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

[DermViser]

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.

Yes, it's obvious you have very little invested. Whether you like it or not, NUMEROUS studies have shown a strong correlation between science GPA and the first 2 years of medical school and passage of USMLE Step 1, which if you are able to do neither, then you will never become a doctor, period. We're not talking about someone who only took sociology courses and got a 4.0. It doesn't matter how much "love for medicine" or whatever other touchy-feely tagline you have, if you don't have the grades and scores to back it up. Right or wrong, when it comes to the ability to get through the first 2 years of rigorous curriculum, grade point average is a very valid marker which has been established by numerous studies based on statistical analysis, not your touchy-feely, unicorns farting rainbows utopia.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[TreadLightly]

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.

How do you know that students from state schools are being chosen over ivy students with the same scores? Most people (myself included) would assume that the ivy students have an advantage.

 

[WillburCobb]

Yes, it's obvious you have very little invested. Whether you like it or not, NUMEROUS studies have shown a strong correlation between science GPA and the first 2 years of medical school and passage of USMLE Step 1, which if you are able to do neither, then you will never become a doctor, period. We're not talking about someone who only took sociology courses and got a 4.0. It doesn't matter how much "love for medicine" or whatever other touchy-feely tagline you have, if you don't have the grades and scores to back it up. Right or wrong, when it comes to the ability to get through the first 2 years of rigorous curriculum, grade point average is a very valid marker which has been established by numerous studies based on statistical analysis, not your touchy-feely, unicorns farting rainbows utopia.

Ummmm, not sure where you found these "numerous studies" but the strongest correlation found was MCAT score, not cGPA or sGPA. Also it was correlation of around .6 - not terrible but fairly modest.

 

[HeyNapkin]

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?

This x10000. When I read his response I was very confused. Also, if the state U kid was willing to go the extra effort to use test prep, it shows dedication.

 

[Ace-Co-A]

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 University of Iowa 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 at the University of Iowa.

Now, while the University of Iowa 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" extracurricular a 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 times, 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 the University of Iowa.

@jeghaber ... I think we've all heard anecdotes like this one, and you're certainly not committing SDN suicide, in my eyes, by providing such a story. However, I'm not sure that you've added anything new to the discussion. Nobody denies that reports of experiences like yours suggest a difference in difficulty between Ivies/Ivy-likes and public schools and/or non-elite privates. What is challenged by folks from non-elite schools is that there is a basis for differentiating between individuals of similar qualifications from two different "school tiers" based on these reports. There is no way to weigh the GPAs of the individuals by the 'difficulty' of each applicant's alma mater. To my knowledge anyway, the only way of comparing between institutions is by SAT scores, which I maintain is not very reliable.

 

[Syndicate]

I would just like to point out, after reading a lot of people's posts flaming ivies, that a lot of ivy league students are not the children of wealthy business magnates who own vacation houses in the Hamptons. Most ivy league/ivy comparable students are the students from all sorts of backgrounds (and let me emphasize, ALL SORTS OF BACKGROUNDS) who worked hard ever since elementary school in order to get into the ivy league/ivy comparable. I agree with all of your sentiments regarding those snobby rich kids that get into ivies b/c of legacies starting from their great grandparents. I share those sentiments. But for the majority of us who've paid our dues to get to this point, the med school admissions game doesn't give us the advantage that we believe we should get. I say this because getting into an ivy/ivy comparable is hard for those of us not from the American elite, and we do not want to see our efforts end up only adding "minimal" advantage in med school admissions.

EDIT: I am not complaining about my situation, as I've been accepted to several medical schools. I speak for a lot of my friends who have a ~3.6/30 from my ivy and have had no luck this cycle.

 

[Ace-Co-A]

I would just like to point out, after reading a lot of people's posts flaming ivies, that a lot of ivy league students are not the children of wealthy business magnates who own vacation houses in the Hamptons. Most ivy league/ivy comparable students are the students from all sorts of backgrounds (and let me emphasize, ALL SORTS OF BACKGROUNDS) who worked hard ever since elementary school in order to get into the ivy league/ivy comparable. I agree with all of your sentiments regarding those snobby rich kids that get into ivies b/c of legacies starting from their great grandparents. I share those sentiments. But for the majority of us who've paid our dues to get to this point, the med school admissions game doesn't give us the advantage that we believe we should get. I say this because getting into an ivy/ivy comparable is hard for those of us not from the American elite, and we do not want to see our efforts end up only adding "minimal" advantage in med school admissions.

I think that the opinion you lament here is a minority position. Not worthy of derailing the thread IMO.

