(02-04-2018, 12:35 PM)Guest Wrote: (01-30-2018, 11:57 AM)Guest Wrote: I can't afford to do second looks, nor can I take time off from rotations to do so. It really sucks that certain programs almost require it.
I strongly sympathize and agree - I have neither the time nor the money for second looks. Nevertheless, I'm not dismayed by the fact that some programs "almost require" second looks, because I think this reveals crucial information about a particular program's culture.
I'm similarly glad there are programs that: offer more interviews than they are able to conduct; include pimping as part of the interview day; and play games with postinterview communication.
These programs tip their hands that these are not necessarily places where I want to train as a resident, and I'm tremendously grateful for this knowledge.
more like you aren't dedicated enough to be a neurosurgeon
(02-04-2018, 01:01 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 12:35 PM)Guest Wrote: (01-30-2018, 11:57 AM)Guest Wrote: I can't afford to do second looks, nor can I take time off from rotations to do so. It really sucks that certain programs almost require it.
I strongly sympathize and agree - I have neither the time nor the money for second looks. Nevertheless, I'm not dismayed by the fact that some programs "almost require" second looks, because I think this reveals crucial information about a particular program's culture.
I'm similarly glad there are programs that: offer more interviews than they are able to conduct; include pimping as part of the interview day; and play games with postinterview communication.
These programs tip their hands that these are not necessarily places where I want to train as a resident, and I'm tremendously grateful for this knowledge.
more like you aren't dedicated enough to be a neurosurgeon
My guess is that this is just trolling, but I'll humor you by articulating the nature of my distaste for the above-mentioned activities:
1. "Strongly encouraging"/mandating second looks - I will admit that some programs on the rise encourage second looks because they are proud of what they have going and are eager to show it off, they may not get many sub-Is, etc.; but I think the vast majority of established programs that encourage second looks do so because they need validation. To require a second look demonstrates a fundamental disregard for the tenuous financial situation many applicants are presently finding themselves in. This also goes against the recent recommendations of the senior society that programs should make efforts to reduce the financial burden on neurosurgery applicants.
2. Offering more interviews that they are able to conduct - This demonstrates that programs care more about metrics than the fit of any particular applicant. It also shows that programs are willing to use arbitrary criteria to determine who does and does not get an interview, which suggests carelessness.
3. including pimping as part of the interview day - Applicants have gone through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, up to 4 sub-Is, board exams, clinical rotations, etc. There are many data points that indicate an applicant's level of knowledge that can be accessed through letters, transcripts, phone calls, test scores, ERAS, etc. To alter one's assessment of an applicant interviewing at your program on whether they answer 1 additional question correctly or not demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of numbers. Pimping also wastes an opportunity to get to know a person, to see if they might be a good fit for your program or to gauge whether they're going to work hard for your patients.
4. Playing games with postinterview communication - Again, I think this indicates insecurity and also a willingness to use manipulation to achieve desired ends. I'm an alpha. I like strength and directness.
5. Not interviewing sub-Is while they are visiting - I'll add this one here too, even though I did not mention it before. See #1 for the rationale. The senior society has explicitly called for programs to interview sub-Is while they are visiting. The places where I did aways all interviewed me while I was there. I was surprised to discover that this is not the norm during interview season. I've heard of places that not only do not interview sub-Is while they are there but also strongly encourage second looks. What is the point of making someone visit your program 3 times except to prevent poor or working class applicants from matching or to indulge some psychopathology?
The programs that I will be ranking highly make a point of not engaging in these unserious activities. They are confident and focused on the training of neurosurgeons. As I am dedicated to the utmost to becoming a world-class neurosurgeon, I am actively seeking to avoid any manipulation, insecurity, weakness, or carelessness that would stand in the way of my goal. I would urge my colleagues to do the same, for your own sake and for the sake of the profession.
