Top 30 Undergrad vs. State School: My Firsthand Experience

[Cyberdyne 101]

I'm sure you (and others) have, I'm just going based off the fact that my friends who went to state school say it was just like a larger version of high school for them, so I don't think I would have developed there. But it still doesn't resolve the issues with GPAs and I don't think the solution should be for people avoid great opportunities.

The gpa issues won't be resolved by med schools. The colleges/professors have to fine tune the difficulty of the relevant course work. They can effectively challenge students without punishing them. I mean other top schools like Stanford seem to find a good balance. I'm not disagreeing that B/B+ students at a few schools would do better elsewhere. However, they are paying tuition at their university. Why are they being held back? One doesn't need to be an organic chem genius to be qualified for med school.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[efle]

Its only a great opportunity if you can hack it. Its a disaster waiting to happen if you're a top student at your average public high school who wants to be a doctor and has no concept of what it means to be curved against the top percentile.

I just don't understand how high schoolers are kept so totally in the dark. Over 2/3 of premeds who arrive here with M+V SATs of 1460+ fall off the premed track...high school counselors really need to be warning premeds how statistically dangerous it is to go somewhere that you won't be special anymore.

 

[altblue]

Its only a great opportunity if you can hack it. Its a disaster waiting to happen if you're a top student at your average public high school who wants to be a doctor and has no concept of what it means to be curved against the top percentile.

I just don't understand how high schoolers are kept so totally in the dark. Over 2/3 of premeds who arrive here with M+V SATs of 1460+ fall off the premed track...high school counselors really need to be warning premeds how statistically dangerous it is to go somewhere that you won't be special anymore.

Never go to your reach school unless it's Harvard or Brown or some ****.

Hell, try to go to a school where your GPA and SAT/ACT is at least in the 60-70th percentile or so; I'm at that point right now and even I'm struggling at times.

 

[efle]

Never go to your reach school unless it's Harvard or Brown or some ****.

Hell, try to go to a school where your GPA and SAT/ACT is at least in the 60-70th percentile or so; I'm at that point right now and even I'm struggling.

But of course on the flip side, if you can pull a 3.8+ GPA at a top 20 you are in a great spot, especially for the best private Med schools with ther prestigious undergrad favoritism. Its quite a gamble, one I've seen both backfire and crush some initially cocky students and also launch others into some solid Med schools despite very basic ECs.

 

[altblue]

Probably don't go to the best school you get into. he describes the problem well.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

But of course on the flip side, if you can pull a 3.8+ GPA at a top 20 you are in a great spot, especially for the best private Med schools with ther prestigious undergrad favoritism. Its quite a gamble, one I've seen both backfire and crush some initially cocky students and also launch others into some solid Med schools despite very basic ECs.

Also, some lesser known colleges have a tradition of sending their students to top med schools

 

[Helse23]

The gpa issues won't be resolved by med schools. The colleges/professors have to fine tune the difficulty of the relevant course work. They can effectively challenge students without punishing them. I mean other top schools like Stanford seem to find a good balance. I'm not disagreeing that B/B+ students at a few schools would do better elsewhere. However, they are paying tuition at their university. Why are they being held back? One doesn't need to be an organic chem genius to be qualified for med school.

Fine tuning the difficulty causes non-pre-meds to miss out. People with my gpa get into top grad (and law) programs all the time; med schools are the only ones who don't think it's good enough, so there is no motivation to change anything.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Fine tuning the difficulty causes non-pre-meds to miss out. People with my gpa get into top grad (and law) programs all the time; med schools are the only ones who don't think it's good enough, so there is no motivation to change anything.

To miss out on what? An unnecessary academic a**-whooping? If I were the Dean at Chicago, I'd want a higher rate of successful pre-meds.

 

[Helse23]

To miss out on what? An unnecessary academic a**-whooping? If I were the Dean at Chicago, I'd want a higher rate of successful pre-meds.

You do learn through a**-whoppings and you learn to use your knowledge in new ways. And our pre-meds are pretty successful, they just have to jump through a few hoops (successful judging on people who apply, I don't really know how many people drop being a pre-med).

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

You do learn through a**-whoppings and you learn to use your knowledge in new ways. And our pre-meds are pretty successful, they just have to jump through a few hoops (successful judging on people who apply, I don't really know how many people drop being a pre-med).

