does college matter when applying ot med school?

<p>I was accepted to the University of Florida, University of Miami and the University of North Carolina. Basicallyy i am wondering if it would be worth the money I spend to go to UNC over UF, b/c i live in florida so i would get free ride. Would the higher ranking of UNC but tougher courses benefit me more, than the lower ranking UF (but by no means bad) and probably easier to attain a higher GPA</p>

<p>I doubt the GPA will be easier to attain at UF. True, it is ranked lower than UNC, but ranks only mean so much. If you can get a free ride to UF, by all means, GO THERE!</p>

<p>You have no idea how glad you'll be graduating with no debt. Either way, your choice. Good luck!</p>

<p>One of the reasons I say UF will be easier is that they do not have the A-,B-,C- etc, they just have straight A', B's, C's. overall i think it will be easier than unc, but by no means do i think it will be easy to obtain a higher gpa.</p>

<p>Well based on that logic, a B+, C+, etc. will be B's and C's also so....</p>

<p>well im just going by whatt people have told me. Most peopel I talk to end up getting screwed over with the A- stuff. I konw someone who got straight A-'s at miami and ended up with a 3.7 one semester, while someone at UF earned low A's as well but ended up with a 4.0. From everyone I have talked to they don't like - and + stuff. Thats the only reason I brought it up.</p>

<p>Huh, Afan, you need to read things more carefully.</p>

<p>
[quote]
"2.60 Grades
2.63 Special Provisions for First-Year Undergraduate Students:
2.63.1 For first-year undergraduate students: (a) in the first semester and in the Independent Activities Period, the only passing grade permanently recorded by the Registrar shall be P; and (b) in the first semester, in the Independent Activities Period, and in the second semester, the non-passing grades of D, F, O, and OX shall be recorded by the Registrar foruse within the Institute only, and shall not appear on official Institute transcripts.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>There it says it right there. IN THE FIRST SEMESTER (and in the winter period of IAP, which is not important for this discussion), the only passing grade that is recorded will be a 'P'.</p>

<p>However, in the second semester, the non-passing grade that will not be published will be a D, F, O, or OX. That therefore means that a passing grade you receive in the second semester will be whatever the passing grade is. Since a C grade is a passing grade, THAT MEANS THAT IF YOU GET A C IN YOUR SECOND SEMESTER, IT IS EXPOSED FOR ALL TO SEE. Read it again, if you don't believe me. And let's face it. A 'C' is a pretty darn disastrous grade when it comes to med-school admissions. Sure, it's not as bad as a D or an F. But it's painful nonetheless. Even a 'B' isn't anything to write home about. </p>

<p>So, once again, first semester- all grades hidden. Second semester - passing grades exposed, non-passing grades hidden. Read it again, if you don't believe me. </p>

<p>
[quote]
No. As used in this report, the term "upperclassmen" refers to everyone except freshmen. I'm sorry if my efforts to explain this did not make it clear. The report divides grades into TWO groups that include ALL MIT undergraduates: Group 1- first year students. Group 2- everyone else. So the grades for "upperclassmen" refers to sophomores, juniors, and seniors. It does NOT refer only to juniors and seniors.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I've read the report. Point to me the direct quote that explicitly says that this is the dichotomy that the report is using. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Huh? why would weaker engineering students feel less need to apply to medical school? Engineers across the board have better job prospects than the liberal arts students. So the reduced need to go to medical school would apply to all of them, not particularly to the weaker students. In fact, the weaker engineers would have the least appealing engineering prospects and might feel the most inclined to improve their fortunes by going into medicine

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, we are comparing the relative standpoints of weak engineering students vs. weak liberal arts students. It is of course true that weak engineering students have weaker engineering prospects. But that's the key - ENGINEERING prospects. From a jobs perspective, who is better off, a guy with weak engineering prospects, or a guy with weak liberal arts prospects? Hence, who is more potentially more desperate and more likely to see med-school as a 'Hail-Mary' pass? I am arguing that a weak MIT engineering student is less likely to apply to med-school than, say, a weak Harvard liberal arts student. True, both are unlikely to apply, but who is MORE unlikely to apply? </p>