(02-04-2018, 02:42 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 01:01 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 12:35 PM)Guest Wrote: (01-30-2018, 11:57 AM)Guest Wrote: I can't afford to do second looks, nor can I take time off from rotations to do so. It really sucks that certain programs almost require it.
I strongly sympathize and agree - I have neither the time nor the money for second looks. Nevertheless, I'm not dismayed by the fact that some programs "almost require" second looks, because I think this reveals crucial information about a particular program's culture.
I'm similarly glad there are programs that: offer more interviews than they are able to conduct; include pimping as part of the interview day; and play games with postinterview communication.
These programs tip their hands that these are not necessarily places where I want to train as a resident, and I'm tremendously grateful for this knowledge.
more like you aren't dedicated enough to be a neurosurgeon
My guess is that this is just trolling, but I'll humor you by articulating the nature of my distaste for the above-mentioned activities:
1. "Strongly encouraging"/mandating second looks - I will admit that some programs on the rise encourage second looks because they are proud of what they have going and are eager to show it off, they may not get many sub-Is, etc.; but I think the vast majority of established programs that encourage second looks do so because they need validation. To require a second look demonstrates a fundamental disregard for the tenuous financial situation many applicants are presently finding themselves in. This also goes against the recent recommendations of the senior society that programs should make efforts to reduce the financial burden on neurosurgery applicants.
2. Offering more interviews that they are able to conduct - This demonstrates that programs care more about metrics than the fit of any particular applicant. It also shows that programs are willing to use arbitrary criteria to determine who does and does not get an interview, which suggests carelessness.
3. including pimping as part of the interview day - Applicants have gone through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, up to 4 sub-Is, board exams, clinical rotations, etc. There are many data points that indicate an applicant's level of knowledge that can be accessed through letters, transcripts, phone calls, test scores, ERAS, etc. To alter one's assessment of an applicant interviewing at your program on whether they answer 1 additional question correctly or not demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of numbers. Pimping also wastes an opportunity to get to know a person, to see if they might be a good fit for your program or to gauge whether they're going to work hard for your patients.
4. Playing games with postinterview communication - Again, I think this indicates insecurity and also a willingness to use manipulation to achieve desired ends. I'm an alpha. I like strength and directness.
5. Not interviewing sub-Is while they are visiting - I'll add this one here too, even though I did not mention it before. See #1 for the rationale. The senior society has explicitly called for programs to interview sub-Is while they are visiting. The places where I did aways all interviewed me while I was there. I was surprised to discover that this is not the norm during interview season. I've heard of places that not only do not interview sub-Is while they are there but also strongly encourage second looks. What is the point of making someone visit your program 3 times except to prevent poor or working class applicants from matching or to indulge some psychopathology?
The programs that I will be ranking highly make a point of not engaging in these unserious activities. They are confident and focused on the training of neurosurgeons. As I am dedicated to the utmost to becoming a world-class neurosurgeon, I am actively seeking to avoid any manipulation, insecurity, weakness, or carelessness that would stand in the way of my goal. I would urge my colleagues to do the same, for your own sake and for the sake of the profession.
Yawn.
I'm at a world class program. We don't explicitly encourage second looks, but do accommodate if an applicant expresses interest.
It does not change their ranking.
In general, I think it is a good idea because the applicant gets a better idea of how the program works in a day-to-day manner. The interview day is all show, and can be deceiving.
Finally, your comments come off as haughty and self important. Realistically, you will match somewhere, get adequately trained, and end up in private practice doing bread and butter neurosurgery. The level of arrogance you display in your comments is amusing, given the ultimate outcome.
(02-04-2018, 04:41 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 02:42 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 01:01 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 12:35 PM)Guest Wrote: (01-30-2018, 11:57 AM)Guest Wrote: I can't afford to do second looks, nor can I take time off from rotations to do so. It really sucks that certain programs almost require it.
I strongly sympathize and agree - I have neither the time nor the money for second looks. Nevertheless, I'm not dismayed by the fact that some programs "almost require" second looks, because I think this reveals crucial information about a particular program's culture.
