While I had previously written a brief post on admissions consulting and why there was nothing inherently wrong with it, I feel a need to write a more complete article on it and examine the issue on a deeper level.
Before I begin, let my begin by saying that I have essentially done consulting for scholarship, awards, undergraduate admissions, and medical school admissions for numerous individuals, both friends and even complete strangers. I have never asked for a single penny from any of these individuals. I currently don't charge for advice/help, although that's not to say I haven't considered it (as a side job) and it's something that could happen for me sometime in the future - who knows?
(As a side note, some of you may have noticed the Consulting Services link on the left hand menu. This is not a consulting service provided by MedChatter - it is simply a link exchange we are doing to help promote MedChatter to medhopefuls).
Because of that, it may surprise some of you that I don't have any problem with those who do charge for consulting advice. Understand that whether I personally choose to charge or not for the help I provide is completely irrelevant. I still believe there is nothing inherently wrong with charging for admissions consulting. There are problems that can stem from admissions consulting (which we will soon discuss), but the existence of some related problems alone is not enough to say admissions consulting is "wrong" or "should not exist".
Why am I writing this?
The biggest public discussion among Canadian students interested in medicine occurs on online forums - they are often the most popular resource for those interested in applying.
Whenever the issue of admissions consulting (i.e. charging money in exchange for help) comes up, the vast majority of the response is the bashing admissions consulting with the overall implication that those who offer it are horrible, selfish human beings.
If I felt that the issue was legitimately one-sided then I wouldn't really care. My concern is that despite this not even being close to a clear cut issue, response continues to be one-sided. I have yet to see anyone really put up an argument against the majority, possibly because they fear being trampled on by the masses. One of my biggest concerns is that those who currently have no stance on the issue will assume the masses are "correct" and jump on that band wagon.
In this article, I will be evaluating the most common arguments individuals have against charging for admissions consulting while also providing my own personal thoughts on them.
Argument #1: It is wrong, shameful, etc. to be charging for advice/help
Because I want to tackle quite a few claims, I don't want to spend too much time on this one. Simply put, there is nothing immediately or inherently wrong with the concept of exchanging a service like admissions consulting for money. Would it be nice if people just did stuff for free like what we currently do at MedChatter? Sure. But just because some people want to earn an income or side money or whatever doesn't immediately make them bad people.
It's true that some admissions consultants will charge prices that some applicants can't afford - unfortunately, that's just the way it is sometimes. Again, this in no way makes them bad individuals and it scares me that some people can't understand this. Remember, this is not a mandatory part of the process - whether you choose to get paid help is a choice you make.
Does it mean that more resources are thus available to those who are better off financially? Yes, obviously. But this is true for everything in life, beyond just the medical school admissions process. That's the real world. Attacking admissions consulting doesn't solve this issue and believing that admissions consultants should be held to some special standard of altruism is pretty ridiculous.
Argument #2: The prices charged can be outrageous
Of course this can happen, and I'm sure it does. But again, this can happen in any industry. Exercise some common sense - if you think someone is outrageously priced, then don't pay for it.
Keep in mind, however, that the term outrageous really is relative. Cost should be proportional to the value you are getting back.
What I mean by this is that in the event you did decide to pay someone for admissions consulting, don't just make your decision based on the absolute price being charged. Some consultants should be worth more than others. Not everyone provides equally good service.
What does this mean? Do your homework the same way you do with any important purchase.
What is the consultant's track record? Are they recommended by someone you trust?
I'm sure there are medical students who I would not pay a single penny for to help me while there are others I would be willing to pay a hefty sum to.
Argument #3: Why pay when there are medical students willing to help you out for free?
I'm not sure how easy it is to get in contact with a medical student (who is not a friend of yours) and ask them to spend hours of their time editing your essay or doing a mock MMI with you, but if you can find one for free that you like, go for it.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess finding someone to do this for free is a lot harder than it sounds. I'm not talking about 30 minutes of random advice over coffee. I'm talking about spending 3 hours nitpicking every sentence of the essay and the underlying ideas behind them, or doing a gazillion MMI practice stations with feedback. Unless someone really likes you, finding someone that both knows what they are doing and willing to provide that kind of help for free is super rare.
