list of schools where it is notoriously hard to get a good gpa

[moop]

Right, but 1) when the evaluation of a student's work is set at the university level, 2) and students from different colleges compete on the basis of this same evaluation, -->> students who attend colleges with an intellectually superior student body/colleges that overly penalize students, the student get's f'ed over in comparison with people from other schools.

Yeah, of course. That's the whole problem with GPA. I was just responding to your "Not really" in response to the claim that the more prestigious the school, the tougher it is. GPA evaluation is a different story, and you're right.

Though I think for Princeton, the phenomenon is overstated. It's nigh impossible to get a first-round interview for investment banking front offices if you're <3.7 at HY (according to recruiters), but people who aren't even in finance here have gotten offers (even some on the buy-side o____o) with 3.6s.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[nabilesmail]

I literally dont want to hear it. I went to Gettysburg College as a Biochemistry & Molecular Biology major and just barely made it out with a 3.2 overall. I then went to JHU for graduate school BMB and laughed my way out of there with a 3.91. The undergrad students taking our courses complained how hard it was. What a joke.

Don't compare Grad school to undergrad. While the material in grad school can be more difficult than the material in undergrad, getting good grades in grad school is MUCH easier. That is the reason why med schools don't care about your grad school GPA, there is super grade inflation in grad school.

 

[moop]

What are some of these stories? I couldn't find them

They're hillbillies. That's all you need to know.

 

[Ace-Co-A]

I don't think most people on SDN know how crappy colleges can get after the top ~100 colleges in the US. I've actually studied and researched such things with professors.

http://web.archive.org/web/20000829094953/http://www.pcmagic.net/abe/gradeadj.htm

Eh. I have mixed feelings about this. I go to a school that is > 100 in the USNWR. While on one hand I am forced to admit that many of the students at this school are pretty terrible, there are some very good students here as well. I put it to you that there is a reason that we leave things to the MCAT to evaluate candidacy for medical school.

I think people from low-ranked schools should be considered for MD admissions with an especially critical eye turned towards poor performance. I also think, though, that there is a reason that the MCAT is more important than GPA and undergraduate institution for admissions purposes.

My friend @knv2u and I have crossed swords about this in the past, and he is welcome to reply if he sees this. I believe our last conversation was left unfinished.

Also, I realize that I'm quoting an old post, here, but I think your post gives me another chance to voice this opinion. I don't do so trivially. I believe that this is an important issue in our field. If it is true that medical school admissions would be best served by taking only the students from the top 25-30 schools in the country and we could find evidence to support this view, then we go with the evidence and change the admissions process. If, as I argue, medical school admissions is best served by basing decisions on MCAT score (some evidence for this), then the current system makes sense.

 

[ranson]

Cornell isn't harder than any other Ivy, neither is JHU.

UChicago
MIT
Caltech
Princeton

that's it. sorry.

Also, that gradedeflation site is crap, especially where it lists the the toughest schools according to GPA; many of those schools have low GPAs because the quality of the students are poor.

 

[moop]

I also think, though, that there is a reason that the MCAT is more important than GPA and undergraduate institution for admissions purposes.

Can't be said as quoted as a generalization. Depends heavily on the med school, Dean, and composition of the committee. Even adcom members on SDN won't be able to speak for anywhere outside of their institution, and impressionistic interpretations of their posts over time suggest that there is a lot of variation across schools, undergrad institutions, and even individual applicants.

 

[Ace-Co-A]

Can't be said as quoted as a generalization. Depends heavily on the med school, Dean, and composition of the committee. Even adcom members on SDN won't be able to speak for anywhere outside of their institution, and impressionistic interpretations of their posts over time suggest that there is a lot of variation across schools, undergrad institutions, and even individual applicants.

