Regrets breakdown doesn't add up?

[crazycello]

I applied and interviewed at the University of Alberta this past admission cycle. I recently received a regrets letter (not waitlisted) with a breakdown of my score on application components compared to the average score of accepted applicants. The average accepted applicants score and my scores were as follows:

 

Avg Score GPA (30): 3.89 Activities (25): 7.00 MCAT (15): 11.21 WS (5): Q Interview (25):18.45

 

My Score GPA (30): 3.95 Activities (25): 8.00 MCAT (15): 11.67 WS (5): P Interview (25):18.30

 

I have trouble seeing where my application really suffered. Is it possible that I was 'red-flagged' during my interview? Is there something about the weighting of the different application components that I don't understand? As I currently understand, my cGPA, personal activities, and MCAT score were all above that of the average accepted applicant with a total weighting in my application of 70%, my writing sample is below average but only weighted at 5%, and my interview score seems more or less on par with those accepted.

 

Before I got this letter, I figured that I must of bombed the interview and had weak ECs but that doesn't even seem to be the case. Any ideas about what I don't understand?

[TheBoss]

Whoa yeah, that makes absolutely no sense. I'd def call them

 

I could see the writing sample making at most a 1 point deficit compared to average, so with the interview probably at most a 1.15 deficit, which should have been more than compensated for by your activites scores and MCAT, not to mention your GPA which would compensate way way more.

[Fresh fry]

At first I thought that it could have been your verbal, but I know people in class with "N's" and they wouldn't have given you an interview if that was the case. Plus I couldn't find any history of a minimum cut off for a verbal score (everything else has to be above 7). I'm going to assume you didn't get the your-scores/averages mixed up which used to be common when they put them in brackets. The only conclusion's that I can come to, being that you had above average scores in every category was 1) You were indeed red-flagged 2) You were either considered an OOP or 3rd year candidate which have their own pools and averages that are not reported (the averages given are for everyone accepted an not broken down for applicant pool). Sorry bro.

[crazycello]

I'm a (was I guess) 4th year IP applicant. I interviewed in 3rd year too, and they send out average accepted statistics for whichever pool you get put in.

 

I'm glad that it seems pretty funky to other people too. I'll be calling admissions on Tuesday. I really hope that they tell me what I said if I had got red flagged, then I could at least have a good story about what not to say in medical interviews.

[David_007]

They wont specify if you are red-flagged... but there might be a good chance that it might be the case.

[TheBoss]

Do waitlisters (eventually) find out their scores if they don't move off the list?

 

Yes, sometime in August I think it was

[10wattbulb]

I applied and interviewed at the University of Alberta this past admission cycle. I recently received a regrets letter (not waitlisted) with a breakdown of my score on application components compared to the average score of accepted applicants. The average accepted applicants score and my scores were as follows:

 

Avg Score GPA (30): 3.89 Activities (25): 7.00 MCAT (15): 11.21 WS (5): Q Interview (25):18.45

 

My Score GPA (30): 3.95 Activities (25): 8.00 MCAT (15): 11.67 WS (5): P Interview (25):18.30

 

I have trouble seeing where my application really suffered. Is it possible that I was 'red-flagged' during my interview? Is there something about the weighting of the different application components that I don't understand? As I currently understand, my cGPA, personal activities, and MCAT score were all above that of the average accepted applicant with a total weighting in my application of 70%, my writing sample is below average but only weighted at 5%, and my interview score seems more or less on par with those accepted.

 

Before I got this letter, I figured that I must of bombed the interview and had weak ECs but that doesn't even seem to be the case. Any ideas about what I don't understand?

 

Hmm... Very strange indeed because your scores kind of look better than the avg score of accepted applicants.

[crazycello]

Could be a verifier, but I'd figure if that was the case they just wouldn't include that activity in scoring the application. It's not like I was faking activities though.

 

Time is moving sooo slowly. I just want this holiday weekend to end so that I can phone admissions.

