Grades or EC?

Pre-Med & Medical School Pre-Med Topics
1

<p>When applying to med school, is it more grade oriented than applying for undergrad schools where EC and other little things matter? I say this because the pattern of becoming more organized as life progresses. For example, when you get a job based off your degree, they don't care that you placed first in nationwide lacrosse but rather your GPA and experience. </p>

<p>How far back do Med Schools look when admitting applicants? Freshmen Year High School? Will getting into a competitive NIH internship (HHMI) for the summer and 3 periods of the day during the senior high school year give me an edge (if any at all)?</p>

2

<p>Med schools only look at college GPA. Your grades from high school count if you took any classes for credit at your local CC or university. </p>

<p>I am currently in HHMI, so PM me with your questions. The thing is, it probably helps you get into 7 year MD programs. My friend in HHMI applied to a few and got interviews at all of them. For med school, doing something like HHMI may get you a published paper (highly unlikely considering that most of us lack concrete data with 1.5 months to go) which is a huge plus for med schools. Also, HHMI experiences will probably help you get research positions at your college (ask me about how I do in getting positions in about a year), and research is pretty big for med school admissions. Finally, HHMI is a huge plus for getting into college anyway. Your undergrad school greatly affects where you go to med school. If you get a full scholarship for undergrad, you may be more willing to take out loans for med school and go to a top one over a lower ranked one that gives you some scholarship money. Also, some colleges like Penn, Duke, and Stanford are amazing at getting students into med schools. If you go to one of the three you will see some classmates getting into med school with GPAs around 3.5 and 3.6. If you go to a third tier state school, you would probably need to get closer to a 3.9 to remain competitive while battling grade deflation (compared to the relative inflation at most Ivy level schools).</p>

3

<p>1.) The EC's are crucial. The grades might not be. So if anything the process is more-EC tilted than previously.</p>

<p>For example, if I went to a public high school and applied to Penn, I would need a 3.9 to go with test scores and EC's. But if I went to Exeter and applied to Penn, I'd probably still need a 3.9.</p>

<p>If you go to UC Davis and are aiming for Penn Med, you'll want a 3.9ish. But from Columbia, a 3.6 might well be just fine.</p>

<p>All candidates, however, will need the EC's. The research, the clinical exposure, the community service.</p>

<p>2.)
[quote]
For example, when you get a job based off your degree, they don't care that you placed first in nationwide lacrosse but rather your GPA and experience.

[/quote]
What on earth are you talking about? Interviews are by far the most important component of job-hunting after college, and those are much more likely to go well if you have something fun/exciting to talk about.</p>

<p>For that matter, interviews and essays are a crucial component of applying to medical school -- much more important than they were for undergrad, obviously. Those, too, depend heavily on your having something to discuss.</p>

<p>3.) VK is on the money. HHMI won't help directly. But publications do, your college does, and it might open the doors to other research experiences.</p>

<p>4.)
[quote]
If you go to one of the three you will see some classmates getting into med school with GPAs around 3.5 and 3.6.

[/quote]
As an average. Half of the class who goes to med school will have less than that.</p>

4

<p>Isn't Hopkins supposedly the best med program? I'm trying to stay in-state unless I can get the best(i.e. Harvard). Why move to another state if a perfectly fine med school is nearby?</p>

<p>But do you see my other point? After undergrad, they begin to care more about experience RELATED to the field. Sure, getting athletic achievements will look good, but you're not going to be playing sports in med school whereas you have time for that stuff in undergrad. During the undergrad, the time might be better spent in research and clinical experience IMO.</p>

<p>I get what you're saying about job interviews, but the interesting part doesn't have to be a particular event. If you have good social skills, then you can leave a good impression no matter what you tell the employer. My original question pertained more to MED SCHOOL not job hunting. Even if you don't get a great job out of med school, you can gain experience and soon get a much better job.</p>

<p>I got into HHMI, so I don't really have any questions from you other than: what's a good 7-year med program? I've heard of GW's program, but it's kinda expensive for a slightly above average university. I don't think 7 year programs are for me.</p>

