Premed + MIT = Good idea?

Colleges and Universities A-Z Massachusetts Institute of Technology
61

<p>
[quote]
I just don't buy Sakky's premise that med schools only look at grades and that because of MIT's supposed grade deflation, MIT students are at a disadvantage compared to students from HYPS schools. As I can tell from searching past threads, he has made this point numerous times before without any ever providing any factual backup. The stats he refers to are way off (90%+ of premeds at HYPS accepted to med school) and are impossible to objectively compare to the data collected at MIT.</p>

<p>Med schools look at a lot more than just grades. (as do mots professional and graduate schools). You only need to look at the wide range of GPAs and MCATs from successful applicants. Most premed students admitted to top medical schools will tell you that the interview is the key to admission. As long as you can get past the first phase of screening other factors have much greater importance such as any medical research or internship experience.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>First off, I never said that med-schools only look at grades. Please point to the quote where I specifically said that med-schools only look at grades. You can't do it, because I never said it.</p>

<p>What I said is that grades are a factor, particularly in the initial screen. You said it yourself - once you can get past the first screen, it all hinges on the interview. But, ay, that's the rub. You have to get past the first screen, and the first screen is largely numbers-oriented. Nobody ever got admitted to med-school who didn't get past the initial screen.</p>

<p>And that's where the problem is - people with low grades have difficulty getting past the first screen. Hence, they don't even have the chance to explain how difficult their course selection was. They don't have the chance to explain anything. They're simply booted out of the process.</p>

<p>Nor am I simply theorizing. I know several former premeds who studied difficult majors (i.e. engineering) at difficut schools. They got pretty decent MCAT scores. The problem was that their grades were not as high as they could have been if they had just taken creampuff classes at an easy school. Most med-schools didn't even bother to invite them to submit a secondary app, which basically meant that their application was rejected by the initial screen. Hence, they got tossed out in the first round because of their grades. </p>

<p>Hence, I think it's a perfectly simple inference that somebody who wants to be a doctor but got mediocre grades at MIT would have clearly been better off going to another school. For example, if you have less than a 4.0/5 at MIT, you're probably going to find it very difficult to get into any medical school (unless you absolutely CRUSH the MCAT). Let's face it. There are PLENTY of students at MIT who are getting less than a 4.0/5. </p>

<p>
[quote]
To claim that Mollie would not have made into med school based on her grades is simply ludicrous.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>First off, I never said that she couldn't get into any med-school. Read my posts again carefully. I said that she would have difficulty in getting into any TOP med-school. She could probably get into a no-name med-school. </p>

<p>Put another way. I doubt that mollieb would be bothered if I said that she got into a PhD program at Harvard Medical School, as she has stated this fact publicly before. However, I highly doubt, and I think she would agree, that she probably wouldn't get into the MD program of Harvard Medical School. It's very difficult to get into the MD program of HMS if you have a 4.4/5 (which translates into a 3.4/4). If you use the MDApplicants.com website, you will see that only 2 people have registered who have gotten into the MD program at Harvard Medical School who had GPa's of less than a 3.5/5, and they are both URM. Mollieb is not a URM. </p>

<p>
[quote]
PhD programs are always more selective than the corresponding MD programs at the same school as they accept much fewer students.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, that's not true. They accept fewer students, but also fewer students apply. It's not clear at all that PhD programs are 'always' more selective than the corresponding MD programs. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Statistics show that most MIT PhD candidates go for a joint MD/PhD program and are very seldom turned down by the medical school once their PhD application has been reviewed.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>May I see these statistics? </p>

<p>I myself know a number of people from various schools (not just MIT) who got into PhD programs but not the corresponding MD programs. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Again, well over 80% of the premeds from MIT get into med school and official surveys show they get into better med schools than applicants from virtually any other college. I am also willing to bet that those who are serious about their intentions and who do not get in on their first try get accepted eventually.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>80%? The latest numbers indicate 73.5%. </p>

<p><a href="http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/preprof.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/preprof.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I agree that MIT premeds probably get into better med-schools than the average premed. But we're not talking about the average premed. We're talking about premeds at MIT's peer schools - meaning schools like HYPS. I think it's safe to say that ALL of the premeds from these schools get into better-than-average med-schools. After all, most students at the top med-schools went to a top undergraduate program. Very few MD students at Harvard Medical School went to, say, Cal-State Bakersfield. The question is not whether MIT is doing better than the 'average' school, the question is whether MIT is stacking up relative to its peers. </p>

