GPA - undergrad institution and major, what counts?

[siracha]

Hi guys,

I am shocked by how much GPA counts...it seems that most DPT programs weigh GPA very highly. Doesn't your undergrad institution ('s competitiveness) and major matter (as well and other things)?

So, I found out I was rejected from a school (my 1st and only school i have heard from so far...and one of my top choices if I were to have one) and I called admissions to get feedback. The lady told me that although she can not share with me the entire decision process, just by a glance from my profile, it looks like my GPA probably factored in a lot. My pre-req was a 3.15 comparing with other people who had 3.7...which is a huge difference. [Not to mention I had a lot of B+(3.3), where PTCAS counted as Bs (3.0) ]

I agree. BUT my undergrad was competitive, and I majored in bio sci and minored in management and completed both in 3 yrs. Not that it's an excuse but I did not want to be like other cut-throat people and just went to school to learn, not to focus on getting all As. I thought I wanted to go into business in healthcare, not med field so...didn't think my grades would matter THAT much anyway. I changed my career goal to DPT after working at a couple PT places (1+yrs)...and found that I enjoyed it a lot, and want to be just like the PTs I was working for!

Anyway, most of this is just venting. I can't help but wonder - doesn't my other attributes matter? That...I was a president of a prestigious club and spent a lot of effort making it blossom? That I was involved in an extensive campus-wide business competition and won first place? That I had 1000+hrs of PT aide experience? As well as tutoring and mentoring disadvantaged students? etc. etc. etc. (also had a medical condition, but wont go there..). My GRE's is 1230.

My scores aren't fabulous, and I understand that they do matter. But I can't help but wonder, are schools taking ppl w/ high GPA scores so their own stats look good? ie "our accepted students's avg GPA is 3.7!" cuz thats just bs if u no wat i mean... of course this doesn't apply to everybody, but its like, okay so we should go to less competitive undergrad schools to get better GPA in order to get into your school.

Sry for such a long msg. Does anyone else feel the same??

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[shellabie]

Siracha, don't lose hope. It's just one school right now and occasionally I have seen people on this board with a GPA closer to 3.8 (overall and science) get rejected from a program. If you dig hard enough, you'll sometimes find that someone with lower stats overall has been accepted to a program, while a person with higher stats was rejected. The reason why? Well, your guess is as good as mine.

Also, many here could have written the exact same post as you did, except substitute "GRE" for "GPA". We are all worried about something.

In regard to your other concerns and please, I'm just one person giving out advice over the internet, so take it for what it's worth. Having been out of college now for well over a decade, I can generalise the following for you:

- In the real world, where you went to school does not matter nearly as much as traditional college-age folks "hope" that it will. I know, I know... I sound like a "mom" right now. Honestly, when you get to be around 28 to 30-years-old or so, nobody even cares anymore. Mark my word... nobody cares.

- Choosing to complete a double major in three years was a choice that you made. If you were struggling with grades, you might have thought about slowing down a bit and taking the four or five year route. There is no penalty for taking an extra year in college to finish a degree; the grades you earn in the time you choose to earn them, however, are there for life. That being said, I can guarantee you that almost everyone here has an academic "story" so you are not alone.

- A bit about "competitive" schools. I'm a bit "older" than most people on this forum. I've taken classes at a variety of different colleges. I have found very little correlation between the supposed competitiveness of a school and the difficulty of the course material. Obviously some schools out there hold a good amount of clout because of their name and these ARE good schools; however, does this mean that an A&P class taken at an ivy league school is all that different from an A&P class taken at a community college? I completed quite a few of my pre-req courses at a community college to save money and I would absolutely and without reservation put my knowledge of anatomy up against someone who took this same class at an ivy league school.

