<p>The data refers to the percentage of premeds accepted to med school. It has nothing to do with "schools producing most applicants" .</p>
<p>bluedevilmike, I do not get what you are trying to say. Are you saying that some schools have 100 % of their premeds admitted to med school?</p>
<p>1.) Yes, since some schools screen their applicants in absurd proportions, some schools do indeed have 100% admissions rates. One example is Christopher Newport University, which (speculation) probably permits one or two premeds a year to apply.</p>
<p>2.) In any case, even after screening is accounted for, Stanford (74%) is trumped by both Penn and Duke, as well as probably MIT, Cornell, Dartmouth, and a host of others.</p>
<p>This is largely not Stanford's fault, since they have to disproportionately deal with the notoriously erratic and tempermental CA medical schools.</p>
<p>Well, certainly the case you mentioned above is totally ridiculous and it does not become a valid statistic worth to be looked at.</p>
<p>As far as Stanford is concerned I will look that up again, but none of the ones you mentioned are the in the top 5. I know for sure Harvard, Brown, Princeton and Yale are the other 4 though. The info is provided by the schools themselves when marketing their premd programs... ( I looked at that closely since i was just applying..)</p>
<p>
[quote]
it does not become a valid statistic worth to be looked at.
[/quote]
Agreed, but what about other cases? Hopkins has a serious weeding policy (complete with threats of negative recommendation letters) and achieves 90%+. How should they be considered?</p>
<p>Speculation: The 5th is probably a LAC. Williams would not surprise me.</p>
<p>Percent accepted is really not a helpful statistic. Consider two colleges. One tells marginal applicants "Your chances are bad, but we will help you apply if you want" and encourages such students to give it a try. Many people will apply with poor prospects for admission, and the overall admit rate will suffer. </p>
<p>Consider a second college that would tell the same applicants "don't waste your time and money. Get some more experience, take a few more courses after graduation and show you can do the work, then apply." This college will have fewer weak candidates applying, a higher admit rate, and fewer students blowing thousands of dollars, hundreds of hours, and untold psychological cost on low probability applications.</p>
<p>Not clear that the first college is doing a better job than the second. The so called weeding may be doing the students themselves a favor.</p>
<p>The real question is "for a given student, with a given GPA and MCAT combination, which provides the greater chance of admission?" You can get some of this info from some colleges that report gpa and mcat for their students who are admitted to medical school. With the exception of places like MIT, there does not tend to be a huge variation in these scores for admitted applicants from the elite colleges. The variation in mcat for admitted students is also small. this comparison will help identify outliers where comparably strong students seem to have poorer admission prospects. It will not tell you directly why the outcomes are worse than they should be. It could be the way admissions committees look at the school. It could be that students overestimate their chances and do not apply to enough "safety" medical schools. The mean mcat for admitted students from elite colleges tends to be well above the overall mean for admitted students, simply because elite college students get high mcat scores.</p>
<p>If you really want to overanalyze, divide the mcat score of admitted students by the gpa of admitted students. The higher this ratio, the more grade deflated the college is for premed purposes. You could also compare the mean gpa of admitted students to the mean gpa of all students at the college. You want the two to be as close as possible. Finally, you might calculate the ratios of mean SAT to mean MCAT and college gpa for admitted students. You want a place that produces high mcat scores as compared to sat scores, and high grades compared to sat scores.</p>
<p>Related question, almost impossible to answer "for a given high school senior with a given high school gpa and SAT 1/SAT 2 combination, what GPA and MCAT is this person likely to achieve at each college?" This probably depends so much on the individual and her/his interaction with the college that there is no general answer.</p>
<p>I posted this on the Amherst website but it may be of interest to applicants here.</p>
<p>"I have seen questions periodically about premed programs at Amherst and other colleges. Amherst does not offer a specific premedical curriculum other than the courses required by most medical schools. Students are free to major in whatever field(s) they want while filling their pre-med requirements.</p>
