<p>What is the optimal GPA for premed students aspiring to get into medical school? </p>
<p>(My mom for some reason believes that since everyone makes straight A's in high school, they should make straight A's in college or else they will fail in life.)</p>
<p>You should listen to your mother more. She has indeed supplied you with the optimal grade for med adcoms.</p>
<p>The more realistic scores that get you above the inherent 50% acceptance rate will be 3.7ish for your science/math GPA and 3.5ish for your other classes.</p>
<p>i had the same fear moving from high school to college</p>
<p>but i do find your mom's advice to ring true...if you are smart enough to get all A's in high school, you should certainly be smart enough to get all A's in college</p>
<p>I find it will come down to effort more so than actual intelligence</p>
<p>Heh heh, perhaps that mother ought to come down to a school whose name ends in the words "Institute of Technology" and tell the students there that they should be getting all A's. </p>
<p>I think it's fairly clear that practically all students at, say, MIT or Caltech got almost all A's in high school, yet very few of them are getting all A's now. That's how the curve works - everybody in your class is brilliant, yet there are only a limited number of A's to go around. </p>
<p>J think that the assertion that it really comes down to effort (as opposed to actual intelligence) does not survive close scrutiny. Again, I would challenge anybody to go up to an MIT EECS student and tell them that if they are not getting all A's, it must be due to a lack of effort. The fact is, there are plenty of brilliant students out there who are working their rear-ends off and STILL getting mediocre grades.</p>
<p>I should bring you sakky to talk to my mom. Haha.</p>
<p>I'll give you another example. Lately a brother and sister both managed to graduate with straight A's at Harvard - and that was considered to be so notable that they got mentioned in the Harvard Crimson (the Harvard student newspapers).</p>
<p>"[Lisa] Schwartz has a perfect academic record. The last person to earn this distinction was Lisas older brother Kevin S. Schwartz 01, who was the first undergraduate in nearly 20 years to achieve such perfection. "</p>
<p>In fact, as of 2003, there have been only 5 Harvard undergraduates who have ever been reported to have graduated with straight A's. Kevin Schwartz was the 4th, and his sister Lisa would be the 5th. </p>
<p>"...Kevin Schwartz, who was only the fourth person in history to graduate from Harvard University with a perfect grade point average..."</p>
<p>I think we can all agree that almost everybody at Harvard got very good grades in high school, many getting straight A's. So if it's really true that all these people should then be getting straight A's in college, then why is it that when Lisa Schwartz managed to do just that, it was considered notable enough to make the newspaper? Why would a newspaper choose to report something that is commonplace? And if it's really so commonplace to graduate with straight A's, then why is it that before her brother did it in 2001, it hadn't been done at Harvard in nearly 20 years? And why have there been only 5 such people at Harvard who ever have been reported to have completed this feat?</p>
<p>I think some people think that just cause you did it in high school, you better do it again in college and they don't understand the magnitude of the difference between the two, not just in the difficultly but the way professors hand out grades.</p>
<p>Definitely it's different. I basically screwed up my first year of college...I mean, it's decent but not medical school worthy. So instead of going the pre-med route, I think I'm going after the nursing practioner road. It's about helping people to me, so that's why I'm not totally bummed out. I think nursing would give me a chance to interact more with patients than doctors, so that's a big plus.</p>
<p>Ahh...perhaps it doesn't ring true for some of the tougher schools like Cornell, Harvard, MIT, Caltech, etc...</p>
<p>But in general, grades seem to be more about effort than intelligence. (This would probably be more pertinent at my school since I went to a state school. Showing up and taking notes was enough to get the A in most classes!)</p>
<p>I think there are 3 things going on:</p>
<h1>1 - The Curve:</h1>
<p>Many college courses, particularly technical courses, tend to be graded on a curve, which basically means that your grade is determined not simply by how much you know, but rather by how much you know relative to how much everybody else in the class knows. In other words, there are only a limited number of A's given out, and if you want one, you have to beat out everybody else in the class who also wants it. It is extremely difficult to consistently beat other people out when you're at a top school like MIT where everybody is brilliant and everybody is working hard. If you know the material extremely well, but everybody else knows it better than you, then you will get the worst grade in the class. That's the utterly cold-blooded and ruthless nature of the curve. You are in direct and often-times savage competition against your fellow students. </p>
<p>Consider this quote about UCLA:</p>
<p>"My freshman year, I met this friend of mine who was crying because she got an 76% on her math midterm. I told her that she should be glad she passed, she told me, "the average grade was 93%, the curve fails me....my friend ended up getting a C- in her math class after studying her butt off. Lucky her!!!"</p>
<p>Or how about Michael Crichton (yes, THAT Michael Crichton) reminiscing about his old days as a Harvard premed:</p>
<p>"In general, I found Harvard an exciting place, where people were genuinely focused on study and learning, and with no special emphasis on grades. But to take a premed course was to step into a different world -- nasty and competitive. The most critical course was organic chemistry, Chem 20, and it was widely known as a "screw your buddy" course. In lectures, if you didn't hear what the instructor had said and asked the person next to you, he'd give you the wrong information; thus you were better off leaning over to look at his notes, but in that case he was likely to cover his notes so you couldn't see. In the labs, if you asked the person at the next bench a question, he'd tell you the wrong answer in the hope that you would make a mistake or, even better, start a fire. We were marked down for starting fires. In my year, I had the dubious distinction of starting more lab fires than anyone else, including a spectacular ether fire that set the ceiling aflame and left large scorch marks, a stigmata of ineptitude hanging over my head for the rest of the year. I was uncomfortable with the hostile and paranoid attitude this course demanded for success. I thought that a humane profession like medicine ought to encourage other values in its candidates. But nobody was asking my opinion. I got through it as best I could. "</p>
