Thoughts post-interview?

[Eudaimonia]

7 hours ago, MedP111 said:

This makes sense, except for the case of US university graduates in the IP pool, whose MCAT score must be taken into account even if it harms them. I believe there are quite a few such applicants (myself included), as I've met many on my interview day alone. So an applicant with just a 4.0 could actually be ranked higher than one with a 4.0 and a 527 mandatory MCAT.

Oh I forgot about mandatory MCATs! Still I feel like each applicant's GPA is ranked, and MCAT is ranked, before combining for a final prereq rank. ie MCAT/GPA are compared to the respective MCAT/GPA across applicants but never compared against one another.

In any case believe that the system will judge us fairly and in a way that reflects our achievements!

[no-name]

Are there any med students out there who can help and share their gpa pre-req? Did some of you get in with average pre-req gpa? I know that would help me

[la marzocco]

27 minutes ago, no-name said:

Are there any med students out there who can help and share their gpa pre-req? Did some of you get in with average pre-req gpa? I know that would help me

If you download the re-applicant session slides (below), they do give some stats on the basic sciences pre-req GPA. 

On 9/22/2017 at 0:21 PM, McGillMedAmbassadors said:

They are working on the audio which is currently not available.

Please find attached the slides.

Cheers!

Re-Applicant Session_slides only.pdf

"Average Basic Science GPA: 3.77 (66% of applicants had this or better)" - slide 14. Maybe I am just stuck on the language, but I think the slide is referring to the entering 2017 class stats so I would imagine the 3.77 is referring to the matriculants not to applicants.

[Readyforthis2018]

On 2/20/2018 at 5:34 PM, MedP111 said:

Just a reminder for everyone to not discuss specifics of stations, as per the NDA.

Bombed 2-3 as well, I think I did okay on the rest, nothing exceptional. It was very well organized and low-stress once it got started, although I still don't understand how people actually have fun with these things haha it wasn't easy! Has anyone in recent years (since they increased the number of interviewees) gotten in while feeling like they did pretty average? I don't think I did too poorly, but I definitely didn't feel like a rockstar coming out.

And now to play the waiting game... Best of luck to all, especially those of you interviewing later this week!

 

On 2/21/2018 at 5:02 PM, MedP111 said:

I guess technically you can't really know how they're evaluating you and what impression you're conveying in those 7 minutes, but I personally feel like "bombing" is when you just don't get anywhere in a station. No resolution of any kind, the insight you offered was rather limited, etc. In these stations I just feel like I did the bare minimum and there's no way other people wouldn't have done at least this much. 

Hi MedP111, thanks for sharing your perspective. I found your definition of 'bombing' interesting, which is why I have quoted both your posts above. The ones you described as 'bombed' sound just below average but not what I would personally consider as 'bombed' which in my opinion would be not doing anything (freezing, not understanding the situation, not doing the task at all, doing something 'wrong', 'failing' the station in a sense). But I do understand where you are coming from  

As for my own experience, I feel it was similar to MedP111's first comment. I felt that in 2-3 stations, I could have/should have done a lot more (though again, one never knows what is being evaluated so it's difficult to self assess). The rest of the stations went okay IMO - still not sure what to make of them... Some that felt great right after the interview now seem average, while others that I thought I did poorly in now seem were pretty okay. 

Spoke to several people who did get in (med students) and others who did not (re-applicants), and received mixed responses re: their immediate post-interview thoughts in previous years. Some med students said they did not feel that the interview went well, but did get an offer of admission (so the interview did go well!). Some re-applicants said they felt their interviews went quite well and were surprised that they did not get in. 

In summary, it's really hard to know at this point. I've recently started reading the posts and find it helpful to see that many of us are in the same situation. Good luck!!! 4 more weeks to go  Please feel free to share more post-interview thoughts!

[Eudaimonia]

I think our mentality is that if we did not do above average, it is ultimately bombing the interview 

Sigh a month is not long but could not come sooner! 

[youtalkintome?]

I am very interested to know exactly how they calculate the 20% for pre-req GPA. Does anyone have a solid answer for that?

