Do Med schools look where you did undergrad at? Or do they just look at MCAT/GPA?

[exacto]

Lets say someone went to a well known, hard to get into college and got a 3.4 and another person went to a lower ranking school or even a Junior college and got a 4.0.

does where you went to school matter? I know that classes at high ranking schools are harder than classes at low ranking schools so how does that play into the gpa/admission choices?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Kochanie]

-_- Oh boy will this question give you mixed answers, many of which are already on SDN.

 

[sunshinefl]

Disclaimer: I am but a lowly premed applying in the 2016-2017 cycle. However, my sum total knowledge of the universe in my 29 years of life has shaped my understanding to this question as follows:

Undergrad rarely matters, "top" school for undergrad does not rationalize lower GPA (and while we're at it, neither does a "difficult" major), higher ranking does not equal harder classes (some even believe grade inflation at certain ones). MCAT is supposed to be the great equalizer as a means of comparing candidates, and your MCAT score should be in congruence with your GPA to not raise questions. (For example a 4.0 GPA who scores a 27 will raise questions of course quality, performance, selection, professor, etc.) Of course there is maybe some aspect of preference to their own undergrad etc (not an expert at this advantage as I am neither from a "top" undergrad nor applying to a "top" medical school).

I saw this quote somewhere on SDN and I liked it but I don't remember who said it to give credit and this is a paraphrase: Your looks will effect your admission more than your undergrad institution.

 

[altblue]

 

[Silverflash]

This question is brought up a lot and is typically quite contentious. That fact alone should tell you that you'll get a bunch of different answers depending on who you ask. I'd recommend you do a search for old threads on the subject.

As far as I'm concerned, it seems like the rigor of the undergraduate program can have a (very) small effect, but is largely irrelevent. This often makes people who go to Ivy Leagues very irate, and perhaps with good reason, but it nontheless seems to be the case.

 

[Lucca]

What do I know? I know that there are many variables associated with school of attendance such as program resources, quality of preparation for MCAT, professor quality, research quality and availability, etc that will affect the decision process.

Secondly, it seems to be the case that the preponderance of admits to top medical schools come from a handful of undetgraduate institutions. However, this is not true for most medical schools in the US.

A friend attending Baylor now said something to me about applying that stuck with me when she was just finishing up with interviews: (Disclaimer: n=1 but theres other data on this site to suggest it is true) "The caliber of student interviewing at Johns Hopkins and at UT Southwestern and Baylor was basically identical, the only real difference was that the students at Johns Hopkins all came from Harvard, JHU, Yale, Stanford, and other big name schools.

 

[Goro]

Yes, if the schools are part of the feeder system for the med school (like the SUNYs for the SUNY schools and all other NY schools), but generally, no. To me, 4.0 at Kutztown State is better than a 3.5 from Harvard.

 

[claduva94]

I seem to be overcome by deja vu...

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I seem to be overcome by deja vu...

Sdn pre-allo should be off limits to ppl who are not at top undergrads. I mean ppl at lower ranked schools don't get into med school anyway, so why should they be allowed to post here?

 

[NickNaylor]

This has been asked and answered a million times. The short answer is yes, your undergrad matters. The long answer is that the degree to which it matters is highly variable and applicant-dependent. If you otherwise have a great application and have no red flags, no one is going to care that you came from General State U. But the reality is that applicants from top schools are often given the benefit in the doubt in the face of lower GPAs or lower MCATs. This is because the simple fact of getting into those universities requires a certain degree of ambition and academic success to begin with. Add to that the opportunities available at those universities which are truly incredible, and you have a pool of applicants that will fair very well in the application process.

In other words, the fact that you go to Harvard isn't itself all that important. It's all of the things that come along with being at Harvard that generally make those applicants very strong.

 

[claduva94]

Sdn pre-allo should be off limits to ppl who are not at top undergrads. I mean ppl at lower ranked schools don't get into med school anyway, so why should they be allowed to post here?

Everyone knows they just hand out As willy nilly to those plebeians at state schools anyways. The GPA swing is definitely almost a whole grade point!!!

 

[Kochanie]

Everyone knows they just hand out As willy nilly to those plebeians at state schools anyways. The GPA swing is definitely almost a whole grade point!!!

Some schools are ridiculously easy, like you show up, you get at least a B+. Obviously 99% of schools are not like that, but it makes me bitter just thinking about those particular schools.

 

[exacto]

Well from what i searched on this site and the reason i still asked this question was that everyone says the Med school application process is a numbers game...meaning med schools will look at gpa and mcat to fit there minimum requirements and if not met, they will pass to even look further into you...

Therefore, how can undergrad possibly matter if med schools will first look at gpa? The only difference would be if two people had the same gpa but at different schools, then obviously the one who went to a "better" school will be better off...this is my questions!

