Pre-Clinical Grades Stink, how bad will this hurt me?

[StupidMedSchool]

hey guys,
I am concerned about my pre-clinical grades. For all of first year and now the beginning of year 2, I have been getting mostly C's and some B's. I bust my ass but for some reason I just can't excel. What makes it worse is that the school I attend has a very high avg gpa (around a 3.6). So I am WAAAY below avg and pretty much at the bottom of the class.

I have always done amazingly well in clinical settings and truly hope my grades in year 3 will reflect this, however I am just concerned that my pitiful pre-clinical grades are going to really hurt me when I apply for residency. I am interested in EM which I know is not amazingly competitive, but is becoming increasingly so.

I have heard people say very often that pre-clinical grades don't mean much in the eyes of residency directors, but I have to imagine the fact that I am so low in my class rank will hurt me.

Can anyone speculate as to how big of a problem this may pose for me? Thanks.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[cliquesh]

hey guys,
I am concerned about my pre-clinical grades. For all of first year and now the beginning of year 2, I have been getting mostly C's and some B's. I bust my ass but for some reason I just can't excel. What makes it worse is that the school I attend has a very high avg gpa (around a 3.6). So I am WAAAY below avg and pretty much at the bottom of the class.

I have always done amazingly well in clinical settings and truly hope my grades in year 3 will reflect this, however I am just concerned that my pitiful pre-clinical grades are going to really hurt me when I apply for residency. I am interested in EM which I know is not amazingly competitive, but is becoming increasingly so.

I have heard people say very often that pre-clinical grades don't mean much in the eyes of residency directors, but I have to imagine the fact that I am so low in my class rank will hurt me.

Can anyone speculate as to how big of a problem this may pose for me? Thanks.

What do you want to do? Grades are important for more competitive specialities and/or competitive programs, but, in general, grades are not that important. Board scores are significantly more important.

 

[StupidMedSchool]

What do you want to do? Grades are important for more competitive specialities and/or competitive programs, but, in general, grades are not that important. Board scores are significantly more important.

I am hoping to do EM.

 

[Instatewaiter]

hey guys,
I am concerned about my pre-clinical grades. For all of first year and now the beginning of year 2, I have been getting mostly C's and some B's. I bust my ass but for some reason I just can't excel. What makes it worse is that the school I attend has a very high avg gpa (around a 3.6). So I am WAAAY below avg and pretty much at the bottom of the class.

I have always done amazingly well in clinical settings and truly hope my grades in year 3 will reflect this, however I am just concerned that my pitiful pre-clinical grades are going to really hurt me when I apply for residency. I am interested in EM which I know is not amazingly competitive, but is becoming increasingly so.

I have heard people say very often that pre-clinical grades don't mean much in the eyes of residency directors, but I have to imagine the fact that I am so low in my class rank will hurt me.

Can anyone speculate as to how big of a problem this may pose for me? Thanks.

Pre-clinical grades don't mean a whole heck of a lot. They can hurt you much more than help you. If you had multiple fails it would be a different story.

The grades may "hurt" you in terms of your class rank- at least in many schools. Some schools use the first 2 years + 3rd year to determine rank and others use just 3rd year grades (ask your administration which they are). The rank is often reflected in the dean's letter that is sent to residencies. They rarely give a discrete ranking and it is often buried in obscure language (ie he was a great student vs he was a good student) but it is there nonetheless.

As the previous poster said, board scores matter much more. Your 2nd year grades are the best indicator of how you will do on the boards. Of course a very solid study effort during board prep goes a long way. So with that said, I would re-double your efforts and try and do the best you can during your 2nd year. It will go a long way toward getting a better step1/level 1 score.

If you still maintain the same grades despite the effort, I wouldn't worry. Study hard for the boards and do the best you can. The most important thing is to not get discouraged and keep plugging so that you maximize what you can do.

Someone with average board scores and passing grades shouldn't have a problem matching into EM. EM (on the allopathic side) is very DO friendly and is medium in terms of competitiveness. I would ask people in the EM forum if they would recommend you take the USMLE if you plan on applying to ACGME (MD) programs.

So to summarize, the pre-clinical grades matter only because they influence your board scores and your class rank (which is hinted at in the dean's letter) but overall they are overlooked by residency program directors. If I remember correctly, they are like #7 on the list of things PDs look at behind board scores, third year grades, LORs, Dean's list, research and what school you went to.

 

[sylvanthus]

I am hoping to do EM.

