MCAT or GPA? Which shows that you're more "prepared" for medical school?

Applying to Med School? Get In Or Your Money Back
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

MCAT or GPA? Which shows that you're more "prepared" for medical school?

  • Total voters
    151
it's simple. grades can be inflated. the only way an MCAT can be inflated is if a very large majority of the test-takers on that specific date do poorly (if i'm not mistaken...).

yes GPA is a much longer period, but at large schools you can often find at least one professor for any given course that is known as the easier professor. i went to a small school, so anything beyond intro liberal arts courses, each course usually had 1 maybe 2 professors. you often didn't have a choice
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
The MCAT, simply because its standardized and impossible to inflate. Your GPA could be inflated depending upon if you had an easy course load each semester or had easy teachers
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
baxt1412 said:
it's simple. grades can be inflated. the only way an MCAT can be inflated is if a very large majority of the test-takers on that specific date do poorly (if i'm not mistaken...).

yes GPA is a much longer period, but at large schools you can often find at least one professor for any given course that is known as the easier professor. i went to a small school, so anything beyond intro liberal arts courses, each course usually had 1 maybe 2 professors. you often didn't have a choice
Click to expand...

MCAT is scaled prior to administration. No curve.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Lamel said:
MCAT is scaled prior to administration. No curve.
Click to expand...

gotcha, thanks. i wasn't too sure.

so then, like listener23 said.... the MCAT is impossible to inflate.
 
GPA is worthless past 3.5 imho and even then it varies so much by courseload/major/school/professor that it is almost impossible to accurately interpret small differences in GPA (3.77 v 3.81 or *gasp* 3.89 v 3.9). I don't think there is a meaningful way to interpret this number past a certain threshold. MCAT it is.
 
I am going to have to go with MCAT. But keep in mind that studies have shown that once you get above a 26 on the MCAT, you are just likely to succeed in medical school as someone who scores a 43.

I think GPA might be slightly more important at many/most schools simply because it is a measure of your consistent work ethics over 3+ years of academic study. The MCAT is standardized, yes, but it is only a snapshot of your abilities.

But regardless, get both as high as you possibly can!
 
Sure MCAT is standardized, but I know multiple people who have gone from low 30s to high 30s, and it's not like they didn't prep the first time. I think GPA combined with looking at course load is more meaningful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
I would say the MCAT. It's one standardized experience for everyone. A guy with a 3.9 GPA at a lower-tier state school studying a relatively easy major will not have nearly the same experience as someone studying engineering at a top 5 school. I think GPA can be a useful metric for schools to look at, but the raw numbers themselves are almost meaningless. Of course I don't work for a medical school admissions committee, and the AAMC acceptance rates speak for themselves.
 
MCAT. Those who state otherwise are misguided (as I was before). Now, that does not mean that you shouldn't have a competitive GPA.
 
I think either one is fairly meaningless without the other to back it up, but taken alone the MCAT is definitely more revealing.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
ProudMD said:
I am going to have to go with MCAT. But keep in mind that studies have shown that once you get above a 26 on the MCAT, you are just likely to succeed in medical school as someone who scores a 43.

I think GPA might be slightly more important at many/most schools simply because it is a measure of your consistent work ethics over 3+ years of academic study. The MCAT is standardized, yes, but it is only a snapshot of your abilities.

But regardless, get both as high as you possibly can!
Click to expand...
If by "likely to succeed" you mean not need remediation, graduate, and pass the boards, then sure. Those are the only metrics measured in the studies that back up your statement. However, it's obvious that success is medical school is more nuanced than simply "getting by," and higher MCAT scores are correlated with higher medical school course performance and quite strongly with Step 1 score (r = 0.66 for the latter.)

in b4 stats argument
in b4 PubMed citations
in b4 I don't want to have this argument again
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
gettheleadout said:
If by "likely to succeed" you mean not need remediation, graduate, and pass the boards, then sure. Those are the only metrics measured in the studies that back up your statement. However, it's obvious that success is medical school is more nuanced than simply "getting by," and higher MCAT scores are correlated with higher medical school course performance and quite strongly with Step 1 score (r = 0.66 for the latter.)

in b4 stats argument
in b4 PubMed citations
in b4 I don't want to have this argument again
Click to expand...

Thanks for your clarifications. Yeah, I meant not needing remediation and being able to pass all courses and graduate on time. That's a tremendous achievement in my eyes. Not everyone wants to (or even should) aim for 250+ board scores and ROAD specialties.

And gettheleadout, I just took a look at your MDapps, and you have some MONSTER stats! Congrats on your acceptances!
 
