understand is how some of the people on this thread did not even receive interviews while people in third year did. Am I wrong in thinking that all Canadian medical schools should have a four year degree as a basic requirement?

[Guest docbil]

Most medical school prefer younger applicants ( I am not saying I agree with it).

 

The reason for med school to prefer this is:

1) THey are younger and can be trained to their idiology.

2) They will serve the community for 10 years more.

3) The will not argue with the teaching (Grad students will)

 

It is unfortunate, but they way I look at it, it means there is something better for you out there. You are meant to do something better... maybe this won't matter much in a few years, you may go south or east and run in to your future spouse, or get offered a chance to go to developing world, that will make a difference in the world.

[Guest TiBz88]

Hey Hippocrates,

I definitely see why you would be annoyed with the whole system. You likely should have received an interview. On the other hand, I don't know your reasoning in the phrase: "how can you even compare an undergrad with basically nothing to a PhD with papers yada sports yada and 9 years to cram everything in." If you're saying what I think you're saying...undergrads likely don't compare to PhDs. Although you might definitely have more academic experience than an undergrad, this does not necessarily translate to you being a more qualified applicant. Even if 'academics' was the only criterion involved here, I'm quite sure some of the MENSAesque undergrads that are gifted intellectually deserve to be in med as much as you do. Furthermore, I'm sure there are undergrads that have much stronger extracurricular profiles than you do. It is alright to be annoyed with not getting an interview if you deserve one; however it is inappropriate to try to prove this by making unsupported claims about having a better application than others. You're not sitting on the board/counsel and thus have not seen everyone else's applications.

[Guest peachy]

How can you even compare an undergrad with basically nothing to a PhD with papers yada sports yada and 9 years to cram everything in....

You have a right to be upset that you didn't get an interview, but your arguments make no sense. There are lots of totally brilliant and amazing undergrads out there, and if U of T doesn't interview them and accept them, then they'll go to another school, and U of T will lose out. The fact that they haven't gone to grad school doesn't mean that they're automatically going to be less great doctors, be less of an asset to U of T, and achieve less great things in the future! It's all well and good to say they have "basically nothing", but you haven't read other people's applications. I'm sure many, and probably all of them, are stellar as well. The hard truth is that there are very many excellent applicants.

 

You also seem to be saying that U of T somehow has a bias against applicants with PhD's! Nothing could be farther from the truth. In some classes there are ten students who completed PhD's before beginning - a huge number considering that very few applicants apply with PhD's.

[Guest peachy]

Most medical school prefer younger applicants ( I am not saying I agree with it).

I don't think that's true at all. Younger applicants make up far more of the applicant pool, which is the main reason why they are accepted in greater numbers. In addition to which, older applicants are more likely to be reapplying, and reapplicants, on average, obviously not everybody, are less likely to have strong applications (or they would have gotten in the first time). What evidence do you have that there is a systematic bias against older applicants?

[Guest hisname]

Hey avarrin2001,

 

Very sorry to hear of your situation. Like you, I was was left hanging on the U of T shortlist last year until the first week of Sept. It was nerve shearing...I'm sure you agree. I haven't received my letter yet regarding interviews for this year but I'm certainly more on edge given your experience. Best of luck with your other interviews.

[Guest try2dstress]

sorry to hear about all the tough shots U of T has given you guys. sounds like you all have top qualifications and will hopefully find a school that appreciates that.

by the way...what's the difference between a 'short list' and a 'waiting list'?

[Guest avarrin2001]

Thanks everyone for hearing us out on this forum

 

hisname - hang in there! You could be a lucky one... I am rooting for you.

 

try2dstress, this is how my understanding is, and if i am wrong, anyone, please feel free to correct... the waitlist is a list you sit on after acceptances have been set out - kind of like pergatory instead, you are sitting between being accepted and being rejected. The initial wait list is quite long, since after acceptances are sent out, there is quite a lot of movement (i.e., many ppl will be accepted at more than one school, etc). Near the end of the summer, it is clear to UofT that the waitlist will not move much more, and so they notify the majority of those on the waitlist that they are officially rejected - i.e., the class has been filled and they wont be getting in. It allows those ppl to get on with their lives.

