Thursday, April 16, 2009
The bucket list
My 81 year old grandfather (who, incidentally, is strong and healthy) told me this afternoon over a couple glasses of lemonade that attending my medical school graduation made it on his bucket list. This is a list of things that one wants to do or accomplish before kicking the bucket. I was touched that my personal journey of becoming a doctor means so much to him.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Drexel: Wait List
Well, I finally heard back from Drexel in a snail mail letter dated April 8. This is a week and a half longer than the long estimate they gave me of 6-8 weeks. It would have felt good knowing that I got into Drexel, but the reality is that I decided almost immediately after getting into Colorado that I would prefer Colorado over Drexel.
Interestingly, Drexel requested that I confirm my continued interest in writing:
Interestingly, Drexel requested that I confirm my continued interest in writing:
- I choose to accept your offer to be placed on the "Wait List."
- I choose to decline your offer to be placed on the "Wait List."
Jefferson: Rejected
Knew it was coming. Would take Colorado over Jefferson, anyways. No more needs to be said.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
UCSD: "Acceptable Pool"
I got an e-mail rather than a phone call from UCSD this morning, which means that I was placed in what they call the "Acceptable Pool" of applicants.
What this means for me is that I have quite a bit more waiting and uncertainty ahead. Although I am obviously disappointed in the immediate outcome, I cannot say that I am all that surprised. It's a tricky business balancing hope and positive thinking with the pragmatism of acknowledging that the odds of acceptance are long in such a competitive process. Regardless of the final outcome, I feel comfortable knowing that I had my fair chance at getting into UCSD and that I did everything in my power to maximize that chance.
Still, though, the game is not over. UCSD will be admitting applicants from the Acceptable Pool starting early May and even up through July. Given that I will be preparing for a move to Colorado in the absence of a UCSD acceptance, I have to consider: At what point do I write off UCSD? Early June? Mid-June? July? Right up until the first day of classes at Colorado?
This pool is essentially an unranked waiting list. As the admissions season continues, individual applicants within the Acceptable Pool will be selected for admission – we anticipate that the first acceptances from this pool will occur in early May 2009.
What this means for me is that I have quite a bit more waiting and uncertainty ahead. Although I am obviously disappointed in the immediate outcome, I cannot say that I am all that surprised. It's a tricky business balancing hope and positive thinking with the pragmatism of acknowledging that the odds of acceptance are long in such a competitive process. Regardless of the final outcome, I feel comfortable knowing that I had my fair chance at getting into UCSD and that I did everything in my power to maximize that chance.
Still, though, the game is not over. UCSD will be admitting applicants from the Acceptable Pool starting early May and even up through July. Given that I will be preparing for a move to Colorado in the absence of a UCSD acceptance, I have to consider: At what point do I write off UCSD? Early June? Mid-June? July? Right up until the first day of classes at Colorado?
Saturday, April 4, 2009
UC Davis: Rejected
Like Irvine, UC Davis sent me a rejection e-mail (with a typo, even). They probably send e-mails rather than real letters to save costs, which is understandable, but it still comes off as cheap.
At this late stage in the game, I am only waiting to hear back from four more schools: UCSD should notify me on Tuesday (!); Drexel told me 6 to 8 weeks from the interview date, which was January 30; and I expect rejections from both Temple and Jefferson, schools that never invited me to interview.
At this late stage in the game, I am only waiting to hear back from four more schools: UCSD should notify me on Tuesday (!); Drexel told me 6 to 8 weeks from the interview date, which was January 30; and I expect rejections from both Temple and Jefferson, schools that never invited me to interview.
Monday, March 30, 2009
Tel Aviv: Accepted!
It is with great pleasure that, upon the recommendation of the Admissions Committee, the Tel Aviv University Sackler School of Medicine - New York State/American Program wishes to offer you a place in the Class of 2013
Very exciting!!!
I knew that I would choose Colorado over Tel Aviv even before I got this letter. Regardless, it feels good to have the "right of refusal," as one friend put it, as well as confidence from knowing that I had options, as another friend framed my admittedly enviable position.
My interview with Dr. XXX, an alumnus of Tel Aviv practicing in San Diego County, was even more relaxed than my UCSD interviews. The most probing questions he asked were related to how serious I was in applying to Tel Aviv and how likely I was to complete the program should I matriculate. Can I handle the language barrier and culture shock? Do I have a support network in Israel, or could I function well half a world away from home?
Dr. XXX stated outright, in fact, that the admissions committee understands that Sackler is a backup school for many if not most applicants, and that those who are accepted to a program in the United States tend to stay in the country. Knowing this makes it a bit easier to turn down Tel Aviv. But, if I had not been accepted into any program in America, I would have been thrilled to go to Tel Aviv for medical school.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
UCSD Decision: Still Waiting
The admissions committee didn't end up discussing my application on Monday, which means that I have to wait another two weeks. As my friend who is a second-year medical student said, "Boo application process!" I agree. But as agonizing as this waiting is, another two weeks (April 7th) won't kill me.