Yeah, there's definitely a difference between constructive and totally unnecessary challenges. That's what I've been trying to say!

Let's try to quantify this. If on average, a Chicago student spends 15-20 hrs a week more on their coursework than a Stanford student (of similar aptitude), then the Chicago student is missing out on sleep, social stuff, ECs, for a potentially lower gpa. I just don't think it's worth it. And as I mentioned before, I've spoken to a few Chicago grads who confirmed that it was excessive.

 

[Porkloins]

Never go to your reach school unless it's Harvard or Brown or some ****.

Hell, try to go to a school where your GPA and SAT/ACT is at least in the 60-70th percentile or so; I'm at that point right now and even I'm struggling at times.

Thing is, this is advice that a high schooler who doesn't know what he wants to do yet would never follow. Of course there are some who come into college and start gunning for a 4.0 right away, but the majority, even at the top schools, are very focused on being successful in other ways - sports, social life, networking, exploring different subjects while still trying hard at school but maybe not necessarily protecting their GPA like it's their newborn child (assuming we're talking about top grade deflators here). Reach schools also often provide the best opportunities to network in fields where alumni connections and "namebrand" matter much more e.g. finance, consulting, so I would hesitate to automatically recommend that all high school seniors stay away from their top choice college...

 

[efle]

Thing is, this is advice that a high schooler who doesn't know what he wants to do yet would never follow. Of course there are some who come into college and start gunning for a 4.0 right away, but the majority, even at the top schools, are very focused on being successful in other ways - sports, social life, networking, exploring different subjects while still trying hard at school but maybe not necessarily protecting their GPA like it's their newborn child (assuming we're talking about top grade deflators here). Reach schools also often provide the best opportunities to network in fields where alumni connections and "namebrand" matter much more e.g. finance, consulting, so I would hesitate to automatically recommend that all high school seniors stay away from their top choice college...

Yep this is all premed specific. If you want togo into research or something, Big Name Uni all the way

 

[redpanda]

Q. Why do state school grads put a copy of their diploma in the window of their vehicles?

A. So they can park in handicap spaces.

And why do certain Hopkins grads have bumper stickers that say "Johns Hopkins: the best of the best"? Because they cannot figure out when to stop being a prat.

 

[justadream]

To miss out on what? An unnecessary academic a**-whooping? If I were the Dean at Chicago, I'd want a higher rate of successful pre-meds.

As someone who has experienced a few, I can say that while it is unpleasant, you do learn from the experience and change your perspective.

You learn:
1) You can't be perfect. You are almost assuredly not going to get 100% (or even like 90% sometimes), no matter how hard you try or how hard you study
2) How to think under stress and how to try to apply basic concepts you know in tricky/unfamiliar settings. There are very few "freebies" in exams.
3) Humility. You may think you are great at Bio/Chem/Math/etc. but you most likely won't be so cocky after you are struggling to get the average

Yeah, there's definitely a difference between constructive and totally unnecessary challenges. That's what I've been trying to say!

Let's try to quantify this. If on average, a Chicago student spends 15-20 hrs a week more on their coursework than a Stanford student (of similar aptitude), then the Chicago student is missing out on sleep, social stuff, ECs, for a potentially lower gpa. I just don't think it's worth it. And as I mentioned before, I've spoken to a few Chicago grads who confirmed that it was excessive.

How do you know the average Chicago student spends more time on coursework than the average Stanford student (of similar aptitude)?

I don't really think that is the case (or at least not to that extent). I think they probably spend similar amounts of time studying except that since Chicago classes are curved to B- (or C-), Chicago students just end up with lower GPAs. Even at Harvard/Stanford, students need to work really hard to beat the curve. If you major in certain things at Harvard/Stanford (e.g., engineering), the average GPAs are much closer to UChicago level (e.g., like 3.4-3.5). It's mostly in the humanities that you see the A- curves.

 

[efle]

As someone who has experienced a few, I can say that while it is unpleasant, you do learn from the experience and change your perspective.

You learn:
1) You can't be perfect. You are almost assuredly not going to get 100% (or even like 90% sometimes), no matter how hard you try or how hard you study
2) How to think under stress and how to try to apply basic concepts you know in tricky/unfamiliar settings. There are very few "freebies" in exams.
3) Humility. You may think you are great at Bio/Chem/Math/etc. but you most likely won't be so cocky after you are struggling to get the average




How do you know the average Chicago student spends more time on coursework than the average Stanford student (of similar aptitude)?

