Average MCAT/Great GPA or Average GPA/Great MCAT

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Average GPA/Great MCAT or Average MCAT/Great GPA

  • Average GPA and great MCAT

    Votes: 69 85.2%
  • Average MCAT and a great GPA

    Votes: 12 14.8%

  • Total voters
    81
Status
Not open for further replies.

TheStallion16

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2014
Messages
242
Reaction score
236
What's better having an average MCAT and a great GPA or an average GPA and great MCAT? Which is looked at better? Are they both looked at the same?

For example an applicant with a 505 MCAT and a 4.0 GPA, or an applicant with a 515 MCAT and a 3.5 GPA? Which would have a better shot of getting accepted?

Members don't see this ad.
 
It is much much easier to get a high GPA than a high MCAT (say hello to GPA padding and grade inflation :hello:). I will easily pick low GPA/high MCAT over high GPA/low MCAT any day.

In your case, the 515 guy would be better than the 505 guy
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
I'd argue that a GPA is a greater indicator of academic performance over four years versus one test on one day. However I still believe the 515 guy would be better off due to the low low mcat. If it was a case of say a 4.0 and 510 vs 3.7 and 515, its debatable
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

That table fails to report GPA trends.

I'd argue that a GPA is a greater indicator of academic performance over four years versus one test on one day. However I still believe the 515 guy would be better off due to the low low mcat. If it was a case of say a 4.0 and 510 vs 3.7 and 515, its debatable

You can game your way into a high GPA by going to a fluff college and taking fluff classes. A high MCAT is impossible for >90% of premeds taking the exam. The MCAT is a true objective measure of academic performance because it is standardized
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
My personal opinion is that a great MCAT score gets you into med school more easily, but a great GPA is what gets you through med school.

I say this because I think that stand-out MCATs are rarer than stand-out GPAs, so adcoms are more likely to take note of a >97%ile MCAT than a 4.0. But I think that the dedication, work ethic, and perseverance that beget a great GPA are the real traits that make for a good medical student.

But also I don't know anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Good evening)

I am not too sure if I am supposed to post this question in this topic, please correct me and redirect me to the right section in this forum if required. Anyways, the question is to what extent could GPA overweight MCAT and vice verca. As an example, would one be consdired more competitive with 3.9 GPA and 30 MCAT, or 3.5 GPA and 33MCAT keeping the rest of the application identical. What are your thought? Thanks.
May want to go to this thread on the same topic and read the responses there...pretty detailed.


Sent from my phone, sorry for any typos or brevity.
 
Not this topic again. People will have differing opinions over this because they're just that - opinions. If you hop on over to the WAMC forum and look at the threads there, you'll see that average GPA/high MCAT is a lot rarer than high GPA/average MCAT. More common are high GPA/high MCAT and low GPA/low MCAT. As long as your GPA isn't low enough to the point of being screened out, you have a shot. If your GPA is average in the strictest sense of the term, namely the matriculant average, and your MCAT is high, I would say that based on stats alone, you are competitive at any school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The real issue is that a high gpa is the average gpa now. That's not true for MCAT.

Sent from my phone, sorry for any typos or brevity.
 
Fool's errand time. You're expected to have good numbers in both categories.

Depending upon the rest of the application, and the School, and it's mission, and state, both person might very well get II's.

What's better having an average MCAT and a great GPA or an average GPA and great MCAT? Which is looked at better? Are they both looked at the same?

For example an applicant with a 505 MCAT and a 4.0 GPA, or an applicant with a 515 MCAT and a 3.5 GPA? Which would have a better shot of getting accepted?
 
Published data says otherwise

I'd argue that a GPA is a greater indicator of academic performance over four years versus one test on one day. However I still believe the 515 guy would be better off due to the low low mcat. If it was a case of say a 4.0 and 510 vs 3.7 and 515, its debatable
 
I would also say that a high MCAT score shows good work ethic and dedication (in the majority of cases). It *generally takes lots of hours to achieve a 515+!
 