<p>I also agree that some MIT premeds who don't get into med-school the first time may reapply and get in later. But that's true of the premeds at any school. That's not what differentiates MIT from other schools, and in particular, not what differentiates MIT from HYPS. </p>

<p>Nevertheless, the point stands that if you get mediocre grades at MIT, you may never get into med-school (unless you are willing to take extreme measures like going to a Caribbean med-school). There are plenty of premed students at MIT who are getting mediocre grades. Frankly, they would probably have been better off going to an easier school.</p>

62

<p>
[quote]
I was actually trying to search for some factual backup for the claim that says 90+% of HYPS premeds got accepted to medical school every year. However, I haven't had any luck in finding such data so far. Can anybody help?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Here's Princeton's data</p>

<p><a href="http://web.princeton.edu/sites/hpa/2005Statistics.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://web.princeton.edu/sites/hpa/2005Statistics.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Harvard refuses to publish its data online, so you basically have to get to one of the hard-copy files from one of the House tutors. But trust me, it's basically the same as Princeton. If you don't trust me, I invite you to get a House tutor to show you the data, or get somebody who's going to Harvard to look at the data and then tell you about it. </p>

<p>The same is true of Stanford and Yale - they also won't publish data online, but only keep it in hardcopy binders. But people who have seen the data have basically told me that it's basically the same as Princeton's. A few percentage points higher or lower, but it's basically the same. </p>

<p>
[quote]
I also have a problem with this supposed "grade inflation" at Harvard. It exists mainly in the humanities and social sciences. Let's say you are a TA grading a bunch of papers. Some are of truly exceptional quality, so those get A's. Most are very well-written and it's obvious that they put in a lot of effort into the assignment. What grade are you going to give them? A B+ of course. This does not happen in science classes, so I don't think Harvard premeds have an advantage in that regard.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The main advantage is that Harvard premeds can load up on a bunch of (relatively) easier humanities/ soc-science classes to boost their overall GPA. Like you said, as long as you put in the effort, it's practically impossible to get a truly bad grade in a Harvard humanities/social-science class. </p>

<p>This is true even in the science classes. While the grading in those classes is surely tougher, as long as you do all the work you're still probably not going to get a truly horrible grade. The absolute worst you will get is probably a C-minus. This stands in stark contrast with technical courses at other schools where you really can do all the work and still get a D or an F.</p>

63

<p>
[quote]
I've occasionally read about accomplished scientists saying they went to graduate school because they couldn't get into medical school, but I have never heard a doctor say he went to medical school because he couldn't get into a graduate school.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's perhaps the best way I have seen anybody ever put it, so good, that I would like your permission to borrow this quote in the future. </p>

<p>I completely agree with you in that I strongly suspect that PhD programs are, on the whole, easier to get into than MD programs. And that's nothing to do with the notion that MD students are supposedly smarter than PhD students. In fact, if anything, the reverse is probably true. No, the real problem is that the premed process is basically a game. It's a beauty contest. A lot of people simply don't do well in that beauty contest who would otherwise make for perfectly good doctors.</p>

<p>I would also mention another factor as to why fewer people are interested in PhD programs than in MD programs (and hence why PhD programs are less selective than MD programs). If you're an MD student, you are basically guaranteed to graduate. Practically no MD student actually flunks out. As long as you do all of the work, you're going to pass. Granted, you may not get the top grades and top rec's to get the top residency slot you want, but you're going to pass and you're going to graduate. Generally, the only people who don't make it through med-school are those who don't WANT to make it. </p>

<p>Nothing could be further from the truth when you're talking about PhD programs. Plenty of PhD students find that they can't pass their quals, and hence end up with, at best, a consolation master's. However, many more are simply unable to complete their thesis. I believe I read somewhere that the overall attrition rate for PhD programs across the country exceeds 50%, meaning that more than half of all new PhD students will never get the PhD. I doubt that there is a single med-school in the country where the attrition rate is 50%, and the nationwide MD attrition rate is certainly nowhere near 50%. Hence, I think all people who are considering a PhD realize that there is a strong chance that they will never actually get the PhD, and they will therefore have basically wasted all of their time for nothing. The MD, on the other hand, is a far safer choice in that you know that as long as you do the work, you're going to graduate.</p>

