UBC Dean of Admissions Interviewed - Interesting for apps

[Guest dr nomis]

In this weekend's Vancouver Sun (Saturday July 29, page C1 and C11) there are two interesting articles that would be of interest to everyone who reads this article.

 

The first article (available online at www.canada.com/vancouvers...b016dbf04e ) is a long article (2000+ words) entitled "Forced to Study Abroad" and written by columnist Paula Brook highlights medical students who, after applying once or twice to UBC, choose to study at schools in the Carribean, Ireland, and elsewhere. The article emphasizes, among other things, the difficulty that IMGs have returning to Canada. It also states a fact I had no idea about: while the UBC med student pays $14,000 in tuition annually, not only is that a 375% increase from four years ago, but it is also only a fraction of the actual cost of tuition - the province pays $60,000 per YEAR for each student's tuition.

 

The second article (unfortunately unavailable online) is a sideline of the original article called "The ones that don't get away" and discusses application procedures of UBC, according to an interview with UBC's Dean of Admissions Dr. Vera Frinton and UBC's Admissions Director Angelina Desjarlais.

 

Highlights of the second article:

the UBC "evaluation team takes a fine-toothed comb through each application. They spend most of their time appraising and double-checking the contentious non-academic qualifications that carry equal weight to marks at UBC. ... One student, for example, claimed 200 hours of volunteer work in a lab where only 50 hours were logged before the lacklustre applicant quit. Another started a club in university so that he could be its president. Into the reject pile they go."

Moral: Don't lie on your application!

 

The evaluators have radar for resume padding. They also have filters for privilege. Only the affluent can spend six months in Africa volunteering at an AIDS clinic, says Frinton. 'It's become sexy to put stuff like that on an application. They think it will help, but it's not true. Look, good for them that they're able to do it, but they're not necessarily going to get extra points for it, she said.

This one surprised me a lot.

 

What do they get points for? "Leadership, caring work of all kinds, genuineness that is demonstrated through long-term commitments," says Frinton

 

Hope this helps!

[Guest Paulchemguy]

(This message was left blank)

[Guest crimson]

Wow! I too am surprised about the second comment. It is true though, not everyone can afford (time and money-wise) to go to Africa for months, so it's not really fair to use it for bonus marks

[Guest GundamDX]

holy cows nomis nice find!

[Guest leviathan]

Hahaha, I love Dr. Frinton's attitude! It's good that they have their radar on resume padding and less-than-genuine activities on applications.

[Guest TheChosenOneDDS]

i am not surprised at all about the overseas volunteering because volunteering is volunteering. A good deed is universal no matter where you do it. Why should one be more than another? There are so many people in Canada and US that need help too...

 

You have to factor in living conditions, i.e. people in 3rd world countries are used to living in poorer conditions, we don't have to bring them up to standard to here so long as their necessities are being met.

 

If you really wanna do something revolutionary, as i have said many times, make a deal with nike to open a sweat shop lol...

you will create jobs and allow for more foreign investment into that country hahahaha.....talk about making a difference.

 

who knows you might even get a share of the pie...even better than med school.

[Guest crimson]

Just to play devil's advocate...

 

I'm actually glad to hear that the admissions committee isn't naive when it comes to these things (i.e. president of self-formed club), but is it often that black and white to weed out the CV-padders? In a way, it makes a future applicant like myself a bit nervous if the stuff I enjoy doing may seem "fake".

 

To those med students who sit in on admission committees, do you find that it's easy to find the non-genuine applicants?

[Guest GundamDX]

I am not a med student on the admissions committee but as someone who jumped through all the hoops I would suggest you not to worry about how they judge the genuineness of your CV... just be yourself (ie. honest) and do what YOU think it's neccessary to convince them you deserve a spot :\

[Guest canuck1]

Crimson,

 

I'm glad you raise the point you did. That was my first impression when I read the article. I'm also worried that certain activities will be painted with an overly skeptical brush. I have some activities that I was genuninely interested in, but could be interpreted this way.

 

I think it's funny that they have radars for resume padding, but yet it could be argued that the feedback sessions kind of encourage the behaviour. If you advise someone to go out and improve their NAQ activities, you kind of run the risk that they are going to make such efforts for the wrong reasons...

