what are they doing???

[Guest toothy1985]

Hi,

So I am just wondering for this cycle of med school applicants: It seems as though the criteria for selection is a bit off. I know of atleast 6 people who had a 4.0, amazing MCAT scores and fantastic ECs/research etc., but got rejected either pre-interview or post it.

 

I am just wondering what the heck the admissions committees are doing? Do they want ppl with low grades to be doctors or what is going on??!!!?!?!?!?!

I think a lot boils down to fate and luck-you could have everything set up for you-steller GPA and MCAT, ECs/research--but still not get in...what you guys think?

[Guest TimmyMax]

Hey,

 

The last time I checked, the DAT wasn't used as part of the admissions criteria for any medical school in Canada. In addition, the last time I checked, a 4.0 GPA doesn't guarantee admission to medical school either.

There are a million reasons why people get rejected. Having great stats is by no means a guarantee to be admitted. Lots of people with as good if not better stats are rejected every year. Maybe the people you know aren't very good at communicating, selling themselves or are just terrible people.

There's obviously more to this than meets the eye.

 

Best of luck!

Timmy

[Guest aneliz]

I agree with timmy... the single biggest deciding factor in whether you get an offer or not is your performance on the interview. If you bomb the interview (or even just don't shine as much as some of the other interviewees...) you are not going to get in. Period. Regardless of what your stats are.

 

While having decent stats is important, it is used as a screening tool to determine whole will move on to an interview. Once the interviews happen, it is the interviews that are the deciding factor, not the stats. Realistically, I would rather have someone with a 3.65 GPA and decent MCAT scores that is an excellent communicator that provided thoughtful and insightful answers to our questions during the interview than someone with a 4.0 GPA and perfect MCATs that was non-communicative or outright racist/sexist/grossly inappropriate during the interview. (and that does happen)

[Guest ItaliaFever]

You guys are both bang on with marks and MCATs not being the be-all end-all when it comes to admission, with communication skills being a HUGE consideration. In most cases even the biggest consideration. The examples you're giving though are of extreme cases. The frustration for a lot of students is that they have stellar MCATs, stellar marks and also pretty good communication skills. Granted, everyone thinks that their own communication skills are awesome which further complicates things lol. It's just the subjectivity of the interview process (meshing personalities, different scoring, etc.) and the great weight that that carries is what frustrates a lot of students. But I guess we have to live with things.

[Guest daryn]

Slightly OT, but the trend here is the applicants have better and better GPA/MCAT stats. So do you think we'll see less of an emphasis on GPA (because come on, you can't go higher than a 4.0) and more on other things?

 

It's like the more extreme we go, the more we go back to the earlier times?

[Guest Kirsteen]

Hi there,

 

It's quite possible that there may be less emphasis on GPA in the future if more applicants have great marks, akin to the relatively slight emphasis on medical school marks now during the CaRMS process, due to the P/F mark reporting style of many medical schools. Like the CaRMS process, within the medical school application process there are many other factors which selection committees may use to gauge the worth of an applicant, e.g., letters of reference, interviews, research, etc.

 

Cheers,

Kirsteen

[Guest whocares123]

In my personal opinion, there are way too many undergraduate students in the Canadian university system.

There is on need for having large incoming class enrollments to only have B- averages in the course, putting more than half of the students out of competition for professional school.

This is maybe why application processes have started to look at very strange things to grant med school admission, and make the whole process very cloudy.

 

As for myself and for most people I know, if you are in need of advanced surgery/treatment or someone else in you family does - you want the most qualified physician - someone who makes the least mistakes possible and has a stellar record of achievement without error.

 

For me that's what it comes down to - do you trust yourself in the hands of that person?

[Guest FamilyMeds]

"WhoCares" - are you implying that a high entry GPA alone predicts the future quality of the physician?

 

-FamilyMeds

[Guest MrNeuroscience]

Whocares123...

 

None of what you said makes a whole lot of sense to me. I hope you can re-word your argument, or atleast walk me through the important parts...because I am lost.

[Guest celeria]

"there are way too many undergraduate students in the Canadian university system"? That's an interesting perspective, but shouldn't the goal be to educate as many people as possible?? Furthermore, I'm not too sure that such a factor would push down the average grade assigned.

[Guest Madz25]

"In my personal opinion, there are way too many undergraduate students in the Canadian university system.

There is on need for having large incoming class enrollments to only have B- averages in the course, putting more than half of the students out of competition for professional school."

 

 

Do ALL students deserve to get good grades? Just because you pay the tuition fees doesn't mean you deserve a good mark. If class averages were higher, your A wouldn't be worth the same weight. If classes started having A- averages, then GPA would become irrelevant to the med school process. How would med schools differentiate the "more able" students from the rest? (I know this topic is also controversial - GPA reflecting one's ability to excel in med school)

[Guest The Law]

"In my personal opinion, there are way too many undergraduate students in the Canadian university system. There is on need for having large incoming class enrollments to only have B- averages in the course, putting more than half of the students out of competition for professional school. This is maybe why application processes have started to look at very strange things to grant med school admission, and make the whole process very cloudy."