Point taken. Touché. I was hoping for some validation by looking at these charts. Below I've put the acceptance percentages from those charts in a spreadsheet according to GPA and MCAT:

This data doesn't look strongly support of either extreme for GPA vs. MCAT discussions [i.e., low-GPA, high-MCAT applicants (~ 55%-60%) fare about as well as high-GPA, low-MCAT applicants(~60%)]. Similarly, mid-GPA, high-MCAT applicants (~ 70 - 80%) do similarly to high-GPA, mid-MCAT (~70-75%)]. These percentages are rough approximations. Nonethelss, neither conclusion (that either the GPA is more important than the MCAT or the MCAT is more important

I didn't see data on matriculants from the AAMC by undergraduate institution, but the data for applicants is here. Many of the schools on those lists are from Top-50 schools. So, we're left with basing our judgement about undergraduate prestige as a factor in medical school admissions to what AdComs have said publically. Many AdComs here on SDN say that undergrad prestige is irrelevant. On the other hand, I remember at least one of the medical schools I applied to (Penn) listing undergraduate institution reputation as a factor in their decisions.

Overall, I get what you're saying. An applicant is an individual. Thanks for calling me out on my unjustified statement.

P.S. -- holy s*** I can't imagine getting 3.8+ and 39+ and not getting accepted anywhere!

 

[LizzyM]

P.S. -- holy s*** I can't imagine getting 3.8+ and 39+ and not getting accepted anywhere!

Imagine you arrive for an interview and don't make eye contact with your interviewer. Your handshake makes the interviewer think they've just grasped a dead fish.

You sit on the edge of the chair and stare at the interviewer in an attempt to make eye contact as you heard you should. The effect is "deer in the headlights".

You are asked a ice breaker question such as "is this your first visit to our city?" Your eyes dart from side to side and you aren't sure how to answer because this is something you had not prepared for. Should you say that you visited your uncle? He doesn't actually live in this city. How can I connect this to medicine? You start to ramble on and on about having had grandparents in the suburbs and but they died and you are going to talk about what killed them but you don't remember but you still have an uncle nearby but no, you never came into the city on any of your visits. All of this is a run-on sentence expressed with no emotion.

You are asked about your research. Now you are in your element. You get deeper and deeper into the material although you can tell you are losing your audience who appears to be a really old guy who is in pediatrics or general internal medicine or something like that. You throw in every big word you've heard your PI use so that they really get the idea that you know your stuff.

On to some ethics questions. The next 30 minutes move like molasses as you try to think clearly and speak without using "like" and "you know" and "um" as every third word. You try to remember the right answers but mostly just pick a side and stick with it no matter what happens or how the case changes. Break eye contact and look quickly from side to side... is he trying to trip you up. No! You can not be swayed. No matter what interpret the rules strictly and with no nuance.

When you are asked if you have any questions for the interviewer, you say "no" just so you can get out of there!

 

[Goro]

You interviewed the same guy too! Lizzy, I'll see you and raise you with the interviewee who starts to answer the question, goes on for a minute, and then asks "what was the question?"

Or the guy who, when asked "how does your hobby relate to the practice of Medicine?", and can't even say "it doesn't", and definitely can't even BS an answer, but sits there in a coma?

Or the gal who, when asked a hypothetical, "what would you do in this situation?" answers, "oh, that wouldn't happen."

So yes, we do reject people who are Top 10 caliber. It actually takes some talent to bomb an interview.

Imagine you arrive for an interview and don't make eye contact with your interviewer. Your handshake makes the interviewer think they've just grasped a dead fish.

You sit on the edge of the chair and stare at the interviewer in an attempt to make eye contact as you heard you should. The effect is "deer in the headlights".

You are asked a ice breaker question such as "is this your first visit to our city?" Your eyes dart from side to side and you aren't sure how to answer because this is something you had not prepared for. Should you say that you visited your uncle? He doesn't actually live in this city. How can I connect this to medicine? You start to ramble on and on about having had grandparents in the suburbs and but they died and you are going to talk about what killed them but you don't remember but you still have an uncle nearby but no, you never came into the city on any of your visits. All of this is a run-on sentence expressed with no emotion.

