<p>You know, I don't think Duke had a single 45 last year, either. I wonder what we're doing wrong...</p>
<p>Again, the MCAT is a test of absorbed knowledge, at a relatively basic scientific level. It is NOT a test of analytic ability. Plenty of people with outstanding analytic capabilities (at the MIT level) might not do that well unless they specifically studied for the type of question and fund of knowledge required. So it is hardly surprising that some MIT students do not ace the MCAT. </p>
<p>MCAT is not an overall evaluation of how well prepared one might be, for example, to enter a graduate program in chemistry or physics. Colleges like MIT might not consider top performance on the MCAT as a particularly important goal. When I was in college at an MIT competitor, the faculty viewed premedical as a low level intellectual aspiration. The people they were interested in were headed to graduate school. The medical school was referred to, not affectionately, as "the trade school". </p>
<p>People with "low" gpa's need to apply strategically, selecting medical schools that will fnd favor in their applications in spite of gpa. They need to present strong packages overall with good research or clinical experience and favorable personal impressions. This might be more difficult coming from a place that focuses so heavily on turning out scientists and engineers. The softer side people oriented skills may be neglected, and those from MIT without sky high gpa's may be at a disadvantage. </p>
<p>Remember, few doctors need the level of science background required to complete the GIR's at MIT. Remember that many people on medical school admissions committees were not science majors and that most would have had trouble passing those courses at MIT. They know that the level of scientific knowledge typical of a B student at MIT is far above what is needed to practice medicine. So they are not that impressed that someone has it, UNLESS that student shows strong interest and accomplishment in research.</p>
<p>Most of medical education is memorization of facts, rather than analysis of principles. This is particularly true of the early years of medical school. It is way more helpful to be able to absorb a lot of information quickly than to be able to derive complex equations about quantum mechanics (which you do not need at all). So even really good grades in your upper level math courses are irrelevant, but doing well in basic bio and chem matters quite a bit.</p>
<p>Certainly the MCAT does require a great deal of background knowledge, without which the situations presented are difficult or even impossible to analyze. But I maintain that differentiation among students -- say, the difference between a 33 and a 36 -- is mostly reflective of verbal critical thinking, not deficits in knowledge.</p>
<p>The MCAT presents a scientific passage with information, often (for example) describing an experiment or an observation. It then asks you questions about that passage in light of your own background knowledge. While it's true that you need background knowledge -- a passage on bird migration might ask what selection pressures existed, in which case you need to know what a selection pressure is -- it remains equally true that a failure to read and comprehend the passage with advanced verbal capabilities will cause major difficulties.</p>
<p>I agree with bluedevilmike. There were many MCAT questions that required analytical ability. </p>
<p>It's not too different from being a physician. Yes, you have to memorize a bunch of facts about the human body. However, when a patient comes to your office with a million complaints (and 10 printouts from the internet about diseases they may have), you have to figure out which symptoms are relevant and make a diagnosis.</p>
<p>Also, I went to MIT and don't recall any of the concerns listed by afan. Perhaps I was the only person at MIT with people skills ...</p>
<p>I am not saying that people who worked hard at engineering and similar fields in college have poor people skills. I am saying that that is the reputation, and I think it works against heavily science oriented people, which includes nearly all med school applicants from MIT.</p>
<p>So the admissions committees do not care that much about deep scientific background, but they worry about whether medicine is the right career for someone with that orientation.</p>
<p>Med schools really do like to see "people" type extracurriculars. If you don't have time to do them, that can be a problem.</p>
<p>The only other factor I can see leading to relatively high gpa's (and mcat's) required for MIT students to get into medical school is that the "official" gpa is a bit overstated. Since MIT hides the first year first term grades, and these tend to be lower than overall gpa, the gpa shown to the med schools is a bit higher than it would be, on average, if the first term grades were included. So I suspect the admissions committees make a small downward adjustment in gpa for these applicants. This is not likely to be more than a couple of tenths of a gpa point, but that could lead to some of the difference between profiles of MIT admitted students and those from the handful of other colleges that enroll a comparably talented student body.</p>
<p>I hear MIT kids do very well on the GREs and the GMATs. Anyway, I think MIT doesn't focus as much on its premeds as it does on its scientists and engineers. A lot of classes focus on deep problem solving and analytical skills. "Premed" classes such as Organic Chemistry and Physics are hard, but often miss a lot of the concepts covered on the MCATs. As a student who have taken classes at BU and Harvard, I notice a strong difference between these schools and MIT. Since they have a greater premed student population, there are special classes for premeds, such as organic chemistry for prehealth students as opposed to organic chemistry for chemistry majors. MIT, unfortunately, does not have those kind of classes.</p>
<p>I agree with Afan about MIT grade inflation. The hidden first year grades allow you to fulfill most premed requirements (which are similar to MIT's requirements) without tarnishing your GPA. If you averaged my freshman year grades into my overall GPA, it would be much lower. </p>
<p>Most MIT premeds major in biology or neuroscience where there is grade inflation (A/B centered) as opposed to engineering (grade deflation). Avoiding classes with engineers is also good for the GPA. As a biology major, I'll be the first to admit that engineers are smarter.</p>
<p>I don't think you can say engineers are smarter just because they're all math savy and stuff. </p>
<p>I'm sure my school does things differently than MIT, or perhaps i was really able to hit the ground running, but i think my freshman grades are going to inflate my GPA, if anything. </p>
<p>Do students on average tend to have GPA-deflating freshman grades? Or is MIT known specifically to be rough on freshman?</p>
<p>"The hidden first year grades allow you to fulfill most premed requirements (which are similar to MIT's requirements) without tarnishing your GPA." </p>
<p>I would guess that these grades will be uncovered by AMCAS for the sake of calculating your GPA. I don't see how you can get away with not having a grade in intro bio or gen chem or whatever prereq you decide to take your first year.</p>
<p>JHU demands the grades be uncovered. As far as I know, that is the only medical school that takes that stance. MIT keeps these covered for most medical schools, but students can request uncovering if the medical school insists.</p>
<p>MIT says this
[quote]
It is best to not fulfill your premed requirements during the freshman year pass/no record semester. Medical Schools want to see grades for your premedical requirements.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Perhaps those who cannot help it take more science courses later to show on their AMCAS? </p>
<p>
[quote]
MIT, unfortunately, does not have those kind of classes.
[/quote]
I don't think it is unfortunate. There are many colleges that will focus on premeds. There are only a few with the academic goals of MIT. People who can get in MIT, but don't want that type of science education, will have lots of choices elsewhere. The MIT approach evidently has been extraordinarily effective in educating mathematicians, scientists, and engineers. Perhaps less so for doctors, but so what?</p>
<p>My first year at MIT consisted mostly of MIT/premed requirements such as Physics, Organic Chemistry and Calculus. Not having to worry about grades allowed me to learn the basics and then relax. No school except Johns Hopkins asked me to reveal my freshman year grades. MIT also allows you to take an additional pass/no record class per semester in subsequent years.</p>
<p>From what I gather, the medical school acceptance rates (though still quite high) at both Stanford and MIT are a little lower than other top schools. A fairly quiet classmate/friend got mostly B's (and even a C), but was still accepted by multiple schools so I'm not sure about the profile of those who didn't make it (poor interview, mediocre grades, etc.)</p>
<p>yup, considering ochem and some other courses you take as a freshy usually brings down your gpa, it's still quite surprising and good that mit's avg gpa for acceptance into med school is still quite low =D</p>