UBC sent out wrong statistics in letters for some!

[Guest Surprise]

UBC has just sent me a new letter. Although still rejected, my interview percentile went up from 9 to 62. Who knows, tommorrow i may get accepted

[Guest not rex morgan]

Sounds like this year they opted for untrained-monkeys, instead of the gold-standard trained ones. :b

[Guest Ian Wong]

Or maybe they forgot to put the caffeine drops in the water...

 

Ian

UBC, Med 3

[Guest BC guy]

I still got rejected, but I am now closer to being a more acceptable person :b

[Guest BCgirl]

Well, I just checked my mail. I was sent the wrong stats too.

 

My interview percentile went from 6 to 62!

 

I'm still upset over the rejection (of course)... and maybe a bit more since I didn't do as bad in my interviews as the last letter made me think (b/c if I had gotten a 6 then I definitely should have been rejected ).

[Guest Sumi23]

Is everyone with wrong interview scores gonna get boosted up to a 62? haha... just kidding.... It's just that I have lost all confidence in the admissions process at ubc. I think they just give out made up numbers and once again, they are making up numbers. So even though they are "fixing" your score for your interview, I think they will ensure that it's below what is required to make it in. Is it not possible that those who got accepted also had wrong interview scores? I guess we'll never know... I mean, UBC wouldn't want to take back acceptance letters from those who were ranked in the top 128 but aren't any longer. If there is quite a few people on this forum who had really high marks in all sections and still didn't make it in, there must be some secret "Fudge" factor involved. I felt kinda hopeless with ubc. Appeal as you may, ubc will find some fudge to mess you up. Sorry about my pessimism. I tried to find some sort of explanation for my rejection and all I got was ambigious crap and the "olympic athelete" story. Honestly, I hope someone wins when they fight back against this weird system. All the best and please post the results of your appeal.

[Guest Ian Wong]

Hi Sumi23,

 

It sucks getting a rejection letter, no question about it. I'm sure you're not happy right now; I definitely wasn't after getting a rejection letter from Saskatchewan. However, I also don't understand the source of your pessimism. There's no advantage to UBC just making up numbers that are conveniently just low enough to give you a rejection; what would they gain from that? Spending that time corresponding with you, interviewing you, and then collating your scores uses up their time and money, just as it does yours.

 

Another way to look at this possibly is that by definition, each of these breakdowns is from someone who has been rejected. If you are accepted, you never get to see your academic and non-academic percentiles; they aren't supplied in an attempt to decrease competition and classmate comparisons within the class.

 

If you think you've not received good feedback, then I'd perhaps contact them again, and really ask them for honest advice about what you can realistically complete for next year in order to improve your application. Don't settle for the rote answer of "Olympic athlete"; don't be afraid to probe a little deeper. At the end of the day, the more feedback you receive, the more preparation you can do next year when you reapply to UBC and other med schools.

 

I'd reiterate again that probably 40-50% of my class needed to apply more than once to get an acceptance, and that with 128 seats for 700+ applicants, you're automatically going to reject 82% of applicants (I think there's actually significantly more than 700 applicants this year, so the overall rejection rate this year was probably even higher than 82%).

 

Chin up, I know this sucks.

 

Ian

UBC, Med 3

[Guest Sumi23]

Hey Ian,

 

Thanks for the encouragement. Ya it sucks to be rejected and this pessimism comes and goes. It becomes a little stronger after reading so many frustrated applicants' comments. Ya, that comment about them making up numbers... of course it wouldn't make any sense for them to make up numbers. However, after trying over and over again to understand what goes on at UBC med, it seems like that's what they are doing. Just a point of view from a frustrated applicant. Reading the recent threads on conspiracy theory and all that speculation has let my imagination fly. I find some humor in this all. Helps me laugh it off since, in the end, it's a matter of luck really.