Members don't see this ad :)

Based on this table the answer is easily surmised. There are approximately 3100 accepted applicants out of about 3900 applicants with a 36+ mcat, about 80% acceptance. There are about 12,600 applicants with a 3.8+ gpa with about 8500 acceptances or 67% accepted. Another way to look at the numbers is that only 3900 applicants had a 36+ mcat vs 12,600 with a 3.8+ gpa out of a total applicant pool of approximately 43,000. That 3100 acceptance pool probably makes up about 80%+ of the top twenty medical school seats. The gpa is a lot easier to obtain therefore it nullifies the assumption that 4 years of work maintaining a high gpa is harder than a one day test. Although I agree with Goro that you are expected to do well in both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Based on this table the answer is easily surmised. There are approximately 3100 accepted applicants out of about 3900 applicants with a 36+ mcat, about 80% acceptance. There are about 12,600 applicants with a 3.8+ gpa with about 8500 acceptances or 67% accepted. Another way to look at the numbers is that only 3900 applicants had a 36+ mcat vs 12,600 with a 3.8+ gpa out of a total applicant pool of approximately 43,000. That 3100 acceptance pool probably makes up about 80%+ of the top twenty medical school seats. The gpa is a lot easier to obtain therefore it nullifies the assumption that 4 years of work maintaining a high gpa is harder than a one day test. Although I agree with Goro that you are expected to do well in both.

I think this table is even better for the purposes of the question and leaves any assumptions out of it: https://www.aamc.org/download/321508/data/factstablea23.pdf

505 MCAT = 28-29 and 515 MCAT = 34. Under OP's conditions, a 28-29 MCAT with a 4.0 GPA stands a 57.6% chance of admission whereas a 34 MCAT with a 3.5 GPA stands a 60.3% chance of admission. As expected, you have about twice as many applicants who meet the former condition as those who meet the latter but there is enough data for a fair comparison. Whether the difference between a 57.6% chance and a 60.3% chance is statistically significant would require a more comprehensive statistical examination.
 
My personal opinion is that a great MCAT score gets you into med school more easily, but a great GPA is what gets you through med school.

I say this because I think that stand-out MCATs are rarer than stand-out GPAs, so adcoms are more likely to take note of a >97%ile MCAT than a 4.0. But I think that the dedication, work ethic, and perseverance that beget a great GPA are the real traits that make for a good medical student.

But also I don't know anything.

Who says that a high MCAT score isn't due to a heavy work ethic either?

What if you went through an easy major at an easy school and didn't need to develop the work ethic to maintain a good GPA?

What if you went through a tough major at a hard school and therefore have a good GPA?

I don't think that you can necessarily say that someone with a higher GPA:MCAT ratio will have an easier time getting through med school than someone with a higher MCAT:GPA ratio without also taking into account other factors like major, school, courseload, demands on time, etc.

(I know that's not what you're saying but I wanted to clarify so that people didn't get the wrong idea)
 
I would also say that a high MCAT score shows good work ethic and dedication (in the majority of cases). It *generally takes lots of hours to achieve a 515+!

The opposite also works. People can spend only a week of studying and score 523+. Surprisingly, this isn't uncommon.

I think what a lot of people don't realize is that the MCAT is the culmination of years of study and not an isolated test. It's not some stand-alone test that you can just up and take without having learned the pre-requisite material, unlike something like SAT, ACT, or GRE. For example, a sixth grader could take the SAT and do well. A high school senior would be hard-pressed to do well on the MCAT without having taken college-level chemistry, physics, and biology. So I personally view the MCAT as a "course" that spans years (the years you spend taking the pre-requisite courses) and the MCAT exam itself is the final which is worth 100% of your grade.

