Small low tier university gets 100% into med school by giving A's to all premed students

[johnnycage377]

I just read this post on r/premed alleging SUU giving easy A's to its premed students to get all of them into med school.

http://www.reddit.com/r/premed/comments/1x99rb/small_very_low_tier_university_gets_100_into/

Also, http://www.reddit.com/r/premed/comments/1x4upu/i_will_give_everyone_an_a_in_this_science_class/

Is this a prime example of grade inflation by colleges? What do you guys think?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[chillaxbro]

Doesn't matter if you get a 5.0 GPA if your mcat is 21

 

[Syndicate]

Typical of party schools giving out easy A's when the classes are too easy to begin with and 3/4th the class are comprised of "students" who could care less about academics while my ivy grade deflates really hard classes curved against real students who all scored 2200+ on their SATs

 

[ChemEngMD]

Typical of party schools giving out easy A's when the classes are too easy to begin with and 3/4th the class are comprised of "students" who could care less about academics while my ivy grade deflates really hard classes curved against real students who all scored 2200+ on their SATs

Bitter much?

 

[Skeeks]

I see no real proof of the title of this thread except one anonymous noname poster on a questionable website. It sounds like SUU is doing a good job at getting thier students into medical school programs by helping them find schools that fit their needs/desires. If you notice a lot of the testimonials on the actual SUU site are students from DO schools. I seriously doubt there is anything sketchy going on here.

 

[BamaNicole]

21 average MCAT?

How are they getting in?

 

[Reckoner]

Typical of party schools giving out easy A's when the classes are too easy to begin with and 3/4th the class are comprised of "students" who could care less about academics while my ivy grade deflates really hard classes curved against real students who all scored 2200+ on their SATs

Easy way to fix that: http://suu.edu/prostu/transfer.html

 

[MedWonk]

21 average MCAT?

How are they getting in?

Caribbean?

 

[Dr Turkelton]

**** I went to the wrong school

 

[MedWonk]

Typical of party schools giving out easy A's when the classes are too easy to begin with and 3/4th the class are comprised of "students" who couldn't care less about academics while my ivy grade deflates really hard classes curved against real students who all scored 2200+ on their SATs

FTFY. You can thank me later for adding 0.1 points to your severely deflated GPA.

Love,
Party school grad

 

[Ace-Co-A]

Typical of public schools giving out easy A's when the classes are too easy to begin with and 3/4th the class are comprised of "students" who could care less about academics while my ivy grade deflates really hard classes curved against real students who all scored 2200+ on their SATs

I've always thought that you Ivy folks overstate your case here, and I feel like your post gives me as good a chance as any to voice my thoughts.

State schools are less competitive, and that's why we get fewer people into medical school. I admit this, but I'll give some evidence to suggest that they are not grade inflating in the way that you suggest. The average GPA at my state school's science college is ~2.6, which is way lower than any of the private schools I know of. And it should be, I agree. Something like a third of my entering class has already failed out. Not very many people (<10%) get As in my science courses. This doesn't seem like grade inflation to me. Only about 10-20 students out of an entering class of 4000-5000 get into medical school from my institution. Maybe my school is not a good example, though.

I've always been confused about the emphasis on SAT scores anyway. Certainly, SAT scores mean something, but we know they don't correlate perfectly with college performance, so why do you cite them? Even if your argument is more subtle [i.e., that a higher proportion of smart people attend your institution (as determined by SAT scores), and the non-negligible correlation of SAT scores with college performance suggests that these students are 'better' and that the curves imposed on them are 'deflating'], I still don't quite understand why you pick out state schools as your scapegoat. As I stated before, to my knowledge, the Ivies and upper tier Privates are extremely well represented in medical school.* This suggests to me that (while I admit some of this is self-selection on the basis of superior self-promotion skills, interviewing skills, etc.) admissions committees acknowledge that a high GPA at a prestigious school is better than a high GPA at a less prestigious (or, dare I say, rigorous) one.

I hope that you will take the time to respond to my thoughts. I've never understood why you Ivy/Private school folks get so up in arms about this. Finally, I hope that I don't sound defensive. That is certainly not my intention. I am genuinely curious about the thinking process behind your statements.

*I apologize but I could not find any data on this. I welcome challenges to this assertion. I googled "aamc data on where matriculants come from" and found these charts, but they don't give data on the number of candidates accepted from particular undergraduate schools.