 

To add to my previous comment about seeking help from Ms. Jeffs... well during the meeting with her, I had to ask over and over again the same questions and she would not give a straight answer. I asked her one thing and she beat around the bush a lot and then told me something else. Perhaps i should have written an appeal letter but at that point, i felt quite discouraged and really confused. My friend, with similar grades and stronger extracurriculars wrote a letter to Dr. Bates, however. First of all, she did not get back to him when she said she would and he had to keep going back to the med office to ask about the status of his appeal. The secretary kept telling him that Dr. Bates would get back to him. Well when she finally did, he got another letter saying that his file was not good enough. That's an ok answer as long as she had some explanations or something. But she didn't; she did not point out any specific details or flaws in his application. In fact, one would think after reading the generic letter she sent, that she didn't even read his appeal letter. So, folks at ubc aren't as open to helping out applicants with their application as one would think. I didn't go as far as my friend with the appeal but i saw him trying and it's wasn't easy to get explanations sometimes. This was just our experience.

 

Chin is up... I will try again everywhere if needed. I am waiting to hear back from some Ontario schools and if it doesn't work out this year I am applying again to UBC. I will just have to work on the presentation of my application a bit more i guess. After reading so much complaining for so long on this board, I just thought i would add my bit.

[Guest maniac]

Ian,

 

My re-evaluated percentile for my interview went from 86th percentile to 69th. But this still puts me in the top one third of the applicant pool. My other percentiles were 89th (overall GPA), 83rd (prereqs), 80th (last 60 credits). I also had tonnes of volunteer stuff, both medical and non, I work in the healthcare field, and have two kids (one of which was born during my BSc years) and work part time while going to school full time! I still don't get it. What more do they want? My first born?

 

I guess I'm feeling (like everyone else on this posting) a bit rejected.... My only hope now is that UBC decides to add more people to their waitlist. Ian, any idea if UBC notifies applicants that they are waitlisted, or do they offer new positions only as others turn them down? I don't care if I don't find out until August, I just really am commited to medicine and really can't imagine doing anything but. Once I get my rejection bomb, is that it? or is there hope that they may waitlist me?

 

Thanks,

 

Maniac

[Guest maniac]

from the other thread that you shut down (sorry, I hadn't read it before making my previous note), wouldn't an appeals process blacklist you for next year? I had my interviews with Drs. Goodman and Bates, both of which I was thrilled with, btw. If the appeal goes through Dr. Bates, she will obviously be on next years' adcom and say "AHA! There's that same know it all who thought she could sneak in via an appeal process!" As I've said in my previous comment, my grades were more than competative, my EC includes not only hospital volunteer, but many community involvements, etc, etc. Will I ruin my chances of getting in next year by being black listed after appealing?

 

After reading that BC girl is going through the same thing, I wonder if I should seriously consider following this up with someone in admissions?

 

Maniac

[Guest maniac]

BC girl,

 

Could you contact me directly? Perhaps we can talk. email me at manakmuhr@shaw.ca

 

Thanks

[Guest BCgirl]

Like maniac, I am also wondering if appealing is a good way to get labelled as a "trouble maker" that just can't accept a rejection letter....

 

I can totally accept it, but I would like some good answers (other than to start training for the Olympics ).

[Guest Ian Wong]

My personal opinion is that the admissions committee is not going to be so vindictive as to keep tabs on you and strike your name off the accepted list when you re-apply the following year. However, that's just my read based on my interactions with some of those individuals. Therefore, take that with a grain of salt, because it's just my opinion. However, I do think it's well within the bounds of reason to obtain a satisfactory answer as to how your application was processed, in light of the corrections to your statistics mailout.

 

There was an interesting event once which I think speaks a bit to the impartiality of Dr. Bates. Her, myself, and a classmate of mine did a presentation for a group of applicants, and our talk kept getting interrupted by a rather insistent and persistent individual, who kept cutting us off by asking very pointed questions in a rather arrogant manner, etc. After this presentation, which we stressed was a chance to ask questions without fear of affecting one's application chances, we were talking about the responsiveness of the applicants, and about this one applicant in particular. Dr. Bates said: "I hope that I forget this person's name when we review applications."

 

This person got an immediate acceptance based on the strength of their application and interview. No black-listing in this situation, and no negative repercussions for being rather excitable that night.

