Is it better to go to an Ivy for undergraduate for law/med later?

<p>

The data suggests that ten years ago, 51% of all grades Harvard gave out were A’s. No distribution was provided. I’d have to speculate that while the grade inflation would not have been so rampant in the STEM fields, it was still there. For instance, before Princeton instated its grade deflation policy (still the only Ivy to do so), more than a third of grades given out in even STEM classes were A’s. The problem was not subjectivity - rather, it was the high concentration of very intelligent students in the same classroom who were all presumably able to get the “right” answers. So, now the departmental ceiling for Princeton is about a third A’s. </p>

<p>If you can get into an Ivy league school, going there (minus Princeton) may very well afford you a good chance at good grades, though you will still have to work hard. </p>

<p>

Now, nobody is exactly sure of how med school admissions correct for rigor of study. There are, of course many of those who ardently claim that med schools do not, in fact, correct for rigor of study. I personally believe this is a case of the haves vs. the have nots. The haves will always hope that med schools will take into account their institution and the have nots will always hope for the opposite. However, the reasoning goes somewhat like this. It’s about the quality of the student body. Take the same student, academically, at two different schools. At public schools, you don’t encounter the same concentration of similarly-minded, extremely motivated, intelligent students such as yourself. As a result, rising to the top may not be that difficult given the low concentration. But at an Ivy, you’re surrounded by people just like yourself - people just as motivated and intelligent. So, rising to the top would be presumably harder. You have a whole class full of people like yourself clamoring for the A-grade. At a public school, you have a much smaller population of people in a given class vying for the A-grade, so it would be easier to get.</p>

<p>If you don’t end up going to med school, the Yale degree would do a lot more for you.</p>

<p>Yale’s GPA will be raised because med schools know that it has a tougher curriculum</p>

<p>No. SOMs will not view it like that. No brownie points for elite schools or tougher majors Besides, Yale has a rep for grade inflation. </p>

<p>Grade inflation exists at schools where they really don’t want to fail anyone. That doesn’t necessarily mean that there are more A’s awarded in premed prereqs, but it could mean that some kids who should be given D’s or F’s are given C’s.</p>

<p>Does it mean that state schools are giving out easy GPA’s so med schools are lowering their GPA’s on applications and raising those from Ivies because those are harder?</p>

<p>NO. Not at all. State schools, like many schools, weed heavily.</p>

<p>^More A’s are awarded in pre-med classes. We’re looking at over a third of students in a class given A’s. However, given the strength of the student body, that should not be a surprise. </p>

<p>While state schools weed, as I said, it still may be easier. For instance, take a top student. If he/she went to a state school, it would be easier because he is a top student and he would rise to the top easier. At an Ivy, with an entire class full of similar top students, it would be much harder to rise to the top in those weeder courses.</p>

<p>I agree that at a state school it may be easier to grab the A’s…IF YOU are a strong student at that school. If you’re an average student at the school, it won’t be.</p>

<p>Even if an ivy gives 1/3 A’s in its premed prereqs, if you’re not a strong student at that school (say that you’re in the middle of middle quartiles), your chances of being one of those 1/3 are lowish because the students in those classes are largely from the upper quartile. The premed prereqs are also being taken by the STEM students…so also more cream students.</p>

<p>In my opinion, the ACT 32ish student with a 3.8 GPA is better off at his state school then an ivy if he’s premed.</p>

<p>No, I totally agree that it’s easier to stand out at a state school than an Ivy. I’m also assuming that if you’re an average student at a state school, you wouldn’t make it at an Ivy anyway. If you’re a top student at a state school, you would be among your kind in an Ivy. That is, like you said yourself, it would be harder to get an A. So, you would have an easier time at a state school. </p>

<p>As a side note, Ivies routinely give out greater than 1/3 A’s. Princeton has grade deflation and we only receive about 1/3 A’s. Thus, it can be safe to assume that the rest of the Ivies, which do not have grade deflation policies, give out significantly more A’s than that.</p>

<p>According to gradeinflation.com, the average grade awarded at Princeton in 2008 was 3.28, but that was after several years of steady decline from a peak of 3.38 in 2001. So definitely more B’s than A’s.</p>

<p>At Harvard, the average grade in 2005 (latest available) was 3.45, and that figure was still on a steady upward trajectory so it may be 3.50 or higher by now if that trend has continued. So, roughly as many A’s as B’s (I’m assuming very few people get C’s or lower). At Yale in 2008 the average grade was 3.51.</p>

