Best PreMed Programs

Pre-Med & Medical School Pre-Med Topics
341

<p>So the question is, Should the Committee LOR be Honest or be **Honest by passive ommittance.<a href="As%20in%20speaking%20the%20truth%20but%20leaving%20out%20some%20unwitting%20detail">/B</a></p>

<p>That is a question to be determined by who is reading the LOR letters and what LOR are meant to be for? Can a Committmee LOR letter benefit you more if Adcoms knows how the medical system work at this particular school and knows that the information revealed is not bias toward polishing applicant's strengths and willing to expose the best of an applicant and its potential downfall and weaknesses?</p>

<p>The intention of an LOR is to give insight. Whether an LOR is valueable with mere positive strengths alone remains to be seen. We can all say that a full bodied honest LOR encompassings both strenghts and weaknesses is worth more than ten thousand good praises. I believe that given the intense amount of LORs read by adcoms and just the mere magnititude of Good praises and Good light things said about an applicant. Negatives can never be a bad thing. Given the Adcoms side of things, this could prove invaluable.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Hopkins is harming its students in order to bolster its reputation by a negligible margin, which is usury by and definition.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is questionable. You must note that this honesty undermining students is not a overriding prevalent thing at Hopkins. For the most part, the majority of students who apply benefit tremendously from the LOR committee letter. Those students who are borderline or just simply put "suck" too much for a LOR Committee letter constitute just a small minortiy of the population</p>

<p>In effect, the Committee LOR letter may arguably harm a small portion of the unqualified premed population, but the reputation of the LOR Committee letter itself and the benefits reaped by the remaining majority of the students at large cannot be undersaid or cannot be refuted.</p>

<p>Since when did you get the idea that Hopkins harms the bigger premed population at large? I for one believe (though you may disagree), that the type of honesty practiced at Hopkins differentiates itself in the eyes of the admission comittmee. Such an important limelight can prove invalueable to adcoms who review the plethora of students coming in from Hopkins. </p>

<p>
[quote]

Now, I have heard the utilitarian argument that Hopkins is benefiting most of its students over the long run by presenting a stronger applicant pool to the adcoms, and so increasing the respect they have for the hopkins program. However, such an argument makes little sense considering that the students at hopkins are every bit as capable as those from the other big-time premed 'factory' schools (by which I mean Harvard, Duke, Penn, Stanford, and WashU), and none of these schools implements a screen.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Interesting. I wonder what Hopkin's acceptance rate into med school is like if the screen was not implemented... It would probably be just as high given the sort of premeds that I see around me. Just ridiculous the fervor and intensity at which all work. There are dumb ones of course, but I can't say that for the majority of premeds here.</p>

342

<p>
[quote]
additionally, it is worth noting that hopkins does not do markedly better in the admissions game than the schools I had previously mentioned, and the caliber of the student bodies at all of the aforementioned places is roughly equal. This evidence directly undercuts the value schools place on the 'special' hopkins letter, or implies that if they do highly value the letter, than something else about the average hopkins student's application must be sorely lacking to even things out.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>With the different types of acceptance reports universities have in place, its truly impractical to attempt to measure how much the 'special' Hopkins LOR letter can impact on admissions. Given Hopkins screens and some schools do infact report alumni rates of acceptances in addition to undergrad, the formulation of report is just too widespread and too broad to able to discern the impact of Hopkins LOR has on admissions. Hopkins LOR cannot does not promise you free admissions, but as types of LORs go, this 10-12pg packet is as comprehensive and overarching detailed as it goes. I apologize for my grammar and all. lol</p>

343

<p>did you even read my post, or did you just quote it to make it look like you did?</p>

<p>if you're argument is that hopkins' acceptance rate would be the same without the screen (a claim for which you have precisely zero evidence), then what is the point of the screen in the first place? just to be mean to a few students so the committee can get its jollies?</p>

<p>I never said that the policy harmed the population at large, which you apparently misread and then proceeded to make use of the utilitarian argument that I specifically refuted in my earlier post. When one student is making a large investment by going to a particular university, they have the right to be treated appropriately by that school and not be used to bring greater prestige to the school overall by having their goals railroaded by a negative letter.</p>

