UBC selection process is so screwed up!

[Guest Sad guy]

I received a rejection letter in the mail on Friday, May 10th. I am a BC resident. I was extremely disappointed b/c I thought everything went well this year. I got in the 82nd percentile for my interview but was still rejected? Don't really understand why I would be offered an interview and score really high on interview and then get rejected? Any thoughts? Those others who, like myself, got rejected, what interview percentile rankings did you receive? Has any other person experienced rejection with such a high interview ranking?

[Guest beats me]

That seems strange. Maybe call the office and see if you can get more information. Maybe you scored really well with one but poorly with another interviewer or something like that so they have to reject you. I don't really know. It doesn't make sense to me. But I would guess that there is some reason.

[Guest YongQ]

I feel for you Sad guy - I got a lot of rejections before going to U of T. If you don't mind me asking, what was your academic percentile?

 

YONGQ

[Guest Sad guy]

re: beats me: The interview score one receives reflects the combined scores of both interviews, as far as I know. I would think this has to be the case otherwise why the two interviews and one score? A supplemental stat sheet accompanying the rejection letter stated that the average interview score was 85.4/100, which means that 82nd percentile should have scored ~90/100 (of course, depending on deviance of the data).

 

YongQ, my stats are as follows: overall ~81%, pre-req. ~81% and last 60 ~81%. My percentile ranking was ~51 when the three ranking scores included in the letter were averaged. That means that I was right in the middle in terms of academic (I'll be the first to admit that my grades aren't stellar but they're also not that bad especially if you take into consideration that last year UBC let in ~37 people who have <80% average.)

[Guest MS1]

As I've mentioned, I am one of those applicants that did not get accepted to UBC. However, I am definitely not bitter regarding this, and am more than happy with my current med school. Hey, I believe I can do poorly on interviews...and some of the people I know who got accepted to UBC have great interpersonal skills and will definitely make great doctors.

 

However, to say that the UBC admissions committee does not need "housecleaning" is just a little unbelievable. From what I've heard on this site as well as from other sources (anecdotal evidence tho it may be), UBC admissions has committed such "crimes" as telling an applicant that he/she does not have the right qualities to be a doctor or insisting that an applicant join the Olympic team to impress the medical school. If nothing else, this definitely should not happen again in any admissions process! Not to mention, UBC itself modifies (housecleans?) it's admissions process a little bit each year...one year they decide to have only two interviews per applicant, the next year they decide to have three interviews per applicant.

 

I am sure that UBC med students are qualified to be doctors. Maybe it is just easy to criticize UBC admissions because many students rejected by UBC get accepted by top notch schools elsewhere...UBC has it's own criteria for acceptance! That's all good and fine, but, when many students from BC apply only to UBC medical school as they could not afford to go to the US, and other Canadian medical schools accept few out of province students, you would like to see UBC admissions being as "fair" as possible. It profoundly affects the lives of many aspiring doctors in BC. It is difficult to believe that an interview could be an objective and fair measure of a student's ability to be a good doctor whereas MCAT and GPA seem like objective measures of at least some intelligence and work ethic. It certainly seems unfair for someone who worked really hard at getting great MCAT and GPA, and participated in many extracurricular and volunteer activities to be rejected just because of a so-so score on the subjective interviews.

 

I know it has been argued earlier on this site that interview is better than grades and MCAT in judging a person's clinical skills. I certainly believed that the interview should at least be used as a screening tool for interpersonal skills (which are all so important in a doctor!). But placing too much emphasis on this subjective tool is another story. For all of you who are tired of anecdotal evidence, here's a real study done with real facts for ya (from research at MacMaster)!

 

Teach Learn Med 2002 Winter;14(1):34-42

 

"Validity of admissions measures in predicting performance outcomes: the contribution of cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions."

Kulatunga-Moruzi C, Norman GR.

 

RESULTS: Undergraduate GPAs were found to have the most utility in predicting both academic and clinical performance. Scores derived from the simulated tutorial did not predict future performance. The MCAT Verbal Reasoning score and the personal interview were found to be useful in predicting communication skills on the LMCC Part II.