 

Ian

UBC, Med 3

[Guest BCgirl]

maniac,

 

I emailed you a while ago. Did you get it?

 

Are you considering appealing?

[Guest maniac]

But no, I'm not going to. Sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you, I was in Van for a few days. Yes, I got your email, thanks for getting in touch so soon. I talked to the Admissions office. I told them that I didn't necessarily want to appeal, but having come this far, couldn't just let it slide not knowing if the correct scores were reviewed. She assured me that they had, and it was just an error in the transfer of data to our letters. I asked her if there was another route to ensure that the correct data was, indeed, looked at. Apparently, there's not. I asked her if there was a timeframe within which I had to appeal, she said no. When asked what the probability of reversing the adcom's decision via an appeal, she hesitated and said "None". I asked her if anyone had ever gotten in via an appeal. Again, the answer was "None."

 

So that's kinda where I stand. Without a hope in hell of getting the decision reversed, what's the point? I'd rather just avoid the frustration and aggravation (and paperwork!) involved and get on with my life. I'll try again next year, though. I have an advising appt on the 18th. I'll let you know what she says about being an Olympic athlete! My answer to that would be: "I have absolutely no desire to become an Olympian, I already excel at many other things, thank you very much!"

 

How about you? What kind of story did you get when you phoned and are you considering appealing?

[Guest helmet33]

maniac,

 

Like you I was given the story about the "ad com only used your raw score". My only problem with that is that they adjust the interviewers score to a common mean, look on the bottom of your yellow stats sheet. So my question was 'did you use the number that had been adjusted by the data base for the meeting?' The answer was "yes, of course!" Next question is did the data base screw up before or after the meeting? Absolutely after, what else would they say! I know of someone in 2nd year at the moment who was given the overall applicant GPA instead of her own and was rejected after interviews for it. It took her 4 meetings with the faculty to finally got the truth and was finally given a space. I think basically if you reason for appeal is that you feel the ad com made a mistake by not accepting you because you are a wonderful applicant...forget it. If you do however find an error, then appeal. Often after mistakes are discovered the faculty will offer a guarantee of interviews next year but I know that if you make it to that point you should be offered a seat.

[Guest maniac]

Helmet 33,

Thanks for the info, but what yellow stats sheet? I didn't get one with my rejection letter. Do you get that when you have your advising session? How do I find a mistake if I don't know what my actual percentages were. They only tell me the percentiles.

 

Have you had your advising appt already?

[Guest BCgirl]

Hey maniac,

 

the yellow sheet helmet was talking about was (or should have been) included with the first rejection letter. It's just a statistical summary sheet that lists academic averages and stuff like that.

 

I was told that we will be able to get our actual scores for the different parts of our apps when we have our advising sessions.

[Guest maniac]

Thanks, BC Girl.

 

Must of missed that (how is that possible?). I will look again, but I don't think I actually got one.

 

Have you talked to admissions lately? Any word on how the appeals are going? When do you have your advising session?

[Guest Thewonderer]

from reading helmet33's friend's story, it is pretty obvious that the only objective aspect of the application is the GPA and MCAT. When you argue for the correct GPA to be placed on your sheet, even ad com cannot do anything about it! However, asking about EC's and interview scores will get you nowhere. They can just give you a generic answer and just say, sorry buddy, other people we admit have better life experiences. Try next year.

 

I personally feel that this is what happens when you place too much on subjective certeria. How is one going to say that even though applicant A has 5 years of working experience and applicant B is straight out of undergrad, applicant B does interview a little bit better than applicant A and therefore deserves to get in? Where do you draw the line in this sea of subjectivity?

 

Another thing is that UBC med does not have that many older students. It could be due to the smaller number of older applicants. But med schools in general do not seem to like admitting older applicants.

[Guest Thewonderer]

Hi Ian,

I did not even realize that the other thread has shut down until today! I will come back and read other posts near the end of thread later.

 

From Ian's page bellow,

 

www.premed101.com/stats.html

 

I do think that UBC med admissions has changed over the years.

