Screwing yourself over?

[amnesia]

Is it possible to go to an ivy league like Princeton and then get screwed over with a gpa of ~3.0, but a high MCAT score?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[jc11011]

Is it possible to go to an ivy league like Princeton and then get screwed over with a gpa of ~3.0, but a high MCAT score?

Yes, but like almost everyone already knows, most ivy leagues have serious grade inflation - I wouldn't worry about the grades at a place like Princeton if I were you.

 

[Centinel]

Yes, but like almost everyone already knows, most ivy leagues have serious grade inflation - I wouldn't worry about the grades at a place like Princeton if I were you.

How can you be so wrong?
a) By being uninformed.
b) By not being informed.
c) By trolling.

(I'm picking C!)

 

[jc11011]

How can you be so wrong?
a) By being uninformed.
b) By not being informed.
c) By trolling.

(I'm picking C!)

Actually, I don't have any specific knowledge about Princeton, but as a quick example, please tell me if you think a 3.7 from Dartmouth means anything at all, seeing as half of the bio classes there have means of an A-.

 

[jc11011]

How can you be so wrong?
a) By being uninformed.
b) By not being informed.
c) By trolling.

(I'm picking C!)

And I also feel kind of bad because I've never heard a formal definition of trolling...

 

[streetlight]

actually undergrad princeton is known for grade inflation, which they are trying to correct and deflate the grades a little. princeton is in the middle of this. i don't think all ivy league schools are guilty of grade inflation... cornell for example... i'd say that only really applies to the big H

 

[Centinel]

And I also feel kind of bad because I've never heard a formal definition of trolling...

Trolling is (here comes an informal definition) posting in such an inflammatory way as to virtually assure that controversy will erupt (without adding in a meaningful way to the discussion).

Your original post was a troll post:
"Yes, but like almost everyone already knows, most ivy leagues have serious grade inflation - I wouldn't worry about the grades at a place like Princeton if I were you."
(You make broad, general statements without any data to back them up, and then you brush off the OP's concerns in a way that was not useful.)

My response to your post was a troll post, too:
"How can you be so wrong?
a) By being uninformed.
b) By not being informed.
c) By trolling.

(I'm picking C!)"
(I ask a rhetorical question, but then proceed to list possible (rude) answers to the question.)

Anyway, trolling is fun, but lowers the level of discourse and should be used only rarely. (It also makes the troll look foolish.)

 

[Reimat]

Trolling is (here comes an informal definition) posting in such an inflammatory way as to virtually assure that controversy will erupt (without adding in a meaningful way to the discussion).

I don't think it's trolling if it's true:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2002/02/08/edtwof2.htm

There has been a problem with Ivy league grade inflation in the past which still exists today. I know just the other day I was talking with a friend who goes to Yale and he said it is rare for kids to get C's or lower- it just doesn't happen that often. That doesn't mean Ivy-leaguers don't work hard to get grades, they just aren't necessarily competing for them.

 

[Centinel]

I don't think it's trolling if it's true:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2002/02/08/edtwof2.htm

There has been a problem with Ivy league grade inflation in the past which still exists today. I know just the other day I was talking with a friend who goes to Yale and he said it is rare for kids to get C's or lower- it just doesn't happen that often. That doesn't mean Ivy-leaguers don't work hard to get grades, they just aren't necessarily competing for them.

Wow, your article totally rebuffs your point. Read it first, next time.

From the article: "And it extends well beyond Harvard.

Fewer than 20% of all college students receive grades below a B-minus, according to a study released this week by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences."

The first sentence, coupled with the title ("Ivy League Grade Inflation") might make you think that the grade inflation extends well beyond Harvard and into the other Ivies. But no, that's not what it means at all.

The next paragraph clarifies what both the title and that previous sentence mean: The title means "Ivy Leage Grade Inflation" as in "Big Time Grade Inflation," not as in "Grade Inflation in the Ivy League." Why do we, the readers, know this? Because the paragraph that I've quoted for you states:

"Fewer than 20% of all college students receive grades below a B-."

The article is not saying that 20% of all grades given are B-'es; it's saying that only 20% of all students have received grades below a B-. This isn't about the Ivy League, folks; it's much more important and far-reaching than that. It's about grade inflation nationwide.

 

[mynamewastaken]

people who want to start this debate again should save us all the time and just take a class at an Ivy.

Wow, your article totally rebuffs your point. Read it first, next time.

From the article: "And it extends well beyond Harvard.

Fewer than 20% of all college students receive grades below a B-minus, according to a study released this week by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences."

The first sentence, coupled with the title ("Ivy League Grade Inflation") might make you think that the grade inflation extends well beyond Harvard and into the other Ivies. But no, that's not what it means at all.

The next paragraph clarifies what both the title and that previous sentence mean: The title means "Ivy Leage Grade Inflation" as in "Big Time Grade Inflation," not as in "Grade Inflation in the Ivy League." Why do we, the readers, know this? Because the paragraph that I've quoted for you states:

"Fewer than 20% of all college students receive grades below a B-."

The article is not saying that 20% of all grades given are B-'es; it's saying that only 20% of all students have received grades below a B-. This isn't about the Ivy League, folks; it's much more important and far-reaching than that. It's about grade inflation nationwide.

 

[beponychick]

I don't think it's trolling if it's true:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/2002/02/08/edtwof2.htm

There has been a problem with Ivy league grade inflation in the past which still exists today. I know just the other day I was talking with a friend who goes to Yale and he said it is rare for kids to get C's or lower- it just doesn't happen that often. That doesn't mean Ivy-leaguers don't work hard to get grades, they just aren't necessarily competing for them.

Oh blah, I hate these posts. The article uses Harvard and Princeton and generalizes to all Ivy League schools! Its not fair. I have encountered NO grade inflation at UPenn and plenty of students work their asses off, compete against other really smart students, and end up with Cs!

 

[mynamewastaken]

amen.

i'm a penn grad and now a post bacc because that is damn true. Listen, even if the kids at harvard and princeton are given A's they are still exceptionally bright and their classes are still taught at a level unparalled with those at state schools....these kids will do well anywhere don't hate them because of it....and as a side note....there are documented statistics proving the correlation between SAT score and MCAT scores....that princeton grad who got a 1590 sat and 38 MCAT will do just fine with his "mediocre" gpa in most instances

Oh blah, I hate these posts. The article uses Harvard and Princeton and generalizes to all Ivy League schools! Its not fair. I have encountered NO grade inflation at UPenn and plenty of students work their asses off, compete against other really smart students, and end up with Cs!

 

[hardy]

Trolling is (here comes an informal definition) posting in such an inflammatory way as to virtually assure that controversy will erupt (without adding in a meaningful way to the discussion).

The term trolling is incredibly overused on this board (and incorrectly too).