 

I don't understand what you mean by this. Are you complaining that since there are too many people in the undergrad system, med school admissions are "making the admissions process cloudy"? That doesn't make sense to me, and I don't believe the admissions process is "cloudy".

 

"As for myself and for most people I know, if you are in need of advanced surgery/treatment or someone else in you family does - you want the most qualified physician - someone who makes the least mistakes possible and has a stellar record of achievement without error."

 

Of course, but those admitted into medical school do have stellar academic records. Just because there are many people in the undergraduate system, it doesn't mean that medical schools are lowering the quality of their ideal applicant. Actually, since there are more people in the undergraduate system, there are even more good applications pushing the envelope even further. However, simply having the grades will not make you a good doctor. I know a few people who have really really high grades, but if you listen to their motivations for medicine and the things they say sometimes... you'd definitely be glad that they're not your doctor.

[Guest anvah]

I take it by the discussion that many accept as fact the notion that a so called perfect student 'with near 4 GPA, excellent MCAT, a varied set of ECs and excellent communication' can be rejected for medical admission.

 

I do not. The problem with anecdotal evidence is that many accept it as fact, make it vivid and essentially exaggerate it. Let me ask you a question: How many percent of such students do you think will be rejected for medical admission? 1%? 2%? I would say less that 5%.

 

Why is this discussion being had? 5% can be human error. As many of you know, most scientific research uses a p-value of 0.05.

 

Its like talking about why in one study people who ate lots of sugar actually got thinner. It's nonsensical. Due to probabilistic variation in sampling, it happens.

 

Instead, we should talk about "What can a student who has a 3.8 GPA, decent MCAT, decent ECs, acceptable communication do to get an admission?"

 

I hope everyone here realizes it - getting into medical school is a technique. It can be boiled down into doing a set of things that maximizes the probability of getting in. I know many prefer looking at it as a 'black box'. It isn't though.

 

If 5% is all we can reach for, then we need to do things that put us in that box.

 

Anvah.

[Guest aneliz]

I too am lost by the original argument... I don't see why there are too many people in the undergraduate system... let alone why this makes med school admissions cloudy.

 

The fact that there are so many undergrads applying for med school pushes the GPA and MCAT cut offs higher and higher every year. This means that only those with the most stellar GPA records are even *considered* for an interview, let alone admisssion.

 

Also, the averages of the large undergrad science courses are not 'set' or 'fixed' at a certain level (B-). That is what happens naturally... to every exam there is usually a normal distribution of marks... and that normal distribution is not generally centred around a mean of 80%... I think that a B- average is quite respectable... if you want don't want to be 'cut off' from applying to med school by your grades, work harder. Nobody is stopping you from achieving your best... no matter how many people are in the class or what the average is. I managed to maintain my GPA even in large undergrad 'weeder' courses that had 1200+ people and averages of 55%.

 

Also, if you are looking for a good surgeon to fix yourself or your family... I don't think you necessarily want the person that memorized the text book and can regurgitate the information on a multiple choice exam but can't communicate or think on their feet. This person, while they may have a stellar GPA, makes an exceptionally poor surgeon... because they can't apply the information they memorised to the problems that they face in the OR, they can't problem solve when something unexpected comes up that *wasn't* in the text book... and they can't communicate any of it effectively to their patients, nurses or assistants...

 

That is why med schools INTERVIEW those with stellar GPA's to determine who has the other qualities that are equally as important (if not more important) than can you memorise your textbook and perform on a written exam.

 

Yes, people with seemingly 'perfect' applications get rejected... but it isn't random... something must have happened to make the school/interview panel rank them lower than somebody else... if they are truly 'perfect' they should get in if they apply again.. otherwise, maybe there is a flaw there that you just aren't seeing... there is more to getting in and being a good doctor than having a high GPA and good MCAT scores and having done some 'good' EC's.

[Guest muchdutch]

I know of atleast 6 people who had a 4.0, amazing MCAT scores and fantastic ECs/research etc., but got rejected either pre-interview or post it

 

Here's a thought - maybe they lied to you...

[Guest whocares123]

Good points made by all here. I predicted almost all of them.

 

Anvah - well said.

 

I don't want to argue, or debate, but just sit back and listen to people's opinions.

[Guest marbledust]

Do ALL students deserve to get good grades? Just because you pay the tuition fees doesn't mean you deserve a good mark.

 

I'm quoting Madz here..which a bit misleading as she wasn't the person who sent the thread in this direction. But for the sake of brevity, I didn't want to quote the original statement and the reply.

 

I would modify this to add that not all students are capable of getting extremely high marks--even when they put in the effort and time. Think of the bell curve--you have small amounts of people at each extreme and a whole bunch in the middle.

 

I think those of us who have high enough grades to be fortunate enough to apply to medicine sometimes forget that for many students a B (or sometimes a C) is a huge accomplishment. It doesn't necessarily mean these students are less intelligent or less worthy of a spot in university.

 

I know somebody is going to argue "well if people would study instead of partying they could get "A"s too." Unfortunately, it doesn't always work that way :hat