<p>I recently read the Amherst Premed handbook again and am impressed by the efforts by Prof. Steve George and other members of the Premed Committee in helping Amherst students get into medical school. The site is: <a href="http://www.amherst.edu/%7Esageorge/guide1.html#chances%5B/url%5D">http://www.amherst.edu/~sageorge/guide1.html#chances</a>.</p>
<p>Over a recent 5 year period, among "well qualified" students with science GPAs of 3.1 or higher, 90% were admitted the first time and 98.9% when applicants who applied again are counted. </p>
<p>Among those students with science GPAs of 3.1 or less, 40% were admitted the first time and 73.3% were admitted if reapplicants from this group are counted. Some unsuccessful applicants did not reapply though. It is also noteworthy that the premedical committee supports the applications of all students regardless of their GPA unless there is concern about academic capability to handle a medical school curriculum (science GPA less than 2.0) or the character of the applicant. </p>
<p>The total acceptance rate of all applicants who applied once or reapplied is an amazing 97%!</p>
<p>In any event, I think these figures should reassure potential pre-med applicants and students that Amherst is an excellent and supportive place to achieve one's academic and professional goals in the context of a liberal arts education. Although I have not gone to the trouble of looking up similar stats elsewhere, I believe that they are similar, if not better, than other peer universities and colleges. I also think LACs allow personal contact with profs. which will enable students to obtain meaningful and personal letters of reference."</p>
<p>I haven't looked it up but I am sure that places like Swarthmore, Williams, Haverford, Pomona, etc. should also have high admission rates to medical school.</p>
<p>"overall first-try acceptance rate of 79%"-Amherst</p>
<p>Fairly standard.</p>
<p>One point I found very interesting in the Amherst guide is that applicants who apply after graduation tend to have stronger applications as they may graduate with honors and also work in a medically-relevant or service area. I think that this is true for most top LACs and universities, and the % admittees goes up substantially when applicants re-apply again. Hopefully, they not only will strengthen their applications, but also improve their chances by learning from their earlier application experience by applying earlier, applying to better match schools, sharpening their essay, and reselecting references. I also think there is something to be said for persistence and commitment to medicine. </p>
<p>I agree with NorCal guy, that if all applicants, including those that are considered less "qualified" i.e., GPA less than 3.1 are counted the % went down.
However, not all schools enthusiastically support all the premed applications so that definitely will pull down the admits from any given school if premed committees are unwilling to endorse their marginal candidates in order to make their stats look good. Also, not all stats are reported similarly (e,g., total first time applicants vs. undergraduate first time applicants) so it may be difficult to make direct comparisons. Still, I do find it reassuring that at some schools, like Amherst, students with a B/B+ average in the sciences have a 90% admittance rate. </p>
<p>For other reasons, I looked up some very helpful guides on the web from MIT and Duke, and they have first-time acceptances by undergrads of 72% and 84%. respectively. Interestingly, the admittance rate for Duke alumni/nae was 68% so the overall acceptance rate of first time and repeat applicants goes down to 75%. I wonder whether the premed committee discouraged weaker applicants from applying to medical school while still in college.</p>
<p>I found these premed guides below, in addition to Amherst's, to be very informative about the application process. I used to serve on a med school admissions committee and was particularly impressed by the premed committee letters from these particular schools (even compared with Ivies), so I looked them up again.</p>
<p>FYI:
<a href="http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/preprof.html%5B/url%5D">http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/preprof.html</a>
<a href="http://prehealth.trinity.duke.edu/prepare/scheduling.html%5B/url%5D">http://prehealth.trinity.duke.edu/prepare/scheduling.html</a></p>
<p>
[quote]
I wonder whether the premed committee discouraged weaker applicants from applying to medical school while still in college.
[/quote]
Yes. For the reasons mentioned above -- including senior year grades in the mix, adding extracurriculars, having more time to devote to applications -- applying one-year-out provides distinct advantages.</p>
<p>Stronger candidates are fine as is and apply directly. Weaker candidates benefit from a one-year-out philosophy. Generally, in fact, they do not have to be "encouraged" by our advising system -- they usually make this decision on their own.</p>
<p>this is a little off-topic:</p>
<p>is getting an education from cornell a plus when you apply to cornell's med school?</p>
<p>do med schools look at that?
