You have probably heard of tele-medicine before. It’s basically a way for doctors to attend to patients in remote locations via video conferencing technologies. It certainly isn’t a replacement for in-person care, but it’s better than nothing for people with limited access to health care settings. Tele-medicine is definitely part of the digital revolution in medicine.
It occurred to me, after a brief Twitter conversation with @thegrandfinalle, that this same video conferencing technology could help medical school admissions committees and applicants make the admissions process a bit easier. Why don’t we bring that digital revolution to the admissions office as well?
Traveling to medical schools is not an inexpensive endeavor. Airplane tickets, hotel stays, rental cars, and food costs add up quickly, making travel to schools across state lines prohibitive for many applicants, especially those in low-income brackets. Moreover, medical schools always interview more candidates than they have available seats, usually at an approximately 5 to 1 ratio. That means admissions offices have to pull away more doctors from work to interview four candidates who may ultimately not make the cut.
Though this process is tried and true, it runs inefficiently, as evidenced by the multiple month-long wait times for admissions decisions. There has to be a better way to execute it.
In-person interviews are unquestionably important. They show admissions committees the “intangibles” about an applicant – presence, confidence, demeanor – that aren’t necessarily present in the paper application. What if, however, in-person interviews were reserved for the applicants who passed the video conferencing interview via Skype?
Instead of first inviting an applicant for an in-person interview, invite them to a video conference with an admissions member (or multiple admissions members, since impressions are always variable) and ask predetermined questions for about 20 minutes. Afterwards, interviewers rank candidates based on a preferred assessment methodology and results are compiled.
If this is done for all, say, 600 potential interviewees, the in-person invite list could arguably be whittled down to 400 or 300. If there are only 100 seats in the medical school, this makes each in-person interview candidate’s odds much better and requires less time on the part of the medical school to interview them all. That also motivates in-person interviewees to actually come to the medical school because they know their chances are much higher. It saves money as well because interviewees who don’t pass muster won’t have to pay futile travel costs.
It’s a win-win!
(It also saves the environment because less people are traveling long distances. Those of you who are environmentally-conscious can get behind this too.)
Of course, as with anything, there are hurdles. Some applicants may not have internet access or a webcam. During the Skype call, internet service may be shoddy, leading to lagging video, audio problems, or just generally poor connectivity. These, however, are all technological problems that will inevitably be solved by Moore’s Law and the decreasing cost of high tech tools.
What are you thoughts? Comment below or tweet me @TheBiopsy!
Image may be NSFW.
Clik here to view.
Image may be NSFW.Clik here to view.