Monday, March 23, 2009
UCSD Decision: March 24?
If my application was discussed in today's meeting, I will hear back from UCSD tomorrow. I'm nervous and hopeful. Regardless of what happens, and whether I find out now or in a few weeks, I have to keep reminding myself that things usually have a way of working themselves out.
UCSD Interview #2
I had about an hour of free time between my first and second interviews. I used that time to do some research on Dr. YYY - to find out what his specialty is, what kind of research he does. A quick PubMed search in the library gave me a whole list of his publications on alcohol and opioid abuse. It occurred to me that I was able to do this so easily because I have the home court advantage here at UCSD.
Finding Dr. YYY's office was frustrating, but I arrived on time in spite of the rat's maze that is the VA Medical Center. Dr. YYY asked me to wait for a few minutes. This gave me some time to take some meditative deep breaths and contemplate a tropical scenery painting hanging on the wall. Dr. YYY greeted me warmly and apologized for keeping me waiting. Like Dr. XXX, he began the interview in a conversational tone, though not quite as carefree.
Soon, he did start asking me real questions, ones that I have already faced and answered satisfactorily in previous interviews.
At the end of the interview, Dr. YYY asked me if I had any questions for him. I asked him about the impact of the California state budget on the educational experience at UCSD, and he was very good at answering this concern. I also asked him about his own personal experience with UCSD. Dr. YYY wrapped up the interview by giving me his e-mail address and saying "Please contact me if you have any more questions. I'd be happy to help."
That was definitely a good sign, a good way to end the interview. I was impressed that he made himself so accessible. I left the interview feeling good about the intangibles, e.g. rapport and ease of conversation, but feeling less good about the quantifiable aspects of the interview. I felt like I didn't answer his direct questions as well as I had answered them in my Colorado interviews. I am far from objective in this matter, though. It is possible that Dr. YYY had an entirely different perspective of my interview performance.
Finding Dr. YYY's office was frustrating, but I arrived on time in spite of the rat's maze that is the VA Medical Center. Dr. YYY asked me to wait for a few minutes. This gave me some time to take some meditative deep breaths and contemplate a tropical scenery painting hanging on the wall. Dr. YYY greeted me warmly and apologized for keeping me waiting. Like Dr. XXX, he began the interview in a conversational tone, though not quite as carefree.
Soon, he did start asking me real questions, ones that I have already faced and answered satisfactorily in previous interviews.
- How did you end up at a small liberal arts college on the East Coast?
- What attracted you to that school?
- Since you took all my pre-med courses in undergraduate, did you go into college intending to become a doctor?
- Is this the first time you have applied to medical school?
- Why did you decide to go to graduate school instead of medical school?
- Why did you go to graduate school straight out of college?
- Why did you leave graduate school with a terminal Master's?
- What was your plan when you left your program?
- What made you decide to go back to medicine?
At the end of the interview, Dr. YYY asked me if I had any questions for him. I asked him about the impact of the California state budget on the educational experience at UCSD, and he was very good at answering this concern. I also asked him about his own personal experience with UCSD. Dr. YYY wrapped up the interview by giving me his e-mail address and saying "Please contact me if you have any more questions. I'd be happy to help."
That was definitely a good sign, a good way to end the interview. I was impressed that he made himself so accessible. I left the interview feeling good about the intangibles, e.g. rapport and ease of conversation, but feeling less good about the quantifiable aspects of the interview. I felt like I didn't answer his direct questions as well as I had answered them in my Colorado interviews. I am far from objective in this matter, though. It is possible that Dr. YYY had an entirely different perspective of my interview performance.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
UCSD Interview #1
The office of admissions didn't give us applicants our interview schedules until literally 15 minutes before the first interview. One person had to take the shuttle bus down to the Hillcrest campus. I got lucky and had both of my interviews in the VA Medical Center, which is just a five minute walk from the admissions office.
I couldn't have been more lucky to get Dr. XXX as my first interviewer. He had a calming voice and demeanor that helped set me at ease when I most needed it. He started the interview by talking about the UCSD program, as if he were trying to anticipate questions that I might ask him later. "The way I see it is that at this point we're beyond the evaluative stage," he said. Good to know, I thought. I let him talk, since that's what he seemed to want, and also as he proved to be very informative, but at the same time I grew increasingly concerned that I was not maximizing this time to convince him that I belong at UCSD.
The entire interview was conversational, though Dr. XXX did ask me a few direct questions about my application. The first direct question was about my experience working with magnetoencephalography (MEG), which is a technology that measures tiny magnetic fields emanating from the brain and infers brain activity from that information. "Why hasn't MEG caught on? Why isn't it being used clinically?" I told Dr. XXX that the fundamental hurdle facing MEG as a clinically relevant tool is the complexity and unreliability of its data analysis. A magnetic field is generated when a current flows in a straight line, such as during an action potential along axons. The problem is that, if two action potentials travel parallel to each other but in opposite directions, the magnetic fields that each action potential creates would cancel the other out. Another problem limiting the usefulness of MEG is that you can only really measure magnetic fields generated close to the brain surface - in the cortex, but not in deeper brain structures like the thalamus or striatum.