<p>I plan to do UMD in 3 years since I can get a discount on tuition and graduate a year early if I get a 5 on all my AP courses (36 credits out of 30 needed for sophomore status).</p>

<p>Isn't this the ranking for medical school admissions?:
1.MCAT
2. GPA
3. Experience
4. Awards/Honors</p>

5

<p>The three schools I listed will have stiff competition for premed courses, but it's not as cut throat as most state schools. I really don't know much about Maryland (even though I'm instate like you) because I knew that I wasn't going to go there. I would assume that it will be like most state schools where there are fair amounts of grade deflation, and advising that is not as good or personal as that of a top private. </p>

<p>From sakky about UCs (this possibly pertains to UMD, I really don't know)

[quote]
but MANY 'ivy-caliber' students opt out of even applying to ivies because they don't want to be in a cut-throat atmosphere.
Huh? Cut-throat atmosphere? With that grade inflation. You can't be serious.</p>

<p>If you want to talk about a cut-throat atmosphere, you may want to take a gander at some of the lower-ranked schools, especially the public schools. Now THAT is a cutthroat atmosphere. Particularly so for certain majors. For example, there are students in engineering majors at the UC's who are just trying to avoid academic probation. Forget about trying to get an A, all they want to do is avoid flunking out.</p>

<p>Consider this quote:</p>

<p>"Weeder?? What's That?
At UCLA there is something called a "weeder" class. "Impacted" courses (courses that have strict guidlines about adding or dropping them due to their high demand) are often "weeders." Most majors have at least one weeder course. Many have more than one (called "weeder series"). A weeder is a course that is designed to flunk out kids who aren't good enough for the major, thus "weeding" them out. FEAR THEM. You're at a school with the best and the brightest... and these courses are designed to flunk a big chunk of them out, of course not on an official level. Most of the time you won't know your class is a weeder until you go to UCLA for a while and you hear the rumor. I will do my best to inform you of what classes you may take as an incoming freshman that may be weeders. UCLA is a pre-med school... remember that. Anything here that is pre-med is *<strong><em>ING HARD. All of the chem courses are considered weeders. Computer science and engineering in general is considered one giant weeder. No, they do not get easier as you move up; in fact, they get really *</em></strong>ing hard. To illustrate, I have a friend who is a graduating senior, Electrical Engineer, I quote him saying, "A's? What is an A? I thought it went from F to C-." It's his last quarter here and yet at least once a week he won't come back from studying until four or five in the morning... and yet it's not midterm or finals season....</p>

<p>Why Do You Keep Talking About "Harder As You Move Up?"
Amazingly, many majors get EASIER as you move up. This is because once you get through the weeder, they give you a break and the workload is only as hard as an "average" class. Certain majors aren't so lucky.</p>

<p>Back to Weeders...
I once took a weeder course in North campus (largely considered the "easier" side of campus). It is the weeder for the communications major (Comm 10). However, because this is an introductory weeder (anybody can take it), it is considered by many as North campus' hardest class. I didn't know this and I took it as an incoming frosh. I was quite scared. The material is ****ing common sense; you get a ton of it. I had 13 pages of single space, font 10 notes covering only HALF of the course (this is back when I was a good student and took notes). I was supposed to memorize the entire list including all the categories and how the list was arranged by them. And I did. Fearing it yet? My friend told me about his chem midterm... the average grade was a 16%.. No, they didn't fail the whole class; I'm sure they curved it so only half the kids failed. My freshman year, I met this friend of mine who was crying because she got an 76% on her math midterm. I told her that she should be glad she passed, she told me, "the average grade was 93%, the curve fails me." Weeders can have curves, as these three examples show... but only to make sure some people pass... and some fail. Famous weeders are courses like: Communications 10, Life Scienes 1 (and 2 & 3), Chemistry 14a (and all the subsequent ones get only harder), English 10a (OMG that class was hard), CS33, etc. Oh, and if you're wondering, my friend ended up getting a C- in her math class after studying her butt off. Lucky her!!! "</p>

