If you were the admissions officer

[Apixaban85]

What would your breakdown be of academic/non-academic/interview scores? (eg. 60%-20%-20% for UofT)

[NewfieMike]

academic/non-academic/interview: 30/10/60

[Leon]

academic/non-academic/interview: 30/10/60

 

Perfect.

 

10char

[mattg]

50%-0%-50%

 

and pre-interview, i would say 40% GPA (best 3 years, full course load), 30% MCAT, 30% personal essay, no sketch/questions

[cnb88]

20%-20%-60%. Plus a 1% bonus to be randomly given out to whomever I choose. Or perhaps the 1% would be a sort of "bonus question" on the application...

[Starling]

20-20-60

 

And for the MCAT, I'd only count BS and VR.

[thebouque]

50%-0%-50%

 

and pre-interview, i would say 40% GPA (best 3 years, full course load), 30% MCAT, 30% personal essay, no sketch/questions

 

Funny, that's pretty much how it works in Quebec except for the MCAT (50%-0-50%).

Pre-interview, the GPA would then be worth 70% and the personal essay 30% (not all schools in qc require an essay though). They take into account the GPA of all your years though, not only the best 3.

 

Peace

[NewfieMike]

Funny, that's pretty much how it works in Quebec except for the MCAT (50%-0-50%).

Pre-interview, the GPA would then be worth 70% and the personal essay 30% (not all schools in qc require an essay though). They take into account the GPA of all your years though, not only the best 3.

 

Peace

 

my friend will become a doctor in a french medical university in canada in 3 years, and THERE WAS NO INTERVIEW.

 

That, in my opinion, is frightening.

[Alex2]

my friend will become a doctor in a french medical university in canada in 3 years, and THERE WAS NO INTERVIEW.

 

That, in my opinion, is frightening.

 

There was only 1 school with no interview (but they have a psychometrial test) and they have now a MMI.

[trymeover]

65%/0%/35%

[takashi]

I would go 40% GPA/20%MCAT/40% non-academics pre-interview. Then that would be reduced to half and the other half is interview score.

[The Law]

Here's one possibility:

 

Early emphasis on marks to pick good applicants, with a still strong emphasis on non-academics/personal qualities:

Pre-Interview: 30 GPA (w/weighting formula to recognize not everyone is perfect off the bat, and that some courses are inherently more difficult than others), 30 MCAT, 40 non-academics

 

 

Now candidates selected must all be strong academically since early emphasis was on academics:

Post-Interview: 80 Interview, 20 Non-academics (non-academic score as judged earlier)

 

 

And if not my way, then I vote with mikeyo.

[thebouque]

my friend will become a doctor in a french medical university in canada in 3 years, and THERE WAS NO INTERVIEW.

 

That, in my opinion, is frightening.

 

I know there's 1 school that had no interview for most applicants (only a psychometric test as someone posted earlier). It might seem frightening, but keep in mind that in France, there's no interview for medicine (acceptance is based on the results of an exam ''concours'') and they have one of the best health care system in the world. Also it's highly unlikely that your friend got into that specific school 1 year ago (since he has 3 years to go) since all the french schools have a common MMI now (it started last year).

 

Peace

[richuurd]

I would go 65%GPA/35%MCAT.

 

Then employ the use of something like a med-resident-aptitude bootcamp for 2-3 days. It will place potential applicants in a controlled, high-stress environment and evaluators will scrutinize applicants on how well they would respond to various situations. It will be like an intense MMI with many more scenarios.

 

I'm mostly kidding, but it'd be interesting to see something like this. I'd imagine it to be fun for both applicants and evaluators, on top of being highly informative about the nature of the applicants.

[NewfieMike]

I know there's 1 school that had no interview for most applicants (only a psychometric test as someone posted earlier). It might seem frightening, but keep in mind that in France, there's no interview for medicine (acceptance is based on the results of an exam ''concours'') and they have one of the best health care system in the world. Also it's highly unlikely that your friend got into that specific school 1 year ago (since he has 3 years to go) since all the french schools have a common MMI now (it started last year).

 

Peace

 

1.) France has a good health care system because of the government, not the physicians.