[Guest kellyl20]

(This message was left blank)

[Guest akinf]

That's pretty intense, but I hope they recognize that overseas volunteering does not necessarily mean they are priveledged. Many students who choose to go overseas (not just for volunteering, but for exposure in international medicine) often fundraise or are supported by organizations. However, I think admissions committees probably understand and are aware of things like that.

 

This article freaked me out a little...but i'm calm now.

[Guest canuck1]

I agree that people fund such trips in all manners, but wonder if they filter for privilege in other forms as well. It's not just the international volunteering bit that seems funny though. The whole article seems to border on a bit cynical to me.

 

What about someone who spends a summer backpacking through Europe? Is this experiencing new cultures, broadening your horizons etc, or does it indicate affluence and an the lack of need for a job? Someone could just as easily saved for years for such a trip or had it paid for by someone else.

 

I would hope that someone who is interested in peds and volunteers at Childrens' (or whatever specialty and setting) isn't thought to be doing so just to make their application look sexy.

 

How does the resume padding radar pick up that someone started a club just to be president? Surely this person didn't indicate that on their application.

 

Does long term committment to something necessarily indicate genuine interest? I'm sure there are those out there with experiences that were more about banking hours than sincere interest.

 

How do you assess things like genuiness and integrity without having a little faith in what people say. Lying on the application is obviously one thing, but being overly skeptical of peoples intentions and interests scares me a little. I'd hope there'd be more of an attempt to look for the positive aspects.

 

I'm trying not to read too much into the article though. You never know what exactly was said in what context.

[Guest leviathan]

That's pretty intense, but I hope they recognize that overseas volunteering does not necessarily mean they are priveledged. Many students who choose to go overseas (not just for volunteering, but for exposure in international medicine) often fundraise or are supported by organizations. However, I think admissions committees probably understand and are aware of things like that.

It still means they're privileged to some extent. People who are not privileged have to work full time all summer to be able to afford to return to university in the Fall.

[Guest ssc427]

I'm glad you raise the point you did. That was my first impression when I read the article. I'm also worried that certain activities will be painted with an overly skeptical brush. I have some activities that I was genuninely interested in, but could be interpreted this way.

 

If you've done alot of things overseas or elsewhere don’t be afraid to put them down, but know that it might set off a radar. I had volunteer experience in Canada, UK, Eastern Europe and Asia and all my refs from these places were contacted. Thankfully they all checked out and I got in.

 

Also, they can easily tell if you’ve done these things to resume pad by your essay. They’re looking to see what you learned from your experiences, not just that you’ve done them.

[Guest kellyl20]

(This message was left blank)

[yspeuten]

I personally think that the article was poor. I saw poor reasoning combined with poor reporting.

 

The reporter starts off by saying how "amazing students" were unable to make it into med school after one or two attempts. They have great grades, and have some volunteer work. Never is it mentioned that interviews account for 50% of your application at most schools. Then she goes on to say that the applicant has only one month to reapply after being rejected, so she will have very little to add to the application. I hope everyone realizes how that doesn't make any sense, since the last application was finished at least 9 months previous to the time she was rejected, so she has an entire YEARS worth of things to add to the application. And as a student that worked my ass of to get into a canadian medical school after three attempts, it SHOULD be difficult for students who went overseas for their MD to get a residency position in Canada, because those positions should be for canadian students that worked damn hard to get into a canadian school. Why should we have to compete with those that decided getting into a Canadian school was too much work, so they decided to just pay the money to go overseas where it's easier to get in? When the bar is set high, should we not strive to reach that height rather than try to find someplace where the bar can be brought down to us?

 

And as for Vera Frinton's comments, I was a little baffled. How can you subjectively determine who is "resume padding" and who is demonstrating "Leadership, caring work of all kinds, genuineness that is demonstrated through long-term commitments?" The guy that started a club and made himself president was deemed to be resume padding, so it was a worthless addition to his application. But what if he genuinely cared about his club? And regardless, he went through the effort to actually start the club, which I believe to be worth something in itself.

 

And her remarks about Africa really bothered me, because I went to Africa to volunteer for one month myself. I went because I genuinely wanted to help in whatever way I could because I was lucky enough to have a year off from school and I wanted to do something worthwhile. I've had a part time or full time job every day of my life since I was fifteen years old, and have worked very hard to get the money I have. I am not rich, but I have been fortunate in my upbringing in that my family has provided me with a roof over my head and food on the table. And as a result of these things, I was lucky to have enough money to go to Africa. I fully understand there are people to help all over the world, and I am not asking that my efforts be considered more impressive than the person that volunteered on the downtown eastside of Vancouver. But I do not think that my efforts should be regarded as "resume padding" or that I did it to "make my resume look sexy." I cannot express how offended I was at the suggestion that I would have spent over a month of my time in Africa, which was a life altering experience, to make my resume look sexy.

