I was admitted to the College of Arts and Science (Undeclared). I was originally hoping to major in Biology, but lately I’ve been considering majoring in Biomedical Engineering instead.
How hard is it to switch from the College of Arts and Science to the College of Engineering? Also, how bad is the grade deflation there? Would Biology or Bioengineering at Vanderbilt be a better choice if I was looking to go to med school?
@yinuos As a general rule of thumb (this isn’t Vanderbilt specific)…often engineering is not the way to go for a pre-med because they make the STEM courseload per semester heavier than other science majors mainly because of the additional math and sometimes physics courses required. So it isn’t about grade deflation as many sciences, especially at introductory levels, tend to grade similarly. It’s more about, what would it be like to have more lower grading courses (admittedly, engineering courses themselves typically grade at least a little higher than actual physical and natural science courses probably because they aren’t all about exams. But can this heavier workload be managed in the context of the pre-med core and classes like biochem which are on the MCAT or becoming a requirement at many med. schools?) than normal per semester as you would in engineering. Unfortunately, medical schools don’t truly take into account rigor if your GPA drops below a certain number, so the extra intensity of the engineering major is not marketable to most med. schools (perhaps at Harvard or for MDPhD programs, it could be, but then one must have a superlative MCAT or something to show that the intensity took you to higher levels of intellectual development than a normal science or non-science major). I would only do engineering if you really like that sort of thing and also willing to entertain doing something else with it. If med. school isn’t guaranteed for other majors when they do well, it certainly isn’t for engineering (where many do not do as well as counterparts in other majors).
Also, note that “grade deflation” is more or less a mythical term that simply alludes to the fact that sciences and math at most schools, even at privates, have not experienced much inflation in comparison to other divisions. I have rarely heard of any elite or non-school where the instructor actually curves grades downward to cap the amount of A’s. The idea is that STEM at most schools is one of the only series of divisions that aim to challenge students for the grade at ANY school, meaning that they will find a way to challenge even students at elite private and public schools so that averages on exams are below B and that the overall course mean is anywhere between C+ and B (depends on teacher, school, and departmental norms). So, in a chemistry course, they may design exams such that averages are in the 70s somewhere and then lab or other things will bring the overall course average to about B-/B. Which means there won’t be tons of A’s (maybe a reasonable amount like 15-25% A/A-, but not like HS or an easier class).
Some professors have low means in like the 60s and then put the grades on a curve and it ends up having about the same distribution as the above case. Mostly B’s, plenty of C’s, very few D/F, and some A’s. Such is the nature of STEM grading at most schools for lower division and intermediate courses. The exams tend to be the bulk of the grade (perhaps different from your HS) and they tend to be more heavily weighted with difficult prompts than an HS exam. And when truly challenging (like an AP exam for example-at an elite school with a decent teacher that gives exams at that level or better, the average can still come out 70-80 as opposed to the 50 you see on some STEM APs which is why even some with AP 4/5 struggle), then at an elite, your competition is either a) more well-prepared from the get-go and/or b) works much harder than the average student who took the AP meaning that the curve simply will not be as generous(you’re now competing against tons of people who either had a high pass on a single or several STEM AP/IBs or would have had they taken it).
^I feel the Bern on this one.
Engineering is a poor choice for pre med. It’s harder to get good grades. I also feel like engineering students miss out on sociology/psychology/philosophy/english classes which end up being important for the MCAT. If you do get good grades, it will probably have eaten up so much time for studying that your ec’s (research/volunteering) won’t be good because you couldn’t fully invest in them. You could be fine if you are really smart (like you got a 36 first try) or if you are partially considering being an engineer.
Switching between schools is pretty easy.
I think people should honestly stop looking for the most “marketable” major for pre-med. If they actually were serious about engineering, this post shouldn’t exist (as in they should be willing to take the risk of trying it despite any possible setbacks that could happen with relation to medical school admissions). The only thing marketable are your ECs, awards and of course grades and MCAT score. Skills from engineering can, however, be used for grad. school, industry, other things perhaps more so than some other science majors.
I think it’s risk-reward. Some people feel they’re smart enough to handle the extra science work load but they’re unsure because they heard other people do it and were unable to make med school.
