Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

If you were the adcom at a medical school, what would be your rules?


Robin Hood

Recommended Posts

I do..and I work part time during school...

 

I kind of want a longer-term assessment of applicants rather than a CV sketch and a one-day interview. It'll be like cutting people slowly from the boot camp :)

 

I like that idea. As much as people think it's hard to "fake" an MMI, it's not. It'd be a lot harder to fake a personality for a week as opposed to just faking for 8 minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Pre-med bootcamp. Survival of the fittest. Battle Royale.

 

;) I'm not sure. Perhaps this is where an actual "pre-med degree" for four years...of intense labor and rigorous continued testing and psychological assessment where we select 150 of the fittest?

 

When did being a smart, motivated, and reasonable "good" human being stop being enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When did being a smart, motivated, and reasonable "good" human being stop being enough?

 

When the number of seats doesn't match the number of "smart, motivated, and reasonably "good" human beings" available for selection. So we have to look for smarter, more motivated, and better human beings?

 

I'm not sure either. I'm really just throwing a random idea out there to solve our admissions problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When did being a smart, motivated, and reasonable "good" human being stop being enough?

 

in Ontario, roughly what, 10% of applicants get interviews of which I suspect the majority of them are smart, motivate and reasonable good human beings.

 

So how do you differentiate between each one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in Ontario, roughly what, 10% of applicants get interviews of which I suspect the majority of them are smart, motivate and reasonable good human beings.

 

So how do you differentiate between each one?

 

Honestly, there is no fair way but I feel like objective is always better than subjective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would make holding a customer service job at some point mandatory. A lot of people could learn a lot about how to interact with people (especially when they are sometimes angry) from a job like this. It can be very humbling.

 

I had a customer service job before, and I can honestly say I learned nothing from it. Really, in a lot of service jobs that you can get in/straight out of high school, employee expectations are really low; you don't have to perform well to keep your job.

 

The job I had can have a place on my CV now, but I'd say it's a poor indicator of interpersonal skills. Probably the only thing you could reliably infer from my having that job was that I could afford to go to the movies on weekends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a customer service job before, and I can honestly say I learned nothing from it. Really, in a lot of service jobs that you can get in/straight out of high school, employee expectations are really low; you don't have to perform well to keep your job.

 

The job I had can have a place on my CV now, but I'd say it's a poor indicator of interpersonal skills. Probably the only thing you could reliably infer from my having that job was that I could afford to go to the movies on weekends.

 

I never managed to get a customer service job :( I just wanted experience, but it always seemed like you needed experience to get more experience, so I just threw in the towel. But it would be nice to have money for movies, clothes, fun stuff, agreed ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

None of this MMI crap. Med admissions committees are incredulously pretentious in how they select their students, as if they are entering some sort of ordained sainthood. Contrast this to basically every other profession, which does it the old-fashioned time tested way of interviews and marks. Plus, these stupid new techniques do nothing to produce better physicians. They just make admissions committees look like they're earning their keep. Stupid.

 

Not sure I agree. I'm usually against making people jump thru excessive hoops to be a doctor but I don't think the MMI is stupid. It tests how you think on your feet, a wide variety of answers are acceptable, you are judged by more than one person and if you mess up one station, it doesn't tank your whole interview. Overall, I'd say that as far as interviews go, it's good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a few gripes with your suggestions brooksbane

 

Doing premed-style volunteering and other classic premed things would be given negative points.
Do you actually think it's better that applicants to medicine don't have exposure to health care through routes such as volunteering? Not counting it I would consider justifiable, but I would prefer if applicants didn't commit to medicine blind.
Interview: this is to find out the motivation for going into medicine. If its to please the parents, the recommendation would be that one should have their umbilical cord severed before becoming a doctor. Money is fine as long as its tempered in reality. Helping people alone doesn't cut it. Helping people with the responsibilities of a leader however does....etc.

If you have a valid, reliable method of determining applicants' true motivations, I'm sure adcoms would love to hear it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one traditional interview I had, was the school I got waitlisted at. If it were not for the MMI, I probably would have never gotten in anywhere. Scrap the traditional interview!

 

LMAO! +1

 

I hate MMI's but it turns out I'm quite successful at them....but I still hate them. :rolleyes:

 

 

I'd make burn out a prereq. Refer to my post: http://premed101.com/forums/showpost.php?p=634041&postcount=21165

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ironically, the sociopaths would score at the top of the interview if it was scored, i always love how people assume sociopaths are weird, crazy people, if they're educated, come from a good background, sociopaths often dominate positions of government and are often extremely successful, firing 10,000 people at a whim without any thought is just as violent (or should cause as much "guilt" or empathy) as throwing a punch... you would weed out the aspergers people though, who could be very good doctors :P

 

50% MCAT score, 50% GPA, and a pass/fail interview that only weeds out the freaks and sociopaths.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

interestingly enough, lots of pharmacy schools use mmi style interviews now too

 

Not sure I agree. I'm usually against making people jump thru excessive hoops to be a doctor but I don't think the MMI is stupid. It tests how you think on your feet, a wide variety of answers are acceptable, you are judged by more than one person and if you mess up one station, it doesn't tank your whole interview. Overall, I'd say that as far as interviews go, it's good.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ironically, the sociopaths would score at the top of the interview if it was scored, i always love how people assume sociopaths are weird, crazy people, if they're educated, come from a good background, sociopaths often dominate positions of government and are often extremely successful, firing 10,000 people at a whim without any thought is just as violent (or should cause as much "guilt" or empathy) as throwing a punch... you would weed out the aspergers people though, who could be very good doctors :P

 

 

But I doubt people with Asperger can effectively communicate with patients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...