You are asked about your research. Now you are in your element. You get deeper and deeper into the material although you can tell you are losing your audience who appears to be a really old guy who is in pediatrics or general internal medicine or something like that. You throw in every big word you've heard your PI use so that they really get the idea that you know your stuff.

On to some ethics questions. The next 30 minutes move like molasses as you try to think clearly and speak without using "like" and "you know" and "um" as every third word. You try to remember the right answers but mostly just pick a side and stick with it no matter what happens or how the case changes. Break eye contact and look quickly from side to side... is he trying to trip you up. No! You can not be swayed. No matter what interpret the rules strictly and with no nuance.

When you are asked if you have any questions for the interviewer, you say "no" just so you can get out of there!

 

[moop]

^ What percentage of top applicants have you seen that are like this?

Because lmao lol

 

[LizzyM]

^ What percentage of top applicants have you seen that are like this?

Because lmao lol

about 10%. It might be as high as 33% for those with MCATs >40 and GPA = 4.0

 

[Boolean]

about 10%. It might be as high as 33% for those with MCATs >40 and GPA = 4.0

Hopefully they can develop some sense of conversation before they finish medical school. I would hate to see them during residency and beyond.

"You've um… got….. uh…. well…. stage 4 brain cancer. Sorry."

 

[Lya]

On to some ethics questions. The next 30 minutes move like molasses as you try to think clearly and speak without using "like" and "you know" and "um" as every third word. You try to remember the right answers but mostly just pick a side and stick with it no matter what happens or how the case changes. Break eye contact and look quickly from side to side... is he trying to trip you up. No! You can not be swayed. No matter what interpret the rules strictly and with no nuance.

When you are asked if you have any questions for the interviewer, you say "no" just so you can get out of there!

Looking back on my past interviews where I was waitlisted or rejected, I am probably part of those anecdotes somewhere, especially about the ethics and eye contact. I am still not sure whether extra practice for interviews would have helped.

 

[moop]

Looking back on my past interviews where I was waitlisted or rejected, I am probably part of those anecdotes somewhere, especially about the ethics and eye contact. I am still not sure whether extra practice for interviews would have helped.

No, it wouldn't have, because these anecdotes aren't showing a lack of interview skills. These are people skills. The ethics stuff is about being thoughtful and flexible, also something more interview practice alone wouldn't help.

That's the thing premeds should probably learn. You can prepare for interviews insofar as organizing your thoughts to make them better than rambles and calming nerves, but you're not going to learn conversational abilities and the how to answer questions simply through interview practice. Just like the VR section, you're being tested on skills that must be picked up over time, not during an app cycle. Get out of the classroom and lab; it's the ECs and work experiences that are most beneficial for those things.

 

[LizzyM]

Hopefully they can develop some sense of conversation before they finish medical school. I would hate to see them during residency and beyond.

"You've um… got….. uh…. well…. stage 4 brain cancer. Sorry."

Some of them don't belong in med school. There are better careers for their gifts.

 

[moop]

Some of them don't belong in med school. There are better careers for their gifts.

Yeah like academia in a social science. Lots of awks there.

/rant

 

[PurpleLove]

In general, the more "prestigious" the school, the tougher it is because they have more competitive students. And yes that is general so don't burn me.

Yeah, but make a thread on it, and have everyone eat you alive.

 

[PurpleLove]

Pointless thread.

If you are among the best, you would be admitted to Harvard or Stanford and just go because it should be a no-brainer.
If you're everyone else, you go to the easy and cheap state school, get a 4.0, and crush the MCAT.

Not pointless thread.
If I saw this 3 years ago, I'd choose an easier life at UIC vs going to UChicago.
Only having to worry about a test I can study for in 3 months than 4 years having no life? Yes, please.

 

[XmedBarney]

Yeah, but make a thread on it, and have everyone eat you alive.

You bought the hype, now suffer the consequences.

 

[PurpleLove]

You bought the hype, now suffer the consequences.

Uh yeah, how? Because people felt personally attacked when I claimed some schools are WAY easier?

