A word about Pre-meds and GPA.

ace550 · May 5, 2012, 1:42pm

All these points are not necessarily conflicting. Students taking pre-reqs in summer at HOME school is trying to do some catch-up. They may need to do that in order to realign their courses so that they can take MCAT in time. I doubt that the grades would be that much different compared to those awarded in the regular season. But, taking a pre-req at a CC is an entirely different matter. The premed committee may not give the most favorable recommendation as Bluebayou indicated.

I think that Kristin probably agrees with Sakky’s point on “Once you’re in, while the lifestyle is certainly not easy, you’re not going to flunk out.” Ingeneral, a premed should not risk too much on difficulty courses if the science GPA may be affected. DS1 has taken four honors pre-req courses in the past year and ended with A- (Chem I), A- (Org Ch I), B+ (Integrated Bio I), and A (Integrated Bio 2). In addition, he also got an A on Molecular Bio (regular session) with a professor typically awarding A to 10% of previous classes. He has a GPA of 3.83 and a science GPA of 3.73. It was pretty brutal even though he learned a lot. If he were to take regular sessions, he would have gotten all A’s. He has no regret so far; but, he would not advise average pre-meds to take the most challenging courses. His GE courses had easier grading. Nonetheless, there was a lot of reading/writing. Hopefully, these will help with his MCAT verbal.

Because of the course load, he has not been able to put in much effort into research the past semester. He will be back to school next month to join other friends for two months of paid research and lots of fun. This month is for relaxing/volunteering/shadowing. Summer of 2013 will be for research and MCAT preparation. Spending money on tuition/room and board for taking courses in the summer is not on his roadmap.

plumazul · May 5, 2012, 1:59pm

I am currently in a pchem class with a prof that gave ONE “A” last term. (that’s 2% of the class). It’s a jungle out here! :eek:

sakky · May 5, 2012, 2:20pm

Is this whining? I am simply pointing out that the med-school admissions process rewards easy classes at easy schools.

I would actually argue that it is the adcoms words that we should trust the least, as they are precisely the ones who won’t want to admit that they refuse to properly compensate students who take difficult courses at difficult schools.

Hence, rather than listening to what adcoms say, we should watch what they do, and the evidence strongly indicates that adcoms pay little attention to the difficulty of your school or your classes.

Is it’s true then McCollough’s advice is applicable only for hooked candidates, then that only strengthens my argument even further. After all, McCullough would then be arguing that even hooked candidates may be better off taking easier courses at a community college and thereby avoiding difficult curves. If even hooked candidates may need to do that, what does that say about the unhooked candidates?

Which would then only make McCollough’s mention of Myths 10 and 11 even more trenchant, right? After all, even the hooked students are being advised by McCullough to ‘play the GPA game’ by taking easier courses at easier schools.

Actually, you’ve confused the issue for what you are talking about is not a Berkeley issue but rather an issue specific to bio majors across the country. The proper comparison of Berkeley MCB would then be against bio majors at other top schools. Sure, I agree that that Berkeley MCB GPA may be high compared to Berkeley engineering, but engineering students sadly must suffer through low average GPA’s no matter what school they attend. It seems to me that at practically every school, bio tends to be the easiest of the STEMS. {If you disagree, then by all means name one school where students are known to say: “I tried bio/MCB, but it was simply too hard, so I had no choice but to switch over to an easier engineering major”. Just name one.}

But more importantly, we’re talking about * the survivors of the MCB major*. What about all of the students who don’t survive the major, such as the students who are weeded out in the notorious Chem3AB and Bio1AB sequences? Let’s face it, if you obtain poor grades in those courses, you’re not going to declare the MCB major. Yet those are precisely the courses that comprise the premed sequence. {Chem3AB is Berkeley’s OChem.}

So since I answered your question, perhaps you can answer mine. Riddle me this: why do Berkeley premeds *as a whole<a href=“not%20just%20MCB,%20but%20all%20premeds”>/i</a> who apply to med-school need to have the same GPA as do all premeds nationwide in order to be admitted? Let’s face it, the vast majority of all premeds nationwide come from average schools, with Berkeley being in the top 1% of the ~2000 colleges in the nation. Yet the adcoms don’t care. Like I said, they seem to demand the same GPA from Berkeley premeds that they do from premeds from average schools. Why is that?

