hi everyone,
i haven't seen much debate on this topic recently, and i would be very interested to see what people think.
does anyone wonder what it would have been like had they gone to another school for their undergrad in terms of applying to vet school?
i say this because i went to the most prestigious school that i got accepted to out of high school. i loved my undergrad experience: it was everything i hoped for, and i was extremely challenged. however, in going to a prestigious school, i wonder if my gpa is unfairly low compared to other applicants.
i say this because i am currently taking org 2 at my state school (i never took it in undergrad) and find it to be so much EASIER. yes, it is org, so it is difficult, but it is by no means the challenge that my classes were at my undergrad college. it is night and day.
so all i hear on these boards are discussions of gpa, and all i think is that comparing gpa's between schools is a bit like comparing apples and oranges.
do vet schools see this?
and before the accusations fly, i am not trying to offend anyone at any type of school. i am relaying my own experience.
thanks.

however, in going to a prestigious school, i wonder if my gpa is unfairly low compared to other applicants.
Heh. The reputation of quite a number of "prestigious" undergrad schools is quite the opposite - that is, rampant grade inflation and therefore an unfairly high GPA compared to other applicants. (NOTE: Not an insinuation against you personally!)

Yet again I think the notion of "prestige" is off the mark here. What you're really wondering about is whether the adcom can or will take into account the *difficulty* of your undergrad program. This is hard. At a lot of colleges, particularly the medium-to-big ones, difficulty is what you make it because there are a dozen levels at which courses are offered. I could have graduated with the same degree having taken easier versions of a lot of classes, but for my own benefit I took the hard ones. And there are thousands of colleges in the country, so they can't possibly know all the permutations.

Some schools do claim to put some weight on the difficulty of your undergraduate program, but then you're stuck wondering how they decided which schools and which majors are the difficult ones. Is Psychology at MIT harder than Engineering at Podunk State? Did they, maybe, just assume prestige means difficulty...?

when i was discussing my admissions committee nightmares at the-school-i-shall-not-mention with another student who was trying to get in (and who after three tries had gotten in), we turned to our other lab partner who said, 'my gpa was 2.6. i went to yale.'

he's brilliant, regardless.

another student at this school told me she went to the 'wrong' pa school, and thus came to this school from out-of-state, that penn only takes most of its in-state students from certain programs (much fewer from penn state, where she went)

i was told i could never do graduate school at yale because i came from an undergraduate state school.

believe-you-me, your undergraduate institution matters.

Yeah, I went to a similar such undergrad institution and also took my organic chem classes at a state school in order to raise my sci gpa. I really loved my undergrad experience, it was very challenging and gave me a wonderful education, but it has cost me SOOOO much in terms of competitiveness. I had to go to grad school at the state university in order to stand a chance at admissions.

i'm glad to hear i'm not the only one facing this dilemna.

and to respond, yes, for the most part, i am not afraid to equate prestige with difficulty. obviously there is a lot of gray, but there is a reason that some schools are deemed prestigious. in my undergrad classes, a majority of my peers were valedictorians, salutorians, etc. when this is your competition, the exams the profs throw at you typically are not easy because they can't give everyone an A.

taking org 2 at my state school, i have yet to get below an A on anything. the types of questions and the grading are different. and bonus points! i haven't had bonus points since high school! (not to say every class at this school has bonus points).

not that i'm complaining. sure, i am ecstatic that i am doing well in org 2. however, i wonder if this is some secret that i was never told when i applied to undergrad; namely, that if your goal is grad school then your undergrad doesn't matter as long as you maintain a great gpa.

it's hard to say. i don't know what i would have done if i were to redo my undergrad application process. it's hard being in debt with a lower gpa and feeling like my chances at vet school are less than if i had gone to another school.

i can't really be bitter until after i apply for vet schools, but i also can't help but think these things as i read through these threads.

all i can say is DO NOT APPLY TO COLORADO STATE!!!!!

i too had the same dilemma and was rejected from CSU. In my post-mortem I was informed that they do not take the difficulty of your undergrad institution into account because "there are some many kids that apply here from liberal arts schools that aren't ranked". Which is fine and dandy, I guess, but it certainly screwed over my chances at that school. I found, however, that most other institutions either directly consider your level of difficulty at your undergrad school, or they have a little "bonus system" if you went to a particularly difficult college.

i wonder if this is some secret that i was never told when i applied to undergrad; namely, that if your goal is grad school then your undergrad doesn't matter as long as you maintain a great gpa.

i have to chuckle a little, b/c at age 16 i WAS told this, but thinking i was so wise, refused to listen... 16 years later i agree that undergrad prestige doesn't really matter as much as grad school, but how to make my younger self see? it seems whatever our goal (high school, undergrad, grad) we are just looking at the next step - trying to get over one hurdle at a time....

Amen- my sentiments exactly. Some of these people post that they had a 4.0, 3.95 gpa. NO ONE at my school in my program (biology) had above a 3.6. Average graduating gpa for those in biology was around a 3.0. And 95% of students at my school where in top 10% of their highschool class... so these aren't idiots we're talking about.



When people ask me how I liked it b/c they, or their kids are considering it, I always tell them… if you want into a grad program go somewhere else. It’s a great education but is it worth it?

Believe me, you're not the only one who feels this way! I've been a reader on this board for a while, and while I feel that I'm getting an excellent education at my very small, very very difficult undergrad school, I wonder if going to the most challenging college I was accepted to means that now it will take me a few extra years to be accepted to vet school. Was it worth it? Much as I love my college, if it really does take me a few extra years, I'm not sure. It would be nice to know if there are schools that seriously consider the rigor of the applicant's academic program!

yayyyyyyy i'm not the only one.

keep it coming, keep it coming.

there were quite a few times i contemplated transfering out to another school to improve my gpa, but because i am stubborn and proud, i didn't.

and i am proud of my undergrad degree, so proud, even just last week i had a job interview for a lab at an ivy league school and they commented how impressed they were with my undergrad.

aren't some vet schools the same?
:love:

I think that going to a harder, more prestigious school does make it harder to get into vet school. I knew for myself when I applied to undergrad that I would be more comfortable wit hthe "big fish in a small pond" phenomenon as I wouldn't be as stressed as competing with others that were valedictorians of their high school classes.