[David_007]

I am not sure if being above the 'average' would guarantee you a seat... My GPA was on the low side... but MCAT, EC's and Interview scores were top notch... but definitely give them a call about being red-flagged

[Telric]

Really doubt it's a missing verifier - last year they contacted me when they couldn't get a hold of my verifier, and they asked for a better way to contact them. Wasn't an issue.

 

I think they would make every effort to ensure something like that didn't cost someone their chance. I would hazard a guess and say that a red flag is much much more likely.

[Dr.MP]

did u find out what happened?

[DontCallMePreMed]

I think the UofA has rules about scores that may not be obvious to students.

For example if you have a 4.0GPA, 45T, 25/25 on extracurriculars and have an interview score less than 2 standard deviations below the average...although you overall score may be much higher than accepted individuals, you'll be rejected on the basis of that interview. I read somewhere it was two standard deviations.

 

UofA seems to have a weird way of displaying their results so who knows what a 18.30 vs 18.45 could mean in terms of actual difference.

 

Also remember the reference letters are pass/fail this year. You might have got a fail on them which wouldnt show on the information they sent you.

 

I've also heard of a girl getting flagged at the UofA for professionalism for wearing a skirt too short to the interview.

When you get flagged, they have a committee that reviews the case the interviewer presents to see if its actually serious. I dont know if they would actually tell you if you've been flagged.

 

So those are the most likely options

[james12698]

Also remember the reference letters are pass/fail this year. You might have got a fail on them which wouldnt show on the information they sent you.

 

Is it possible to get an interview after you fail the letters?

[Fox]

Is it possible to get an interview after you fail the letters?

 

No it is not possible to be invited with a fail on LOR. During the interview, a slide during the presentation prior to the MMI, showed that you had to pass the reference letter pass/fail to get the invite.

 

Makes sense. All it takes is a read through the letters. Would be a waste of resources if the person given an interview had no chance of acceptance based on all information given in the application.

[AsYouWish]

I thought they opened the letters after sending out interview invites. I remember the slide you're talking about, and I'm pretty sure I remember someone saying "so now that you're all here for the interviews, it means we're opening all your letters of reference." I specifically remember being surprised by the fact that they were not opened before the interviews.

[Tacrolimus]

I thought they opened the letters after sending out interview invites. I remember the slide you're talking about, and I'm pretty sure I remember someone saying "so now that you're all here for the interviews, it means we're opening all your letters of reference." I specifically remember being surprised by the fact that they were not opened before the interviews.

 

Yeah, that's what I was told by my friend who has a friend in U of A med. I was surprised by that too, but it makes sense. They probably don't want to read through 2600+ reference letters.

[Fox]

Strange. The slide I was referring to was a flow chart. The point after the reference letter was interview. I vaguely remember him (not sure if it was the dean) saying that after the reference letters were checked, interviews were given.

 

I could be wrong. We probably had interviews on different time slots.

 

Edit: They don't have to read all the reference letters. Just read, let's say some random arbitrary number, 420ish (with the estimate that 20 will be fail) with hope of giving 400 interviews. This is just speculation.

[DontCallMePreMed]

I don't understand why you would invite someone to an interview only to reget them soley on the reference letters though. I understand it makes for less work to read through letters because the numbers are lower but then you get people like the OP confused as to how they didn't get in.

 

The old 2% system for references may have been better for applicants in general. I know they probably only need need one of the two letter to be good to pass though... So I guess you get two chances to miss.

Quite unfortunate if this is the case for the OP.

[crazycello]

I just made the long drive to Edmonton and back to meet with admissions.