And if that’s true, then once again make the behavior of the adcoms even more inflammatory. After all, who disputes that MIT engineering students endure indefatigable hours under savage levels of competition, right?

That only serves to reinforce my basic point: med-school adcoms do not really reward hard work and difficult courses. Plenty of premeds are surely better off, as per McCullough’s advice, taking easier courses at an easier school.

sakky · May 5, 2012, 3:33pm

And yet med-schools seemingly now welcome plenty of premeds who never even majored in STEM at all, but rather majored in HASS. Heck, I can think of several such students who were admitted to the MD program at Harvard Medical School, which surely we can all agree is an elite research medical school. They surely have less familiarity with biomedical research than does the engineering student you cite.

Actually (and deeply ironically) this particular statistic only serves to highlight the issue. A 30/3.8 represents prime premed credentials. {Yes, kristin5792, I salute you as a prime premed candidate.} Nevertheless, of even these prime candidates, a whopping 20% of them are rejected by every med-school that they apply to. Just think about that for awhile. That means that you can work hard to amass strong premed credentials…and still not get in anywhere.

Now, granted, perhaps some of them forewent safeties and simply applied to only the top med-schools. Some of them perhaps didn’t receive strong rec letters or never performed any clinical volunteer work. Some of them may have written poor essay or interview responses. But come on, how many such students would truly exist? Let’s face it, we’re not talking about a group of careless and untalented students. The category of premeds with 30/3.8’s represents a highly responsible and studious class of students. Surely not many of them would simply refuse to engage in the appropriate EC’s/volunteering, not properly prepare for their interviews/essays, receive poor rec letters, or simply be so arrogant as to apply only to the top med-schools. I would estimate that those features might explain, at very most, half of the rejected students in that category (hence 10 percentage points of the 20% who were rejected). And even of those students, some of them may strengthen their application in the future, reapply and get in. But that still leaves the remaining 10% of those students who are rejected everywhere for which no reasonable explanation exists.

That 10% represents a gigantic risk. To put it in perspective, if I suffered a car accident 10% of every time that I drove, I would immediately foreswear driving for the rest of my life as being far too risky. If I sprained my ankle 10% of the time that I went jogging, I would immediately find another exercise regimen as jogging is clearly far too dangerous. But here we’re talking about talented premed students amassing prime credentials: strong GPA’s, MCAT’s, EC’s, rec’s, and essays, applying to a reasonable spectrum of med-schools…and nevertheless 10% will be admitted nowhere.

So to be clear, I agree that some premed applicants should probably not get in. I certainly don’t dispute that if you have a sub-3.0 GPA and a terrible MCAT, you should probably not be admitted. What is far more controversial regards how a significant percentage of students with even prime credentials nevertheless do not get admitted. Med-school adcoms are therefore offloading a unconscionable level of uncertainty and insecurity onto the shoulders of the premeds - for even those who do everything right may still not get in.

I agree. But what’s really not going to garner a favorable recommendation from the committee is taking that prereq during your normal term at your normal university…and getting a terrible grade.

Now obviously the best outcome would be taking regular courses during the regular term, and receiving A’s. If you can do that, you should obviously do so. But let’s face it - not everybody will be able to do that. Indeed, the premed grade curves dictate that only a fixed percentage of the students will receive A’s. What if you’re not one of them?

To tell people that they should simply get A’s in their regular classes is like telling guys that an effective way to attract a girlfriend is to be tall and handsome. Obviously every guy would like to be tall and handsome, but what if you’re not? What do you do now? Similarly, just imagine telling a student at a competitive, top school such as MIT or Berkeley that he should simply get A’s in his regular premed courses. Of course every student at those schools would like to get A’s. But what if you can’t?

In every premed course at every competitive school in the country, there are plenty of students who will receive terrible grades and hence effectively ruined their medical career before it even started. Let’s face it - many (perhaps even most) of them would have been better off had they instead taken that course at an easy community college.