In other words, it's impossible to dissociate the MCAT from your coursework. That's why people who generally do well on the MCAT have done well on their coursework. Notice that the opposite is not necessarily true - people who do well on their coursework do not necessarily do well on the MCAT but this is due to rampant grade inflation, rigor of undergraduate institution, etc. than with what's actually on the MCAT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I think what a lot of people don't realize is that the MCAT is the culmination of years of study and not an isolated test. It's not some stand-alone test that you can just up and take without having learned the pre-requisite material, unlike something like SAT, ACT, or GRE. For example, a sixth grader could take the SAT and do well. A high school senior would be hard-pressed to do well on the MCAT without having taken college-level chemistry, physics, and biology. So I personally view the MCAT as a "course" that spans years (the years you spend taking the pre-requisite courses) and the MCAT exam itself is the final which is worth 100% of your grade.

In other words, it's impossible to dissociate the MCAT from your coursework. That's why people who generally do well on the MCAT have done well on their coursework. Notice that the opposite is not necessarily true - people who do well on their coursework do not necessarily do well on the MCAT but this is due to rampant grade inflation, rigor of undergraduate institution, etc. than with what's actually on the MCAT.

I would argue that a high school senior who decisively crushed AP exams and classes in chemistry, physics, psychology, literature, and biology can crush the MCAT with only a slight review for biochem/ochem/sociology (which can be accomplished in high school)... thereby effectively bypassing all college prereqs.

Being a National Merit Scholar will make things much easier as well.
 
In other words, it's impossible to dissociate the MCAT from your coursework. That's why people who generally do well on the MCAT have done well on their coursework. Notice that the opposite is not necessarily true - people who do well on their coursework do not necessarily do well on the MCAT but this is due to rampant grade inflation, rigor of undergraduate institution, etc. than with what's actually on the MCAT.

Bullsh*t. I had an advisee several years ago, a princeton grad in economics/gov't who took the TPR course and score a 33 on the MCAT without having any prereqs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
This whole discussion misses the point as it make such simplistic assumptions of what goes on in evaluating a candidate. With the software available now and/or simple human review, a school does not rate on these numbers as directly as it may seem during the "initial" (pre-interview) phase. Here you may have one of more evaluations, either pre-screen for secondary, post-screen by reader/adcom staff or formal review by adcom members. In any of these, you would get academically scored. That is, all the parts of your academic metrics are noted and you are given a score. The factors that can be taken into this would be
GPA (cGPA, sGPA aoGPA)
MCAT (whole, subsection, multiples)
Grade Trends
Weighting for school rank (prestige factor)
Weighting for credit loads (ie doing well in sGPA with high credit load vs. low credit load)

A simple (and common) system would be a score of 6 to 1, from outstanding to substandard (some will have 0 as in academically unqualified). 2 people may read your background and one with a 5 and one with 4. A computer algorithm doing this may come up with a more "precise" confidence score. Each school may weigh different factors differently and thus come up with different scores.

A similar process happens with all the other sections as well, but certainly more subjective. Schools will resort and score your experiences into such things as "healthcare experience" (ie all the clinical-related), nonclinical volunteering, research, etc. Say two people each read and score each category the school creates, two read PS, two secondary, etc. Each person has a score sheet with qualities/characteristics for the category and will evaluate you with a score and comments, again 6 to 1 from outstanding to substandard. They may do it as a whole score for that category or points for each characteristics.

Ultimately, all your sections will be evaluated, scored, and placed on a summary sheet for a total score. This what the committee will see as a whole, the summary. Not each member will read each application. Consider this your interview priority. Say 8 readers evaluate at 6 points each for 48 total. Everyone over 39 may get called for interview. As the cycle goes on and the slots fill up, that may slide up to 41 or 42. And depending on how/who is presenting your application, you may have a more forceful advocate and gets you a slot
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Who says that a high MCAT score isn't due to a heavy work ethic either?

What if you went through an easy major at an easy school and didn't need to develop the work ethic to maintain a good GPA?

What if you went through a tough major at a hard school and therefore have a good GPA?