 

(I've only copied part of the abstract here...if anyone is interested in reading the rest of the article, you'll have to look for it.)

 

I apologize for the long message...I know...it's annoying...I have a short attention span too

[Guest Accepted]

Although I was accepted this year, I can honestly say I did not see what the UBC committee obviously saw in my application to grant me my acceptance. Everything in my application was, in my opinion, less than that of those I know who interviewed there.

 

I can only conclude that I handled the interviews better than average and that the adcom found, from my profile, that I would be able to contribute to the diversity and strength of their class. (You can probably tell that my English skills aren't that well either with my numerous grammar mistakes, heh) As well, it is very likely that in a process such as this, a lot of luck comes into play.

 

FYI:

-The success of this applicant did not involve joining any sort of Olympic team.

-I am well below the median age of acceptance

-My marks are average at best

 

I hope this helps anyone who has been rejected. I understand that having the adcom tell you to join an Olympic team seems unreasonable. Just know that an average joe was able to make it without jumping through those kinds of hoops.

[Guest Ian Wong]

MS1,<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> UBC admissions has committed such "crimes" as telling an applicant that he/she does not have the right qualities to be a doctor<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->Maybe you could give some examples of what exactly they said. I would argue that it probably isn't that they don't have the "right" qualities (although there are a few people out there that probably fall into this category), but rather that there were many other co-applicants with similar or superior qualities who were chosen ahead of those rejected individuals. Med school admissions is a competition after all. When you only have 128 seats for 700+ applicants, the vast majority of people <!--EZCODE BOLD START--> by definition<!--EZCODE BOLD END--> are going to come away unhappy. It's important to remember this.<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> ...or insisting that an applicant join the Olympic team to impress the medical school.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->Let me just state that anyone who is naive enough to believe this probably needs a bit more realistic grounding. I agree that this is not the best example of an activity that most med students share, but come on. If you actually believe that you need to become an Olympic athlete to get into med school, I've got some really cool dot-com stocks to sell you.<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> UBC itself modifies (housecleans?) it's admissions process a little bit each year.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->Which is good. Because the alternative is to stay static every year, and not adjust and adapt... Evolution is not a bad thing. The interview process was streamlined from three interviews down to two in order to accomodate the faculty interviewers. As you might well imagine, particularly in this rather strained time in the university and health care sectors, it's increasingly tough as a faculty member to commit the time to interview applicants. Dropping from three interviews down to two saved 300 interview sessions this year (that's *300* man-hours in interview times alone if each interview lasts about an hour). UBC found published admissions literature (I assume it isn't proprietary and is out there somewhere in a journal) stating that the difference in yield between doing two interviews versus three was minimal to none. If the process can be streamlined, it should be. I can guarantee you that the admissions process is an ever-evolving pathway.<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> It is difficult to believe that an interview could be an objective and fair measure of a student's ability to be a good doctor whereas MCAT and GPA seem like objective measures of at least some intelligence and work ethic. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->UBC uses the MCAT and your GPA as well. Please don't make this into some black and white phenomenon where academics don't play a role in your acceptance, because they do. Accepted UBC students have a strong GPA and MCAT scores typically. However, we also weight the interview and non-academic side very heavily. If interviews weren't important, then does virtually every, if not every, North American medical school use the interview as part of the admissions process? <!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote>Quote:<hr> here's a real study done with real facts for ya<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END-->I'd like to read the rest of this paper, but we both know that's not going to happen. I'd like to know a little bit more about the methodology of this paper, such as how they determine academic and clinical performance in medical school. In any event, I don't think that paper is really stating anything profound. Academics are important, as is the interview. Not surprisingly, UBC evaluates both, just like all the other Canadian med schools. Again, we've got some 128 spots and over 700 applicants. There's going to be lots of well-qualified people in the pool who'd make great doctors who receive a rejection letter regardless. That sucks; hopefully the government will come through with the funding for additional spots.

 

Ian

UBC, Med 3

[Guest BCgirl]

sad guy,

 

If your academic percentile was about 51, then isn't it possible that your academics (was your MCAT on par with the usual average?) and non-academic factors (letters of rec and ec's) were low enough to get you rejected even with the high interview score?