On a related note - I was always a little bitter about the course rigor that is suggested. My undergrad advisor always recommended the hardest/honors courses and I also chose to pursue a harder major. I think it is sad that challenging yourself in undergrad can end up being a detriment.

on a related note, i always LOATHED the "med school kids" who took bird courses to improve their gpa.
you know, 'pop music after 1960' and 'children's lit.'
and guess where it got them.
med school.
because they had high gpa's.
so there i was, trying to not be a med school kid, taking my english elective course on john milton (of paradise lost fame) to challenge myself and content that i, as a biology major, got a b whereas class avereage was b-.
this will get me into vet school, right?

:P

A friend of mine who graduated from my school a year ahead of me had a 3.1gpa and got accepted to 3 vet schools his first year applying (penn, auburn and florida). But his gre score was in the upper 1300s.
So, it is possible to get in with a less than impressive gpa.

I honestly don't know here, but my guess is that adcom's do take SOME note of your undergrad. college. For example, I think if you have an excellent GPA but went to a less challenging undergrad., they probably want to see whether you attempted to challenge yourself at whatever school you went to. That said, if you have a lower GPA (though I'm sure there's a cut-off), most probably give SOME consideration if you've got a prestigious school listed. I come from the opposite, that is, a not quite so prestigious school (Arizona State, to be specific; don't get me wrong -- I LOVE my school, and I feel you can get a great education if you have the initiative, but something about being rated the #1 party school by PlayBoy that probably takes it down a couple notches :o . I have what most consider a great GPA and good GRE scores (1410), plus research experience. That said, I got rejected from 3 schools and accepted at 1. Now I'm not saying it's DEFINITELY because of the school I went to, but I can't help but think some of the schools looked at me and said "Yeah she has a 4.0, but she went to ASU...:cool: "

but to play devil's advocate... it isn't gpa alone that gets you into vet school. i was surprised at how "holistic" both davis and colorado were. get some great experience under your belt, and do something that makes you stand out, while at the same time illustrates your passions and interests. ultimately, you want to look different somehow than the other 1200 applicants to the program. :)

serendip - wasn't meant as a reply to you... i posted just after you :-)

Prestige matters, period. To repeat myself, Penn flat out told me that it matters. When I went to my Penn interview, everyone around me was from one of the top schools in the country. Tufts also implied that it matters, and Cornell's admissions rubrick says they give 5% for the "difficulty" of your academic program. Even with grade inflation, it's much harder when competing against people who got As in high school AP classes than people who got Bs in regular college prep classes. And the schools know that, especially Penn, Tufts, and Cornell, whose undergraduate programs To back this up, my GRE was a 1460 and my essays were well-written, reflective of the fact that I'm at a difficult school where a 3.5 is pretty good. My GPA was a 3.5, and I got into 3 out of the 4 schools I applied to. The exception was CSU, as someone already mentioned - don't waste your time and money with CSU (out-of-state), regardless of your undergraduate institution, unless your GPA is amazing or you have extensive extensive veterinary or "life" experience. Moral of the story: I honestly think I would have had a much harder time if I went to a state school.

yeah, but what about those whose undergrad was prestigious, and very difficult, but is not really well know outside of the state b/c its a small liberal arts college. Thats where you get screwed.

i also wonder if this is an east versus west coast thing?? honestly, things are a little different out here. i lived/worked/schooled on the east coast for ~3 years and where you went/who you knew really seemed to matter. not so much out here (but, of course, i am a tad biased).

I went to a lowly state school, got a 3.9 overall GPA, and got into every school i applied to.

Your undergrad school is completely irrelevant. Its how you do that counts.

At one point, my college web site stated that 70% of its students who got a GPA of 3.0 or above got admitted to med school. Apparently, nationwide, only 40% of students with 3.0+ get admitted to med school. I suspect the same is true for other well-regarded liberal arts schools, and for vet school as well as med school.

(Don't know from personal experience, though, since I took an unorthodox route.)

Like a lot of you I chose to go to the hardest undergrad I could find, because it was prestigious, and there were a few times I wished that I could have just gone somewhere easy and floated through. But you know what? In the end, now that I'm in vet school, I wouldn't trade my undergrad experience for anything! Being at a tough undergrad institution taught me how to study for classes that throw a ridiculous amount of facts at you and expect you to remember them (exactly like vet school!) and also taught me how to think. Because of that, I haven't had a hard time at all doing well in vet school, while a lot of my classmates who went to "easier" undergrad schools are doing pretty poorly. So, don't regret your decision to go to a hard undergrad because it will pay off later :)

I went to a lowly state school, got a 3.9 overall GPA, and got into every school i applied to.

Your undergrad school is completely irrelevant. Its how you do that counts.

Ok. I've kept my mouth shut up til now but now I have to say something. I rather resent the phrase "lowly state school" I currently attend a state school and consider it a quality institution. What's more; many of the vet schools are affiliated with "lowly state schools"...

I went to a lowly state school, got a 3.9 overall GPA, and got into every school i applied to.

Your undergrad school is completely irrelevant. Its how you do that counts.

I don't think anyone was saying that at all. What people are saying is that if you go to an ivy league/difficult school you are competing against people that are more likely to get high grades, therefore, your GPA may not be as high. People are saying that going to a state school, which I do go to and I think is an excellent school, makes it easier to get a high GPA. I don't think this is necessarily true if you take challenging course work, but I do agree that it would have been harder to get a high GPA at an ivy league school.

Your pedigree (defined here as "the perceived quality/reputation/prestige of your undergrad school") will matter more to some vet schools than to others. Just as your pedigree will matter more to some people/jobs/etc later on in life than it will to others.

Perhaps Penn, Tufts, and Cornell do put greater weight on pedigree than other schools. I only say this because Penn, Tufts, and Cornell ALSO all asked at some point during the app period whether or not any family members are staff, faculty, or alumni of their schools. They consider the legacy factor, whereas other places never ask about that. Penn and Cornell are "ivy league", and I do think that has something to do with the type and background of overall student they try to attract to their schools. Tufts as a vet school is much newer--having only opened up in the early-80s--but sees Penn and Cornell as direct competitors (these are all private universities in the NE), and, hence--in my opinion--may model *some* of their admissions policies so that they can attract and compete for some of the same students. All conjecture on my part.