I don't think that you can necessarily say that someone with a higher GPA:MCAT ratio will have an easier time getting through med school than someone with a higher MCAT:GPA ratio without also taking into account other factors like major, school, courseload, demands on time, etc.

(I know that's not what you're saying but I wanted to clarify so that people didn't get the wrong idea)

Sure there are definitely many factors that go into a GPA, but there are also just as many factors that go into the MCAT. What if you get a test that plays into your strengths? What if you get a test that doesn't? Maybe you just had an off day or you had a really good one, maybe you just got fairly lucky with some guessing, maybe most of the passages were on topics you understood well, maybe they weren't.

With so many factors, I feel like you can't judge an applicants aptitude for success in Medical school based off of 1 score on 1 day, just like I don't think you can judge it solely on the GPA. Of course if you score sub 500 and you have an awful GPA that's probably good indication you won't do well. But for the most part I think it's about (or at least it should be about) the ENTIRE application. I think someone with an average MCAT score and a fantastic rest of their app should have a better shot than a person with a high MCAT and nothing much else to their app. But, like @Goro said, so many people do have both these days.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
GPA is so incredibly unstandardized that it's really hard to read anything out of it at all.

A 4.0 indicates that you MAY be academically better than a peer with a 3.5. Or maybe you:

Picked an easy undergrad
Picked an easy major
Picked easy professors
Padded your GPA with research & TA credits
Went to an undergrad with a more lenient grading scale (like those places that eliminate B+/A- and consider everything over 84% an A :mad:)
Went to an undergrad with a wonky credit distribution (like my UG where OChem was 5 credits but Physics or Biology were 3 becuase they were condiered "easier")
Went to an undergrad with lenient gen ed requirments.
Took fewer credits
Didnt have to face a serious illness or family trouble
Didnt need to work during school


There are far fewer confounding factors for MCAT. Maybe financial resources. But besides that it's basically impossible to take an "easier" MCAT. Everyone sits in the same room, has the same amount of time, and are always curved to the same distribution.

Plus low GPA high MCAT people are relatively rare compared to high gpa low mcat. Usually the low gpa people have a good excuse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
This whole discussion misses the point as it make such simplistic assumptions of what goes on in evaluating a candidate. With the software available now and/or simple human review, a school does not rate on these numbers as directly as it may seem during the "initial" (pre-interview) phase. Here you may have one of more evaluations, either pre-screen for secondary, post-screen by reader/adcom staff or formal review by adcom members. In any of these, you would get academically scored. That is, all the parts of your academic metrics are noted and you are given a score. The factors that can be taken into this would be
GPA (cGPA, sGPA aoGPA)
MCAT (whole, subsection, multiples)
Grade Trends
Weighting for school rank (prestige factor)
Weighting for credit loads (ie doing well in sGPA with high credit load vs. low credit load)

A simple (and common) system would be a score of 6 to 1, from outstanding to substandard (some will have 0 as in academically unqualified). 2 people may read your background and one with a 5 and one with 4. A computer algorithm doing this may come up with a more "precise" confidence score. Each school may weigh different factors differently and thus come up with different scores.

A similar process happens with all the other sections as well, but certainly more subjective. Schools will resort and score your experiences into such things as "healthcare experience" (ie all the clinical-related), nonclinical volunteering, research, etc. Say two people each read and score each category the school creates, two read PS, two secondary, etc. Each person has a score sheet with qualities/characteristics for the category and will evaluate you with a score and comments, again 6 to 1 from outstanding to substandard. They may do it as a whole score for that category or points for each characteristics.