 

[BamaNicole]

Caribbean?

ha! true. They definitely didn't say what med school.

 

[Syndicate]

I've always thought that you Ivy folks overstate your case here, and I feel like your post gives me as good a chance as any to voice my thoughts.

State schools are less competitive, and that's why we get fewer people into medical school. I admit this, but I'll give some evidence to suggest that they are not grade inflating in the way that you suggest. The average GPA at my state school's science college is ~2.6, which is way lower than any of the private schools I know of. And it should be, I agree. Something like a third of my entering class has already failed out. Not very many people (<10%) get As in my science courses. This doesn't seem like grade inflation to me. Only about 10-20 students out of an entering class of 4000-5000 get into medical school from my institution. Maybe my school is not a good example, though.

I've always been confused about the emphasis on SAT scores anyway. Certainly, SAT scores mean something, but we know they don't correlate perfectly with college performance, so why do you cite them? Even if your argument is more subtle [i.e., that a higher proportion of smart people attend your institution (as determined by SAT scores), and the non-negligible correlation of SAT scores with college performance suggests that these students are 'better' and that the curves imposed on them are 'deflating'], I still don't quite understand why you pick out state schools as your scapegoat. As I stated before, to my knowledge, the Ivies and upper tier Privates are extremely well represented in medical school.* This suggests to me that (while I admit some of this is self-selection on the basis of superior self-promotion skills, interviewing skills, etc.) admissions committees acknowledge that a high GPA at a prestigious school is better than a high GPA at a less prestigious (or, dare I say, rigorous) one.

I hope that you will take the time to respond to my thoughts. I've never understood why you Ivy/Private school folks get so up in arms about this. Finally, I hope that I don't sound defensive. That is certainly not my intention. I am genuinely curious about the thinking process behind your statements.

*I apologize but I could not find any data on this. I welcome challenges to this assertion. I googled "aamc data on where matriculants come from" and found these charts, but they don't give data on the number of candidates accepted from particular undergraduate schools.

I appreciate your thoughts and I certainly would like to offer my opinions as well. I also don't mean to sound offensive either even if what I say below may sound a bit offensive. It is not my intention; I just want to say what I feel is "wrong" about the system:

First, I have no problem with students from state schools getting into medical schools, even top tier medical schools. The top 10% from a state school is basically the same as the top 10% of an ivy/ivy comparable. I'm sure the top 10% from the state school could have gone to an ivy if they wanted but for personal reasons, chose to go in-state. What I have a problem with, however, is that there are numerous state schoolers who are not the top 10% and they are able to get into medical school. I'm talking about the 3.6-3.7/30-32 kind of student from state schools. There are plenty of students from my Ivy who have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 and end up not getting into any US allopathic. And this is not because there is a red flag/not enough ECs, LORs, research, etc. It is because there are TOO MANY 3.6-3.7/30-32 candidates in total and considering that this entire process is a crapshoot, a lot of the 3.6-3.7/30-32 state schoolers get taken over the 3.6-3.7/30-32 ivy/ivy comparables. That is what I have a problem with. If you have a 3.8+/33+, you should get into medical school, regardless of where you attended college. But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy. If that were the case, does the work you put in during high school to get into an ivy/ivy comparable not mean anything at all?

 

[SN12357]

If you have a 3.8+/33+, you should get into medical school, regardless of where you attended college.

......No.

I also think you're making this whole state school vs. ivy with equivalent grade thing up. Do you have any statistics to back this up? Things that are not anecdotes about your friends who didn't get in? And have you factored in background and ECs, things that are equally important in determining admission?

 

[Reckoner]

But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy.

Why not? On the only standardized measure adcoms have to look at (the MCAT), the two applicants scored exactly the same.

 

[Lucca]

I appreciate your thoughts and I certainly would like to offer my opinions as well. I also don't mean to sound offensive either even if what I say below may sound a bit offensive. It is not my intention; I just want to say what I feel is "wrong" about the system:

First, I have no problem with students from state schools getting into medical schools, even top tier medical schools. The top 10% from a state school is basically the same as the top 10% of an ivy/ivy comparable. I'm sure the top 10% from the state school could have gone to an ivy if they wanted but for personal reasons, chose to go in-state. What I have a problem with, however, is that there are numerous state schoolers who are not the top 10% and they are able to get into medical school. I'm talking about the 3.6-3.7/30-32 kind of student from state schools. There are plenty of students from my Ivy who have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 and end up not getting into any US allopathic. And this is not because there is a red flag/not enough ECs, LORs, research, etc. It is because there are TOO MANY 3.6-3.7/30-32 candidates in total and considering that this entire process is a crapshoot, a lot of the 3.6-3.7/30-32 state schoolers get taken over the 3.6-3.7/30-32 ivy/ivy comparables. That is what I have a problem with. If you have a 3.8+/33+, you should get into medical school, regardless of where you attended college. But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy. If that were the case, does the work you put in during high school to get into an ivy/ivy comparable not mean anything at all?