But regardless of what the possible admissions policies may or may not be and what they may or may not judge as more or less prestigious, the bottom line for you is to attend the best fit (personally, academically, financially, etc) undergrad school for you, as you determine. And while you're there, challenge yourself as much as you can; just as you would with anything in your life that really matters to you.

Ok. I've kept my mouth shut up til now but now I have to say something. I rather resent the phrase "lowly state school" I currently attend a state school and consider it a quality institution. "...

I completely agree. I also attend a state school and was accepted at 3 of the 4 schools I applied to and was waitlisted at the other. IMO, your undergrad experience is what you make of it. And I don't think that prestiges schools teach you how to study either, that is something that you learn on your own if you want to do well, regardless of what school you are attending.

Prestige matters, period. To repeat myself, Penn flat out told me that it matters. When I went to my Penn interview, everyone around me was from one of the top schools in the country. Tufts also implied that it matters, and Cornell's admissions rubrick says they give 5% for the "difficulty" of your academic program. Even with grade inflation, it's much harder when competing against people who got As in high school AP classes than people who got Bs in regular college prep classes. And the schools know that, especially Penn, Tufts, and Cornell, whose undergraduate programs To back this up, my GRE was a 1460 and my essays were well-written, reflective of the fact that I'm at a difficult school where a 3.5 is pretty good. My GPA was a 3.5, and I got into 3 out of the 4 schools I applied to. The exception was CSU, as someone already mentioned - don't waste your time and money with CSU (out-of-state), regardless of your undergraduate institution, unless your GPA is amazing or you have extensive extensive veterinary or "life" experience. Moral of the story: I honestly think I would have had a much harder time if I went to a state school.
i think ya'll are silly. i too had a 3.5 and 1460 GRE, not extensive "life" experience, and was waitlisted at CSU. that's not an acceptance, but Ms. Stewart said she was confident i'd be offered a spot this semester; granted, i'm declining, but CSU is not a waste of money, even if you're out of state!

school is what you make it. you take a john milton lit class for the hell of it, yeah, you're gonna have a more difficult time getting into professional school if that elective drastically brings down your GPA. i went to a private school, and despite the loans, i loved it. so my GPA wasn't a 3.9, but i doubt it would have been at Penn State, either. yes, i was asked about my undergrad school at my Penn interview, but i don't think that was a big role in my acceptances. i really don't think undergrad is a make or break decision here. go where you want to go.

i'm also inclined to think that maybe the med school students are the smart ones.

One of my prof's was speaking with someone at Penn (he graduated from there and also works there and at my school) and said that Penn does rank the undergraduate schools for in state applicants from 1 to 4 (don't know if 1 is better than 4 or vice versa). I think he was concerned that students here weren't being counted "equally" to those of larger universities and such. Turns out my little school was highly ranked - I'm assuming for the quality of the animal science department and not for the overal academic prestige factor. This professor also talks to himself and wears sweat pants w/ collared shirts and ties so I don't know how much weight I would put on this statement. :)

I went to a lowly state school, got a 3.9 overall GPA, and got into every school i applied to.

Your undergrad school is completely irrelevant. Its how you do that counts.

You missed the point. I'm arguing that a 3.5 at a prestigious school is worth more than a 3.5 at a less prestigious school.

i think ya'll are silly. i too had a 3.5 and 1460 GRE, not extensive "life" experience, and was waitlisted at CSU. that's not an acceptance, but Ms. Stewart said she was confident i'd be offered a spot this semester; granted, i'm declining, but CSU is not a waste of money, even if you're out of state!

Didn't you take a year off though? CSU loves that sort of "life experience" stuff (not that it's not important).

My point is that some schools DO take it into consideration. CSU doesn't, but Tufts, Penn, and Cornell definitely do. So I was saying that if you're counting on CSU to recognize your school, don't bother. If you're counting on them to recognize your spiritual journey or your non-trad status, then it's worth applying.

Heh. The reputation of quite a number of "prestigious" undergrad schools is quite the opposite - that is, rampant grade inflation and therefore an unfairly high GPA compared to other applicants. (NOTE: Not an insinuation against you personally!)


I went to one of the main targets of these criticisms, Harvard - and there definitely was grade inflation, but I do have a few comments.

First, I went intending to study science and and got C's in orgo in math. I abruptly switched majors and discovered that suddenly I could get A's in what were my worst subjects! English and history. Then I realized maybe like 10% of every english class got less than an A-. So the real culprit of grade inflation were humanities teachers, and the whole grade inflation scandal reflected pretty unfairly upon some very bright science majors, many of whom were getting B's and C's despite working pretty damn hard. And when I went to get my prevet reqs postbac, the courses I repeated were much easier than the equivalent Harvard undergrad courses.

But it cuts both ways. I dont think that people who go to prestigious schools have any place complaining that they are treated unfairly, for the most part. In 99% of cases, going to a prestigious school helps tremendously, even giving an unfair advantage sometimes. I know plenty of people who got straight A's at state schools and couldnt even get their resumes looked at by companies they wanted to work for, whereas some of the biggest slackers I knew at Harvard hardly batted an eyelash to get cushy jobs with 6 figure salaries straight out of college.

Anyway, I think some people are oversimplifying things in this thread a bit. To some schools, prestige matters more. Maybe if your school is prestigious but vet school X doesnt know much about its curriculum or reputation, school X wont take that prestige into account so much. Personally my biggest disappointment in the whole application process was how impersonal and formulaic most of the applications were. There are plenty of people who can pull off 4.0's and still wouldnt make good vets, and there are as many brilliant vet techs Ive met who would make great vets but just cant do well in orgo and are written off.

I went to one of the main targets of these criticisms, Harvard - and there definitely was grade inflation, but I do have a few comments.

First, I went intending to study science and and got C's in orgo in math. I abruptly switched majors and discovered that suddenly I could get A's in what were my worst subjects! English and history. Then I realized maybe like 10% of every english class got less than an A-. So the real culprit of grade inflation were humanities teachers, and the whole grade inflation scandal reflected pretty unfairly upon some very bright science majors, many of whom were getting B's and C's despite working pretty damn hard. And when I went to get my prevet reqs postbac, the courses I repeated were much easier than the equivalent Harvard undergrad courses.

