Monday, July 14, 2008

The applicant creates an application, which is then digested by a committee and reconstructed back into an applicant (whew!)

I decided not to do a summer rotation. Instead I spent a month and a half traveling around Spain, taking some classes, doing touristy-related things, and working on a farm/garden for a week. This was the right choice for me—I needed a break, needed some time to unwind, forget about academics, decompress from thesis, the interview process, etc., etc.

It has been five months since my last MSTP interview, and I am glad the process is over. At this time last year I was thinking about my secondaries but not filling them out, instead concentrating on summer research. I watched as the number of forms- and essays-to-be-completed added up, reaching 15. I waited and waited until I achieved an appropriate headspace, after finishing my summer work, and resumed the application process, which lasted way too long when final decisions were sent out in middle March.

Now that I’m a veterano, experienced in the ways of interview gaffes, I’ll share my opinion regarding the application process. My opinion is pessimistic. My opinion is jaded. Whatever.

The key to the application process is to think like a car salesman, a damned good one, so good that she can write and speak about herself in a way that is seamlessly authentic, an anti-car-salesman, but because the illusion of authenticity is manufacture, in essence, the best applicant is the anti-anti-car-salesman. Enough with the meta-jiberish—I’ll save it for later.

The applicant needs to separate herself from others, create hype about her potential, and promote herself as a worthy INVESTMENT to the medical-scientist community. That being said, absurd stats (MCAT, GPA, # of pubs, etc.) are nice but not necessary because LOR’s, and personal statements and experience are equally important, and not quantitative. With that said, I can think of two rough tiers of assessment in the application process. (Feel free to add more factors that I’m forgetting.)

Tier One: MCAT, grades, LOR’s, personal statement, research experience

Tier Two: number of publications, clinical hours, extracurricular

The application selection process is complex. I have no idea what goes on behind the scenes. I could speculate about formulas to achieving interviews and acceptances, but I won’t. What I will say is, be smart with your words, tie your narrative with your career goals, be the anti-anti-car-salesman. But N.B., the anti-anti-car-salesman (okay, now for an invented acronym: aacs) is not bad. The aacs is genuinely interested in a career as a medical-scientist. The aacs is passionate about research and medicine, and wants to contribute to society. The aacs is confident, has a sense of direction, a career trajectory, and can create links between basic science and translation research. Often the aacs is so good that they have even fooled themselves.

Anyway, I have digressed into potentially worthless metaphor, but if I can give one piece of advice, the ideal applicant will create an application that constructs an applicant, perceived by the individual reader and collective committee, with confidence, passion, and sense of service. The applicant should be a master of words.

I think I have given myself a headache now, so I am signing off for now. I may post soon about my thoughts regarding the start of MS1 (August 4th!).

3 comments:

  1. Anonymous11:06 PM

    Thanks man! I understand what you mean. I plan to apply only when I feel fully prepared all around.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous11:08 PM

    Anthony, make sure you stop by Pamplona to run with the bulls.

    ReplyDelete
  3. LOL. That's funny. You said be the aacs... but doesn't that make you the cs since two negatives are a positive? Maybe a better word would be the metaanticarsalesman (macs) :D But no, I get the point... I had been pondering this same thing and had reached the same sort of conclusion (though I've not been on an interview just yet).

    ReplyDelete