 

[HeyNapkin]

I would just like to point out, after reading a lot of people's posts flaming ivies, that a lot of ivy league students are not the children of wealthy business magnates who own vacation houses in the Hamptons. Most ivy league/ivy comparable students are the students from all sorts of backgrounds (and let me emphasize, ALL SORTS OF BACKGROUNDS) who worked hard ever since elementary school in order to get into the ivy league/ivy comparable. I agree with all of your sentiments regarding those snobby rich kids that get into ivies b/c of legacies starting from their great grandparents. I share those sentiments. But for the majority of us who've paid our dues to get to this point, the med school admissions game doesn't give us the advantage that we believe we should get. I say this because getting into an ivy/ivy comparable is hard for those of us not from the American elite, and we do not want to see our efforts end up only adding "minimal" advantage in med school admissions.

EDIT: I am not complaining about my situation, as I've been accepted to several medical schools. I speak for a lot of my friends who have a ~3.6/30 from my ivy and have had no luck this cycle.

Why should you get an advantage for something you did in highschool? A student getting a 3.6/30 is average no matter how you look at it, ivy or not.

 

[Aerus]

Yes, it's obvious you have very little invested. Whether you like it or not, NUMEROUS studies have shown a strong correlation between science GPA and the first 2 years of medical school and passage of USMLE Step 1, which if you are able to do neither, then you will never become a doctor, period. We're not talking about someone who only took sociology courses and got a 4.0. It doesn't matter how much "love for medicine" or whatever other touchy-feely tagline you have, if you don't have the grades and scores to back it up. Right or wrong, when it comes to the ability to get through the first 2 years of rigorous curriculum, grade point average is a very valid marker which has been established by numerous studies based on statistical analysis, not your touchy-feely, unicorns farting rainbows utopia.

Again with the irrelevant posts. I said that while I disagreed that GPA actually tells you anything about an applicant in the process, there WAS a correlation, so it wasn't completely useless. I KNOW there were studies. You're basically explaining something to me because I said what you said. You sure have a knack for saying things that don't actually add any value to the discussion.

If you want to get into the actual discussion about why I believe that a GPA doesn't tell much about an applicant, then you should already know that a 3.2 sGPA from one school and a 3.8 sGPA from another school are impossible to compare without thorough background information. Even then, we don't know about the individual professor's grading policies either, which you can clearly see has an effect since premeds are known to try and take the easiest professor possible.

The MCAT should be strongly emphasized more than the GPA since the whole nation takes, more or less, the same test. There have been studies on that and it definitely correlates to med school success, which is why it even exists. Is it possible for a high sGPA to indicate intelligence and hard work? Yes. It's also just as likely to mean that the student is very skilled at taking the easiest route possible.

 

[Lucca]

I would just like to point out, after reading a lot of people's posts flaming ivies, that a lot of ivy league students are not the children of wealthy business magnates who own vacation houses in the Hamptons. Most ivy league/ivy comparable students are the students from all sorts of backgrounds (and let me emphasize, ALL SORTS OF BACKGROUNDS) who worked hard ever since elementary school in order to get into the ivy league/ivy comparable. I agree with all of your sentiments regarding those snobby rich kids that get into ivies b/c of legacies starting from their great grandparents. I share those sentiments. But for the majority of us who've paid our dues to get to this point, the med school admissions game doesn't give us the advantage that we believe we should get. I say this because getting into an ivy/ivy comparable is hard for those of us not from the American elite, and we do not want to see our efforts end up only adding "minimal" advantage in med school admissions.

EDIT: I am not complaining about my situation, as I've been accepted to several medical schools. I speak for a lot of my friends who have a ~3.6/30 from my ivy and have had no luck this cycle.

"Ivy League student says Ivy League advantages not good enough."

A 3.6/30 is a 3.6/30. If an Ivy-leaguer is truly objectively better than a non-ivy leaguer student then that would show up on the MCAT. None of your assertions are backed by data and are instead just assumptions. The average medical school acceptance rate at Harvard was 97% at the time I applied. At Yale I think it was 95%.

Princeton, the ivy with the hardest grade deflation, reports 85-95% acceptance rate to medical school. Source here.

At Cornell, the "lowest" Ivy, the acceptance rate was 67% in 2010. Source. Additionally, Cornell's website states that 74% of applicants with a GPA above 3.4 were accepted into medical school. Consider that most applicants face a 45-60% rate from the GPA ranges of 3.4-4.0 at average MCAT scores.

So, tell me again, how are you entitled to more advantaged?

 

[Aerus]

I would just like to point out, after reading a lot of people's posts flaming ivies, that a lot of ivy league students are not the children of wealthy business magnates who own vacation houses in the Hamptons. Most ivy league/ivy comparable students are the students from all sorts of backgrounds (and let me emphasize, ALL SORTS OF BACKGROUNDS) who worked hard ever since elementary school in order to get into the ivy league/ivy comparable. I agree with all of your sentiments regarding those snobby rich kids that get into ivies b/c of legacies starting from their great grandparents. I share those sentiments. But for the majority of us who've paid our dues to get to this point, the med school admissions game doesn't give us the advantage that we believe we should get. I say this because getting into an ivy/ivy comparable is hard for those of us not from the American elite, and we do not want to see our efforts end up only adding "minimal" advantage in med school admissions.