64

<p>
[quote]

First off, I never said that she couldn't get into any med-school. Read my posts again carefully. I said that she would have difficulty in getting into any TOP med-school. She could probably get into a no-name med-school.</p>

<p>Put another way. I doubt that mollieb would be bothered if I said that she got into a PhD program at Harvard Medical School, as she has stated this fact publicly before. However, I highly doubt, and I think she would agree, that she probably wouldn't get into the MD program of Harvard Medical School. It's very difficult to get into the MD program of HMS if you have a 4.4/5 (which translates into a 3.4/4). If you use the MDApplicants.com website, you will see that only 2 people have registered who have gotten into the MD program at Harvard Medical School who had GPa's of less than a 3.5/5, and they are both URM. Mollieb is not a URM.

[/quote]

For the record, I have absolutely no disagreement with any of this.</p>

<p>On a prosaic level, I didn't complete all the classes which are required for admission into most top medical schools. I didn't take the second semester of organic chem (5.13), and I never took chem lab (5.310). </p>

<p>On a more fundamental level, tying in with what Jessie is saying, I've just never had the desire to go after good grades to the neglect of everything else -- I've never, as they say, let schooling interfere with my education. I like working in the lab way more than I like acing tests, and my GPA (particularly my freshman/sophomore GPA) reflects that. That's a great quality for a research scientist, but it certainly would have prevented me from going to medical school, had I wanted to go.</p>

65

<p>i know there's a brochure--a premed/medical school student guide--for mit undergrads. where's the link? i searched for one hour already and could not find it?</p>

66

<p>Would this be what you're looking for? It has some helpful information, at any rate.</p>

67

<p>thanks, i found that page too, but there's like a thirty-page pdf file called something like "mit premed study guide"? do any of you know this?</p>

68

<p>How about the AMSA</a> guide?</p>

69

<p>
[quote]
I've just never had the desire to go after good grades to the neglect of everything else -- I've never, as they say, let schooling interfere with my education.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Which makes you an excellent candidate for a PhD program, and not so appropriate for an MD program.</p>

<p>I wonder whether the low acceptance rate from MIT (as compared to comparable colleges) is precisely because MIT students are selected for a scientific, intellectually independent, mindset, that is not particularly adaptive for medical school. Most of medical school is rote memorization and grunt work, while PhD programs are looking for people who would hate that. </p>

<p>So it would not surprise me at all to find many people who would be great PhD candidates, but for the very same reason, terrible medical school candidates. There is a lot of "learn this because I told you to learn it" in medical school. This attitude is the antithesis of education in a PhD program, and probably strikes MIT graduates as bizarre.</p>

<p>So I might take the original question back one step. If you really want to be a scientist, then you may find the education at MIT extremely gratifying, if also extremely challenging. They will encourage you to think like a scientist and stimulate intellectual curiosity. If you really want to be a doctor, then you may not benefit nearly so much from the science oriented education at MIT. </p>

<p>Sakky has raised the following point before, but I don't see it in this thread. the relatively low admission rates from MIT cannot be only due to tougher grading and medical schools refusing to take this into account in admissions. MIT graduates who are accepted have, on average, HIGHER GPA's than do graduates of their peer schools. Compare MIT to Princeton in this regard. </p>

<p>This says that, with the same GPA and MCAT's, a Princeton student has a better chance at admission than does an MIT student. This, I believe, goes back to the social question. </p>

<p>Medical schools look with some suspicion on people who would be willing to spend 4 years locked in a library pounding out problem sets. The schools know that, however much these students may know about science, this is not good preparation for medical practice. </p>

<p>They also know that little of the science the students learned is useful for medicine. So when confronted with two kids, one with a 3.7/4 from MIT, no serious extracurriculars, who looks and acts as if she has been locked in a box for four years (of course I am exaggerating for effect here) and another with the same MCAT's and a 3.5 from Princeton who wrote for the newspaper, participated in political campaigns, acted in plays, etc, and seems relaxed and comfortable around people, it is an easy choice. The MIT grad has no chance. </p>

<p>The fact the the MIT grad has a degree in electrical engineering and the Princeton degree is in history also works against the MIT student as soon as the interviewer tries to strike up a conversation about something other than engineering. The interviewer is likely to find the Princeton grad's discussion of her thesis topic fascinating, and is unlikely to understand, or care about, a word of the MIT grad's description of some new kind of chip she has designed.</p>

