Grade Inflation Isn't The Only Thing

Pre-Med & Medical School Pre-Med Topics
1

<p>Hi all,</p>

<p>Can we deal once and for all with this myth that your undergraduate school doesn't matter, all that matters is grade inflation?</p>

<p>It's simply not true. Your undergraduate school DOES matter.</p>

<p>Here's my analysis. Let me know if you see something wrong:</p>

<p>1.) If undergrad GPA was all that mattered, and undergrad institution didn't matter at all, then you'd see that among undergraduate schools, all the kids admitted would have the same grades. Duke kids who got admitted would have the exact same grades as MIT kids who got admitted. After all, if school doesn't matter, then isn't a 3.65 the same, no matter where you get it from? A 3.65 from nowhere state should be the same as a 3.65 from Berkeley, a 3.65 from Duke, and a 3.65 from MIT.</p>

<p>2.) Empirically, this simply isn't what you see. MIT grads need, on average, a 3.7 to get admitted to medical school. Duke kids need a 3.54. That's a huge gap. Unless you want to argue that Duke kids are more qualified in other ways - a notion I would find flattering but probably untrue - then adcoms really are paying attention to undergrad institution.</p>

<p>3.) Notice that this is not correlated with prestige. Nobody questions that MIT is harder to get into than Duke, with possible exceptions. If sakky is going to tell you not to pick the school that's most "prestigious" (read: "hardest to get into"), then he's drawing a correct conclusion.</p>

<p>But for those of you who have concluded that undergraduate institution doesn't matter at all, I think that's simply an incorrect conclusion. Case Western needs a 3.75; Stanford needs a 3.54. These sorts of disparities are extremely common.</p>

<p>They are NOT a correction for grade deflation (Stanford and Duke are more inflated than MIT and Case). They are NOT an indicator of prestige (Stanford is harder to get into than MIT, which is harder than Duke, which is harder than Case).</p>

<p>But to claim that undergrad school "only" matters in terms of getting higher grades is patently false. Higher grades from Case don't improve your odds relative to lower grades at Duke. Etc.</p>

2

<p>good points. Now where did you get those GPA averages for people admitted to med schools from specific undergraduate colleges?</p>

3

<p>Case, MIT, and Duke all have that information publicly. A girl from Stanford posted Stanford's average on the boards, and I was able to verify it.</p>

4

<p>I'm not really sure, I know going to a grade-inflated school helps as grades do matter, but of course the school matters as well. I think once you get towards schools that are in the top 20 or to 25, then its much better to go to a school that's grade inflated. Obviously a 3.6 from a state school is nowhere near as impressive as 3.6 from a top-10 school. At my hometown's school, columbus state, you cant even consider pre-med without pretty much a 4.0. Also, my brother-in-law noted once to me that he got a 3.6 at penn and fared better in admissions than his friends from back home who stayed in-state and got a 3.9 to a 4.0 at UT. Obviously there are other factors in every situation though.</p>

5

<p>
[quote]
Once you get towards schools that are in the top 20 or to 25, then its much better to go to a school that's grade inflated.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But see, I think even this qualifier isn't true. Imagine a world where MIT had more grade inflation than Stanford. (It's fiction, I know.) Even so, you'd want to go to Stanford, because their average-accepted-GPA is lower.</p>

6

<p>Your post is confusing me somewhat- Should you not need a higher GPA at grade-inflated schools (ie Duke, Stanford) than at MIT, for example?</p>

<p>Sorry, I'm just too thick :S</p>

7

<p>If one were designing a good system, there would be a grade inflation compensator in there. In the specific cases I mentioned, the reverse is actually happening. I think that's just coincidence.</p>

8

<p>One thing that's worth noting is that the GPA of all the people applying from MIT is already a 3.6. The GPA of all the people accepted, 3.7, is probably not statistically different (given the range of applicants) from the intial average of 3.6 -- indicating that the MIT students accepted are a statistical random sample from the initial pool of applicants.</p>

<p>It's probably very unfair, then, to say that you "need" a 3.7 from MIT in order to get into medical school, considering a) that the GPA of everyone applying is already high, and b) that the range of acceptances (3.0-4.0) is rather broad. A more informative measure would probably be the modal GPA rather than the mean.</p>

<p>You can't just go around flinging statistics without analyzing what they actually mean.</p>

9

<p>
[quote]
A girl from Stanford posted Stanford's average on the boards, and I was able to verify it.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would like to see this. Where is this post?</p>