EDIT: I am not complaining about my situation, as I've been accepted to several medical schools. I speak for a lot of my friends who have a ~3.6/30 from my ivy and have had no luck this cycle.

If your argument is solely that being a student from the ivy league deserves major browny points, then you're either still missing the point or completely ignored many of the posts here.

Again, what exactly about your high school accomplishments (which I'm sure pales in comparison to difficulty compared to college achievements) should merit you an automatic advantage? According to adcoms, there is a slight bonus given to going to a prestigious institution already. It's definitely not ignored. But to say that, automatically, an ivy league kid should be given higher priority seems very arrogant and conceited. Judging from the anecdotes from people on SDN who have met toxic ivy league personalities on the interview trail, is it possible that your friends didn't come off as humble as they would like to be in the essays and interview?

 

[JBOB]

I would just like to point out, after reading a lot of people's posts flaming ivies, that a lot of ivy league students are not the children of wealthy business magnates who own vacation houses in the Hamptons. Most ivy league/ivy comparable students are the students from all sorts of backgrounds (and let me emphasize, ALL SORTS OF BACKGROUNDS) who worked hard ever since elementary school in order to get into the ivy league/ivy comparable. I agree with all of your sentiments regarding those snobby rich kids that get into ivies b/c of legacies starting from their great grandparents. I share those sentiments. But for the majority of us who've paid our dues to get to this point, the med school admissions game doesn't give us the advantage that we believe we should get. I say this because getting into an ivy/ivy comparable is hard for those of us not from the American elite, and we do not want to see our efforts end up only adding "minimal" advantage in med school admissions.

EDIT: I am not complaining about my situation, as I've been accepted to several medical schools. I speak for a lot of my friends who have a ~3.6/30 from my ivy and have had no luck this cycle.

Outside of correcting for grade deflation, there is absolutely no reason to give ivy league students any advantage. You and your friends worked hard in high school, that paid off by getting a "better" college education, which should be demonstrated by a good MCAT score & ECs/research, which were more available to you than students at other colleges.

 

[jeghaber]

@jeghaber ... I think we've all heard anecdotes like this one, and you're certainly not committing SDN suicide, in my eyes, by providing such a story. However, I'm not sure that you've added anything new to the discussion. Nobody denies that reports of experiences like yours suggest a difference in difficulty between Ivies/Ivy-likes and public schools and/or non-elite privates. What is challenged by folks from non-elite schools is that there is a basis for differentiating between individuals of similar qualifications from two different "school tiers" based on these reports. There is no way to weigh the GPAs of the individuals by the 'difficulty' of each applicant's alma mater. To my knowledge anyway, the only way of comparing between institutions is by SAT scores, which I maintain is not very reliable.

That's a good point. My story is certainly anecdotal and I agree it has no bearing on comparing all schools in broad swaths of hazy delineations of elite vs "non"-elite. I just wanted to provide some perspective for those who seem to claim "If I went to the Ivy I was accepted to, I would have had a much better GPA because of all the rampant inflation and would have gotten into more/better schools." My point was simply that one can succeed in both environments, and either way, would have likely ultimately ended up with the same kind of success in medical school admissions and thus, for individual applicants, at least, I find this discussion of school vs GPA to be non-productive. As applicants, all we can do is aim for the best we can in whatever environment we're in.

But I admit, I've come to this conclusion mostly because I more or less trust in the admissions system -- that is, I would like to believe that committees are able to be above giving unfair advantages to one applicant over the other simply because of school reputation or minimal GPA differences. As many have mentioned, not only does the MCAT exist as a great equalizer, but also, medical schools have so much more raw data on this endless school vs GPA debate than we as individual applicants, or even as a forum, have. I think the unfortunate state of the matter is that there are far too many qualified applicants and not nearly enough seats for all of them. It's also unfortunate that it's difficult to determine whether one should, when confronted with two applicants with the same profile, boost one over the other because of undergraduate reputation or conversely, penalize the one for not achieving "more" in an environment with more opportunities/support. Neither scenario is ideal since both candidates earned those same credentials. But again, it comes down to trusting that the admissions committee can come to an objective and well-guided decision based on their experience and data. I sincerely hope this kind of thinking doesn't come from maybe already receiving the boosts from school reputation or whatnot and thus not being as disgruntled about the system, but feel free to call me out on it if it seems that way. If I'm becoming an elitist pig, I'd want to know -- I prefer being that random Asian from Iowa

 

[KnuxNole]

I would just like to point out, after reading a lot of people's posts flaming ivies, that a lot of ivy league students are not the children of wealthy business magnates who own vacation houses in the Hamptons. Most ivy league/ivy comparable students are the students from all sorts of backgrounds (and let me emphasize, ALL SORTS OF BACKGROUNDS) who worked hard ever since elementary school in order to get into the ivy league/ivy comparable. I agree with all of your sentiments regarding those snobby rich kids that get into ivies b/c of legacies starting from their great grandparents. I share those sentiments. But for the majority of us who've paid our dues to get to this point, the med school admissions game doesn't give us the advantage that we believe we should get. I say this because getting into an ivy/ivy comparable is hard for those of us not from the American elite, and we do not want to see our efforts end up only adding "minimal" advantage in med school admissions.