Ultimately, all your sections will be evaluated, scored, and placed on a summary sheet for a total score. This what the committee will see as a whole, the summary. Not each member will read each application. Consider this your interview priority. Say 8 readers evaluate at 6 points each for 48 total. Everyone over 39 may get called for interview. As the cycle goes on and the slots fill up, that may slide up to 41 or 42. And depending on how/who is presenting your application, you may have a more forceful advocate and gets you a slot

This is very interesting insight, and I do agree with the fact of taking the entire app into consideration. From what I can tell, it's pretty much an overarching assumption that the MCAT is the #1 thing schools take into consideration. But is that the case with it being so new? Sure, we have percentiles to go off of, but no one REALLY knows what these scores mean. No one really knows how spread the bell curve is. No one really knows the % of people that will successfully make it though medical school and onto a good residency with a 505 or 515. We just don't have the data yet because it's only been around for year. That being said, do you think adcoms are weighing MCAT scores as heavily at this moment of time as they have in years past?
 
Whoa, unanimous sdn.

Much more goes into the app than GPA and MCAT and both get looked at in context. However, I would be more impressed with a 40 MCAT and 3.5 applicant than the 4.0 and 31 MCAT applicant and I would rather be the first applicant
 
Bullsh*t. I had an advisee several years ago, a princeton grad in economics/gov't who took the TPR course and score a 33 on the MCAT without having any prereqs.

I'm sure a personal anecdote with n = 1 is definitive. Nail on the metaphorical coffin, guys.

On that note, I also know of a guy with 3.2 GPA and 30 MCAT who got into Harvard Med!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
This is very interesting insight, and I do agree with the fact of taking the entire app into consideration. From what I can tell, it's pretty much an overarching assumption that the MCAT is the #1 thing schools take into consideration. But is that the case with it being so new? Sure, we have percentiles to go off of, but no one REALLY knows what these scores mean. No one really knows how spread the bell curve is. No one really knows the % of people that will successfully make it though medical school and onto a good residency with a 505 or 515. We just don't have the data yet because it's only been around for year. That being said, do you think adcoms are weighing MCAT scores as heavily at this moment of time as they have in years past?
Yes.

MCAT profile is about hopefully having a high step average/successful students and having a good ranking. Class stat profile plays a part in rankings. Top schools spend a ton of money on increasing/maintaining their ranking and increasing stats is an easy way for less rich schools to help their rankings. There is no benefit to demphasizing the MCAT. Plus, most schools have enough applicants to keep both their MCAT and GPA profile high, so they don't need to compromise on their MCAT standards

The test is also based on a percentile. Even though the test is new, a 97th percentile is a 97th percentile and that applicant still did better than 97% of applicants. The MCAT is standardized
 
GPA isn't standardized in the slightest, which is why you can't use it for comparison. There could be a difference even within the same school based on different professors, TAs or a whole host of things. Then if you try to compare the GPA of an applicant from Brown with that of an applicant from UCLA, you're really comparing apples and oranges.

In my opinion, personal trend is what matters. I would value someone who started with a <3.0 but finished with a 3.5+ just as much as someone with an even 3.7+ let's say. Negative trend would obviously be a bad indigator. Stable or increasing would be a good indigator.

MCAT is weighed so heavily because it is the only part of the application that can really be used for direct comparison. Even if you drop a lot of money on prep courses, historically they don't make a significant difference.
 
GPA isn't standardized in the slightest, which is why you can't use it for comparison. There could be a difference even within the same school based on different professors, TAs or a whole host of things. Then if you try to compare the GPA of an applicant from Brown with that of an applicant from UCLA, you're really comparing apples and oranges.

In my opinion, personal trend is what matters. I would value someone who started with a <3.0 but finished with a 3.5+ just as much as someone with an even 3.7+ let's say. Negative trend would obviously be a bad indigator. Stable or increasing would be a good indigator.

MCAT is weighed so heavily because it is the only part of the application that can really be used for direct comparison. Even if you drop a lot of money on prep courses, historically they don't make a significant difference.

But adcoms almost never do that. It just is the most objective metric that will go into the overall academic evaluation, which in turn goes into the overall evaluation.
 
MCAT is weighed so heavily because it is the only part of the application that can really be used for direct comparison. Even if you drop a lot of money on prep courses, historically they don't make a significant difference.

