How can medical schools have similar GPA ranges yet also very different MCAT ranges?

[WUPM]

Hello all! Longtime lurker, first time poster.

I've started looking into some medical schools' GPA ranges and MCAT ranges, and noticed a strange lack of correlation, in that GPA seems to span the same range among all schools (with some exceptions).

For example, School A will have MCATs ranging 26-33 and GPA ranging 3.3-3.9
School B will then have MCATs ranging 28-39 (markedly higher) but still GPA ranging 3.4-3.9.

How is this possible? Shouldn't schools with much higher MCATs have similarly higher GPAs?

Does this arise because School B is accepting 3.65's from top tier colleges, whose students bring along extreme high MCATs, while School A is accepting 3.65's from more typical universities whose students bring along more moderate MCATs? I can't come up with any alternatives.

All thoughts appreciated!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WillburCobb]

Different adcoms put different weights on different parts of the application. Some care more about MCAT over GPA and vice versa, some give more weight to those with greater life experience, or substantial research experience. Some have strong regional/IS biases that limit the pool of potential students.

 

[allantois]

I think it is because there are many more applicants with high GPAs than MCAT scores. There are also many applicants with high GPAs and lower than average MCAT.

 

[darkjedi]

I think it is because there are many more applicants with high GPAs than MCAT scores. There are also many applicants with high GPAs and lower than average MCAT.

It's basically this reason, there are a ton of applicants with 3.3-3.9, less so with high MCATs.

 

[Ace-Co-A]

Hello all! Longtime lurker, first time poster.

I've started looking into some medical schools' GPA ranges and MCAT ranges, and noticed a strange lack of correlation, in that GPA seems to span the same range among all schools (with some exceptions).

For example, School A will have MCATs ranging 26-33 and GPA ranging 3.3-3.9
School B will then have MCATs ranging 28-39 (markedly higher) but still GPA ranging 3.4-3.9.

How is this possible? Shouldn't schools with much higher MCATs have similarly higher GPAs?

Does this arise because School B is accepting 3.65's from top tier colleges, whose students bring along extreme high MCATs, while School A is accepting 3.65's from more typical universities whose students bring along more moderate MCATs? I can't come up with any alternatives.

All thoughts appreciated!

The bolded is probably part of it. Also, you have to consider the distribution of the GPAs in the school's range. Harvard's range might be 3.5 to 4.0 but the median is like 3.85 or something, whereas Wiscy's range might be 3.4 to 3.9 but the median is 3.6

 

[WUPM]

@Willbur, that would explain it if there was a lot of variation between GPAs as well as MCATs, but GPA is pretty universally 3.3ish-3.9ish, no matter how much other factors (% offered interviews, MCATs, etc) vary.

@allen and jedi, how can that be? There are large numbers of people acing most/all of their core science courses and then performing only average on the MCAT? I thought that since most core STEM classes are curved, the people with GPAs of 3.7 must be in the top decile or two, and should also be significantly above the middle of the MCAT curve.

@Ace good point, you'd also have to wonder whether the quoted MCAT ranges are anything resembling a normal distribution.

 

[darkjedi]

@Willbur, that would explain it if there was a lot of variation between GPAs as well as MCATs, but GPA is pretty universally 3.3ish-3.9ish, no matter how much other factors (% offered interviews, MCATs, etc) vary.

@allen and jedi, how can that be? There are large numbers of people acing most/all of their core science courses and then performing only average on the MCAT? I thought that since most core STEM classes are curved, the people with GPAs of 3.7 must be in the top decile or two, and should also be significantly above the middle of the MCAT curve.

@Ace good point, you'd also have to wonder whether the quoted MCAT ranges are anything resembling a normal distribution.

There are 66,384 applicants with a cGPA between 3.6-4.0, vs the 29,526 who were able to score 33 or better on the MCAT.

Alternatively, there are more applicants with a 3.8-4.0 (33,069) than there are those who scored more than a 33+.
https://www.aamc.org/download/321508/data/2013factstable24.pdf

 

[allantois]

Basically MCAT is harder to ace than GPA. Also don't forget that 31 is only a mean for accepted applicants, not everyone who took the test.