<p>Now if you are talking about entering a research oriented MD program (like HST), or an MD/PhD program, then the MIT students get reviewed for their promise as scientists, and the whole picture changes.</p>

70

<p>Yes, MIT shares a larger percentage of nerds. A nerd with limited social skills cannot become a good doctor.</p>

71

<p>
[quote]

Sakky has raised the following point before, but I don't see it in this thread. the relatively low admission rates from MIT cannot be only due to tougher grading and medical schools refusing to take this into account in admissions. MIT graduates who are accepted have, on average, HIGHER GPA's than do graduates of their peer schools.

[/quote]

I think this is because applicants to medical school from MIT have higher GPAs than most people at MIT -- it's not that only the ones with sky-high GPAs get accepted, it's that the people who are applying have high GPAs in the first place.</p>

<p>The average GPA of MIT medical school applicants was a 3.6/4.0 (). Compare this to MIT law school applicants, who averaged a 3.25/4.0 (same data as above), and to the median MIT GPA, which is a 3.2/4.0 ([url=<a href="http://web.mit.edu/scholarships/details/fulbright.htm%5Dsource%5B/url%5D">http://web.mit.edu/scholarships/details/fulbright.htm]source</a>). Moreover, the GPA of admitted students is approximately the same as the GPA of applicants -- a few kids at the bottom are getting knocked out, but mostly people are being accepted or denied on the basis of factors other than GPA.</p>

<p>I also think it is patently absurd to attribute MIT's slightly lower acceptance numbers to the stereotype that MIT grads are unable to function socially. There are vanishingly few people at MIT who do not participate in any sort of extracurricular activity, and premeds at MIT are well aware that medical schools expect them to be involved in research, volunteer work, and leadership. My premed friends were volleyball players, cheerleaders, tutors for inner-city middle schoolers, and accomplished researchers. </p>

<p>One thing to remember is that not a terribly huge number of people apply to medical school from MIT each year -- for 2005, 70 undergrads applied and 53 were accepted. A few years ago (see the AMSA</a> guide, page 37), 82% of MIT applicants were accepted. If approximately the same number of people applied each year (the 2003 data does not say), that's only a difference of five acceptances. The small numbers involved skew the data quite a bit.</p>

<p>I would also note that MIT is a good deal more economically diverse than most of its peer schools (as measured by things such as the percentage of Pell grant recipients, etc), and this fact alone does suggest that MIT would have a lower percentage of admits than schools whose student bodies are heavily affluent.</p>

<p>I don't think MIT is a good place for grade-grubbers or people who care about grades to the exclusion of everything else. But I don't think it's a bad place for students interested in a career in medicine, so long as they're willing to work.</p>

72

<p>I am afraid I am not convinced. Comparing MIT to Princeton, the mean gpas in science and in all other fields for applied and admitted are
Princeton</p>

<p>science 3.4 applied, 3.5 admitted
all other 3.5 applied, 3.5 admitted</p>

<p>MIT does not break gpa's out by science vs other, but overall Mollieb's source reports </p>

<p>applied 3.49, admitted 3.7. </p>

<p>I don't see anything to support the assertion that the gpa's of MIT applicants are higher than students overall to a greater degree than at other colleges. After all, aside from a few super elites, realistic chances at admission dictate that only those with high gpa's need apply. By contrast, it does appear true that successful med school applicants from Princeton have gpa's close to the overall average Princeton student, but that is because they don't need higher grades to get in.</p>

<p>I am NOT claiming that the stereotype of techno nerds with no social skills is valid, but I AM saying that it is pervasive, and it is the first thing that pops into people's minds when they hear "MIT". </p>

<p>I am sure many MIT students engage in extracurriculars, but they cannot pursue them with the depth and intensity that is typical at other elite colleges- neither the curriculum nor the culture permit that. Compare MIT's twice-weekly newspaper to the dailies put out by the Ivies. Compare MIT's D3 sports to the D1 programs at the Ivies, Duke and Stanford. Compare the overwhelming variety of activities at a place like Harvard to those at MIT. </p>

<p>Drop by Harvard square one weekend evenning and see how many MIT (and BU, Brandeis, etc) students come over for their night's entertainment. Compare that to the number from H and elsewhere who head over to MIT for an exciting time. </p>