 

[claduva94]

Well from what i searched on this site and the reason i still asked this question was that everyone says the Med school application process is a numbers game...meaning med schools will look at gpa and mcat to fit there minimum requirements and if not met, they will pass to even look further into you...

Therefore, how can undergrad possibly matter if med schools will first look at gpa? The only difference would be if two people had the same gpa but at different schools, then obviously the one who went to a "better" school will be better off...this is my questions!

I don't think this changes anything. A 3.0 is not competitive no matter where you graduate from. I'm not sure exactly what you are asking now.

 

[Lamel]

They look at everything in context of the entire application. Be the best that you can be wherever you go.

 

[TheRhymenocerous]

Of course they "look" at it. Anyone reading your application will be able to see where you went for undergrad, and I think it'd be hard to argue that it doesn't color their assessment of you to some degree. But, as everyone else has said, a prestigious school is not going to get you into med school any more than a low ranked one is going to keep you out. And besides, it's a nuanced process – there's no way to generalize this broadly on what "they" do or don't do when you're talking about hundreds of admissions committees and thousands of applicants.

 

[FutureOncologist]

Sdn pre-allo should be off limits to ppl who are not at top undergrads. I mean ppl at lower ranked schools don't get into med school anyway, so why should they be allowed to post here?

 

[FutureOncologist]

Real talk: the only schools that care would be IS-only schools (in Mississippi, FSU, a school in NC, and some CA Schools).

 

[efle]

There's some numbers you can look at to help figure this out

For example say you're an applicant with a 30-32 MCAT and a 3.2-3.4 sGPA.

Average across all alma maters, you'd have a 37% chance of an acceptance with that sGPA
If you are from Washington University in St. Louis, you'd have a 68% chance (appendix A)

some other schools may have similar data available

 

[sunflower18]

I go to a no-name undergrad and I was very worried that it would hurt me this cycle. I don't think it's been an issue, even though not a single interviewer/faculty member/admissions staff member/interviewee I've met along the trail (except for at my state school) has ever heard of my institution.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I go to a no-name undergrad and I was very worried that it would hurt me this cycle. I don't think it's been an issue, even though not a single interviewer/faculty member/admissions staff member/interviewee I've met along the trail (except for at my state school) has ever heard of my institution.

Sunflower U is easily one of the most rigorous institutions in Middle Earth.
Sorry, I couldn't help it
I'm still thrilled about your UCLA interview!

 

[altblue]

There's some numbers you can look at to help figure this out

For example say you're an applicant with a 30-32 MCAT and a 3.2-3.4 sGPA.

Average across all alma maters, you'd have a 37% chance of an acceptance with that sGPA
If you are from Washington University in St. Louis, you'd have a 68% chance (appendix A)

some other schools may have similar data available

I'm very skeptical of this... WashU probably has good pre-med advising, so the students probably applied intelligently. Not to say that name doesn't account for some of the differences, but I don't think it's the biggest factor.

 

[godawg300]

Well all I can say is that interviewers seem impressed with my undergrad or at least have made comments about how great it is to get applicants from there and on some top tier interviews everyone happened to go to a top 5 school, except maybe 1. Probably more to do with the students that attend these schools. If it were me, I wouldn't pay attention to this too much and just do the best you can. A high gpa and high mcat from anywhere will serve you well.

 

[LizzyM]

There are a few schools that are well known for grade deflation. UChicago and Reed are two and there are others. That has to be taken into consideration.

 

[litotes]

Well all I can say is that interviewers seem impressed with my undergrad or at least have made comments about how great it is to get applicants from there and on some top tier interviews everyone happened to go to a top 5 school, except maybe 1. Probably more to do with the students that attend these schools. If it were me, I wouldn't pay attention to this too much and just do the best you can. A high gpa and high mcat from anywhere will serve you well.

25 II in October??

LEGEND

 

[ridethecliche]

So much this.

There should be a sticky that every new member is forced to read. zomg.

 

[Dr. Retractor]

Well all I can say is that interviewers seem impressed with my undergrad or at least have made comments about how great it is to get applicants from there and on some top tier interviews everyone happened to go to a top 5 school, except maybe 1. Probably more to do with the students that attend these schools. If it were me, I wouldn't pay attention to this too much and just do the best you can. A high gpa and high mcat from anywhere will serve you well.

That's not a coincidence. I don't think people who don't come from sub-100 ranked schools understand that students from those schools are at a disadvantage regardless of their GPA, MCAT, or ECs. There have been some amazing applicants from my school that would have rivaled the best from top schools that didn't so much as get an interview invite from any schools in the top 20. According to my adviser, she only knows of one student from my school that got II from a top 10 school, after which she was rejected.