Med school admissions is actually not a crapshoot. Individually, yes, it is a crapshoot, but overall not really. Medical School admissions is game-able to the level that we can confidently provide admission statistics for certain quantitative echelons (3.7/31 = 50%, 4.0/44 = 90%, etc.). You wanna know what is a crapshoot? The Ivy League. Unless, of course, you're from Exeter or Milton or some such place.

Thus, you're argument falls apart unless you can provide an R-value of 0.90 of higher with Ivy league success and Medical school success as otherwise there is no appreciable difference between identically LizzyM tagged applicants at any two institutions. In fact, one might say the ivy-leaguer is always more advantaged even before application time simply because the Ivies have enormous endowments and offer their students a plethora more opportunities than state schools can. That's why you picked the Ivy league in the first place!

 

[Ace-Co-A]

I appreciate your thoughts and I certainly would like to offer my opinions as well. I also don't mean to sound offensive either even if what I say below may sound a bit offensive. It is not my intention; I just want to say what I feel is "wrong" about the system:

First, I have no problem with students from state schools getting into medical schools, even top tier medical schools. The top 10% from a state school is basically the same as the top 10% of an ivy/ivy comparable. I'm sure the top 10% from the state school could have gone to an ivy if they wanted but for personal reasons, chose to go in-state. What I have a problem with, however, is that there are numerous state schoolers who are not the top 10% and they are able to get into medical school. I'm talking about the 3.6-3.7/30-32 kind of student from state schools. There are plenty of students from my Ivy who have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 and end up not getting into any US allopathic. And this is not because there is a red flag/not enough ECs, LORs, research, etc. It is because there are TOO MANY 3.6-3.7/30-32 candidates in total and considering that this entire process is a crapshoot, a lot of the 3.6-3.7/30-32 state schoolers get taken over the 3.6-3.7/30-32 ivy/ivy comparables. That is what I have a problem with. If you have a 3.8+/33+, you should get into medical school, regardless of where you attended college. But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy. If that were the case, does the work you put in during high school to get into an ivy/ivy comparable not mean anything at all?

Ok, thanks for clarifying. I'm not sure that you addressed my concern about using SAT scores as the gold standard for comparing the quality of students at different institutions, so I leave that for further comment.

I'm not sure that we disagree about the window of state school applicants who are (apparently randomly - as your mention - there is a 'crapshoot' factor) selected over Ivies/Ivy-likes, but I have some reservations as others (esp. @SN12357 ) have discussed. I mentioned in my first post that AdComs seem to give an edge to the applicant from better (i.e., grade-deflating) school when stats are comparable. However, I've met people from Ivies who claimed that they didn't work hard in undergrad & they were accepted to medical school with strong GPAs, though, so I don't want to paint all Ivies/Ivy-likes with a broad brush as being 'grade-deflating'.

As @SN12357 mentioned, I'm not sure why you think someone with a 3.8+ and a 33+ should be a shoe-in. Some clarification or evidence is requested here, because the statistics do not back this up.

 

[SnakeOilForSale]

Well, I know where I'm transferring to.

 

[RedWedding]

But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy. If that were the case, does the work you put in during high school to get into an ivy/ivy comparable not mean anything at all?

….seriously? You expect the Ivy League name to boost you above someone with the exact same credentials? Let's be honest, for most people, the work they put in during high school isn't why they can attend an Ivy. It's the fact that Mommy and Daddy have enough dollar$ for it. I was accepted to an Ivy, but couldn't attend because I am not fortunate enough to be sitting on a comfortable trust fund. I know many others who were in the same situation. So I'm sorry that us lowly state school attendees are being accepted to medical school over Ivy grads with the same or worse credentials. At least it gives you something to talk about over your campfire fueled by $20 bills. Those arguments about Ralph Lauren vs. Brooks Brothers were getting old anyway.

