<p>What about LAC"S?</p>
<p>What about them?</p>
<p>LAC'S? Anyt thoughts?</p>
<p>You have to have an actual question before we can be helpful.</p>
<p>which school would be better for getting into a top med school, brown or cornell?</p>
<p>small Lac's vs big research universities for pre med path? For instance- Lewis and Clark in Portland VS maybe UCSD?</p>
<p>You guys also have to consider that most of the people that end up going to duke, brown (or any of the other ivies) most likely have really good gpa's and will score well on the mcat. This give a exceptional high chance that they will have a high acceptance rate to medical school than someone that went to a top public. The school you go to doesn't make you get into medical school, its what you prove that you can do at that university that will get you into medical school.</p>
<p>firstkid, depends on what you want. A small LAC will most likely have smaller classes and the opportunity to get closer with you teachers. At a big university, you will have a lot more research and variety of research to chose from.</p>
<p>Okay this is a similar topic that i have,
How are these schools in terms of their Pre-Med programs?
Which would be good for getting into GOOD med schools?
Rank horrible, poor, not good, ok, good, great, AMAZING</p>
<p>Boston U -
Colgate U -
Connecticut C -
Cornell U -
George Washington U -
Johns Hopkins U -
Northwestern U -
Rice U -
Tufts U -
Vassar C -
Washington & Lee U -
Whitman C -</p>
<p>See post #6 in this thread.</p>
<p>but of course certain schools are indeed better than others, and looking online at stats and what a college says isnt getting a good picture. thats the point of these forums. im wondering how these schools falls into place.</p>
<p>The school doesn't get you into medical school. Its what you do at the school that will get you in. Prestige will only play a very small factor. A school will pick a person with at 3.8, 34/35, EC's, research at UCF over someone with 3.2, 30, some EC's, no research at harvard.</p>
<p>ok, but theyll take someone with a 3.6, 33, some ec's research at harvard over a person with a 3.8, 34, some ec's research at UCF. hands down.</p>
<p>Not necessarily. The prestige of the school can add 0.2 onto the GPA (AT MOST). The MCAT is standardized so there's no reason to give someone from Harvard a bonus over someone from UCF. The point is that the prestige of the school is behind your GPA, MCAT, clinical experience, EC's, research, LOR's, personal statement, and interviews in importance. Now, if you can find two applicants who are exactly the same in all of those other categories, then, yes, the applicant from Harvard will be taken.</p>
<p>I was going to response, but agree with everything norcal said.</p>
<p>as well, someone who goes to harvard will have a better chance at getting a better score on the MCAT's. when youre taught by one of the top professors in the world..i think this higher education will help you do better on it. just kidding. i know it will.</p>
<p>Keep believing that.</p>
<p>Depends. The most famous professors do not always make the best teachers. Professors become famous for their research, not their undergrad teaching. This is why liberal arts schools may not have exceptional researchers but they still teach the premed courses better than top research schools. Besides, the MCAT covers orgo, intro bio, chem, and physics. Not exactly astrophysics. Most of these courses can be taught more than adequately by high school teachers. You don't need a Nobel Prize to teach Bio 101.</p>
<p>theyre at harvard because of their ability to teach as well as their intelligence. not just their record. dont generalize something you have no idea about because you didnt make it there.</p>
<p>(not talking to norcalguy). i can see where youre coming from. im applying to like 3 or 4 LAC's for pre-med. And like Rice, Northwestern..Tufts..pretty much sexy schools for pre-med</p>