<p>People who are more interested in writing for a literary magazine than learning vast amounts of math and science they do not need for medical careers do not go to MIT. Most never apply. </p>

<p>There are plenty of people who are plenty good enough at science to succeed as premeds and in medical school, but who are not interested in completing the equivalent of MIT's GIR's. </p>

<p>Anyone who has graduated from MIT, even the one who is dead last by gpa, knows far more about math, physics, and chemistry than they will need to practice medicine. This is not about what you know.</p>

<p>This is not a knock on MIT. It is a fantastic place. Perhaps the best in the world for launching a science career. But premeds are better served by focussing on grades, esp in their handful of premed courses, and doing the other stuff admissions committees want to see. Since the committees will be, at best, indifferent to whether one has had an intense, world class science education, or has just completed the minimum requirements, going the intense route is not necessarily the best strategy if med school is the goal.</p>

<p>Mollie says that MIT may not be a good place for someone who is too interested in grubbing for grades. From what I have seen, this is certainly true. It is admirable, as is almost everything else about the science education at MIT. BUT, for med school admissions purposes, it is more important to get great grades than it is to have an MIT-level science education.</p>

73

<p>Sorry, I meant to link to the latest premed</a> data at MIT, which says that average applicant GPA is 3.6 and average admit GPA is a 3.7.</p>

<p>
[quote]

I am sure many MIT students engage in extracurriculars, but they cannot pursue them with the depth and intensity that is typical at other elite colleges- neither the curriculum nor the culture permit that. Compare MIT's twice-weekly newspaper to the dailies put out by the Ivies. Compare MIT's D3 sports to the D1 programs at the Ivies, Duke and Stanford. Compare the overwhelming variety of activities at a place like Harvard to those at MIT.

[/quote]

I disagree -- the vast majority of students are involved, and involved to a great degree. I mean, sure, the Ivies have DI sports programs, but how many premeds at those schools are athletes? At MIT, a premed (or anyone else) has a realistic chance of participating in varsity athletics. After all, we have the second-largest number of NCAA-recognized varsity sports programs in the country.</p>

<p>I haven't seen a list of student groups available at other schools, but MIT certainly isn't lacking in student activities -- the Association</a> of Student Activities recognizes many, many groups.</p>

<p>The admissions office [url=<a href="http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/life/workplay_balance_at_mit/index.shtml%5Dsays%5B/url"&gt;http://www.mitadmissions.org/topics/life/workplay_balance_at_mit/index.shtml]says[/url&lt;/a&gt;]

[quote]

Although schoolwork is important to MIT students, extracurricular participation is the rule rather than the exception. Approximately 80% of MIT undergraduates participate in athletics - 20% join varsity teams, 73% play intramural sports, and 10% play club sports. Over 330 activities are recognized by the Association of Student Activities, and all of these groups enjoy robust participation. More than 60% of the student body is involved with the arts.

[/quote]

Are those numbers really so different from MIT's peer schools? I seriously doubt it. MIT students may be busier than other students, but they also have a much higher tolerance for pain.</p>

<p>
[quote]

Drop by Harvard square one weekend evenning and see how many MIT (and BU, Brandeis, etc) students come over for their night's entertainment. Compare that to the number from H and elsewhere who head over to MIT for an exciting time.

[/quote]

I agree that people go to Harvard Square on the weekends, but that's not because of Harvard -- it's because of the restaurants. At any rate, I've went to a lot of MIT fraternity parties, and seen a lot of Wellesley/BU/Northeastern/Simmons kids there (and a lot of MIT kids, of course), but rarely have I seen Harvard kids. (Anybody else care to back me up here?)</p>

<p>I just think this is all much ado about nothing (and I don't even like premeds). So ~80% of MIT students who apply to medical school are accepted, vs. ~90% of students at comparable schools. Is that small difference really worth all the debate?</p>

74

<p>It is important to budding premeds.</p>

<p>Going to MIT is probably a safe bet if you can realistically convince yourself that you are among the top people admitted that year, and thus you have little reason to worry about your grades. However, since so many people at MIT top out on the SAT's it is difficult to know that you are really at the top. MIT and other top elites will probably tell you that you are a top student in the way they recruit you.</p>

<p>People are fascinated by this because they assume, probably correctly, that anyone admitted to MIT is good enough at science to be a doctor, and again, probably correctly, that anyone who graduates is overqualified in science background for medical school. So they wonder why the admit rate is not only lower than 100%, but lower than other top elites.</p>

