Read on Twitter
Yes to all of this. Not just a problem for programs, but also for applicants. System becomes more chaotic and random when everyone applies everywhere and there's no way to signal genuine interest or assess fit (on both sides). Matching at preferred programs gets harder. 1/ https://twitter.com/MishaRosenbach/status/1326517137326878720
I firmly believe application caps would significantly improve system. But caps alone could lead to negative downstream effects (really, mismatch between programs and applicants). Transparency from programs AND from applicants necessary to guide applicants and to optimize fit. 2/
Holistic review is necessary (and touted by everyone, for good reason), but we need to be realistic about what that means. Programs need to devise their own review processes based on their mission, values, program strengths and weaknesses. 3/
Programs should be transparent about review processes, BUT that actually becomes tougher when metrics are de-emphasized (which is what we all hope to achieve over time). Easy to say you look for Step 1>250 and AOA. Harder to explain "intangibles" like distance traveled, etc. 4/
Applicants should be honest about their goals, strengths/weaknesses, wants/needs in a program. (I know it's hard, but it will help you find a program that values *you.*) Also much easier for us to determine who would be a good fit for our program. 5/
Personal statement is a great place to highlight unique qualities, experiences, goals, "asks" for residency, etc. But often applicants are told to keep it safe (ie not personal). Generic statements make holistic review of hundreds of applications very tough. 6/
(Not blaming applicants/students here at all - I get that you get lots of conflicting advice & you just want to match!) Given all that @MishaRosenbach brought up about trend toward homogenization of grades, LORs, etc, harder and harder to get to know *you* from @ERASinfo. 7/
And on that note, @ERASinfo needs to adapt to these changing times. The presentation of data is terrible - laundry lists of "experiences" - medical, work, research, volunteer. Too restricting. What about teaching, service, advocacy? 8/
Better yet, what about a much briefer biosketch-type application. Briefly discuss your background, interest, career goals, and list up to 5 most significant activities (in any realm). This would allow us to actually gauge what is meaningful to applicants rather than guessing. 9/
Okay, now that I've rambled on for a while...my actual point:
For effective holistic review and optimized fit, we need application caps + greater transparency from programs and applicants + significant @ERASinfo modifications.
We would ALL benefit from these changes. x
For effective holistic review and optimized fit, we need application caps + greater transparency from programs and applicants + significant @ERASinfo modifications.
We would ALL benefit from these changes. x