Moreover, realize that someone simply being a medical student does not mean they would be a good consultant. A random medical student saying your essay is good doesn't necessarily mean that it's actually good.
Here is the problem: a random medical student's journey through the admissions process is not enough proof that they actually have a significant edge in the application process. Why? Simply put, the sample size is way too small.
On average, a medical student probably has a handful of interviews and a few acceptances. Recall that the objective parts of the admissions process (GPA and MCAT, which no one but yourself can help improve) are huge components, and the subjective components (interview and essay) have variance. Furthermore, just because someone is good at essays/interviews doesn't mean they would be able to teach you well. Taking this altogether, it is very difficult from looking at medical school acceptances alone to know which medical students would actually be good consultants.
Of course, you are then going to ask yourself, how are actual admissions consultants any better?
The only real difference with admissions consultants (who I would assume work with many clients and thus have more experience) is that they are likely to have spent more time thinking and practicing strategy when it comes to admissions. They are likely to have read many essays and understand the common mistakes applicants make. Same for interviews - they have probably heard many good answers and many bad ones. Furthermore, if they can provide a track record of success, their sample size is much bigger than medical students whose only sample size is their own experience.
Argument #4: Consultants don't know anything special that can't be found for free online
While it is true that any individuals who are actually involved in the admissions process won't be able to give you advice (and rightly so), this doesn't mean that everyone else is useless. If you really believe that, then you might as well ignore any advice that I type since I'm not on any admissions committee.
If you've been following my blog for a long time, you'll know that I strongly believe there is a science to essay writing and interviews. If everyone was really good at essay writing and interviews, the process would be way more competitive and variance-filled than it is now. I have read a lot of essays, and trust me when I say that even some of the people who I think would make the best doctors in the world can write really bad essays. However, I know I can help them make their essays better. I know this because of the science in it that I see.
While there is a lot of information freely available on the Internet, the Internet cannot sit down next to you, read your essay, and provide specific advice on what you're doing wrong or right.
Take 10 random medical students, and let me pick 10 medical students of my choice (who aren't on any admissions committee, and thus, know "just as much" as anyone else). Let them each work with a random large sample of medical school applicants. I am extremely confident the group I pick would produce a significantly higher success rate.
Of course I don't see this ever being proven, so I guess you have to take my word for it.
Conclusion
Let me be perfectly clear: I'm not saying you should go out and get an admissions consultant. And I'm definitely not saying anyone who claims to be a good admissions consultant really is and that you should work with them. I am confident that there are many bad consultants out there too.
What I am saying is that, like in any service industry, there can be admissions consultants who are good and who are worth the money they are asking for, and we shouldn't just dismiss the concept so easily.
Like I said before, do your home work before spending any money on a consultant. See what their track record is for their own admissions experience and of those they helped. Get recommendations from friends with first hand experience.
Cliff notes: Use common sense.