With formal apologies to molliebatmit for putting her on the spot, I would continue to invoke her as a prime example of the inequities of the med-school process. She has openly admitted in prior posts that she would have had great difficulty being admitted to med-school because her overall GPA is relatively low (~3.3/4), particularly in the early premed courses for which she received several C’s. This despite her exhibiting excellent leadership and EC activities, and amassing a research record and recs impressive enough to be admitted to Harvard Medical School itself…for their PhD program. But MD adcoms would care little for the fact that she went to a difficult school such as MIT and consequently received relatively low grades. All they will see is those low grades. It should also be noted that she wasn’t even an engineering student at MIT - her major was in biology.

kristin5792 · May 5, 2012, 3:51pm

So then…is admission to medical school a reward for getting a certain GPA, MCAT score, and otherwise jumping through the hoops published on med school’s admissions websites? That students with certain credentials deserve to be admitted?

Perhaps I erroneously look at the process as med schools determining which individuals to invest substantial resources (time, money, energy, etc) in, and that there’s more to it than test scores, grades, etc. After all, these med schools are graduating physicians who will be responsible for the care of thousands of patients during their careers and will also be responsible for advancing the field of medicine (and relevant policies) in the future. I imagine the decision of who to admit is not taken lightly, and is not as straightforward as a set of scores and grades and hours spent in health care settings or at a lab bench. That unlucky 20% could have been rejected for any number of reasons–a late application, a lack of ECs, a poor choice in recommenders, a less-than-steller interview (showing up late, dressing inappropriately, answering rudely, failing to maintain conversation, etc), a poorly constructed list of schools, not fitting with the school’s mission/image/etc.

I’ve interviewed for plenty of jobs and applied for plenty of scholarships or programs or whatever where I fit the expected criteria to a T–and I didn’t get it. Do I know why? Well, no. If I called the interviewer or the organization and asked why I wasn’t awarded whatever I was applying for, would they have a straightforward answer? Who knows. But the thing is, that’s how life works. Qualified people don’t always get what they “deserve.” High school students with perfect SATs don’t get into Ivy league schools. The kid who practiced nonstop doesn’t always win the game. The nice guy doesn’t always get the girl (or the guy, depending). The intern who works the hardest isn’t always hired. And it seems like med school’s just another example of that. Good kids don’t get in, even if they prima facie should get in.

And thanks for the compliment! I don’t know if I agree that I was a prime candidate by any means but I did enjoy my time as an undergrad and am definitely happy (and lucky!) to be a med student.

texaspg · May 5, 2012, 5:15pm

“Do I know why? Well, no. If I called the interviewer or the organization and asked why I wasn’t awarded whatever I was applying for, would they have a straightforward answer? Who knows.”

In a lot of cases the claim is they felt someone else is better. The interview process usually weeds out a lot of people, sometimes unfairly. However, if several people talk to the same candidates and they are looking for a specific fit, they usually find it.

bluebayou · May 5, 2012, 5:39pm

That is exactly what he is telling the hooked candidates. All one has to do is to look at the gpa/mcat scores of URM matricluants.

Let me fix this for you:

That only serves to reinforce my basic point: med-school adcoms do not really reward hard work and difficult Engineering courses. Plenty of hooked premeds are surely better off, as per McCullough’s advice, taking easier courses at an easier school.

Absolutely nothing, at least to me. You have not presented any source of data to support a differential for liberal arts majors.

Would be happy to, but first show me the data as a whole. (Hint, Career Services only has about 1/7th of the whole.)

If the major has a high mean gpa (B++), how can students not survive it?

Ok, and what about colleges without med schools? And what about the premed advisors at said colleges who advise their students not to take the easier summer courses? What’s in it for them? Are they just parroting the adcoms for no apparent reason? It would seem to me that, if your point was correct, then colleges lower down the food chain would ALL be recommending students follow your position. Voila, their med acceptance skyrockets, and thus so do next year’s applications. Wouldn’t it be in their own self-interest to advise their students as you suggest?

sakky · May 5, 2012, 6:21pm

I would argue that it should say absolutely everything. I don’t need to present any data regarding liberal arts majors. You admitted yourself that even hooked candidates may need to boost their GPA by taking easier courses. So what does that imply about candidates who don’t even have a hook? Seems to me that they would really need to bolster their GPA.