-Observation hours. These are a component of the application process that I just don't quite understand. It seems like some schools are moving away from even requiring them, while other schools still want beaucoup amounts. It does seem like even those schools who require a 100+ minimum don't give a hoot about those hours if an applicant's GPA/GRE aren't acceptable. I can think of one example of a girl who applied to Pitt. She had tons of observation hours (TONS) done AT a Pitt clinic... and yet, they rejected her for whatever reason. Ouch. When you really look at it, observation hours overall seem to be waaaay down there on the list of "importance". I'm not sure if this is right or wrong. Sometimes when you do something for quite a while (such as log endless hours at a PT clinic or in my case, endless hours as a medic) you may continue along that path simply b/c you have invested so much time. I ended up initially going the route of nursing school b/c I had 6 years of medical experience/skills already invested... but that didn't mean that I was passionate about nursing (or would even 'make' a good nurse). It took me two full semesters worth of an upper level BSN program to finally figure out that I did not belong there. So much for six years worth of "observation". I can guarantee my situation isn't unique. I know this does not relate directly to your situation, but it may be why some universities are moving away from requiring mega obs hours.

- Schools could be padding their stats. This thought has crossed my mind as well. Let's hope that most of them aren't doing that.

Have you considered re-retaking some of your pre-req courses at a local college? If you focused on just one to two classes at a time, this would help plump up your sci-gpa. You could then utilize the, "Does your transcript reflect your abilities?" spot on the PTCAS application form and use the re-takes to your advantage to highlight your sincerity in pursuing the field.

I think that eventually you will be fine. Your GRE is terrific, you do have the hours (even if they don't seemingly hold as much weight as the GPA/GRE) and there are things that you can do to bring that pre-req GPA up. Keep at... it WILL happen for you!

 

[watersgoneby]

It may also be that they weigh GPA so heavily because they want to ensure academic success for the participant. No program wants to admit someone who can't make the grade, so to speak.
I of course am not speaking to anyone specific, but am thinking of why it matters. The same thing probably applies to GRE scores, they indicate ability to succeed and manage material, time and outside distractions.
While these numbers may not indicate your passion for the field or intelligence, they do tell an admissions committee something about you (and certainly they read in).

Siracha, did you have an opportunity to explain why your GPA is where it is? Most of my applications offered a space to explain hardships or other things that affected my scores.


And you still haven't heard back from all the others, maybe you are just meant to go to another school!! I bet you get in somewhere with all that experience in PT and your GRE score is definitely not a deterrent!

 

[siracha]

Siracha, don't lose hope. It's just one school right now and occasionally I have seen people on this board with a GPA closer to 3.8 (overall and science) get rejected from a program. If you dig hard enough, you'll sometimes find that someone with lower stats overall has been accepted to a program, while a person with higher stats was rejected. The reason why? Well, your guess is as good as mine

Also, many here could have written the exact same post as you did, except substitute "GRE" for "GPA". We are all worried about something.

In regard to your other concerns and please, I'm just one person giving out advice over the internet, so take it for what it's worth. Having been out of college now for well over a decade, I can generalise the following for you:

- In the real world, where you went to school does not matter nearly as much as traditional college-age folks "hope" that it will. I know, I know... I sound like a "mom" right now. Honestly, when you get to be around 28 to 30-years-old or so, nobody even cares anymore. Mark my word... nobody cares.

Hey, thanks for taking the time to explain everything to me in your perspective. It's very helpful! You are right about where you went to school not mattering...its wat you constantly strive for in the current state that matters. However going to a good school is sometime helpful. For me, I like good schools not just for the rep, but to surround me with people that challenges themselves which is good influence for me. Having a good sports team to converse about and having a good network can be benificial as well dont you think? But i get the big picture of what you mean

- Choosing to complete a double major in three years was a choice that you made. If you were struggling with grades, you might have thought about slowing down a bit and taking the four or five year route. There is no penalty for taking an extra year in college to finish a degree; the grades you earn in the time you choose to earn them, however, are there for life. That being said, I can guarantee you that almost everyone here has an academic "story" so you are not alone.