<p><a href="http://www.moochworld.com/scribbles/ucla/16.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.moochworld.com/scribbles/ucla/16.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I would say that, if anything, you should go to Ivies to avoid cutthroat competition. At least at the Ivies (with the possible exception of Cornell engineering), you aren't constantly worried about flunking out the way you are at other schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>About 7 year programs, if you get into WashU's so long as you maintain your good grades and get a good MCAT score, you are guaranteed acceptance to their top 10 med school. Don't count on getting into this. The 7 year program I liked the most was NU's because it was one of my top choices for college anyway. If you get into GW's 7 year program, you get a scholarship so it only costs 35k a year (down from 50). </p>

<p>About graduating in 3 years, BDM says

[quote]
...this becomes a liability since they have 50% more information on everybody else than they have on you.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Now I have one question for BDM. If JJ Redick applied to med school after 4 years instead of going to the NBA (while getting good grades, MCAT scores, some research experience during the offseason, and utilizing Duke's advising) would he be at an advantage over most applicants from Duke, or are 4 years of D1 basketball and several ACC championships not valued by most med schools?</p>

6

<p>1.) Re: staying in-state for med school: No objections from me. Which program is "the best" depends on how you define best. I picked Penn because they're my personal favorite. (And no, I don't go there.)</p>

<p>2.) Sure, experience related to the field -- or which you can potentially argue is related to the field, as I did with my economics major -- is what counts. I was responding to your original question:
[quote]
is it more grade oriented than applying for undergrad schools where EC and other little things matter?

[/quote]
The answer is no, if anything it's less grade-oriented. If you want an objectives-obsessed application process, go pre-law.</p>

<p>4.) I don't like BS/MD programs as a general rule so I'll defer your question to someone (anyone) else.</p>

<p>5.) The first problem with your rankings is that it's not like they trade off. You can't compensate for a 2.8 with a 40. (Trust me, I've had friends -- well, a friend -- who've tried.) Certainly awards/honors are the least important. A 2.8 will disqualify you no matter what. A 24 will disqualify you no matter what. You can't use these factors to compensate for other ones, so I'm not sure how this ranking system is supposed to work for you.</p>

<p>6.) Second problem is that they vary from school to school. One school I know of hates students who do research because it thinks they tend to be bookish and nerdy. (Obviously, this school is not ranked very highly on USN's Research rankings, which I'm sure is just fine with them.) Most of the Research schools have 90+% of their students applying with research experience, so then it's basically a prerequisite.</p>

<p>7.) If you wanted to tell me you were within a school's average for everything and then way past them in one of those four things, there's only one field which I would never say is the most important: Awards.</p>

<p>Research is probably the most important at most research schools. A few state schools will probably value GPA most. I can't think of anybody off the top of my head who would put the MCAT first. But, then, I can think of several schools that would put either research or GPA last, too.</p>

7

<p>If Redick had taken the premed courses and the MCAT and done research and clinical exposure, I would suspect that his DI experiences would be worth at least several index points*. Off the top of my head, I'd say it's probably in the five to seven range. His essays and interviews could talk extensively about leadership, pressure, teamwork, mentoring, etc.</p>

<p>I'd say most DI athletes probably take a harder hit to their overall application than their DI status is worth, but that's not always true and it's certainly not true of a Final Four basketball athlete.</p>

<p>BRM -- thoughts?</p>

<p>(1 index point = 1 MCAT point or .1 GPA points.)</p>

8

<p>I think the weeder course is Chem and Organic Chem for my major (biochem). I'm taking AP chem right now and I am very confident about getting a 5 on the exam. Organic...ummm...I guess I'll study my *** off!!</p>

<p>For GW's 7 year program, you need good SAT scores and don't have to take the MCAT. If only I could find out I'd get into WashU's 7 year program after HS graduation, then I would want to go there with no doubt. I don't want to go to WashU for 4 years for just undergrad if my MCAT scores aren't great. I want to do undergrad and med in 7 years. If only there were some way to guarantee a good MCAT.</p>

9

<p>
[quote]
I want to do undergrad and med in 7 years.