Nice, so you would ask for data that you know is not publicly available.

Hey I can play the same game. Why don’t you present some data of your own? In particular, since you invoked the opinions of adcom officers, perhaps I could ask you to present the actual decisions made by every adcom officer in the nation (which I know you cannot obtain).

Umm, what are you talking about? Survivorship bias is the elementary explanation. Those students who perform poorly tend to leave the major and therefore are no longer counted as MCB students. Indeed, they probably never make it to the (mostly upper-division) MCB courses at all, having washed out in the lower-division non-MCB courses such as Chem3AB or Bio1AB.

Put another way, what if I told you that 10 students completed a particular course and they all received A’s. An easy course, it would seem, right? But then what if I told you that the class actually started with 20 students, and 10 were receiving failing grades and therefore dropped. Not so easy of a course anymore, is it?

By your argument, one could conclude that nobody ever died in a war, if you counted only the survivors.

Actually, I would argue that McCollough demonstrates that schools are indeed doing exactly that. I’ve similarly heard of premed advisors at MIT and Harvard have advised their premeds to also avoid difficult courses.

But to your point, what premed advisors have to gain is simple: no school wants to gain an official reputation for coaching their premeds to ‘game’ the system. Such gaming obviously surely happens, but it does so quietly and unofficially.

Besides, every savvy premed surely has learned the hard way that the admissions ‘game’ is far more complicated than either the adcoms or the official advisory statements of their schools would have them believe. Most schools would rather not officially admit that certain premed courses are weeders, when all the premeds surely know otherwise. Most schools would rather not admit that certain profs, and indeed entire majors, grade easier and offer lower workloads than others, when again, the premed students know otherwise. And many schools won’t want to admit that their premed advising is simply not that strong, when again, the premeds at that school surely know otherwise.

But all of that is irrelevant, for at the end of the day, the question boils down to what should those students who want to be doctors but who can’t get top grades in their school’s standard premed courses do? I think that anybody who has ever taken those courses (whether they were premeds or simply forced to take them as part of their regular major) would agree that there are many such students who are relegated to lousy grades. In many cases, it won’t matter how hard they try, as they’re still not going to break the top end of the curve to receive a strong grade. There are simply too many other talented and hard-working students who occupy those slots on the curve.

I (and McCullough) would argue that those students would be that those students should consider taking easier courses at community college. But, bluebayou, since you seem to object so vociferously to my advice, then riddle me this: Exactly what would you have them do? Just give up their dream?

sakky · May 5, 2012, 7:04pm

But that’s what I had already discussed in post #44. I agree that some (perhaps up to half) of the rejectees might be explained through such causes. But to attribute more than that seems to be a stretch. After all, the group of candidates in question have 30/3.8’s which indicates that they are probably highly conscientious and talented individuals. To then say that half of the rejectees could be attributed to irresponsibility, ill preparation, or simple arrogance seems to be highly uncharacteristic. {If somebody truly is irresponsible, ill-prepared, or arrogant, they probably wouldn’t have gotten a 30/3.8 in the first place.}

I don’t believe that that’s an appropriate analogy, for your examples are easily ameliorated by simple ‘risk-diversification’. A top high school senior might not get into the Ivy League, but he’ll certainly get into some decent college. Indeed, that’s why most of them possess the awareness to apply to a spectrum of schools, including some safeties (which will still be a relatively decent school). It is truly rare for a strong high school student to truly not be admitted to any decent school (and surely the numbers don’t approach anywhere near 20%). The kid who practices nonstop may not win any one particular game, but he’s surely likely to win many others. Indeed, that is why players are judged by their entire careers, not simply on the outcome of one game. {Dan Marino may have lost the only Superbowl that he appeared in, but he’s still considered to be one of the greatest football players of all time.} The nice guy may not get one particular girl that he likes, but he’ll surely get some other girl. {Which is why I think that people should date numerous people, at least initially, before exclusively committing to one person.} The hardest-working intern may not get that particular job, but he’ll surely get some other job. Indeed, that is why jobseekers don’t just apply to one particular employer, but rather to many of them simultaneously.