 

[Cmdr_Shepard]

Ivy leagues are overrated.

 

[PleaseCallMeDoc]

….seriously? You expect the Ivy League name to boost you above someone with the exact same credentials? Let's be honest, for most people, the work they put in during high school isn't why they can attend an Ivy. It's the fact that Mommy and Daddy have enough dollar$ for it. I was accepted to an Ivy, but couldn't attend because I am not fortunate enough to be sitting on a comfortable trust fund. I know many others who were in the same situation. So I'm sorry that us lowly state school attendees are being accepted to medical school over Ivy grads with the same or worse credentials. At least it gives you something to talk about over your campfire fueled by $20 bills. Those arguments about Ralph Lauren vs. Brooks Brothers were getting old anyway.

This exactly....

 

[ChemEngMD]

I think academics are academics and major is way more important to your GPA than school. An Electrical Engineer at a state school is going to have a way harder time getting a 3.6 than a bio or humanities major at an Ivy.

Speaking strictly from an EC perspective:

I feel like all things even themselves out in this process.

If you go to an ivy league you have way more institutional money to help you with things like study abroad, research, starting clubs, doing really cool ECs, etc.

If you go to a smaller less prestigious state school (like I did) you don't have as many "opportunities" due to lack of funding, but you do have less competitive classmates and have an easier time running the school as a student leader (or at least this was my experience).

I think if anyone gets the short end of the stick it's students at really big state schools. It's super tough to be a top leader at a school with 30k+ students and they don't have the endowment like an Ivy or a top Private school. These really big schools though do have lots of opportunities for students to find their "niche" and while they may not be the President of the Student Body or get a grant to do summer research abroad at an affiliate university, they can usually gain a good footing in a particular community and get some quality ECs.

Like I said, things tend to even themselves out and I think that's why med schools don't necessarily look at two similar applicants, one from an ivy and one from a state school, as significantly different.

Sorry Ivy leaguers...you mighta just blown 200k for a name that won't help as much as you thought

 

[CyberMaxx]

As I stated before, to my knowledge, the Ivies and upper tier Privates are extremely well represented in medical school.* This suggests to me that (while I admit some of this is self-selection on the basis of superior self-promotion skills, interviewing skills, etc.) admissions committees acknowledge that a high GPA at a prestigious school is better than a high GPA at a less prestigious (or, dare I say, rigorous) one.

*I apologize but I could not find any data on this. I welcome challenges to this assertion. I googled "aamc data on where matriculants come from" and found these charts, but they don't give data on the number of candidates accepted from particular undergraduate schools.

This is the best data I could find. I've posted it here because this is data freely provided by the AAMC so I don't believe doing so violates SDNs rules (mods correct me if I'm wrong ). It only shows total applicants by undergraduate institution not total matriculants. However, as far as applicants go you can clearly see that the most represented institutions are the big name state schools then largely top tier private schools.

The entire file from the AAMC can be found here: https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Diversity in Medical Education_Facts and Figures 2012.pdf

 

[Lucca]

This is the best data I could find. I've posted it here because this is data freely provided by the AAMC so I don't believe doing so violates SDNs rules (mods correct me if I'm wrong ). It only shows total applicants by undergraduate institution not total matriculants. However, as far as applicants go you can clearly see that the most represented institutions are the big name state schools then largely top tier private schools.

The entire file from the AAMC can be found here: https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Diversity in Medical Education_Facts and Figures 2012.pdf

Alright! My school made the top cut of state schools. No wonder I see so many premeds here.

 

[HeyNapkin]

I appreciate your thoughts and I certainly would like to offer my opinions as well. I also don't mean to sound offensive either even if what I say below may sound a bit offensive. It is not my intention; I just want to say what I feel is "wrong" about the system:

First, I have no problem with students from state schools getting into medical schools, even top tier medical schools. The top 10% from a state school is basically the same as the top 10% of an ivy/ivy comparable. I'm sure the top 10% from the state school could have gone to an ivy if they wanted but for personal reasons, chose to go in-state. What I have a problem with, however, is that there are numerous state schoolers who are not the top 10% and they are able to get into medical school. I'm talking about the 3.6-3.7/30-32 kind of student from state schools. There are plenty of students from my Ivy who have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 and end up not getting into any US allopathic. And this is not because there is a red flag/not enough ECs, LORs, research, etc. It is because there are TOO MANY 3.6-3.7/30-32 candidates in total and considering that this entire process is a crapshoot, a lot of the 3.6-3.7/30-32 state schoolers get taken over the 3.6-3.7/30-32 ivy/ivy comparables. That is what I have a problem with. If you have a 3.8+/33+, you should get into medical school, regardless of where you attended college. But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy. If that were the case, does the work you put in during high school to get into an ivy/ivy comparable not mean anything at all?