 

[MedP111]

54 minutes ago, Readyforthis2018 said:

 

Hi MedP111, thanks for sharing your perspective. I found your definition of 'bombing' interesting, which is why I have quoted both your posts above. The ones you described as 'bombed' sound just below average but not what I would personally consider as 'bombed' which in my opinion would be not doing anything (freezing, not understanding the situation, not doing the task at all, doing something 'wrong', 'failing' the station in a sense). But I do understand where you are coming from  

As for my own experience, I feel it was similar to MedP111's first comment. I felt that in 2-3 stations, I could have/should have done a lot more (though again, one never knows what is being evaluated so it's difficult to self assess). The rest of the stations went okay IMO - still not sure what to make of them... Some that felt great right after the interview now seem average, while others that I thought I did poorly in now seem were pretty okay. 

Spoke to several people who did get in (med students) and others who did not (re-applicants), and received mixed responses re: their immediate post-interview thoughts in previous years. Some med students said they did not feel that the interview went well, but did get an offer of admission (so the interview did go well!). Some re-applicants said they felt their interviews went quite well and were surprised that they did not get in. 

In summary, it's really hard to know at this point. I've recently started reading the posts and find it helpful to see that many of us are in the same situation. Good luck!!! 4 more weeks to go  Please feel free to share more post-interview thoughts!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, you make good points!

I should specify my remarks by saying that, in some cases, I believe people think they did poorly in a station mostly because they're being too nervous and start overthinking everything, from the way you worded a sentence to small actions that are unlikely to change their overall impression of you. In these cases, what often happens is that their feelings about the station fluctuate over time. I think this is a very good sign, as it is an indication that you did NOT bomb the station, but rather are being overly nervous, which is perfectly natural. Just remember that no one gives a perfect performance and covers everything!

On the other hand, there are people (like me) who think they did poorly in a station because they truly think that they missed the major point of the station. It's not just that there are extra little things that I wish I had done, it's that these things are what I believe would address the core purpose of the scenario, and without which I mostly just wasted the 7 minutes (kinda like sharpening your pencils for 7 minutes without ever getting to drawing). In other words, I feel like I really missed the point. As time passes, I only become more convinced that I truly bombed the stations in question, not just performed below average.

What stresses me out even more is that the only people whom I've met and who told me that they've gotten in despite feeling like they made a couple of serious mistakes are people who applied years ago; back when you only needed to be in the top 50% or so to gain admission. In recent years, the game has become much, much more difficult, as you now need to be in the top 30% or so post-interview to get in. So I know people always say "Hey you never know, people in the the past have done it!", but that never helps me much because the current process is very much different :/ Would love to be shown wrong on this though haha!

[MedP111]

21 minutes ago, youtalkintome? said:

I am very interested to know exactly how they calculate the 20% for pre-req GPA. Does anyone have a solid answer for that?

 

You can read about all the speculation in the past couple of pages haha, but there's nothing beyond that. I've pestered McGill for an answer on this in the past as it affects me a lot, but it's not something they're willing to provide more details for.

[Eudaimonia]

@MedP111 I'm still having difficulty assessing what the purpose of some stations were as I reflect on my experience. I don't feel like any station had any clear direction to warrant a single major purpose. So I don't wish for you to continue thinking you bombed it! (although it's possible that your insights are right and it is me who is not grasping the points of the situations) 

[SunAndMoon]

2 hours ago, Eudaimonia said:

I think our mentality is that if we did not do above average, it is ultimately bombing the interview 

Sigh a month is not long but could not come sooner! 

It's not the right way of looking at it as you are not certain of what they are assessing. Even the opposite (thinking you killed a particular station) may be wrong, as you may feel like you came to a resolution without assessing or probing for an important issue that would have opened a whole other situation. It's really just best not to overthink about the stations.

 

1 hour ago, youtalkintome? said:

I am very interested to know exactly how they calculate the 20% for pre-req GPA. Does anyone have a solid answer for that?

 

The faculty has never said anything precise or specific about that unfortunately...