 

For overall-premed average of entering class, the number in the 90%+ category seem to have dropped from 1996 to 2001 (7 accepted in 1996 to 1 and 3 accepted in 2000, 2001). Also, only 3 and 4 applicants with 90%+ average were rejected in 1996 and 1997 respectively (acceptance rates of 70% and 50% respectively), but 13 were rejected in 2001 (with paultry acceptance rate of around 25%). And more dramatically, MCAT of entering class drops from 9.75 to 9.36 while the rejected applicants' MCAT actually RISES from 8.73 to 9.22

So it seems that UBC med has recently taken out MCAT as a factor in its admissions consideration. Furthermore, that high GPA seems to be negatively correlated with admissions success (when in 1996 that did not seem to be the case). Does it anything to do with Dr. Bates taking the helm? Maybe, maybe not.

 

I think that the main issue is that UBC med has monopoly. The number of people who want to stay in BC at all cost definitely leads to this phenomenon. UBC med's yield always seems to float around 85-95%. Hey, if everybody wants to come here, then why should we change anything? We can admit who we want and tell then whatever we want to tell them (be an Olympic athelete) and what can they do to us? They are even afraid to appeal because, guess what, they will have to apply to UBC again next year if they ever want to stay in BC for med school.

 

In the states, top schools are always competing for top students. Even yields at Columbia, Duke, Stanford and Hopkins don't go above 60%. Hey, if Duke does not want you, Columbia or Hopkins will happily take you in. Even in Ontario, there are more choices.

[Guest Ian Wong]

Thewonderer,

 

Medical school admissions is subjective. No question about it. By its very definition, it has to be. A 3.8 GPA in Engineering does not equal a 3.8 GPA in Basket-Weaving. A 35 R MCAT by someone who had both the free time and financial resources to take a review course and sign-up for 1-on-1 tutoring is not the same 35 R MCAT from someone who is working a full-time job, or taking summer school, or taking care of kids. Yet numerically, those two people appear identical on paper. Thank goodness we have non-academic methods to fall back on to evaluate these two individuals more fully.

 

Even the traditional "objective" measurements of GPA and MCAT scores are subjective. People can, and do take bird courses to boost GPA scores, people can, and do take "easier" degree programs perhaps at "easier" universities to get higher GPA scores, people can, and do take summer courses to get ahead of the game, people can, and do cheat, use old exams, copy lab reports off people who took those courses last year, etc. MCAT scores, in my opinion, are almost completely dictated by how much time and resources you have to prepare for them; that makes them very NOT objective.

 

As far as interviews and reference letters, and all the subjective parts of medical school applications, since virtually all schools in North America use them, it seems that your arguments can't be leveled squarely at UBC. Whichever medical school you are currently attending, you must have had to obtain reference letters and perform interviews, and in getting accepted, those subjective evaluations you received allowed you to bump someone into getting a rejection letter. Med school applications are subjective.

 

As far as the academic profile of UBC med goes, you're drawing some pretty vast conclusions from not an awful lot of data. That makes things suspect. From the point of UBC med, the only important criteria are the academic characteristics of the people who are accepted. No offense to those who get rejected, but if UBC is going to analyze its medical school classes, it will look at the academic profiles of its accepted classes.

 

So let's do that over the years 1996-2001 for both MCAT and GPA scores, just like you suggested:

 

www.premed101.com/stats.html#MCAT

www.premed101.com/stats.html#Marks

 

Average MCAT scores of UBC Accepted students:

1996: 10.41

1997: 10.21

1998: 10.18

1999: 10.00

2000: 10.30

2001: 10.22

 

Average Overall GPA scores of UBC Accepted students:

 

1996: 82.56%

1997: 82.49%

1998: 82.51%

1999: 82.44%

2000: 82.38%

2001: 82.29%

 

So, in the last six years, the largest difference between MCAT scores was a minor 0.41, and the largest difference in GPA scores a measly 0.37%.

 

I don't think you'll find any statistically significant differences in the academic scores of the UBC med classes over the last six years. Do you think that someone who receives a 80.37% on a test is any smarter than someone who receives a 80.00%. Not really. I guess we are maintaining our academic standards after all.