Someone sounds really bitter. Why should someone with a 3.7/32 at a state school be valued ANY LESS than someone with a 3.7/32 at an ivy. A 32 on the MCAT is still a 32 so they still put in the same amount of work. If anything, a 3.8 at a state school is worth more than a 3.8 inflated everyone gets an A BS at an Ivy League

 

[Ace-Co-A]

This is the best data I could find. I've posted it here because this is data freely provided by the AAMC so I don't believe doing so violates SDNs rules (mods correct me if I'm wrong ). It only shows total applicants by undergraduate institution not total matriculants. However, as far as applicants go you can clearly see that the most represented institutions are the big name state schools then largely top tier private schools.

The entire file from the AAMC can be found here: https://members.aamc.org/eweb/upload/Diversity in Medical Education_Facts and Figures 2012.pdf

Looks to be similar to the link I posted. Thanks!

 

[whatbout2morrow]

The first article cited in the reddit post from the "Mainstreet Business Journal" is from 2006. The title refers to medical school specifically, but in the article, the director of the program talks about the success rate being in terms of acceptance to "graduate healthcare programs". This could mean anything from MD, DO all the way to graduate-entry BSN programs.

The 95% & 94% acceptance rates mentioned in the second link are from 2008 & 2009 respectively. I'm guessing the acceptance rates in other years weren't as impressive.

 

[WillburCobb]

I appreciate your thoughts and I certainly would like to offer my opinions as well. I also don't mean to sound offensive either even if what I say below may sound a bit offensive. It is not my intention; I just want to say what I feel is "wrong" about the system:

First, I have no problem with students from state schools getting into medical schools, even top tier medical schools. The top 10% from a state school is basically the same as the top 10% of an ivy/ivy comparable. I'm sure the top 10% from the state school could have gone to an ivy if they wanted but for personal reasons, chose to go in-state. What I have a problem with, however, is that there are numerous state schoolers who are not the top 10% and they are able to get into medical school. I'm talking about the 3.6-3.7/30-32 kind of student from state schools. There are plenty of students from my Ivy who have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 and end up not getting into any US allopathic. And this is not because there is a red flag/not enough ECs, LORs, research, etc. It is because there are TOO MANY 3.6-3.7/30-32 candidates in total and considering that this entire process is a crapshoot, a lot of the 3.6-3.7/30-32 state schoolers get taken over the 3.6-3.7/30-32 ivy/ivy comparables. That is what I have a problem with. If you have a 3.8+/33+, you should get into medical school, regardless of where you attended college. But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy. If that were the case, does the work you put in during high school to get into an ivy/ivy comparable not mean anything at all?

Sorry to piss on your party and prevent someone from an Ivy getting into med school with my 3.45cGPA/3.35sGPA from a Music BS and Psych BS from a state school. I guess my MCAT and the actual interest I expressed about medicine in my PS, ECs, and interview don't really matter anyway...

 

[Chir0nex]

But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy. If that were the case, does the work you put in during high school to get into an ivy/ivy comparable not mean anything at all?

This is where your argument falls apart IMO. You are assuming that difficulty in achieving these greater is greater in Ivy vs. state schools when in reality you have provided no hard evidence for there being any significant difference. While there is certainly variance in how courses are taught from school to school, this alone is not enough to say that one school has a harder premed than another, let alone that the entire Ivy league is harder than all state schools. Hell, even within my own UG different professors were "harder" than others within the same subject. If anything, the MCAT is best number to work off of because it is actually standardized for the entire country. In your example, both students have scored the same on the MCAT, i.e by the most standardized and object measure they are the same! Also note, that this is exactly what is seen in the OPs post, where students get terrible MCATs so that differences in academic ability are clearly notable.