EDIT: I am not complaining about my situation, as I've been accepted to several medical schools. I speak for a lot of my friends who have a ~3.6/30 from my ivy and have had no luck this cycle.

Unfortunately, that's the game. We all know that Ivy league students are a rare sight in the USA. Adcoms do acknowledge this fact, I doubt this is completely ignored despite feeling like it hasn't been helpful. Also, what kind of schools did these kids apply to? I hope it wasn't only top 20 schools but schools within their reach. Also, state schools.

 

[johnnycage377]

*snip*

 

[Microglia]

Again with the irrelevant posts. I said that while I disagreed that GPA actually tells you anything about an applicant in the process, there WAS a correlation, so it wasn't completely useless. I KNOW there were studies. You're basically explaining something to me because I said what you said. You sure have a knack for saying things that don't actually add any value to the discussion.

If you want to get into the actual discussion about why I believe that a GPA doesn't tell much about an applicant, then you should already know that a 3.2 sGPA from one school and a 3.8 sGPA from another school are impossible to compare without thorough background information. Even then, we don't know about the individual professor's grading policies either, which you can clearly see has an effect since premeds are known to try and take the easiest professor possible.

The MCAT should be strongly emphasized more than the GPA since the whole nation takes, more or less, the same test. There have been studies on that and it definitely correlates to med school success, which is why it even exists. Is it possible for a high sGPA to indicate intelligence and hard work? Yes. It's also just as likely to mean that the student is very skilled at taking the easiest route possible.

I understand your argument, but the truth of the matter is GPAs can and will be compared. How will they be compared? Bluntly, by which number is bigger. It's that simple. The thing is, jobs do it all the time without any standardized test like the MCAT to back up the GPA. To some jobs, though, undergrad name matters. At med schools, undergrad school prestige matters 0%, as does major and how big of a course load you take (at least at my school, and the schools of my college buds).

 

[Aerus]

I understand your argument, but the truth of the matter is GPAs can and will be compared. How will they be compared? Bluntly, by which number is bigger. It's that simple. The thing is, jobs do it all the time without any standardized test like the MCAT to back up the GPA. To some jobs, though, undergrad name matters. At med schools, undergrad school prestige matters 0%, as does major and how big of a course load you take (at least at my school, and the schools of my college buds).

Which I never disagreed to occurring. Such is reality.

 

[mehc012]

To me, the biggest difference I've noticed since graduating my 'top' school and having to take classes elsewhere is the type of tests given. Now there are actually multiple choice sections on tests again, rather than 5-10 pages of short answer/essay/problem solving prompts. Tests take an hour, tops, instead of 8-24 for most upper level sciences.
Does that make the GPAs different? Probably not, considering curve and everything. But I wouldn't trade the experience I got in my 'top' college for anything...I feel like it really developed me academically. Useful to anyone else? Perhaps not. But it was helpful to me as a person.

 

[midnight0il]

Does this thread really boil down to Ivy-League versus non-? I've met so many incredible students over the years from both sides of the "great divide" that I don't understand why anyone would paint broad sweeping generalizations. For what's it worth--I did my undergrad at an Ivy, but more recently, my post-bac at a state school and certainly saw some differences, but the best of the best were not that different from each other.

 

[RedWedding]

To me, the biggest difference I've noticed since graduating my 'top' school and having to take classes elsewhere is the type of tests given. Now there are actually multiple choice sections on tests again, rather than 5-10 pages of short answer/essay/problem solving prompts. Tests take an hour, tops, instead of 8-24 for most upper level sciences.
Does that make the GPAs different? Probably not, considering curve and everything. But I wouldn't trade the experience I got in my 'top' college for anything...I feel like it really developed me academically. Useful to anyone else? Perhaps not. But it was helpful to me as a person.

I have a hard time believing that your tests take 8-24 hours. That seems quite ridiculous....

 

[1badmamajama]

MCAT: the great equalizer.

Even if these people got into medical school.. I foresee just as many failing out since they're obviously not prepared. It all balances out in the end.

 

[circulus vitios]

If it's so much easier to get into med school from a lower ranked school, then why don't you transfer out of Ivies and into state schools?