But it cuts both ways. I dont think that people who go to prestigious schools have any place complaining that they are treated unfairly, for the most part. In 99% of cases, going to a prestigious school helps tremendously, even giving an unfair advantage sometimes. I know plenty of people who got straight A's at state schools and couldnt even get their resumes looked at by companies they wanted to work for, whereas some of the biggest slackers I knew at Harvard hardly batted an eyelash to get cushy jobs with 6 figure salaries straight out of college.

Northwestern's not Harvard, but it's the same way here. The science curves are extremely hard because you are competing against the top students in the nation - whereas the humanities generally aren't curved. I'm just glad I'm in my last quarter here - it's so f'ing hard.

I know that some schools take into account the prestige of your school. I go to UConn and feel that I have had a very good education. I have taken challenging courses and done well in them. I think one thing that schools might care about more than what school your at is how heavy a course load you are taking. If you are taking 12 credits (ie are just barely a full time student) and getting A's that is good but taking 20 credits and getting A's shows that you are willing to work hard and can handle the course load in vet school. I do not mean any offense to people that are balancing classes and work but feel that showing you can handle a heavy course load in undergrad is important. Go wherever you want, do well, and have fun.

Didn't you take a year off though? CSU loves that sort of "life experience" stuff (not that it's not important).

My point is that some schools DO take it into consideration. CSU doesn't, but Tufts, Penn, and Cornell definitely do. So I was saying that if you're counting on CSU to recognize your school, don't bother. If you're counting on them to recognize your spiritual journey or your non-trad status, then it's worth applying.

i did take a year off, and did nothing grandiose with it. i wasn't flipping burgers, but i wasn't saving lives. and thanks for your "not that there's anything wrong with that!" seinfeld comment, lol.

*sigh* i still think ya'll are silly. and i'm sure you didn't mean this cyrille, but if anyone is "counting" on a school to recognize their undergrad institution, their application most likely has enough flaws other than their relatively low GPA that will hold them back in the admissions cycle.

Northwestern's not Harvard, but it's the same way here. The science curves are extremely hard because you are competing against the top students in the nation - whereas the humanities generally aren't curved. I'm just glad I'm in my last quarter here - it's so f'ing hard.

(Chuckling) Yeah, Michigan was like that too - particularly the engineering school.

When I went to my Penn interview, everyone around me was from one of the top schools in the country.
That's kinda funny, because at my Penn interview, most of the people at my table (including at least one of the current students) went to either Penn State or University of Delaware.

That's kinda funny, because at my Penn interview, most of the people at my table (including at least one of the current students) went to either Penn State or University of Delaware.

Hm, well I can assure that I'm not lying, but Herpen did tell me it makes a difference. On the other hand, not EVERYONE went to a "top" school, that would be pretty unfair.

I went to one of the main targets of these criticisms, Harvard - and there definitely was grade inflation, but I do have a few comments.
Sorry, I wasn't putting any claim forward one way or the other. I just snickered when I read "I went to a prestigious undergrad and I have an unfairly low GPA" given that many people outside the Ivy League would *assume* just the opposite.

As a more general comment, I suppose my whole take on this is that acting all entitled will, by and large, not make you any friends. Sure, you're at a prestigious school now and it's all good to talk amongst yourselves about how much better you are (which may well be true, since a lot of prestigious schools *do* have rigorous programs). And probably at the private vet schools that put some emphasis on prestige, that same kind of attitude will not hurt you, because they feel the same way. BUT... *Most* undergrad schools in the country are (by definition!) not prestigious. Most veterinary schools are associated with state universities. Veterinary medicine 20 years ago was generally not the kind of profession that people from prestigious backgrounds went into. So your adcom is going to be made up of a lot of people who went to non-prestigious undergrad institutions and are currently employed by a state university, and might well be insulted if you insinuate that they should just let you in with a lower GPA because you went to a better university than they did. See my point?

Vent all you want on here, that's what internet forums are for. Just be careful what you actually say in your personal statement and interview...

Sorry, I wasn't putting any claim forward one way or the other. I just snickered when I read "I went to a prestigious undergrad and I have an unfairly low GPA" given that many people outside the Ivy League would *assume* just the opposite.

As a more general comment, I suppose my whole take on this is that acting all entitled will, by and large, not make you any friends. Sure, you're at a prestigious school now and it's all good to talk amongst yourselves about how much better you are (which may well be true, since a lot of prestigious schools *do* have rigorous programs). And probably at the private vet schools that put some emphasis on prestige, that same kind of attitude will not hurt you, because they feel the same way. BUT... *Most* undergrad schools in the country are (by definition!) not prestigious. Most veterinary schools are associated with state universities. Veterinary medicine 20 years ago was generally not the kind of profession that people from prestigious backgrounds went into. So your adcom is going to be made up of a lot of people who went to non-prestigious undergrad institutions and are currently employed by a state university, and might well be insulted if you insinuate that they should just let you in with a lower GPA because you went to a better university than they did. See my point?

Vent all you want on here, that's what internet forums are for. Just be careful what you actually say in your personal statement and interview...

100% agree. IF the admissions committee decides that you deserve some sort of recognition for your institution, it will speak for itself. DO NOT mention it anywhere else!

Okay, so this is a partial detour from the subject, but this got me thinking. Okay, so we begin with what effect does going to a well known school have. I won't even argue that either way, but why should it stop there. The other things I quickly think of that place people on different playing fields (please understand this is no personal assault on anyone I just imagined how complicated this could all get):
* What if I have a degree in English and you have one in Biology? Does that automatically mean I should be deducted points even if I have aced all the prereqs?
* What is someone has a minor or double major? Should they automatically get bonus points?
* What if my school is on the semester system and yours is on the quarter? I've heard many argue that a semester system is "easier". So if you attend a school that is on the quarter system should you get a bonus?
* Some schools grade using a plus/minus system and others use straight letter grades. Does that mean one should be punished?
* What if your school has a strong pre-vet or pre-med program and therefor sciences are very competitive. While someone else goes to a school where there are fewer "competitors" do they get a deduction?
*Heck I know on my campus some science course you just beat your head against the wall, and then there is the occassional what a joke. Should I ask the admissions committed to disregard the A in the joke class and give me more points for the struggle of a B in that killer Ochem course?
I guess I'm just saying that yes it is hard to compare apples and oranges but could you imagine if they tried to compare apples to apples. The matrix that would have to be created would be pages long and the application process would last years instead of months.

when i was discussing my admissions committee nightmares at the-school-i-shall-not-mention with another student who was trying to get in (and who after three tries had gotten in), we turned to our other lab partner who said, 'my gpa was 2.6. i went to yale.'

he's brilliant, regardless.

another student at this school told me she went to the 'wrong' pa school, and thus came to this school from out-of-state, that penn only takes most of its in-state students from certain programs (much fewer from penn state, where she went)

i was told i could never do graduate school at yale because i came from an undergraduate state school.

believe-you-me, your undergraduate institution matters.