It depends on how the GPA and MCAT were achieved. Medical school, as far as I can tell, does not require a ton of critical thinking. It requires a ton of effort. If you have someone who coasted through school and did well on the MCAT without studying, that doesn't really show that they'll have the work ethic to pull off medical school. If someone busted their ball to get their GPA, but struggled with the MCAT despite similarly busting, then they perhaps aren't good enough at connecting concepts together under time-constrained situations. This isn't a PhD in physics, usually the biggest challenge is in simply remembering the ridiculous amount of material that we're given.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Narmerguy said:
It depends on how the GPA and MCAT were achieved. Medical school, as far as I can tell, does not require a ton of critical thinking. It requires a ton of effort. If you have someone who coasted through school and did well on the MCAT without studying, that doesn't really show that they'll have the work ethic to pull off medical school. If someone busted their ball to get their GPA, but struggled with the MCAT despite similarly busting, then they perhaps aren't good enough at connecting concepts together under time-constrained situations. This isn't a PhD in physics, usually the biggest challenge is in simply remembering the ridiculous amount of material that we're given.
Click to expand...

How exactly would medical schools find out that somebody aced the MCAT/GPA without much effort?
 
I don't think one is definitively more preparatory than the other. A good MCAT can show ability to think critically under pressure and recall vast amount of knowledge. GPA does the same over an extended period of time. That's why both are required to get in. Ultimately I think someone with a great GPA sets themselves up for success in medical school.
 
I'm going to go with MCAT, because I don't think all GPAs are created equal. But I would say that I am more proud of my GPA (3.9) than my MCAT (35) just because more time has gone into maintaining it.
 
Aloft085 said:
I would say the MCAT. It's one standardized experience for everyone. A guy with a 3.9 GPA at a lower-tier state school studying a relatively easy major will not have nearly the same experience as someone studying engineering at a top 5 school. I think GPA can be a useful metric for schools to look at, but the raw numbers themselves are almost meaningless. Of course I don't work for a medical school admissions committee, and the AAMC acceptance rates speak for themselves.
Click to expand...

This is why I said GPA combined with course load > MCAT. If the person at a low-tier state school is taking 17 or more hours each semester with 4 science courses each semester and has that 3.9 , then that's legitimate in my opinion.
 
allenlchs said:
How exactly would medical schools find out that somebody aced the MCAT/GPA without much effort?
Click to expand...
They don't. I suppose it is just reflected by performance in medical school to some extent. Obviously there are exceptions but it seems valid.
 
gettheleadout said:
If by "likely to succeed" you mean not need remediation, graduate, and pass the boards, then sure. Those are the only metrics measured in the studies that back up your statement. However, it's obvious that success is medical school is more nuanced than simply "getting by," and higher MCAT scores are correlated with higher medical school course performance and quite strongly with Step 1 score (r = 0.66 for the latter.)

in b4 stats argument
in b4 PubMed citations
in b4 I don't want to have this argument again
Click to expand...
Source? How many studies have shown that the mcat to step 1 correlation is low to moderate?
 
Chubbs Peterson said:
Source? How many studies have shown that the mcat to step 1 correlation is low to moderate?
Click to expand...

I can imagine you can draw that conclusion from the fact that students from schools with high MCAT averages tend to score high on steps.
 
Chubbs Peterson said:
Source? How many studies have shown that the mcat to step 1 correlation is low to moderate?
Click to expand...
I'm seriously not going to have this argument again but as a courtesy I'll give you the direct quote:

"The MCAT total has a large predictive validity coefficient (r = 0.66; 43.6% of the variance) effect size for USMLE Step 1, and medium validity coefficients for USMLE Step 2 (r = 0.43; 18.5% of the variance) and USMLE Step 3 (r = 0.48; 23.0% of the variance)."

- Donnon et al., 2007.
 
gettheleadout said:
I'm seriously not going to have this argument again but as a courtesy I'll give you the direct quote:

"The MCAT total has a large predictive validity coefficient (r = 0.66; 43.6% of the variance) effect size for USMLE Step 1, and medium validity coefficients for USMLE Step 2 (r = 0.43; 18.5% of the variance) and USMLE Step 3 (r = 0.48; 23.0% of the variance)."

- Donnon et al., 2007.
Click to expand...
Whose arguing? I asked two simple questions.
 