 

[Syndicate]

I looked at your MDApps. It seems like you were a top-tier applicant, and yes, you probably would've succeeded even if you had gone to a different school -- but that's for you- people at the top can succeed wherever they go. It's the people who are at the middle or borderline, where picking the right or wrong school, major, or classes can mean the difference between acceptance and getting weeded out due the difference in GPA. And I'm not just talking about Ivy or non Ivy , but easy state schools over harder state schools, or even within schools, picking the easy major. I don't agree with your assertion that admissions will account for everything-- if that were true, you wouldn't see so many premeds gaming the system by picking easy schools/classes to boost their GPA.

True. However, those students who game the system by picking easy schools and classes end up only hurting themselves when they have to adjust to the challengers of med school.

 

[Skeeks]

 

[bunionberry]

True. However, those students who game the system by picking easy schools and classes end up only hurting themselves when they have to adjust to the challengers of med school.

And adjust they will. If you're accepted to med school, it's not usually because of dumb luck or because someone made a bribe with the admissions committee. You're accepted because the adcom believed that you are a suitable candidate for their medical school. Everyone has to adjust. I'll probably have to adjust because my study habits are crap in undergrad. That doesn't mean I'm not going to do well in medical school though.

 

[Lucca]

I have a hard time believing that your tests take 8-24 hours. That seems quite ridiculous....

It's actually pretty common at some schools. My friend at CalTech had a take-home exam that was "Open-Google" and the students were given two-weeks.

 

[WillburCobb]

It's actually pretty common at some schools. My friend at CalTech had a take-home exam that was "Open-Google" and the students were given two-weeks.

I can second this. The grade in my Endo class consisted of two tests and a paper. The first test was after school hours and consisted of 6 questions. I think it took me about 3.5-4hrs. The second one was a take home 12 question test and we had a little over a week. I ended up turning in a single spaced 48 page tome for that one. This was at one of those lowly state schools too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lucca]

I can second this. The grade in my Endo class consisted of two tests and a paper. The first test was after school hours and consisted of 6 questions. I think it took me about 3.5-4hrs. The second one was a take home 12 question test and we had a little over a week. I ended up turning in a single spaced 48 page tome for that one. This was at one of those lowly state schools too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's the same here, at a state school, in the upper division science courses. Mostly physics.

 

[osprey099]

I'm not from an ivy but I go to a top ranked college and I think where you go to school has a lot to do with the individual as well. For me, my current college costs a total of about $100k more than my state school. Looking back on the friends I've made and the experiences I had, I think the $100k extra was worth it.

So I don't think going to a top college warrants an automatic bid into medical school. However, I like to view med school admissions like the NFL draft. They like players coming from the traditional powerhouses in the SEC, PAC12, Big10, Big12, ACC (in this case, the top ranked colleges) but they also take a lot of players from the bad teams in the major conferences and then teams from lesser conferences like the AAC, Mountain West, WAC, etc (all other colleges). So I think it has a lot to do with individual effort, although school definitely is a factor.

 

[KnuxNole]

People who game for easy classes will be fine. It's not like you have to force yourself to take some hard class if you don't need to. After all, you can learn how to work hard in 1st semester. Yes, knowing how before helps, but it's not mandatory. In fact, trying to find the easier teachers is a good plan! Med school isn't something that's only for highly smart people...that would be madness. It's simply a professional school with a lot of volume. Anyone who puts effort can make it through. Some need a lot more than others who can coast, but once you are in, as long as you keep trucking, you'll reach the goalpost.

 

[MDforMee]

….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.

So you're saying that the only reason you didn't go to an Ivy League school is because your parents couldn't afford it and you didn't want to take out loans? You sound bitter about that, to me.

If it really eats at you this much, get off your butt and help other people (like community college and poor state school kids). Don't bad mouth people who are hard working and privileged enough to go to good schools. Mmmkay?

 

[Skeeks]

Sometimes I wish there were a "dislike" option.

 

[KnuxNole]

To be honest, I've never looked at ivy league attendees as people who are privileged. I think that's a stereotype in TV shows or looking at Princeton pamphlets. At least in my school, the ones who went where the ones who were heavily pushed in high school, or the ones who were gifted, or took 5-6 AP classes in junior/senior year. As you know, there are these wonderful things called student loans, which makes college accessible for a wide variety of people. I have nothing against Ivy League schools, they are simply a college. As we know, they are a TINY percentage of college kids, and a minority in the nation. The ones who make it are a rare sight, kinda like a shiny pokemon. However, on the flip side, I think if you do get into one, you shouldn't be too angry at someone who chooses an easy school, takes easy classes and has a higher GPA. Some people actually like taking the easy path instead of the hard path. And definitely don't need to chastite people who have fun in HS. Af

 

[gettheleadout]

Why should you get an advantage for something you did in highschool? A student getting a 3.6/30 is average no matter how you look at it, ivy or not.

I'll go a step further. I expect more from the nation's "top students" and from my perspective a 30 seems especially substandard for someone with an Ivy League education, not to mention the potential/qualities that got them to that point.

 

[Tungsten5]

If you're going into medicine, you're a fool if you paid more for an undergrad name.

