<p>SIMR is competitive enough that most people are very strong in all 4 categories. Idk exactly how they choose, and we interns never exactly sat in a circle and passed out our resumes. That being said, I would guess that…</p>
<p>–your resume can be extremely important, depending what’s on it. You definitely should have some demonstrated interest in science. This is an extreme case, but if you’ve been doing research for the past several summers, and were an intel semifinalist with your previous research project, then you’ve demonstrated that you have the skills to be a successful researcher. Even if you have imperfect stats they would love to have you participate. If your resume has more ‘average’ extracurriculars/science activities, ie it looks just like everyone else’s resume, then the resume is obviously a less defining factor, and then other parts of your application also have to be very strong for you to get in.</p>
<p>-- your essays are very important; you need to show that you have a passion for research. They also look for diversity, so if you have any unique life circumstances, or special reason why you really want to do biomedical research, that helps.</p>
<p>(That being said, if you claim to be incredibly passionate about research, but have never done anything science-related, have mediocre grades, and very low test scores, they will 1. doubt that you are really that passionate, 2. doubt that you are diligent enough to carry out extensive work on this supposed passion, and 3. doubt if you have the smarts to learn about very complicated research topics. To quote some book, “Good essays can heal the sick, but they do not raise the dead.” Even if your essays are amazing, the other parts of your application have to be there.)</p>
<p>–grades are very important. They show you’re smart and work hard. Why take B+/A- student when tons of others have (almost) all A’s?</p>
<p>–test scores are important. They are a common denominator between all applicants, they show a rough correlation with intelligence (or at least motivation to study for them), and 2400s always look better than 2100s.</p>
<p>^That all being said, I think the whole “what category is most important” thing is overrated. They look at applications holistically, and usually all these components of the application reinforce each other-- bright, motivated, accomplished kids who pursue science generally have good grades & test scores, have participated in science-related stuff, and can (in most cases) write well about their interest in science.</p>