Don't suck on your boards and 3rd year and you will be fine.

 

[thepoopologist]

Pre-clinical grades don't mean a whole heck of a lot. They can hurt you much more than help you. If you had multiple fails it would be a different story.

The grades may "hurt" you in terms of your class rank- at least in many schools. Some schools use the first 2 years + 3rd year to determine rank and others use just 3rd year grades (ask your administration which they are). The rank is often reflected in the dean's letter that is sent to residencies. They rarely give a discrete ranking and it is often buried in obscure language (ie he was a great student vs he was a good student) but it is there nonetheless.

As the previous poster said, board scores matter much more. Your 2nd year grades are the best indicator of how you will do on the boards. Of course a very solid study effort during board prep goes a long way. So with that said, I would re-double your efforts and try and do the best you can during your 2nd year. It will go a long way toward getting a better step1/level 1 score.

If you still maintain the same grades despite the effort, I wouldn't worry. Study hard for the boards and do the best you can. The most important thing is to not get discouraged and keep plugging so that you maximize what you can do.

Someone with average board scores and passing grades shouldn't have a problem matching into EM. EM (on the allopathic side) is very DO friendly and is medium in terms of competitiveness. I would ask people in the EM forum if they would recommend you take the USMLE if you plan on applying to ACGME (MD) programs.

So to summarize, the pre-clinical grades matter only because they influence your board scores and your class rank (which is hinted at in the dean's letter) but overall they are overlooked by residency program directors. If I remember correctly, they are like #7 on the list of things PDs look at behind board scores, third year grades, LORs, Dean's list, research and what school you went to.

I agree with this advice. Keep plugging away, regardless of performance. I'd like to suggest two programs for you, Pathoma and USMLERx. I'm doing these programs now to prep for the USMLE and wish Pathoma had been around at the start of my 2nd year. It would've helped a lot.

Don't suck on your boards and 3rd year and you will be fine.

Yes, and he'll be able to accomplish this if he can maintain a consistent effort during 2nd year, since knowing that material plays a significant part in doing well on the boards and answering a lot of pimp questions 3rd year. I'd say a good 90% of pimp questions I've been asked have been 2nd year material. I'm clarifying because what you're saying is recycled around here a lot and while it's true, the wording implies that one isn't related to the other.

 

[Eustace]

How important usually are preclinical grades for anesthesiology, both AOA and ACGME? Also, does this emphasis change if you're applying from a less prestigious/well-known osteopathic school?

 

[Kuba]

As someone already stated, the only reason they might matter is if they accurately reflect your preparation and medical knowledge going into boards and clinicals. If you have a better grasp than the grades indicate, than you'll be perfectly fine. I worry about the straight A med students that busted their butts memorizing every little detail. They tend to fall behind on clinical rotations.

 

[sylvanthus]

As someone already stated, the only reason they might matter is if they accurately reflect your preparation and medical knowledge going into boards and clinicals. If you have a better grasp than the grades indicate, than you'll be perfectly fine. I worry about the straight A med students that busted their butts memorizing every little detail. They tend to fall behind on clinical rotations.

I really hate hearing this crap because it is so incredibly wrong, but gets tossed around all the freakin' time. Somehow, the crappy students become amazing 3rd year and the good students somehow become sucky. Yaaaaaa, not likely and no N=1 example is going to suddenly make me believe it.

 

[Kuba]

I really hate hearing this crap because it is so incredibly wrong, but gets tossed around all the freakin' time. Somehow, the crappy students become amazing 3rd year and the good students somehow become sucky. Yaaaaaa, not likely and no N=1 example is going to suddenly make me believe it.

What year are you? I'm not saying all of them, but I've seen it happen quite a bit. Getting an A does not necessarily equal mastery of material.

And show me the study that disproves it.. since n=1 isn't the standard.

 

[sylvanthus]

What year are you? I'm not saying all of them, but I've seen it happen quite a bit. Getting an A does not necessarily equal mastery of material.

And show me the study that disproves it.. since n=1 isn't the standard.

And getting a B or C does?

The burden is on you to prove it, not for me to disprove it. You are the one making the initial claim. I am a 3rd year and though personal examples are meaningless, the top 4 people in my class all have extensive clinical experience as an optometrist, EMT, surgical tech, and MA, somehow I don't think we are sucking on our rotations.

This is a false claim that gets tossed around far too often for my liking.

