illuminate the man in the cave

[apache]

hey guys, just some quick questions as i'm very unfamiliar with american schools... i just finished my fourth year with a psych degree and applied to u of a and u of c, i'm waitlisted at both at the moment and while pondering future plans in the event that i stay on the wait list, i see myself next year applying to top american schools as well as all over canada

 

my question is whether i should rewrite the mcat and what sort of scores i would need to get into an american top 20 school. my current score is 32T (10-12-10-T). because i wrote my mcat with minimal sciences background i sure i can improve the 10's (i took all advanced bio and phys science courses this year) and am confident i can maintain my humanities scores. what sort of score would i need to be competitive at very good american schools, would 36s plus be a good goal? my gpa is a fairly good 3.76 ish after this year and my extra currics are also very good.

 

any advice would be great, thanks so much .

[token]

Yeah I agree with Alastriss, also you didn't mention if you had any research experience which is very important.

[Jochi1543]

my current score is 32T (10-12-10-T

 

SCORE TWIN!

[apache]

i have 16 months experience in a couple psych labs, no publications, but acknowledgements in a few papers. its good to know that helps! thanks guys, i think if i dont get off uofa's first offer off the waitlist, im going to rewrite it and see if i can nail it, who knows... i was generally approaching under the cold-calling only need one fish philosophy , i also wanna re-write it anyways because i think i might barely miss queens/western interviews if bio is an 11

 

Yeah I agree with Alastriss, also you didn't mention if you had any research experience which is very important.

[Oak]

Not to shake your confidence but as the other person said above, there are so many canadian applicants with 40+ MCAT and 4.0 GPA getting rejected all over the place. I don't know what the stat is, but I'm pretty sure there are less than 40-50 Canadian applicants accepted into the top 20 US schools every year.

[Guest viscous]

i have 16 months experience in a couple psych labs, no publications, but acknowledgements in a few papers. its good to know that helps! thanks guys, i think if i dont get off uofa's first offer off the waitlist, im going to rewrite it and see if i can nail it, who knows... i was generally approaching under the cold-calling only need one fish philosophy , i also wanna re-write it anyways because i think i might barely miss queens/western interviews if bio is an 11

 

i think acknowledgments do not really matter .... I think med schools are coming to the realization that possession of so-called research experience on the resume w/o publications does not really reflect any significant research done. It might mean that the person worked hard, it very well might mean something else unless there are presentations, publications, abstracts to strengthen the importance of "research experience." Or maybe I am just stating my experiences as any average joe you ask, he/she tells you that they have "significant" research experience.

[tree999]

LOL OK OAK if the OP had a 40+ mcat he would be solid for all US schools.

 

But you are right in that the schools are very picky. It will take a lot more than an mcat score in the high 30s to impress those reading your files.

 

16 months research is good, but with no publications you are the "run of the mill" stellar applicant that although is good for medical school, not quite good enough for top 20 schools.

 

Although the lower end top tiers might be very feasable. Included here are Schools like case western, mt. sinai, vanderbilt, etc. Even so, you will want to reconsider rewriting your mcat.

 

Silvermen85 I remember reading your credentials on the Ottawa U forums. Yes I remember where I read them because they made my jaw drop. It serves as an excellent example of the impression you want to make if you are serious about top tiers.

I had two interviews at top 10 research intensive schools, with zero research experience. No publications, no experience. Granted I didn't get in, but still. I also think Token said she didn't have any research experience and was successful.

[token]

Let me just give my 0.02 CDN on this research issue...

 

16 months sounds really impressive to someone like me. Honestly I think the admissions commitees know about the politics that goes on in labs, and realize that unless you complete a masters degree or work full time, the depth of your publication history has as much to do with luck as it does scholarly "aptitude" or committment.

 

The top 20 medical schools are in the top 20 because of their research output. Opportunities for medical students to get involved are everywhere, and they don't want to accept people who won't take advantage. That's why, at least from what I've seen, it's enough to have attempted to get involved with research. Participation is enough, basically.

 

I spent a lot of time in interviews justifying my desire to contribute to academic medicine. Obviously I was more successful at convincing some admissions commitees than others. My only successful interviews were when I was able to emphasize the applicability of my non-science academic background in furthering the field of medicine. If you can't convince them that you want to be involved in research (basic science, clinical, public health, whatever), you're not getting into a top 20 school. But that's not neccessarily determined by the impressiveness of your CV.