According to the one and only source - the Hacker's dictionary - a troll is:

[From the Usenet group alt.folklore.urban] To utter a posting on Usenet designed to attract predictable responses or flames. Derives from the phrase "trolling for newbies" which in turn comes from mainstream "trolling", a style of fishing in which one trails bait through a likely spot hoping for a bite. The well-constructed troll is a post that induces lots of newbies and flamers to make themselves look even more clueless than they already do, while subtly conveying to the more savvy and experienced that it is in fact a deliberate troll. If you don't fall for the joke, you get to be in on it.

Some people claim that the troll is properly a narrower category than flame bait, that a troll is categorized by containing some

In order for this to be trolling, grade inflation at Ivy league schools would have to be something that is not really controversial or specifically posted to create a flame war. However, there are claims from both sides that grade inflation affects ivy league schools more than public schools (see www.gradeinflation.com). As such, it is certainely a topic of debate and given the context the claim has its place. I would therefore not call this trolling.
However, if, on the other hand, he posted this only to create an uproar, then that would be considered trolling.

 

[hardy]

Let me add that you might want to call it flame bait. Every person posting about grade inflation should most certainely be aware that it can stir controversy (i.e. a flame war). But it is NOT trolling as there is no malicious motivation.

 

[curlykid]

i have a similar question:

i have busted my butt off for my almost 3.5 GPA (~3.3 science). I go to a top 15 school, with no inflation that I know of (they curve the intro classes so the average grade for the course is either C+/C or B-/C+). Am I screwed for medical school? (I haven't taken my MCATs yet, but assuming I do well, do I still have a chance at a decent medical school? - I am also a MA resident) I've been reading the posts for a little while now, and I am amazed how many stellar students have been turned away for medical school

 

[rugirlie]

Okay, I am only getting in on this debate because I constantly have to defend the validity of my gpa from a state school.... people think that just because its a state school, they hand you the A's on a platter... anyhow, here is what I have to say...

1.) If it is so obvious to all of you that some schools have high grade inflation and other schools have none, don't you think adcoms know this??
2.) If the only purpose of the MCAT is supposed to be the equalizer of all gpas from different schools, then why even bother having grades? Why don't we just have the MCAT?
3.) Furthermore, for the people who argue that people (at schools where grade inflation is assumed by outsiders) who have high gpas but low MCAT scores just validates the inflation of the school, what does this say about other circumstances.. .like the people at those same schools that have high gpas and high MCAT... which just brings me back to point number two... and furthermore what about people at non-inflated schools who have lower gpas and lower MCAT.... now are we saying that they're not smart because of their MCAT... compare them to their peers who have the same gpa but a high MCAT...

My point is that gpas mean something or else they would be ruled out and MCAT would be the only numerical factor in admissions... all of us like to bitch that adcoms know nothing but really, they've been doin this for years, all of them... what do we know as young, pre-meds? Do we know better about what numbers indicate what about a person as far as their potential to do well in med school? If you're someone who thinks so, then I say to you that you must think mighty highly of yourself and probably wrongfully so. One last thing... I'm sure classes differ per school... some classes at some schools are easier than others and vice versa.. however, a 4 year record of grades either way is not easily manipulated by inflation or lack of it at a school... You do not get a C or a B- in every single class at your school because your school is harder than everywhere else... some people are getting the higher grades and if its not you, then why don't you look at yourself and not the grading system? Furthermore, if you're at a school where A's are more attainable, getting in A in every single class consistently for four years is hard work still.. its not like you can do nothing and get a 4.0 or else everyone there would have one... And... I'm spent

 

[amnesia]

OK, thanks.

It's a very hard decision to choose colleges. I don't want to mess anything up.

 

[Centinel]

The term trolling is incredibly overused on this board (and incorrectly too).

According to the one and only source - the Hacker's dictionary - a troll is:


In order for this to be trolling, grade inflation at Ivy league schools would have to be something that is not really controversial or specifically posted to create a flame war. However, there are claims from both sides that grade inflation affects ivy league schools more than public schools (see www.gradeinflation.com). As such, it is certainely a topic of debate and given the context the claim has its place. I would therefore not call this trolling.
However, if, on the other hand, he posted this only to create an uproar, then that would be considered trolling.

From the page that you linked to:
"Statements have been made by some that grade inflation is confined largely to selective and highly selective colleges and universities. The three charts above would suggest that these statements are not correct. Significant grade inflation is present virtually everywhere and its rate of change in terms of GPA shift is about the same everywhere. "

Again, people, please read what you link to. Alternatively, you could make up your statements and not provide a link.

 

[hardy]

From the page that you linked to:
"Statements have been made by some that grade inflation is confined largely to selective and highly selective colleges and universities. The three charts above would suggest that these statements are not correct. Significant grade inflation is present virtually everywhere and its rate of change in terms of GPA shift is about the same everywhere. "

Again, people, please read what you link to. Alternatively, you could make up your statements and not provide a link.

What's your point?
My claim was that the topic is controversial and no opinion is accepted universally. The website in itself is evidence for the controversy! Whether or not there is more grade inflation at certain schools is none of my concern. What bothers me is your labeling people as trolls just because they do not agree with your opinion. As you know, a similar tactic is used by governments of a certain political alignment to prevent opposition. A troll is somebody like the OP in this thread and not somebody who just doesn't agree with you on a topic for which you cannot produce any convincing evidence anywany.

Let me refer you to the following post which is in my opinion the best thing that has been said about grade inflation:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=2772616&postcount=9

The only thing I don't agree with is the last paragraph. Nobody on this board will be able to offer an unbiased opinion.

 

[rugirlie]

What's your point?
My claim was that the topic is controversial and no opinion is accepted universally. The website in itself is evidence for the controversy! Whether or not there is more grade inflation at certain schools is none of my concern. What bothers me is your labeling people as trolls just because they do not agree with your opinion. As you know, a similar tactic is used by governments of a certain political alignment to prevent opposition. A troll is somebody like the OP in this thread and not somebody who just doesn't agree with you on a topic for which you cannot produce any convincing evidence anywany.

Let me refer you to the following post which is in my opinion the best thing that has been said about grade inflation:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?p=2772616#post2772616
The only thing I don't agree with is the last paragraph. Nobody on this board will be able to offer an unbiased opinion

what post are you referring to? you linked the whole thread... you have to click on the number in the upper right hand corner of the thread and then link that...

 

[hardy]

what post are you referring to? you linked the whole thread... you have to click on the number in the upper right hand corner of the thread and then link that...

It works for me with just the post number in the URL, but I changed it for your viewing pleasure.

 

[rugirlie]

It works for me with just the post number in the URL, but I changed it for your viewing pleasure.