 

I hope you get some info from them with your appeal. Good luck!

[Guest Kirsteen]

Hey again Sad guy,

 

Overall, it's impossible to ascertain where any of us sit in the final selection process as there are large and key pieces of information that remain unknown. Firstly, we don't know the exact ratio used to determine the final ranking score. Secondly, and most importantly, we don't know how everyone else relative to us--and that's what, 300-330 people--shape up.

 

What we can assume though (and I feel that this may sometimes be overlooked), is that all of those 300-330 people are exceptionally strong applicants. That means that, in general, they will all have good academic, non-academic and MCAT scores (as defined by UBC), and furthermore we can generally expect them to perform well in the interviews. In essence, at this point we're at the Olympics of selection steps and sure, getting to the Olympics means that you have to be a great athlete, but succeeding there means that you have to be the best. That is, the competition at this point is a hell of a lot stiffer!

 

Now being the best in this competition does not necessarily mean attaining the average set of scores in each category, which again, are going to be pretty high to begin with. Being the best means achieving one of the top 128 scores out of 300-330 in terms of the components that UBC has selected to make up the final score; and this score can potentially be reached in all sorts of ways, e.g., scoring 100% in the interview and slightly below average (for this group of 300-330 people, remember) in the academics.

 

Back to the point of the ratio used in the final competition, or the score that makes or breaks us in this "Olympics", echoing BCgirl's post above, the non-academic factors may play a significant role, albeit, not as large a role as the interview and academics. Again, if we look at some of the hypothetical numbers for the final ranking and assume the following:

 

50% = interview

3% = MCAT

 

This leaves 47% to be potentially divided between the academics and non-academics. Now, say the academics are deemed more important than non-academics in the final stage of this process; they could be assigned a value of 25%, which would allow them a larger value than the non-academics, but the non-academics would still constitute a significant portion of the overall score--22%. This means that, even at this stage, the non-academics could still play a very major role in deciding whether or not you receive the big, brown envelope. (Again, all of these numbers are hypothetical.) However, overall, no matter how we slice and dice these numbers, the fact remains that, to be in that top 128, the better we score in each of the categories, the better the chance we have of making it, and in this stiff competition, attaining the average is not necessarily a green light for making that final cut.

 

In all, I'll probably find out today or tomorrow how I fared in the final stage of the UBC selection process; however, prior to receiving the biggie envelope or the wee one, to me, the apparent UBC selection process seems fair. Also, I feel that even if it is the wee envelope that appears in my mailbox, it's because I was alongside a whopping bunch of candidates and I'll find solace in the fact that at least I had some of the stuff to make it this far.

 

Cheers,

Kirsteen

[Guest BC guy]

Are you sure about the 51 percentile for your academics? is it not 81%? For your sake I hope that it is the latter. Anyhow, be well prepare to present your case as I know (through contacts in student governance) that it is very very hard to win an appeal anywhere. Rightly or wrongly, "they" have to defend their decision and since there are some things in their decision that are hard to ascertain and you are not privy to all the info yet regarding that decision, I would say just be prepare to hear some surprises. I hope that it is only an admin. mistake only. Best of luck to you and chin up!

[Guest BCgirl]

aaaaaaaaaahh....

 

I guess my application was "not competitive"... I got rejected... surprise surprise.

 

This is so frustrating!! I've busted my ass for so long (school, work, volunteering, blah blah blah).. the icing on this cake really f-ing sucks.

 

Kirsteen: I sincerely hope you got better news in the mail today!

 

Jase133: I want to ask you a couple of questions... if you're willing to answer them, please email me at med_girl20@hotmail.com. Thanks.

 

I doubt there's many people still waiting considering I'm in Nova Scotia, but if there are: good luck!

[Guest Useful info]

Does anyone know if there was a french judge on the admissions committee?

[Guest not rex morgan]

Good one about the French Judge! I know Sad Guy is upset about his interview scores being so high, and still not getting in. How about the rest of those of you who will now be doing something fantastic and unique with your free year? Any ridiculously high interview scores out there?

