<p>^ But this was also the case when I was in undergrad- the strongest students did science (Like at least the top 10-15 %) and then you were competing with them for the few As. the weak students left when they saw the amount of work that had to be done,</p>
<p>I think that is even the case for every school so it balances out in the end. There are lots of people at Ivy leagues who are not gonna be able to survive hardcore science classes no matter how grade inflated they are.</p>
<p>Brown alpert is a medical school. I guess you are talking of Brown?</p>
<p>No one gets a low GPA at brown hehe the average GPA is like a 3.6 haha</p>
<p>
You are incorrectly assuming that med schools are only admitting those students in the “tough” science majors. Yes, the science majors, where a lot of pre-meds are, are tough even at public universities. However, you have to remember that just as many kids from the “easier” majors get in. For instance, just as many English majors get in as Biology majors. So, you could major in something “easy” at a public university and still get into med school, provided you’ve taken the pre-med classes and MCAT. </p>
<p>Now, apply this model to a tough private university. It does not matter what major you are or what classes you take, the classes you take are all going to be tough because of the quality of the student body, regardless of major. So, you’re looking at almost ALL majors being difficult at the top private universities (relative to their public university analogs). </p>
<p>Now, the pre-med requirements may still be grade deflated. However, I seriously doubt that EVERY single student in those courses, or even a significant majority, are top students in their own right. For instance, you might have 40% of a class being near the top of their high school classes, 30+ ACT. That’s because, you have to remember, not all kids who are pre-med are actually qualified to be pre-med. I know of several kids from my high school class who wanted to be doctors, but could not possibly do well in the pre-med coursework. So, even if we assumed that half of a given pre-med course in a public university are highly qualified students, it would still be much easier to get an A in the course. This is opposed to a pre-med requirement at a top private university, where the VAST MAJORITY of the students in the course were top of their high school class, 30+ on the ACT, 2250+ on the SAT. I assume the high scores simply because those top universities essentially only extend admissions offers to those kids who are extremely qualified. So everybody at the top universities are essentially capable of getting an A. Which messes up the curve.</p>
<p>You are incorrectly assuming that med schools are only admitting those students in the “tough” science majors</p>
<p>???</p>
<p>Where did I say that? I never would have said that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think her point was that those people in the easier majors aren’t in, or get weeded out of, the pre-med classes.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you’re going to compare a top private university to public schools, you have to compare top privates to top publics. Is Harvard really that much more difficult to get an A in than Berkeley? Columbia much more difficult than UCLA?</p>
<p>Additionally, what makes classes ‘tough’ doesn’t just depend on the student body, but on the curriculum the professor sets for the class. As an example of this, I had two classes on Kant, using two different Kant books, from two different professors who are both Kant scholars. In one, we read about 20 pages of Kant with the class largely focusing on the professor giving, and defending, his interpretation of Kant’s very difficult philosophy; in the other, we read 100 pages of Kant, which is insane imo, especially for a quarter class. The latter professor wanted us to struggle with the primary text. That made the class extremely difficult to get an A in, regardless of the rest of the student body. (I did not get an A in that class)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s not true. What makes it easier or harder to get an A in a university doesn’t just include the rigor of the student body, but also on how many As the faculty, and university, want to give out. I expect as a Princeton student, you understand this well given Princeton’s grade deflation policy.</p>
<p>As an example of this, I was in classes where I was one of six students (out of maybe 40) to receive an A; I was in another where I was one of two (also out of forty.)</p>
<p>You have to realize that the faculty at a lot of schools did their dissertations at HYPSM type schools and have very high standards which they don’t want to compromise on. If they only want to give As to the top 5% of students, they can do that, whether they teach in UC Berkeley or UAlabama.</p>
<p>mom2collegekids,
If you don’t assume that medical schools admit primarily out of these “10-12” majors, then your argument doesn’t have much for anyway. I apologize for devoting so much time to attacking it. I also assumed that you were imagining these “10-12” majors as science majors, since you say 1) that most premeds are in these majors and 2) most premeds are in science majors (later on in the next paragraph). Med schools admit across a variety of majors and just as many people from the “easy” majors get in as ones from the “hard” majors, provided that they all complete the pre-med classes. </p>
<p>Now, addressing the latter part of your argument and beyphy’s argument, I concede beyphy’s point. A grade at a top private university can be comparable to a grade at a top public university. I never contended that point. For instance, UMichigan, Berkeley, etc. are all known for their rigor and top notch student bodies. Grades there will be comparable to grades at top private universities. But if you’ll agree that grades from your average public university - i.e. the ones not known for rigor - are NOT comparable to grades from top private universities, then we are done here - we both agree. Some people above argue that a GPA from a top private university is comparable to your average public university, as long as the public university is not completely unheard of.