<p>Even at the best publics, average GPAs tend to be lower. At UVA, the average in 2006 was 3.21; at UC Berkeley (2006) 3.26; at Michigan (2006) 3.25; at UNC-Chapel Hill (2006) 3.16.</p>

<p>No doubt some people with 3.4’s from Harvard do get into medical school or law school, but probably only if they have very strong MCAT or LSAT scores. But I’m not sure that’s not also true at any other school; it’s just that Harvard produces more med/law applicants with very high MCAT and LSAT scores, because Harvard selects undergrads who are very strong standardized test takers. I’m more familiar with law school admissions because of my daughter’s interests, but for most law schools the formula is quite simple. Law school deans and admissions officers will tell you thast, except at Yale, Stanford, and maybe Harvard, the law school admissions process is now driven almost entirely by the US News law school rankings, in which median entering class LSAT scores and median entering class undergrad GPAs figure heavily. The ideal candidate will therefore be above the school’s target median in both LSAT and GPA, but there aren’t enough of those to go around. So all but the tippy-top schools (Yale, Harvard, and Stanford Law Schools) will “flip-flop,” taking some candidates with LSAT scores above their target median but GPAs below their median, and some with high GPAs but lower LSAT scores, using this strategy to protect both medians. But since high LSAT scores are rarer than high GPAs, and LSAT scores also carry greater weight in the US News rankings, it’s better to have a high LSAT score and lower GPA than vice versa. That’s how the Harvard grad with a 3.4 GPA and 172 LSAT gets into some very good law schools; that 172 is above the LSAT median at all but 3 or 4 law schools. It’s not because anyone’s giving the Harvard guy extra credit for being from Harvard, it’s just that he’s an exceptionally good test-taker, and there are more like him at Harvard than at Wisconsin. But someone from Wisconsin with a 3.4 GPA and 172 LSAT is also going to get into some very good law schools; there are just fewer people at Wisconsin who will score 172 on the LSAT.</p>

<p>It’s interesting how you fail to include Princeton in your list of “tippy-top schools” when Princeton has consistently ranked at or above Harvard in almost every ranking. And definitely ahead of Yale. As I said, Princeton is unique in the Ivy League for its grade deflation policy, which was instituted in 2004, so it stands to reason that there will be more B’s than A’s.</p>

<p>Even at the best publics, average GPAs tend to be lower. At UVA, the average in 2006 was 3.21; at UC Berkeley (2006) 3.26; at Michigan (2006) 3.25; at UNC-Chapel Hill (2006) 3.16.</p>

<p>I don’t think you can compare publics that way with top privates. Publics serve, well, the public…so they have more students who have a history of lower GPAs. They also offer more lesser-academic majors. </p>

<p>The top schools are loaded with top 10% students and kids who were Vals & Sals of their classes.</p>

<p>So my question was, should I go to Yale or NYU for pre-med (I plan on majoring in math and finishing pre-med requirements or doing biomedical engineering which seems pretty interesting and cool).</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yes, but it’s much easier to grab As in some state schools than others ;)</p>

<p>OP: NYU has a fantastic mathematics department, so that’s something you consider. But your decision will likely be determined by admissions anyway so I wouldn’t worry about it :)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Um . . . I think it’s pretty clear if you read what I said that I was talking about “tippy-top” LAW schools. And the last time I checked, Princeton didn’t have a law school. Did I miss something?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree with what you say about public universities serving a broader spectrum of students. That is one of the great things about them in my opinion. And I didn’t mean to suggest that GPAs at the top public are directly comparable to those at the elite privates. On the other hand, there’s been a lot of loose banter on this thread, most of it coming, I take it, from people who have never attended a public university, about how easy it is to get A’s at public universities, and how it’s the publics that throw around A’s as if they were penny candy. No, not the case. Average GPAs at the top publics are actually markedly lower than even Princeton, and certainly much lower than Harvard and Yale. At the best publics, something like 20% to 25% of the grades are going to be A’s and A-'s. So when you see a 3.8 or 3.9 GPA from a UC Berkeley, Michigan, or UVA, that really means something. All those A’s weren’t freebies. That student worked hard and stood out.</p>

<p>As for top 10% and vals & sals, yes, there are many of them at top privates. But Michigan says 90% of its entering freshmen were in the top 10% of their entering class, and nationally there are far more vals and sals who are not at Ivies and other top privates, than the number who are. If each of the nation’s 30,000 high schools had one vale and one sal, that would be 60,000 vals and sals (I know some high schools don’t name vals and sals, but some name many, so 60,000 may be a low estimate). That’s more than there are places in the freshman class in the top 25 or so private universities—and we know not every freshman at those schools was a val or sal. At Brown, which actually publishes those figures, it looks like about 13% were val or sal. Most vals and sals probably end up at their state flagship. Granted, the percentage of vals and sals in the entering class may be lower, but the actual number may well be greater, and those are the students competing for the 20% of grades that will be A’s and A-'s at the public flagship.</p>