 

[WillburCobb]

@Willbur, that would explain it if there was a lot of variation between GPAs as well as MCATs, but GPA is pretty universally 3.3ish-3.9ish, no matter how much other factors (% offered interviews, MCATs, etc) vary.

@allen and jedi, how can that be? There are large numbers of people acing most/all of their core science courses and then performing only average on the MCAT? I thought that since most core STEM classes are curved, the people with GPAs of 3.7 must be in the top decile or two, and should also be significantly above the middle of the MCAT curve.

@Ace good point, you'd also have to wonder whether the quoted MCAT ranges are anything resembling a normal distribution.

3.3 - 3.9 is a pretty broad range and goes to show that there are other factors that different adcoms will weigh differently. Also, I think you're either overestimating the number of profs that truly curve classes or have a misunderstanding as to what a true curve is. Many students ace their classes and bomb the MCAT and vice versa (the former tends to be more common based on my what I observed with classmates).

 

[EMDO2018]

SOME SCHOOLS ARE HARDER THAN OTHERS.

 

[Ace Khalifa]

GPA is highly subject to multiple variables such as rigor of undergrad institution, grade inflation/deflation, easy vs hard classes taken, and personal work ethic of the student. MCAT only depends on the stident's ability. Therefore, it's more difficult to actually do well on the MCAT compared to getting a good GPA. Also, a lot of people are terrible test-takers, which accounts for the lower number of high MCATs.

 

[Law2Doc]

There is rampant grade inflation out there. Even within just the Ivy League the median student taking the prereqs will have a very different GPA at different places. So when you mix in different majors, postbacs, a handful of people taking summer courses and community college things, etc all bets are off. The MCAT is the yardstick across all schools, but it's major flaw is that it's a one shot deal and even a superb student can have a bad day, and some people retake it and schools mAy handle retakes differently. So schools do their best with both, but ultimately most programs end up filling with very similar GPAs in the 3.5+ range, and a slightly larger range of MCATs in the 30+ range. but bear in mind it's not all about the numbers. Schools are as importantly Also looking for a "good fit", and a diverse class, and in some cases have other missions relating to serving underserved communities, etc. Also the guy with the 3.2/30 but with military service, amazing research, or an Olympic medal may be worth a lot more to programs than a couple of MCAT points. So the fact that programs have a range shouldn't be that surprising.

Also premeds try to be cookie cutter and there's a lot of self selection. If you don't have at least. 3.3, you might not bother sitting for the MCAT at all, but once you have an MCAT, you might be more likely to go ahead and apply. So the GPA becomes the baseline for self selection.

 

[Kochanie]

Because the MCAT is the equalizer.

 

[Goro]

Depends upon the matriculant pool. Different schools have different wants. My Dean likes high MCATs for example. other schools are highly mission-specific.

Hello all! Longtime lurker, first time poster.

I've started looking into some medical schools' GPA ranges and MCAT ranges, and noticed a strange lack of correlation, in that GPA seems to span the same range among all schools (with some exceptions).

For example, School A will have MCATs ranging 26-33 and GPA ranging 3.3-3.9
School B will then have MCATs ranging 28-39 (markedly higher) but still GPA ranging 3.4-3.9.

How is this possible? Shouldn't schools with much higher MCATs have similarly higher GPAs?

Does this arise because School B is accepting 3.65's from top tier colleges, whose students bring along extreme high MCATs, while School A is accepting 3.65's from more typical universities whose students bring along more moderate MCATs? I can't come up with any alternatives.

All thoughts appreciated!

 

[WUPM]

Thanks for the comments all.

I think my view of GPAs vs MCAT is probably skewed by having only experienced my university (Wustl). I don't know what our reputation for grade inflation/true curving/prerequisite course difficulty is (I come from California so I only really encountered the reputations of those schools, maybe you all have more knowledge about this you'd share). But, I don't think its considered normal for people with 3.7+ to score 32 or less let alone for over half of them to; usually people at the top of the grades heap end up top of the MCAT heap as well. I'd thought that was typical at all schools though. This:

" 66,384 applicants with a cGPA between 3.6-4.0, vs the 29,526 who were able to score 33 or better on the MCAT " is pretty shocking. Doesn't this indicate that GPA is a pretty useless number unless adcoms keep track of how each and every college compares to others in terms of difficulty? Because this stat makes it look like having something like a 33 MCAT is more impressive than a 3.7 GPA, which I'd thought to be totally the opposite.