 

[XmedBarney]

Uh yeah, how? Because people felt personally attacked when I claimed some schools are WAY easier?

You wanted to go to a "top" school, you wanted to compete with the "best", you went there and you competed and you got a result. Then you realized students that were "weaker" than you at "weaker" universities than yours were performing objectively "better"(GPA). Bitching on SDN, about how everyone else's colleges are easier and therefore their GPA's should not be given the same weight as your GPA at a "tough, top" school is a little pathetic. If GPA is what you care about then either transfer out or perform at UChicago and prove yourself. Your entire previous thread was about you trying to ride the coattails of your university and not about you proving jack, other than that you were able to get an admission. So, congratulations you were a bright high school student.

 

[sundays24]

about 10%. It might be as high as 33% for those with MCATs >40 and GPA = 4.0

but when it all comes down to it, i'd rather be treated by the smarter doctor than the one with better interpersonal skills

 

[LizzyM]

but when it all comes down to it, i'd rather be treated by the smarter doctor than the one with better "interpersonal skills"

It doesn't have to be an either - or. It is possible to be smart and personable. There are plenty of applicants to choose from and in the end, physicians are in a service profession that deals with people who are in emotional fragile states and being "brainy" but lacking emotional intelligence is a recipe for inflicting great suffering on patients and their families.

 

[gyngyn]

You interviewed the same guy too! Lizzy, I'll see you and raise you with the interviewee who starts to answer the question, goes on for a minute, and then asks "what was the question?"

Or the guy who, when asked "how does your hobby relate to the practice of Medicine?", and can't even say "it doesn't", and definitely can't even BS an answer, but sits there in a coma?

Or the gal who, when asked a hypothetical, "what would you do in this situation?" answers, "oh, that wouldn't happen."

So yes, we do reject people who are Top 10 caliber. It actually takes some talent to bomb an interview.

We interview 110 of these every year.

 

[Goro]

I feel your pain, colleague!

We interview 110 of these every year.

 

[Ace-Co-A]

You wanted to go to a "top" school, you wanted to compete with the "best", you went there and you competed and you got a result. Then you realized students that were "weaker" than you at "weaker" universities than yours were performing objectively "better"(GPA). Bitching on SDN, about how everyone else's colleges are easier and therefore their GPA's should not be given the same weight as your GPA at a "tough, top" school is a little pathetic. If GPA is what you care about then either transfer out or perform at UChicago and prove yourself. Your entire previous thread was about you trying to ride the coattails of your university and not about you proving jack, other than that you were able to get an admission. So, congratulations you were a bright high school student.

Hear, hear.

We need to recruit more people like @XmedBarney to SDN.

 

[Oso]

You wanted to go to a "top" school, you wanted to compete with the "best", you went there and you competed and you got a result. Then you realized students that were "weaker" than you at "weaker" universities than yours were performing objectively "better"(GPA). Bitching on SDN, about how everyone else's colleges are easier and therefore their GPA's should not be given the same weight as your GPA at a "tough, top" school is a little pathetic. If GPA is what you care about then either transfer out or perform at UChicago and prove yourself. Your entire previous thread was about you trying to ride the coattails of your university and not about you proving jack, other than that you were able to get an admission. So, congratulations you were a bright high school student.

damn son, this is some straight up truth.

 

[moop]

You wanted to go to a "top" school, you wanted to compete with the "best", you went there and you competed and you got a result. Then you realized students that were "weaker" than you at "weaker" universities than yours were performing objectively "better"(GPA). Bitching on SDN, about how everyone else's colleges are easier and therefore their GPA's should not be given the same weight as your GPA at a "tough, top" school is a little pathetic. If GPA is what you care about then either transfer out or perform at UChicago and prove yourself. Your entire previous thread was about you trying to ride the coattails of your university and not about you proving jack, other than that you were able to get an admission. So, congratulations you were a bright high school student.