But the case of the premeds is quite different. We’re not simply talking about a premed rejected from any particular med-school that he applies to, but rather being rejected from all of them. And to reiterate, we’re not talking about irresponsible, untalented premeds. We’re talking about those who have had the forethought and talent to amass 30/3.8’s.

And that ultimately may be the crux of the issue. Why exactly is admissions to US med-schools so difficult anyway? After all, admissions to med-schools in Europe tend to be far easier. Many European med-schools admit students straight from high school. Nor, frankly, does Europe exhibit such an attraction of the ‘best-performing’ students from the ‘best’ colleges applying to med-school as we do here. I remember talking to a number of Europeans who became graduate students at US universities and who were utterly mystified to find so much of the most talented American students with the most elite educations desperately striving for med-school. In contrast, you don’t really see the very best French, German, or Swiss students striving to enter medical school.

Yet nobody disputes that Europe delivers excellent medical services. Indeed, frankly, I think I’d rather be sick/injured in Europe than I would in the US. Indeed, the WHO ranks France as having the best health-care system in the world (with the US ranking a mediocre #37).

Granted, I agree that the very best US medical services, offered by the best hospitals under the care of the very best doctors, surely exceeds the quality available anywhere else in the world. The US also does have the best medical research. But let’s face it: most Americans aren’t obtaining their medical care from the best doctors and best hospitals.

The upshot is that the excessive career risks foisted upon US premeds by the med-school admissions process might well be justifiable if Americans were indeed receiving the very best medical services in the world. {By the same notion, the high risk of pursuing a career as a movie actor might be justified by the fact that we have the most successful film industry in the world.} But they’re not. We lose out on two fronts: grave career uncertainty for aspiring premeds, and, frankly, relatively mediocre (for a developed nation) medical services.

The core question then is, what exactly does the country gain from having a med-school admissions process that is not only so difficult, but also so risky? {Difficulty being different from risk, as a purely difficult admissions process might be one that guarantees admission provided that you attain certain stringent thresholds. For example, a system that guarantees admission if you score a 40+ on your MCAT would be difficult but not risky.}

mcat2 · May 5, 2012, 8:00pm

If this is true, this may support the theory that as long as a student is good enough academically, she or he can become a good physician IF given the opportunity to receive med school education.

Regarding the US’s rank #37, the rank is pulled down by the fact that a large percentage of population do not get good service. But the top N percenters do get the best service. This is society’s priority issue.

Regarding easy/hard school/majors, I always thought a student should go to a school/major that is challenging enough for him but is not overly challenging (so he could still get good grades.) So the “best” premed school is different for different students, depending on his/her own capability. I also heard that, as long as your GPA or MCAT is above some threshold (say 3.75+ and 32+), any additional points you get may contribute very little to your outcome, especially when the outcome is about getting into any medical school, rather than being concerned about the rank published by a certain magazine.

sakky · May 5, 2012, 8:23pm

And should that be society’s priority issue?

Even if it is society’s priority issue, I would argue that you could have both. The top N percenters could still receive the very best service from the best hospitals, staffed by physicians with MD’s from Harvard and Johns Hopkins, completed residencies at MGH and Mayo and Johns Hopkins Hospital. I’m not asking the top med-schools and residencies to lower their standards.

But why not also have many more graduates from lower-ranked med schools and who don’t complete elite residencies to serve the less fortunate Americans? I have to imagine that even that would be better than what they are receiving now, which is basically nothing.

bluebayou · May 5, 2012, 8:26pm

Just as you asked a question for which there is no answer. :rolleyes:

MCB at Cal is one of its largest majors. Even if thousands wash out, they do not apply to med school, do they? Thus, they are not part of the numerator/denominator of the Career Services data which you are so fond of posting.

But more importantly, hundreds do survive every year and graduate with a mean gpa of 3.4. Not great, but excellent for STEM at any place outside of Palo Alto, Cambridge, New Haven and Providence. And these are the students applying to med school.