<p>

You’re not taking into account the extreme spectrum of the student body. For instance, my high school funnels students into our state flagship school. These are mainly B, B/C average students. If you’re going to take the average GPA of this group, you’re obviously going to get something around 3.0, maybe a little lower - obviously lower than Princeton’s average GPA, or that of any Ivy. But when you take into account the demographics of Ivy students, you get profound results. Many Ivy students were 4.0 students (and most are pretty darn close) in high school. Assuming the same trend of hard work and motivation, you should still have a pretty high average GPA. That makes sense. </p>

<p>So you have to take into account the demographics of the student body when you claim that only 20-25% A’s are given out at state schools. Yes, there are fewer A’s, but there are also fewer tippy-top students vying for them. In fact, there may be even fewer tippy-top, Ivy-caliber students vying for those A’s than there are A’s total. Which allows for intelligent and hard-working (but not necessarily Ivy caliber) students to get those A’s. So the fact that state schools give out 20-25% A’s is meaningless unless you take into account the strength of the student body. </p>

<p>Now, when you’re talking about Berkeley or Michigan, yes, I concede that those schools are hard. But those schools also have a high concentration of intelligent, motivated students - very similar to the Ivies.</p>

<p>I really appreciate the help but can anyone give me a very succinct answer?</p>

<p>Succinctly: We don’t know you as an individual so can’t gauge how strong you are academically.</p>

<p>In the case of Top 20-25 private versus the better state schools (Berk, Mich, UVa), It really matters less about what school you attend than how smart you are.</p>

<p>In the case of not-so great privates and not-so-great publics in some cases you would need a really high GPA say a 3.9 and a lot more to standout in terms of LSAT score, MCAT score, work and research experience. You would have to convince the admission committee that you are as prepared as your Ivy-Caliber competition</p>

<p>So a great GPA at a public university is probably better than a lower GPA at say Brown Alpert?</p>

<p>A great GPA at a public university that’s known for its rigor, i.e. Berkeley, Michigan, Cornell (jk!), etc. is not going to be weighed much differently than a great GPA at the top private universities, i.e. Harvard, Princeton, Yale, etc. Now, if you’re talking about a great GPA at some unknown public university or one known for its weak student body or grade inflation, that’s going to be different.</p>

<p>A great GPA at a public university that’s known for its rigor, i.e. Berkeley, Michigan,</p>

<p>No…the publics do not have to be ranked that high at all for med schools to consider GPAs to be equivalent. </p>

<p>If the GPA is coming from Podunk Directional Never-heard-of-it University, then there would be an issue. However, med schools won’t care if the GPA is from Brown or the GPA is from University of South Carolina or similar. </p>

<p>MCAT scores are often the tipping point. Just as high school GPA’s are typically viewed in context by looking at the students’ test scores (to determine how weak/strong that GPA really is), a college GPA is backed up by the MCAT score. A 4.0 from any college will be a problem if the MCAT is low. On the other hand, a 3.7 from many/most colleges will be fine if the MCAT is strong.</p>

<p>or one known for its weak student body</p>

<p>largely irrelevant. The student body at large publics isn’t representative as to who is in the premed prereqs and academic majors.</p>

<p>Weak student body = easier curves = easier to rise to the top. You can’t seriously believe that all GPAs are equal (those from reasonably known public universities). MCAT equalizes, but it is very possible to have a 3.5 from Princeton and a 35+ MCAT, simply from the strength of the overall student body. But you certainly are entitled to your opinion.</p>

<p>Weak student body = easier curves = easier to rise to the top</p>

<p>You’re wrongly assuming that a school with a weaker student body has those students spread equally amongst the school’s classes…but that’s not true.</p>

<p>When you’re dealing with large flagships and similar, those schools often have 25,000+ students who are spread out in 100+ majors. Typically, the top 25% of those students (not weak students) are found largely in about 10-12 majors and those are where most of the premeds are as well. Those top 25% typically will have ACT scores in the 30+ range. Those students are strong enough to go to school anywhere. </p>

<p>The weaker students are typically found in the easier majors and they typically don’t step foot in the “sciences for majors” that the premeds are taking. </p>

<p>So, the profs of those few majors and premed prereqs do not have to dumb down their curriculum to match the middle quartiles of the school because those students aren’t typically in the seats.</p>