<p>I was not a bio major, so I’m only basing this opinion on what I’ve heard others say. Premeds who choose Bio as their major because they liked bio in high school, often find that many college bio classes are boring, unrelated to medicine, and require too much (boring, useless) memorization…which ends up dragging down their GPAs.</p>
<p>My son loves bio and chem, but he used his AP Bio credits so that he wouldn’t have to take Bio 2 which has a lot of boring stuff that might have dragged down his GPA (I think Bio 2 has plant study in it?)</p>
<p>Anyway, your son shouldn’t start at a CC. He has the stats to start and get merit at some univs. He may need to be open-minded about his major, even if he still wants to be premed. </p>
<p>UCLA does not do committee letters, so that aspect of “weeding” out pre-meds who are not highly likely to be admitted to medical school is not present there.</p>
<p>I served on med school committee in the past. My committee mates were NOT at all aware of grading practices outside the large state university where we worked. GPA was a pure weed out to start–without a certain GPA (I believe 3.0) we didn’t even read the rest of the application. Of course, the vast majority of people we admitted had GPA’s well above 3.5. So if your goal is 100% to get into med school, then maximizing GPA is key. However, most people who start as premed don’t stay premed. This isn’t just because they get “weeded out”. Lots of kids grow up and find other areas more fascinating. </p>
<p>Another aside–as a physician, I would advise any aspiring med student to think long and hard about their choices. Medicine is not for everyone, and the field is changing rapidly.</p>
As @ucbalumnus pointed out, UCLA does not use committee letters, so there will be more no-hopers trying their luck from UCLA who would be weeded out at schools that send committee letters
The difficulty of getting in to med school varies a lot by your state of residency, CA is probably the hardest state in the country, and (surprise!) the vast majority of pre-meds at UCLA are CA residents.</p>
<p>@coolweather, because UCLA, like many big publics, has a broader range of pre-professional majors than most private RUs, and those kids very likely are not even considering med school. For instance, I doubt that many architecture/arts/theatre/film/TV majors have med school as their goal. Meanwhile, JHU is known as a pre-med magnet.</p>
<p>Keep in mind that medical school has a lot of biochemistry, so if your son doesn’t like chemistry it may not be for him. </p>
<p>Medical school also has a lot of what some call ‘boring memorization’. Like learning the names of every nerve, muscle, joint, blood vessel, etc. </p>
<p>Med school also starts immediately with clinical simulation. Good to know you aren’t just interested in the academic side of being either a med student or doctor. </p>
<p>That is a good point; it may make more sense to go to an honors program at a lesser school (or a school like Rice/Harvard if you can get in) rather than a top public if you are deadset on medicine.</p>
<p>To the OP: I would say that this should not be a strong consideration. I’d weigh other factors more heavily if I was in your situation.</p>
<p>Those Berkeley numbers do NOT look good for students with a MCAT 30-34 and a GPA of 3.6+</p>
<p>I’m not blaming Cal, it’s a Calif weakness not a school weakness. But, it just reinforces my belief that any OOS premeds should not consider Calif schools for undergrad. Going to undergrad in almost any other state with those stats would likely result in a 80% chance of admittance into at least 1 MD SOM.</p>
<p>As S has already applied to several schools with good bio programs and cost is not significant consideration, at this point I would wait for acceptances and not spend your time worrying about a school’s “grade deflation policy”, or about the number of some school’s stats of med school applicants and/or school’s acceptance rates, or committee letters or not, or weeding out practices of some schools, etc as your head may explode from overload.</p>
<p>After reviewing acceptances, I would suggest rereading the referenced below posts as the advice/opinion offered would serve your S well as he starts a potential premed pathway:
Wowmom (post 13) …It’s not about the school–it’s about the kid….
TatinG (post 22) … When considering a pre-med school, look at the availability of the extra-curricular opportunities….</p>
<p>And also reread compmom (post 32) …I think your son should base his choice of college based on size, location, academic offerings and “vibe” just like anyone else…. would also be helpful no matter whether he continues down premed path or not as if S is happy at his choice, he’s more likely to thrive.
Good luck. </p>
<p>Just to clarify, i was not suggesting that he start at CC (though many do of course). I waa just trying to say that grade inflation or potentially higher GPA seems to be a poor reason for choosing a school overall.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s accurate to say that some schools “take pleasure” in weeding kids out. It’s likely more accurate to say that at some colleges, they do not have the resources (either academic support, tutoring, advising, etc.) to be able to invest in every kid with a particular academic or professional interest. So it makes sense to slice the class into cohorts and track those most likely to succeed vs. those less likely. </p>
<p>I think it is more that such classes have a pretty hard curve (not unlike Law school). But unlike many privates where a Gentlemen’s B-/C+ is ok, the UC’s give out plenty of lower grades.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sure, but what they “present” is only a small proportion of those that apply to med school from Cal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>At best, all UC advising is poor, so the answer is that UC chooses not to provide such resources. (And that is why UC does not have a handle everyone who applies to med school. Every applicant is essentially on their own.) </p>
<p>Precisely. Why do they need a “pretty hard curve” in a biology class? One would assume if they are admitting the cream of the crop in California, most people should be able to get an A rather than 15 to 20%</p>
<p>Where one draws the curve line is sort of irrelevant. Top privates may have B/B- curve. Cal/UCLA as slightly lower. The other UC’s lower still.</p>
<p>btw: which highly selective college has an “A” curve for premed prereqs (where “most people should be able to get an A…”)? I certainly never heard of any (other than perhaps Brown).</p>
<p>The curve is pretty relevant in my opinion if a bunch of high performing kids go to a college where they end up being graded on a curve, especially they have the opportunity to attend a school where they are not. Essentially, it means that you have to be in the top 20% of a group who would have been considered your peers during the admission process. So how do you beat out 80% of kids who may have the same ability as you? </p>
<p>It is not a question of whether UCB considers themselves a peer of Brown or Stanford or whoever else but they don’t consider themselves a state college like most others. I expect that when someone attends a state college, they are able to get a grade when they meet a certain percentage and get an A as opposed to being measured based on comparative abilities.</p>
<p>Essentially, my view is that a premed should attend a school where grades are not given based on comparative abilities but based on what you are able to answer.</p>
<p>Hard to blame the curve when the tests can include material not covered in class or readings.
Cooperative vs competitive. I have given the example of my young, brilliant friend,always an ardent, top performer, who flunked orgo at college #1. For financial reasons, she transferred. Her new orgo teacher had a much more cooperative approach: we will do this work and if you do your part you will thrive in this class and learn. Ended up an an Ivy med, now a doc.</p>
<p>Many premed guys during my time were weak in STEM classes. Many dropped out of premed right after the first general chemistry class, let alone orgo.</p>