 

[Kuba]

Sylvanthus, we have to agree to disagree. Studying for a test and studying for long-term knowledge and grasp of fundamentals is not the same.

 

[sylvanthus]

Furthermore, I see this is a crutch in that people assume, falsely, that even though they are sucking the first 2 years, somehow they are going to make up for it magicly during 3rd year and all the terrible gunners are going to fall flat on their faces.

 

[sylvanthus]

Sylvanthus, we have to agree to disagree. Studying for a test and studying for long-term knowledge and grasp of fundamentals is not the same.

They do not have to be mutually exclusive.

 

[dermpathdoc]

I really hate hearing this crap because it is so incredibly wrong, but gets tossed around all the freakin' time. Somehow, the crappy students become amazing 3rd year and the good students somehow become sucky. Yaaaaaa, not likely and no N=1 example is going to suddenly make me believe it.

okay in clinical rotations your preceptors and your fellow students will be rating you on what you know...say you did poorly in Pharm...your preceptor tells your school you can't come up with the drugs needed to treat a patient or determine an acid base ratio on a ventilated patient. That precepto r says, how come all the student's i am getting from your school are so bad at Pharmacology and don't know the basic drugs for treating a patient with a UTI? This is why you need to do better, because those preceptors are the one's who write your recommendations to your residency slots. This is not just passing boards, this is knowign your stuff when you do your rotations.

 

[TallScrubs]

They do not have to be mutually exclusive.

Agreed.

 

[Goro]

If I may jump in at this late date, If you're at High C level, you might be OK on your boards. We have tons of data to show that board scores reflect how you did in your 1st two years. Residency directors really don't give a rat's ass about your GPA, but they do care about board scores, so indirectly, a low pre-clinical GPA CAN hurt you.

Better luck this coming year!

hey guys,
I am concerned about my pre-clinical grades. For all of first year and now the beginning of year 2, I have been getting mostly C's and some B's. I bust my ass but for some reason I just can't excel. What makes it worse is that the school I attend has a very high avg gpa (around a 3.6). So I am WAAAY below avg and pretty much at the bottom of the class.

I have always done amazingly well in clinical settings and truly hope my grades in year 3 will reflect this, however I am just concerned that my pitiful pre-clinical grades are going to really hurt me when I apply for residency. I am interested in EM which I know is not amazingly competitive, but is becoming increasingly so.

I have heard people say very often that pre-clinical grades don't mean much in the eyes of residency directors, but I have to imagine the fact that I am so low in my class rank will hurt me.

Can anyone speculate as to how big of a problem this may pose for me? Thanks.

 

[JustPlainBill]

Furthermore, I see this is a crutch in that people assume, falsely, that even though they are sucking the first 2 years, somehow they are going to make up for it magicly during 3rd year and all the terrible gunners are going to fall flat on their faces.

interesting thread --- An attending we had used to say,"What the mind does not know, the eye will not see"....if you don't know that a clinical sign is indicative of a disease process (i.e. How was I to know that a patient turning blue meant he was hypoxic), you won't see/report/act on it.

Now, are grades the be all, end all -- probably not -- if you're fighting over the difference between a 94 and 96 -- it may not be worth the extra 2 hours of study time/sleep deprivation that it takes....you still have mastered the basic material. However, if you're fighting over the difference between a 75 and 90, yeah, grades do matter. at 75, you're just above minimally competent and need to do whatever it takes to improve....I don't care how good your clinical skills are, how well you relate to people or how much they like you...if you stand a chance of missing 25% of the diagnoses/treatments, it's a little bit scary....

And what is a gunner anyway -- I had one in my class who wanted to be a surgeon and his little crowd all wanted to be either surgeons, anesthesiologist, pathologists, ortho -- so what did those peckerwoods do? yeah, they found out about a Step 1 class that was going on about 20 miles from school over spring break of 2nd year. the group of them went and didn't bother to tell anyone else in the class about the Step 1 class. Ok, so what? Yeah, the specific reason they did it was to stack the deck to ensure their Step 1 scores were higher than the rest of the class....this was related by someone who was a roomate with one of them....to me, that's a gunner...someone who will screw everyone else to get ahead...

Anyway, don't waste time/energy with this....use the tests as an objective marker of where you stand vs. your peers. Let the tests point out areas that require more study and do that so that you become the best physician you can be, regardless of where you wind up.....I'm family medicine, didn't smoke the boards but passed on first try. Got to my #1 pick and then found I love EM and excelled at it...to the point where I'm talking with an attending about maybe moving to the local EM program after completing the FM residency....