Nope, just you.

Quite frankly, a 30 is rather low with a 3.8, and will not be competitive at four of the med schools in California.

Au contraire. I do not object one bit; it’s a free forum, and your anonymous advice is just as good as anyone else’s. I just challenge your “advice” as I do the advice of others on cc. But unlike you, I find no factual basis to conclude that advice for disadvantaged/URMs works for ORMs.

Attend Brown or Yale; many premed courses at the former are curved to an A-, while the latter has a mean gpa of ~3.6. Alternatively, accept a full ride to a much lower ranked school. Move out of California, preferably to Texas. Rock the MCAT and enroll in an SMP, with a linkage. Go DO. Go Caribbean. Lotsa options. And yes, if one can’t earn A’s against regular competition, enroll in easier science classes with lesser competition (which includes summer). Just recognize that your competitors for those admission seats will have earned A’s against the regular competition. Some adcoms may not care, but we’ll never know, will we?

PS: I’d advise all but the really top students to avoid Cal, UCLA and UCSD if premed. By top students, I mean 5’s in the three AP sciences, and Calc BC, as well as a long list of ECs. Take a Regents at Santa Barbara instead.

sakky · May 5, 2012, 9:38pm

Which is why we have to work with the data that we’ve got.

Look, the vast majority of questions on CC - certainly the most interesting ones - are those that have no definitive public data. Is School X better than School Y, which is surely one of the most common questions on CC? No public data could ever definitively answer that question. But there are snippets of data that you could use - rankings, student testimonials, etc. - at which one could attempt to construct a reasonable answer.

To say that the only topics worthy of discussion on CC are the ones for which definitively public data exists to answer them is to obviate 90%+ of all topics on this board.

No, once again, you’ve conflated biology with all of STEM. Like I said, biology is generally understood to be the easiest major in all of STEM, regardless of which school we’re talking about. Even molliebatmit has openly conceded that her biology major was amongst the easiest STEM majors at MIT. Similarly at Berkeley - I doubt that there are many MCB students who would argue that their major is actually the most difficult in STEM. The same seems to be true at Harvard and Stanford. What we therefore need is to compare Berkeley MCB vs. specifically the biology major at other schools, not against all of STEM.

I therefore ask again: riddle me this - name me a single school where biology is the most difficult of the STEM majors, such that many students will try biology and wash out and hence feel that they have to switch to an ‘easier’ major such as engineering/CS or physics, or heck, even chemistry. I know that I’m hard-pressed to think of even one such school.

But also don’t understand how this line of logic supports your argument anyway. Even if what you are saying is true, that Berkeley MCB is a relatively grade-inflated major, the fact remains that about half of all Berkeley premeds (from all majors) are rejected from every med-school that they apply to. That only serves to reinforce the notion that premed is a high-risk endeavor.

Nope, for that part of the conversation was between me and kristin5792. And she was the one who brought up the topic in the first place, not me.

If you don’t want to participate in that part of the conversation, fine, don’t. But allow kristin5792 and I and anybody else who does want to participate to do so.

So what? Since when were we talking about only those 4 particular higher-end med-schools in California? I doubt that there are many people who apply to only those particular 4 med schools and no others. We’re talking about all of the med-schools that any particular applicant may apply to.

Besides, if kristin5792 (who originally brought up the 30/3.8 classification in the first place) ever said that she was from California, then I’m afraid that I must have missed it. But even if she was, I rather doubt that she would advocate applying to only those 4 med-schools and no others. So why you choose to bring it up is unclear to me.

And I believe I’ve met your challenge.

You don’t? Seems like simple logic to me. After all, it is well understood that, frankly, URM’s require lower grades and test scores to be admitted than ORMs do. Given that, if URM’s still need to boost their GPA to maximize their chances of med-school admission, then it’s hard to ever imagine that that wouldn’t hold even more strongly for ORM’s. After all, why would it ever go the other way? If URM’s nevertheless need GPA boosts, despite their hook, why wouldn’t ORM’s need the same boost?