75

<p>I think we MIT students are very social yet nerdy at the same time! If you look at Harvard Medical School's acceptance rate from last year, you will see that Harvard admitted more MIT applicants than any other individual school's applicants. Memorization might be a big issue in medical school, but medical schools like people who are science-oriented and can think critically--we get this training from our hard hard problem sets!</p>

76

<p>Well, I think the critical issue is that the statistics don't tell us how many of those MIT premeds who didn't get into a medical school would have gotten in if they had gone elsewhere for college. And it doesn't tell us how many of those people were cross-admits with schools with higher acceptance rates.</p>

<p>Ultimately, the premeds at MIT with the lowest GPAs are disproportionately engineering majors, and therefore I don't think we should be crying too hard for them -- having an engineering degree from MIT is not exactly the worst thing in the world as far as the job market goes.</p>

<p>No doubt there's a cost-benefit analysis involved in choosing any undergrad school. But I don't think prospective premeds should rule MIT out -- the acceptance rate to medical school is still very high, and an MIT degree will open a lot of doors if medical school doesn't pan out.</p>

77

<p>
[quote]
an MIT degree will open a lot of doors if medical school doesn't pan out.

[/quote]

absolutely!</p>

78

<p>Talked to my husband today. He does admissions but only to the MD/Phd program at the Med School where he works. (He is a Phd. not an MD.) He said it never occured to him that kids from MIT might be at a disadvantage GPA-wise. He also says he tends to look more at MCAT scores than grades because it's so hard to tell what grades mean at one college vs. another. For the MD-PHd program research experience and recommendations is also a huge factor - which I doubt is as important for straight MDs.</p>

79

<p>There you go, we forgot about MCAT! How many MIT med school applicants that were too busy working on the problem sets and did not have enough time preparing for the MCAT?</p>

80

<p>Maybe I am wrong here, as I am neither a PhD or an MD, but I do have some experience in evaluating candidates for various posts.</p>

<p>I am (amongst other things) and MIT EC (interviewer). Every year I interview candidates who have tried to buff their application as much as possible by getting involved in things that they have no interest in but which they think might look good on their application. Last year I had three candidates involved in charity work for Africa, only one of which (an african) seemed sincerely interested.</p>

<p>MIT regularly gets applications from students who have spent so much of their time over 4-6 years preparing to get into a top school that they haven't found any time to live. Most of these students will not get in, despite stellar scores. MIT undergraduate admissions rejected 81% of all applicants with SAT Math scores 750-800 in admitting the most recent class.</p>

<p>Now maybe it is different for Medical Schools, maybe it is the case that these schools cannot differentiate between easy and difficult course loads. And if so, so what. Maybe Sakky is right, if you see university as nothing more than a necessary tick box towards a larger plan, then you probably won't be happy at MIT.</p>

<p>It's been said on a lot of these discussions that University admissions is all about match. I spent a fair amount of time at Harvard and at MIT, and I really did feel more comfortable at MIT. MIT encouraged me, nurtured me, and prepared me for what I wanted to do with my life - even though I did not know at the time what that was. That is not to say that Harvard could not have done these things, but it is to say that I was a much better match for MIT than for Harvard, and I am confident that I was happier at MIT than I would have been at Harvard. One of my close friends at High School was in exactly the opposite position; she was a much better match for Harvard than for MIT.</p>

<p>Your university is many things. It is your home for four years, which is a fair percentage of your lifespan. It is where you will end up doing lots of different things for the first time. It is a place where you get to discover what you want to do. That is not trivial. I would guess, without any actual data, that the overwhelming majority of nuclear engineering majors did not end up doing so because of their strong high school Nuke E background.</p>

<p>There are a variety of good reasons to accept or reject any university offer. To my mind, a differential in Medical School acceptance rates is not one of them. If you are truly happy at MIT, then you will prosper and then you are likely to end up succeeding whether you are one of the 80 or so undergraduates who go directly onto Medical School or not. If you will spend all of your time worrying that you need to take easier classes in order to shine on some future application, then you probably will not be happy at MIT, and that, much more than any statistical deviation is a good reason not to go to MIT.</p>

<p>Pick a university where you will be truly happy. Everything else is secondary.</p>

<p>-Just my tuppence,
-Mikalye</p>