<p>
[quote]
Finally, imagine you are on the admissions committee of a medical school. You see applications from HYPSM. From HYPS you see all grades, from the start of freshman year. From M you see no first year grades (which is typical of medical schools). You know that first year grades tend to be lower. How would you compare HYPS grades to M grades? You could drop the freshman grades from the HYPS students and recompute their GPA's, to make the basis of comparison comparable to M. Since this would tend to raise their GPA's, you would them rank them higher. Or you could impute a lower GPA to the M students, based on the knowledge that, on average, their freshman GPA's are lower than their later GPA's. Either adjustment would result in higher reported GPA from M (since it excludes the freshman grades) than from HYPS. So, allowing for the practice of not giving (first semester) or not reporting (second semester) grades, admissions committees may be adjusting to compare M with HYPS. They would then accept HYPS students with lower REPORTED GPA's,those total GPA's, including freshman grades, are comparable.[ /quote]</p>

<p>That's a non-sequitur for two reasons. #1, as explained above, you do see the MIT passing grades for the second semester of freshman year. #2, if you as the adcom officer really wanted to, you could demand to see all MIT grades (and places like Johns Hopkins do precisely that). The fact that other med-schools don't demand to see those grades indicates that they don't think it is an important enough of a point to quibble about.</p>

<p>Perhaps you should reread more carefully. </p>

<p>"Freshman letter grades may not appear on students' official internal grade reports or external transcripts and are to be used in accordance with guidelines established by the Committee on the Undergraduate Program."</p>

<p>Seems pretty clear. It does not say "First semester freshmen letter grades..."</p>

<p>As for the report, it contains extensive tables and charts showing grade distribution by semester for students in each year. It shows the identical distribution of grades in years 2-4, with much lower grades in year 1. There is a long discussion of the differences in behaviour between 1st year and 2-4 year students. Take another look.</p>

<p>By the way, Caltech also is pass fail first year, perhaps explaining some of their med school outcomes.</p>

<p>At Berkeley, "almost 50%" of undergraduate grades are A's. "Grade inflation" is a red herring.</p>

<p><a href="http://ls.berkeley.edu/undergrad/colloquia/04-11.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://ls.berkeley.edu/undergrad/colloquia/04-11.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Either med schools do not request full first year grades because they do not care, or because it is too much trouble, when they can adjust the numbers they get, without having to deal with something other than an official transcript.</p>

<p>Uh, no, once again, you should reread more carefully. Or perhaps you have forgotten what we are arguing about.</p>

<p>"For first-year undergraduate students: (a) in the first semester and in the Independent Activities Period, the only passing grade permanently recorded by the Registrar shall be P; and (b) in the first semester, in the Independent Activities Period, and in the second semester, the non-passing grades of D, F, O, and OX shall be recorded by the Registrar foruse within the Institute only, and shall not appear on official Institute transcripts"</p>

<p>So afan, you tell me, what does that mean for second-semester grades in the freshman year? </p>

<p>Here, I will make it as clear as I can. I quote straight from MIT's academic handbook.</p>

<p>"None of the grades that students can receive in the first semester of their freshman year (P, DN, FN, ON, or OXN) is calculated in the term or cumulative ratings. For freshman in their second semester and transfer students granted an initial term of ABC/no external record grade reporting, A, B, and C grades are counted in the term and cumulative ratings but DN and FN are not."</p>

<p><a href="http://web.mit.edu/acadinfo/undergrad/academic-guide/sec6.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://web.mit.edu/acadinfo/undergrad/academic-guide/sec6.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Or how about this one?</p>

<p>"The second term {meaning the second semester of the freshman year} at MIT is graded on an "A/B/C/no record" basis."</p>

<p><a href="http://admissions.mit.edu/AdmissionsWeb/appmanager/AdmissionsWeb/Main?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageFreshmanYear#q2%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://admissions.mit.edu/AdmissionsWeb/appmanager/AdmissionsWeb/Main?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=pageFreshmanYear#q2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>So, tell me, afan, what does that mean for freshman year, second semester grades? </p>