<p>Again, you have not, nor I suspect are able to, provided any evidence of the benefit that this super-honest committee letter provides, given the clear fact that hopkins students do not perform markedly better than those at peer institutions that do not screen or have these letters. The only data that could support your argument would be something showing that hopkins students are in some other way inferior applicants to those at peer schools, and that this great letter compensates for that shortcoming.</p>

344

<p>Does anyone know the GPA/MCAT cutoff for JHU's screening process? Also is this number different for URM pre-med applicants? [I ask because I'll be attending JHU this fall and am an URM(Black) and want to know what I at least need to score if I want to really be helped]</p>

345

<p>I never said Hopkins LOR gave advantage one way or another in admissions.</p>

<p>There should be no reason why your spill facts on comparison between two populations of students at XYZ universities just based on the erroneous inconsistent incredible information such as acceptance rates between universities given the different circumstances in which they report them.</p>

<p>There is no way to report how much advantage Hopkins LOR reports give in admissions, and I have not supported such an idea really ever in my posts.</p>

<p>Secondly, I never argued that Hopkins acceptance rate would be the same if the screen was not implemented.</p>

<p>It would be interesting to know what the acceptance rate would be like. like I said, it would probably lower if not the same, but not that low. Just based on my experience with the premed pool here. I just don't know for sure, </p>

<p>Ok, we both have an acute misunderstandment going on between us now. Maybe its because I read your posts and interpreted it the wrong way or you just thought I was asserting something that I wasn't. Can we call it quits now? I don't want to argue this. Its kinda ridiculous and I don't want to give future premeds looking into Hopkins a bad idea of the rumored practice that going on here. It isn't a big deal with the seniors that I've talked to on campus. Then again, I can't say I've talked to all the senior premeds at Hopkins, if it were such a calamtiy or huge issue, I wouldn't have attended.</p>

346

<p>Sharif08:</p>

<p>It depends on the list of schools you come up with. I believe PhillySAS or BlueDevilMike can provide better insight here.</p>

347

<p>Firstly, </p>

<p>Your Post 322: “Hopkin's Committee Recommendation is essentially a yes or no on whether you get into a medical school or not since medical school admissions circle give heavy weight on this 10-12 page paper detailing every single activity, involvement, summarizing all faculty and professor recommendation, reports, and summarizing why you are eligible or qualified to become a med student.”</p>

<p>Secondly,</p>

<p>Your Post 341: “It would probably be just as high given the sort of premeds that I see around me. Just ridiculous the fervor and intensity at which all work.”</p>

<p>Thirdly, I fail in particular to see how the reporting of alumni acceptance rates has much bearing on this discussion. I believe the career services department at most schools keeps tabs on and provides the numbers for both to current students.</p>

348

<p>^^ wait, the cutoff for a good letter depends on the list of schools you provide the committee? you can't possibly mean that</p>

349

<p>I have no idea. I'm going to stop talking and watch the game on TV.</p>

<p>Seriously, The Hopkins Committee and LOR is what it is, Honesty by all measures is how they play, don't come to Hopkins hoping you can squiggle your way to any easy acceptances because by any measures, this undergraduate screen process is just as rigorous as the real admissions process itself. You really won't survive the real admissions process itself if you can't even get pass the first part of the screen. lol come on.</p>

<p>PS. Acceptance rate into medical school, there are instances where colleges and universities skew their data by activity leaving out certain information and including other information such as post graduate alumni acceptance rates are included in some of the acceptance statistics. Statistics themselves vary interms of which population you are looking at. I believe its a while jump to say because a school screens and have the same acceptance rate on par with an Ivy means that quality of student are in someways lacking or a 'special' LOR doesn't give weight. Acceptance rate alone simply cannot provide enough evidence alone to support such a drastic conclusion. You really do have to look at more factors and more information to make that claim.</p>

350

<p>mzpennylane
[quote]
Does anyone here have any idea if NYU or University of Miami have a good pre-med program?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>departed is wrong.</p>

<p>The University of Miami has a very well established pre-med program that dates back to at least 30 years. The pre-med advising is top notch and very involved and active in writing rec letters, etc. They have honors programs and the like. Also, as a courtesy to their students, the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine grants interviews to ALL the UM premed applicants.</p>

351

<p>
[quote]
ts interesting you left out this quite important part of the article right before your quote.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And you left out some quite important parts of the article yourself. </p>