 

As far as a monopoly situation goes, that's reality. If there was money to open up another independant medical school, we would be doing so. But then again, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, PEI, the Yukon, NWT, and Nunavut all have to subsist with one or no med schools as well. If you have an idea to solve this problem, I'm sure the BC government would love to hear from you.

 

Interestingly enough, this argument also means that the BC government has a vested interest in keeping and retaining UBC med graduates. Given that we are still graduating only 120 medical students a year, while BC loses 300 physicians annually, UBC med grads are a pretty valuable commodity.

 

Ian

UBC, Med 3

[Guest Thewonderer]

Hi Ian,

It is a matter of what criteria are more objective and which are more subjective. Everything lies on an objective to subjective spectrume. And if you want to argue for subjectivity in GPA/MCAT, that's a piece of cake. But one has to remember that subjectivity is found in everything. After all, even scientific inquiry can be fairly subjective (clouded by the investigator's bias, the way he or she frames the question, etc.). But at the end of the day, which one is more objective (i.e. less subjective)? Scientific experiment or witchcraft? Same thing with GPA/MCAT v.s. interivew/list of EC's. At the end of the day, which is more objective?

 

And by throwing away the more objective criteria and relying on the subjective ones, UBC med is prone to the controversy that is being explored here on this forum. Because the sentiment is that in the end, UBC just admits people at whim and pulls numbers out of a hat.

 

As for the numbers, it is also important to see that the rejected applicants' MCAT also rose while acceptee's MCAT scores fell (i.e. there is virtually no gap now!). And my point again is focused on the 90%+ group and shows how it not only does not pay to have high GPA but it actually hurts you bad. Yet that was not the case in 1996 and 1997 when it actually was good to be in the 90%+ group! And this could apply to BCgirl's case.

 

The 90%+ group is very small. So of course, the mean GPA of acceptees won't change that much when UBC med takes that group out of it acceptance pool.

 

You might have seen the link already. Below is an interesting link to Stanford School of Medicine's internal report. It is interesting in that it shows

1) the competition there is for top students among US med schools

2) how GPA and MCAT are factored in prominently in its admissions process

 

www.med.stanford.edu/sena...Report.pdf

[Guest Thewonderer]

What I see is that a lot of people at UBC med probably grew up in BC, stay in BC for undergrad, get accepted to UBC med, and plan to practice in BC afterwards. There is nothing wrong with it. But if that is the case, of course none of these people would want to change the status quo. They reap the benefit of the system. They are not the ones who wroked so hard to get 90%+ and yet are told that they are not good enough and should try to be olympic atheletes instead.

 

And for many many applicants who were rejected in the past, most of them probably applied only to UBC med. So when they received the rejection letter, they just knew that UBC med thought that they were not good enough. And they had NO way to form any comparison because they did not apply to other med schools. Therefore, end of story for them. They would simply try again next year.

 

However, I had the opportunity to see how many of my friends fared. They also happened to be ambitious people, not willing to put their eggs in one basket (i.e. UBC med) and did not want to take a year off if they had not gotten into UBC med. So they applied all over Canada and the US. And when they got rejected by UBC but yet were accepted elsewhere, that's when I get a little suspicious about the validity of all these academic and non-academic percentiles. However, if they were like many other BC applicants on this forum where they applied only to UBC med, then I would have had no way of forming the opinion I currently hold.

 

The other thread of applying to UBC v.s. applying to different schools is not thriving. It is probably because Ontario and other schools are just starting to accept people. I will get a new thread up sometime.

[Guest Ian Wong]