 

[Ace Khalifa]

Thanks for the comments all.

I think my view of GPAs vs MCAT is probably skewed by having only experienced my university (Wustl). I don't know what our reputation for grade inflation/true curving/prerequisite course difficulty is (I come from California so I only really encountered the reputations of those schools, maybe you all have more knowledge about this you'd share). But, I don't think its considered normal for people with 3.7+ to score 32 or less let alone for over half of them to; usually people at the top of the grades heap end up top of the MCAT heap as well. I'd thought that was typical at all schools though. This:

" 66,384 applicants with a cGPA between 3.6-4.0, vs the 29,526 who were able to score 33 or better on the MCAT " is pretty shocking. Doesn't this indicate that GPA is a pretty useless number unless adcoms keep track of how each and every college compares to others in terms of difficulty? Because this stat makes it look like having something like a 33 MCAT is more impressive than a 3.7 GPA, which I'd thought to be totally the opposite.

Oh hi, fellow Wash U student! Like I said before, GPA is influenced many more factors than the MCAT, which is why it's easier to obtain a high GPA (grade inflation, easy classes, undergrad school isn't rigorous, etc.). Wash U definitely deflates grades (or at least does VERY minimal inflation, to the point that the grade you get is the grade you deserve), and med schools know this. Also, I also said that a lot of people are just simply bad test-takers, even at Wash U (I know this because some of my friends were bad test-takers and didn't do well on their first MCAT after having a whole summer to study). I personally think it takes more skill to get a high MCAT score than a high undergrad GPA (however, Wash U science courses are def tough, so WUSTL BCPM is always legit).

 

[WUPM]

Hi Ace! I had heard from our premed advisers and other students that we don't get much inflation, but then again that's not totally bias free, I'm sure people at Harvard are told their inflation is minimal too but I see a lot of outside statements to the contrary. I haven't seen anything posted about WashU before in either direction.
I certainly hope that if we are less inflated than others, adcoms really do know about it. They must have some conflict between keeping their reported GPA numbers high and still accepting people out of schools like Northwestern, Cornell or JHop that I hear have miserable grading.

The thing that gets me is how a bad test-taker could get high grades, especially when its over the same material. Orgo grades were based on three or four of the hardest tests I've ever seen, so it seems strange to me that people would ace all of that and then choke on the MCAT after extensive preparation.

 

[DermViser]

Depends upon the matriculant pool. Different schools have different wants. My Dean likes high MCATs for example. other schools are highly mission-specific.

Ah, bc he wants to recruit people who will more likely go for competitive specialties?

 

[Goro]

No, he wants people who will master our curriculum and rock COMLEX. Specialties he could care less about. As per our mission, we send huge numbers of our grads into Primary Care.

Ah, bc he wants to recruit people who will more likely go for competitive specialties?

 

[WUPM]

@DermViser are MCAT scores good enough predictors of med school performance for that line of thinking? Pretty sure SAT/ACT for undergrad that was not the case.

 

[DermViser]

No, he wants people who will master our curriculum and rock COMLEX. Specialties he could care less about. As per our mission, we send huge numbers of our grads into Primary Care.

But then why place so much emphasis on MCAT score? If you're recruiting for primary care, recruiting by MCAT score is a very bad way to do it vs. much more important factors.

 

[DermViser]

@DermViser are MCAT scores good enough predictors of med school performance for that line of thinking? Pretty sure SAT/ACT for undergrad that was not the case.

GPA (specifically science GPA) is more correlative with performance in the first 2 years of medical school. There have been studies that have shown moderate correlation of MCAT score with USMLE Step 1 score. Again these are correlations, not written in stone by any means.

 

[Goro]

MCAT scores have a good correlation to success in medical school, and board performance. Our students self-select for primary care...it's what draws them to our campus.

I'll wager there are plenty of other deans who like high GPAs and ignore MCAT.