 

[Centinel]

What's your point?
My claim was that the topic is controversial and no opinion is accepted universally. The website in itself is evidence for the controversy! Whether or not there is more grade inflation at certain schools is none of my concern. What bothers me is your labeling people as trolls just because they do not agree with your opinion. As you know, a similar tactic is used by governments of a certain political alignment to prevent opposition. A troll is somebody like the OP in this thread and not somebody who just doesn't agree with you on a topic for which you cannot produce any convincing evidence anywany.

Let me refer you to the following post which is in my opinion the best thing that has been said about grade inflation:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=2772616&postcount=9

The only thing I don't agree with is the last paragraph. Nobody on this board will be able to offer an unbiased opinion.

"However, there are claims from both sides that grade inflation affects ivy league schools more than public schools"
^ The way you wrote this, it looked to me like you were saying that both sides think that grade inflation affects Ivy League schools more than public schools.

 

[JIKJen124]

Yet another Amen to the lack of grad inflation at UPenn... As a postbacc, if it's here I seem to be missing it somehow...

amen.

i'm a penn grad and now a post bacc because that is damn true. Listen, even if the kids at harvard and princeton are given A's they are still exceptionally bright and their classes are still taught at a level unparalled with those at state schools....these kids will do well anywhere don't hate them because of it....and as a side note....there are documented statistics proving the correlation between SAT score and MCAT scores....that princeton grad who got a 1590 sat and 38 MCAT will do just fine with his "mediocre" gpa in most instances

 

[hardy]

"However, there are claims from both sides that grade inflation affects ivy league schools more than public schools"
^ The way you wrote this, it looked to me like you were saying that both sides think that grade inflation affects Ivy League schools more than public schools.

Ah... yes, now that I look at it again it is unclear, sorry.

 

[amnesia]

Thanks for... hijacking the topic...

Princeton or UF? It's a hard decision.

 

[hardy]

Assuming that medical school does not work out for some reason, a degree from Princeton will be worth much more in private industry.
If you want to base your decision on the possible GPA, go with Princeton. If you have to take other things into consideration (like tuition) then it requires more thinking.

 

[amnesia]

Money isn't an issue. I realize that an AB from Princeton is worth a lot more than a BS from UF.

I've heard that Princeton isn't that hard, but then I come to this message board and it seems everyone is struggling with school. I really don't think it's that hard. I can't speak with authority, but people said high school was hard. It's hard, but it's not impossible to get straight As.

 

[Hebrew Hammer]

Please....PLease....PLease....No more of these really stupid threads. This thread needs to be closed

 

[45408]

Please....PLease....PLease....No more of these really stupid threads. This thread needs to be closed

Word. Look - if you can get into Princeton, you'll probably get a good GPA just like you would at a state school. Attend the school you will most enjoy your four years at.

 

[Centinel]

If you wouldn't go to [insert any school's name here] because you are afraid of getting sub-stellar grades, you don't belong there.

Go where you want to go because they offer stellar academics; because you like the living system; because you like the students; because you like the location.

Don't go somewhere because you think you can get good grades there although you'd rather be elsewhere. More importantly, don't not go somewhere because you don't think you can rock the GPA.

 

[Peterock]

Okay, I am only getting in on this debate because I constantly have to defend the validity of my gpa from a state school.... people think that just because its a state school, they hand you the A's on a platter... anyhow, here is what I have to say...

1.) If it is so obvious to all of you that some schools have high grade inflation and other schools have none, don't you think adcoms know this??
2.) If the only purpose of the MCAT is supposed to be the equalizer of all gpas from different schools, then why even bother having grades? Why don't we just have the MCAT?
3.) Furthermore, for the people who argue that people (at schools where grade inflation is assumed by outsiders) who have high gpas but low MCAT scores just validates the inflation of the school, what does this say about other circumstances.. .like the people at those same schools that have high gpas and high MCAT... which just brings me back to point number two... and furthermore what about people at non-inflated schools who have lower gpas and lower MCAT.... now are we saying that they're not smart because of their MCAT... compare them to their peers who have the same gpa but a high MCAT...

My point is that gpas mean something or else they would be ruled out and MCAT would be the only numerical factor in admissions... all of us like to bitch that adcoms know nothing but really, they've been doin this for years, all of them... what do we know as young, pre-meds? Do we know better about what numbers indicate what about a person as far as their potential to do well in med school? If you're someone who thinks so, then I say to you that you must think mighty highly of yourself and probably wrongfully so. One last thing... I'm sure classes differ per school... some classes at some schools are easier than others and vice versa.. however, a 4 year record of grades either way is not easily manipulated by inflation or lack of it at a school... You do not get a C or a B- in every single class at your school because your school is harder than everywhere else... some people are getting the higher grades and if its not you, then why don't you look at yourself and not the grading system? Furthermore, if you're at a school where A's are more attainable, getting in A in every single class consistently for four years is hard work still.. its not like you can do nothing and get a 4.0 or else everyone there would have one... And... I'm spent

1) Why do we assume that the average 65 year old adcom knows what Biology at Rutgers is like vs. Duke. You realize that most of these people are still practicing medicine. I wonder if this is b/c you feel you deserved to get into your medical school and your situation worked out for you, therefore everyone should "trust in the all knowing wisdom of the adcoms" mentality.

2) Everyone looks at rankings in the US News. Everyone. And how are they measured? By numbers (gpa/mcat/total research dollars), not by ones desire/ability to practice medicine (I don't think grades show your dedication to medicine but more to academics and competition). Reputation is based on numbers. Students get angry at the Harvard/Yale/MIT kids b/c their school is obviously the most stringent based on the numbers. Numbers very few people on this website had.
Medical school is the same way, every school that we consider "elite" like Upenn has ridiculously bloated scores and research dollars. Of course, we just can't see where their students came from ugrad b/c that is never really openly published.

3) The MCAT is a test of reading comprehension and previous knowledge/mechanics ability of BASIC (late high school / early college) science. MCAT is entirely based on you vs. an entire population. GPA is based not only on work, but also health, course selection, testing population within the class, professor favortism, professor biasness in test questions. The whole idea of the MCAT is to see if that gpa (average tester has a 3.6) is actually worth more than just a weak courseload that tests on a small amount of material or if you're actually learning something etc. Of course since the average student gets a 24 on the MCAT - it shows that no, a 3.6 at most schools isn't all it's cracked up to be!
However, the MCAT is a 8 hr test and there are some geniuses out there (see Nutmeg) who study for all of 3 hours and drop a 40. They want peopel who are interested in learning medicine for the long haul (judged by gpa) AND who are smart. Unfortunately, if your undergrad premed population has a higher MCAT than the average medical school population getting a B+/A- in a class that has a medican score of a B-/C+ (2.5median gpa) is rather daunting. Duke's ave MCAT is a 31.5-33 based on any given year.

People at top schools work their asses off. Don't you think it's really odd that roughly 50% of people at a top school who graduated in the top 5% of their HS class AND had awesome SAT scores, turn "lazy" when they get into their top school. Someone has to be below average at top schools, but many times the below average students are still very good workers and intelligent enough for plenty of medical schools. The absurdly high average MCAT at most top schools proves my point. The average premed at my undergrad (duke ~32) has a higher mcat on average than the average accepted medical student (29.5).