I don't really think that is the case (or at least not to that extent). I think they probably spend similar amounts of time studying except that since Chicago classes are curved to B- (or C-), Chicago students just end up with lower GPAs. Even at Harvard/Stanford, students need to work really hard to beat the curve. If you major in certain things at Harvard/Stanford (e.g., engineering), the average GPAs are much closer to UChicago level (e.g., like 3.4-3.5). It's mostly in the humanities that you see the A- curves.

Look up some of the self-reported student happiness surveys that get published in the giant guides to finding a college (such as Princeton Review 379 Best Colleges). Places like JHop and UChicago have markedly below average happiness (and also higher stress) according to the students there, when compared to some other Top 20s. There are certainly differences in amount of time spent studying - people at Brown simply do not study as much of their day away as do people at U Chicago (source: being a visiting student at a lot of top schools and asking current students). Whether this comes from the different deflation levels or just campus culture is up for debate.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

As someone who has experienced a few, I can say that while it is unpleasant, you do learn from the experience and change your perspective.

You learn:
1) You can't be perfect. You are almost assuredly not going to get 100% (or even like 90% sometimes), no matter how hard you try or how hard you study
2) How to think under stress and how to try to apply basic concepts you know in tricky/unfamiliar settings. There are very few "freebies" in exams.
3) Humility. You may think you are great at Bio/Chem/Math/etc. but you most likely won't be so cocky after you are struggling to get the average




How do you know the average Chicago student spends more time on coursework than the average Stanford student (of similar aptitude)?

I don't really think that is the case (or at least not to that extent). I think they probably spend similar amounts of time studying except that since Chicago classes are curved to B- (or C-), Chicago students just end up with lower GPAs. Even at Harvard/Stanford, students need to work really hard to beat the curve. If you major in certain things at Harvard/Stanford (e.g., engineering), the average GPAs are much closer to UChicago level (e.g., like 3.4-3.5). It's mostly in the humanities that you see the A- curves.

Again, I learned 1,2, and 3 from my state school. I've taken courses with high attrition rates, impossible exams, and abysmally low averages.

My 2nd paragraph was based on an anecdote given to me by a Chicago grad. He gave me the 15-20 hr difference.
Obviously, Stanford students (and those of us who were challenged at our state schools) have to work hard to earn good grades. But some places clearly make it overwhelmingly difficult.

 

[altblue]

but some places clearly make it overwhelmingly difficult.

I honestly dunno if top schools are aware they weed out many students who would have made it into med school if they had attended easier colleges.

 

[Kochanie]

I honestly dunno if top schools are aware they weed out many students who would have made it into med school if they had attended easier colleges.

Yah they do, professor on first day of Orgo, "if you want to get into medical school, you might as well take this class at your state school because 10% will fail, 15% will get Ds, etc etc"

 

[efle]

I honestly dunno if top schools are aware they weed out many students who would have made it into med school if they had attended easier colleges.

Really? You don't think Johns Hopkins, Princeton, MIT, U Chicago, Columbia, Cornell, etc consider their student body to be the best of the best, and realize that they hand out B- and C to many people from the top percentage of American high schools who turned down invites to state school honors colleges where they'd be expected to set the curves?

I think they know, and don't really care. What does it matter to them that 500 brilliant young people give up on medicine? The 300 that survive average mid 30s on the MCAT, get into med school at a 85+% rate, many to top schools, and that lets them attract the next batch of gifted high schoolers!

I'd be really interested to see the stats on premed drop rates across some of the notoriously tough schools. I don't think WUSTL is known to be as tough as UChicago or JHop, and we lose at least two thirds (source: 950 people in my GenChem 1 class, 270 took the Orgo 2 final).

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I honestly dunno if top schools are aware they weed out many students who would have made it into med school if they had attended easier colleges.

Oh, they know. And it's a shame. You can compare it to Halo difficulty levels. The pre-reqs shouldn't exceed the heroic level (the 3rd icon) IMO.

The legendary level is totally unnecessary for the purposes of med school admissions (and almost everything else). But as @efle pointed out, those schools really don't care.