 

I think UBC needs to re-evaluate their admissions process. They ask the same questions each year at interviews, which I find to be ridiculous. Anyone can come up with a great answer to "define integrity" if they've had three months to plan it. And the fact that people that come from "affluent families" apparently cannot do anything genuine with their time is ridiculous. I think that if someone has the money to go to Africa for three months and chooses to do so, it's impressive in itself. They could have just as easily chosen to spend that money on clothes or their car, but instead they chose to do something meaningful with their time and money. They should be commended, not penalized.

 

After learning more about UBC's admissions process, I am happy to say that I am in Queen's medicine, and not UBC.

[ssc427]

I agree that the UBC admissions process is goofy. I hated the entire process. However Dr Frinton has at least done some research to investigate the 'best' way to admit candidates.

 

See:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16643711&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16262815&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16199355&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum

 

Personally I prefer the UBC selection method over the Queens strict cutoff system. And the admissions process does not reflect the program in any way. If you are lucky enough to be accepted to more than one program the admissions process should have nothing to do with your choice of school.

 

Also, I think it is fairly easy to distinguish resume padders over genuinely good people.

[Jazz]

I would add that the admission process has gotten a lot more transparent and objective since the expansion and Dr. Frinton became dean.

 

The kids on here are probably too young to remember the days when there were only 128 spots and 300 interviews granted. We had two one-on-one interviews anytime from January to April. The interviews took place where the interviewers worked, so some students ended up waiting for hours if there MD interviewer gets called away. There were no structure to the interviews. It can lasts from 20 minutes to 1 1/2 hr depending on your interviewer's mood. With no preset questions and no panel, it was extremely subjective and applicants would have huge variation in their two scores and be rejected on that basis.

 

Now we have as objective as possible panel interviews, same qustions across the board, a structured interview weekend and even med students to soothe your nerves. Screening for resume padding can no doubt be subjective, but I don't believe overseas volunteering is punished, it just wouldn't be looked upon as more favourable than local work. Unfortuantely, the cost of tution have skewed the demographics of medical school classes towards students from higher income families anyways, but that's for another thread.

 

The article greatly inflated the difficulty of getting into UBC. It mentioned the rejected applicant with the 89% average, but failed to mention that the average of ACCEPTED applicants are much lower than that. Perhaps there was a problem with the interview as the above poster mentioned. Also, the stat of 1800 applicants for 224 spots is grossly exaggerated. 800 of those applications are for the 10 out-of-province spots. The number of in-province spots are still going up, perhaps to 280 spots if the Okanagan campus opens. We have or will become the easiest school to gain admission to. It is my opinion that almost every solid applicant in BC can proceed to the interview stage. I apologize if this offends anyone. But the prospective applicants on these forums should know that you don't have to win a gold medal, have all A's and save the whale to get in.

[Destiny Gundam]

For last year's cycle, if you're in-province, you have 50% to get an interview. At the interview stage, you have 40% to get in. That's 20% overall chance. To me those odds are pretty good.

 

According to the 2009 class survey, 40% of the students get in with their first try.

 

As I posted in another thread, I think the reason for "outstanding" applicants not being accepted is either 1. they failed to pick up the "soft skills" med schools look for, things that cannot be assessed on paper, such as communication skills OR 2. they failed to convince the Adcoms that they DO possess these skills in the interview ie. they didn't successfully present themselves to the interview panel.

 

I agree with Jazz. You don't need A+ average and "blow people away" like ECs to get in (unless you're applying as a third year). Lots of people get in with 70 averages. I really think that the interview is the make or break step.

 

I also agree with ssc427, it's very easy for the interview panel/ EC evaluaters to distinguish people who do things to pad their resumes than people who are genuinely interested in making a difference.

 

Just my 2 cents

[Smurfette]

Anyone can come up with a great answer to "define integrity" if they've had three months to plan it.

 

Honey, isn't it obvious that the person who can define integrity best HAS the most integrity? Duh!