I'm similarly glad there are programs that: offer more interviews than they are able to conduct; include pimping as part of the interview day; and play games with postinterview communication.
These programs tip their hands that these are not necessarily places where I want to train as a resident, and I'm tremendously grateful for this knowledge.
more like you aren't dedicated enough to be a neurosurgeon
My guess is that this is just trolling, but I'll humor you by articulating the nature of my distaste for the above-mentioned activities:
1. "Strongly encouraging"/mandating second looks - I will admit that some programs on the rise encourage second looks because they are proud of what they have going and are eager to show it off, they may not get many sub-Is, etc.; but I think the vast majority of established programs that encourage second looks do so because they need validation. To require a second look demonstrates a fundamental disregard for the tenuous financial situation many applicants are presently finding themselves in. This also goes against the recent recommendations of the senior society that programs should make efforts to reduce the financial burden on neurosurgery applicants.
2. Offering more interviews that they are able to conduct - This demonstrates that programs care more about metrics than the fit of any particular applicant. It also shows that programs are willing to use arbitrary criteria to determine who does and does not get an interview, which suggests carelessness.
3. including pimping as part of the interview day - Applicants have gone through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, up to 4 sub-Is, board exams, clinical rotations, etc. There are many data points that indicate an applicant's level of knowledge that can be accessed through letters, transcripts, phone calls, test scores, ERAS, etc. To alter one's assessment of an applicant interviewing at your program on whether they answer 1 additional question correctly or not demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of numbers. Pimping also wastes an opportunity to get to know a person, to see if they might be a good fit for your program or to gauge whether they're going to work hard for your patients.
4. Playing games with postinterview communication - Again, I think this indicates insecurity and also a willingness to use manipulation to achieve desired ends. I'm an alpha. I like strength and directness.
5. Not interviewing sub-Is while they are visiting - I'll add this one here too, even though I did not mention it before. See #1 for the rationale. The senior society has explicitly called for programs to interview sub-Is while they are visiting. The places where I did aways all interviewed me while I was there. I was surprised to discover that this is not the norm during interview season. I've heard of places that not only do not interview sub-Is while they are there but also strongly encourage second looks. What is the point of making someone visit your program 3 times except to prevent poor or working class applicants from matching or to indulge some psychopathology?
The programs that I will be ranking highly make a point of not engaging in these unserious activities. They are confident and focused on the training of neurosurgeons. As I am dedicated to the utmost to becoming a world-class neurosurgeon, I am actively seeking to avoid any manipulation, insecurity, weakness, or carelessness that would stand in the way of my goal. I would urge my colleagues to do the same, for your own sake and for the sake of the profession.
Yawn.
I'm at a world class program. We don't explicitly encourage second looks, but do accommodate if an applicant expresses interest.
It does not change their ranking.
In general, I think it is a good idea because the applicant gets a better idea of how the program works in a day-to-day manner. The interview day is all show, and can be deceiving.
Finally, your comments come off as haughty and self important. Realistically, you will match somewhere, get adequately trained, and end up in private practice doing bread and butter neurosurgery. The level of arrogance you display in your comments is amusing, given the ultimate outcome.
I know you are at UW
(02-04-2018, 06:46 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 04:41 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 02:42 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 01:01 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 12:35 PM)Guest Wrote: I strongly sympathize and agree - I have neither the time nor the money for second looks. Nevertheless, I'm not dismayed by the fact that some programs "almost require" second looks, because I think this reveals crucial information about a particular program's culture.
I'm similarly glad there are programs that: offer more interviews than they are able to conduct; include pimping as part of the interview day; and play games with postinterview communication.