Penn's Class of 2010 has 10-12 Penn State students, so I don't think they discriminate against 'state' schools now...they did change Deans, so this may have made a difference.

Okay, so this is a partial detour from the subject, but this got me thinking. Okay, so we begin with what effect does going to a well known school have. I won't even argue that either way, but why should it stop there. The other things I quickly think of that place people on different playing fields (please understand this is no personal assault on anyone I just imagined how complicated this could all get):
* What if I have a degree in English and you have one in Biology? Does that automatically mean I should be deducted points even if I have aced all the prereqs?
* What is someone has a minor or double major? Should they automatically get bonus points?
* What if my school is on the semester system and yours is on the quarter? I've heard many argue that a semester system is "easier". So if you attend a school that is on the quarter system should you get a bonus?
* Some schools grade using a plus/minus system and others use straight letter grades. Does that mean one should be punished?
* What if your school has a strong pre-vet or pre-med program and therefor sciences are very competitive. While someone else goes to a school where there are fewer "competitors" do they get a deduction?
*Heck I know on my campus some science course you just beat your head against the wall, and then there is the occassional what a joke. Should I ask the admissions committed to disregard the A in the joke class and give me more points for the struggle of a B in that killer Ochem course?
I guess I'm just saying that yes it is hard to compare apples and oranges but could you imagine if they tried to compare apples to apples. The matrix that would have to be created would be pages long and the application process would last years instead of months.

Bravo, 4theanimals. These are good questions that (to me) serve to point out the gray areas in this entire debate.

There is of course another solution to all of this... Which is to have it both ways. Go to a prestigous university and get good grades. Before you jump down my throat for stating what may be somewhat obvious, let me say I'm speaking from experience here. I went to a very highly respected (and ranked) private university (that happens to have a team in the Final Four), and managed to do very well. Was it fun spending all those Friday and Saturday nights in the library? Not particularly. However, I thrived on the challenge and the knowledge that my success would help open doors later on. If you're really an excellent student, demonstrating it against the best competition can only help. If nothing else, it should make performing at the vet school level that much easier.

From the non-trad side of me, I always advocate going to the undergrad institution that "feels right" for you, and where you'll get the best, student centered education by professors who are committed to your success. In all likelihood (as would be echoed by others on this forum), life is going to change in ways you can't expect. Consequently, focusing your school choice based solely on grad school plans that may or may not pan out, might not make the most sense.

* What if I have a degree in English and you have one in Biology? Does that automatically mean I should be deducted points even if I have aced all the prereqs? No, as is made clear in most admissions policies.
* What is someone has a minor or double major? Should they automatically get bonus points? Yes, there's really no debate here.
* What if my school is on the semester system and yours is on the quarter? I've heard many argue that a semester system is "easier". So if you attend a school that is on the quarter system should you get a bonus? No, because the educational difference between the semester and quarter systems is not proven.
* Some schools grade using a plus/minus system and others use straight letter grades. Does that mean one should be punished? No, that would make no sense. It doesn't affect your GPA. Just as you might get a 4.0 for an A-, you'll get a 3.0 for a B+.
* What if your school has a strong pre-vet or pre-med program and therefor sciences are very competitive. While someone else goes to a school where there are fewer "competitors" do they get a deduction? No, unless the reason that the program is more competitive is because you're at an ivy league school.
*Heck I know on my campus some science course you just beat your head against the wall, and then there is the occassional what a joke. Should I ask the admissions committed to disregard the A in the joke class and give me more points for the struggle of a B in that killer Ochem course? No, every school has classes that are easier, and everyone has the opportunity to take them. It's easy to tell the difference between Organic Chemistry and Bioethics.

I don't really see any grey areas here.

Unlike the difference between the semester system and quarter system, it's been proven that, on average, higher grade students go through more competitive undergraduate institutions. Of course, pretty much everyone on this forum is a high-grade student, considering how many of us got into vet school. I'm just saying there's a reason why a 3.5 at Harvard is worth a 3.7 or 3.8 at a lesser known school.

Penn's Class of 2010 has 10-12 Penn State students, so I don't think they discriminate against 'state' schools now...they did change Deans, so this may have made a difference.

Keep in mind that the vast majority of these students were undoubtedly in-state applicants.

No, that would make no sense. It doesn't affect your GPA. Just as you might get a 4.0 for an A-, you'll get a 3.0 for a B+.[/B]

Actually it does effect GPA at some schools. In my B+ grades, I was awarded A 3.3 for those hours, if I got an A-, I earned a 3.7 for those credits, not a 4.0.

I think it all balances out though. I would not worry about extactly what school you go to (as far as obsessing over it). Do what's right for you, when it's right, the rest will follow. I haven't gotten in anywhere yet, but I wouldn't change the path I've taken.

Unlike the difference between the semester system and quarter system, it's been proven that, on average, higher grade students go through more competitive undergraduate institutions.

The only thing that should matter would be if students from more competitive undergraduate programs performed better in veterinary school. And as far as I know, there's no such proof.

Bottom line is that I highly doubt that anyone on this thread is on the admission committees at any of the vet schools. Who's to say why one person will get accepted at 8 schools while rejected from 2. Just try your hardest and get the best grades. Go to a school you like and worry about the rest later. Oh and correct me if I'm wrong if you are on an admission committee.