<p>Honestly, do you really think I don't know how MIT's grading works? While I don't want to put my biographical information online, why don't you email me privately, and I'll tell you everything you'd ever want to know about who I am, and then we can figure out who knows more about MIT's grading policy, you or I.</p>

<p>Or, maybe even better, let's go the MIT section of CC. There are people there who are known for being current MIT students or MIT alumni. Why don't we ask them what happens with the grades of the freshman year, second semester? Hey, if you're really sure that you're right, then you have nothing to be afraid of, right? So why not ask them? Or are you now starting to doubt yourself? </p>

<p>And if you really say that grade inflation is a herring, then why is it that around 1996, the average Berkeley GPA was a 3.10, whereas the average GPA at, say, Stanford was a 3.44, the average GPA at Dartmouth at that time was somewhere between a 3.25-3.31, the average GPA at Brown was between a 3.4-3.47? Seems to me that in peer schools, Berkeley's GPA is significantly lower than that of its peers.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.gradeinflation.com/stanford.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.gradeinflation.com/stanford.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.gradeinflation.com/berkeley.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.gradeinflation.com/berkeley.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.gradeinflation.com/brown.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.gradeinflation.com/brown.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.gradeinflation.com/dartmouth.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.gradeinflation.com/dartmouth.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Looking at A's is simply not enough. You have to look at the whole proportion of grades. At certain schools, it's practically impossible to get anything lower than a B-, and certainly almost unheard of to get anything lower than a C. At Berkeley, low grades are indeed handed out at a rather substantial rate.</p>

<p>If you want to know who I am call 1800-wildflower :D</p>

<p>Almost 50% of Berkeley grades are A's, this is comparable to Harvard and Princeton. MIT is at least 44%. So is Cornell.</p>

<p>In 2003 less than 5% of Berkeley grades were D's or F's.</p>

<p>And how many D's and F's were handed out at Harvard or Princeton in 2003? I don't know either, but I'm going to go with 0%, and I am fairly certain I am not going to be that far off.</p>

<p>Furthermore, afan, you keep harping about the percentage of A's. That's not the issue. The issue is the entire grade distribution. You haven't talked about what the non-A grades are. Are they B's? C's? That's a tremendously important distinction to make. That is why we have to look at the total grade distribution, not just the % of A's given out. </p>

<p>What do I see here the average GPA at Harvard in 1996 was a 3.38, at Princeton in 1996, it was a 3.31, the average GPA at Berkeley in 1996 was a 3.1. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.gradeinflation.com%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.gradeinflation.com&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Almost 50% A's, about 35% B's, less than 5% D's and F's, the remainder (somewhat over 10%) C's. Eighty five percent A's and B's.</p>

<p>Perhaps not the answers you were hoping for.</p>

<p>Princeton 46% A, 39% B, 7% C, 1.5% D and F, 7% P. </p>

<p>Eighty-five percent A's and B's, exactly the same as Berkeley. In other words, at the top, where everyone agrees that Berkeley students are on a par with those at Harvard and Princeton, the grade distributions are the same. </p>

<p>Your next question was about the low end of the distribution. Although this is not particularly relevant for medical school admissions, since C's and D's do not get you med school, here are the numbers.</p>

<p>Berkeley average GPA 3.25, Princeton 3.36. Now factor in the difference in entrance qualifications, and explain how Princeton grading is easier. Berkeley 25th percentile SAT V 570 M 620. Princeton 25th percentile SAT V 690 M 690. Note that a 690 M puts one at the 25th percentile at Princeton, and just below the 75th percentile (at 700) at Berkeley. At Berkeley 27% of students scored above 700 V, 45% were above 700M. Comparable figures at Princeton are 71 and 73. More to this point, at Berkeley 33% were below 600 on SAT V, 20% below 600 on Math. At Princeton the figures below 600 are 4% and 2%. Berkeley had 10% V and 5% M below 500. Princeton-none. </p>

<p>The Berkeley student body, and hence the grades, include a lot of people who could not get into Princeton. If grading standards were identical, one would hardly expect the same GPA from the two sets of students. </p>