As for your second idea, that high school performance should somehow mean something when it comes to med school, this is flawed in a couple of ways. First of all, as mentioned by other posters, you are receiving benefits in that a higher tier UG tends to provide better connections and opportunities for research, EC's, and networking. Secondly, people change a great deal during college, and who the are when they are applying to med school is what matters. If someone has a great GPA after four years of college, why the hell does it matter if they flunked 10th grade algebra? The truth is high school stops mattering the minute you get into UG, and UG stops mattering the second you get into graduate school.

 

[KnuxNole]

Typical of party schools giving out easy A's when the classes are too easy to begin with and 3/4th the class are comprised of "students" who could care less about academics while my ivy grade deflates really hard classes curved against real students who all scored 2200+ on their SATs

Uhh...most college kids don't care that much about academics. They care enough to get a degree or get an A/B, but that's about it. They aren't those people who like to go in depth and all that ****. The 2% or less of the population in Ivy league might be the exception, but I'm sure there are a decent percentage of fun loving normal peeps there

Sadly in all schools, there are freaky fish guys who obsessively care about numbers and stuff.

And high school is just high school. I don't know many people who find the "hard work" there relevant, especially given the state of high schools, and the mentality of teenagers.

 

[jeghaber]

I realize this is probably SDN suicide to post on this thread, but I just wanted to present my own experience.

I took several courses at the local Big Ten university during high school in addition to a full load in high school, 2/semester during senior year and 8 total, over the course of three years. These courses included both advanced math courses and general science courses (GenBio/GenPhys) as well as some other courses in neuroscience and philosophy. I breezed through these with minimal effort, studying the night before for exams and completing problem sets the day they were due between classes at school.

For college, I attended an ivy with notorious (justifiably, admittedly) grade inflation. I had to work my butt off to achieve the same kind of grades and %ile-wise, I was still nowhere near where I was in my classes before.

Now, while the Big Ten university is a fine state school it's doesn't have the same reputation for rigor as say, UC Berkeley. I was also only taking 2 courses (albeit in addition to a full load in high school, which included 4 AP courses each year) before compared to the 4+ in college. Further, it could be said I had more responsibilities in college, with more "demanding" extracurriculars that required more time and dedication. And of course, this is just one person's experience at two schools. Still, I'd be lying if I thought equivalent courses between the two universities required the same amount of work.

HOWEVER, as many people have mentioned, because of large class sizes and most of the time, more stringent grade allocations, better grades are harder to come by at state universities. I had plenty of friends who did just as well as I did during high school, went to state schools for college and applied to medical school. They did fine. Given the MCAT and the countless variables that account for class performance, when it comes to medical school admissions, I've come to believe that for any single individual, regardless of which school they choose to attend, they would have ended up doing just as well in either. If you're a strong candidate, it doesn't matter what school you chose to attend when you were just barely 18. You'll do great either way.

As a side note, to prevent giving anyone about to bite my head off any more ammunition, my college education cost was significantly less than what I would have paid for my in-state tuition. While I would have gotten a solid merit scholarship had I chosen to attend my stare school, my family and I decided that my education was worth the "extra" money (that was still under the normal state tuition levels). I am not a trust fund baby nor do I shop at Brooks Brothers. I am not saying this decision is the right one for very person, but it has worked out for me and I have no regrets -- and as I've said, I think I would have done just fine as well had I gone to my state school.

[Edited to delete a few details]

 

[Aerus]

It is because there are TOO MANY 3.6-3.7/30-32 candidates in total and considering that this entire process is a crapshoot, a lot of the 3.6-3.7/30-32 state schoolers get taken over the 3.6-3.7/30-32 ivy/ivy comparables. That is what I have a problem with. If you have a 3.8+/33+, you should get into medical school, regardless of where you attended college. But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy. If that were the case, does the work you put in during high school to get into an ivy/ivy comparable not mean anything at all?

I agree with some of your points, but I disagree with the bolded. The only accomplishments the vast majority of Ivy League et al kids had was a good high school GPA, a good SAT score, and a bunch of cookie cutter extracurricular activities in bulk. I'll admit there are a few amazing people in the ivies who did amazing things, but they are the minority. In most cases, getting a high GPA in high school isn't that difficult compared to getting a good college GPA. The SAT is definitely easier than the MCAT. Most high school extracurricular activities are BS and not really meaningful anyways.