This entire MEG-related interaction lasted only about 2-3 minutes. Dr. XXX did seem genuinely curious about a rather obscure experience in my application, but I got the sense that the secondary purpose of the question was to evaluate how I discussed my past research experience.
The conversation then shifted to running and triathlons. I got the sense that Dr. XXX knew that this subject would make me more comfortable. He showed me a picture on his wall of him finishing a triathlon while holding the hands of his two children. "They don't let you do that anymore," he said. I asked, "Did you do triathlons in medical school?" It turns out that he did, and that he surfed. "Sounds like you had a well-rounded life while in medical school." Dr. XXX actually went to medical school here at UCSD, so this fact was very relevant to me. He also got married during his fourth year.
Toward the end of the interview, I found an opportunity to tell him about my recent medical relief mission to Honduras, since it isn't included in my application. Dr. XXX raised his eyebrows and said that he in fact participates in a very similar program in Fiji. He then explained to me how the cultural history of the island has created a sort of health care crisis. There are essentially two separate populations on Fiji: native islanders and Indians brought over during British colonial rule. There is a distrust between the two groups such that the native islanders won't even accept medical care from someone of Indian ethnicity; most doctors there are Indian. People in Fiji also have to deal with tropical diseases, and recently there was a big flooding problem. So, Dr. XXX talked about his experiences volunteering with the Loloma Foundation (I pulled out a pen in the middle of the interview and wrote down the name of the organization). I felt good that this was yet another topic on which we had something in common.
I left the interview with a decidedly positive feeling. If we really are "beyond the evaluative stage," then this interview was about personality and making connections. I think I did that very well with that in both the running and international volunteer work parts of the interview. Still, it's difficult to get a sense of how this interview will impact the committee's decision.
I couldn't have been more lucky to get Dr. XXX as my first interviewer. He had a calming voice and demeanor that helped set me at ease when I most needed it. He started the interview by talking about the UCSD program, as if he were trying to anticipate questions that I might ask him later. "The way I see it is that at this point we're beyond the evaluative stage," he said. Good to know, I thought. I let him talk, since that's what he seemed to want, and also as he proved to be very informative, but at the same time I grew increasingly concerned that I was not maximizing this time to convince him that I belong at UCSD.
The entire interview was conversational, though Dr. XXX did ask me a few direct questions about my application. The first direct question was about my experience working with magnetoencephalography (MEG), which is a technology that measures tiny magnetic fields emanating from the brain and infers brain activity from that information. "Why hasn't MEG caught on? Why isn't it being used clinically?" I told Dr. XXX that the fundamental hurdle facing MEG as a clinically relevant tool is the complexity and unreliability of its data analysis. A magnetic field is generated when a current flows in a straight line, such as during an action potential along axons. The problem is that, if two action potentials travel parallel to each other but in opposite directions, the magnetic fields that each action potential creates would cancel the other out. Another problem limiting the usefulness of MEG is that you can only really measure magnetic fields generated close to the brain surface - in the cortex, but not in deeper brain structures like the thalamus or striatum.
This entire MEG-related interaction lasted only about 2-3 minutes. Dr. XXX did seem genuinely curious about a rather obscure experience in my application, but I got the sense that the secondary purpose of the question was to evaluate how I discussed my past research experience.
The conversation then shifted to running and triathlons. I got the sense that Dr. XXX knew that this subject would make me more comfortable. He showed me a picture on his wall of him finishing a triathlon while holding the hands of his two children. "They don't let you do that anymore," he said. I asked, "Did you do triathlons in medical school?" It turns out that he did, and that he surfed. "Sounds like you had a well-rounded life while in medical school." Dr. XXX actually went to medical school here at UCSD, so this fact was very relevant to me. He also got married during his fourth year.
Toward the end of the interview, I found an opportunity to tell him about my recent medical relief mission to Honduras, since it isn't included in my application. Dr. XXX raised his eyebrows and said that he in fact participates in a very similar program in Fiji. He then explained to me how the cultural history of the island has created a sort of health care crisis. There are essentially two separate populations on Fiji: native islanders and Indians brought over during British colonial rule. There is a distrust between the two groups such that the native islanders won't even accept medical care from someone of Indian ethnicity; most doctors there are Indian. People in Fiji also have to deal with tropical diseases, and recently there was a big flooding problem. So, Dr. XXX talked about his experiences volunteering with the Loloma Foundation (I pulled out a pen in the middle of the interview and wrote down the name of the organization). I felt good that this was yet another topic on which we had something in common.
I left the interview with a decidedly positive feeling. If we really are "beyond the evaluative stage," then this interview was about personality and making connections. I think I did that very well with that in both the running and international volunteer work parts of the interview. Still, it's difficult to get a sense of how this interview will impact the committee's decision.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)