Go to the cheapest respectable university and do well. If it happens to be an ivy so be it.

Otherwise you'll arrive at med school someday already saddled with big debt completely on the same totem pole with your low debt peers who took the cheaper route.

 

[knv2u]

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

Depending on the schools that are being compared (it certainly doesn't hold true universally), the 3.6-3.7 from a top school might not be equivalent to a 3.6-3.7 from a less selective institution. It all comes down to how the grades are distributed at the two schools. At some of the top schools, all of the science classes are curved and there are students who are actually curved downwards even when the exams are of equal or higher levels of rigor than those administered at other universities where the curving system doesn't result in grades being curved downwards or there is no curve at all. In this situation, it can be much harder to get an A at a top school where there competition is greater because of the increased quality in the overall student body. In this scenario, the grades at the more selective institution may be more indicative of the student's relative rank in the class than the level of knowledge obtained; thus, unless you have equivalent quality student bodies (which, you must consider the student body as a whole), you cannot necessarily equate an A from the schools as being the same.

Then one must also consider the rigor of the individual classes. I attended the most selective institution in my state, and then had a couple of prerequisites to finish after graduation. I went to another good, but less selective school. I even retook a couple of biology classes of interest to refresh myself for the MCAT. There was no comparison in the level of rigor of the exams. The exams from my first institution were much more difficult and the questions involved more analytical thinking and logic than those from the second university. I think both were good schools, but I would NOT say that an "A" from the second school was necessarily the equivalent to an "A" from the first school.

There are numerous confounding variables here, and as with everything, it varies tremendously depending on the two schools being compared. And while I think it is fair to say that there are trends among top private and public schools over less selective institutions, it doesn't hold true in every scenario which is why I think this is so controversial. To me, there is such much variation in course rigor, grade inflation, grade deflation, GPA scales (some schools don't give +/- and a 90 is an A, etc.), makes me question the over reliance on GPA in medical school admissions. That leaves us with the MCAT, which is also problematic because of its flaws and the fact that it is a snapshot of academic achievement/aptitude from a single day rather than four years of university studies. Based on equivalent MCAT scores, the deciding factor should come down to whether the 3.6-3.7 GPA from the state school or other private school is equivalent to that of the Ivy. In some cases the scores may not be equivalent. In some cases it might be.

 

[GopherMD]

If you're going into medicine, you're a fool if you paid more for an undergrad name.

Go to the cheapest respectable university and do well. If it happens to be an ivy so be it.

Otherwise you'll arrive at med school someday already saddled with big debt completely on the same totem pole with your low debt peers who took the cheaper route.

That's the biggest thing some of my classmates in medical school regret. They have $100,000+ in undergrad loans.

 

[Pogobuns]

Did I just read that Ivy's grade deflate?

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/20...has-company/kCeheDYfuDjSRcM1sVljfK/story.html

Princeton, the "hardest" grade deflator gives 35% A's? 91% of Harvard grads graduate with honors?

This cracks me up.

 

[knv2u]

@jeghaber ... I think we've all heard anecdotes like this one, and you're certainly not committing SDN suicide, in my eyes, by providing such a story. However, I'm not sure that you've added anything new to the discussion. Nobody denies that reports of experiences like yours suggest a difference in difficulty between Ivies/Ivy-likes and public schools and/or non-elite privates. What is challenged by folks from non-elite schools is that there is a basis for differentiating between individuals of similar qualifications from two different "school tiers" based on these reports. There is no way to weigh the GPAs of the individuals by the 'difficulty' of each applicant's alma mater. To my knowledge anyway, the only way of comparing between institutions is by SAT scores, which I maintain is not very reliable.

I agree that the SAT and MCAT might not be very reliable with individual students, but I think they are accurate for large populations where stochastic variation and anomalies tend to work themselves out; thus, I think it is a meaningful indication of the overall quality/competiveness of the entire student body. Moreover, I think the MCAT is just as reliable as the SAT. If grades and the MCAT are unreliable, then what is left in medical school admissions? And I don't ask the last to be sarcastic, but I am truly curious. There is an enormous variation in grading policies among institutions, and the MCAT has flaws when looking at individual scores. Based on this, I agree with the posters who think the process is a crapshoot once you reach a certain MCAT/GPA score.

 

[487806]

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.

a bit extreme...

 

[Ace-Co-A]

That's a good point. My story is certainly anecdotal and I agree it has no bearing on comparing all schools in broad swaths of hazy delineations of elite vs "non"-elite. I just wanted to provide some perspective for those who seem to claim "If I went to the Ivy I was accepted to, I would have had a much better GPA because of all the rampant inflation and would have gotten into more/better schools." My point was simply that one can succeed in both environments, and either way, would have likely ultimately ended up with the same kind of success in medical school admissions and thus, for individual applicants, at least, I find this discussion of school vs GPA to be non-productive. As applicants, all we can do is aim for the best we can in whatever environment we're in.