These programs tip their hands that these are not necessarily places where I want to train as a resident, and I'm tremendously grateful for this knowledge.
more like you aren't dedicated enough to be a neurosurgeon
My guess is that this is just trolling, but I'll humor you by articulating the nature of my distaste for the above-mentioned activities:
1. "Strongly encouraging"/mandating second looks - I will admit that some programs on the rise encourage second looks because they are proud of what they have going and are eager to show it off, they may not get many sub-Is, etc.; but I think the vast majority of established programs that encourage second looks do so because they need validation. To require a second look demonstrates a fundamental disregard for the tenuous financial situation many applicants are presently finding themselves in. This also goes against the recent recommendations of the senior society that programs should make efforts to reduce the financial burden on neurosurgery applicants.
2. Offering more interviews that they are able to conduct - This demonstrates that programs care more about metrics than the fit of any particular applicant. It also shows that programs are willing to use arbitrary criteria to determine who does and does not get an interview, which suggests carelessness.
3. including pimping as part of the interview day - Applicants have gone through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, up to 4 sub-Is, board exams, clinical rotations, etc. There are many data points that indicate an applicant's level of knowledge that can be accessed through letters, transcripts, phone calls, test scores, ERAS, etc. To alter one's assessment of an applicant interviewing at your program on whether they answer 1 additional question correctly or not demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of numbers. Pimping also wastes an opportunity to get to know a person, to see if they might be a good fit for your program or to gauge whether they're going to work hard for your patients.
4. Playing games with postinterview communication - Again, I think this indicates insecurity and also a willingness to use manipulation to achieve desired ends. I'm an alpha. I like strength and directness.
5. Not interviewing sub-Is while they are visiting - I'll add this one here too, even though I did not mention it before. See #1 for the rationale. The senior society has explicitly called for programs to interview sub-Is while they are visiting. The places where I did aways all interviewed me while I was there. I was surprised to discover that this is not the norm during interview season. I've heard of places that not only do not interview sub-Is while they are there but also strongly encourage second looks. What is the point of making someone visit your program 3 times except to prevent poor or working class applicants from matching or to indulge some psychopathology?
The programs that I will be ranking highly make a point of not engaging in these unserious activities. They are confident and focused on the training of neurosurgeons. As I am dedicated to the utmost to becoming a world-class neurosurgeon, I am actively seeking to avoid any manipulation, insecurity, weakness, or carelessness that would stand in the way of my goal. I would urge my colleagues to do the same, for your own sake and for the sake of the profession.
Yawn.
I'm at a world class program. We don't explicitly encourage second looks, but do accommodate if an applicant expresses interest.
It does not change their ranking.
In general, I think it is a good idea because the applicant gets a better idea of how the program works in a day-to-day manner. The interview day is all show, and can be deceiving.
Finally, your comments come off as haughty and self important. Realistically, you will match somewhere, get adequately trained, and end up in private practice doing bread and butter neurosurgery. The level of arrogance you display in your comments is amusing, given the ultimate outcome.
I know you are at UW
So?
(02-05-2018, 06:23 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 06:46 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 04:41 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 02:42 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 01:01 PM)Guest Wrote: more like you aren't dedicated enough to be a neurosurgeon
My guess is that this is just trolling, but I'll humor you by articulating the nature of my distaste for the above-mentioned activities:
1. "Strongly encouraging"/mandating second looks - I will admit that some programs on the rise encourage second looks because they are proud of what they have going and are eager to show it off, they may not get many sub-Is, etc.; but I think the vast majority of established programs that encourage second looks do so because they need validation. To require a second look demonstrates a fundamental disregard for the tenuous financial situation many applicants are presently finding themselves in. This also goes against the recent recommendations of the senior society that programs should make efforts to reduce the financial burden on neurosurgery applicants.
2. Offering more interviews that they are able to conduct - This demonstrates that programs care more about metrics than the fit of any particular applicant. It also shows that programs are willing to use arbitrary criteria to determine who does and does not get an interview, which suggests carelessness.