</p>
<p>Finally, I understand grade deflation very well. Grade deflation does NOT work at a university like Princeton, where your curves are strict and your student body is completely (essentially) elite. But when you’re talking about your average public university (I don’t mean Berkeley, Michigan, etc.), the quality of the student body will come into play. It doesn’t matter if the professor wants to give A’s to the top 5% of students - in those cases, only 5% of students are qualified to get A’s anyway. Whereas at places like Princeton, more people are qualified to get A’s than receive them. I have felt the very real effects of this in my classes, even when the University officially says that A-range work will not be graded down for the sake of the policy. A-range work is subjective. A-range work may be A-range compared to other work at a public university, but not A-range when compared to the higher quality of work found at top private universities.</p>
<p>93Tigers</p>
<p>You have misread my post. I never said that most premeds are science majors. </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>Premeds (no matter what their major) take the Principals of Bio, Gen Chem, Physics and OChem for science majors to fulfill the prereqs. They don’t usually take the less-demanding versions for nursing majors, etc. And, even if they did, the weaker students on campus aren’t taking those classes either.</p>
<p>The point is that the weaker students on campus aren’t usually stepping foot in Gen Chem, Physics, and Ochem classes because their majors don’t require such classes. </p>
<p>and, when I said that at a large public, the top students are largely found in about 12 majors, I never said that those were all science majors…because they aren’t. Eng’g, Math, Physics, Bio, Chem, English, History, Econ, Business, The Classics, French, …and sometimes Music or a couple of other majors.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>With that we’ll have to agree to disagree, at least for private med schools. And since neither of us have any facts… :)</p>
<p>IMO, there is little grade differentiation in blocks of undergrads, say top 35 or top 50. Then a break to the next 35-50. And since South Carolina is in the next tier (#112)…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right, but the fact is that academics are prestige-hounds; they can’t help themselves – its in their DNA. Thus, the 3.7 from Brown will much more easily score an interview than the 3.7 from Directional State U (ignoring instate med schools, such as South Carolina, which give a ~99% preference to instaters or those with local ties).</p>
<p>But, back to the OP: one thing which top private Unis offer is a plethora (sorry, bad SAT word) of opportunities for on-campus research, lab work, etc.; they have the money and faculty research. Plenty of spots available for most/all of those who are interested. At the top UCs, such opportunities exist, but are much more competitive to get.</p>
<p>Blue…in the past (not sure if this is still true) only 40% of USNews ranking is based on Academics, so where a school ranks is not going to tell the Adcoms much about the difficulty of a student’s curriculum.</p>
<p>Besides, if Adcoms were really going to care, then they would give brownie points for “harder majors”. After all, a person could argue that the ChemE major from Cal Poly had more challenging classes than the Spanish major from a top school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m a firm believer in the PA…and so, I would submit that adcoms know with certainty the ‘prestige’ of the undergrads.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If all other things are equal – and they never are, since an Eng major is highly unlikely to graduate from Cal Poly in 4 years, while a Span major at UC can easily get out in 4, but professional schools tend to prefer liberal arts majors over vocational majors (such as Eng). Within traditional liberal arts majors, they don’t care. </p>
<p>Again, it’s an academic thing. (And such is pretty clear in law school admissions, where the numbers are much larger than med, so the anecdotal data is more apparent.)</p>
<p>Just my (fact-free) opinion.</p>
<p>Mom2collegekids:</p>
<p>Fact is that the average success of students at top schools in getting into med school is higher than that of students at publics with lower GPAs. I am too lazy to find the stats but that has always been the case.</p>
<p>One can draw a million conclusions based on these statistics one of them been that a lower GPA at a top Private is valued much more than a lower GPA at some schools. Also if you look carefully at like sites like mdapplicants.com one can see the trend that students at Harvard get into good med schools with GPAs less than those from corresponding publics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The people filling the PA and the Adcoms at top medical and law schools are totally two different groups . . .</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well they do that for both med/law school. Some Med schools have a statement “that the rigor of your undergrad matters”. </p>
<p>While in law school hard majors anyways tend to score higher on the LSAT. The logic and thinking process required by the LSAT (and most standardized tests) is a joke to the average Scientist/Mathematicians/Philosopher so they already do have a leg up. I remember a girl I knew in my science major who was at the bottom of my class getting like an LSATs of 173 with minimal preparation.</p>