Medical schools have to keep their programs looking strong and this is based on numbers, not undergrad rep, volunteering, or desire to be a doc. Just b/c adcoms think a certain way doesn't validate a person's accomplishments.

 

[crazy_cavalier]

Is it possible to go to an ivy league like Princeton and then get screwed over with a gpa of ~3.0, but a high MCAT score?

Not sure what you are asking here. But I'll venture a guess and respond accordingly with an example of a remarkable person who gave a talk to me and a group of my peers.

The person I am speaking of was from Princeton, had a pretty "low" gpa... decent MCAT's, and in the end he did a MD/PHD at a really, really great school. It's not so much the numbers but more the drive and the motivation.

good luck

 

[gujuDoc]

Amnesia,

If you prefer Princeton go there. If you prefer UF, go there.
Remember that UF has a top 50 med school affiliated with it. It also has the best premed program in the state of Florida with numerous opportunities. Having a med school around the corner, it offers a great chance for both research and clinical opportunities. Their premed organizations are very good too. Their AED chapter offers good shadowing rotational programs, volunteering programs, etc.

Their Premed AMSA offers many leadership opportunities that allow you to get involved with learning about different aspects of healthcare, national leadership opportunities you gain through convention, etc.

But if you really want an IVY league, then go with Princeton.

Go where you feel you'll be happier.

 

[gujuDoc]

People at top schools work their asses off. Don't you think it's really odd that roughly 50% of people at a top school who graduated in the top 5% of their HS class AND had awesome SAT scores, turn "lazy" when they get into their top school. Someone has to be below average at top schools, but many times the below average students are still very good workers and intelligent enough for plenty of medical schools. The absurdly high average MCAT at most top schools proves my point. The average premed at my undergrad (duke ~32) has a higher mcat on average than the average accepted medical student (29.5).

Medical schools have to keep their programs looking strong and this is based on numbers, not undergrad rep, volunteering, or desire to be a doc. Just b/c adcoms think a certain way doesn't validate a person's accomplishments.

I think you have to take into account another factor. A lot of top students in highschool make up the future classes of these higher ranked universities. So when you get there, you will be surrounded with people with equal or higher intelligence then you and so you won't always remain at the top. That really doesn't mean that you are not smart. It means that you are competing with people with equal intelligence as you, so it is going to be tough.

 

[45408]

Medical school is the same way, every school that we consider "elite" like Upenn has ridiculously bloated scores and research dollars. Of course, we just can't see where their students came from ugrad b/c that is never really openly published.

Maybe not in one single source, but I've found numerous listings in publications from individual med schools that list off the undergrads that their students graduated from. UWisc even listed every college that had at least one applicant apply from there with the number of AMCAS applicants, secondary applicants, interviewed applicants, accepted applicants and matriculants.

I'm looking through the 2003-2004 Bulletin of Yale University, and it gives the names of every student in each year, their undergrad, and their home town. For giggles and thrills, Yale's MS4 class that year had students from (just running off the top handful): NYU, Yale, Amherst, Brown, Emory, UPenn, Swarthmore, Edinburgh (Scotland), UPitt, McGill, Yale, Upenn, Stanford, Princeton, Boston, Wake Forest, Clemson, Stanford, Yale, Brown, Cornell, Standford, Harvard, UT Austin, Brown, UCLA, Princeton, etc.

Obviously, lots of well-known schools. Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Peterock]

Maybe not in one single source, but I've found numerous listings in publications from individual med schools that list off the undergrads that their students graduated from. UWisc even listed every college that had at least one applicant apply from there with the number of AMCAS applicants, secondary applicants, interviewed applicants, accepted applicants and matriculants.

I'm looking through the 2003-2004 Bulletin of Yale University, and it gives the names of every student in each year, their undergrad, and their home town. For giggles and thrills, Yale's MS4 class that year had students from (just running off the top handful): NYU, Yale, Amherst, Brown, Emory, UPenn, Swarthmore, Edinburgh (Scotland), UPitt, McGill, Yale, Upenn, Stanford, Princeton, Boston, Wake Forest, Clemson, Stanford, Yale, Brown, Cornell, Standford, Harvard, UT Austin, Brown, UCLA, Princeton, etc.

Obviously, lots of well-known schools. Draw your own conclusions.

Yeah, you can find it for SOME, not all of the medical schools if you dig around their websites (Wake Forest, Vanderbilt, etc). But as far as USNews and MSAR go, people aren't looking at that and it is not published. So for most students when they see that a school's average matriculated student has a 3.65 and a 30 MCAT they assume their are respectable EC's and school names going along with the applicant, but that isn't always the case (there are definitely some midwest schools out there like this...)

When it comes down to it, we're talking about big business... it's all about where the dollars go. A medical school with reputable students and principal investigators is attractive for government and private sector research dollars. Reputation is primarily based (to us) on numbers and to private sector on patents and potential research discoveries. That potential is at least in some part based on public perception of faculty + student's intelligence etc.


Back to the OP's question:

Yes you can fuvk yourself over by going to a top private school, particularly if you take a lot of bcpm classes where the median gpa falls between a C+/B- (and therefore the median gpa is a 2.5). Many of the upper level classes are taught at the phd or md level and the bottom line is that someone has to get a B or below.

I talked to several deans about this. Basically if you have a good mcat and a bad gpa they say that you did not dedicate yourself to academics. That you were choosing to "hold back" because they believe that the only thing determining your grade at that point is your work ethic, not ability.

Of course, the flaw in this reasoning is that I know many people in my undergrad who worked more hours than they do in medical school (most of my friends admit to studying 5 hours / day in medical school). At ~18-24yrs old taking an undergrad education should NOT require you to work the hours you would in medical school, that is absolutely crazy.

Going to an elite school makes you run the risk of showing that you have a breaking point that would not otherwise be breached at an easier public school (and yes they are easier please just look at the average SAT, MCATs, % of accepted premeds based on school population, etc), so you do run the risk of fvcking yourself over. The benefits of course are that IF you can climb to the top, you will be rewarded (generally) in admissions.

My recommendation would be to go to a top school and major outside of the sciences in something where most of the grades are A's and mix your bpcm classes with summer classes at low ranked public schools.

OR

Go to a good public school and take nothing but the equivalent of medical school classes.

 

[beponychick]

Yeah, you can find it for SOME, not all of the medical schools if you dig around their websites (Wake Forest, Vanderbilt, etc). But as far as USNews and MSAR go, people aren't looking at that and it is not published. So for most students when they see that a school's average matriculated student has a 3.65 and a 30 MCAT they assume their are respectable EC's and school names going along with the applicant, but that isn't always the case (there are definitely some midwest schools out there like this...)