JoshNS
said:
 |
... I won't comment on the whole of this, but it strikes me that you spent a great deal of time defending what remains a very questionable practice and business venture. I'll assert further that dismissing the inequality of resources facing prospective med applicants on the grounds that "life isn't fair" is simplistic, unconvincing, and generally insulting to those with limited means, most of whom already face larger obstacles "getting in". Would-be admissions consultants need not be held to any standard of altruism, but they are not immune from being accused of exploitative practices. Second, I continue to reject the notion that admissions consultants have any particularly notable expertise to offer. Now, if they are devoting a substantial amount of time to helping with an essay or a practice MMI, then it is reasonable to charge a fee. I do not believe for a second that there is any kind of "science" to either essays or interviews, however; poor writing skills and simply poor writing skills. Practice them and you'll improve. Interviews are similar. About two weeks ago I even had the opportunity to assess applicants during an MMI; the amount of training for that was minimal ( |
JoshNS
said:
|
... (sorry, cut-off) ...the amount of training for that was minimal (less than 1 hour). My assessments were fairly general. Is the applicant articulate? Respectful? Comfortable? What is the quality of her arguments and does she elaborate upon them? Does she seem suited to medicine? It's not rocket science. Finally, I've noted that you provide no evidence for your claims regarding your particular insight into admissions, essays, interviews, etc. Let's see some stats. Have you matched your group with a group with comparable admissions stats who did not receive your advice? How did they fare? Or do you not really have much basis for your claim at all? |
Joshua Liu
said:
|
... As I stated already, the reason why I spent a great deal of time on this is because I see only one side of this issue being addressed and not the other. Simple as that. I have to say though that I am a bit offended that you imply that I am “dismissing” inequalities and basically not giving a damn because I don’t like my words and ideas being misconstrued. Why burn me at the stake for making an obviously true statement that admissions consultants are not doing anything wrong if they believe they are charging prices they believe are fair? I’m not going to say that exploitive practices never occur because that’s just as outrageous as saying that it occurs most of the time. It seems that your dislike for admissions consulting stems from your belief that there isn’t a science to essay writing or interviews. Just to be clear, when I say science, I am basically saying there are strategies, styles, thought processes, approaches, etc. specific to the topics of essay writing and interviewing that can maximize one’s chances of admissions. Concepts like being able to understand why admissions committees are asking certain questions and adjusting your approach accordingly. Concepts like flow. Concepts like an essay having a unifying theme with direction. Concepts like understanding how an interviewer perceives the words that you say and the way you say them. You can be a competent writer, someone whose literacy skills are more than good enough to be a competent physician, and you can still not know/understand any of this and write a poor admissions essay. Do you think admissions essay readers are trained to look for this? Of course not. They are trained to read essays and pick people they think would be a good doctors. But these concepts play a significant role in presenting the applicant in a good light. I also clearly disagree with your notion that you just need to practice, practice, practice in order to improve. That's why coaches, tutors, teachers, etc. exist - because in order to improve, you need the right approach. There is no point practicing if you're just repeating the same mistakes over and over. And I think it's far too idealistic to think everyone will just naturally have a strong approach to something like the MMI, for example, and just needs to do a lot of stations. Before anything, one needs to develop a solid thought process and approach to them. I don’t see how any of this is even debatable. But if you deny the existence of a science and strategy to essays/interviews, then there really is no point arguing. No, I don’t have any hard core statistics for what I say and I have no real incentive to spend my time constructing a large sample and comparing it. All I have is significant success in the application and interview process of some of the most competitive scholarships and awards in Canada, as well as medical school admissions. That, and students I’ve provided advice to winning some of those same extremely competitive scholarships. Oh and the logic that my views on essay/interview strategy is based on. I really could care less if people disregarded everything I say and believed that if they are good doctor potential they will naturally write great essays and give great interviews. I’m just trying to help. |
JoshNS
said:
|