[/quote]

What's the importance?</p>

<p>Graduating from undergrad in three years will put you at a disadvantage without the year off. Not an insurmountable one, of course, if everything else is really solid.</p>

<p>As BRM is fond of mentioning: at the end of it all, will the extra year really matter?</p>

10

<p>Yeah, because then my AP classes would have been for nothing other than college admissions...</p>

<p>And yes, the year will matter since a medical career doesn't get started until your 30's if your specialized like I plan to do.</p>

11

<p>
[quote]
Yeah, because then my AP classes would have been for nothing other than college admissions...

[/quote]
</p>

<p>1.) That's what economists refer to as a sunk cost.</p>

<p>2.) Depending on which APs, some med schools don't recognize them anyway.</p>

<p>3.) So you finish your residency at 32 instead of 33. It wouldn't matter to me when I was 70 and looking back at my career, but, hey, that's your call.</p>

12

<p>Unless you plan to graduate early do a **** load of research and get some publications or something else to supplement your application, I can't see the advantage. Also, one year means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Why rush through the best 4 years of your life?</p>

<p>If you must become a doctor ASAP, do PSU's or Howard's 6 year program. You finish 2 years early with a BA and MD. I would hate to do one of these programs, but for some these are fits.</p>

13

<p>I will get to this thread when I'm less intoxicated...which likely means Monday given the holiday. There are several things I have to say though...wait for it, wait for it, wait for it...</p>

14

<p>What a weekend! Last night was officially named "Mr. Toad's Wild Ride" (we got a limo for about 20 people)...oh man, still a little hazy at the moment but let's get this done.</p>

<p>1) This is a ridiculous question. Simply put, you need both. There are plenty of stories out there of kids with 4.0's and 37 MCATs, but nothing else who don't get in to any medical schools, usually summarily dismissed everywhere, even without interviews. Also, as BDM pointed out, balance between MCAT and GPA is important. Using his friend's index of 68 as an example, within a certain range, a point in either direction can be make up for the other category - ie a 30/3.8 student is roughly the same as a 31/3.7 or a 33/3.5, get too far out though, like the person he referenced, and it does no good.</p>

<p>2) Medicine is a social profession. Yes, there are some specialties that are far less patient oriented, but in the end, no physician works entirely independently. If you can't communicate and deal with people, then you probably shouldn't go into medicine. So how do medical schools assess this? With your extracurriculars and the interview. You must have them, and you will be asked about those things during your interviews. They are also the ways in which you learn and develop the skills that a physician needs - leadership, communication, compassion, empathy.</p>

<p>3) Staying in-state is one thing, but in-state status doesn't matter much when you're talking about private schools. </p>

<p>4) I'll echo the statements made about BS/MD programs. The real scenario you have to ask yourself is, when you're 70 and getting ready to retire as a pediatric orthopedist (7 years of training), are you really going to look back and say, "Gee I'm really glad I was a doctor for 37 years and not 36, best decision ever!"? I tend to think not.</p>

<p>5) If you can sell it during an interview or on your personal statement, ANY experience can help in the admissions process. I waited tables at Old Chicago for almost two years and when it came up in both my interviews, I was able to talk about the multitasking, the heavy demand on time and getting things right and the social interactions and how that would benefit me as a student and future physician (just like you can't **** off a cook, you don't want to **** of your nurses). At one school I interviewed at, both interviewers (there were two separate interviews) were super enthusiastic about the fact that I had waited tables. Dead serious. One of them, went on and on about how he could tell a lot about me because I had handled such job and enjoyed doing it. Is research more readily apparent to admissions committees? Sure, but it isn't always more applicable. </p>