But I admit, I've come to this conclusion mostly because I more or less trust in the admissions system -- that is, I would like to believe that committees are able to be above giving unfair advantages to one applicant over the other simply because of school reputation or minimal GPA differences. As many have mentioned, not only does the MCAT exist as a great equalizer, but also, medical schools have so much more raw data on this endless school vs GPA debate than we as individual applicants, or even as a forum, have. I think the unfortunate state of the matter is that there are far too many qualified applicants and not nearly enough seats for all of them. It's also unfortunate that it's difficult to determine whether one should, when confronted with two applicants with the same profile, boost one over the other because of undergraduate reputation or conversely, penalize the one for not achieving "more" in an environment with more opportunities/support. Neither scenario is ideal since both candidates earned those same credentials. But again, it comes down to trusting that the admissions committee can come to an objective and well-guided decision based on their experience and data. I sincerely hope this kind of thinking doesn't come from maybe already receiving the boosts from school reputation or whatnot and thus not being as disgruntled about the system, but feel free to call me out on it if it seems that way. If I'm becoming an elitist pig, I'd want to know -- I prefer being that random Asian from Iowa

Your main point seems to be that good candidates succeed (or can succeed) regardless of where they go to school. If I've summarized that appropriately, then I'm not sure I took a very interesting shot at your post in the first place. I agree that "for individual applicants, at least, I find this discussion of school vs GPA to be non-productive."

I really like an idea in this post, though, that "medical schools have so much more raw data on this endless school vs GPA debate than we as individual applicants, or even as a forum, have." Let us hope that this informs admissions decisions, and makes them more objective. I'm all for ultimately leaving the decision up to the admissions committee, and trusting that the application process and admissions officers are, on the whole, not biased in favor of elite schools.

I agree that the SAT and MCAT might not be very reliable with individual students, but I think they are accurate for large populations where stochastic variation and anomalies tend to work themselves out; thus, I think it is a meaningful indication of the overall quality/competiveness of the entire student body. Moreover, I think the MCAT is just as reliable as the SAT. If grades and the MCAT are unreliable, then what is left in medical school admissions? And I don't ask the last to be sarcastic, but I am truly curious. There is an enormous variation in grading policies among institutions, and the MCAT has flaws when looking at individual scores. Based on this, I agree with the posters who think the process is a crapshoot once you reach a certain MCAT/GPA score.

Hi @knv2u ... glad you stopped by. From what I've seen in some of your other posts, you and I disagree about this issue. I hope that I can learn a little more about your thoughts, here.

"If grades and the MCAT are unreliable, then what is left in medical school admissions?" I didn't say grades and MCAT scores were unreliable in general, just that we don't have a great way of comparing individuals from different institutions. Nobody would argue that a 3.9/38 applicant beats (statistically, only) a 3.4/29 one. The idea I wish to convey is that we cannot know what similar GPAs mean between institutions. A 3.8 at Penn State almost certainly, it seems to me, would not equate to a 3.8 at Hopkins. Does that mean that the 3.8 from Hopkins is better than a 3.8 at Penn State? I submit that that is an open question. What if we were comparing an Engineering major from Penn State and an English major from Hopkins? Does that change things? What if they had the same major? ... etc., etc. ... At this point, we look back to @jeghaber 's post and appreciate that the abundance of data in the hands of admissions committees makes this determination more objective.

As I said earlier... in particular, I'm drawing your attention to my paragraph about the reliability of SAT scores. A good SAT score is good, but it doesn't get you a life pass for success. What have you done for me lately? This thinking is prominent in medicine. We don't rely on MCAT scores when it comes time to apply for residencies -- we have the boards. We are constantly reassessing ourselves to make sure that we're always at the top of our game, no?

 

[Syndicate]

I think choosing where to go to school has a lot to do with your upbringing, immediate family, and social environment. My family was far from rich back when I was a kid but they have always emphasized that I need to work my hardest in order to get into an Ivy League school and eventually become in the American elite, and they have sacrificed everything for that purpose. A lot of my friends' families shared that sentiment and as a result, my family was always comparing me to their colleagues' children who end up getting in to this ivy or that ivy. Please realize none of us are considered rich, but my family brought me up in an environment where academics and getting into an Ivy League trumped everything else in life.

I realize not everybody grows up in this kind of environment, so you may not share my beliefs. But personally, I believe getting into an ivy establishes a certain social standing in this country. And all I was trying to say in my previous posts is that I don't see that social standing helping ivy students out that much in med school admissions compared to how it helps us out in other careers like finance and law.

 

[MDforMee]

I think choosing where to go to school has a lot to do with your upbringing, immediate family, and social environment. My family was far from rich back when I was a kid but they have always emphasized that I need to work my hardest in order to get into an Ivy League school and eventually become in the American elite, and they have sacrificed everything for that purpose. A lot of my friends' families shared that sentiment and as a result, my family was always comparing me to their colleagues' children who end up getting in to this ivy or that ivy. Please realize none of us are considered rich, but my family brought me up in an environment where academics and getting into an Ivy League trumped everything else in life.