That seems to be like telling guys who to meet girls that they should simply be tall and handsome. Obviously everybody would like to be tall and handsome, and plenty of people would like to be admitted to Brown or Yale. But few people can. Heck, it seems to me that fewer people can be admitted to Brown or Yale than will simply obtain top grades in their standard premed courses.

Alright, so in your last sentence here, we actually agree. So then what’s the quarrel about?

Your other suggestions are, frankly, seemingly far more extreme than the proposed option of swapping community college or summer premed courses for those at your standard college. DO? Caribbean? SMP’s? Moving to Texas? I don’t disagree with those options, but then if you’re willing to consider those options, I don’t see what’s so outrageous about also considering the community college track.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: if you can earn A’s against your regular competition, then you should obviously do that. Nobody has ever disputed that.

But the question on the table is, what if you can’t? What do you do now? Just give up?

mcat2 · May 5, 2012, 10:19pm

^ Since post #52 happens to refer to DS’s alma mater, let me share what we happen to know during DS’s 4 year journey there (esp. about whether a student from a less competitive high school or not being a top student in bluebayo’s defintion, should or should not attend this kind of school as a premed.) These are anecdotal examples only.

1) A majority of URMs who were from the rural area in our state, or the neighboring states and were premeds in their freshman year stopped being a premed by sophomore or even earlier. DS once mentioned that one of such students he happen to be more familiar with somehow just did not do well in many of the premed weeder classes. Actually, when we helped DS move-in in freshman year, one of the upperclass students in the “Common” cafeteria said to his friends that he had been struggling all along (do not know whether he was a premed or not.) – It is not good to hear such a comment on your first day in campus.

2) An ORM student who was valedictorian from an above average (but not the very top) high school in NYC had been struggling during most of her college years to maintain a premed-worthy GPA. In the end, she barely got into a state med school. Although we do not know her GPA exactly; her GPA was likely better than the GPA average you mentioned. Her MCAT was likely the average of the school’s average. Her ECs were better than the average, especially in the research area. This likely indicates that the rough rank of a premed student, not the GPA number itself, from a given school, is what counts. (Her GPA trouble is more in the area of general education requirements, rather than most STEM/prereq classes. She might have grown up in a famnily environment that is not “liberal art-ish”/“intellectual gentlemen” enough, and overly emphasizes STEM subjects only.)

3) Since you are in California, you may have more “feelings” about this one: An applicant with 3.95/40 with an additional year of full-time research job (besides two years of research while in school) got into a single med school in California very late in the application cycle. (He did not apply late though.) He kind of said that because of his MCAT score, he was “cornered” into applying to a some small parts of med schools only. (My guess is that he might be over-confident when he selected the list of schools to apply to.)

4) One student from New Mexico in DS’s year decided against attending that school bluebayo refered to, worrying that he might not be competitive enough once he’s there (He was not a top student according to your definition, with many AP=4?) He decided to attend a newly established BS/MD program in his home state instead.

5) I do not know whether DS exaggerated this when he said this: The premed population in his class (especially after the sophomore year) are almost exclusively from public high school. The pool of students a premed competes against were mostly “who’s who from competitive public high schools” across the country, with a selected few from the high power private high school. (My interpretation here: In public high school, you compete against your peers to be among the top 3 to enable you to get into a top college. When you get into the top college, if you are a premed – no matter which college you end up attending, you compete against the “top dogs” from various high schools, with the exception that some “top dogs” may pursue other career paths.)

curmudgeon · May 5, 2012, 10:27pm

Yeah, sakky. I do see your very impassioned assertions that engineering students get a bum rap from med schools as whining. And I gotta ask, why would med schools possibly compensate someone for choosing a focused major like engineering? That’s just not what med schools are looking for in most of their students.

Sorry.

Gripe. Moan. Or whine. You choose. You still ain’t changing that.

Are they (engineering students) the most deserving just because, for some students, engineering is hard? Based on my very direct observations, for some students, math and science come much, much easier than English and History.

Heck, I could have majored in Vocal Performance…now that would have been a lot harder for me than Engineering. It’s at least theoretically possible I could have passed an Engineering course.

