“Have you thought about the situation where you got into a top-tier med school and also a good but not-as-good school? Would you go to the best one you got in to, which might be incredibly stressful, or some place you have less doubt you'd succeed in?”
A friend raised this question to me. The answer? Of course I've thought about it.
I discussed this idea with a professor on the admissions committee for the residency program at Harvard. Every year, he had his choice of the best medical students in the country, and he picked out the ones he wanted to train in his hospital. A piece of wisdom he gave me:
“Every year I admit students from Harvard and UMASS. Both applicants are among the best students at their schools. The thing about a school like Harvard, the competition is high and the kid at the bottom is so smart, that the average student gets pushed up. But the best students at any school are the same. There’s something special that makes them tick. If you think you’re one of the best, it doesn’t matter whether you go. I myself, went to Vanderbilt.”
I’ve obsessed about whether I was with the best or the mean. I’ve also wondered if the theory was even right.
I went to a small liberal arts college, Kenyon. In the world of liberal arts colleges, Kenyon is mid-tier. Good enough that people notice it, but not good enough to be overflowing with money, nor to pull in the top cut of high school students.
I have a friend that went to Williams, another small liberal arts college, except for Williams is not mid-tier, it’s arguably the best. It’s a prime mating spot for rich and powerful 17 year olds.
We have this conversation a lot. My friend and I are basically the same - he might have a small edge over me at standardized tests, I would argue that I’m a stronger writer. Sidenote - If we actually had this argument, he would concede superiority to me, which probably says something, but I’ll pretend it doesn’t.
Regardless, at Kenyon I found myself among the best. At Williams, my friend was in the upper echelon, but not the best.
If the Harvard/UMASS theory was right, we should have both risen to the top.
Where would I have landed in a world like Williams? My thought is that I would have been left in the dust by overachievers and never stumbled upon enough opportunities to become great.
I felt like at Kenyon, I was a big fish in a small pond. The best example would be running. At Kenyon, our cross country team was around 15 runners. With a small team, I had the opportunity to run in big races with the varsity team. I even picked up leadership skills as a captain. In a world like Williams cross country that carries 50 or so runners and consistently makes Nationals – I would never have gotten those opportunities to grow by sitting on the bench.
Part of me wants to take my Kenyon-developed self and dive into the competitive pool that my friend went into at Williams. Another part of me questions if my fragile ego would crumble.
I wouldn't trade my Kenyon experience for the world, there’s a lot to be said about big fish in a small pond – it gives you opportunities to mature and provides protection as you grow - something I desperately needed as an immature 17 year old. On the other hand, now I'm 23, married, and intellectually/socially competent. At some point don’t you have to jump into the shark tank to size yourself up against the competition?
As always, more questions than answers. My friends, please enlighten me.
See you on the other side,
from ken
Yessir I think you are correct--Kenyon remains in your experience and personal heritage and informs your path today. Your personal heritage can't become a ball and chain that prevents you from being where you need to be today. It sounds like you belong in that bigger, in some ways less gentle pond.
ReplyDeleteI'd comment more but you have it well thought-out and covered already. It's gratifying to see great things unfolding in a former teammate's life.
Lots of things to talk about here, but I'll just free form reflect. I think the key to the question you ask at the beginning is knowing yourself and what you need. Sounds like Kenyon was the perfect school for you in 2006. Now, as you mention, it's 2012 and your life is very different and you're ready and excited about the 'competitive pool' (although one could argue that all medical schools are big ponds).
ReplyDeleteI also think the answer to your final question, 'At some point don't you have to jump into the shark tank...', is dependent on what you seek from life. I know a lot of really successful, really happy people who are happy to live in small ponds for their entire life. Maybe you want to be a PCP and you just want an MD at a place where you don't have to deal with the research / stress of a place like Harvard Med School.
I probably disagree with the MD at Harvard that you spoke with - I think it does matter whether you go to UMASS or Harvard. I'm sure the elite students at both schools are special, but maybe the elite student at UMASS wouldn't have developed into an elite student at Harvard, and vice versa. Maybe the elite Harvard students needed the added pressure of being at Harvard to become the best of the best. Perhaps after 4 years, they are capable of similar performances in residency programs, and their destinations are the same - but I imagine their journeys were quite different.
Personally, for me, I spent a year teaching at a school alongside families that had been teaching at the same place for 25 years. They were legends at the school - true big fish in a small pond - and I was really envious of them when I was there. They were incredibly happy, they did a LOT of good with their lives, and they were very well-respected. However, the more I thought about it, the more I realized that I've always had Big dreams (with a capital B) and for now I want to chase them in the Big Pond. Perhaps one day, when I have a family or when I realize I can't hang with the big boys, I'll change my mind. But Big Pond For Now.
Evan - Thanks for the support, it is nice to see the lives of a former teammate and shower buddy.
ReplyDeleteAmulya - Interesting reflections. One thought that came to my head was that "performance in residency" is not all there is to being a beast MD.
To me, a lot of it is beyond that. Yeah, you have to have great performance, but you also have to have swagger, good patient communication, rapport with the nurses, resiliency to bounce back from failure, etc. All that stuff - maybe at Harvard or UMASS you have a better shot to develop it.
Also, love the last paragraph. "Big dreams with a capital B." I think people like us, we would have to chase big dreams and live big lives for as long as possible. Better to burn out than to fade away. Or something.
from ken