[MedP111]

12 minutes ago, Eudaimonia said:

@MedP111 I'm still having difficulty assessing what the purpose of some stations were as I reflect on my experience. I don't feel like any station had any clear direction to warrant a single major purpose. So I don't wish for you to continue thinking you bombed it! (although it's possible that your insights are right and it is me who is not grasping the points of the situations) 

Thank you for the encouragement

I realize I'm probably overly pessimistic right now, as the nerves are admittedly really getting to me. I hope I didn't discourage anyone with my negativity, but if I did, please ignore my unwise ramblings and listen to the calmer souls around here  You guys are all most likely right in that there's not too much of a point in overthinking the interview at this point. We'll just have to wait and see. Best of luck and see you all in next month's thread!

[Eudaimonia]

7 minutes ago, SunAndMoon said:

It's not the right way of looking at it as you are not certain of what they are assessing. Even the opposite (thinking you killed a particular station) may be wrong, as you may feel like you came to a resolution without assessing or probing for an important issue that would have opened a whole other situation. It's really just best not to overthink about the stations.

I wish the stations were longer! I always felt like there could be so much more to be explored and not enough time to address it all. Poor time management on my part perhaps 

[SunAndMoon]

1 minute ago, Eudaimonia said:

I wish the stations were longer! I always felt like there could be so much more to be explored and not enough time to address it all. Poor time management on my part perhaps 

DW i had plenty of stations i did not get to resolve either. Ideally you'd be great with the actor and resolve the situation (if the script even allows for that), but time is limited and imo it is important not to rush into things and take your time with the actor

[SMT]

3 hours ago, Readyforthis2018 said:

Spoke to several people who did get in (med students) and others who did not (re-applicants), and received mixed responses re: their immediate post-interview thoughts in previous years. Some med students said they did not feel that the interview went well, but did get an offer of admission (so the interview did go well!). Some re-applicants said they felt their interviews went quite well and were surprised that they did not get in. 

Am I the only one who, reading again again and again that some who felt confident on the interviews were rejected while others less confident were admitted, starts to feel like being confident about the interviews is akin to a bad omen?

[MDmaybe99]

.

[SunAndMoon]

^ You should delete that post @guest2017

edit: by this i do not mean to say or imply that you revealed any type of information inappropriately - just that, in my opinion, it is better to be safe than sorry  

[MEDusa]

@guest2017 Ishh that's a little bit too much info about the content of the interview. I suggest you remove it. 

[MedP111]

40 minutes ago, SMT said:

Am I the only one who, reading again again and again that some who felt confident on the interviews were rejected while others less confident were admitted, starts to feel like being confident about the interviews is akin to a bad omen?

This is said again and again to give a bit of hope to the many people who are feeling a little discouraged right now. Those of you who already feel confident don't need this kind of treatment  Good job on the interview!

[youtalkintome?]

1 hour ago, SunAndMoon said:

DW i had plenty of stations i did not get to resolve either. Ideally you'd be great with the actor and resolve the situation (if the script even allows for that), but time is limited and imo it is important not to rush into things and take your time with the actor

4

I feel the same way. Didn't resolve most of my acting situations, but definitely felt like I was in control of the outcome and exhibited proper response. In one case, even though I didn't get to the conclusion, to the credit of the actor, I clearly saw in his face that the situation was getting better. I was truly impressed with that one actor. 

There was definitely not enough time or the actors were too persistent most of the times. I feel like how you conduct yourself, whether you show empathy and are in general sensitive (not talk over them, be open, etc) would have gotten you a good portion of the mark?

[MDmaybe99]

44 minutes ago, SunAndMoon said:

^ You should delete that post @guest2017

edit: by this i do not mean to say or imply that you revealed any type of information inappropriately - just that, in my opinion, it is better to be safe than sorry  

sorry ! I didnt think I had posted about information that wasn't already public knowledge! thank you for the heads up!

[franmelan]

50 minutes ago, youtalkintome? said:

I feel the same way. Didn't resolve most of my acting situations, but definitely felt like I was in control of the outcome and exhibited proper response. In one case, even though I didn't get to the conclusion, to the credit of the actor, I clearly saw in his face that the situation was getting better. I was truly impressed with that one actor. 

There was definitely not enough time or the actors were too persistent most of the times. I feel like how you conduct yourself, whether you show empathy and are in general sensitive (not talk over them, be open, etc) would have gotten you a good portion of the mark?