Enjoy medical school -- most relaxed point of your medical career...trust me...

 

[deleted245139]

GPA in the first two is the single best predictor for board scores.

a 3 yr study at LECOM (classes of 2007 - 2009) GPA vs COMLEX 1 scores
http://www.aacom.org/events/annualmtg/past/2008/Documents/2008 Posters/Michael_Bradbury.pdf

Study out of WV
http://www.jaoa.org/cgi/content/full/107/11/502

Study out of NYCOM
http://www.jaoa.org/cgi/content/full/104/8/332

few factors are as reliable a predictor of performance on COMLEX 1 as GPA. Hard work early = success later. You are well served to work hard in your first two years. No, it doesn't guarantee success, but it DOES put you in the best position to SUCCEED.

 

[tehdude]

GPA in the first two is the single best predictor for board scores.

I seriously doubt that.

 

[deleted245139]

granted, i only posted three studies, but it's just easier to say 'no, you're wrong' isn't it. Regardless of how a school chooses to test the material, the better grasp one has on it the better they will perform.. please show me the huge student population with 2.0-2.5 who crush their boards.

I'll make an correction though... maybe not 'best', but certainly 'most reliable'

 

[MLT2MT2DO]

Since when is 61.5% a GOOD correlation?

Studies these days...

 

[bleeker10]

granted, i only posted three studies, but it's just easier to say 'no, you're wrong' isn't it. Regardless of how a school chooses to test the material, the better grasp one has on it the better they will perform.. please show me the huge student population with 2.0-2.5 who crush their boards.

I'll make an correction though... maybe not 'best', but certainly 'most reliable'

I agree about the students with low GPAs crushing boards. Most of the people in our class who did well, all had higher GPAs. My school shows us the top 10 or so scores from the previous classes and the GPAs of those people. I never saw any GPA less than 3.0 that had a score in the top 10 of that class. Everyone likes to tell students who have low GPAs to study hard and crush boards. It's really not that simple. If you have 6-12 months to study (without classwork), then yes you can do well. Most of us don't have that time commitment because we are taking classes on top of studying for boards.

Another thing is that students who do well the first two years are probably more likely to have the study habits to do well on boards. I know I couldn't have done as well as I did if I hadn't developed the study habits necessary.

 

[deleted245139]

Since when is 61.5% a GOOD correlation?

Studies these days...

fair enough...
not a perfect predictor, but when such a thing doesn't exist, and the question has so many variables, I suppose 61.5% is a good correlation. The OP was questioning if GPA in the first two yrs makes a difference. 61.5% is higher than chance, meaning yes; GPA in the first two years serves as a predictor of board performance (I was too emphatic about just how MUCH of a predictor in earlier posts).

 

[MLT2MT2DO]

fair enough...
not a perfect predictor, but when such a thing doesn't exist, and the question has so many variables, I suppose 61.5% is a good correlation. The OP was questioning if GPA in the first two yrs makes a difference. 61.5% is higher than chance, meaning yes; GPA in the first two years serves as a predictor of board performance (I was too emphatic about just how MUCH of a predictor in earlier posts).

Totally agree.

 

[Daedra22]

Doing well in class means you probably have a good grasp of the material which may lead to a higher board score

Doing well in class does not guarantee a great board score

Doing poorly in class does not help you get a great board score

Doing poorly in class does not guarantee a bad board score

...the only way good way to predict your board score is by taking practice tests before the real deal, and even then, practice tests are not always right. All med students want to see the future, when really all we can do is try our hardest to learn and then pray to the gods things go well on test day.

 

[bleeker10]

Doing well in class means you probably have a good grasp of the material which may lead to a higher board score

Doing well in class does not guarantee a great board score

Doing poorly in class does not help you get a great board score

Doing poorly in class does not guarantee a bad board score

...the only way good way to predict your board score is by taking practice tests before the real deal, and even then, practice tests are not always right. All med students want to see the future, when really all we can do is try our hardest to learn and then pray to the gods things go well on test day.

Agree 100%, especially the bolded part. There are plenty of examples of people who score well on practice tests and then score average on COMLEX or vice versa.

As I said in a previous thread, the best way to prep for boards is to LEARN the material the first two years so you can REVIEW the material for boards. You don't want to be learning the material when you are prepping for boards.

 

[bleeker10]

(I was too emphatic about just how MUCH of a predictor in earlier posts).

You are too emphatic about everything haha.