Thewonderer,<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> And by throwing away the more objective criteria and relying on the subjective ones, UBC med is prone to the controversy that is being explored here on this forum. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->What throwing away? If they were throwing away GPA and MCAT scores, then you'd expect our GPA and MCAT scores to be different than other medical schools. They aren't. You're making an irrational statement. If you believe that we are throwing away our numbers, then why don't you apply with really crummy marks and see how far you get. Answer: Not far.<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> Because the sentiment is that in the end, UBC just admits people at whim and pulls numbers out of a hat.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->Ah. This is good. Keep working at your conspiract theory that makes no sense. I'm glad that you think getting into UBC is like playing BINGO; I'm sure that UBC, the ACMC accreditation committee who accredit all Canadian med schools, and the BC government see it the same way <heavy sarcasm>.<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> ...it is also important to see that the rejected applicants' MCAT also rose while acceptee's MCAT scores fell.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->The acceptee's MCAT scores have NOT fallen. Quit making stuff up to fit your delusion. It's nice to see that the rejected applicant's scores have moved up a fraction of a point this last year (tells you that numerically people are scoring higher). The bottom line is that from the med school's perspective, we are still placing the same demands upon our accepted students to maintain a high MCAT standard. The fact that the total applicant pool is getting more competitive is irrelevant, particularly when the MCAT is used as a flag.<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> And my point again is focused on the 90%+ group and shows how it not only does not pay to have high GPA but it actually hurts you bad. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->Your logic is incredibly bad. Really bad. You cannot look at a single aspect of a small group of individuals and extrapolate everything else from that. As we've previously discussed in exhaustive detail, if non-academics are valued highly, and academics count only up to a threshold level (which appears to be a GPA of 80% from the stats), then those 7 90+% applicants who got rejected were also competing with the 45 85-90% applicants and the 141 80-85% applicants who were also simultaneously rejected.

 

Now, don't you think that based on sheer numbers, that there were MANY people in the 186 people with GPA's between 80-90% who had stronger non-academic profiles than the measly 7 people with 90+% GPA's. I think so, and that's why getting a high average has NEVER been a guarantee of med school acceptance. You need to be well-rounded. This is not some secret.<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> And for many many applicants who were rejected in the past, most of them probably applied only to UBC med. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->Do you have any numbers to back this up? Or even better question: do you have ANY NUMBERS to back up ANYTHING you say on these boards? You've been consistently wrong about such a huge number of assertions regarding UBC med school that it's pretty staggering.

 

1) All UBC grads run to the US to strike it rich. Fact: Only one student in this graduating class is doing a US residency. Usually less than 5 students a year head south for residency.

 

2) PBL is a cost-saving alternative to lectures. Fact: A PBL curriculum is much more faculty and labour intensive, and costs vastly more to administer. Each Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, UBC needs to hire 40 tutors to lead PBL groups in 40 separate rooms while it only takes 1 person to lecture in front of an auditorium.

 

3) UBC only accepts French-speaking Asians. Fact: Of the 31 Asians or part Asians here in my class, only 2 of them speak French fluently. French is also a nearly completely useless language here in Vancouver; try finding people here who speak French but not English, there aren't any.

 

4) UBC doesn't accept Asians. Fact: Then I've got 31 Asians here, just over 25% of the class to show you.

 

5) Higher MCAT scores translates into higher board scores and higher match results. Fact: Our board exams are taken AFTER the CaRMS match and therefore don't affect our match results. I guess this shows your complete lack of knowledge of the Canadian med school system. Further along this is that at UBC, MCAT results in my experience have NOT correlated with clinical performance.

 

6) Dr. Bates is singlehandedly skewing the results of UBC admissions. Fact: Then she'd have to convince both the Admissions Selection Committee as well as the Admissions Policy Committee, both of which consist of both UBC faculty and UBC medical student representatives. The admissions committee functions as a COMMITTEE; one person cannot accomplish what you are suggesting.

 

7) In order to discriminate against people with high marks, UBC interviews them and gives them just low enough of an interview mark to reject them. Fact: Then why bother interviewing them at all? Just reject all individuals who have a 90% average, or better yet, don't even give them an interview so that you can interview other people with lower marks. Each person who gets an interview bumps off another applicant who would have otherwise received an interview. Isn't it telling that ALL of your friends received an interview? UBC wouldn't have interviewed them if it wasn't interested in accepting them.

 

8) Interviews and non-academic criteria at UBC are too subjective, and therefore not reliable. Fact: Virtually EVERY medical school in North American uses both interviews and non-academic criteria such as autobiographical essays and reference letters, which means that they are IMPORTANT in the admissions process.

 

Cheers,

 

Ian

UBC, Med 3