* What if your school has a strong pre-vet or pre-med program and therefor sciences are very competitive. While someone else goes to a school where there are fewer "competitors" do they get a deduction? No, unless the reason that the program is more competitive is because you're at an ivy league school.
*Heck I know on my campus some science course you just beat your head against the wall, and then there is the occassional what a joke. Should I ask the admissions committed to disregard the A in the joke class and give me more points for the struggle of a B in that killer Ochem course? No, every school has classes that are easier, and everyone has the opportunity to take them. It's easy to tell the difference between Organic Chemistry and Bioethics.

please. i'm not looking to start a fight, i'm looking to help you down from your self-prescribed pedistool. your blatant statements may be accurate for you, but not necessarily an ultimate truth.

why should the reason of the competition of the program matter? it's obviously should not be the case that your school has an outrageously competitive biology program yet the kid that got into an ivy league based on legacy gets a 'bonus'? maybe i misread... she asked if the fewer competitor school studnet gets a deduction, and you answered, not unless the competition is due to ivy league status. so those taht *don't* go to ivy league should get deducted?

and just an aside... i purposely steered clear of our Bioethics course. being a jesuit institution, ethics is taken very seriously, and taught by the biggest hard-ass the university has to offer. hell no, i'm not messing around with that. much more difficult that the org chem class, from what i've heard. diagnosing certain classes amongst colleges as "easier" and thus weighting them less would be impossible. (i guess ultimately on that one i'm agreeing with you.)

apologies if i got rubbed the wrong way for nothing.

Keep in mind that the vast majority of these students were undoubtedly in-state applicants.

I'm sure that many of them were but the fact remains that that is roughly 10% of Penn's class...

Penn State has a killer Animal Science Department. We may not be "prestigious" in your opinion but our faculty is awesome. If our student are not quality applicants, then why did Dean Hendricks make a special effort to bring many of the faculty members on the admissions committee up here to meet our advisors and Pre-Vet Club members last spring?

I don't necessarily agree that students will go to the best undergraduate school that they get into. I got into some schools that I'm sure many people would think are "better" than Ohio State, but I wouldn't trade my experiences at my state school for anything in the world. Large state schools have the opportunity to bring in world class faculty and researchers. Ohio State is also continually improving and accepting increasingly higher caliber applicants.

Also, one of my good friends from high school had a perfect score on her SAT and ACT, was one of our valedictorians and a state ranked athlete. She had her pick of schools to go to (but she was debating between OSU and the school she currently attends) but she didn't want to attend an ivy league institution because of the mentality at those schools.

Keep in mind that the vast majority of these students were undoubtedly in-state applicants.

Considering PA students can attend Penn and other Ivy League/'prestigious' schools and be considered 'in-state', your statement fails to make much of a point.

Some schools may be 'ranked higher' than other schools overall, but this may not reflect on every aspect related to pre-veterinary education. Sure, private, 'prestigious' schools may make their science majors memorize textbooks, but public schools can offer more hands-on animal courses and experiences. State governments run animal diagnostic labs, veterinary extension services, and workshops out of state schools. Also, many state schools maintain livestock as part of their teaching and research resources.

I really don't understand why this thread is important or why certain schools need to be proven better than others....

'Prestigious' schools have their reputation value, but other schools can excel above them in certain aspects. This thread is becoming a joke.

let's all not get our feathers ruffled... it's pretty clear that different schools use different formulae... maybe some presume to be able to rank schools by "prestige" (which is just as difficult to quantify-- for so many reasons-- as things like "quality of veterinary experience" and "is Johnny Q a good human being?"). i think this thread was kind of a joke to begin with. if you want to believe that you're life sucks because you went to a "prestigious" school, fine. if you want to believe that your life sucks because you didn't, fine. it all averages out in the end. do well wherever you go, get good experience, be confident in your decision, and frigging apply.

if your life sucks THAT MUCH, transfer.

please. i'm not looking to start a fight, i'm looking to help you down from your self-prescribed pedistool. your blatant statements may be accurate for you, but not necessarily an ultimate truth.

why should the reason of the competition of the program matter? it's obviously should not be the case that your school has an outrageously competitive biology program yet the kid that got into an ivy league based on legacy gets a 'bonus'? maybe i misread... she asked if the fewer competitor school studnet gets a deduction, and you answered, not unless the competition is due to ivy league status. so those taht *don't* go to ivy league should get deducted?

and just an aside... i purposely steered clear of our Bioethics course. being a jesuit institution, ethics is taken very seriously, and taught by the biggest hard-ass the university has to offer. hell no, i'm not messing around with that. much more difficult that the org chem class, from what i've heard. diagnosing certain classes amongst colleges as "easier" and thus weighting them less would be impossible. (i guess ultimately on that one i'm agreeing with you.)

apologies if i got rubbed the wrong way for nothing.

I think you misread with the ivy league thing. What I meant was that ultimately, the only way to judge the difficulty of the program is by the competitiveness of the school. And that's the way some schools do it. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but that's the way it is. Everyone keeps forgetting that I talked to each school about this issue specifically. The bioethics thing was just an example, because at my school it's easy. I was going to use "History of Modern Science" but I couldn't remember if we have that course, haha.

I'm not trying to be on a pedestal, but I can't help but feel like a lot of people here are trying to shoot down good schools just because they don't/didn't go to them. Everyone started taking offense and getting all upset, but the point of this thread was NOT to determine which schools are better, but to determine whether better schools help you get in. I went to this school because it was the best choice for me, and because its reputation among many employers and grad schools makes a difference. And, the fact is that it helped me get into the school of my choice, which they specifically told me. So no one's going to be able to convince me that it doesn't make a difference, sorry. It's certainly not the end-all be-all of vet school admissions, but the question was "did it help?" and my answer was "yes". If you're going to be all smart and try to confuse the issue with a bunch of other questions, expect smartass answers in return.

And with the Penn state thing, my point is that of course they're going to take 10-12, because a disproportionate number of in-state applicants went to Penn state. It's the flagship state school. Just like I bet a bunch of students in each class at Illinois are from UIUC. It's a good school - I was not attacking Penn state, as much as you were dying to defend it. Can we got argue about this anymore? The question has been answered from several perspectives.

i have to chuckle a little, b/c at age 16 i WAS told this, but thinking i was so wise, refused to listen... 16 years later i agree that undergrad prestige doesn't really matter as much as grad school, but how to make my younger self see? it seems whatever our goal (high school, undergrad, grad) we are just looking at the next step - trying to get over one hurdle at a time....