<p>6) As far as D1 athletes - depends on the school, the sport, and the individual. Also where they are applying. Some schools have phenomenal support systems in place for their athletes - free tutors, great test files, great academic advising and so on. Students-Athletes, regardless of sport, at those schools are probably getting a lot of benefits that most students have no idea about (I only know about them in such detail at my school because I dated a scholarship athlete for a while and one of my good buddies was on the track team). Of course the student has to take advantage of the help offered or otherwise it's of no use. However, other schools don't provide for their student athletes nearly as well, and despite the experience, team work, and leadership, they probably do take a pretty big hit. I'd imagine that this is an even bigger problem at lower division schools due to smaller budgets and such. </p>

<p>However, it's hard to put a value on how much playing a sport can mean. I know I have several stories of people I know who did not click with their interviewer at all, and it cost them their admission (including one guy who had his initial interviewer - who he had a great interview with - die before submitting the report of the interview meaning the student had to reinterview about a month later). You catch the right person who's a huge Nebraska or USC Football fan, or Duke or Kentucky basketball fan...who knows what that could do for you. Even just the association athletes in smaller sports have with those famous programs could be a benefit.</p>

<p>7) I believe your gusto for AP courses is misplaced. In some cases, namely AP chem in certain situations, I even believe that AP's can be detrimental to pre-med students. However, I'm sure that they do matter a lot to college admissions and so they remain important. Not having much knowledge about college admissions, I can't tell you just what importance they have though. It seems rather petty to whine about APs only being important for college admissions.</p>

<p>I think that's pretty much all I wanted to get at...</p>

15

<p>Thoughts anyone? Can someone help estimate/quantify?</p>

<p>examples:</p>

<p>Personal stories/background?
Disabilities/obstacles to overcome?
Underrepresented group/Minority status?
Undergrad at a favored school -- which ones count?</p>

16

<p>1.) You need to understand that I just made that number (Redick's) up off the top of my head. I have no source, no validity, etc. I probably should not have done so if I had known people would take it seriously, as you seem to be doing.</p>

<p>2.) See post 9 here for an answer as to why the question is unanswerable:
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?p=3888659%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?p=3888659&lt;/a> The short answer is that balance is key, and that strengths and weaknesses don't cancel out.</p>

<p>3.) The exception I think is race. At a first approximation based on AAMC data, Hispanic status is worth ~5 index points while being black is worth ~10.</p>

<p>4.) As for "favored" schools, obviously that will vary from medical school adcom to adcom, not to mention school to school. Beyond that, most of the "boost" seems to come only in GPA, and it's impossible to say how much of it is because of MCAT scores.</p>

<p>5.) Obviously -- at least I would hope this wouled be obvious -- not all stories are the same. A classmate of mine* had to walk eight miles to the doctor's office (too poor for a bus ticket) while suffering lung failure, bleeding out, coughing blood, and vomiting all along the way. That story is much more compelling than, say, an emotionally distant physician father. Of course, she also was her university's 4.0 valedictorian, class president, and scored a 41, so I don't think she needed the story anyway.</p>

<p>*SIGNIFICANT DETAILS HAVE BEEN CHANGED.;</p>

17

<p>LOL...love the disclaimer</p>

18

<p>I love this discussion board. I just found this recently when I was looking to sign up for MCAT. I am a sophomore. I have signed up for August 6 MCAT. I am planning to take junior year fall off and do health related volunteer/research field work abroad. I did quite a bit of lab research in hight school. One paper was published last year and the other one will be sometime this year. I did not get involved in lab research in college because I was not too crazy about it - I like instant gratification ;). My question is will the paper publication count for med schools even though the research for it was done in high school ? Also, not doing research work against me @ schools that are big in research.</p>

19

<p>
[quote]
will the paper publication count for med schools even though the research for it was done in high school ?

[/quote]
Probably at least some.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Also, not doing research work against me @ schools that are big in research.

[/quote]
... obviously yes. If you were a school that highly valued research, wouldn't you obviously want students who valued it too?</p>

20

<p>I am and will be doing public health related research but not hardcore lab research. Does it matter what type of research ?</p>