1. TEMPLATE DESIGN © 2008
www.PosterPresentations.com
Goal 1: Give students better access to feedback on personal
statements
 Improve and Expand Personal Statement Workshop
• Professor in Department of English who led freewriting exercise
• Collaborated with trained students from the Writing Center
• Media & Technology Support Services videotaped session
 Improve and expand Personal Statement Review for PreHealth
students
• University Career Services need for collaboration from our office
• Offered first in-house Personal Statement Review in March 2016
Result: Addition of freewriting exercise at the end was well-received by
students surveyed. Reviewed 55 PreHealth personal statements through
our office between March and May 2016 (43 med, 8 PA, 3 dental, 1
MD/PhD).
Goal 2: Increase communication with other related advising areas
 Met with advisors in Psychology to talk about common questions for
pre-health applicants who are majoring in Psychology
 Invited advisors from Psychology, Kinesiology, Biobehavioral Health,
Nutrition, and Rehabilitation Health Sciences to a well-received
presentation for advisors from Jefferson University’s PA, OT, and PT
programs, followed with a session for students for which far exceeded
room capacity
 Began identifying a department liaison for health professions
communications
Result: Identifying useful strategies for continuing collaboration.
Goal 3: Better Communication with Health Professions Schools
• Salus University Optometry- visit 10/20/15
• Johns Hopkins Nursing- visit 10/21/15
• Advisor Road Trip to TCMC-11/15/15
• Thomas Jefferson PA/OT/PT Reps- visit 4/14/16
• University of the Sciences PA Coordinator Phone Call- 3/11/16
Weekly First Year Seminars, a graduation requirement for all Penn State
students:
 Followed predetermined college curriculum (40 percent of curriculum)
 Added PreHealth specific material:
• Overviewing the health professions
• Describing the medical education process
• Introducing extracurricular opportunities available
 Hosted junior and senior student panels focused on:
• “What I wish I would have known”
• “The PreHealth application process from my perspective”
• “How I got involved in research and service at Penn State”
 Required capstone project (group presentation) requiring students to
research and present on various assigned (a) health professions or
(b) health specialties
Result: Student evaluations revealed that student panels and health
professions overviews were most helpful to them. Students still struggled
to find motivation to learn about health professions more broadly (i.e.,
not just MD/DO). As a result, it can be difficult to get students to prepare
more holistically for the health professions. Another approach needed.
Design:
Letter-Writing Committee surveyed 2016 applicants on March 1, 2016.
 Goal: To assess application statuses and advising needs
 Format: 14-question survey including questions about the number of
completed primary applications for MD/DO schools (each), number of
secondary applications completed for MD/DO (each), number of
interview invitations received, number of acceptances received, and
number of waitlist spots earned.
 Response Rate: Approximately 37 percent of applicants (and re-
applicants) completed the survey
Findings:
Out of 105 respondents, 92 had received at least one invitation to
interview at an allopathic or osteopathic medical school (see Figure 3.1)
by March 1.
Approximately 66 respondents indicated that they had been waitlisted at
a medical school. About 55 percent of these waitlisted students indicated
that they were waitlisted at multiple schools (see Figure 3.2).
Out of 105 respondents, 44 percent of respondents indicated that they
would like to receive individualized advising at this point in the
application process. Others, who did not respond to the survey,
contacted us as a result of receiving it and requested individualized
advising.
Result: Following up with these respondents helped us increase
advising support for those who were strategically updating medical
schools and/or analyzing their acceptance decisions. We also learned
from requested follow-up appointments which parts of the candidates’
applications needed improvement and what kind of advising support was
needed for candidates planning to reapply.
 Collaborative Workshop Series
• Address a wider range of specific topics (based on applicant
survey findings)
• Identify and set up meetings for collaborative partners, including
PSU partners in other units and health professions representatives
• Create listserv for department liaisons
• Continue with revised Personal Statement Workshop; increase
frequency; possible virtual dissemination
 First Year Seminars
• Use AAMC competencies as framework to explore health
professions, goal-setting, and building resume/application
• Re-frame exploration of the health professions: How do physicians
work with various healthcare providers? How are other healthcare
professionals’ role the same or different than that of a physician?
• Combine student panel sessions into rooms that allow for a larger
audience at common times to be more respectful of upper-class
students’ time and ensure consistency of information presented
 Group Advising Sessions
• Increase scope (separate profession presentations) and frequency
• Revise content coverage (based on applicant survey results)
• Require attendance before individualized meetings
 Applicant Surveys
• Reach out to medical applicants earlier (January or February)
• Create re-applicant modules, helping students critique their
applications more closely
 Workshops and Seminars: Assessment did not begin until mid-to-late
spring.