 

[Kochanie]

That's not a coincidence. I don't think people who don't come from sub-100 ranked schools understand that students from those schools are at a disadvantage regardless of their GPA, MCAT, or ECs. There have been some amazing applicants from my school that would have rivaled the best from top schools that didn't so much as get an interview invite from any schools in the top 20. According to my adviser, she only knows of one student from my school that got II from a top 10 school, after which she was rejected.

I do think this is unfair, but at the same time, top schools have the luxury of rejecting many brilliant students, just another way for them to narrow applicants down.

 

[efle]

I'm very skeptical of this... WashU probably has good pre-med advising, so the students probably applied intelligently. Not to say that name doesn't account for some of the differences, but I don't think it's the biggest factor.

What does applied intelligently mean, and how does it boost odds of acceptance for a low GPA by 30%? Like people from average schools aren't told to apply broadly while WashU people are?

That's not a coincidence. I don't think people who don't come from sub-100 ranked schools understand that students from those schools are at a disadvantage regardless of their GPA, MCAT, or ECs. There have been some amazing applicants from my school that would have rivaled the best from top schools that didn't so much as get an interview invite from any schools in the top 20. According to my adviser, she only knows of one student from my school that got II from a top 10 school, after which she was rejected.

We will never know how much of this phenomenon comes from Top 20 medical schools favoring Top 20 undergrads vs Top 20 undergrads containing a disproportionate chunk of top caliber students to make it appear this way. But yeah, there's just as many high GPAs at UC Riverside as UC Berkeley but the latter gets a lot more interviews at top California schools. Pretty much wishful thinking to say All GPAs Are Created Equal. What we really need is data on how MCAT scores are distributed among universities...

 

[godawg300]

That's not a coincidence. I don't think people who don't come from sub-100 ranked schools understand that students from those schools are at a disadvantage regardless of their GPA, MCAT, or ECs. There have been some amazing applicants from my school that would have rivaled the best from top schools that didn't so much as get an interview invite from any schools in the top 20. According to my adviser, she only knows of one student from my school that got II from a top 10 school, after which she was rejected.

Just n=1 here, but my school has amazing resources. Very easy to get grants, free money everywhere and tons of opportunities to go out and do whatever you want. I know this was not the same with friends that went to lower ranked schools. I just have a hunch that the school I attended helped. Def helped with giving me opportunities to be a more attractive candidate.

 

[godawg300]

25 II in October??

LEGEND

I actually received zero October invites lol. Last one I received was mid September.

 

[ndafife]

I think the university quality comes out in other areas. Going to a top tier school will lead to better research opportunities, better advising, better LOR quality, better intoductory courses that should lead to better MCAT scores, etc...

 

[efle]

Bigger than any of those is the competitiveness of the student body you can distinguish yourself from among I think.

 

[altblue]

What does applied intelligently mean, and how does it boost odds of acceptance for a low GPA by 30%? Like people from average schools aren't told to apply broadly while WashU people are.

Also, kids from WashU probably have more ECs on average than kids from Central City State--Satellite Campus (and were probably advised to have leadership, clin, non-clin. etc.).

 

[gettheleadout]

I'm just going to quote a post I made recently:

There's no way I'm reading this whole thread on my phone (sorry lol), but I wanted to add a couple points that may not have been mentioned and/or are my opinions.

1. Curves? Everyone's talking about curving in courses establishing relative performance via grades and how this is important for student evaluation. I've graduated, and I never once had a course where grades were set by a curve (at my state school.)

2. Only a fool would think my 3.9X at U of State is as meaningful a piece of information in evaluating my candidacy as a 3.9X at Princeton. The latter obviously says more about whatever you want to interpret GPA to represent. It doesn't necessarily say that the other applicant is strongly academically than I am, but it almost certainly speaks more to their performance in college than mine.

3. Obviously a straight up formulaic GPA modification is unlikely, but pedigree almost certainly is more important than not. All my peer interviewees at the top schools I've interviewed at have interviews at other equally selective schools I haven't heard back from despite being complete ASAP. This trend has been echoed in the experience of several other state schools applicants I've talked to. I would be SHOCKED if the reason for this is not that all of these other interviewees attended top undergrads and I did not. It's possible, but like I said, I would be very surprised.

4. @mimelim gave a great summary early in the thread. Attending a top undergrad definitely has it's perks outside of applying to medical school.

5. If you're worried about your GPA at a top school being THAT unrepresentative of your academic chops, then your MCAT score should demonstrate that.


Sent from my neural implant using SDN Mobile

 

[Goro]

It means applying to schools whose median numbers are close to your own. If you have a 3.6 and a 31 MCAT, you are an average candidate, and should NOT be applying to Cornell. NYMC, Drexel and your state school (unless you live in CA), are OK. it has nothing to do with where you did your undergrad, unless you went to Brown.

What does applied intelligently mean, and how does it boost odds of acceptance for a low GPA by 30%? Like people from average schools aren't told to apply broadly while WashU people are?