 

I know rejection sucks. I have many rejection letters. When I finally got in, I was tempted to frame all of my rejection letters. It's really hard to be positive now, but keep this in mind. Many people apply several times to med. Tons of people in my class applied twice. A good number applied three times (myself included), and a couple got in after four tries. When you are planning this year, and are thinking of applying again, ask yourself if you do get into med, and you are staring down the barrel of a five year residency, what do you think you would wish you had done in that year you had off. Once you get into med, your time is not entirely your own. You graduate, do your residency (and they call them residents b/c they live in the hospital), then you try to get a job or start a practice, or some may want to do a post-doc if they are interested in research. You have time now. Travel, learn a new language, do something you never thought you'd do. I saw the Taj Mahal and kissed the Blarney stone in one trip.

[Guest Kirsteen]

BCgirl, that royally bites. Truly.

 

I feel some of your pain, in the most bizarre of ways, since I received an acceptance today. Initially, I was literally leaping and screaming as I retrieved the big, brown envelope and read the "Congratulations!..." paragraph of the enclosed letter, and then I read a little further and made a few calls and now sit here with a bit o' wind oot o' the sails.

 

At this point there is only a tiny hope that I'll be amongst the class of 2006 on Aug. 26th. I'd truly love to be, but my acceptance to the MD program (and currently there is a spot being held for me) is contingent upon two things: a) my acceptance to the MD/PhD program; my agreement to continue with the program. Given that I'd absolutely LOVE to be a part of the MD/PhD program and feel that research should be a part of my future career, part B is not any sort of a problem; however, part A is. The acceptance letter received from the MD office does not mean that I've been successful in the MD/PhD competition, and in fact, I was told by the MD office that I had to contact the MD/PhD office myself (given that I hadn't received word from them) to find out if I was accepted. If I was, then yay, I'm in as of Aug. 26th; if not, then my spot in the class goes to the fortunate, first person on the waitlist.

 

So I phoned the MD/PhD office, and the response: I seem to have been rejected. Bummer--there goes my seat. I'm waiting to chat with Dr. Chow to find out why I've been rejected, as at this point, I'm unclear as to why given that I was told that the MD admission must appear before the MD/PhD is considered. I'd never heard of the MD program admission being contingent upon an MD/PhD acceptance. In any case, if the issue is the funding, then it's not a problem, I'll generate my own; if it's motivation, I can show him my Plan B (a graduate program in research at another school); if it's a fear that I won't be accepted to the MD program, well, I have that acceptance. We'll see.

 

Cheers guys, and best of luck to you waiting to hear,

Kirsteen

[Guest B]

Hi Kirsteen,

 

I will keep my fingers crossed for you...

 

B

[Guest BCgirl]

Not rex morgan,

 

my "year off" will include suffering through phys chem Since I was a third year applicant, I'll be finishing my chemistry degree. Even if I wasn't going to school next year, I don't think I would be able to do anything really "life altering" as travelling costs money... and that's something I certainly do not have (I would have to pay off student loans, etc). Oh well.

 

 

Kirsteen,

 

I don't totally understand. I was under the impression that if MD/PhD students don't get into the MD/PhD program, they are still considered for just MD (? I don't know much about the process, but that was the impression I got from the FAQ's on the ubc med site).

 

When will you know everything for sure?? Good luck... I hope you can still keep your spot.

[Guest Kirsteen]

Hey there BCgirl,

 

I didn't totally understand either, as I was under the same impression as you. Och well, we'll see.

 

Kirsteen

[Guest bosshogg]

Best of luck Kirsteen! I hope everything gets sorted out.

[Guest not rex morgan]

Hey Kirsteen, I may be able to shed some light on this issue. I'm assuming you do not have BC residency, yeah? Md/phd is considered an even playing ground for all Canadian applicants as it is run with Federal funding. Md is run by provincial funding. So.... You were good enough under BC standards (as all applicants to md/phd are automatically given BC status), but did not meet the outrageously high, only-super-woman-could-meet-these-standards standards for an out of provincer. (if you don't get accepted by the phd half, your in-province status drops). Sucks, I know. It will be interesting to see what Dr. Chow says about rejections. I know the md office considers their process transparent. I'm curious how the phd people explain the decisions. I hear the decisions were hard this year. The competition was apparently really outstanding. Off to a degree in epidemiology for you?