Haha, tell me about it. I was offered about 15 full-ride athletic scholarships out of high school, but turned them all down to pay $60,000 a year at a school I though was better academically (I felt I worked my ass off so hard in high school I wasn't going to settle). Of course, on every recruiting trip, I was told by the pre-health deans that I'd be better off getting a 4.0 in an "easier" (their words, not mine) academic environment in terms of getting into med/vet school than a 3.6 in a more "competitive" academic environment. Not that I would have necessarily gotten a 4.0 at those schools, nor would I have traded in my years at my "prestigious" school for anything, but I too, definately refused to listen. On the otherhand, coaches at Harvard told me they'd flag my application (meaning they'd get me in based upon being academically sufficient enough for an athlete) and I refused because I didn't want to be struggling as the "stupid" kid in the school that got in just for sports. I guess I found the happy middleground...maybe I didn't get into all the vet schools I wanted, but I still got in somewhere! ...still I wonder, if I could tell the 16 year old version of myself that maybe those pre-health deans were right...

psst, Emio. You misspelled "pedestal". You must have gone to one of those wretched STATE SCHOOLS or something!

Everyone should settle down. I think the vet schools do the best they can to try to get the people that fit them. I dont think gaming the system by going to a school you think they like better is a good idea at all. Just go to a school you like, do the best you can, and at least some of the vet schools will recognize you for what youre worth. So nyah!

psst, Emio. You misspelled "pedestal". You must have gone to one of those wretched STATE SCHOOLS or something!

Everyone should settle down. I think the vet schools do the best they can to try to get the people that fit them. I dont think gaming the system by going to a school you think they like better is a good idea at all. Just go to a school you like, do the best you can, and at least some of the vet schools will recognize you for what youre worth. So nyah!

Yeah, considering that some of us are going to be classmates, let's not fight and be friends again :D

psst, Emio. You misspelled "pedestal". You must have gone to one of those wretched STATE SCHOOLS or something!

Everyone should settle down. I think the vet schools do the best they can to try to get the people that fit them. I dont think gaming the system by going to a school you think they like better is a good idea at all. Just go to a school you like, do the best you can, and at least some of the vet schools will recognize you for what youre worth. So nyah!

lol, i know right? kinda flushed my argument right down the toilet when i go and misspell something like that. no one's ever gonna take me seriously!

and trust me, i wasn't getting heated, i just have trouble understanding where you're coming from sometimes... most likely just cause we're online and such. dude, we're all gonna LOVE each other when we're all studying together.. it'll be good times once we're in there and past all this bull**** of applications.

ha ha. i thought emio spelled "pedestal" as "pedestool" on purpose to be witty... like "pedestool sample".

keep thinking that texlaevis!

please?

I'm arguing that a 3.5 at a prestigious school is worth more than a 3.5 at a less prestigious school.
I'm not trying to be on a pedestal, but I can't help but feel like a lot of people here are trying to shoot down good schools just because they don't/didn't go to them.
:rolleyes:
Cyrille, I truly am not trying to pick on you in particular, it's just that you're doing a good job of encapsulating this mindset that makes me shudder ("prestigious"=="harder" and "prestigious"=="good", implying "not prestigious"=="not good").

Because most undergraduate institutions are (by necessity!) not "prestigious," most of your *classmates* will not have gone to prestigious undergrad institutions. You will not get very many invitations to be lab partners if you go around saying things like "I would have gotten a GPA as high as you, and probably even higher, if I'd gone to a school as easy as yours."

By the way, I know this is kind of a late response, but...

The only thing that should matter would be if students from more competitive undergraduate programs performed better in veterinary school. And as far as I know, there's no such proof.

Right on, Bill! :laugh: You always manage to cut to the ultimate pragmatic chase of these arguments.

:rolleyes:
Cyrille, I truly am not trying to pick on you in particular, it's just that you're doing a good job of encapsulating this mindset that makes me shudder ("prestigious"=="harder" and "prestigious"=="good", implying "not prestigious"=="not good").

Because most undergraduate institutions are (by necessity!) not "prestigious," most of your *classmates* will not have gone to prestigious undergrad institutions. You will not get very many invitations to be lab partners if you go around saying things like "I would have gotten a GPA as high as you, and probably even higher, if I'd gone to a school as easy as yours."

I think you're making a few jumps here. First, I am arguing that prestigious schools are difficult and good. However, I am definitely not saying that schools that are not prestigious are not difficult or good. There are certainly schools that are less well-known that are great schools. Second, I would never say anything like that...I don't know if that's true, and, and that would be a really offensive comment.

What I'm saying is that it helped me, and probably other people as well. My claim that a 3.5 at a prestigious school is worth more than a 3.5 at a lesser known school was based purely on my observations here. As posted above, someone who worked her butt off for close to a 4.0 at ASU was not given the same recognition. I'm not trying to be offensive here, I think people are inferring things that I don't mean.

Hi all! I'm not too sure about all of this "prestige" vs. state school stuff. I agree that it may be an east coast vs. west coast thing because the majority of our schools out here are fantastic state schools (UCLA, UCSD, etc.). Anyway (and I don't know how true this is) I was told that going to a liberal arts school would hurt my application later for a science-based grad program. The only school I applied to out of high school is a relatively easy-to-get-into polytechnic state school. It seems to me that a large portion (I'm not sure what exactly) of our pre-vet students get into vet schools all over the nation. Again, I'm not sure how this really measures up against gaining a bio-related degree from a liberal arts college, or a prestigious one, but this is just what I was told.

Honestly, in my own opinion, I don't really think it matters. If you are able to show that you are dedicated and capable through grades, test scores, and extensive & varied experiences you shouldn't have too difficult a time getting in. I've noticed a trend with people on here that haven't gotten accepted in that they all realize the weaknesses in their applications (forgive me if I'm wrong). That isn't to say that my application lacked any weaknesses, but I haven't seen anyone on here saying "damn, I didn't get in and I have no idea why". There are always lower than average GPAs, or very few hours of experience, etc. Just to reiterate what has already been stated, go to a school that makes you happy and work your tail off to achieve your goal (get the grades and get involved in animal-related activities). GOOD LUCK!!!:luck:

If you are able to show that you are dedicated and capable through grades, test scores, and extensive & varied experiences you shouldn't have too difficult a time getting in.