... There may be better strategies, but they don't go much beyond what's available in most university writing and career counselling centres. Or first year university English composition. Writing a structured essay in response to a specific set of questions is a skill that is learned over time, but the only prerequisite to helping someone else with an essay is being a good, perceptive writer yourself. As I said above, if this requires a lot of time, then you should certainly be paid for it, but the skills required are neither very specialized nor uncommon; anything above the lower end of private tutoring fees would start to become exploitative of applicant clients - some of whom may simply be manifestly unqualified. That brings up another point - would you offer "consulting" to just any applicant? Regardless of their actual chances on paper? Would you take money to help with someone's essay who you thought had a negligible chance of acceptance? When it comes to interviews, the biggest marks against an applicant had a lot less to do with content than delivery. Awkwardness, nervousness - these are not things that can easily be overcome. Or are you saying that you are qualified and able to teach communication skills? When it comes to the content - arguments, questions, collaboration - the information freely available about an interview is amply sufficient. It's all the assessors get in any case. Incidentally, your personal success with scholarships, awards, and finally admissions really has no bearing on this situation. I will never know what the main strengths were of my applications, though I can speculate. If you choose to help - for a price - your obligation is simply to avoid any situations where such help would be of negligible use and to limit the sorts of expectations you might create. I would suggest further some humility - gaining admission is a major accomplishment, to be sure, but it doesn't convey particular insight into the process, and it still leaves you as a med student. And we don't know anything. I know a bit more in second year - or at least appreciate better the amount of stuff that I'm wholly unaware of. And I do not feel you have explored this issue adequately. It's one thing to present a case for consulting; failing to acknowledge the potential pitfalls is disappointing. |
Mike
said:
|
... I don't think his purpose was to disregard the pitfalls of consulting fees. His purpose was to bring some balance to the grossly one-sided argument that charging for consulting is evil. |
JoshNS
said:
|
... Fair enough, but that requires substantive responses to criticisms, though I grant that the post above addresses some (albeit with no agreement on my part). |
Joshua Liu
said:
|
... Paragraph 1: We’ll have to agree to disagree on what a standard university writing and career centre offers in terms of essay strategy writing. I believe there are a lot of important concepts that wouldn’t be covered in most centres. We’re not talking about a regular, formal, English essay that is taught about in school. There is no course on writing an admissions essay. Again, I’m not denying that exploitation can occur. I even brought up that it can be difficult to determine the quality of a consultant in my original article, which is why I advocated for people to be careful when looking for consultants. Paragraph 2: Yes, if it were me doing the consulting, I would be completely honest with the applicant about what I thought their chances were. I know what you’re trying to get at, but again, the fact that some exploitation can occur does not mean the industry shouldn’t exist. I would say both content and delivery are both important, especially in the medical school interview process. You can strategize with the consultant for strong ways to approach certain questions based on their background and experiences, and you can do mock interviews with the applicant to determine ways to improve on delivery. The Internet can’t help you determine which of your three leadership experiences is best used to answer the leadership question, among many, many other things. While information online can give general advice, it can’t give applicant-specific advice. Paragraph 3: Major scholarships and awards have processes very similar to medical school admissions. Application essays have to be written and interviews with professors, community leaders, and even doctors occur (yes, I’ve even been interviewed by a medical doctor for a scholarship). My point being that I have spent a significant amount of time thinking about these types of processes in order to maximize my chances at the application stage, and I have used these thought processes for many years and have been very successful with them. I have written about these types of concepts countless times and anyone can read them and debate them if they like. You can interpret my success however you like, but I think the most likely possibility is that I’m doing something right at the application and interview stage. I’d like to think that means I have a good amount of theoretical insight into application and interview processes in general. I mention them because the reality is that most people are results oriented, but no one has to believe me of course. Paragraph 4: I’m not saying that getting into medical school gives me some magical insight into the admissions process. All I’ve said is that I believe there is are general strategies one can employ to improve your chances at student application processes, like that of medical school or scholarships or whatever. I am not saying I know exactly how an admissions committee thinks. |
Joe...
said:
|
... If people aren't OK with these consulting services why not just ignore them? To be honest, a consulting service is not going to be the main factor to your acceptance... |
Arthur
said:
|
... I can see similarities in personal trainers at the gym. Back on topic, I think it is unfortunate that the demand for admissions consulting is high enough to support 1) high and exploitative pricing; 2) low-quality consultants who only hold the "qualification" of getting in. Also, a reason for the level of exploitation would be the massive number of panicking applicants who are desperate to get in (for the $ and prestige) Josh, could you provide your opinion on the value and effect of the admissions consulting industry? Are otherwise "inferior" students getting in because of the help they receive from admissions consulting (as in, essay getting revamped and emphasized things adcoms like to hear)? Has it grown necessary to use admissions consulting? As you say: "You can be a competent writer, someone whose literacy skills are more than good enough to be a competent physician, and you can still not know/understand any of this and write a poor admissions essay." Is this an unavoidable result of the competitiveness of medical school admissions? Applicants that are competent and willing and devoted, but could not afford a consultant? (I know it's not that extreme in most cases...) |