I think med schools are getting the students they want, sakky. You just want them to want the students you believe are more deserving. And for some reason I can’t even comprehend, an engineer from UCB or MIT is the pinnacle. Sorry. Ain’t happening. I’m just reporting what “is”.

Not that it matters what you or I think, but I agree with the med schools …engineering majors don’t “deserve” a break on GPA.

entomom · May 5, 2012, 10:37pm

D1 did both of these, attending a top public fr year and then transferring to one of these privates. She would disagree about it being easier to get a higher gpa at the private. She contends that she was in the top few percent of her cohort at the public, but closer to the 75% level at the private, which made getting top grades a lot more work.

My intent is not to argue the point, I just want to present a different POV on this often cited comment.

bluebayou · May 6, 2012, 1:44am

You step back and smell the roses. And do the math. There are ~130 allopathic med schools, and ~3,000 four year colleges. Approximately 20-25% of EVERY liberal arts college Frosh matriculant is premed (includes Arts & Sciences in big public Unis). At schools like Hopkins, it’s a third. Again, do the math. For the masses of premed wannabe 18-year-olds, allopathic med school is an impossibility.

So the question on the table is what is the best way to present one’s application: fill up on summer courses with easier A’s, or follow the recommendations of the college’s premed advisors – the ones that will write YOUR rec? hmmmmm

For most, yup.

hey, curm, I’d ‘pay’ to see your vocal performance. hahahahahha

curmudgeon · May 6, 2012, 2:16am

I see (or hear) myself as a slightly less cultured Levon Helm (Godspeed, brother) but ,to be honest, Tom Waits…on a bad day… has and hits better chords. ;)

I’d rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy. T. Waits

Nature64 · May 6, 2012, 2:49am

So, let’s say I want to major in Biology, I shouldn’t take any Biology courses during the summer?

I decided to follow a different career path pretty late. Next semester I’ll be a junior, and I will take Bio 101, Chem 101 and Calc 1 with two Gen Ed classes. As of now, I have been taking Gen Ed classes. I would like to finish all pre med requirements before Summer of 2014, so I can take the MCAT during the summer. I also plan to spend another year in college to finish my major because I started it so late.

kristin5792 · May 6, 2012, 3:15am

Sakky! You still haven’t answered my question.

It’s clear that you’re passionate about this topic and it seems like you’re frustrated.

Out of curiosity, how would you recommend med schools choose students?

Should you get a bonus for deliberately choosing a difficult major that is unrelated to medicine? Playing a sport? Doing great on the MCAT? What about for going to a challenging school? Putting in thousands of hours of volunteer work? Starting a nonprofit? Publishing a paper? Being a major financial provider for your family?

I think if the admissions process were simple enough that it could be boiled down to the quantitative/objective process you seem to desire (wherein everyone who meets the threshold requirements is accepted somewhere) by definition it would be more predictable. But then…how do you account for the variety of life experiences you want in your classes? Does the single mom get a boost? Or the nontraditional student? How about the young whippersnapper just out of school? What about people who did lots of research but not so much clinical work, or vice versa?

I can think of at least one person from my class who meets each criterion I just described.

And re your analysis of my mentioning winning the game, getting the girl, going to an Ivy, etc: your (reasonable, in my opinion) argument is that those situations didn’t really count because there were alternatives. I’d argue that there are PLENTY of alternatives to medicine, namely every other career out there.

Thread		Replies	Views
Gpa Pre-Med Topics	26	95	April 17, 2021
A few questions about AMCAS GPA Pre-Med Topics	4	310	April 17, 2021
GPA worries! Pre-Med Topics	3	40	April 17, 2021
My Chances at med school? Pre-Med Topics	11	86	April 18, 2021
What exactly is BCPM GPA? Pre-Med Topics	3	65	April 17, 2021

A word about Pre-meds and GPA.

POPULAR STATES

SEARCH SAT SCORES

SEARCH ACT SCORES

SEARCH GPA’S

A word about Pre-meds and GPA.

Related Topics

POPULAR STATES

SEARCH SAT SCORES

SEARCH ACT SCORES

SEARCH GPA’S

CONNECT WITH US