Post Interview Chances??

[Jamie]

I know that western takes around 140 students and interviews around 450....so assuming that some people get off the waitlist the chances of admission post interview is around 40%??

 

Also, I read in the forum that the weighing formula for Western is:

 

Interview 50%

MCAT 25% (just the VR and WS)

GPA 25% (Highest year)

 

I was just wondering where these stats come from and if there is a link for it. Thanks

[mcpherv]

I know that western takes around 140 students and interviews around 450....so assuming that some people get off the waitlist the chances of admission post interview is around 40%??

 

Also, I read in the forum that the weighing formula for Western is:

 

Interview 50%

MCAT 25% (just the VR and WS)

GPA 25% (Highest year)

 

I was just wondering where these stats come from and if there is a link for it. Thanks

 

Class size is going to be 147, and the 2008 admissions book indicates that there have been 64 and 60 people that have declined their spots in the past 2 years that are documented in the book (for 2005 and 2006 entry, respectively). So roughly 200 individuals accepted.

 

However, this doesn't count the individuals that are removed from the waitlist because they are accepted elsewhere. So, if for instance, 25 people that were initially within the 150-200 range on Western's overall rankings were to be accepted elsewhere and decline their spot on the waitlist, then the waitlist moves these extra spots. Probably a fair bit of this occurs, and I'd think that it occurs at a high enough rate to justify having a relatively long waitlist.

 

Overall (and this is strictly an estimate), I'd think that the school gets down to at least to their 250th selection on the initial rank list. This would give a

250/450*100% = 55.6% chance of acceptance. It's also possible that this is an underestimate of the amount of wailist movement that goes on.

[supafield]

I know that western takes around 140 students and interviews around 450....so assuming that some people get off the waitlist the chances of admission post interview is around 40%??

 

Also, I read in the forum that the weighing formula for Western is:

 

Interview 50%

MCAT 25% (just the VR and WS)

GPA 25% (Highest year)

 

I was just wondering where these stats come from and if there is a link for it. Thanks

 

Interview 50% yes

and although I've read in the odd spot that MCAT is looked at specially all Western says is that your MCAT score is used for 25% I don't know where the people are coming up with VR and WS.... but maybe that's the case.

GPA is 25% but it's only your highest year if you have only one year that meets their requirements and then if you were to get accepted it is conditional on scoring a 3.7 plus that year otherwise it would be your best 2 years of gpa.

[lostintime]

Actually it's your best year regardless of whether you have one or two years above 3.7. Otherwise, that wouldn't be fair to people who have 2 years of 3.7+.

[Dante]

hahaha i think there is no official word on what sections of the MCAT matter and whether the GPA is your top year or top two years.

 

I made a similar argument to yours lostintime about the unfairness of taking top 2 years from those who had it, but only top year from those who were yet to submit their second >3.7 year's worth of marks. In the end, I think these issues are of minor concern since gpa's and mcats don't display the same degree of variability as does interview performance (nor are they given as much weight).

 

It's nice to look at the statistics and tell yourself that since you've got an interview, you're that much more likely to get in, but statistics don't mean much. As has been brought up on these boards before, there are people who receive interviews EVERYWHERE in Ontario, and get in NOWHERE. Now I'm sure that if you speculatively calculated what the probability of that happening was, you'd find it to be quite low, but it still happens.

 

Statistics is nothing, performance is everything. Sprite: Obey your thirst

sorry for that last piece of randomness...

[lostintime]

Actually I e-mailed about the best year thing. So unless things have changed since I e-mailed (around September/Octoberish), I think it should be best year.

 

True, I agree, but I guess we all have curiosity within us and would like to know more about this mysterious process =P

 

And I know that interview weighs more, but if they follow their own scheme, 50% interview, that means marks/MCAT is still another HALF, which isn't such a small factor after all.

 

As for MCAT, I never asked because I figured they wouldn't tell me, but yeah, I heard rumors it's VR/WR.

[rocky222]

hahaha i think there is no official word on what sections of the MCAT matter and whether the GPA is your top year or top two years.

 

Oh there is definitely official word written somewhere. Check the website or the offer for interview, its kicking around somewhere.

 

Post-interview:

 

MCAT = 25% (WS + VR)

GPA = 25% (best year)

Interview = 50%

[Alastriss]

Oh there is definitely official word written somewhere. Check the website or the offer for interview, its kicking around somewhere.

 

Post-interview:

 

MCAT = 25% (WS + VR)

GPA = 25% (best year)

Interview = 50%

 

Does anyone know what the best year average is around or more importantly..how much of an impact does it have?

[supafield]

Wow I had no idea....

Now that I know I would love to think I could use it to my advantage but I don't think I can go and just score higher in verbal now lol....

 

The first time around I had an 11 and a R so here's to hoping I can do that again or better...

 

Just out of curiosity does anyone know where the source of this WS and VR for post interview MCAT consideration comes from?

 

Thanks!

