<p>While this is not untrue, I think you underestimate the number of people who take time off after college. My premed adviser says, after meeting with premed advisers at other Ivy League schools, typically 30-50% of applicants from the Ivy League schools are alumni applicants. Medical schools love interesting candidates. It’s tough to become interesting as a 21 year old because much of your life has been occupied by school and whatever EC’s you can do in those 10-15 hours of free time per week. You have nothing on the non-trads who have extensive research experience, advanced degrees, military backgrounds, Peace Corps, AmeriCorps, prestigious fellowships, work experience (extensive work experience, not 10-week internships), responsibility (actually caring for other human beings like children), etc.</p>
<p>Goldshadow, when did I say that I did not know about admissions ? :)</p>
<p>Bluedevilmike, 24 is the mean. Half of all matriculating students are 23 and younger. That does not make sure suggestion any more valid, does it?</p>
<p>Norcal, the other half of the matriculating students may fall then in the non traditional pool that you mentioned. Furthermore, if your 30-50% are correct, then 50-70% apply straight from college without any extra years. That’s most (which was my point)</p>
<p>The applicant in question has no life outside of medicine and sciences. He most have sounded like a pretty boring individual if you ask me. The point is, do not underestimate the power of being “interesting”. And you do not need to be an old bag to do that.</p>
<p>Which is why I said that your assertion was not untrue. However, your post makes it seem as if the only people applying late were those who are stragglers or unmotivated. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t see why someone “should” be matriculating straight out of college. The great thing about medicine is that there are many paths to it (hence, the large proportion of non-traditional students). Some students defer to complete Rhodes or Fulbright Fellowships. Some students complete a Peace Corps stint or a TFA stint. Some applicants didn’t decide on medicine until years after college. Hence, I disagree with your point that age is not an important factor. It is. Many schools (such as UCSF) explicitly declare their preference for non-trads and just about any school will appreciate any post-college experience you get. There is no negative bias towards people who take time off for any reason. In fact, there is a very positive bias.</p>
<p>Enriching one’s life experiences is a personal choice. The duration of that pathway is also personal and for some people it never ends. But what we are talking about here is medical schools admissions (graduate school, which follows undergraduate…) </p>
<p>I believe, the fact that half of students matriculating are 21, 22 and 23 years old, indicates that age is not as important as you seem to portray (half! ). It is in fact no different than the rest of someone’s application. </p>
<p>Come on. Now you’re being ridiculous. Here are the equivalents to your argument:</p>
<p>1.) Half the matriculants are below 23. Therefore, since age doesn’t matter, a 6 year old should be fine.
2.) Half the matriculants have MCAT scores below 30. Therefore, the MCAT doesn’t matter.</p>
<p>You’re using a large number of 23 and 22 year olds to argue that 20 year old will be fine.</p>
<p>Statistics sure do shoot their mouths off a lot…especially when you only have half the statistic! Do we know what the SD for that mean age? It’s obviously heavily positively skewed, so it IS likely that a 19 or 20 year old applying and being accepted is very rare, but how many people of that age group actually apply? It’s the percentage in each age group that would matter for your argument not the total number accepted.</p>
<p>WHAT!!! NO. MEAN is not the same as AVERAGE. I would refer you to your basic STATISTICS course and I do not mean to be insulting by that. In fact, I am shocked about your statement. If you have no idea about what you are talking about, then there is no point in trying to engage in an argument with you. BTW, that’s a basic rule in debate.</p>
<p>Uh, I think you are the one that needs to refer to your basic statistics course, and we should actually be shocked by YOUR statements because you clearly don’t have any idea what you are talking about. Purely by definition, the mean IS the average.</p>
<p>*Definitions of mean on the Web:</p>
<p>average: approximating the statistical norm or average or expected value *</p>
<p>Look, it’s perfectly understandable and forgivable to say something that’s wrong. We’ve all done it. But what is not is beyond the pale is to insist that somebody else is wrong when in fact you are the one that is wrong, and to not even bother to check your facts.</p>
<p>mean = average fo sho
but it would be interesting to know the median because (and I really doubt this, but I guess it’s worth considering) there could be a bunch of random 40+ year olds throwing off the mean.</p>
<p>Also, many students, and I go to school in California so see it a lot here, turn 21 during the beginning of their 4th year (Sept - Dec). If they are not planning on taking a year off, they would be applying the previous spring/summer as 20 year-olds. Someone in a previous post said it was pretty rare for a 20 year-old to get accepted, but this seems like it happens a lot. Is it actually rarer or harder to get accepted if you’re like this??</p>
<p>and how the heck do you quote previous posts?!?!? I’m sure there’s some FAQ section on CC that tells you how to do it, but for some reason I can’t figure it out lol</p>
<p>I don’t know why people are surprised that the mean age is 24 (which means you took two years off). Anyone who’s interviewed at medical school know that a large percentage of applicants have taken at least 1 year off.</p>
<p>also if its the mean age, ( not that i want to get involved in the stats debate) a small number of really large ages can skew the mean while if it was the median, that wouldnt happen..</p>
<p>but like norcalguy said, 24 isnt really that surprising…especially considering that some people switch to the pre-med track later in college, therefore take longer to graduate…and reapplicants/people taking a year off…</p>
<p>question: is it really that big of a deal that when i apply i will be 20, since i will have just turned 21 when i matriculate? (not that i can do much about it, but just wondering…)</p>
<p>Is it a big deal? Hard to quantify exactly. But I know that it’s something that’s working against you for the reasons as already discussed. You’ll be in a better position a year or two later.</p>
<p>I won’t get into the discussion on whether or not I think it’s a good idea for you to just assume that you’ll get in on your first try…</p>
<p>haha…i tell myself i can do it ( on the first try) in attempt to boost my lacking self-esteem and not for lack of being realistic…</p>
<p>im thinking about doing the 5-year masters program at my university…but i have time to decide…i think im going to apply to masters programs and med school at the same time, because at least i wont waste any time if i dont get in on the first try…and even if i finish a masters i will only be 23-24ish..so its not like its going to be that late…but since its so much school, it would be nice to get in on the first try…</p>