or does it really not matter?</p>
<p>I mean, obviously, if you go to cornell, you're taking the courses cornell med recommends, and you're getting the ideal education that cornell med school looks for, right?</p>
<p>Varies from school to school. According to NCG, in Cornell's particular case the med school claims it's an advantage but it does not actually seem so.</p>
<p>I am attending small LAC next year. Lawrence University isn't very well known, but it does seem to have a good science department and decent Health Career Advising Committee.</p>
<p>I plan to apply to our state college of medicine as a first choice after graduating from college, but my dad feels that going to an out of state LAC will put me at a significant disadvantage. He feels that I should go to the local state university and network from there.</p>
<p>Any thoughts?</p>
<p>Networking doesn't matter much, especially at a big state school, and DEFINITELY not if it's a different campus. Going out of state for college does not jeopardize in-state status unless you become in-state at the new place as well.</p>
<p>Right- that is pretty much what I had assumed. The only hesitation in my mind would be the potential disadvantage of coming from a lesser-known LAC that is out of the state.</p>
<p>I am fairly sure that my dad's concerns are primarily economic, but I want to make sure that I don't hurt my admissions chances at the medical school that is currently my #1 choice (Iowa).</p>
<p>Invasion, you mention your college is not well-known. However, is it well known to the admissions committee of your state medical school? One way to check is to see whether there are any alumni from your college that were accepted or even better, matriculated to the medical school. Also, a little known college nationally may still be well known regionally. Another writer mentioned Lawrence College which may not be well known on the East Coast but has a very good reputation in the Midwest. If that student applied to medical schools in Wisconsin or Minnesota, for instance, going to Lawrence would be a strong plus as it is well known and regarded there. However, in general, attending a lesser known LAC which may, perhaps for unfair reasons, not be known for its academic reputation does put the onus on the student if he/she applies outside its geographic sphere of influence. It will be important to show that you are as strong a candidate as someone applying from schools that are well known to the Admissions Committee, particularly the state university This can be accomplished several ways: 1)MCAT scores which compare you against a national candidate pool; 2) Working at the medical school as a summer student with a faculty member. He/She will then be able to write a letter that compares you (hoepfully favorably) with students from the state university 3) Obtaining a letter of reference from someone who may have been affiliated with the medical school or the state university and thus would be knowledgable enough to compare you with undergrad students from the state university. This option is not as good as the first two, as typically, the connection is somewhat tenous and outdated. </p>
<p>I used to be on an admissions committee at a highly ranked medical school on the East Coast. When we received applications from students that attended schools we knew very little about or never previously had applicants(e.g., small religious colleges, schools from the very deep South), we looked at MCAT scores, recommendation letters, and sometimes followed up with calls to the premed advisors. If the GPA/MCAT scores were in our range, the student would be given an interview opportunity. Rather than having a bias against a lesser known school, we wanted to create opportunities for such students to attend, provided they had GPA/MCAT scores in our range.</p>
<p>I would like to also add that attending LACs can offer certain advantages over attending state universities. In particular, there are more opportunities to know your professors at a personal level which may help in getting meaningful letters of recommendation, research and thesis opportunities with professors who are interested in teaching undergrads, and an involved and supportive advisory system.</p>
<p>pmyen- Thank you VERY much for the detailed response to my questions. You definately assuaged some of my fears and hesitations about attending a lesser-known LAC. </p>
<p>As for the name recognition of Lawrence, my father apparently contact our state med school (Iowa). Although he didn't show me any official paperwork, he claimed that the admissions rep he talked to stated approximately 1-5 students apply annually and one or two will get in. Last year nobody got it (out of four applicants). My dad feels this is excessively low, but one or two out of five seems fairly reasonable. Any thoughts or opinions on this subject would be appreciated.</p>
<p>On a different note, does anyone think that there might be a disadvantageous aspect of contacting the admissions offices at a few medical schools during my freshman year? I have already called around and sent a few emails, but I don't want to be a hassle or cast myself in a negative light.</p>
<p>Have him ask how many students from the state school get in. If it's better than 2 out of 5 (40%), he has a point.</p>
<p>So if you guys were to rank schools in order of the quality of pre-med education they offered/which are the "best" pre-med schools, what would the top ten or so schools be?</p>
<p>just the curiosity, does 3.8~9ish GPA student from ranked 40s undergrad has higher chance getting into top 10 med school than 3.6~7ish GPA students from top 10 undergrad? (assuming other backgrounds are all same)</p>
<p>thnx</p>
<p>If all other components of the application are equal, yes. But the disparity between student bodies is quite large even between a school ranked #10 and a school ranked #30. If you compare Cornell's figures with those of Berkeley and Michigan's, you will see that a 3.7 student from Cornell is more likely to score higher on the MCAT than a 3.7 student from Michigan.</p>