[Jamie]

I've been trying to find something on the Western meds or the OMSAS websites to confirm all this....but haven't found anything. The closest piece of documentation I found was from the medical application cycle 2008 document which says:

 

Requirements for Offer of Admission

An OFFER OF ADMISSION is based on

1) the interview score

2) achieving the minimum MCAT score

3) achieving the minimum GPA in EACH OF TWO undergraduate years in which a minimum of 5 full or equivalent courses (30 credit hours) have been completed.

 

Nothing about percentages or a weighing system. If anyone can find the document that specifies the weighing system, please post the link! Thank you

[daryn]

I think I read somewhere here on the forum that although they do take your GPA/MCAT into account, the differences between applicants are very slim (how they rank you). So it's the interview that is going to make or break it.

[lostintime]

The differences may be slim and everything, but it's still 50% of the application, is it not? And I think it's also possible for applicants to have similar interview scores. Of course, if you do exceptionally well or completely screw up the interview, any good/bad marks won't make a huge impact.

 

But if you're somewhere in b/w, it could be a difference b/w moving up a waitlist spot or having to re-apply next year.

 

Nonetheless, the end conclusion is that we can't do anything about it at this point. So I guess regardless of whether it's true or not, we should think of the interview as the make/break point, because it's the only thing we CAN control/change at this point (to a certain degree).

[inzi]

Regarding the MCAT, I am pretty sure that they only look at WS and VR. When I interviewed at Western last year, they gave us a breakdown of how post-interview selections are made

 

50% interview, 25% GPA, and 25% MCAT (WS/VR)

 

I remember that because this mcat formula doesnt work in my favour with a 10/Q (which was the minimum requirement for an interview last year)

 

I agree with the other posts, no point thinking about this since its not in our control anymore. The interview is the only thing that is.

[rocky222]

Also peruse the accepted/waitlisted/rejected thread from last year and there you will pick up on the pattern that the majority of people offered interviews had a high score on at least one of the two academic requirements.

 

I know from talking with people who do interviews at three schools, the general consensus is that the majority of people invited for interviews are all exceptional, and if it were up to them, they would accept them all. So unless you do something truly extraordinary in your interview (ie. stand out as being really really great or on the other hand really really bad), most people tend to get the same scores from what I hear. For instance, the schools I'm familiar with tend to mark on a 1-10 scale on different criteria (probably not any different from how UWO does it). So think about if you were to mark a medschool candidate on such a scale. Anything below 5/10 would be a fail, and probably reserved for very bad applicants. On the flip side, 10/10 would be reserved for the very best applicants. Therefore, typical applicants would probably score in that 6,7,8,9 range with most probably falling in that 7/8 range. So while the interview is probably the factor showing the most variance among the applicant pool in the final admission equation, I'm assuming that for most of the pool, the scores tend to aggregate around some average value.

 

So with that in mind, if you have barely scraped by with the cutoffs at 10Q + 3.70, then an average interview will not really move you up the rankings all that much considering that people with a perfect score in one of the academic categories are already ahead of you in line and would require a terrible interview to fall behind you.

[Jamie]

I just don't get why the MCAT portion only consist of VR and WS? Why don't they take the MCAT as a whole?

[epigal]

I just don't get why the MCAT portion only consist of VR and WS? Why don't they take the MCAT as a whole?

 

Keep in mind, if you have *just* met the cut-offs in the VR + WS sections you are not scored at 0/25. I think people with higher scores are only at a slight advantage and it is really your interview that makes the difference.....

[Mick]

Class size is going to be 147, and the 2008 admissions book indicates that there have been 64 and 60 people that have declined their spots in the past 2 years that are documented in the book (for 2005 and 2006 entry, respectively). So roughly 200 individuals accepted.

 

However, this doesn't count the individuals that are removed from the waitlist because they are accepted elsewhere. So, if for instance, 25 people that were initially within the 150-200 range on Western's overall rankings were to be accepted elsewhere and decline their spot on the waitlist, then the waitlist moves these extra spots. Probably a fair bit of this occurs, and I'd think that it occurs at a high enough rate to justify having a relatively long waitlist.

 

Overall (and this is strictly an estimate), I'd think that the school gets down to at least to their 250th selection on the initial rank list. This would give a

250/450*100% = 55.6% chance of acceptance. It's also possible that this is an underestimate of the amount of wailist movement that goes on.

 

Can someone please explain this to me? I had thought that being accepted somewhere else is the same as declining an acceptance at Western, as you have chosen not to go to western in favor of somewhere else. Hence would the "declined" section on all these stats not include everyone who was accepted or waitlisted at western but chose to go somewhere else they were accepted? I hope you're right, as this would mean better chances post-interview, but I'm still a bit skeptical. any info would be appreciated

[Alastriss]

Can someone please explain this to me? I had thought that being accepted somewhere else is the same as declining an acceptance at Western, as you have chosen not to go to western in favor of somewhere else. Hence would the "declined" section on all these stats not include everyone who was accepted or waitlisted at western but chose to go somewhere else they were accepted? I hope you're right, as this would mean better chances post-interview, but I'm still a bit skeptical. any info would be appreciated

 

OK here is a good way of looking at it. It took me a while to grasp but lets use this simple model. 20 people were interviewed for a class of 8 at school x and 15 offers are usually sent out.