<p>You quote this:
*"If you put it in perspective--that they're trying to help you," Palaganas said, "[the advising system] will work better for you." *</p>

<p>But you don't include this next paragraph:</p>

<p>* Yet not all students are able to put a positive spin on their experience like Palaganas. Recent premed graduate Brett Gutterman felt that Fishbein and Savage discourage students who may actually have a chance of being admitted to medical school *</p>

<p>And that's precisely the point: some students don't like the process. </p>

<p>
[quote]
We can all agree that Hopkins Premed committee can be a tremendous tool to have. Right?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sure, for those students who get a strong recommendation from the committee. What about those who don't? </p>

<p>
[quote]
And finally, to address the core of the question.</p>

<p>What we all pull from this is that the JHU PreMed Committee LOR is very honest, which is why admissions counselors in the medical world put heavy weight on them since they are very honest.</p>

<p>Sometimes, Honesty can work against some people. If Hopkins wants to keeps its integrity and have its recommendation letter hold weight, it has to speak the truth.</p>

<p>What differentiates a committee letter that only speaks the positives versus another that speaks only the truth, As an admissions counselor, which recommendation letter would you hold greater weight to?</p>

<p>The only that speaks of the positives and negatives. Thats why medical schools look forward to reading the Hopkins committee letter.</p>

<p>Because its Honest.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I believe I dealt with this issue. If the committee doesn't want to recommend a particular person, fine. Then just don't say anything at all. I said it before, and I'll say it again, if you can't say something good about somebody, don't say anything at all. It's simply rude to go around talking bad about other people. Give that student a form letter that makes no recommendation one way or another. Lots of schools (i.e. Berkeley) do that. </p>

<p>
[quote]
In effect, the Committee LOR letter may arguably harm a small portion of the unqualified premed population, but the reputation of the LOR Committee letter itself and the benefits reaped by the remaining majority of the students at large cannot be undersaid or cannot be refuted.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It is precisely that harm to a (possibly small) portion of the population that is the issue. In essence, what the JHU committee is doing is playing reverse Robin Hood: deliberately hurting the weak in order to help the strong. </p>

<p>What I am saying is the possibility exists to still help the strong while not hurting the weak (or, at least, minimizing the hurt). For example, you can tell each weak candidate that if he wants a JHU recommendation, fine, but it will probably be a bad/mediocre one. Or, he can take a neutral form letter. If that student really feels that a mediocre/bad JHU recommendation is still useful, he can use it. But if not, he can submit the form letter. But it's up to him, not the committee. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I never said Hopkins LOR gave advantage one way or another in admissions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh, wait a minute, if the Hopkins LOR does not provide any advantage to admissions one way or another, then why even have the process at all?</p>

352

<p>
[quote]
Seriously, The Hopkins Committee and LOR is what it is, Honesty by all measures is how they play, don't come to Hopkins hoping you can squiggle your way to any easy acceptances because by any measures, this undergraduate screen process is just as rigorous as the real admissions process itself. You really won't survive the real admissions process itself if you can't even get pass the first part of the screen. lol come on.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And here is the crux of the paradox. If what you are saying is really true, and the real admissions process is just as tough as the JHU committee screening process, then why even have the latter at all? After all, if somebody is really not worthy of getting into med school, then presumably the med school adcoms will realize this and simply reject that candidate. What is the JHU committee afraid of? Why not just leave well enough alone?</p>

<p>The JHU committee can, with brutal honesty, inform each premed what his honest chances of gaining admission to med school are. For example, a weak candidate can be told that he has a less than 1% chance of getting in somewhere and that it is their opinion that applying would be a waste of time and money. But if that candidate decides to apply anyway, the committee should simply step aside and allow it to happen. After all, these students are grown adults here and they should be allowed to spend their time and money however way they wish. Give that candidate a neutral form letter that makes no recommendation one way or another. Again, if that person really is a poor candidate, then the med school adcoms are going to reject him, so what is the committee afraid of?</p>

353

<p>I've thought a lot about it, and I think the "neutral form letter" is even still stingier than necessary. Every candidate is going to have a couple of bright spots on his application, and a couple of look-worse-than-they-are things. The committee's role is to defend the candidate within the bounds of the evidence.</p>