Yep, bloom where you're planted and you should be fine. There are advantages and disadvantages to all types of schools, and ultimately, we'll never know what goes through admissions committee minds.

and trust me, i wasn't getting heated, i just have trouble understanding where you're coming from sometimes...

heh, just to be clear, i never once in this thread said prestigious schools are better in any sense. My own "prestigious" school is a choice I kind of regret these days.

Hi all! I'm not too sure about all of this "prestige" vs. state school stuff

I don't think prestigious is the opposite of state school. There are lots of prestigious state schools. I think prestige refers to some vague category meaning "well known" and "having a good reputation." Moreover, there are plenty of "prestigious" schools that may have that reputation unfairly, or no longer deserve that reputation but keep it for historical reasons, and there are plenty of non-prestigious schools that may not have earned that reputation, for one reason of another (maybe theyre too new, too small, etc).

So "prestigious" is a weird category to use when deciding which school to go to, unless you truly want to brandish a name around. Itd be more appropriate to argue things such as whether public vs private matters, whether the amount of research an insitution is pumping out is relevant to its educational caliber, facilities, size, level of the classes offered, ability to make connections in your field, satisfaction of current undergraduates, etc.

Second, I would never say anything like that...I don't know if that's true, and, and that would be a really offensive comment.
Like I said, I was just using your words because they encapsulated a particular mindset. I'm not suggesting you necessarily have the full-blown stereotyped version of that mindset, you just expressed it well. :)

My entire point was that with broad generalizations like "prestigious schools are more academically rigorous" or "a 3.5 from a prestigious school is worth more than a 3.5 from any other school", any listener who has *not* gone to a prestigious school is likely to hear "your school is inherently not as good as mine." Whether or not that was what you meant, or what you think. And, most importantly, whether or not it's true! An insult that happens to be true feels even *worse* than an insult that's patently false.

Know your audience, is all I'm saying (in general, to everyone on the thread who has expressed variations on the above claims), or prepare to become unpopular pretty quickly once you leave that prestigious institution!

my husband's contribution to this debate:

"at least we [meaning state schools] have good football"

gotta love him, but obviously we look at things a bit differently! (no offense to anyone, i just thought it was funny ;))

my husband's contribution to this debate:

"at least we [meaning state schools] have good football"

gotta love him, but obviously we look at things a bit differently! (no offense to anyone, i just thought it was funny ;))

LMAO!!! That was my bf's exact reply too when he saw me reading this thread. :laugh:
He absolutely bleeds scarlet and gray... and gets super annoyed when people ask him if he went to "THE Ohio State" for undergrad/vet school (he just finished a week of job interviews and every single doc asked him that question!)

basketball too. Sorry, Jen, I just had to say that ;) .

basketball too. Sorry, Jen, I just had to say that ;) .

Yes! We will have a very happy home at least until Monday night :scared:

Tears for the Hoyas +pity+

If they had to lose though, it wasn't a bad team to lose to!!

You missed the point. I'm arguing that a 3.5 at a prestigious school is worth more than a 3.5 at a less prestigious school.

i know i am late to this thread. But I totally agree. I know med schools are different, but my friend interviewed at a kentucky med school last year and the interviewer flat out told him that they would take a 3.4 from Washington and Lee (small top ranked liberal arts school) over a 4.00 at a state school (all other things being equal). Our school has a very good pre-med reputation (around 80% acceptance rate), but only one or two students apply to vet schools each year (bc we are such a small school) so i don't know if that reputaion extends to vet schools as well. I also took org I & II at my state school and experienced the night and day revelation. But I think all the work I am putting in now will help later. at least i hope

the interviewer flat out told him that they would take a 3.4 from Washington and Lee (small top ranked liberal arts school) over a 4.00 at a state school

With an inreasing number of applicants every year -- and the vast majority of schools assigning a number of "points" to each category... I'd still rather have a 4.0 from a state school than a 3.4 from a top tier school. I don't doubt they'll toss in a few brownie points for the difficulty/reputation of ones undergrad school, or for a particularly difficult major .... but, for the most part I don't think it would make up for the 0.6 gpa point difference mentioned above....maybe an ivy 3.4 is equivalent to a state 3.6 or something like that... but not much more IMHO.

Edit -- I should add that I didn't read through the whole thread...

Wow I'm surprised to hear this private vs. state debate. New York must be backwards, It seems to me that the state schools in New York, CUNY and SUNY, are harder to get into and more prestigious than the private schools (aka pay to pass schools).

I think it really comes down to the actual professor giving you the grade. I have had some very difficult professors and some very easy professors all for the same types of classes. I think class size is a big factor in grades also...you get more help and your efforts are seen more in a 20 person class than a 500 person class.

I think class size is a big factor in grades also...you get more help and your efforts are seen more in a 20 person class than a 500 person class.

Even that isn't necessarily true, at least in my experience. I'm just finishing up a BS in Molecular Biology and Microbiology at a very large state school and if you sit near the front and pay attention and do what you are supposed to do the professors will take notice and you will be able to ask them for help if you do need it. There are also more opportunities for meeting a good group of people (or two or three different groups!) to study with.

I prefer large classes by far, truthfully.

I went to a state school (a state that has its own vet school that I did not apply to, mind you), got into three vet schools, and 12 out of 14 who applied to vet school in my undergrad class got in :D

How's d'em apples.:banana:

I don't think it's your school that matters, I think its what you make of it. I did undergraduate research...that makes a huge impression, not where you went to school. I also worked at dairies, animal hospitals, and horse barns. I worked two jobs and took 18-20 credits a semester. And believe me, as I stated before, I do not have a fabulous GPA and GRE. I just made the most of it, and they see that. I can tell you, plenty of students who get 4.0's because all they do it academia, and they wonder why they don't get in. If you can get the grades and work your butt off, power to you. But just based on my own experiences with applying, I think vet schools are looking more into you, not where you came from.

Good luck.

V

. I also took org I & II at my state school and experienced the night and day revelation. But I think all the work I am putting in now will help later. at least i hope


Maybe the professors at state schools are better :p Just food for thought.

-V

this thread again??? didn't we beat it before?:beat:

this thread again??? didn't we beat it before?:beat:

seriously.