 

Mystery solved: I got red flagged

 

They weren't able to give me a specific instance, but kept stressing that it was important to be professional from the moment you walk in the hospital on interview day, so I'm guessing that I got red-flagged for unprofessional behavior outside of the interview. I'm pretty positive I didn't set any alarms off during the MMI, but I definitely swore a few times before the interview when I was talking with my group and the 1st year meds. It's kind of annoying, because I figured that I wouldn't need to watch what I said when I wasn't in the interview, but it's totally my fault. I guess the biggest takeaway is that you can be red flagged at anytime during the interview day and that it's really important to remain professional through the whole experience. Don't say anything to your group/1st year meds that you wouldn't say to one of the interviewers, and don't act in a manner that you wouldn't act in around patients. Now I get to reminisce on the fact that I could've been in medical school if I hadn't been an idiot before the interview while I work on next years applications.

[zunik]

I just made the long drive to Edmonton and back to meet with admissions.

 

Mystery solved: I got red flagged

 

They weren't able to give me a specific instance, but kept stressing that it was important to be professional from the moment you walk in the hospital on interview day, so I'm guessing that I got red-flagged for unprofessional behavior outside of the interview. I'm pretty positive I didn't set any alarms off during the MMI, but I definitely swore a few times before the interview when I was talking with my group and the 1st year meds. It's kind of annoying, because I figured that I wouldn't need to watch what I said when I wasn't in the interview, but it's totally my fault. I guess the biggest takeaway is that you can be red flagged at anytime during the interview day and that it's really important to remain professional through the whole experience. Don't say anything to your group/1st year meds that you wouldn't say to one of the interviewers, and don't act in a manner that you wouldn't act in around patients. Now I get to reminisce on the fact that I could've been in medical school if I hadn't been an idiot before the interview while I work on next years applications.

 

Oh wow! That's definitely a bummer. So do you consider applying next time to U of A? was it one of the 1st year students who snitched or did someone from Adcom heard you?

[Lactic Folly]

Wow, that's too bad. An expensive lesson, but now you know you have what it takes and won't repeat it in the future when you may have more to lose. Thanks for coming back to share what you learned with everyone.

[james12698]

..................................

[crazycello]

Well it's definitely my fault. I wouldn't blame anybody for 'snitching'. They're just doing what they were told to do. It sucks that I'm on the receiving end of it, but I understand why these rules are in place.

 

Admissions actually spent some time explaining that they take these things pretty seriously and that there's a review process involved, so I'd imagine it's not just me rubbing someone the wrong way. They also mentioned that several people commented on it. I don't know exactly what I said or did, but the bottom line is that I messed up and need to be more aware about how I act in settings like that.

 

I'll definitely apply to U of A again because I think it's a great school.

 

e - I got a good question in my private messages about whether the red-flag is permanently associated with my name if I were to apply again. Admissions was very clear on telling me that I would have a totally blank slate if I applied in future cycles and that the red-flag would not be retained.

[David_007]

I just made the long drive to Edmonton and back to meet with admissions.

 

Mystery solved: I got red flagged

 

They weren't able to give me a specific instance, but kept stressing that it was important to be professional from the moment you walk in the hospital on interview day, so I'm guessing that I got red-flagged for unprofessional behavior outside of the interview. I'm pretty positive I didn't set any alarms off during the MMI, but I definitely swore a few times before the interview when I was talking with my group and the 1st year meds. It's kind of annoying, because I figured that I wouldn't need to watch what I said when I wasn't in the interview, but it's totally my fault. I guess the biggest takeaway is that you can be red flagged at anytime during the interview day and that it's really important to remain professional through the whole experience. Don't say anything to your group/1st year meds that you wouldn't say to one of the interviewers, and don't act in a manner that you wouldn't act in around patients. Now I get to reminisce on the fact that I could've been in medical school if I hadn't been an idiot before the interview while I work on next years applications.

 

Sorry to hear that... you never know whos listening... gotta be careful at all times...

[james12698]

Yes I agree with you now after the OP said several people commented on it. It also is a professional atmosphere so professionalism is expected.

 

I initially thought it was just some first year med student that didn't like the way the OP looks/walks/behaves and tattled on him.