So why do your high school credentials mean more than someone's college credentials? If someone peaked early in high school or had a lot of parental support in high school and suddenly drowned in the new independent world of college, so be it. If an Ivy kid performed the same on the MCAT as a state school kid with the excellent education that the Ivy claims to provide, then theoretically, that ivy kid would do worse if they were at the state school whose education is supposedly inferior, right?

 

[DermViser]

I just read this post on r/premed alleging SUU giving easy A's to its premed students to get all of them into med school.

http://www.reddit.com/r/premed/comments/1x99rb/small_very_low_tier_university_gets_100_into/

Also, http://www.reddit.com/r/premed/comments/1x4upu/i_will_give_everyone_an_a_in_this_science_class/

Is this a prime example of grade inflation by colleges? What do you guys think?

Realize medical school also includes DO schools and Caribbean schools, many of whose only requirements are credit card and a pulse.

 

[johnnycage377]

One thing to keep in mind there are a lot of factors that go into GPA, such as competition and grade inflation. It's like comparing apples and oranges

 

[DermViser]

Someone sounds really bitter. Why should someone with a 3.7/32 at a state school be valued ANY LESS than someone with a 3.7/32 at an ivy. A 32 on the MCAT is still a 32 so they still put in the same amount of work. If anything, a 3.8 at a state school is worth more than a 3.8 inflated everyone gets an A BS at an Ivy League

Yes, I'm sure test prep courses, that now even have individualized tutor options for the MCAT have absolutely nothing to do with it.

 

[Aerus]

Yes, I'm sure test prep courses, that now even have individualized tutor options for the MCAT have absolutely nothing to do with it.

The average person who attends a top private university is probably more likely to utilize test prep courses than the average state school student.

 

[Aerus]

Personally I don't think med schools should judge by GPA at all and just go by MCAT. If someone gets a 3.7 vs another student who got a 3.4, does it mean that person is a better student? It could, but it could also mean that person took easier classes, or they had easier competition, or both. It's like comparing apples and oranges, you just don't know.

I agree and do think using a GPA tells you very little about the person. You can't even compare GPA's from two people from the same school reasonably unless you had a representative who knows the school very well.

But strangely enough, med school adcoms say that there is a correlation between uGPA and med school success, so I guess GPA still has some use after all.

 

[DermViser]

The average person who attends a top private university is probably more likely to utilize test prep courses than the average state school student.

bc I'm sure there are no neurotic premeds who purposefully enter easier colleges to get higher overall GPAs and science GPAs than they would at an Ivy League. Also with the huge amount of money they save by attending a state college, I'm sure there is no way they could afford those courses. Realize your "average" premed who matriculates, is not the average college student.

 

[DermViser]

I agree and do think using a GPA tells you very little about the person. You can't even compare GPA's from two people from the same school reasonably unless you had a representative who knows the school very well.

But strangely enough, med school adcoms say that there is a correlation between uGPA and med school success, so I guess GPA still has some use after all.

In those studies they are referring to SCIENCE GPA, and "medical school success" is defined as USMLE Step 1 score (hardly a real measure of medical school success).

 

[johnnycage377]

*snip*

 

[Syndicate]

If going to an ivy or state school doesn't matter to a lot of people, then what's all the buzz I read on SDN about getting into a "top 20" med school?

 

[WillburCobb]

If going to an ivy or state school doesn't matter to a lot of people, then what's all the buzz I read on SDN about getting into a "top 20" med school?

It doesn't f@&king matter, unless you're 100% concerned about research.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KnuxNole]

Cause SDN has those obsessive neurotic population, which is a HUGE minority of people, but a vocal one on this site.

Thankfully, that's not the majority...that would be horrid. I would introduce those people to booze and to have fun in life...! After all, you can't make decisions based on freaky fish guys who are obsessive over those "top 20" schools or whatever.

For 90% of people going to med school, a top 20 school is not even possible!