I mean I find my science courses noticeably easier than some of the liberal arts reqs I had to take, etc but I’m still reluctant to fill my schedule with stem courses because of what I hear from other people (med school is the priority even though I think engineering is interesting). Honestly if you have free time and want to market yourself better get involved in more clubs. I realized I had a lot of free time spent napping and stuff so I decided to use that time differently. Luckily it isn’t too late for me but I see lots of very smart people do nothing outside of class
Usually, most won’t find STEM classes particularly/unreasonably hard (though often they are still harder than HS) unless they require higher level thinking and less brute force memorization and algorithmic problem solving. Often moderately rigorous to challenging non-STEM courses have more higher-ordered tasks than some science classes (more writing, debate, discussion, analysis). Science courses just often have less room for error due to them being based on few high stakes exams. That adds to the stress associated with them.
I feel engineering courses will often be more biased to higher ordered tasks and exams than many biology or even chemistry courses taken by pre-meds. Most of the time is spent remembering lots of content and quick plug-and-chug type of problems in the latter case, whereas engineering students likely have to do that while also preparing for curveball or more open-ended problems and tasks. It takes more investment of time in studying and homework to get to a level where one is comfortable with doing actual analysis and higher-level thinking in science or anything for that matter, but maybe more so for science because that wasn’t the protocol in HS. Memorization and typical problem types are the comfort zone of many who did well in HS science. In college, often the next thing to tackle is often the time constraints on things like exams (must solve things faster).
I agree with Bernie’s here. You also need to look at your areas of strength academically. In general a high GPA trumps a rigorous major with a lower GPA for med schools. As an engineering major you have a fall back. Bio majors are pushing all their chips to the middle of the table. Vandy also has a Med/Health/Society major which looks at global delivery, race & gender issues, politics etc…of healthcare.
Your pre-med or engineering Freshman checklist should include:
Thank you all for your help.
One thing that I’ve noticed around the board is that HOD seems to get a bad rep. Why is this? Couldn’t I potentially transfer to Peabody and major in HOD while taking the required pre-med classes? If HOD really is as easy as people have been making it sound, it would free up a ton of time for me to study for classes like Bio and in turn boost my grades for med school.
HOD gets poked fun at because the courses tend to be relatively easy and grades tend to be easier to come by. You can choose any major you want with pre-med and HOD would be a great choice if the subject interests you. It’s not exactly going to “free up a ton of time,” you’re still going to be taking Vanderbilt-level courses with books to read and papers to write and lectures to study. How much time you want to spend on these things is up to you.
To provide a small data point, In 2015, ~31% of Peabody students graduated with Latin honors (Peabody includes HOD as well as a couple other majors), versus ~28% in A&S ~20% in the School of Engineering.
Wow, that’s a lot for well…all of them. Do they all use the same thresholds (I know it is GPA based there so that certainly has an effect and might be a little low among schools that award any type of Latin honors based on GPA) or do the different schools just have different standards? My guess is that maybe it is the same because of the natural closeness of A&S and then decline in engineering students getting it. Honestly better to aim for departmental honors when that many people get GPA based though.
Thresholds are based on the GPA of the previous year’s graduating class and unfortunately the same thresholds apply to all of the schools. Totally agree that it should be departmental… I didn’t even mention Blair, where >50% received Latin honors in 2015.
The top ~25% at Vanderbilt receive a Latin honor of one sort or another, which I believe is pretty conservative. Many schools use 30%. I believe Harvard uses 50% and Princeton 40%…
I applied to the college of arts and sciences but now I want to double major in economics and comp sci. Will I be able to major in both starting my freshman year?
You can’t declare your major until Sophomore year, but you can take classes from the different schools your freshman year.
@Pancaked : Wow, all of them are ridiculous. At Harvard, that is essentially giving half of the student body another award for getting in. The system is rigged against up and coming schools that want to have high standards with that sort of thing going on at Harvard. As if going to Harvard was not enough for most of them. Only top Ivies would come up with the idea of using Latin Honors as essentially a competitive strategy and then the rest of the schools must play along to some extent.
@bernie12 @Pancaked A bit off-topic, but why don’t “up and coming” schools do things like grade inflate or give a ridiculous amount of people Latin Honors? It would attract a lot more students and increase yield for students that aren’t looking for a cutthroat environment.
Schools like Brown and Stanford do it, so why can’t Vanderbilt? The student body is already extremely strong at Vandy so good grades shouldn’t be as hard to come by.
@yinuos : The idea is that it is more believable from a place like Harvard or Stanford than it is Vanderbilt or Emory (or Brown for that matter…they honestly aren’t that much better than Emory or Vandy at the UG level) regardless of “student body strength”. The fact is, if students are being challenged at high levels and graded fairly versus the high expectations that supposedly exist at such places, then even strong students aren’t going to always get perfect grades. Other up and coming elite schools already do grade inflate a lot, just less than some of those. It’s a matter of integrity.