medaholic
said:
 |
... Wow, personal attacks are totally uncalled for. Please try to respect each other and opinions that are different from your own. In terms of consulting or even "helping" people with the admissions process, I believe it can be extremely beneficial. Friends help each other out all the time and the difference it can make might just be what someone needs to get into medical school. You can teach communication skills. You can improve in your critical thinking. As much as people say you can't prepare and train for your interview, that is simply not true. Having someone who is knowledgeable and experienced guide you through the process can make it a lot easier on your part. I don't have anything against people charging money for time to help you. If there's a useful service, people will naturally pay for it. I am against exploitative prices and bad consulting. For the people who are totally against "admissions consulting" and helping others prepare their application for medical school, have you even helped others with the application process? If you have, you would know it takes a lot of time and energy to read over essays, run mock interview sessions, strategize, plan and create the best chances for the applicant. Just because there are "FREE" resources out there on the internet, it doesn't necessarily mean that would be the most suitable resource. In conclusions (1) I am against exploitative practices and consulting fees (2) I believe that there is a valuable contribution from admissions consulting, whether that is strategizing, preparing for interviews, essay editing, etc (3) I agree that people who can't afford such services, of even applicants who don't know personal friends/physicians who can help train them are at a disadvantage. But if you disagree with pt.2, then it shouldn't matter unless of course they are exploited (pt. 1) |
Joshua Liu
said:
|
... Arthur: I don't know enough about the admissions consulting industry to say what the general effect is right now. I will say that I think most admissions consultants probably genuinely believe they are worth what they charge and most clients will probably agree with that after the fact. However, I'm not saying in any way that they actually are worth what they charge, however. No, I don't think undeserving students are getting in because of admissions consulting. There are way too many qualified applicants than there are spots in the first place. All admissions consulting does is help you improve the way you market yourself. Anyone with a decent GPA, MCAT, and people skills would probably make a good doctor. The problem is somehow separating yourself from the many people who fit that criteria. I don't think admissions consulting is "necessary" to get into medical school by any means, but I do think if you have a really good one (which is probably rare in itself), it can definitely take an average applicant and turn him/her into a great one. (Note: When I say average applicant, I don't mean average in capability or anything. I mean average in terms of the way the applicant "appears" in the admissions process). Hater: lol way to state the obvious. Guess you agree with everything I've said then, otherwise I'm here to discuss if you want to be grown up about it. Medaholic: I like how you can put everything together so well in a concise and clear manner. Nice post. |
gurpaul singh
said:
|
... Your a joke joshua. Theres an advertisement on MD consultants to this webpage.So obviously some shady stuff is going on. I have lost all respect from you. |
Joshua Liu
said:
|
... I already explained the cross-linking done between the two websites at the beginning. I don't work for MD Consultants, so no, I can't vouch for anything they do or comment on it. Feel free to think what you want, but to say this is "shady" is kind of ridiculous. I'm going to go ahead and mention that I consulted with someone yesterday for one of his medical school admissions essay for the upcoming cycle and didn't charge a dime as usual. Obviously that shouldn't matter at all, but given comments like this, it seems like I need to keep throwing anecdotes like that in for obvious reasons. |
Kevin L
said:
 |
... Hey guys, Let's keep things civil here. There is no need to be throwing personal attacks. First of all, to clarify the link to MDConsultants, MedChatter has no invested interests in the company nor do we benefit from their business. The reason I've decided to put up their link was because time and time again, MDConsultants has helped to promote our website at their local seminars. Since I do have a personal relationship with one of their members, I feel that putting up a link to their website is the least that I can do to reciprocate the help that we've received from them. Whether our members would actually choose to use their services simply does not concern us. I can understand how this can be misinterpreted, so I've removed the "consulting service" section and moved it under the links page. Furthermore, I can understand why people would question Josh's intentions on writing such an article. But this is blog, and blogs should be a space where you can freely voice your thoughts, and this is what he is doing. Please realize that many of us here have sacrificed much of our time despite our hectic schedules to turn MedChatter into a reality. We've still have many goals for the website and are working very hard towards them. It's not to say that we don't welcome any criticisms. We really appreciate the input. We sincerely hope that this site will evolve into an organism of its own where people can freely express their opinions and exchange useful information with one another. I just hope that we can all do this respectfully even if our opinions differ. Kevin |