<p>mom2collegekids, I now understand your point. However, I still disagree, because I still hold that the quality of the student body - even within those classes, Orgo, Physics, Biochem - are lower than the quality of the student bodies in those classes at your top private universities. Therefore, it will be easier to rise to the top. Of course, we are both speculating here. It is all dependent upon the quality of the student body and how the class is distributed. But since I see little evidence suggesting that the student bodies at public schools - even the limited number who are in those science classes - are on par with the quality of the student body at top universities, I am convinced that it will still be easier to get an A at a public school. Less qualified people in a class = easier to get an A for the qualified people whereas everybody is qualified at a top private university. </p>
<p>Note that I am also referring to your average public school, NOT top caliber schools like Michigan, Berkeley, etc.</p>
<p>*Well they do that for both med/law school. Some Med schools have a statement “that the rigor of your undergrad matters”. *</p>
<p>Which med schools have that? I’m not saying that it’s not true anywhere, but the general message has been: major in what you want, get a high GPA and high BCMP GPA. The message has been that double majors, extra minors, etc, were unnecessary and not considered. </p>
<p>I agree that some law schools might have that, but I don’t think many (if any) med schools have that.</p>
<p>^That has been the general message. However, it would be foolish to think med schools admissions officers are ignorant people. A mid-range grade at Harvard may very well be equivalent or better than a good grade at your average public university. Here’s one website of several that support this claim: [We’re</a> Just Not That Into You: 6 Reasons Medical Schools Reject Applicants - PreMedLife - The Lifestyle Magazine for Pre Medical Students](<a href=“http://www.premedlife.com/1/post/2012/02/were-just-not-that-into-you-6-reasons-medical-schools-reject-applicants.html]We’re”>http://www.premedlife.com/1/post/2012/02/were-just-not-that-into-you-6-reasons-medical-schools-reject-applicants.html)</p>
<p>
The author is a physician who has also become somewhat of a medical school admissions specialist. </p>
<p>High GPA and MCAT are good, no doubt. But that’s not what is in question here. What is in question is whether a lower GPA from an Ivy or other similarly competitive university would be viewed in context of the competitiveness of the institution. That is, whether a lower GPA from an Ivy may be comparable to a higher GPA from an average public institution. Several sources suggests that this may be so.</p>
<p>
Among accepted MDApplicants members who had a 33-35 on their MCAT, the median undergrad GPAs are listed below. I’ve also included a rough estimate of the average GPA of the full undergrad class in parenthesis, estimated as data listed on GradeInflation.com adjusted for inflation since when last listed. I realize this estimate may be significantly off, if the inflation trend has changed since ~2006 (GradeInflation’s data is old).</p>
<p>Princeton – 3.55 (3.35?)
Stanford – 3.58 (3.6?)
Harvard – 3.58 (3.55)
MIT – 3.60 (3.4?)
Cornell – 3.67 (3.45)
Berkeley – 3.71 (3.35)
Brown – 3.74 (3.7)
Texas – 3.83 (3.2)
Arizona – 3.84 (3.2?)</p>
<p>The ranked differences between median GPA of accepted vs estimated average GPA of class are below:</p>
<p>Stanford : -0.02
Harvard : 0.03
Brown : 0.04
Princeton : 0.2
MIT : 0.2
Cornell : 0.22
Berkeley : 0.36
Texas : 0.61
Arizona : 0.62</p>
<p>Highly selective colleges with notable grade inflation like Stanford, Harvard, and Brown all have little gap between the overall average GPA of the class and the median GPA of accepted med school apps. However, less selective colleges like Texas and Arizona have a huge gap between average GPA of the class and median GPA of accepted med school apps Harsher grading selective colleges, like Princeton and MIT, fall somewhere in between. Note that I am not considering biases in who is on MDapplicants (likely better apps that average), biases in varying percent of students on upper end of MCAT range at different colleges, biases in which med schools students are applying to, biases in undergrad colleges that discourage/block lower stat students from applying, differences in acceptance rate among similar stats, and various other sources of inaccuracies. Nevertheless, the data still suggests that the students with a particular GPA who did their undergrad at a highly selective school are more likely to be accepted than students with the same GPA who did their undergrad at a less selective school.</p>
<p>I have taken the premed sequence at Stanford and have also taken math and science courses at less selective colleges, like SUNYA and RPI. In my experience, there was no question that it was usually more difficult to achieve A’s at Stanford than less selective schools, even though Stanford has a much higher average GPA and is known for grade inflation. It related to both to difficulty/speed of the material and being curved against and/or compared to an overall less competitive group. I also know that in MS/PhD acceptances, Stanford gives preference to apps who are current undergrad students at Stanford. I’d expect the same to be true for med school, and a similar pattern to exist in other colleges. </p>
<p>So getting back to the OPs question, if you can do well at a highly selective college, it’s probably better to attend the highly selective college. If you cannot do well, it’s a more difficult call. Can you get a top GPA near 4.0 at a less selective college, if you can’t do well at a selective college?</p>