<p>A good public defender doesn't argue that every defendant is innocent; sometimes that's just not possible. But his role is to find something positive enough to say to try to advocate for his client in some way or another.</p>

354

<p>
[quote]
I've thought a lot about it, and I think the "neutral form letter" is even still stingier than necessary.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I think of it in the context of some schools who provide the same neutral form letter to every premed. Berkeley immediately comes to mind; at Berkeley, if nothing else, at least you're not going to be hurt by a negative committee letter, because Berkeley doesn't even have a committee at all. I believe that several Ivies (i.e. notably Harvard) also don't have committees. </p>

<p>But in any case, all of this just brings us back to the basic notion that this sort of committee process is surely simply going to deter some students from choosing to go to JHU at all. JHU admittees are strong students and therefore are good enough to get into other strong schools. Why go to JHU and take the risk of ending up with a bad rec letter if you can go to some other strong school and not have to take that risk?</p>

355

<p>Right, but my understanding of schools which provide a neutral form letter usually do so out of time constraints, not some effort to "preserve honesty." You can always find SOMETHING positive to say honestly, if you're a small private school and have the time for it.</p>

356

<p>
[quote]
You can always find SOMETHING positive to say honestly, if you're a small private school and have the time for it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Exactly. Just because your letter is positive, it doesn't mean it can't carry weight. My college provides everyone with a one hour interview with the committee letter writer and also requires everyone to submit an AMCAS-style application (w/ your activities and personal statement). The point is so that the committee can then write a positive but PERSONAL letter tailored to the strengths of each applicant.</p>

357

<p>my school also does something virtually identical to ncg's description</p>

358

<p>Yup, that's how Duke does it.</p>

359

<p>Davidson also does it that way; here is a statement my dad made in a thread two years ago about advantages of going to one type of college over another; it may have some relavance today as well:</p>

<p>Sony,</p>

<p>This is Hubbell's dad(the physician) responding-I peruse this sight using hubbell's password at times(he is the davidson student).</p>

<p>The point I was trying to make in the other thread was that I went to medical school by one route and decided to advise my son to take a different route. My route-I went to a third tier state university in Pennsylvania-a college that has 15,000 undergraduates-that sends less than 10 students to medical school a year-and in order to get accepted from that school, you had to be a summa cum laude graduate and do extremely well on the MCAT(no easy feat from that school as those who go there can not afford prep courses and are poorly advised as to how to 'game' the application process). When I got to medical school, I met lots of students, mostly from LAC's, who got in with much lower GPA's etc... Tiny Franklin and Marshall college had more graduates in my class then my entire college sent to all medical schools. I was greatly impressed with this, and the mentoring they got from their pre-med program, the advice, the preparation for the MCAT etc.. All of this for me was like pulling teeth from my college. So, when my son was interested in going premed, I told him that a LAC with a great premed record is better than what I went through-even though I could give him advice that was not available to me(I am now a medical school professor after a long career in military medicine-I had military scholarships to pay my was through both college and medical school). He chose Davidson-where the premed advisor is presently the President of the national association of college premedical advisors, where they know exactly what it takes to get accepted to medical school-they tell you what it is, the help you acheive it and they work with you until you accomplish your goal-at a >90% acceptance rate for those students who go throught the 'premed committee". That is not to say that 90% of all students to arrive at Davidson who once thought that they were going to medical school get accepted, it is 90% of thiose who stick it out and folow the advice. Obviously, if you fail organic chemistry and get a D in calculus-you will probably be taken aside and told to rethink your career options a bit.</p>

<p>OK, I am getting a little off track, but the point was that I am living proof that you can get into medical school from just about anywhere-especially if you are singleminded, work extremely hard etc.., but, if you want some room for error, need to a little push now and then, could use some helpful advice and have people help arrange research during the summer, get clinical experiences and 'check off all the boxes' that medical school adcoms like to see checked off, there is a to to be said for a place that looks out for you in that regard-very large schools just can not give you that 'boutique' attention. Some people do not need boutique attention-the question is-do you?</p>

<p>I wish you well on your journey.</p>

360

<p>I agree with Hubbel's dad. I am also a prof of surgery and have been on med school admissions committees.
The school premed committee is helpful to get all of your boxes checked. </p>

<p>However, I and colleagues do not like students with "premed" majors. I would rather have a humanities or language or art major. They will make a better doc.</p>