Last edited:
Chubbs Peterson said:
Whose arguing? I asked two simple questions. I'm glad you picked one study, of a plethora (mostly showing wildly inconsistent data), to back your claim, though. Very scientific.
Click to expand...
Hmm, you're right. If only the study I cited could have been a meta-analysis of many published studies... Oh wait.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
gettheleadout said:
Hmm, you're right. If only the study I cited could have been a meta-analysis of many published studies... Oh wait.
Click to expand...
And there are meta-analysis studies showing that the correlation is.. low to moderate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
gettheleadout said:
...and higher MCAT scores are correlated with higher medical school course performance and quite strongly with Step 1 score (r = 0.66 for the latter.)

in b4 stats argument...
Click to expand...

You started the stats argument with the above statement. .6 quite strong :smack:
 
allenlchs said:
How exactly would medical schools find out that somebody aced the MCAT/GPA without much effort?
Click to expand...

They wouldn't, or at least, I think it would require work. I was answering the question of which demonstrates better preparation--it depends. They're just scores, they don't communicate a sufficient picture on their own. Whether or not schools can uncover the contextual bits of information behind those scores is another question, which is essentially the game of admissions.

As a simple example, had I not studied as much as I did for the MCAT, I would have gotten a much poorer score. The first time I was going to take it I was researching full time over the summer and had very little time to study. I delayed the test because I just didn't study very much, but had I taken it, people would have made a judgment about my fitness for medical school on that basis. The subsequent summer I did nothing and studied for 2 months for the MCAT and achieved a high score. Suddenly I'm 10 points "more fit" for medical school than I was a year ago. In reality my circumstances simply permitted me to get a better score, and I've been on SDN long enough to know the MCAT percentile targets that I'd need to hit to be in good position for the schools I wanted to get into (i.e. 90th percentile on the test is surprisingly unremarkable--33).

My point is that people are pitting the MCAT vs GPA against each other, when in reality the manner in which the scores are achieved is very important. Medical school doesn't require a beautiful mind, it requires a gladiator's mental preparedness for a long grind with lots of delayed gratification.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Saw this on another thread and thought it was interesting. From 2011 but unless admissions processes dramatically changed....

2r40pr6.jpg


Someone with a 3.7 GPA only needs around a 30-31 to have a ~70% chance of getting in.

Someone with a 3.6 GPA needs roughly a 33 to have a ~70% chance of getting in.
 
vikingsking82 said:
Saw this on another thread and thought it was interesting. From 2011 but unless admissions processes dramatically changed....

2r40pr6.jpg


Someone with a 3.7 GPA only needs around a 31 to have a ~70% chance of getting in.

Someone with a 3.6 GPA needs roughly a 34 to have a ~70% chance of getting in.
Click to expand...


Really depends on the person's school list and timing of applying. But, 70% is 70%.
 
Well, isn't the MCAT graded on a curve? I feel like people with more access to prep materials/classes could perform better. And like others said, GPA depends on teachers and class load. So they are both sort of imperfect. Plus I'm pretty sure GPA/MCAT score rarely correlates to how successful a surgeon/doctor is.

Maybe just having so many tests and parameters to get into medical school is better at judging devotion/commitment than actual performance?

The SAT is supposed to show how well prepared you are for college better than grades, but my SAT was awful and I have great college grades . . .
 
Generally, i feel MCAT has a more impact on the admissions. It's standardized so med schools know how you stack among peers nationally. And also statistically from the data that SDN has provided it seems better MCAT scores improve your chances better than a better grade; moreover, grades can be inflated with post-bacs and graduate school. After all, there's a reason why it's preferable you can only take an MCAT.
 
My gut says MCAT, though I sure do wish it was the other way around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I'm confused about the "percent historically accepted". I'm sitting at about a 60% chance, if my practice tests are similar to my MCAT. Is that to a specific school or overall? And shouldn't your chances go up the more broadly/numerously/early/(don't apply to reach schools) you apply?
 
Your vertical leap is actually more important. If you can dunk from the dotted line, you'll be a shoo-in for most top schools.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Number versus number, I think MCAT wins. But I think a strong GPA during periods of rigor is better, it's just much harder to define and you start having to define intangibles like "rigor."

I'll put it this way: if I had two accept one of two students to a medical school knowing only that one had a "high GPA, low MCAT" and the other had a "high MCAT, low GPA," I would gamble on the latter.
 
How is this even a question?

GPA is so hard to compare:

How are you going to compare GPAs between a math major at MIT vs. a EE major at MIT? (can't compare GPAs between majors - even if they are known to be "hard")

How are you going to compare GPAs between a math major at Harvard vs. a math major at MIT? (can't compare GPAs between schools - even if they are "peer")

How are you going to compare GPAs between a CS major at Stanford who does the easiest track vs. a CS major at Stanford who does the hardest track (can't compare GPAs between people at the same school with the same major but who do different tracks)?