When it comes down to it, we're talking about big business... it's all about where the dollars go. A medical school with reputable students and principal investigators is attractive for government and private sector research dollars. Reputation is primarily based (to us) on numbers and to private sector on patents and potential research discoveries. That potential is at least in some part based on public perception of faculty + student's intelligence etc.


Back to the OP's question:

Yes you can fuvk yourself over by going to a top private school, particularly if you take a lot of bcpm classes where the median gpa falls between a C+/B- (and therefore the median gpa is a 2.5). Many of the upper level classes are taught at the phd or md level and the bottom line is that someone has to get a B or below.

I talked to several deans about this. Basically if you have a good mcat and a bad gpa they say that you did not dedicate yourself to academics. That you were choosing to "hold back" because they believe that the only thing determining your grade at that point is your work ethic, not ability.

Of course, the flaw in this reasoning is that I know many people in my undergrad who worked more hours than they do in medical school (most of my friends admit to studying 5 hours / day in medical school). At ~18-24yrs old taking an undergrad education should NOT require you to work the hours you would in medical school, that is absolutely crazy.

Going to an elite school makes you run the risk of showing that you have a breaking point that would not otherwise be breached at an easier public school (and yes they are easier please just look at the average SAT, MCATs, % of accepted premeds based on school population, etc), so you do run the risk of fvcking yourself over. The benefits of course are that IF you can climb to the top, you will be rewarded (generally) in admissions.

My recommendation would be to go to a top school and major outside of the sciences in something where most of the grades are A's and mix your bpcm classes with summer classes at low ranked public schools.

OR

Go to a good public school and take nothing but the equivalent of medical school classes.

Having gone to an Ivy, I whole heartedly believe this is the BEST advice anyone can ever give you! Thank you Peterock!

 

[Hoberto]

OP-

This must be a very difficult decision for you. With money not being an issue you at least don't have to worry about where you'll work, if you can find roomates and all the other financial crap. So, you are left with other decision making factors. Such as: where can you get the highest GPA? where will you be most happy? Who has the best program in the field you are interested in? Who has the best pre-med environment? Is the environment competitive or friendly? There are, of course, many other things to consider. Given your background chances are good you will do fine in your premed classes without too much trouble. Now, look at the other things.

If it were me, I would seriously consider the department I am interested in. For instance, if I planned to major in Developmental Anthropology I would want to know which school has the best program? I don't mean highest rated but, which program has the most courses to offer in Developmental Anthropology that are interesting to me? Which program offers the most opportunities for research or other avenues for futher exploration in Dev. Anth? Personally, I really would want to get some hands on experience be it in the lab or in the field. Now, say school #1 only offers lab work but school #2 offers both lab and field experience, I might want to choose school #2. I would consider in this vein until I had compared the points of each school that are of most concern to me and could confidently say which school's program would best prepare me for a career in my major. Let's face it, lots of people don't get into med school or change their minds completely. If you are in a program that will do a good job preparing you for a career that you will enjoy, you will make the grades, be happy and have an alternative career possibility.

Now, another option I don't think anyone has mentioned is to attend Princeton for at least a year. This would give you time to take some of the pre-med classes and other general college requirements. If you are miserable after that first year for whatever reason, (You hate the classes, your colleagues, the town, you're homesick, your significant other is moving to Missouri and you want go, you just won a Nobel and are now a PI and don't need Princeton, etc.), you can transfer to UF (or maybe UMissouri if there is such a place ) and complete your education there. You will not have lost anything if you end up transferring and will get to find out if Princeton is for you.

Good luck!

 

[rugirlie]

1) Why do we assume that the average 65 year old adcom knows what Biology at Rutgers is like vs. Duke. You realize that most of these people are still practicing medicine. I wonder if this is b/c you feel you deserved to get into your medical school and your situation worked out for you, therefore everyone should "trust in the all knowing wisdom of the adcoms" mentality.

I'm not saying adcom members know what classes are like at every single ugrad institution. Obviously, that is ridiculously absurd. What I am saying is that adcoms are not stupid. They are not all 65 year olds who went to medical school decades ago. Adcoms are made up of fresh doctors, PhDs, even in some cases, 4th year medical students. They are not that far removed from the undergrad experience AND just like all of us know, they obviously know the different caliber of students at top schools versus public state schools becuse just like med schools, admissions requirements are different for both. How could they not know this?! For people to think that adcoms look at "lower" average gpas from a top school and think that everyone there is lazy is insulting their intelligence. However, there are plenty of people from top schools who do do well... when compared to people who aren't doing well, they're gonna be on top, regardless of your MCAT score.

2) Everyone looks at rankings in the US News. Everyone. And how are they measured? By numbers (gpa/mcat/total research dollars), not by ones desire/ability to practice medicine (I don't think grades show your dedication to medicine but more to academics and competition). Reputation is based on numbers. Students get angry at the Harvard/Yale/MIT kids b/c their school is obviously the most stringent based on the numbers. Numbers very few people on this website had.
Medical school is the same way, every school that we consider "elite" like Upenn has ridiculously bloated scores and research dollars. Of course, we just can't see where their students came from ugrad b/c that is never really openly published.

First of all, I didn't say ability/desire to practice medicine, I said predictor of how well you will do in medical school. And if it is so obvious to everyone that gpa does not really mean anything since you can't compare across schools or even within schools (people bitching about diff professors, etc), why would a school want its ranking to be judged on a useless number? That makes no sense. Adcoms across the board at every medical school feel that gpa is a valid indicator of work and assessment in pre-med classes as a predictor of med school performance and its really naive of you to think that everyone on an adcom is stupid and doesn't really know what they're talking about. Who do you think you are that you know more than all of them? Fyi, no med school makes a point of trying to hide where their ugrads come from. At every interview I went to, I was given a list of represented ugrads from their current MS1 class. You can also find this information on most school websites. I don't even know what your point in bringing this up was unless you're trying to say that schools have ridiculously high gpa averages but really its because all of their kids are from easy to get A's state schools, which is also ludicrous because top med schools are name ****** as much as anyone else and tend to accept the majority of their students from top named ugrad schools.

Unfortunately, if your undergrad premed population has a higher MCAT than the average medical school population getting a B+/A- in a class that has a medican score of a B-/C+ (2.5median gpa) is rather daunting. Duke's ave MCAT is a 31.5-33 based on any given year.

Fyi, Rutgers pre-meds have an average gpa of 3.223. Unfortunately, the average reported MCAT score is not listed, as you might say is pretty conveinent. Of course, our gpa is low, I'm sure you'll say because we're all stupid as opposed to your gpa average being low because you're all smart but its just really really hard. No one goes to a state school because they can't afford a top school or they have to work and commute from home. Oh no, the only people who go to state schools are people who were too stupid to get into a top school. This is something you've personally said to me, which just shows how ignorant you are. Do you know how many people at my school that I know who got into top schools but turned it down for a full ride at Rutgers because it was more economically feasable for them. Not everyone wants to be in massive debt even before med school starts.