Yes, i agree...that was my mistake and a choice i made that i can not blame anyone else but myself. I did write a letter to all my schools explaining it....my medical condition had a part in it, which made me rather spend less time in school.

- A bit about "competitive" schools. I'm a bit "older" than most people on this forum. I've taken classes at a variety of different colleges. I have found very little correlation between the supposed competitiveness of a school and the difficulty of the course material. Obviously some schools out there hold a good amount of clout because of their name and these ARE good schools; however, does this mean that an A&P class taken at an ivy league school is all that different from an A&P class taken at a community college? I completed quite a few of my pre-req courses at a community college to save money and I would absolutely and without reservation put my knowledge of anatomy up against someone who took this same class at an ivy league school.

That's true - the materials and its difficulty doesn't change. I was meaning the competitiveness among students and grading because of that....since most of my classes are curved. Versus a school that is not curved or w/ less competitive students. The grading would turn out differently. For example, I take classes at both my school and the local JC....I definitely feel that it is sooo much easier getting an A at a JC - from my speech classes, to pysch, to anatomy...
I definitely would much rather go to school to learn than to get the couple extra points for an A.

-Observation hours. These are a component of the application process that I just don't quite understand. It seems like some schools are moving away from even requiring them, while other schools still want beaucoup amounts. It does seem like even those schools who require a 100+ minimum don't give a hoot about those hours if an applicant's GPA/GRE aren't acceptable. I can think of one example of a girl who applied to Pitt. She had tons of observation hours (TONS) done AT a Pitt clinic... and yet, they rejected her for whatever reason. Ouch. When you really look at it, observation hours overall seem to be waaaay down there on the list of "importance". I'm not sure if this is right or wrong. Sometimes when you do something for quite a while (such as log endless hours at a PT clinic or in my case, endless hours as a medic) you may continue along that path simply b/c you have invested so much time. I ended up initially going the route of nursing school b/c I had 6 years of medical experience/skills already invested... but that didn't mean that I was passionate about nursing (or would even 'make' a good nurse). It took me two full semesters worth of an upper level BSN program to finally figure out that I did not belong there. So much for six years worth of "observation". I can guarantee my situation isn't unique. I know this does not relate directly to your situation, but it may be why some universities are moving away from requiring mega obs hours.

OMG that really sucks for that girl. And sigh, I know what you mean... However, I did explain in my personal statement how much that experience meant to me...and helped me decide on my career goal. I mean, Ive been an Aide for mostly volunteering...and minimum pay. I can def get a higher paying job...so why did I do it? I loved going to work every day! And...I can also see someone with spectacular numbers being completely incompetent in clinical settings...which is at least 50% of what PT is all about.

- Schools could be padding their stats. This thought has crossed my mind as well. Let's hope that most of them aren't doing that.

Have you considered re-retaking some of your pre-req courses at a local college? If you focused on just one to two classes at a time, this would help plump up your sci-gpa. You could then utilize the, "Does your transcript reflect your abilities?" spot on the PTCAS application form and use the re-takes to your advantage to highlight your sincerity in pursuing the field.

Since I got Bs in most of my classes, I don't know if it's even logical or legal to re-take my classes? It's also too late for me. So for anyone one who's still in school out there, try and get A's if your goal is to get into a school that is numbers-oriented!

I think that eventually you will be fine. Your GRE is terrific, you do have the hours (even if they don't seemingly hold as much weight as the GPA/GRE) and there are things that you can do to bring that pre-req GPA up. Keep at... it WILL happen for you!

Thanks!!! Anyway, I applied thinking that GREs are more important than GPA. After all, GRE is a standardized test, and GPA is biased depending on schools, major, traumatic events, illness, etc. Just nervous right now because most of the schools I applied to are ranked and therefore would weight GPA/GRE heavily =/.