The interviewees are ranked 1 - 20:

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

...

20

 

Top 8 peeps get the initial acceptance, applicants 9-17 are waitlisted and 18-20 are sent rejections..this is right off the bat.

 

Now because usually 15 offers are sent out, youd think that eventually applicant 15 is the last person to receive an offer (last person off the waitlist), but what if while waiting for applicants 1-8 (who got the initial acceptance) to make a decision, applicant 13 and 14, who were initially on the waitlist at school x get off it because they got in at school y and took that offer. If 15 offers are still going to be sent out at school x, applicant ranked 16 and 17 have a shot now. I hope that clarifies it.

[Alastriss]

Class size is going to be 147, and the 2008 admissions book indicates that there have been 64 and 60 people that have declined their spots in the past 2 years that are documented in the book (for 2005 and 2006 entry, respectively). So roughly 200 individuals accepted.

 

However, this doesn't count the individuals that are removed from the waitlist because they are accepted elsewhere. So, if for instance, 25 people that were initially within the 150-200 range on Western's overall rankings were to be accepted elsewhere and decline their spot on the waitlist, then the waitlist moves these extra spots. Probably a fair bit of this occurs, and I'd think that it occurs at a high enough rate to justify having a relatively long waitlist.

 

Overall (and this is strictly an estimate), I'd think that the school gets down to at least to their 250th selection on the initial rank list. This would give a

250/450*100% = 55.6% chance of acceptance. It's also possible that this is an underestimate of the amount of wailist movement that goes on.

 

 

 

Doesn't this seem a little too high? Queens is i think around 40%ish...but Im sure tehre are so many variables we aren't accounting for

[mcpherv]

Doesn't this seem a little too high? Queens is i think around 40%ish...but Im sure tehre are so many variables we aren't accounting for

 

It doesn't seem too high to me - I think a large number of the individuals with interviews at Western have interviews elsewhere (especially true, I'd imagine, for the individuals that are highly ranked by Western, as both GPA and MCAT are factored into the final ranking). It seems especially probable when you consider that once the waitlist starts moving at all of the schools, people are continually recieving offers from all schools, which means that as the summer progresses, more and more individuals will be removed from the waitlist. I can easily see how this could result in significant waitlist movement by the time July rolls around. This, I would imagine, is probably why the schools keep long waitlists - otherwise, if there is no hope for the majority of the individuals on the waitlist, keeping almost everyone that doesn't get a first round acceptance on the waitlist is just cruel.

[rocky222]

I think it sucks how they don't tell you where on the waitlist you are and just leave you second guessing with high expectations for the duration of the summer. Even if they can't give you an exact numbered position, an indication of high, middle, or low would give you some idea so you can start making future plans with that in mind.

[Athina021]

I've been waitlisted twice at Ottawa (on the French side, though), and their notification letter told me in no uncertain terms that I shouldn't expect to get an offer due to my position on the list (I've since been told the French list doesn't move at all!).

 

At least I wasn't waiting around for two summers! I don't know how it works with other schools but they should give us an idea of where we stand. Contrary to popular thought, most of us do have lives...

[mcpherv]

I think it sucks how they don't tell you where on the waitlist you are and just leave you second guessing with high expectations for the duration of the summer. Even if they can't give you an exact numbered position, an indication of high, middle, or low would give you some idea so you can start making future plans with that in mind.

 

I totally agree - two summers ago, I was waitlisted at Western. I had applied during my 4th year, so I was unsure whether or not I should firm up plans to go to grad school. When I first interviewed for the M.Sc. position I'm currently in, it was early June and I had to inform my potential supervisor of the situation. I was obviously unable to commit, despite being informed that there was another individual that he would be interviewing for the position. Thankfully, the position was still there for me a month and a half later, in mid July, when I finally heard that the class was full.

 

On top of that, Western had unconventional course prerequisites at that point. They required something like 3.0 credits of non-science courses and because of this, I was taking 2 summer courses to meet the prerequisite requirements in the event that I got the call. Thankfully they removed that requirement following that cycle, but it made for a long and expensive summer.

 

Anyways, this all said, Western appears to me to be a great school, and I'd go there in a heartbeat if I get accepted this cycle.

[Alastriss]

I think that even tho the stats say that you have ~ 55% chance of getting an acceptance, taking a lesson from great applicants such as mcpherv and others on this forum should be a lesson that it is not an easy task or one that is to be taken lightly. Even 50% chance isn't so awesome when the competition is tight from applicant to applicant. This is especially true, in my opinion, of schools that select applicants for interviews based on ECs and achievements (Mac, UT)

[Alastriss]

excuse the typos..i wasnt able to edit it for some reason