People at top schools work their asses off.

People anywhere who do well work their asses off, but maybe in your eyes thats just because we're stupid to begin with so the reason we're working hard is because we're not capable of understanding the material without a lot of constant effort.

And just to add on, the scoring of the MCAT is very precarious. If you want to talk about cross comparison, there are a ridiculous amount of different versions of different sections, all scored on different scales from each other, even within one testing date. Some people even insist one administration of the test is generally easier than the other (April versus Aug). Even a difference of 3 points is not that hard to grasp. This is really easy to see when taking the AAMC practice tests and scoring them with the provided scales.. one question always makes a difference between two particular scores, say a 10 or a 11 so potentially 1 question per section can make the difference between a 30 and a 33. I don't think this shows that the person who got the 33 is way smarter than the person who got the 30. All it shows is that they answered 3 more questions right, perhaps even by chance or good guessing. Like I said, if the MCAT was so perfect and its score is golden in determining who well do well in med school, why is it not the only numerical admissions indicator?

 

[wowzer]

Word. Look - if you can get into Princeton, you'll probably get a good GPA just like you would at a state school. Attend the school you will most enjoy your four years at.

I think drinklord and jc should take it up in the boxing ring

 

[45408]

So for most students when they see that a school's average matriculated student has a 3.65 and a 30 MCAT they assume their are respectable EC's and school names going along with the applicant, but that isn't always the case (there are definitely some midwest schools out there like this...)

what do you mean by that?

 

[10minutes]

Good points.

I'm not saying adcom members know what classes are like at every single ugrad institution. Obviously, that is ridiculously absurd. What I am saying is that adcoms are not stupid. They are not all 65 year olds who went to medical school decades ago. Adcoms are made up of fresh doctors, PhDs, even in some cases, 4th year medical students. They are not that far removed from the undergrad experience AND just like all of us know, they obviously know the different caliber of students at top schools versus public state schools becuse just like med schools, admissions requirements are different for both. How could they not know this?! For people to think that adcoms look at "lower" average gpas from a top school and think that everyone there is lazy is insulting their intelligence. However, there are plenty of people from top schools who do do well... when compared to people who aren't doing well, they're gonna be on top, regardless of your MCAT score.



First of all, I didn't say ability/desire to practice medicine, I said predictor of how well you will do in medical school. And if it is so obvious to everyone that gpa does not really mean anything since you can't compare across schools or even within schools (people bitching about diff professors, etc), why would a school want its ranking to be judged on a useless number? That makes no sense. Adcoms across the board at every medical school feel that gpa is a valid indicator of work and assessment in pre-med classes as a predictor of med school performance and its really naive of you to think that everyone on an adcom is stupid and doesn't really know what they're talking about. Who do you think you are that you know more than all of them? Fyi, no med school makes a point of trying to hide where their ugrads come from. At every interview I went to, I was given a list of represented ugrads from their current MS1 class. You can also find this information on most school websites. I don't even know what your point in bringing this up was unless you're trying to say that schools have ridiculously high gpa averages but really its because all of their kids are from easy to get A's state schools, which is also ludicrous because top med schools are name ****** as much as anyone else and tend to accept the majority of their students from top named ugrad schools.



Fyi, Rutgers pre-meds have an average gpa of 3.223. Unfortunately, the average reported MCAT score is not listed, as you might say is pretty conveinent. Of course, our gpa is low, I'm sure you'll say because we're all stupid as opposed to your gpa average being low because you're all smart but its just really really hard. No one goes to a state school because they can't afford a top school or they have to work and commute from home. Oh no, the only people who go to state schools are people who were too stupid to get into a top school. This is something you've personally said to me, which just shows how ignorant you are. Do you know how many people at my school that I know who got into top schools but turned it down for a full ride at Rutgers because it was more economically feasable for them. Not everyone wants to be in massive debt even before med school starts.


People anywhere who do well work their asses off, but maybe in your eyes thats just because we're stupid to begin with so the reason we're working hard is because we're not capable of understanding the material without a lot of constant effort.

And just to add on, the scoring of the MCAT is very precarious. If you want to talk about cross comparison, there are a ridiculous amount of different versions of different sections, all scored on different scales from each other, even within one testing date. Some people even insist one administration of the test is generally easier than the other (April versus Aug). Even a difference of 3 points is not that hard to grasp. This is really easy to see when taking the AAMC practice tests and scoring them with the provided scales.. one question always makes a difference between two particular scores, say a 10 or a 11 so potentially 1 question per section can make the difference between a 30 and a 33. I don't think this shows that the person who got the 33 is way smarter than the person who got the 30. All it shows is that they answered 3 more questions right, perhaps even by chance or good guessing. Like I said, if the MCAT was so perfect and its score is golden in determining who well do well in med school, why is it not the only numerical admissions indicator?

 

[Peterock]

I'm not saying adcom members know what classes are like at every single ugrad institution. Obviously, that is ridiculously absurd. What I am saying is that adcoms are not stupid. However, there are plenty of people from top schools who do do well... when compared to people who aren't doing well, they're gonna be on top, regardless of your MCAT score.

How many "fresh" doctors can really take the time to be an adcom? Is this what you would want to do with your time while trying to start a practice or move up the residency ladder? Yes there are md's and phd's but the vast majority of the voting adcom committees are OLD (and white.... and male). I know that 4th year medical students interview, but I have rarely heard of them being able to vote for a candidate.

MIT's premed site used to compare accepted vs. rejected MIT student applicants and it turns out they had IDENTICAL MCATs and a gpa difference of .25. The rejected applicants had a gpa of roughly 3.20-3.25 on average. Don't you think it is just a little odd that medical schools are almsot entirely devoid of students with <3.25 gpa's in general. Even when they come from MIT they're still not good enough. This is repulsive, as I am really stunned that any of you could believe that these students could not make a 3.5+ gpa at a third tier public school. As far as students at top schools go... I know of very few who have scored less than a 30 on their MCATs, the highest % of MCAT scores are always found in the top schools. Please go to mdapplicants and search 38-45 mcat scores and you'll see that harvard, berk, uva, duke, princeton, upenn, ivies... have the highest number of self reported huge mcat scorers. Now consider the size of some of the ivies versus GIANT schools like berk or any other public school and realize the % of 38+ scores at top schools is many magnitudes higher than public schools. People who attend public school have a tendency to dismiss the MCAT b/c they don't seem to nearly as well on it as the big name university students (not just individually, but just the average student at the school etc).