 

Then, a small group of ppl that, presumably, were at the top of the waitlist are kept on, in case anything happens that leaves a seat or two open last minute in the class... close... but yet so far. Unbelievably far, apparently - not only was i so close, I am now not even in the game with UofT anymore. Thank God for Ottawa and NOSM... or i would be going nutso right now

[Guest noncestvrai]

Eventually, people get in, it might not be at your top choice, but you'll get in somewhere and find your niche, if you really want to do medicine.

 

noncestvrai

[Guest Kirsteen]

Hey there,

 

Given the large number of folks who are applying to UofT these days, I would assume that the size of the graduate applicant pool has increased too. It's not unforeseeable that UofT sets a resource-limited quota as to the number of applicants they will interview from the undergraduate and graduate pools. That being the case, it's possible that there are some outstanding graduate applicants out there who will receive interviews from UofT, thereby edging out some other folks from the opportunity. I'll give you an example of the calibre of graduate applicants out there. I know two people who recently applied to medical school. One is a tenured university professor, has a few CIHR grants and almost 100 papers. The other runs his own lab in pulmonary basic science and likewise, has well over 50 papers published and a number of grants to run his show. Both were quite successful in gaining medical school interviews, having been in the graduate applicant pool.

 

The interview process and the applicants within it are dynamic. As the number of applicants to schools increases and the applicants become more savvy, it seems logical that the competition for medical school seats will only increase too.

 

Cheers,

Kirsteen

[Guest noncestvrai]

WTF PIs applying to med? How old are they 50?

 

I'm not saying they should not, just that I find it surprising, and I would be curious to know their motives.

 

noncestvrai

[Guest Kirsteen]

Hey there,

 

Yep, two PIs who are quite looking forward to gaining a clinical education to complement their research experience. As far as I'm aware, both are planning on pursuing a residency, and both are interested in Internal Med. Clearly, they'll be well equipped to be academic clinicians at the end of it all and neither have reached 40 yet.

 

Cheers,

Kirsteen

[Guest siobhansiobhan]

Peachy, you said:

 

"In addition to which, older applicants are more likely to be reapplying, and reapplicants, on average, obviously not everybody, are less likely to have strong applications (or they would have gotten in the first time). What evidence do you have that there is a systematic bias against older applicants?"

 

My Reply:

The older applicants obviously have more years in which to collect life experience - that does lead to a statistical advantage in having better extracurriculars - i mean the ones that are not scholarships, or other extensions of gpa. The systematic bias is in using gpa as such a massive primary filter. According to your logic, that alone is a systematic bias against older applicants. And disadvantaged applicants, I might add. Struggling to survive gets in the way of the comfort, confidence and solitude which sure helps to study physics within each night. Etc.

 

As for subjective influences - sure! I agree. I've been a t.a. I know what it means to mark essays. I know that I have had my 'bad t.a.' karma sent back on me later on by bad lab co-ordinators. I know that I was told once to mark everyone low for the first essay to show that the course was 'serious' - and I know that I lost the enthusiasm of most of the class that way. I know I was not prepared, life-experience, sorting out my own blocks, to truly be a good teacher (that would extend in the same way in terms of becoming a doctor). The training program i am in for psychotherapy analyzes a person's life experience before letting them in. What tragedies, adversities, major life events has the person had? I was one of the youngest in the class at 26 when I started. That was a new trend to let people in below 30. Age has huge value. Only recently did I finally take away a button of a brain with a 'forbidden' line through it, off of an old gaelic saying on my wall - 'only with age comes wisdom'.

 

The filter that is used is advantageous for those who have high gpa - which we have or we don't have, most of the time, from when we are young.

 

The process is subjective. Once that is assumed, then we can look in terms of how to be open and fair.

 

Siobhan