 

[MedWonk]

I appreciate your thoughts and I certainly would like to offer my opinions as well. I also don't mean to sound offensive either even if what I say below may sound a bit offensive. It is not my intention; I just want to say what I feel is "wrong" about the system:

First, I have no problem with students from state schools getting into medical schools, even top tier medical schools. The top 10% from a state school is basically the same as the top 10% of an ivy/ivy comparable. I'm sure the top 10% from the state school could have gone to an ivy if they wanted but for personal reasons, chose to go in-state. What I have a problem with, however, is that there are numerous state schoolers who are not the top 10% and they are able to get into medical school. I'm talking about the 3.6-3.7/30-32 kind of student from state schools. There are plenty of students from my Ivy who have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 and end up not getting into any US allopathic. And this is not because there is a red flag/not enough ECs, LORs, research, etc. It is because there are TOO MANY 3.6-3.7/30-32 candidates in total and considering that this entire process is a crapshoot, a lot of the 3.6-3.7/30-32 state schoolers get taken over the 3.6-3.7/30-32 ivy/ivy comparables. That is what I have a problem with. If you have a 3.8+/33+, you should get into medical school, regardless of where you attended college. But when you have a 3.6-3.7/30-32 AND you are from a state school, you should not get taken over a 3.6-3.7/30-32 from an ivy. If that were the case, does the work you put in during high school to get into an ivy/ivy comparable not mean anything at all?

Not sure what a crappy sports league has anything to do with academic performance.

 

[Lucca]

If going to an ivy or state school doesn't matter to a lot of people, then what's all the buzz I read on SDN about getting into a "top 20" med school?

The consensus on SDN is that it doesn't really matter what school you go to and that your residency training is what matters most.

Generally, climbing the ladder of medical school rankings on really matters for students who are passionate about research or possibly going into academic medicine as ranking correlates more closely with the strength of an institution's research than it does with the quality of their medical education. The ivy league carries a certain mystique, a weight coat-tailing on hundreds of years of history and high-academic achievement; a privilege all its own and a symbol of a higher strata - the scholar, the academic, the philosopher. In the past couple of decades this image has been bastardized into a commodity, a child's play thing. Predictably, but nevertheless, ironically, at this time in american history when where you go to school is more important than ever its proving that it means the least it ever has.

Medicine is unique in that it hardly makes a difference where you went to undergrad, much unlike Finance, Business, Engineering, Music, Consulting, or most other high profile careers.

 

[Chir0nex]

If going to an ivy or state school doesn't matter to a lot of people, then what's all the buzz I read on SDN about getting into a "top 20" med school?

Because people are obsessed with rankings that say very little about the quality of education. A huge chunk of rankings is based on research grant money, so unless if you are going to pursue research heavily, the rank doesn't matter. What most people should (and do) care about is just getting in period. At that point, you are most likely going to graduate and be a doctor, very few patients will ever even ask what medical school you attended.

 

[MedWonk]

The consensus on SDN is that it doesn't really matter what school you go to and that your residency training is what matters most.

Generally, climbing the ladder of medical school rankings on really matters for students who are passionate about research or possibly going into academic medicine as ranking correlates more closely with the strength of an institution's research than it does with the quality of their medical education. The ivy league carries a certain mystique, a weight coat-tailing on hundreds of years of history and high-academic achievement; a privilege all its own and a symbol of a higher strata - the scholar, the academic, the philosopher. In the past couple of decades this image has been bastardized into a commodity, a child's play thing. Predictably, but nevertheless, ironically, at this time in american history when where you go to school is more important than ever its proving that it means the least it ever has.

Medicine is unique in that it hardly makes a difference where you went to undergrad, much unlike Finance, Business, Engineering, Music, Consulting, or most other high profile careers.

Music? As in classical music, or music in general?

 

[Lucca]

Music? As in classical music, or music in general?

Classical and Chamber, not becoming a pop sensation or something like that

 

[Aerus]

bc I'm sure there are no neurotic premeds who purposefully enter easier colleges to get higher overall GPAs and science GPAs than they would at an Ivy League. Also with the huge amount of money they save by attending a state college, I'm sure there is no way they could afford those courses. Realize your "average" premed who matriculates, is not the average college student.

You can cut the sarcastic tone. I never claimed that state school premeds don't use test prep courses. I was merely pointing out that your response to HeyNapkin's post didn't make sense. He was arguing that a 32 is a 32 and your response that state school kids use test prep courses is irrelevant since I'm sure there are a plethora of ivy kids who do the same. How do you think many of them got to the ivies in the first place?

 

[Aerus]

In those studies they are referring to SCIENCE GPA, and "medical school success" is defined as USMLE Step 1 score (hardly a real measure of medical school success).

I have very little invested in actually paying attention to those studies. In my honest opinion, GPA should be disregarded as a whole. It doesn't introduce any useful information about the applicant, since there are so many ways they could have gotten that GPA. And a GPA is even more useless in comparing applicants with each other.