 

Haha, I wouldn't get too upset about the article or try to draw too much insight from it. I know lots of people who volunteered overseas and made it into medical school. If you thought it was a great experience, then it doesn't matter. It won't hurt you. (I have not volunteered overseas, btw). Also, the interviewers are not the adcom. They will not be looking for resume padding and will probably not be so cynical about volunteering in Africa. Don't get too paranoid about it.

[yspeuten]

Honey, isn't it obvious that the person who can define integrity best HAS the most integrity? Duh!

 

To be honest, I'd disagree. If you have lots of time to prepare an answer, you can just ask someone else you know who may demonstrate the most integrity you've ever seen, and then just use their answer. Just as an example of how someone could define integrity best while not actually having the most integrity.

 

And I totally understand that many people can volunteer overseas and still get in. That's not what I'm talking about. I am sure that all who were offered admission to UBC were more than worthy, and that a single thing like volunteering overseas will not make or break your application whatsoever. And I also think that interviewers should be able to tell who is genuine and who is supposedly padding their resume. However, I'm saying that the article demonstrated a poor level of insight from UBC admissions, as well as the reporter. And granted, the reporter may have just edited the interview with Dr. Frinton in a poor way, thus reflecting more on the reporter than UBC admissions. However, I am still dismayed by the comments made in the article.

 

And as for judging a med school by its admissions process, it does play a part into my selection of the school. It's basically my first impression of the school. I understand it is unlikely to really reflect what kind of program they have to offer, but the medical school and admissions as a whole should be able to represent themselves in a positive way. Admissions still represents UBC med school to applicants, and as a result I think that they should do their best to have the most rational admissions process possible.

[carebear15]

"You have to factor in living conditions, i.e. people in 3rd world countries are used to living in poorer conditions, we don't have to bring them up to standard to here so long as their necessities are being met."

 

I can't believe somebody on these boards would actually write a ridiculous thought like this. Do you seriously want to be a doctor, or heaven forbid, are you actually in medical school and you believe this? I take it you've never been to a third world country. The people who live there DO NOT have their necessary needs met, they don't even have clean water to drink, proper houses to live in let alone proper health care! I think you need to travel and actually see for yourself how wrong you are.

 

I find it surprising that UBC would discard somebody's application because they ASSUME somebody who volunteers abroad has money. Or they ASSUME that somebody started a club just to President - maybe they started an organization that was needed at a university, like a food drive program perhaps? This is the kind of attitude in medicine that disturbs me. From my personal experience as an interviewer, you really cannot tell on paper what a person is like at all, or if their experiences are genuine or not. You have to meet the person and directly ask them about it to find out. It's just like taking a history, you can assume something by purely looking at the patient and you can be totally wrong!

 

Seriously, I don't even know why I have to explain this.

[leviathan]

I think everyone is going to be worried about whether or not their application activities look sincere or not. I think the most important thing to demonstrate that is both involvement and loyalty. If you only commit a few hours to a program, or only stick with it for a few months, this does not suggest you had genuine intentions for involving yourself in it. I'm not saying it suggests you DIDN'T (perhaps you thought you would enjoy it but found out otherwise and left), but perhaps things like that should be left off your application.

[Smurfette]

LOL, yspeuten, I was being flippant. I suppose it's hard to tell tone in a written post without the non-verbal cues.

[peachy]

I find it surprising that UBC would discard somebody's application because they ASSUME somebody who volunteers abroad has money. Or they ASSUME that somebody started a club just to President - maybe they started an organization that was needed at a university, like a food drive program perhaps? This is the kind of attitude in medicine that disturbs me. From my personal experience as an interviewer, you really cannot tell on paper what a person is like at all, or if their experiences are genuine or not. You have to meet the person and directly ask them about it to find out.

I think it's reasonable to assume that in the original interview the individuals involved with admissions were giving examples to give the flavour of what they do. Some part of the time you can tell based on a paper application that someone was doing something just to pad it. Maybe it's a miniscule portion of the applications, but it must happen occasionally, and it's fair for them to use that instance as an example.

 

I don't know how the UBC application itself works, but presumably there is some kind of essay in which people describe their experiences and give context to what they have done: that's your chance to show them why your overseas volunteering wasn't resume padding. If you can't convince the reader of that, and you come across as a resume-padder ... then you won't get in. But that's no different from what everybody always knows about medical school admissions: it's all about what you learn from the activities, about the leadership you show within them, etc, etc, not about simply having done activity X.