Agree with what everyone is saying here. It is obvious that the Higher Mcat, lower GPA is favored. The problem with the MCAT though is the variation of the test (as someone pointed out earlier) per person. My MCAT I got decimated on very specific types of physics through-out the test and had very little chem (I personally am very strong in gen chem).. obviously got a test that hit weak spots I had. Instead of hitting my median score, I scored 3 points below. I don't know what the new MCAT is like, if its more evened out compared to the final tests in 2014-2015, but maybe they designed it to lessen those types of issues.
Disagree on the prep-course. I know someone who self studied and couldn't get higher than a 24 MCAT (practice).. Mommy and daddy bought them through a 8 week 1 on 1 tutor and they pulled a 35.
I think adcoms look at GPAs with the major, with the classes; it is obvious when someone padded their app and it will be taken into account. Likewise, what the applicant did, what they went through, how they overcame things, etc will have a great impact on what their ultimate fate will be.
 
But adcoms almost never do that. It just is the most objective metric that will go into the overall academic evaluation, which in turn goes into the overall evaluation.
Sorry if I wasn't clear. I meant ideally that is how GPA should be used, in my opinion. It is a poor metric but unfortunately the best adcoms have besides the MCAT. This was more in regards to people saying that you can use it as a means of comparison for work ethic. GPA trend can hint at work ethic, the number alone cannot.
Disagree on the prep-course. I know someone who self studied and couldn't get higher than a 24 MCAT (practice).. Mommy and daddy bought them through a 8 week 1 on 1 tutor and they pulled a 35.
I think adcoms look at GPAs with the major, with the classes; it is obvious when someone padded their app and it will be taken into account.
Well that's an extreme n=1 case. Maybe an 8 week 1 on 1 tutor had the student finally studying correctly and diligently for 2 months. Also depends on the practice test. I had a (converted) <20 on my Kaplan diagnostic mid studying but got a (converted)37 on the real test. Most MCAT prep courses are either study/review sessions that you could do on your own or just throw out random "tips and tricks" to "game the system" that I'm pretty sure are stickied in the MCAT subforum here for anyone with an internet connection to look at.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The opposite also works. People can spend only a week of studying and score 523+. Surprisingly, this isn't uncommon.
Where did you get this info? I spent an entire summer studying 25+ hrs/wk to get a 520. There's just too much info on the MCAT to be able to study for a week and get a great score. You could possibly get lucky but statistically, that's not happening.
 
Where did you get this info? I spent an entire summer studying 25+ hrs/wk to get a 520. There's just too much info on the MCAT to be able to study for a week and get a great score. You could possibly get lucky but statistically, that's not happening.

Well if we are going with anecdotes here, some friends of mine and a few posters in the 509+/30+ thread explicitly stated that the MCAT is a reasoning exam. They already had very strong mastery of content from coursework, and their analytical skills are extremely sharp (this could be measured using any metric, more commonly that of National Merit back in high school). So with these, preparing for the MCAT was pretty straightforward.

This shouldn't come off as a surprise because people don't start on the same footing when studying for the MCAT. Some are geniuses who can crush standardized tests with ease; others struggle to break 508+ despite months to years of practice. So this is why the MCAT doesn't correlate well with hours spent studying: ideally though, >3 months of practice is recommended
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Where did you get this info? I spent an entire summer studying 25+ hrs/wk to get a 520. There's just too much info on the MCAT to be able to study for a week and get a great score. You could possibly get lucky but statistically, that's not happening.
But there are people who don't need to study that much to score high on the MCAT. I know of a person who didn't study nearly as much as you did and scored about the same.
 
The more important question is which is preferable: A high MCAT (36+) and low GPA (~3.2-3.3), or a low MCAT (~25) and high GPA (3.9+)?
 
Bullsh*t. I had an advisee several years ago, a princeton grad in economics/gov't who took the TPR course and score a 33 on the MCAT without having any prereqs.

You probably know that that would be a terrible idea for most people. Honestly taking the new MCAT without having taken Biochem will be a really, really bad idea in and of itself.
 