 

[amad01]

I met a Harvard alumna over the weekend at an interview. We were assigned to work in groups for a project, and before we (5 other people) had the chance to discuss the project, she interjected and started telling everyone what to do in a rude and condescending way. I've never seen such an entitled attitude in my entire life. The med student overseeing our work was giving her dirty looks behind her back, too. She dragged down the group to make herself look good, and our group came in last place for the assignment. The only way you feel comfortable acting like she did (during a med school interview group scenario, of all places) is if you feel superior to other people.

At one of my interviews (very far from boston), there was a dude from harvard carrying around a nice leather binder that said "HARVARD" on the front... and everyone was asking him if he went to harvard... I guess that's all he could find to take notes in?

 

[altblue]

Really? You don't think Johns Hopkins, Princeton, MIT, U Chicago, Columbia, Cornell, etc consider their student body to be the best of the best, and realize that they hand out B- and C to many people from the top percentage of American high schools who turned down invites to state school honors colleges where they'd be expected to set the curves?

I think they know, and don't really care. What does it matter to them that 500 brilliant young people give up on medicine? The 300 that survive average mid 30s on the MCAT, get into med school at a 85+% rate, many to top schools, and that lets them attract the next batch of gifted high schoolers!

I'd be really interested to see the stats on premed drop rates across some of the notoriously tough schools. I don't think WUSTL is known to be as tough as UChicago or JHop, and we lose at least two thirds (source: 950 people in my GenChem 1 class, 270 took the Orgo 2 final).

It reminds me about the "wisdom" saying that tip-top high schools schools are important. People head to Bronx Science or whatever top high school people fawn over, expecting to get into Harvard or MIT, and get their GPA trashed, and end up going to a state school, because Harvard isn't looking for people with a 3.2 and a 2300 when it could get someone from a disadvantaged public school with a 3.9 and a 2300. It's kind of like that for grade-deflating colleges and med school too! Except, with a 3.2, they need 2 years of a post-bacc at a state school or a 97th percentile MCAT, and if they're just lucky enough, some state's new med school might be understanding of their "poor performance" and "personal growth".

But hey, if somebody takes this risk and is able to make it through JHU, it might look nice to an adcom, right?

 

[efle]

It reminds me about the "wisdom" saying that tip-top high schools schools are important. People head to Bronx Science or whatever top high school people fawn over, expecting to get into Harvard or MIT, and get their GPA trashed, and end up going to a state school, because Harvard isn't looking for people with a 3.2 and a 2300 when it could get someone from a disadvantaged public school with a 3.9 and a 2300. It's kind of like that for grade-deflating colleges and med school too! Except, with a 3.2, they need 2 years of a post-bacc at a state school or a 97th percentile MCAT, and if they're just lucky enough, some state's new med school might be understanding of their "poor performance" and "personal growth".

But hey, if somebody takes this risk and is able to make it through JHU, it might look nice to an adcom, right?

Yeah, I tell myself I'll get people who went to hard undergrads and will sympathize looking at my app so I don't cry myself to sleep at night

 

[Kochanie]

At one of my interviews (very far from boston), there was a dude from harvard carrying around a nice leather binder that said "HARVARD" on the front... and everyone was asking him if he went to harvard... I guess that's all he could find to take notes in?

uh was too lazy to go to store and bought his school supplies at the book store?

 

[efle]

interesting that a book store very far from boston was selling harvard notebooks

uh was too lazy to go to store and bought his school supplies at the book store?

wait you meant he was a harvard student who bought a harvard notebook at the harvard bookstore

i'll be going to sleep now

 

[amad01]

uh was too lazy to go to store and bought his school supplies at the book store?

haha right............

 

[Kochanie]

haha right............

Lol that's why half my notebooks say my school name on them..

 

[EvenStevens]

Probably don't go to the best school you get into. he describes the problem well.

favorite presentation i've seen lately. remember watching this back in august

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Yeah, I tell myself I'll get people who went to hard undergrads and will sympathize looking at my app so I don't cry myself to sleep at night

You have a 3.8 and a 40 mcat!
Just be sure to get some clinical experience with humans

 

[efle]

You have a 3.8 and a 40 mcat!
Just be sure to get some clinical experience with humans

Nah man, this is all I need:

 

[altblue]

Nah man, this is all I need:

 

[PreMed015]

How can same GPA = equally qualified when there is a vast difference in difficulty?