 

BC girl. I didn't realize you are only in third year. Congrats on making it to interviews in this round. Better luck next time. It's pretty rare to get in after third year. Consider it good practice. You already know what it's like to interview.

[Guest BCgirl]

Thanks not rex morgan,

 

but considering it was a bad interview score that kept me out this year, who knows what will happen next year (and I thought my interviews went well).

[Guest Jase133]

BCGirl

 

I e-mailed you

[Guest Sad guy]

Would you mind posting your interview score for my sake or the sake of others? If you would prefer not to make it public, would you consider emailing me? I'd just like to know how I faired against others in my rejection boat: ediot90210@yahoo.com. Thanks.

[Guest BC guy]

I empathize with you; but chin up, it is only 3rd. yr. People do better in the interview as they get older, or so I was told. Good Luck in the future.

[Guest Thewonderer]

1) The reason: I feel that they want to admit whom they want with whatever preconception they have.

 

2) I already gave the reason: because they want to "appear" to be open about it. Being "open" is also about being to accept criticism and improve. Honestly, if you really have inside track to the admissions, maybe you can tell them to stop telling rejected applicants to become olympic atheletes. And if they take that advice and implement on it, then maybe we can start talking about being "open."

 

3) Ian, it is HARD not to put words in your mouth. Allow me to SUMMARIZE your posts (if you disagree, then you can put direct quotations of your own posts, but I am simply tooo lazy). "If I had gotten into ALL the schools in NORTH AMERICA, I still would have chosen UBC (i.e. over U of T, UWO, McGill, HARVARD, YALE, UCSF, etc." "EVERY SINGLE one of my 119 classmates has decided to go to med school because of his or her own unique and personal reason (like none of them cares about making big $$$ as doctors and jump to the US bandwagon when they sap the cheap tuition of BC education)" "I have gotten the MOST excellent education at the MOST reasonable price (when compared to other med schools)" "UBC med admissions does the MOST impressive job in assembling a class full of diversity in age, race, academic background, life experiences, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc." "UBC med has done nothing WRONG to do admissions differently from other schools." I mean, basically, UBC is perfect. Your tone is not condescending but your content certainly is. So I certainly would not say that I was putting words into your own mouth.

 

4) Yeah, so UBC does nothing wrong by doing its admissions different from other schools and yet it has the most impressive entering class year after year (and of course, on top of that, it slaps them with the MOST impressive med education with the most cooperative, helping attitude among students). Isn't that a put down of other med schools? see above.

 

5) Other med schools use personal statement as a guide. UBC uses it to reject applicants they don't like and just say they wrote poor essays (so as to cancel their 99% on academic score).

 

6) yeah, I guess you have to give me this one. I will gladly take that.

 

7) that's a matter of controversy. Even with MCAT of 24, you are probably intelligent enough to handle med school curriculum. But why don't you admit someone with 38 instead of 28? Isn't the 38 person more likely to be able to cram as much material as he could and perhaps think faster within a limited time span? I am NOT talking about below certain MCAT or GPA cut-off, one automatically become "unfit intelligence-wise" to become a doc . But I am talking about merely giving the person with higher MCAT or GPA a better chance because he or she is probably better at handling the amount of materials he or she gets thrown at and at working within tight time-constraint.

 

Ian, for argument's sake,

a) how can you successfully argue for a stance when you continuously use the words: all, every one, and most. These are ALL INCLUSIVE terms.

painting an Utopian pictures of UBC med's education and admissions only make words that follow that much more unbelievable.

 

But you probably think that I totally read your posts in the wrong way and nobody could share my impression of your posts.

[Guest JSS02]

Best of luck, Kirsteen. It's seriously a bunch of BS if you DON'T get in, especially if it's just because you also applied to the PhD program! I find it extremely hard to believe that they don't consider you qualified for the MD program if you aren't simultaneously admitted to the PhD program.