3. including pimping as part of the interview day - Applicants have gone through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, up to 4 sub-Is, board exams, clinical rotations, etc. There are many data points that indicate an applicant's level of knowledge that can be accessed through letters, transcripts, phone calls, test scores, ERAS, etc. To alter one's assessment of an applicant interviewing at your program on whether they answer 1 additional question correctly or not demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of numbers. Pimping also wastes an opportunity to get to know a person, to see if they might be a good fit for your program or to gauge whether they're going to work hard for your patients.
4. Playing games with postinterview communication - Again, I think this indicates insecurity and also a willingness to use manipulation to achieve desired ends. I'm an alpha. I like strength and directness.
5. Not interviewing sub-Is while they are visiting - I'll add this one here too, even though I did not mention it before. See #1 for the rationale. The senior society has explicitly called for programs to interview sub-Is while they are visiting. The places where I did aways all interviewed me while I was there. I was surprised to discover that this is not the norm during interview season. I've heard of places that not only do not interview sub-Is while they are there but also strongly encourage second looks. What is the point of making someone visit your program 3 times except to prevent poor or working class applicants from matching or to indulge some psychopathology?
The programs that I will be ranking highly make a point of not engaging in these unserious activities. They are confident and focused on the training of neurosurgeons. As I am dedicated to the utmost to becoming a world-class neurosurgeon, I am actively seeking to avoid any manipulation, insecurity, weakness, or carelessness that would stand in the way of my goal. I would urge my colleagues to do the same, for your own sake and for the sake of the profession.
Yawn.
I'm at a world class program. We don't explicitly encourage second looks, but do accommodate if an applicant expresses interest.
It does not change their ranking.
In general, I think it is a good idea because the applicant gets a better idea of how the program works in a day-to-day manner. The interview day is all show, and can be deceiving.
Finally, your comments come off as haughty and self important. Realistically, you will match somewhere, get adequately trained, and end up in private practice doing bread and butter neurosurgery. The level of arrogance you display in your comments is amusing, given the ultimate outcome.
I know you are at UW
So?
so..stop pretending you are at a world class program.. UW is crap
(02-05-2018, 07:46 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-05-2018, 06:23 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 06:46 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 04:41 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 02:42 PM)Guest Wrote: My guess is that this is just trolling, but I'll humor you by articulating the nature of my distaste for the above-mentioned activities:
1. "Strongly encouraging"/mandating second looks - I will admit that some programs on the rise encourage second looks because they are proud of what they have going and are eager to show it off, they may not get many sub-Is, etc.; but I think the vast majority of established programs that encourage second looks do so because they need validation. To require a second look demonstrates a fundamental disregard for the tenuous financial situation many applicants are presently finding themselves in. This also goes against the recent recommendations of the senior society that programs should make efforts to reduce the financial burden on neurosurgery applicants.
2. Offering more interviews that they are able to conduct - This demonstrates that programs care more about metrics than the fit of any particular applicant. It also shows that programs are willing to use arbitrary criteria to determine who does and does not get an interview, which suggests carelessness.
3. including pimping as part of the interview day - Applicants have gone through 4 years of college, 4 years of medical school, up to 4 sub-Is, board exams, clinical rotations, etc. There are many data points that indicate an applicant's level of knowledge that can be accessed through letters, transcripts, phone calls, test scores, ERAS, etc. To alter one's assessment of an applicant interviewing at your program on whether they answer 1 additional question correctly or not demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of numbers. Pimping also wastes an opportunity to get to know a person, to see if they might be a good fit for your program or to gauge whether they're going to work hard for your patients.
4. Playing games with postinterview communication - Again, I think this indicates insecurity and also a willingness to use manipulation to achieve desired ends. I'm an alpha. I like strength and directness.
5. Not interviewing sub-Is while they are visiting - I'll add this one here too, even though I did not mention it before. See #1 for the rationale. The senior society has explicitly called for programs to interview sub-Is while they are visiting. The places where I did aways all interviewed me while I was there. I was surprised to discover that this is not the norm during interview season. I've heard of places that not only do not interview sub-Is while they are there but also strongly encourage second looks. What is the point of making someone visit your program 3 times except to prevent poor or working class applicants from matching or to indulge some psychopathology?