How do you quantify this difference numerically? Yes, there is a difference, but imagine if someone got a 3.8/38 from Liberty University and another received an identical 3.8/38 from Yale. How could you honestly tell me the Yale grad is more qualified? The Liberty student could have very well maintained the same GPA at Yale.

Given these two applicants, however, I think the Yale student would get the seat. Not because Yale is more prestigious, but because Yale probably opens up many more doors for research/EC's than a school like Liberty.

 

[efle]

How do you quantify this difference numerically? Yes, there is a difference, but imagine if someone got a 3.8/38 from Liberty University and another received an identical 3.8/38 from Yale. How could you honestly tell me the Yale grad is more qualified? The Liberty student could have very well maintained the same GPA at Yale.

Given these two applicants, however, I think the Yale student would get the seat. Not because Yale is more prestigious, but because Yale probably opens up many more doors for research/EC's than a school like Liberty.

You'd compare the statistics which describe the two student bodies your applicant was competing against - by ACT for example, Liberty the 25-75th interval 42-83rd percentile while Yale is 98-99th percentile. You would also need to know whether it is valid to assume the GPAs are directly comparable or need some context by seeing what the average GPAs for Liberty and Yale are. (Yale is a bad example here because they are notorious inflaters; somewhere like Princeton is usually more legitimate for direct GPA comparisons). Similarly, you'd want to use BCPM GPA since those classes are far more often curved and not inflated.

Say someone got a 34 on the MCAT and another got a 38. Could you really say one is more qualified? Upon a retake they could each score 36 without leaving their confidence intervals as provided by the AAMC. Yet a 38 is competitive anywhere in the nation while a 34 would place you bottom quartile at some of the best schools. You are always operating loosely and making a best guess at what an applicants numbers really mean, and whether they're better than all the others vying for the same spots. And ceteris paribus, coming in as an A- student from among the top 1% communicates a greater likelihood for murderous board scores and grades than does A- performance from among the national average.

As I said earlier in the thread, I don't buy the whole "top schools provide better ECs". I found lab work, volunteering opportunities and my fun EC (a sport) just as easily over summers near my giant state school and hospital.

 

[Gregarious_and_Hilarious]

As I said earlier in the thread, I don't buy the whole "top schools provide better ECs". I found lab work, volunteering opportunities and my fun EC (a sport) just as easily over summers near my giant state school and hospital.

While I agree that the rigor is definitely different between the school, I really have to disagree on this point. I went to a state school and we had very few of the opportunities my friends at the "brand name" schools have.

Many of these schools don't emphasize research, aren't near large clinical centers, and don't have the options for the same activities. It's not impossible to get the same ECs, but I had to work my butt off for some of them while my friends at big name schools had entire offices dedicated to helping them with things (ie research, conferences, clinical exposure)

 

[Helse23]

Yeah, I definitely agree that I had more research opportunities. All the kids from my high school were work study students. My ex-pre-med friend at a state school worked in the alumni donation call-center. My work study jobs were as a clinical research assistant and research assistant. If I didn't get paid to do research, I never would been able to do it. (But maybe other state schools have the money to fund student research?). And starting next year, UChicago is providing guaranteed paid internships in their field for all Odyssey scholars (low-income students), which is great since a lot of students can't afford to not work over the summer

 

[PreMed015]

While I agree that the rigor is definitely different between the school, I really have to disagree on this point. I went to a state school and we had very few of the opportunities my friends at the "brand name" schools have.

Many of these schools don't emphasize research, aren't near large clinical centers, and don't have the options for the same activities. It's not impossible to get the same ECs, but I had to work my butt off for some of them while my friends at big name schools had entire offices dedicated to helping them with things (ie research, conferences, clinical exposure)

Exactly. At my institution, I was ASKED by a professor to join his lab. Don't think this would have happened at many universities.

You'd compare the statistics which describe the two student bodies your applicant was competing against - by ACT for example, Liberty the 25-75th interval 42-83rd percentile while Yale is 98-99th percentile. You would also need to know whether it is valid to assume the GPAs are directly comparable or need some context by seeing what the average GPAs for Liberty and Yale are. (Yale is a bad example here because they are notorious inflaters; somewhere like Princeton is usually more legitimate for direct GPA comparisons). Similarly, you'd want to use BCPM GPA since those classes are far more often curved and not inflated.