I really appreciate your response. Happy Holidays to ya! (and everyone else who responded)

 

[Eb3]

I feel your frustration siracha. I thought long and hard about transferring out of U of Michigan to a different 4 year institution where I knew I could get better scores for the GPA numbers game, but decided to stick it out here because academic advisors and family members told me that grad schools were aware that UofM was not just competitive, but also very rigorous for biology majors, more so than most other universities. Several years on and after a lot of blood and sweat, my GPA has climbed half a point despite taking many of the most difficult undergrad courses offered here, but I am starting to doubt that I made the right decision to stay rather than transfer.

I really do believe your scores and experience will get you acceptances.
And although looking at PT school applications it seems like it doesn't matter, but the other experiences you had in undergrad will be more important to you over the course of your life than your gpa was. You know how to work hard in a difficult major and still be devoted to extracurriculars. And you have the life experience of being out of school and working in the PT field and discovering where your passion truly lies.

I don't really have the experience to know how much this correlates, but I have heard that often the better schools are the ones that really evaluate you on who you are as a person rather than just whether you achieved a prestigeous 3.7 GPA.

I hope this helps. Based on what you've written, I feel you have what it takes both to get accepted into a good PT school and to make it through one.

 

[jbizzle]

If you guys get a chance, check out the GPA sticky from the very beginning. There you will see people with low GPAs being accepted and high GPAs being rejected. I did this and gave me hope!

 

[lizzo76]

- A bit about "competitive" schools. I'm a bit "older" than most people on this forum. I've taken classes at a variety of different colleges. I have found very little correlation between the supposed competitiveness of a school and the difficulty of the course material. Obviously some schools out there hold a good amount of clout because of their name and these ARE good schools; however, does this mean that an A&P class taken at an ivy league school is all that different from an A&P class taken at a community college? I completed quite a few of my pre-req courses at a community college to save money and I would absolutely and without reservation put my knowledge of anatomy up against someone who took this same class at an ivy league school.

Just to weigh in... there are certainly plenty of cases in which what you say is absolutely true. I went to undergrad at a very competitive (accepts < 20% of applicants) highly-ranked liberal arts college. To save money, in my first foray into grad work (which I eventually quit and went on to get a different degree at a private university) I was at my state university. I had always looked down on it - it's not a research powerhouse like in some states, and half my high school class went there. I was surprised by how difficult it was and by how there was a forced mean of a C+ in core classes, while at much higher-ranked schools, As and Bs were handed out like candy. Our exams were not open-book while at "better" schools, they were. So selective does not necessarily mean the work is harder.

At the same time... I'm taking A&P at Harvard Extension School. We have weekly quizzes which together add up to 15% of our grades. When I was deciding where to go, I found one community college which has an online program and weekly online quizzes, each of which you could take up to FIVE TIMES, and the highest score would count. Those weekly joke quizzes added up to 30% of the grade. There, I would say it is MUCH easier to get a high grade at the "lesser" school.

I think a lot of schools also have to weigh GPA heavily because of volume of applicants. Some schools will essentially use a formula for admitting students, or for whittling down the pool. And, how exactly does one quantify "selectivity" as it affects GPA? Reviewers might have some general sense that one school MIGHT be harder than another, but it's not like they can come up with a number which represents that and weigh your GPA accordingly. And even at a really hard school, who is to say that a lower GPA is because the classes were so hard, and not because the person didn't study? They can't automatically look at your grades and say well, he went to a hard school and he was really involved in other things, so we should boost him up above these other people with good grades (who may also have been involved in a lot of other things.) Of course plenty of schools do have smaller applicant pools and the resources to more carefully scrutinize applications and make a decision about the person as a whole... it's not ALL GPA.

But I feel your pain. (I am also an "older" applicant, at 34. I've got my undergrad degree from the aforementioned top liberal arts college, masters degree from the top-ranked university in Canada, as well as a year at a lesser state university in the US, and coursework at Harvard.)