How are you going to compare GPAs between a CS major at Stanford and another CS major at Stanford who took the exact same classes except a few were taught by different instructors who had different grading schemes (can't compare GPAs between people at the same school with the same major with the same track but who had different instructors)?

How are you going to compare GPAs between a CS major at Stanford and another CS major at Stanford who took the exact same classes with the exact same instructors but in different years with the grading scheme changing between those years (can't compare GPAs between people at the same school with the same major with the same track with the same classes with the same instructors but maybe took them at different times)?

Sure, this might be somewhat of an exaggeration but the point is that with GPA, it's very hard to compare things in a statistically meaningful way. Are you going to come up with some "adjustment factor" that takes into account all the factors I mentioned above when comparing GPAs? If so, it's bound to be less statistically sound than just using a tool (i.e., the MCAT) which is designed from the start to make meaningful comparisons among students possible.

A standardized test (i.e., the MCAT) is not perfect but it does provide the ability to compare abilities in a statistically meaningful way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
justadream said:
How is this even a question?

GPA is so hard to compare:

How are you going to compare GPAs between a math major at MIT vs. a EE major at MIT? (can't compare GPAs between majors - even if they are known to be "hard")

How are you going to compare GPAs between a math major at Harvard vs. a math major at MIT? (can't compare GPAs between schools - even if they are "peer")

How are you going to compare GPAs between a CS major at Stanford who does the easiest track vs. a CS major at Stanford who does the hardest track (can't compare GPAs between people at the same school with the same major but who do different tracks)?

How are you going to compare GPAs between a CS major at Stanford and another CS major at Stanford who took the exact same classes except a few were taught by different instructors who had different grading schemes (can't compare GPAs between people at the same school with the same major with the same track but who had different instructors)?

How are you going to compare GPAs between a CS major at Stanford and another CS major at Stanford who took the exact same classes with the exact same instructors but in different years with the grading scheme changing between those years (can't compare GPAs between people at the same school with the same major with the same track with the same classes with the same instructors but maybe took them at different times)?

Sure, this might be somewhat of an exaggeration but the point is that with GPA, it's very hard to compare things in a statistically meaningful way. Are you going to come up with some "adjustment factor" that takes into account all the factors I mentioned above when comparing GPAs? If so, it's bound to be less statistically sound than just using a tool (i.e., the MCAT) which is designed from the start to make meaningful comparisons among students possible.

A standardized test (i.e., the MCAT) is not perfect but it does provide the ability to compare abilities in a statistically meaningful way.
Click to expand...

Everything you mentioned is true. And yet, the AAMC charts show that people with high GPAs/low MCATs are still significantly more likely to get into med school than low GPA/high MCAT applicants (like me :()
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
cryhavoc said:
I'm confused about the "percent historically accepted". I'm sitting at about a 60% chance, if my practice tests are similar to my MCAT. Is that to a specific school or overall? And shouldn't your chances go up the more broadly/numerously/early/(don't apply to reach schools) you apply?
Click to expand...

It is percent accepted to 1 or more medical schools in their whole cycle. As in, 60% means you have a 60% chance to get in SOMEWHERE, assuming everything else in your app is average across the board.. Since this only looks at GPA/ MCAT obviously it will be affected by other variables like when you apply, your EC's, etc.

So I would use this as a general indication of chances to get in somewhere if you apply to approximately 15 schools (the average) decently early in the cycle and feel that you have competitive EC's, letters and personal statement plus no red flags.
 
wh2k13 said:
Everything you mentioned is true. And yet, the AAMC charts show that people with high GPAs/low MCATs are still significantly more likely to get into med school than low GPA/high MCAT applicants (like me :()
Click to expand...

I think medical schools should put much more emphasis on MCAT than on GPA because of the reasons I outlined for assessing students' academic preparedness. Unfortunately, as you mentioned and can attest, they don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

G
  • Question
Should I be prepared for criticism?
Replies
4
Views
972
gdub4ever
G
a3suki
Transferring Schools for More Clinical Opportunities
Replies
6
Views
621
candbgirl
C
T
SAT restarted in Ivy League schools, is MCAT becoming more important? Could Step1 score come back?
Replies
41
Views
2K
Alejandro
A
N
School that is cheaper (>$110k) or my preferred school which is closer to family?
Replies
7
Views
1K
Octcoming
Octcoming
M
whats more important, undergrad GPA or Master's GPA?
Replies
29
Views
2K
Goro
Goro
Top