Say someone got a 34 on the MCAT and another got a 38. Could you really say one is more qualified? Upon a retake they could each score 36 without leaving their confidence intervals as provided by the AAMC. Yet a 38 is competitive anywhere in the nation while a 34 would place you bottom quartile at some of the best schools. You are always operating loosely and making a best guess at what an applicants numbers really mean, and whether they're better than all the others vying for the same spots. And ceteris paribus, coming in as an A- student from among the top 1% communicates a greater likelihood for murderous board scores and grades than does A- performance from among the national average.

As I said earlier in the thread, I don't buy the whole "top schools provide better ECs". I found lab work, volunteering opportunities and my fun EC (a sport) just as easily over summers near my giant state school and hospital.

To your concern about GPA: As a student at a top institution, I can tell you that rigor is not only different between schools, but even variable within departments. We have several classes at my univ. that can be either moderate or extremely difficult depending on the professor. Orgo, for instance, was a breeze for me. I finished that class ranked (yes, our science classes have a brutal ranking system) in the top 3 students out of ~100. Another professor teaching the same class was absolutely atrocious. Even with the material fresh in my mind, I struggled with a good number of his practice exams. I used his practice materials when studying for my professor, because I knew if I could answer at least half of those questions, I would breeze through my exam. All this to say: If we were to go by your approach, we would have to take all of these things into consideration.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

I honestly dunno if top schools are aware they weed out many students who would have made it into med school if they had attended easier colleges.

sure, likely story

 

[altblue]

While I agree that the rigor is definitely different between the school, I really have to disagree on this point. I went to a state school and we had very few of the opportunities my friends at the "brand name" schools have.

Many of these schools don't emphasize research, aren't near large clinical centers, and don't have the options for the same activities. It's not impossible to get the same ECs, but I had to work my butt off for some of them while my friends at big name schools had entire offices dedicated to helping them with things (ie research, conferences, clinical exposure)

This is an extreme example, but for research at my old CC, one had to write a "proposal", find a faculty sponsor willing to add on more work in addition to being full time, and complete an independent "project" (that is more like a research paper), which isn't legitimate PI/postdoc/undergrad style research by any means. If one means decent to good state schools like Penn State, Michigan State, Arizona, or UC Davis, that's okay. But at CCs, smaller state schools, most LACs, the impression I had gotten from admissions and friends is that research opportunities and pre-health clinical opportunities (especially at rural schools!) are much harder to find.

 

[Kochanie]

Meh I disagree with the whole EC thing. If I had to go to a cheaper/easier school, I'd just pick one that is focused on research. I mean no offense, but why would anyone not choose a research school (except for CCs, of course).

 

[efle]

Yeah, I definitely agree that I had more research opportunities. All the kids from my high school were work study students. My ex-pre-med friend at a state school worked in the alumni donation call-center. My work study jobs were as a clinical research assistant and research assistant. If I didn't get paid to do research, I never would been able to do it. (But maybe other state schools have the money to fund student research?). And starting next year, UChicago is providing guaranteed paid internships in their field for all Odyssey scholars (low-income students), which is great since a lot of students can't afford to not work over the summer

This involves a lot of luck at any university; I was assigned work in a lab for my Fed work-study as well but two of my friends were put in the library reshelving books and scanning in endless pages of old tomes of artwork.

Exactly. At my institution, I was ASKED by a professor to join his lab. Don't think this would have happened at many universities.



To your concern about GPA: As a student at a top institution, I can tell you that rigor is not only different between schools, but even variable within departments. We have several classes at my univ. that can be either moderate or extremely difficult depending on the professor. Orgo, for instance, was a breeze for me. I finished that class ranked (yes, our science classes have a brutal ranking system) in the top 3 students out of ~100. Another professor teaching the same class was absolutely atrocious. Even with the material fresh in my mind, I struggled with a good number of his practice exams. I used his practice materials when studying for my professor, because I knew if I could answer at least half of those questions, I would breeze through my exam. All this to say: If we were to go by your approach, we would have to take all of these things into consideration.