In addition, in areas that are known to grade harshly such as STEM, I don’t think it can be justified that most of the up and coming schools grade like Brown, Yale, or Stanford (note that Harvard, Columbia, and Princeton grade similarly to most schools in STEM including the southern schools like Duke, Emory, Rice, and Vanderbilt. Brown, Yale, and Stanford are known for grading upwards to two levels higher so like the B-/B averages common for such classes becomes more often B+ or B+/A- in extreme cases). I’ve seen plenty course materials and on average I would predict that from an objective point of view (as in course content, speed, and rigor of examinations), those schools are more rigorous. I think there is a difference, but I don’t think students deserve an extra reward for it. Employers and grad. schools already know that the tracks and courses offered at several of the super academically elite (these places not only have strong student bodies, but they find many more avenues to challenge them academically than many schools outside of that tier) generally provide higher levels of training and/or are more innovative, so throwing an almost artificial award at another 10 or 25% of the students is plain unnecessary.
And honestly, one is already helping students by allowing honors only based on GPA, which may or may not offer any real post-graduate advantage. Again, the student who completed and successfully defended an actual honors thesis at the departmental level (or some sort of senior project) is going to look better for jobs and post-graduate scholarships. Some schools only offer latin honors at the departmental level…which makes more sense to me as you want to encourage students to do more than just get grades. A so called elite school (or really any university) is supposed to try to develop students into scholars no matter their career aspirations if it can. The GPA scheme usually results in a lot of desperation and GPA management strategies more so than an effort to truly engage academically. Setting a low bar kind of makes it worse, but luckily for places like HYPS and many of those super elite places, more students are going to be academically immersed (like in a project) than those at places with seemingly similar student bodies (incoming stats). So slapping on an additional honors designation really has limited added value.
Also, note, I meant competition post-grad, not admissions. Most students gungho on the super elites other than Stanford and Brown probably don’t choose based on grading practices (these are not the people who would get on CC and post a thread asking “which of these schools has the most grade inflation because I’m pre-professional and need easier grades”. They are the types that ask: “Can and should I take a really advanced STEM course my freshman year” or “How is this department vs. this other school?”), They want more prestige, higher level academics, and probably a strong intellectual climate. More grade inflation isn’t going to make one compete well against those schools for the types they tend to attract. Only money, improved academics, and other environmental attributes will help one win yield battles against them.
There are plenty of articles concerning grade inflation and Vandy like most other U’s has seen its average GPA go from 2.9-3.43 over the past 25 years. While Vandy is not as inflated as Harvard, Yale, Stanford, & Brown it is better than MIT, Princeton, & JHU.
Once the grade inflation genie is out of the bottle it’s not going back. U’s attempting to fight grade inflation are fighting a losing battle with students, parents, and even faculty. I suspect the pressure on U’s to inflate grades will grow to HYS levels…everyone is an A student. When a few U’s inflate their grades others must match it to keep their students competitive in the job and grad school world.
As a pre-med or engineering student your goal is to survive the grade deflated intro STEM classes.
@bud123 Princeton recently had a prisoners dilemma (nice “moral” move on their part, but stupid strategically) .And
yes, places like Duke, Emory, and Rice joined a while ago. I went and looked at Emory’s on this website and the inflation was obvious when it appeared that within a year, the grades suddenly jumped by .07 (from 3.26 to 3.33) and then hovered somewhere between that and 3.4 ever since. It looked almost deliberate because I am willing to bet there was no huge jump in quality or lowering of academic rigor.
Also don’t call the STEM classes deflated…they just have been “less adjusted for inflation” than other classes and part of that comes from the less subjective grading criteria and the increased rigor of them versus HS classes. I would argue that most other division’s courses are more on par with a solid HS course/school whereas STEM is more exam oriented than HS counterparts (plus the exams are generally harder unless you had special teachers in HS). It would be unrealistic for as many people to make A’s in many STEM classes even if they are in general well-qualified. STEM divisions still feel as if they are training students for specific ends (prof. school, grad. school, or industry) so probably feel as if there should be more fixed or higher standards of achievement.
STEM here is pretty hard(BME major here), but it isn’t as impossible as some people say it is. If you’re smart, and have a good work ethic, you’ll get a good grade. It might not be an A, but you’ll get a good grade.