<p>There are some classes that are so interesting yet unbearably hard (mostly because of a professor). I think a good way to still learn the material and not tank your GPA is to buy the books from the class and read them on your own. Or buy a whole other set of books of your choosing. You can even arrange to talk to professors who are experts on the just to chat and attend guest speaker events. In some schools, you can even audit some classes. By the end, one's knowledge would be comparable to that of somebody who took the class AND one's GPA wouldn't suffer in the process. You could even call yourself an "intellectual" in the end because you took classes that are not required simply for the joy of it. This process is also acknowledgement that you simply have to do the best you can in the law/med school admissions process. You can still learn without sacrificing your future. </p>
<p>My question is: Is there anything wrong with this approach? I seriously feel bad for people who "challenged themselves because of an insatiable thirst for learning" and then not get into a single top 15 law school despite high LSAT scores and excellent recs. They don't get rewarded for having a lower GPA on the most challenging schedules.</p>
<p>You can read any books you want. Knock yourself out. That doesn’t mean you’ve taken the course or can claim you’ve taken it. And whatever you do, please don’t call yourself an intellectual anywhere but inside your own head–you’ll be perceived as insufferable.</p>
<p>I’ve audited classes and it’s fun and informative, but don’t kid yourself that it’s the same as actually taking the course where you discuss the reading and write the papers.</p>
<p>If the class is not required, you can usually audit it or take it pass/fail. </p>
<p>That said, my kids hardly ever did this. They claimed that what you get out of the class correlates directly with the time and effort you put in, so if you don’t plan to put in the effort, taking it is a waste of time anyway…</p>
<p>I’m pushing 60 years old and went to a UG school that was 40% premed. This strategy was used back then. Many kids took the horror story classes at “easier” schools even to pump up the gpa.</p>
<p>I have no doubt that some kids attempt to “game” the system and select certain courses in order to keep their gpa’s high for law/medical school admission. Is that a good way to go through college? Certainly not but it is a reality.
My own d went through the law school admission process last cycle. As she didn’t even consider law school until her junior year, there was virtually no gaming of the system in her course selection. But the reality is that grades from 2 or 3 courses probably wouldn’t change her gpa that dramatically anyway. </p>
<p>But with that said, I wouldn’t hesitate to tell anyone to consider the affect a grade can have in one’s overall gpa and to choose classes wisely. Following law school admission graphs on sites like law school numbers, I don’t think law schools nitpick over a 3.73 vs. 3.78 gpa as the LSAT grade would be the deciding factor in admission for that gpa range. </p>
<p>I will say my kids study abroad semester (4.0) certainly boosted her overall gpa. So there may be ways to boost one’s gpa without intentionally trying to game the system.</p>
<p>If I knew then what I know now-- I might have suggested she take one or two summer courses at a local college. I think that is what CPT was implying. Lots of kids in my area take a summer course or two at Nassau Community college or other local colleges. It may be done to boost one’s gpa- or just allows the kid to have a lighter schedule back at the “home school”. But I don’t think that even 2 more (hopefully) “A’s” would have changed her gpa significantly to make a difference in her admission endeavor. </p>
<p>Bottom line- gpa’s count ALOTfor law school/medical school admission- but grades for a handful of classes won’t affect the overall gpa significantly. But students need to aim for at least a 3.7 for top law school admission with at least a high 160’s LSAT.<br>
I wouldn’t suggest students steer clear of one or two courses in order to maintain a high gpa. But I would suggest they steer clear of 5 or 6 challenging courses, as that could bring down their overall gpa.</p>
<p>for the “pre-med” student, the science or math course may be a piece of cake. It’s the art or writing course that may be their most challenging.<br>
For the artistically challenged (like myself), my college art course almost brought me to tears.</p>
<p>However, a lot of pre-med students take the easier versions of several courses:</p>
<p>General chemistry for biology majors (instead of the course for chemistry majors)
Organic chemistry for biology majors (instead of the course for chemistry majors)
Physics for biology majors (instead of the course for physics/chemistry/engineering majors)
Calculus for biology (and business and social studies) majors (instead of the course of math/physics/chemistry/engineering majors)</p>
<p>can’t speak much about pre-med as d went law school route. But guess that is why we have the right to sue doctors for malpractice. </p>
<p>I would like to hope that the MCAT and years of medical school training might compensate for the doctor in training who skipped the art or philosophy course. And would the science course geared towards biology majors be that watered down? It’s still geared to the science major. If you said “organic chem for film majors”, I might agree more with your point.</p>
<p>Or just to take the classes when they had no other classes so that they could spend more time on it…like taking organic chem during the summer semester.</p>
<p>Lest anyone start looking askance at their doctors, the chemistry, physics, and calculus that they take is plenty rigorous–it may not be as rigorous as chem for chem majors, but it is by no means chem for non-science majors that some universities have.</p>
<p>Moreover, biochemistry is taught as a first-year med school course that one has to pass, and master well enough to pass Part I of the boards. There are checks and balances…</p>
<p>Quite seriously, this is exactly why Brown’s S/NC program makes sense to me. The pre-meds there take REAL science courses. They also take REAL courses outside of their “concentrations.” Often, the latter are taken S/NC. If I were paying $50,000 a year, I’d rather have my kid take a REAL course learning something on a pass/fail basis than take a gut in which (s)he learns nothing just to boost his/her gpa.</p>
<p>I’m not familiar with the pre-med process but all doctors do have to go through the bar. That said, there are some incompetent doctors out there, I agree. I did not mean to suggest in any way that doctors should avoid their core classes (well they wouldn’t even be eligible for med school if they did that, would they?), only unnecessarily hard ones due to an incompetent professor or something outside one’s ability that’s also irrelevant to his/her major.</p>
<p>I did not go after a medical career but several of my classmates did. </p>
<p>There was no premed program so the premed students go creative. Going for a chemistry degree forced you to take some tough, but not required for premed, classes. Same for biology. </p>
<p>So what they did was go for a degree in philosophy. They then had enough electives to pick and choose the required courses for a premed program.</p>