Difficulty is subjective, curved grading is not. Unless the professors actually award a different number of As, Bs, Cs and fails then you can still be compared fairly to your peers even if one teacher didn't suit you as well as another. And anybody can seek out better ways to learn than from a crappy professor.

sure, likely story

Yes, very likely, based on the performance of honors college students at state schools with similar (in fact slightly lower) stats than the average student at top universities, many of whom drop.

Meh I disagree with the whole EC thing. If I had to go to a cheaper/easier school, I'd just pick one that is focused on research. I mean no offense, but why would anyone not choose a research school (except for CCs, of course).

I know at least a few people who essentially had to go to small LACs in the middle of nowhere because they were giving a far more generous financial aid package than any giant research schools. I still think people from anywhere can set up research for summers without having an office at your university to baby step you through it.

 

[IlDestriero]

How do you quantify this difference numerically? Yes, there is a difference, but imagine if someone got a 3.8/38 from Liberty University and another received an identical 3.8/38 from Yale. How could you honestly tell me the Yale grad is more qualified? The Liberty student could have very well maintained the same GPA at Yale.

Given these two applicants, however, I think the Yale student would get the seat. Not because Yale is more prestigious, but because Yale probably opens up many more doors for research/EC's than a school like Liberty.

The person who went to Yale would absolutely get the seat and be more qualified. That is evidenced by their not being stupid enough to attend Liberty University. Seriously.

 

[Gregarious_and_Hilarious]

Meh I disagree with the whole EC thing. If I had to go to a cheaper/easier school, I'd just pick one that is focused on research. I mean no offense, but why would anyone not choose a research school (except for CCs, of course).

Cause it was fo free

 

[Kochanie]

Cause it was fo free

Not worth it... A public school that costs 5k a year vs a school that costs 5k a year with research labs + some credibility..

 

[Gregarious_and_Hilarious]

lol the only schools I know in my city that don't have research labs are like 5k a year.

Wait the college tuition was only 5k a year?? That's crazy!!

My school had research labs, but it was much much more focused on education/teacher training until ~2 years ago.

 

[IlDestriero]

If one means decent to good state schools like Penn, Michigan State, Arizona, or UC Davis, that's okay.

Penn is the nickname for The University of Pennsylvania, an Ivy league private school founded by Ben Franklin.
Penn State is a state school. Penn State is never called Penn.

 

[Kochanie]

Yeah but it's so ****ty I can't honestly respect any premed that chooses the one without research facilities over the one that does. I mean, I guess if your ACT/GPA was that ****ty (they accept anyone and the average is like a 16), but then I would rather go the CC route.

Wait the college tuition was only 5k a year?? That's crazy!!

My school had research labs, but it was much much more focused on education/teacher training until ~2 years ago.

 

[el_duderino]

Yeah but it's so ****ty I can't honestly respect any premed that chooses the one without research facilities over the one that does. I mean, I guess if your ACT/GPA was that ****ty (they accept anyone and the average is like a 16), but then I would rather go the CC route.

Careful what assumptions you make about a student based solely on the institution they attended for undergrad.

 

[PreMed015]

Difficulty is subjective, curved grading is not. Unless the professors actually award a different number of As, Bs, Cs and fails then you can still be compared fairly to your peers even if one teacher didn't suit you as well as another. And anybody can seek out better ways to learn than from a crappy professor.

Professors, at least at my undergrad, make their own curve. At the beginning of the semester, there is no "chart" to explain what percentage of students get A's, B's, etc., it's something that's determined throughout the course. Some professors do talk amongst their colleagues to see how others are designing their curve, but ultimately, the professor can decide to award zero A's if he or she chooses (happened in my intro bio course).

 

[Kochanie]

Careful what assumptions you make about a student based solely on the institution they attended for undergrad.

Of course, but a university that joins CC classes with their classes... Come on, it wouldn't take me more than a year before I realized my opportunities were limited.

 

[Gregarious_and_Hilarious]

Yeah but it's so ****ty I can't honestly respect any premed that chooses the one without research facilities over the one that does. I mean, I guess if your ACT/GPA was that ****ty (they accept anyone and the average is like a 16), but then I would rather go the CC route.

I agree with that, I know several people who did the transfer from CC route and I think it was very wise for them.

I was mostly referring to getting a scholarship that may pull you away from a top school to a less prestigious school. Still some opportunities, but not nearly as nice or plentiful as from the top ones. Why get yourself into heaps of debt just for UG?