First of all, I didn't say ability/desire to practice medicine, I said predictor of how well you will do in medical school. And if it is so obvious to everyone that gpa does not... on most school websites. I don't even know what your point in bringing this up was unless you're trying to say that schools have ridiculously high gpa averages but really its because all of their kids are from easy to get A's state schools, which is also ludicrous because top med schools are name ****** as much as anyone else and tend to accept the majority of their students from top named ugrad schools.

GPA is based on hard work, intelligence, AND class difficulty. How quickly people from big public schools forget this. Is it because all the students who graudated ahead of you in high school b/c they had a higher gpa than you AND took more AP's/honors than you AND did better than you on the SAT are all now at big name schools? Adcoms do NOT care about your school name or anything else, they just want people to work hard and your class selection and difficulty of major and school mean very little to the minds of most of these people. It is much easier for someone to imagine a student with a 3.9+ from any institution to not be able to fail out of medical school.

The point is this process should be about merit, and it isn't. People will gladly retake low level classes or classes that are notorious for easy A's. Majors that are notoriously low level (ie sociology at Duke) are viewed in a similar fashion to majors that are much more difficult (ie electrical engineering at Duke). The adcoms don't care about the class load or the fact that the average engineer spends roughly 40 hours a week studying to get an average grade of a 3.2 while the sociology major studies for 10 hours a week and gets an average grade of a 3.7. Even worse at a place like Duke is when one compares the average SAT of the engineers vs. the sociology majors. Do adcoms care about any of this? NO.

THey are looking for students with bloated gpa's b/c it is the fastest (and laziest) way to determine "hard work". Can you imagine trying to figure out the "quality" of THOUSANDS of students gpa's, course selection, AND undergrad? It's overwhelming. The easiest way is to simply evaluate the gpa in context with the MCAT and give the student a subscore and thats exactly what happens. Your application isn't even seen by an adcom till your interview and that process is almost based entirely on numbers. The adcoms have the added incentive of taking students with higher numbers for the "added reputation" I discussed earlier (numbers, no matter how easy the classes taken or how easy the ugrad is still provide a better rank).

Fyi, Rutgers pre-meds have an average gpa of 3.223. Unfortunately, the average reported MCAT score is not listed, as you might say is pretty conveinent. Of ... schools but turned it down for a full ride at Rutgers because it was more economically feasable for them. Not everyone wants to be in massive debt even before med school starts.

(I rarely call people stupid. I would not categorize 99% of the college population as stupid. If we're making up fake quotes though... remember that time you said you had genital herpes?)

Fyi Rutgers SAT average is ~ 1220... sounds pretty good till you realize that at a school of 1500 like Duke, when you throw out the athletes the average SAT is ~1450. And yes if we looked at HS gpa Duke students would win out again. What is your point? That Rutgers students aren't as strong as Duke students? Yes, I agree.

People anywhere who do well work their asses off, but maybe in your eyes thats just because we're stupid to begin with so the reason we're working hard is because we're not capable of understanding the material without a lot of constant effort. Blah blah blah...

Grades are relative to who you are testing against (much like the MCAT). If 20% of your school took the MCAT, we both know the average score would be no where near a 32 (like my ugrad's). That means I am competing at the very least, against students who are merely awesome test takers. Being a good student at school A where people study 10 hours/week on average is not quite as difficult as being a good student at school B where people study 25 hours/ week. You pretend like you don't understand this, but I thikn you're just in denial.

Yes, I got a full ride to my state ugrad (UNC) and entrance into their honors program. I was also a runner up for a full scholarship to Duke University. What is 25,000 in debt when I am going to make 6 figures down the road? You really aren't one to talk about not wanting to go into debt as you gladly whored yourself out to a top ranked medical school the first chance you got. You are an absolute hypocrite for using debt as an excuse for not wanting to go to a certain type of school b/c when you FINALLY got the opportunity to attend an elite school you jumped at it. Of course you are so so desperately poor that you go to the Domincan Republic for vacations and join a sorority!

And just to add on, the scoring of the MCAT is very precarious. If you want to talk about cross comparison, there are a ridiculous amount of different versions of different sections, all scored on different scales from each other, even within one testing date. Some people even insist one administration of the test is generally easier than the other (April versus Aug). Even a difference of 3 points is not that hard to grasp. This is really easy to see when taking the AAMC practice tests and scoring them with the provided scales.. one question always makes a difference between two particular scores, say a 10 or a 11 so potentially 1 question per section can make the difference between a 30 and a 33. I don't think this shows that the person who got the 33 is way smarter than the person who got the 30. All it shows is that they answered 3 more questions right, perhaps even by chance or good guessing. Like I said, if the MCAT was so perfect and its score is golden in determining who well do well in med school, why is it not the only numerical admissions indicator?

The MCAT has roughly 20% of experimental questions, otherwise the test is just ordered differetnly for people. The material is comprable and people tend to score the same, etc etc - aka "testing validity". And yes, yes, a STANDARDIZED test is soooo unfair, blah blah blah. It is the epitome of fair. You're just angry that your SAT and MCAT, even with test prep, were both not in alignment with your ego, and we both know the USMLE is waiting just around the corner for another disappointment of yours. I like your little cracks against me being ignorant since you HAVE NOT ATTENDED AN ELITE SCHOOL AND A PUBLIC SCHOOL AND I HAVE. <-- you have no comeback for this

You shamelessly attack me on these boards b/c you lack the ability to defend yourself over yim or any other forum where you have to rely simply on your meager wits. I find fighting on the boards to be tacky and ridiculous, but we both know that there are ten times the number of public schoolers who don't like to hear that they aren't the best to help back you up. Coward.

As I have said before, it is YOU who is bitter, and it is you who has to constantly bring up my name with personal attacks and question my character. When was the last time I mentioned your name FIRST in any thread?

 

[Peterock]

what do you mean by that?

UC Davis vs. Creighton. Look up the numbers, they are almost identical. I guarantee you though that UC Davis med students went to higher ranked ugrads on average and have more EC's etc even though both schools have very similar numbers.

 

[rugirlie]

How many "fresh" doctors can really take the time to be an adcom? Is this what you would want to do with your time while trying to start a practice or move up the residency ladder? Yes there are md's and phd's but the vast majority of the voting adcom committees are OLD (and white.... and male). I know that 4th year medical students interview, but I have rarely heard of them being able to vote for a candidate.

MIT's premed site used to compare accepted vs. rejected MIT student applicants and it turns out they had IDENTICAL MCATs and a gpa difference of .25. The rejected applicants had a gpa of roughly 3.20-3.25 on average. Don't you think it is just a little odd that medical schools are almsot entirely devoid of students with <3.25 gpa's in general. Even when they come from MIT they're still not good enough. This is repulsive, as I am really stunned that any of you could believe that these students could not make a 3.5+ gpa at a third tier public school. As far as students at top schools go... I know of very few who have scored less than a 30 on their MCATs, the highest % of MCAT scores are always found in the top schools. Please go to mdapplicants and search 38-45 mcat scores and you'll see that harvard, berk, uva, duke, princeton, upenn, ivies... have the highest number of self reported huge mcat scorers. Now consider the size of some of the ivies versus GIANT schools like berk or any other public school and realize the % of 38+ scores at top schools is many magnitudes higher than public schools. People who attend public school have a tendency to dismiss the MCAT b/c they don't seem to nearly as well on it as the big name university students (not just individually, but just the average student at the school etc).