<p>I don't have data beyond "% A's" for Harvard, but obviously its student body is even (slightly) more highly selected than Princeton's. Wouldn't you expect high grades from this crowd?</p>

<p>Do you have any evidence that the same student going to Berkeley would get lower grades there than at Princeton? Professional school admissions committees, as you point out, do not seem to believe this.</p>

<p>Cite your sources. Where are they? I want to be able see those numbers for myself and do my own fact-checking. </p>

<p>And you're correct, we should talk about equivalent schools with equivalent peer groups. So let's talk about a place like MIT, which I think to be equivalent to a place like Princeton in terms of selectivity. What would you say about the grade inflation, or lack thereof, of Princeton vs. MIT. If you are going to provide a grade distribution, then cite where you got it from.</p>

<p><a href="http://ls.berkeley.edu/undergrad/colloquia/04-11.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://ls.berkeley.edu/undergrad/colloquia/04-11.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.princeton.edu/%7Eodoc/grading_proposals/index.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.princeton.edu/~odoc/grading_proposals/index.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://registrar1.princeton.edu/data/common/cds2003.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://registrar1.princeton.edu/data/common/cds2003.pdf&lt;/a>
<a href="http://cds.vcbf.berkeley.edu/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://cds.vcbf.berkeley.edu/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I certainly agree that on student academic credentials MIT is more comparable to Harvard and Princeton than is Berkeley. The only problem there is how to compare the much different proportion of science and engineering majors. Grades are often higher in social sciences and humanities than in science. MIT and Caltech have much higher proportions of science majors and lower proportions of humanities and social science majors than the more broadly-based colleges. This makes it hard to compare GPA's at these technical schools to those of colleges with a wider range of majors. One of the sources above gives grade distributions at Princeton by major division, but I don't know of comparable data for other schools. There is a report about Cornell that comes to the same conclusion, but the effects were small and it reports regression coefficients, rather than actual GPA's by field. I'll see if I can find the reference.</p>

<p>how is it at yale?</p>

<p>Well, I would argue that that what you just said, which is something that I have myself pointed out many times on CC, doesn't really matter. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter why a school gives out lower grades, relative to its peers. We can talk about whether it's because technical subjects are graded harder than non-technical subjects (which then begs the question of why that is), but all of that is neither here nor there. For the purposes of med-school admission and grade inflation, the only thing that matters is whether a school grades harder than its peers do, or not. </p>

<p>Even the data you show illustrates this point to some degree. According to the Princeton data, humanities is graded significantly easier than all other fields, especially the natural sciences and engineering. And Princeton is one of the better Ivies when it comes to the natural science and engineering. I would therefore assert that it is likely that a more humanities-oriented Ivy, like Yale, would display even more grade inflation due to the heavier humanities weighting. </p>

<p>Whether it's because of the school or just because of the various discplines, I don't think really matters. What matters at the end of the day is whether there is inflation or not. A guy who does EECS at MIT and has his grades suffer from that so much that he can't get into med-school is not going to be mollified by being told that it wasn't really MIT, but rather EECS that was the cause of the problem. All he cares about is that he can't get into med-school.</p>

<p>Hey guys.. i was wondering about premed at Swarthmore as opposed to Univ. of Notre Dames'? I considering either school, yet they are completely opposite. I received a full tuition scholarship to Notre Dame that will cover all tuition for the next four years which removes work study and loans, and as for Swarthmore I received very good need based aid... so that makes ND a little cheaper, but Swarthmore is still the better academic institution?... which would help me more for getting into into med school--my ultimate goal? What can you tell me in terms of their premed educations? swarthmore has a 94% admin rate for minority premed students.. notre dame has around a 70% admin rate for all premed students... does Swarthmore discourage weaker students from applying to med school (as stated by a previous post)? of course ND has many more applicants to med school, but can anyone tell me which of these two programs would be better for me simply in terms of med school? Thank You.</p>

<p>Decide on your own, no one is going to make the decision for you. Where do you want to go. Go there, do well, be happy get into med school and work. Thats all there is. You can go to either of those places, do well and you will most likely get into med school.</p>