But then why place so much emphasis on MCAT score? If you're recruiting for primary care, recruiting by MCAT score is a very bad way to do it vs. much more important factors.

 

[Ace Khalifa]

Hi Ace! I had heard from our premed advisers and other students that we don't get much inflation, but then again that's not totally bias free, I'm sure people at Harvard are told their inflation is minimal too but I see a lot of outside statements to the contrary. I haven't seen anything posted about WashU before in either direction.
I certainly hope that if we are less inflated than others, adcoms really do know about it. They must have some conflict between keeping their reported GPA numbers high and still accepting people out of schools like Northwestern, Cornell or JHop that I hear have miserable grading.

The thing that gets me is how a bad test-taker could get high grades, especially when its over the same material. Orgo grades were based on three or four of the hardest tests I've ever seen, so it seems strange to me that people would ace all of that and then choke on the MCAT after extensive preparation.

Read the second paragraph: http://pages.wustl.edu/medprep/virtual-advisor/gpa

What grade are you going to be in next semester? I just graduated in May. I can tell you that while GPA and MCAT def correlate with each other, it's not perfect by any means. Correlation does NOT equal causation, which every WUSTL psych class teaches you during the first week of class. Some people know how to test well. Others don't. Yes, taking orgo at Wash U makes MCAT orgo look like a joke, but some people just don't study as well or with as much effort as others. Most of my friends were huge procrastinators who would pull multiple all-nighters every semester to cram for exams. I was the only one out of my old crew who didn't stay up all night before our orgo 2 final 2 years ago. Guess who scored the highest and got an A in the class? Also, some of my old crew were on-the-fence about medicine during all 4 years we struggled thru Wash U premed. Nothing's absolute in this world except death and taxes. This applies to exam prep, test-taking skills, GPA/MCAT correlation, and the whole medical school application process.

 

[Law2Doc]

MCAT scores have a good correlation to success in medical school, and board performance. Our students self-select for primary care...it's what draws them to our campus.

I'll wager there are plenty of other deans who like high GPAs and ignore MCAT.

Let's not get too carried away. There is "some" mild correlation between MCAT score and Step 1 scores (and even less for various portions of med school). It is actually pretty minimal utility insofar as predicting how one will fare. Not "good". (statistics is dangerous in pre-allo and any "slight" correltion becomes "good" on here too often). Which is why its but one of many factors adcoms look at. And yet, it's not even used because of that.

It's used because you don't have another metric that everyone takes that you can compare across school, and thus bypass grade inflation issues and relative course difficulties. As someone said, the great equalizer. Again, the shortcoming of the MCAT is it's a snapshot -- only a few hours out of a four year college career, so it might not be enough of the picture -- you could have a bad day or even a particularly lucid one. I do think the notion of a prior poster that everyone who gets a High GPA should get a high MCAT is bizarre and misses the point of the existence of the MCAT which is required precisely because that isn't true. It's a check on the GPA, so it mostly provides useful information to schools when those numbers don't jibe.

Bottom line is med schools want it all. They want a high GPA and a high MCAT. And good ECs, interviews, letters, essays. As close to tops in everything that they can get. I'm not sure what is being debated here and the "what more important" threads are always fruitless for this reason.

 

[WillburCobb]

Yes, taking orgo at Wash U makes MCAT orgo look like a joke, but some people just don't study as well or with as much effort as others.

Pretty sure ochem anywhere makes MCAT ochem look like a joke. It's a best of ochem one, with a sprinkling of ochem two for taste.

 

[WUPM]

@Law2Doc "I do think the notion of a prior poster that everyone who gets a High GPA should get a high MCAT is bizarre..."

That's what I'm finding so surprising, I had no idea it was typical for 3.8 GPAs to be easier to achieve than 31's on the MCAT. And I've asked a lot a friends the last few days, they're pretty shocked to hear that too. People around here with 3.8 consider a 30-31 so mismatchedly low that it is worth retaking the MCAT, as is the case with two people on my sports team. I think it may just be a case of "varies wildly by university" where a lot of schools hand out higher averages than I thought. For a school that really sets the science class curves so only the top fifth get an A, it makes no sense for the A-earners to then score average on the MCAT.