GPA is based on hard work, intelligence, AND class difficulty. How quickly people from big public schools forget this. Is it because all the students who graudated ahead of you in high school b/c they had a higher gpa than you AND took more AP's/honors than you AND did better than you on the SAT are all now at big name schools? Adcoms do NOT care about your school name or anything else, they just want people to work hard and your class selection and difficulty of major and school mean very little to the minds of most of these people. It is much easier for someone to imagine a student with a 3.9+ from any institution to not be able to fail out of medical school.

The point is this process should be about merit, and it isn't. People will gladly retake low level classes or classes that are notorious for easy A's. Majors that are notoriously low level (ie sociology at Duke) are viewed in a similar fashion to majors that are much more difficult (ie electrical engineering at Duke). The adcoms don't care about the class load or the fact that the average engineer spends roughly 40 hours a week studying to get an average grade of a 3.2 while the sociology major studies for 10 hours a week and gets an average grade of a 3.7. Even worse at a place like Duke is when one compares the average SAT of the engineers vs. the sociology majors. Do adcoms care about any of this? NO.

THey are looking for students with bloated gpa's b/c it is the fastest (and laziest) way to determine "hard work". Can you imagine trying to figure out the "quality" of THOUSANDS of students gpa's, course selection, AND undergrad? It's overwhelming. The easiest way is to simply evaluate the gpa in context with the MCAT and give the student a subscore and thats exactly what happens. Your application isn't even seen by an adcom till your interview and that process is almost based entirely on numbers. The adcoms have the added incentive of taking students with higher numbers for the "added reputation" I discussed earlier (numbers, no matter how easy the classes taken or how easy the ugrad is still provide a better rank).



(I rarely call people stupid. I would not categorize 99% of the college population as stupid. If we're making up fake quotes though... remember that time you said you had genital herpes?)

Fyi Rutgers SAT average is ~ 1220... sounds pretty good till you realize that at a school of 1500 like Duke, when you throw out the athletes the average SAT is ~1450. And yes if we looked at HS gpa Duke students would win out again. What is your point? That Rutgers students aren't as strong as Duke students? Yes, I agree.




Grades are relative to who you are testing against (much like the MCAT). If 20% of your school took the MCAT, we both know the average score would be no where near a 32 (like my ugrad's). That means I am competing at the very least, against students who are merely awesome test takers. Being a good student at school A where people study 10 hours/week on average is not quite as difficult as being a good student at school B where people study 25 hours/ week. You pretend like you don't understand this, but I thikn you're just in denial.

Yes, I got a full ride to my state ugrad (UNC) and entrance into their honors program. I was also a runner up for a full scholarship to Duke University. What is 25,000 in debt when I am going to make 6 figures down the road? You really aren't one to talk about not wanting to go into debt as you gladly whored yourself out to a top ranked medical school the first chance you got. You are an absolute hypocrite for using debt as an excuse for not wanting to go to a certain type of school b/c when you FINALLY got the opportunity to attend an elite school you jumped at it. Of course you are so so desperately poor that you go to the Domincan Republic for vacations and join a sorority!


The MCAT has roughly 20% of experimental questions, otherwise the test is just ordered differetnly for people. The material is comprable and people tend to score the same, etc etc - aka "testing validity". And yes, yes, a STANDARDIZED test is soooo unfair, blah blah blah. It is the epitome of fair. You're just angry that your SAT and MCAT, even with test prep, were both not in alignment with your ego, and we both know the USMLE is waiting just around the corner for another disappointment of yours. I like your little cracks against me being ignorant since you HAVE NOT ATTENDED AN ELITE SCHOOL AND A PUBLIC SCHOOL AND I HAVE. <-- you have no comeback for this

You shamelessly attack me on these boards b/c you lack the ability to defend yourself over yim or any other forum where you have to rely simply on your meager wits. I find fighting on the boards to be tacky and ridiculous, but we both know that there are ten times the number of public schoolers who don't like to hear that they aren't the best to help back you up. Coward.

As I have said before, it is YOU who is bitter, and it is you who has to constantly bring up my name with personal attacks and question my character. When was the last time I mentioned your name FIRST in any thread?

I'm done with you. Not that this is any of your business, but I whored myself out for a price that was cheaper than my state school, so don't say things when you don't know what you're talking about. I feel sorry for you that you have to be so insecure and in denial that you have to project your own feelings onto someone else to make yourself feel better. First of all, you started this because I got into Upenn and you felt like I didn't deserve it so much that you talked about me behind my back to another sdner so don't say I started it. So you go enjoy your debt-free (oh thats right, you're in debt from ugrad so its not debt-free is it?) med school and be bitter elsewhere about the fact that your school's adcom made a "mistake" when they rejected you the first time you applied.

 

[hardy]

Wow... this thread certainly derailed.

And what's up with the full quote? Why would anybody full quote such a long post and only say "I agree"?

 

[Centinel]

Is it possible to go to an ivy league like Princeton and then get screwed over with a gpa of ~3.0, but a high MCAT score?

To respond directly to the OP in an attempt to salvage this thread:
1) Yes, if you have a 3.0 at a highly-regarded school, you will still not be looked upon favorably.
2) If you are concerned about your GPA, you can take courses of lesser difficulty.

 

[vmc303]

The notion that certain Ivy League schools inflate grades over and above the normal level of grade inflation present at virtually every other school in the country is absurd. What exactly does it mean to say that Harvard inflates grades? That 30 years ago, it was a lot harder to get a 3.5? Undispusted. But is that to say that someone with 3.5 from Harvard worked significantly less hard than someone with a 3.5 from most other schools around the country? With a few notable exceptions -- MIT, Swarthmore, Berkeley -- that's just false. People who whine about grade inflation ignore the fact that at the 90% of the schools in the country that don't qualify in any was as "elite," it's pathetically easy for any moderately bright, motivated student to come out of college after four years with a 3.9+, having never been seriously challenged.

 

[45408]

(I rarely call people stupid. I would not categorize 99% of the college population as stupid. If we're making up fake quotes though... remember that time you said you had genital herpes?)

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=2647897&postcount=15

Yeah, I think most people who are from middle class backgrounds who scored less than a 1300 on their SAT's and get less than a 28 on their MCAT are essentially ******ed as well. Oh wait, thats pretty much everyone at state schools.

ah, well, at least now I know you were just being inflammatory, the average MCAT tester isn't actually ******ed. Had me worried there.