The more important question is which is preferable: A high MCAT (36+) and low GPA (~3.2-3.3), or a low MCAT (~25) and high GPA (3.9+)?

The 3.2-3.3/36+ wins easily. Especially with a strong upward GPA trend

The high mcat with even the slightly lower GPA will have more success at the "mid top tier schools" like BU, Case Western, Emory, USC, Miami, Hofstra, etc. Maintaining their high MCAT median is more important to them lol.
 
Where did you get this info? I spent an entire summer studying 25+ hrs/wk to get a 520. There's just too much info on the MCAT to be able to study for a week and get a great score. You could possibly get lucky but statistically, that's not happening.

n = 2 here. It wasn't as extreme as 1 week, but a friend studied for several weeks (<4) and got 522. I really only studied for 4 weeks if you take the long breaks in the middle out (grad school stuff got in the way).
 
n = 2 here. It wasn't as extreme as 1 week, but a friend studied for several weeks (<4) and got 522. I really only studied for 4 weeks if you take the long breaks in the middle out (grad school stuff got in the way).

I also studied only 4 weeks and got a 523. I waited until I had taken all the courses and knew the content so it was just taking practice test every 2-3 days so I would be working on test taking technique rather than learning content. I think most people that take months to study is because they either did not finish all of the necessary content classes or did not retain the knowledge they learned in classes. You can be a great test taker but you must have thorough content knowledge in order to ace the mcat which would likely reflect in medical school students ability to succeed. Also the fact that less than 4% of applicants who scored a 39+ had a gpa under 3.4 and about 8% of total applicants had a 36+ mcat and a gpa under 3.4. That statistic reinforces that high mcat low gpa is a rare applicant and an exception. The fact that over 80% of 36+ mcat applicants had a 3.6+ gpa also reflects the correlation of good student high mcat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I also studied only 4 weeks and got a 523. I waited until I had taken all the courses and knew the content so it was just taking practice test every 2-3 days so I would be working on test taking technique rather than learning content. I think most people that take months to study is because they either did not finish all of the necessary content classes or did not retain the knowledge they learned in classes. You can be a great test taker but you must have thorough content knowledge in order to ace the mcat which would likely reflect in medical school students ability to succeed. Also the fact that less than 4% of applicants who scored a 39+ had a gpa under 3.4 and about 8% of total applicants had a 36+ mcat and a gpa under 3.4. That statistic reinforces that high mcat low gpa is a rare applicant and an exception. The fact that over 80% of 36+ mcat applicants had a 3.6+ gpa also reflects the correlation of good student high mcat.
I suspect that low GPA high MCAT is usually the result of students who at some point had some sort of unmotivated period or special circumstances that resulted in poor grades. At least that was the case with me.
 
I also studied only 4 weeks and got a 523. I waited until I had taken all the courses and knew the content so it was just taking practice test every 2-3 days so I would be working on test taking technique rather than learning content. I think most people that take months to study is because they either did not finish all of the necessary content classes or did not retain the knowledge they learned in classes. You can be a great test taker but you must have thorough content knowledge in order to ace the mcat which would likely reflect in medical school students ability to succeed. Also the fact that less than 4% of applicants who scored a 39+ had a gpa under 3.4 and about 8% of total applicants had a 36+ mcat and a gpa under 3.4. That statistic reinforces that high mcat low gpa is a rare applicant and an exception. The fact that over 80% of 36+ mcat applicants had a 3.6+ gpa also reflects the correlation of good student high mcat.

Just curious, where are you getting those GPA/MCAT percentages? I've always been curious about how many students with good MCAT scores also had good GPAs, and what represents say the 90th percentile c or sGPA of med school applicants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Where did you get this info? I spent an entire summer studying 25+ hrs/wk to get a 520. There's just too much info on the MCAT to be able to study for a week and get a great score. You could possibly get lucky but statistically, that's not happening.
Hi, please I'd like to know which prep books you used to study for MCAT
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top