The programs that I will be ranking highly make a point of not engaging in these unserious activities. They are confident and focused on the training of neurosurgeons. As I am dedicated to the utmost to becoming a world-class neurosurgeon, I am actively seeking to avoid any manipulation, insecurity, weakness, or carelessness that would stand in the way of my goal. I would urge my colleagues to do the same, for your own sake and for the sake of the profession.
Yawn.
I'm at a world class program. We don't explicitly encourage second looks, but do accommodate if an applicant expresses interest.
It does not change their ranking.
In general, I think it is a good idea because the applicant gets a better idea of how the program works in a day-to-day manner. The interview day is all show, and can be deceiving.
Finally, your comments come off as haughty and self important. Realistically, you will match somewhere, get adequately trained, and end up in private practice doing bread and butter neurosurgery. The level of arrogance you display in your comments is amusing, given the ultimate outcome.
I know you are at UW
So?
so..stop pretending you are at a world class program.. UW is crap
As a third party observer on the east coast, this is petty and obviously absurd. Also, it doesn’t strike me as strong, direct, or alpha to try to call someone out on an anonymous board while remaining anonymous yourself.
Although, I should know better than to engage with someone who says “I’m an alpha” non-ironically.
(02-05-2018, 08:54 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-05-2018, 07:46 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-05-2018, 06:23 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 06:46 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 04:41 PM)Guest Wrote: Yawn.
I'm at a world class program. We don't explicitly encourage second looks, but do accommodate if an applicant expresses interest.
It does not change their ranking.
In general, I think it is a good idea because the applicant gets a better idea of how the program works in a day-to-day manner. The interview day is all show, and can be deceiving.
Finally, your comments come off as haughty and self important. Realistically, you will match somewhere, get adequately trained, and end up in private practice doing bread and butter neurosurgery. The level of arrogance you display in your comments is amusing, given the ultimate outcome.
I know you are at UW
So?
so..stop pretending you are at a world class program.. UW is crap
As a third party observer on the east coast, this is petty and obviously absurd. Also, it doesn’t strike me as strong, direct, or alpha to try to call someone out on an anonymous board while remaining anonymous yourself.
Although, I should know better than to engage with someone who says “I’m an alpha” non-ironically.
Typical beta east coast behavior. You guys used to have good programs. Now you're all just wage slaves living on the reputation of your respective programs 1990s achievements. Sad that you don't wake up and acknowledge it, call out your overlords, and prevent the next generation of rubes from drinking the Kool-aid, too. That might hurt too much though, admitting you're a failure at life and got duped. Take a hard look in the mirror, son.
(02-05-2018, 09:34 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-05-2018, 08:54 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-05-2018, 07:46 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-05-2018, 06:23 PM)Guest Wrote: (02-04-2018, 06:46 PM)Guest Wrote: I know you are at UW
So?
so..stop pretending you are at a world class program.. UW is crap
As a third party observer on the east coast, this is petty and obviously absurd. Also, it doesn’t strike me as strong, direct, or alpha to try to call someone out on an anonymous board while remaining anonymous yourself.
Although, I should know better than to engage with someone who says “I’m an alpha” non-ironically.
Typical beta east coast behavior. You guys used to have good programs. Now you're all just wage slaves living on the reputation of your respective programs 1990s achievements. Sad that you don't wake up and acknowledge it, call out your overlords, and prevent the next generation of rubes from drinking the Kool-aid, too. That might hurt too much though, admitting you're a failure at life and got duped. Take a hard look in the mirror, son.
LOL oh man great point. It might be too late to overcome my ingrained beta ways, but I'll try scrolling /r/The_Donald and pounding Jager Bombs to correct my wimpy coastal ways. Thanks internet stranger for the advice, for the wake-up call, and for calling me son!
I'm planning my sub-is, and was wondering if people do second looks if you've done an away at a program to begin with?
|