In the end, it doesn't matter. Med schools are omnisciently conscious of these notorious top schools where As are hard to come by. The top-notch research and breadth of ECs available more than makes up for the GPA dip, assuming one's grades isn't as ****ty and below ~3.3ish (my guess). And honestly, if one's grades are really bottoming out in the low 3.00s or even 2.xx, then it's not the school that's the problem, but the student instead; the result wouldn't be drastically different at another institution.

Anyone who's been on the interview trail knows that pedigree matters based on who was in the interview rooms. The top schools still have absurdly high acceptance rates (>85-90%), and besides anal places like JHU, committees rarely screen because there's no reason to with the applicant pools. So unless the GPA is downright terrible, the rest of the package a top school offers is still above the competition, so the "hype" is very real and tangible.

P.S. I am talking about top privates, so don't use the UCs as a nonconforming example. Too many students transfer there from CCs, and CA is just an outlier to begin with.

 

[XmedBarney]

In the end, it doesn't matter. Med schools are omnisciently conscious of these notorious top schools where As are hard to come by. The top-notch research and breadth of ECs available more than makes up for the GPA dip, assuming one's grades isn't as ****** and below ~3.3ish (my guess). And honestly, if one's grades are really bottoming out in the low 3.00s or even 2.xx, then it's not the school that's the problem, but the student instead; the result wouldn't be drastically different at another institution.

Anyone who's been on the interview trail knows that pedigree matters based on who was in the interview rooms. The top schools still have absurdly high acceptance rates (>85-90%), and besides anal places like JHU, committees rarely screen because there's no reason to with the applicant pools. So unless the GPA is downright terrible, the rest of the package a top school offers is still above the competition, so the "hype" is very real and tangible.

P.S. I am talking about top privates, so don't use the UCs as a nonconforming example. Too many students transfer there from CCs, and CA is just an outlier to begin with.

I wasn't debating the merits of attending a state school vs. a top private institution, I simply wanted to address the obscene amount of condescension and bitching being put out by purplelove. Check out her old thread, it wasn't about any of the things you mentioned.

 

[sourdoughllama]

P.S. I am talking about top privates, so don't use the UCs as a nonconforming example. Too many students transfer there from CCs, and CA is just an outlier to begin with.

I don't get what transfers have to do with this

 

[moop]

I wasn't debating the merits of attending a state school vs. a top private institution, I simply wanted to address the obscene amount of condescension and bitching being put out by purplelove. Check out her old thread, it wasn't about any of the things you mentioned.

Oh yeah I know; I wasn't arguing against you or anything.. I was just saying that overall, bitching or not, it doesn't matter. If her GPA is fine, then she's fine. If her GPA is too low, then it's not. That's all.

 

[moop]

I don't get what transfers have to do with this

In debates about whether attending a "top school" is worth it, UCs are often used as an example that it's not a good idea because of the attrition rates and difficulty to get a high GPA. However, the UCs aren't the same as other "top schools" due to 1) their undergrad sizes and 2) the large amount of transfers from CCs makes it look like (on SDN at least) that there are more people at UCs unable to make it as a premed. Since I was arguing for the case that top schools are still worth it, I didn't want the old UC counterargument to be brought up again, because it's not as applicable as people think.

 

[sourdoughllama]

In debates about whether attending a "top school" is worth it, UCs are often used as an example that it's not a good idea because of the attrition rates and difficulty to get a high GPA. However, the UCs aren't the same as other "top schools" due to 1) their undergrad sizes and 2) the large amount of transfers from CCs makes it look like (on SDN at least) that there are more people at UCs unable to make it as a premed. Since I was arguing for the case that top schools are still worth it, I didn't want the old UC counterargument to be brought up again, because it's not as applicable as people think.

Oh okay I see what you mean now thanks for the clarification.

 

[Tawantinsuyu]

Hopefully they can develop some sense of conversation before they finish medical school. I would hate to see them during residency and beyond.

"You've um… got….. uh…. well…. stage 4 brain cancer. Sorry."

I've never laughed so hard reading SDN posts before.

 

[lucin]

The inner city school of hard knocks