<p>you're learning a lot about the human body and its systems</p>
<p>^ that's why i want to go ^
scorp so u didnt take AP's to skip classes?</p>
<p>I'm another BME, so I figure I'll throw in my $0.02. My high school offered a lot of AP classes, so I was able to get out of a lot of the traditional Freshman classes. My load for last semester was Organic Chemistry I, Honors Linear Algebra, Introduction to Business, BME Design Team and Advanced Intermediate French for a total of 17.5 credits. I agree with what scorp said - it's not easy, but if you budget your time properly, it's definately doable.</p>
<p>how was ur gpa tanman?</p>
<p>Not sure yet. Normally, everyone can check their grades online on the Registrar's website. But since it's first semester, we only get an official Pass or Fail - I'll find out my actually grades from the Advising office when I go back to campus (I'm still at home becaise I'm not taking any classes for intersession)</p>
<p>I guess Hopkins is about properly allocating your time for studies. I have always found my engineering classes to be the easiest because I like to study the material and it actually makes sense after sitting through lectures. I've never really felt that the work load was too much, but at times it can be challenging.</p>
<p>How much of an engineering/computer/math background do you need to be successful in BME?</p>
<p>Technically speaking you could probably get away with very little math/science background to do well in BME.</p>
<p>I'd say in general, for any engineering (after all BME isn't that much different or harder), a year of calc and physics in high school will more than suffice.</p>
<p><a href="93%%20acceptance%20rate%20into%20med%20schools%20last%20year">quote</a>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Unfortunately, I think this has to be taken with a large grain of salt, considering the way that JHU runs its premed program. While JHU doesn't outright bar weaker premeds from applying as some other schools do, it does seem to heavily discourage weaker premeds from applying. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I remember hearing the acceptance rate is somewhere in the high 90s (what this means is that of those BME's who apply to med schools, 98% or whatever the number is get in somewhere, not necessarily at their top choice).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I would point out that due to the sheer difficulty and arbitrariness of the med-school admissions process, practically nobody gets into their top choice med-school. The vast vast majority of people have to settle for any med-school they can get into, and some people can't get in anywhere.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Honestly, I've never heard anyone say not to major in BME as a pre-med except here on CC. BME is a challenging major and GPA's may not be as high as in some other fields or at other colleges, but from what I've heard, med schools recognize this when the consider applicants.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I wish this were true, but mounting evidence indicates that this is not true, and not just for JHU BME, but for any difficult major anywhere. For example, MIT has a premed placement rate (~77%) that is conspicuously lower than that of its peer schools like HYPS, which are generally around the low 90's. Furthermore, the GPA's of the average admitted MIT premed is basically the same as the GPA's of the average admitted premed nationwide. And MIT is obviously known as an extremely rigorous school with tough grading standards. Yet when it comes down to which MIT premeds get admitted, the med-schools do not seem to be compensating for the difficulty of the MIT grading. The same can be said for other grade deflated schools like Caltech, Berkeley, and Chicago.</p>
<p>Sakky until I hear from a real life Admissions Director at a medical school that they look at the GPA with out taking into consideration the difficulty of the course load, major or the university, I won't believe it. No matter what you say. For some reason I've never replied to your posts before but I always think you're wrong. No reason I just feel that way, and while I understand that that is not the most convincing arguement, I have no other -- just a gut feeling. (PS I've read a lot of your posts and they are convincing -- but I just think you're wrong, and since going with my gut feeling has gotten me this far, I'm going to roll with it.)</p>
<p>BanKai, I took 7 APs, I think, in HS. All but AP Calc AB turned out to be useless. I ended up taking Calc I because I didn't feel confident even though I got a 4 on the AP -- I'm not sure I would say that that was the right thing to do. Basically, I took APs in High School because that was just the challenging thing to do. My HS offered mostly humanities APs and I took all of them I got all 5s and two 4s, so I did well - got no credit anyway. </p>
<p>--</p>
<p>spe07 what engineering are you in?</p>
<p>--</p>
<p>tanman nice schedule you had there; graduating in 3 years? :) (Why didn't you take molecules and cells though; you're basically a sophmore?)</p>
<p>Where did you here 77% for MIT? I've heard 94%. Are there any med school adcoms here who can give us some insight?</p>
<p>Nope - I'll probably be here for 4 years. I'm planning on doing the Entrepeneurship</a> and Managment Minor and the Math Minor (which is just one class more than the BME major requirements).</p>
<p>As for the whole medical school admissions thing, I based what I wrote on what I heard from two admissions officers for a local med school (and Caltech alums) who I met at a Caltech admitted students meeting. They said that while this was not the case ~10 years ago, in recent years, they (and their colleagues at other med schools) have begun to consider the difficulty of different colleges in addition to the GPA students earned. Maybe (hopefully not) they overgeneralized what they do at their school?</p>