10

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=147457&page=2%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=147457&page=2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>This is of course not solid information. I was able to privately verify this, for which I am afraid I cannot provide evidence.</p>

<p>Oh, and my understanding is that the 3.56 is NOT (contrary to what she says) the BCPM GPA, but rather the overall GPA. If I recall correctly, their BCPM is (as would be expected) a little bit lower.</p>

11

<p>What is the difference between the BCPM GPA and Overall GPA? What does BCPM stand for?</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

12

<p>biology chemistry physics math....i'm guessing</p>

13

<p>Good guess. :)</p>

14

<p>blah math...why oh why!</p>

15

<p>MBM,</p>

<p>First, I would argue that a 3.6 probably is considerably different from a 3.7</p>

<p>Second, if the average applicant from MIT has a 3.6 - higher than the average accepted applicant from Stanford - then at least one of two things must be happening.
1.) Students are not applying if they have lower GPAs.
2.) It is more common to get high grades at MIT.</p>

<p>In neither case do I think the overarching point is negated: undergraduate institution does, in fact, matter in med school admissions, and pursuing a school simply for higher grades is ill-advised, not only from an ethical standpoint but from a tactical one as well.</p>

16

<p>Is it better to have a higher BCPM GPA or an overall GPA?</p>

17

<p>They're often considered to be equally important.</p>

<p>Remember that your BCPM GPA is part of your overall GPA, so the two goals are in fact interrelated very closely.</p>

18

<p>
[quote]

First, I would argue that a 3.6 probably is considerably different from a 3.7

[/quote]

I actually meant that in the "statistical significance" sense -- given the range of accepted vs. not accepted GPAs given on the website, it's very reasonable to assume that 3.6 and 3.7 are statistically indistinguishable. I don't see the error bars being particularly small given a range like that.</p>

<p>At any rate, the MIT applicants very well could have higher GPAs than one would expect, for two reasons:
1. MIT doesn't use plus/minus modifiers, so an A is the same as an A-, as far as GPA goes. An MIT applicant could get straight A-'s and still have a 4.0.
2. An MIT applicant doesn't have first term freshman year screwing up his or her GPA, since that term (in which a student takes intro chem, physics, and calculus) is on pass/no record.</p>

19

<p>I think, or at least hope, that what BDM is really getting at is that one should not choose a school just based on how your GPA is going to play out. That's the real issue here.</p>

<p>We could go back and forth and argue a lot about what constitutes a necessary GPA so on an so forth. The problem with using the average GPA of admitted students as "needed" (the way that BDM implied it in his first post "MIT grads need, on average, a 3.7 to get admitted to medical school. Duke kids need a 3.54.") is that it ignores the fact that many students will get in with less than that. Someone already mentioned the statistical problem of pulling a sample from a group of individuals with higher gpa's to begin with. If everyone is tightly bunched together with a 3.6, then your average admitted gpa is going to be higher than if you have a relatively equal distribution spread from 3.8 - 3.3. This is where the arguement breaks down...</p>

<p>There is also of course the problem that if you have grade inflation and are more likely to get a 4.0, then the number of 4.0's getting accepted is greater, simply because there is a larger number of them, thus pulling up the average admitted GPA. </p>

<p>The final and perhaps biggest problem I have with using admitted GPA is that it ignores MCAT scores, and the whole combined interplay of MCAT, GPA, volunteering, interview, experiences/involvement, etc., that goes into medical school admissions. To look at one aspect without the others is to miss the point and a faulty analysis in my opinion. I promise you that their are individuals who do nothing but study, pull 4.0s, get a 33 on the MCAT and still don't get accepted because they have done nothing else. Are they very common? probably not, but I bet they exist.</p>

<p>The fact of the matter is that picking an undergrad institution on the basis of how likely it is to get you into medical school is poor logic. College should not just be some trifling step on your way to a profession, because if you treat it as such, you're going to be miserable. Yes it is the means to the ends but you do have to enjoy the ride (4 years is a long time). So go to a school that will allow you to do the best you can with most enjoyment.</p>

<p>If you wish to get accepted, I really think that your best bet it to be wellrounded. Make up for deficiencies by being good in other areas. If your grades are poor, do well on the MCAT, or be involved. A 3.45 with a ton of involvement and responsibility/leadership looks far better than a 3.7 with nothing.</p>

20

<p>This is may be a little off-topic but how hard is it to get a good GPA during the undergrad years?</p>

<p>Can someone make the relation to high school?</p>

<p>(I am probably wrong but for example, 3 AP classes = 1 semester with XXX classes)</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>