<h1>2 - The harshness of the grading policy.</h1>
<p>The fact is, there are plenty of majors (i.e. anything ending with the word "engineering") and plenty of schools (i.e. any school whose name ends in the words "Institute of Technology") that almost seem to enjoy handing out boatloads of bad grades to their students. Some of these places almost seem to 'want' to flunk as many of their students out as possible. It's almost as if they enjoy it. </p>
<p>Again, Moochworld:</p>
<p>"I have a friend who is a graduating senior, Electrical Engineer, I quote him saying, "A's? What is an A? I thought it went from F to C-." It's his last quarter here and yet at least once a week he won't come back from studying until four or five in the morning... and yet it's not midterm or finals season."</p>
<h1>3 - The Random Grade Generator:</h1>
<p>Then there are some classes for which grading seems to have no rhyme or reason. You've probably seen a snippet of this in high school, for many of us know that we can hand in the exact same English paper to 2 different English teachers and get 2 entirely different grades. It gets worse in college. For example, there are classes in college where the guy who knows the subject extremely well and gets top grades on all papers still for some unknown reason ends up with a worse grade than the guy who knows nothing and whose work is mediocre. </p>
<p>Even more egregiously, I recall one class where the grading revolved only around 1 thing - a group project. The guy who worked hardest on the project ended up with a lower grade than another guy on the same group who barely did anything on the project. How the hell could that have happened? They were on the same group! But that's the nature of those classes that are random grade generators. People will end up with mysterious grades that will have no discernable basis in reality.</p>
<p>that schwartz girl is a joke. for one thing, grade inflation at harvard is rampant. for another thing, the girl was a government major. she takes a course called "Fairy Tales, Childrens Literature and the Culture of Childhood" her freshman year. make her an engineering major and we all know she doesn't have 15 anymore.</p>
<p>ouch...you dealt a swift blow there...I think you might have started WWIII.</p>
<p>By the way, 15 WHAT????</p>
<p>grade inflation is not rampant at harvard. I know plenty of kids who would eagerly challenge that statement.</p>
<p>The statistics would say otherwise.</p>
<p>is cultural anthropology considered a science course</p>
<p>The random grade generator? What's the purpose of even taking those classes taught by those kind of profs? I'd rather avoid it at all costs if it was possible.</p>
<p>
[quote]
that schwartz girl is a joke. for one thing, grade inflation at harvard is rampant. for another thing, the girl was a government major. she takes a course called "Fairy Tales, Childrens Literature and the Culture of Childhood" her freshman year. make her an engineering major and we all know she doesn't have 15 anymore.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Your statement contains a logical paradox. After all, think about it. If grade inflation is as rampant at Harvard as you are implying, then why doesn't EVERYBODY at Harvard get perfect grades? Specifically, why was it reported that she was only the 2nd person in the last 2 decades, and in fact the 5th person in Harvard College history to get perfect grades? Are you saying that the articles are false? If so, you may want to tell Harvard about that. </p>
<p>You also harp on the fact that she is a government major. Well, if that's the issue, then why doesn't EVERY Harvard government major get perfect grades? Not even Henry Kissinger, who is perhaps the most famous Harvard government major in the history of the school, got perfect grades. </p>
<p>Look, it's all relative. The fact of the matter is, Ms. Schwartz has managed to do something that very few people have done. If it's so easy to do, then many more people should have done it. </p>
<p>
[quote]
The random grade generator? What's the purpose of even taking those classes taught by those kind of profs? I'd rather avoid it at all costs if it was possible
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, in many cases, the courses are required for your major. </p>
<p>Or, in other cases, they tend to cater towards the lazy. Let's keep in mind that randomness can go both ways. You can work extremely hard and know the material backwards and forwards and wind up with a mediocre grade. On the other hand, you can do nothing and barely even show up and still get an 'A'. I've seen it happen, especially in courses that revolve around group projects. One particular group might be completely dysfunctional and the hardest working guy on the group ends up with a bad grade (because everybody in the group ends up with a bad grade). On the other hand, you might be extremely lazy and do nothing on the project, but if your group is good, then can lounge around and still get an A because the group does all the work. </p>
<p>Even more odd are the cases where individual members of the group get different grades - sometimes resulting in the hardest working guy in the group getting a worse grade than the guy in the group who did nothing. But such is the 'game' of the random-grade generator.</p>
<p>I agree wholeheartedly with the last post. I worked the hardest that I've ever worked during this past semester and managed to drop my GPA by 0.1 ...</p>
<p>I think another factor is that some classes are taught by different professors each semester. This was the case with my second semester physics course. Last year, students were given a limited formula sheet during tests and the exam, and the class emphasized conceptual understanding a lot more. This year (when I took the course), the class was extremely theoretical, and we had to derive all equations. I'm not saying that last year's course was necessarily better in absolute terms, but this variability ended up hurting me since I definitely needed more emphasis on concepts for E&M. Thus, when an adcom compares my grade in this course with the grade of someone else who took it the previous year (or maybe even next year), they'll see the difference in grades on our transcripts and will most likely assume that course had a relatively constant format. Unfortunately, this was not the case at all. But life goes on :).</p>