 

2.) Oh, you're right. My really good friend DIDN'T start medical school in September without doing an interview... it was clown college. Sorry for the mistake...

[trymeover]

1.) France has a good health care system because of the government, not the physicians.

 

2.) Oh, you're right. My really good friend DIDN'T start medical school in September without doing an interview... it was clown college. Sorry for the mistake...

 

Be more careful next time Newfie. Clown College does not equal medical school... wow.

[thebouque]

1.) France has a good health care system because of the government, not the physicians.

 

2.) Oh, you're right. My really good friend DIDN'T start medical school in September without doing an interview... it was clown college. Sorry for the mistake...

 

I guess it was because Sherbrooke required MMI for this september.

[thebouque]

Also, I'm sure a physician in France is just as good as a physician in Canada even though he did not take an interview to get into med school.

Don't reply with sarcasm (your clown thing) when you're obviously wrong please.

[switcheroo]

Obvious: maybe the friend deferred an acceptance for a year, and both of you are right? Just throwing it out there.

[thebouque]

Obvious: maybe the friend deferred an acceptance for a year, and both of you are right? Just throwing it out there.

 

You know, you're very right. I'm sorry Newfie Mike I shouldn't ve said obviously wrong. Anyway that wasn't my point. My point is that we're used to Drs who got into medical school by taking an interview among other things but that it's not the only way to go. We might be scared by things that are different, but sometimes we gotta think outside the box and realize that other methods work as well.

 

Peace

[jp1284]

30% GPA

30% MCAT (11,11,11-Q) cutoff and there should be substantial points deducted for multiple attempts.

30% ECs + Essay

10% References

 

Interview - Cutoff only (acceptable or unacceptable based on MMI). For example if the school has 100 seats, interview only 150ish and take the top 100 that had an acceptable (past the cutoff) interview.

 

Why?

1) I really don't agree that he 30min interview should outweigh the year of work for GPA/MCAT/ECs etc. Also, I am not convinced they can get a real sense of who you are in less than an hour.

2) MCAT should be weighed heavily because it is a test that everyone has to do and is fair. GPA depends too much on the program/school you went to.

[aye25]

55% GPA (best 3 years, full-time, more pre-reqs = programs become less relevant if everybody more or less is forced to take the same classes; its too easy to have 1 or 2 really good years, it takes real effort to have 3+ strong years; and there is no excuse for 2+ years of poor performance as a result of slacking/circumstances,etc., hence only 1 year of gpa forgiveness).

 

20% MCAT (with additional weight on VR and BS). Too many schools, like Toronto, Ottawa, overlook the importance of a standarized test, whereas others give it too much weight, especially given the modern climate of MCAT shotgunning).

 

25% interview (to weed out sociopaths and to make sure your not a complete idiot, and that you can communicate verbally and on paper - hence on-site essay component. I think many schools give the interview far too much weight, really, how can you learn any great deal about a person you have just met for only 30-45 minutes; a GPA in contrast is something you have to work at consistently, fervently, for 4 long years. Clearly, that should say more about a person, than could be gleaned from a 45 minute conversation.) (IMO, your non-academic experiences/abilities are only worth as much as the person they have made you today, which will come through in the interview.)

[NewfieMike]

Thebouque is right. It's impossible that your friend started med school in Quebec last september without doing an interview.

 

I never said my friend is going to medical school in Quebec

[Doctor_Strangelove]

I never said my friend is going to medical school in Quebec

 

Are you sure you're not the one who started clown school Newfie?

 

In any case, what people say about emphasis on academics pre-interview is in my opinion the best option.

[NewfieMike]

You know, you're very right. I'm sorry Newfie Mike I shouldn't ve said obviously wrong. Anyway that wasn't my point. My point is that we're used to Drs who got into medical school by taking an interview among other things but that it's not the only way to go. We might be scared by things that are different, but sometimes we gotta think outside the box and realize that other methods work as well.

 

Peace

 

dude, that makes no sense. If medical acceptance was based 100% on academics + a psychometric test (which is not too challenging to fake) it is very possible that a complete socially inadequate malpractice-lawsuit-waiting-to-happen could get good enough grades to get into medical school.

 

Interviews are necessary for ANY JOB