<p>If Medical Admissions Committees in-fact do take into consideration the rigors and demands of a university, they can only give you so much le way. The trick is to always have a positive-attitude, and do your best no matter where you choose to go. :)</p>
<p>I've been on admissions committees at two different elite medical schools. </p>
<p>At my two schools, people are aware that Chicago, Caltech, and MIT distribute grades more strictly than peer colleges. If someone has a 3.7 from one of these three schools, it is clear that some serious smarts are at work. The grade inflation has hit those schools as well, but not as much as the top 20 feeder schools (Ivies, Stanford, Duke, etc). It's important to realize that, at least at my schools, it is very hard to dazzle admissions committees with brilliance. We turn down many of the smartest people who apply. Insted, we tend to interview the smartest or most accomplished kids in the applicant pool and then pick the ones we like the most from among those we interview. That's quite different from simply acceptiung the 100 smartest.</p>
<p>Anyhow, if someone has a 3.3 gpa from one of those 3 schools, and doesn't have some compensating stuff (like minority status, an alumni connection, a direct research connection/letter, or GREAT MCAT's), he/she is unlikely to get interviewed. This is true despite the fact that we might interview someone with a 3.7 in a sociology major (chosen as a major that is widely seen as easy) from a top 20 school and despite the fact that we 'know' that the caltech 3.3 in ee is probably more intellectual.</p>
<p>Is this fair?</p>
<p>Admissions isn't fair. It's complicated, and there are competing interests. US News rates us, for example, not based on the quality of education but on the average gpa and mcat. Students choose to attend schools at least partly based on that bs ranking. We get hurt by picking the caltech 3.3. It drops our numbers. A second important issue is that med school isn't Jeopardy. It's not even grad school. We have lots of competing interests, but we are primarily engaged in selecting physicians for sick people. If the caltech 3.3 guy is weird or unsociable or applying primarily as a scientist, then he better be prepared to compete against some of the smartest people in the country for one of our MD/PhD spots, and that B+ average will likely render him uncompetitive. Otherwise, we are looking for people who will be happy to tend to the ailing at 8:30 on a Tuesday night when they could be writing a paper or drinking a beer. For that, grades and mcat's matter a lot less than a kind heart and durability. </p>
<p>One mitigating factor when it comes to med school admissions and MIT, Caltech, and Chicago is that those 3 schools produce a lot fewer premeds than the nontech schools. At the nontech Ivy and quasi-Ivy schools, many of the smartest undergrads go to med school. That isn't the case at the above schools.</p>
<p>Interesting to read how med school admissions works. Since you brought up MD/PhD programs, I was wondering if applicants for these programs are evaluated in the same way as standard MD applicants? (from what I understand, you have to be admitted to the MD program before you're considered for the combined program) Thanks!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Sakky until I hear from a real life Admissions Director at a medical school that they look at the GPA with out taking into consideration the difficulty of the course load, major or the university, I won't believe it. No matter what you say. For some reason I've never replied to your posts before but I always think you're wrong. No reason I just feel that way, and while I understand that that is not the most convincing arguement, I have no other -- just a gut feeling. (PS I've read a lot of your posts and they are convincing -- but I just think you're wrong, and since going with my gut feeling has gotten me this far, I'm going to roll with it.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, what I would say is that you can read clearedeyeguy's post above. He doesn't come right out and say and that course difficulty is never taken into consideration, but he does say that GPA is a complicated beast and med-schools are not necessarily looking for the guy who studied the hardest. </p>
<p>Like he said: "...it is very hard to dazzle admissions committees with brilliance. We turn down many of the smartest people who apply..."</p>
<p>"Anyhow, if someone has a 3.3 gpa from one of those 3 schools, and doesn't have some compensating stuff (like minority status, an alumni connection, a direct research connection/letter, or GREAT MCAT's), he/she is unlikely to get interviewed. This is true despite the fact that we might interview someone with a 3.7 in a sociology major (chosen as a major that is widely seen as easy) from a top 20 school and despite the fact that we 'know' that the caltech 3.3 in ee is probably more intellectual.</p>
<p>Is this fair?</p>
<p>Admissions isn't fair. It's complicated, and there are competing interests. US News rates us, for example, not based on the quality of education but on the average gpa and mcat. Students choose to attend schools at least partly based on that bs ranking. We get hurt by picking the caltech 3.3. It drops our numbers. A second important issue is that med school isn't Jeopardy. It's not even grad school. We have lots of competing interests, but we are primarily engaged in selecting physicians for sick people. If the caltech 3.3 guy is weird or unsociable or applying primarily as a scientist, then he better be prepared to compete against some of the smartest people in the country for one of our MD/PhD spots, and that B+ average will likely render him uncompetitive."</p>
<p>Clearedeyeguy, feel free to jump in here anytime. </p>