I realize not everybody grows up in this kind of environment, so you may not share my beliefs. But personally, I believe getting into an ivy establishes a certain social standing in this country. And all I was trying to say in my previous posts is that I don't see that social standing helping ivy students out that much in med school admissions compared to how it helps us out in other careers like finance and law.

Don't try to play it down. You got into a good school and you deserve what comes with it. Let other people be jealous, but just don't be one of those people that gets a princeton alumni license plate frame.

Kind of reminds me of the guy I saw last week wearing a "Stanford Medicine" sweater with really huge lettering. Even I almost wanted to tell him to where to stick it.

But, on this thread, I know someone that went to Southern Utah and got into the University of Arizona SOM as an out of state applicant. My dad told me about him last week... I was kind of in disbelief because I know that the kid isn't that bright. Reading this thread's story shows where the pieces fit. Also, I thought that I saw something in the article says that its Mormons helping Mormons or something... if that's true, well, that goes against their code of ethics, doesn't it?

 

[HeyNapkin]

I think choosing where to go to school has a lot to do with your upbringing, immediate family, and social environment. My family was far from rich back when I was a kid but they have always emphasized that I need to work my hardest in order to get into an Ivy League school and eventually become in the American elite, and they have sacrificed everything for that purpose. A lot of my friends' families shared that sentiment and as a result, my family was always comparing me to their colleagues' children who end up getting in to this ivy or that ivy. Please realize none of us are considered rich, but my family brought me up in an environment where academics and getting into an Ivy League trumped everything else in life.

I realize not everybody grows up in this kind of environment, so you may not share my beliefs. But personally, I believe getting into an ivy establishes a certain social standing in this country. And all I was trying to say in my previous posts is that I don't see that social standing helping ivy students out that much in med school admissions compared to how it helps us out in other careers like finance and law.

Because there is no social standing advantage when it comes to medicine maybe with the exception of being a URM or having doctor parents. You sound like a stuck up prick begging for his advantage. You're like a high school football player who is now in college and whining about why no one lets him cheat anymore.

 

[MDforMee]

Because there is no social standing advantage when it comes to medicine maybe with the exception of being a URM or having doctor parents. You sound like a stuck up prick begging for his advantage. You're like a high school football player who is now in college and whining about why no one lets him cheat anymore.

I'm going to laugh when you run your mouth like that to someone in the real world. Take this stuff off of a pre-medical forum.

Syndicate, don't pay attention to people like this.

 

[HeyNapkin]

I'm going to laugh when you run your mouth like that to someone in the real world. Take this stuff off of a pre-medical forum.

Syndicate, don't pay attention to people like this.

How is this garbage? Why should someone who is exceedingly mediocre get preferential treatment?

 

[MDforMee]

How is this garbage? Why should someone who is exceedingly mediocre get preferential treatment?

How is it garbage? Because it sounds like a steaming pile of resentments. The shoe fits, cochise.

Don't call people stuck up that you don't know. You're going to get put into your place if you do that to someone in the real world, and it won't be pretty.

 

[HeyNapkin]

How is it garbage? Because it sounds like a steaming pile of resentments. The shoe fits, cochise.

Don't call people stuck up that you don't know. You're going to get put into your place if you do that to someone in the real world, and it won't be pretty.

"Kind of reminds me of the guy I saw last week wearing a "Stanford Medicine" sweater with really huge lettering. Even I almost wanted to tell him to where to stick it."

Yeah ok.

Anyways, I don't need to know him to feel like he's stuck up when he mentioned how he feels like how people who went to ivies despite an advantage, despite being average.

 

[Ace-Co-A]

How is it garbage? Because it sounds like a steaming pile of resentments. The shoe fits, cochise.

Don't call people stuck up that you don't know. You're going to get put into your place if you do that to someone in the real world, and it won't be pretty.

Putting aside the dangerous direction that this thread is turning ... dude... is your avatar that scene from Indiana Jones where the guy rips the sacrificed dude's heart out and it lights on fire?

 

[MDforMee]

"Kind of reminds me of the guy I saw last week wearing a "Stanford Medicine" sweater with really huge lettering. Even I almost wanted to tell him to where to stick it."

Yeah ok.

Like I said, even I had trouble not giving him a dirty look.

I can admit that I'd want to call him a fancy-ass for wearing it, but I realize that the reason why I'd want to do it is because I'm jealous that he's there, and that I'm not. That's why I told Syndicate to not flaunt his bejeweled education.

Putting aside the dangerous direction that this thread is turning ... dude... is your avatar that scene from Indiana Jones where the guy rips the sacrificed dude's heart out and it lights on fire?

Hahaha, yes indeed it is. You're the first one to ask what it's from, too.