I agree that the most important thing they're assessing is your communication. While it is important to investigate a situation, I doubt there really were any ways to truly "conclude"  most of the stations.

[Readyforthis2018]

9 hours ago, MedP111 said:

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, you make good points!

I should specify my remarks by saying that, in some cases, I believe people think they did poorly in a station mostly because they're being too nervous and start overthinking everything, from the way you worded a sentence to small actions that are unlikely to change their overall impression of you. In these cases, what often happens is that their feelings about the station fluctuate over time. I think this is a very good sign, as it is an indication that you did NOT bomb the station, but rather are being overly nervous, which is perfectly natural. Just remember that no one gives a perfect performance and covers everything!

On the other hand, there are people (like me) who think they did poorly in a station because they truly think that they missed the major point of the station. It's not just that there are extra little things that I wish I had done, it's that these things are what I believe would address the core purpose of the scenario, and without which I mostly just wasted the 7 minutes (kinda like sharpening your pencils for 7 minutes without ever getting to drawing). In other words, I feel like I really missed the point. As time passes, I only become more convinced that I truly bombed the stations in question, not just performed below average.

What stresses me out even more is that the only people whom I've met and who told me that they've gotten in despite feeling like they made a couple of serious mistakes are people who applied years ago; back when you only needed to be in the top 50% or so to gain admission. In recent years, the game has become much, much more difficult, as you now need to be in the top 30% or so post-interview to get in. So I know people always say "Hey you never know, people in the the past have done it!", but that never helps me much because the current process is very much different :/ Would love to be shown wrong on this though haha!

Thanks for clarifying! As some others have mentioned, it's still hard to know what the 'major point' of each station is  Even if you think that you did miss the point that was being evaluated, maybe you didn't... unfortunately it's something we would not know (unless of course one ends up becoming an evaluator in the future ). Try to stay positive (easier said than done, I know!) I am fairly certain that almost every interviewee must have felt this way for some part of the interview (and trust me, it's not just the nerves thing). 

If it makes you feel any better, the people I mentioned in my previous post (med students, re-applicants) have all gone through the interview process in the last 1-2 years. I am pretty sure the process was quite similar to this year  

Counting down the days! Good luck to all interviewees!

[youtalkintome?]

So if I get rejected post-interview, how do you guys suggest I go about improving my application? (aspects other than GPA) The only thing that I actually want to do is just take more courses and keep learning. And pursue the hobbies that I've been pursuing. 

If my application was good enough to get an interview, how dramatically can I improve it so to ensure I get invited again?

[Eudaimonia]

10 minutes ago, youtalkintome? said:

So if I get rejected post-interview, how do you guys suggest I go about improving my application? (aspects other than GPA) The only thing that I actually want to do is just take more courses and keep learning. And pursue the hobbies that I've been pursuing. 

If my application was good enough to get an interview, how dramatically can I improve it so to ensure I get invited again?

Are you IP? If you get rejected they will give you your ranks which include a pre-interview rank so you get an idea how likely you are to get invited again. If your GPA is already good (especially prereqs) and you ranked in a comfortable position, I would continue doing what you've been doing and focus on improving on the interview component (how, I'm not sure yet) for your next invite. 

But this is IF you get rejected! As you see, my advice doesn't recommend you prepare anything in advance, so try not to worry about it until the time comes 

[youtalkintome?]

48 minutes ago, Eudaimonia said:

Are you IP? If you get rejected they will give you your ranks which include a pre-interview rank so you get an idea how likely you are to get invited again. If your GPA is already good (especially prereqs) and you ranked in a comfortable position, I would continue doing what you've been doing and focus on improving on the interview component (how, I'm not sure yet) for your next invite. 

But this is IF you get rejected! As you see, my advice doesn't recommend you prepare anything in advance, so try not to worry about it until the time comes 

Thank you for your reply. I am IP. I personally really enjoyed the interview and I'm happy with the way things went (given the circumstances) now just keeping my fingers crossed.

Do they tell you at any point if they've accepted the recommended courses (say even after invites come out) or no?