<p>Basically, the problem is not that the med-school adcoms don't know about the difficulty of certain schools. It's more like they don't care. Like clearedeyeguy said, the magazine rankings will judge med-schools on the GPA's of the students they admit. Admitting the 3.3 guy from Caltech will hurt them in the rankings, even if he's the better guy. Furthermore, every med-school uses a system of numerical screens to help them sort their applicants. If your numbers are too low, then you may not even get invited to submit the secondary app, which is the "real" application. </p>
<p>And thirdly, regarding the entire assertion that a lot of highly studious people from Caltech or MIT are antisocial nerds, I would assert that that is ITSELF linked to school difficulty. After all, if you go to a difficult school, then you will have to study harder, and harder studying doesn't help your social skills. So it's not really that Caltech and MIT students are inherently antisocial, it's that they were never given the time and the chance to develop social skills. But the med-schools don't care about that. You either have social skills or you don't, and if you don't, then they don't care why you don't. All they see if that you don't. </p>
<p>The same thing could be said for EC's. Maybe MIT and Caltech premeds sport fewer EC's (I don't know if that's true, but it might be true), and that's why they get rejected. I would submit that if they do have fewer EC's, perhaps the reason why is that, again, they have to spend all their time studying. But again, med-schools don't care about that. They just see that you don't have good EC's. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Where did you here 77% for MIT? I've heard 94%. Are there any med school adcoms here who can give us some insight?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You can always go straight to the source.</p>
<p>Two quick comments.</p>
<p>At my current medical school, MD-PhD selection runs parallel to MD selection. The MD-PhD people are screened by a different committee and interviewed by some members of the MD committee and by several members of a special MD-PhD committee. They are discussed in a special committee that is not the regular MD committee. People who don't get an MD-PhD interview can choose to try for an MD interview. I think those who aren't chosen for acceptance by the MD-PhD can choose to be looked at by the MD group, but most are accepted by other MD-PhD programs and drop out of our process.</p>
<p>This leads to some differences between these two types of applicants and students. Successful MD-PhD applicants have outstanding research track records, outstanding grades and MCAT's, and relatively mediocre extracurriculars compared to our MD applicants (there are only so many hours in a day, and our straight MD students tended to be manically involved in EC's). In fact, I bet I could tell which entering student is MD and which is MD-PhD based on cv's. 6-8 years later, the MD-PhD's almost always get their choice of residencies and are generally seen as excellent med students even though they rarely run the Christmas show or the volunteer organizations. They are also some of the liveliest intellects around.</p>
<p>Second, it really is important to realize that admissions isn't a reward system, nor is it entirely fair. It is definitely not a popularity contest or a reflection on the quality of the applicant. We are trying hard to pick people to serve a variety of societal needs. We accept MD-PhD's with few extracurriculars (and, sometimes, limited interpersonal skills)because someone has to cure cancer. We accept a high percentage of minorities even though that lowers our average gpa because my school is convinced that physician diversity is important to our society and believe that a sizable community of minorities will lead to an environment in which they can excel. We accept them not to redress societal injustice and despite the fact that US News will knock us down a tad (just take a look at some of the schools in the top 4 of US News; at least a couple have embarrassingly low numbers of underrepresented minorities). By the way, our minority students perform at essentially the same level as everyone else despite having somewhat lower entering numbers. Anyway, we accept really outgoing people and jocks and folks whose major hook is that they've overcome serious adversity. We also turn down the vast majority of researchers, minorities, jocks, underprivileged strivers, and community organizers (sometimes all of the above are in the same person), sometimes because of one low mcat score or an ambivalent letter of recommendation, or simply because we have way too many excellent applicants.</p>
<p>Having said all of that, we are also looking to fill a class, as are all of the other medical schools. Most applicants seem to get in to solid places. One of the nice aspects of the American system that virtually all medical schools are excellent places to get professionalized. And I'd like to think that most of the people who don't get in anywhere may be better off pursuing a life outside of medicine.</p>
<p>Wow, thanks for the input.
I think that Sakky touched on the role of ECs in med school admissions. So, how great of a role do they play?
Also, can somebody explain how the mcat works? Is it based more on your knowledge of biology/chemistry/physiology, or is based on your science/math/english skills (like the SAT) or is based on your critical thinking ability?</p>
<p>Isn't there a Pre-Med, Medical School Forum on CC. </p>
<p>Why yes, yes there is!!!</p>
<p>Maybe it would be more beneficial to have this conversation over there, since this pertains to all medical schools - not just JHU.</p>
<p>cleareyedguy and sakky thank you both for the excellent information! I will consider MD-PhD programs when my time comes (that and my ECs will suck :) )</p>