 Applicant Survey: Response rate was only 37 percent. We still need to
capture more students who are going through the process.
 First Year Seminars: A certain percentage of curriculum must reflect
mandated college curriculum.
Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2008). Three elements of self-authorship.
Journal of College Student Development, 49(4), 269-284.
Crookston, B. (1972). A developmental view of academic advising as
teaching. Journal of College Student Personnel, 13, 12-17. Reprinted in
NACADA Journal, 14:2, 5-9.
Tinto,V. (1988). Stages of Student Departure: Reflection on the
Longitudinal Character of Student Leaving. Journal of Higher Education
59:4, 438-455.
Special thanks to the Richard E. Lace Premedicine Program Endowment
in the Eberly College of Science, whose purpose is to enrich and
enhance the development of the Premedicine Program at Penn State.
Medical Mondays: Group Advising Sessions held 1-2 Mondays per
month where we covered basics of applying to medical/
dental/optometry/podiatry/PA schools
Challenge: Impossible to cover everything in 50 minutes
Solution: Split into Freshman/Sophomore and Junior/Senior sections
Freshman/Sophomore Presentations:
 Basics of exploring health professions
 Timeline and pieces for application
 Required coursework
 Applicant competencies
 Reflection on and record of relevant experiences
Result: Students identified useful information they gleaned from
presentations (see Figure 2.1). Follow-up appointments were often
necessary; 70 percent of attending freshmen/sophomores surveyed
made follow-up appointments. Resulting appointments proved much
more productive/less repetitive (see Figure 2.2).
Junior/Senior Presentations:
 Competitive timeline for application and MCAT
 Application (self-)evaluation
 Committee letter process
 Primary vs. secondary applications
 School selection
 Glide year options
Result: Well attended. Covered much more detail in regard to
application process. Students expressed interest in separate health
professions (especially PA) presentations. Found need for series of
workshops to cover specific topics.
Expanding the Advising Footprint for PreHealth Students:
Using Group Advising and Collaborative Strategies to Create Better PreHealth Applicants
Kelli Hutchens and Jessica Matzko
Science Advising Center, Penn State University
Applicant Surveys Long Term Strategy
Limitations
First Year Seminars
References
Group Advising Collaborative Workshops
Who We Are: PreHealth Advisors from Penn State
• An R1 PWI University in rural Central Pennsylvania
• PreHealth advising housed in the College of Science
• 40,000 undergraduates at main campus (University Park)
• Additional 30,000 undergraduates among commonwealth campuses
Observations:
• Thousands of students are interested in health professions
• Individual appointments feel repetitive and inefficient
• Applicants often ask questions too late in the process
• Committee interviews/letter writing demands are extensive (300+/yr)
Questions:
• How to reach more students earlier
• How to make one-on-one appointments more effective
• How to assess when/where students need individualized advising
• How to help students best prepare for the committee process
Theoretical Approach
Relying on the concept of academic integration (Tinto, 1988), we sought
to increase student and advisor interactions; the more connected
students are to health professions advising, the more informed they will
be about the experiences they need to prepare for application. In
addition, we found that the more students are able to reflect on and grow
from their own experiences, the better applicants they become (Baxter
Magolda & King, 2008). Structuring advising interactions to reflect where
students stand developmentally allows us to address more precisely
their needs (Crookston, 1972).
Strategic Initiatives
• Group Advising
• Newsletter
• Collaborative Workshops
• Applicant Surveys
• First Year Seminar Content
• Weekly newsletter reorganized for readability and content consistency
• Switched from a listserv platform to Campaign Manager platform In
November 2014 to increase readability and content consistency
Result: New format/content led to almost 30 percent increase in both the
number of recipients and number of newsletter emails opened from 2014
to 2016 (see Figure 1).
0 2 4 6 8 10
Coursework/MCAT vs schools
GPA/Numbers
LORs/getting to know profs
Committee Interview Info
Timeline
Other
Specifics Learned from Presentation
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
11-7-14 4-22-16
Newsletter Reach
Recipients Opened
Challenges Common to Large R1 Universities
Initiatives To Address Challenges
PreHealth Newsletter
Acknowledgement
Received at Least One Invitation to Interview
Figure 1
At how many schools have you
earned a waitlist spot?
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.2
70
30
Follow-Up Appointments Requested by
First- and Second-Year Students
Yes No
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.2