<p>I mean, besides grades and MCAT scores (or is that pretty much all that matters?)...ex. for undergrad admissions, it was extracurriculars, community services, awards, etc.</p>
<p>... well, there are your essays, your extracurricular activities, and your interview.</p>
<p>Flip EC's with essays and it's in order of most important to least important.</p>
<p>I disagree with you. Interview, in my opinion, is make or break. Stuff that doesn't come through in the essays, extracurricular activities, or LORs can come through in the interview, for better or worse.</p>
<p>If all your other stuff is average, then the interview is make or break. Your true personality comes through in an interview (or at least it should), whereas the essays and ECs and MCAT scores are typical or most pre-med students.</p>
<p>YEah, but to even get the interview in the first place, you'll need all of those other things ;P</p>
<p>gpa/mcat/EC's are the most important factors. Interview/personal statement/Letters of rec are all important as well, but they wont make up for weak gpa/mcat/EC's</p>
<p>I agree that GPA, MCAT score, and EC's are the basics. They'll get you an interview invite. To actually get an acceptance, though, numbers and resume probably aren't enough - you'll need to have good essays and a good interview.</p>
<p>hmm...is it the type of EC that sets applicants apart, or the extent of their involvement? do research activities count as ECs?</p>
<p>extent and yes</p>
<p>1.) Weights vary from school to school. Some schools will tell you clearly that interviews don't matter unless you're really obviously a sociopath. Some tell you clearly that once interview invitations are extended, nothing else matters. I applied to two schools at these extremes, one at each. (Unfortunately, I did very well at the unimportant interview and very poorly at the important one.)</p>
<p>2.) EC's absolutely ought to include clinical experience.</p>
<p>The answer depends where along the application process someone gets rejected versus final acceptance.</p>
<p>Grades and MCATs are used to make the first cut unless you are an URM or have extenuating circumstances. Occasionally, students with modest overall GPA who have made major improvement from their freshman to junior years will be considered. </p>
<p>Secondary applications will then be offered to the next group. Among those applications, letters from the premed committee are very important and then ECs and essays. Also some demonstration of interest or exploration of medicine is helpful (lack of it is a signficant negative). The students who are invited for interviews will be selected from this group. </p>
<p>Among students intereviewed, the interview is the paramount determinant. In fact, the academic and test qualifications of accepted or non-accepted interviewed students are indistinguishable at most medical schools. Everyone in this select pool is qualified and potentially desirable by the school.<br>
During the final selection process, the interview and the premed letter (and less so for other references) are major determinants. The question is not whether the student will be a good doctor but whether he/she will be a good doctor here?</p>
<p>Well, I would contend that there's more school-to-school variation than this.</p>
<p>The vast majority of private schools now extend secondaries to every single applicant, for example. And since the PS and EC's are included in the primary, that must be part of the "first cut" as well, even for public schools.</p>
<p>Letters of recommendation, legacy, and secondary essays are part of the secondary process.</p>
<p>Interviews vary in importance from school to school. Many -- most? -- will tell students exactly what you've just said. Some, however, will be very clear that interviews are only for removing "psychos" from the pool; that is, so long as your interview is not catastrophic, it won't matter in the slightest.</p>
<p>In the last step, intereviews are important unless your grades, MCATs, and/or ECs are exceptional. Screening out psychos is important. However, students who click with their interviewer will have a strong advocate during the final selection session by the committee. Usually, the two members (usual number) who interviewed the candidate will have the most influence in the final decision. A very bad interview (hard to do-but some examples I have experienced are calling the intereviewer by their first name, putting feet up on the desk, wearing unprofessional attire or having poor hygiene, and being constantly distracted rather focusing on the encounter) will hurt; a neutral one may not matter and the other factors we have discussed above will be more important in the final decision; however, a strong interview can help put someone over the top as almost all interviewees fill the profile of students the school is looking for. Unfortunately, there is randomness to whom you interview with and you have no choice in the matter. If you realize early on they you are not clicking with your intereviewer, at least play defense, and try to be polite, courteous, and informative. Interviewers will respect someone even if they do not click with them. I know most students do not have much experience in this area; however, the med school interview process also is good practice for future interviews that will always be part of your future professional life.</p>
<p>The particular school I had in mind ("Unless you're a psycho, it really won't matter") actually does not permit anybody who interviewed the student to sit for the final committee meeting. They write up their report, submit it to the committee, and recuse themselves for the deliberation.</p>
<p>Again, I realize I'm discussing the exception rather than the rule, where certainly interviews matter a great deal. But I just wanted to point out that there's some variation.</p>