2.85 science gpa?

[lmorea]

Did anyone get accepted to schools with a 2.85 science gpa or lower?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Taus]

A friend of mine got into Harvards class of 2009 with lower grades then that.....but keep in mind he had a 37 MCAT and incredible EC's and LOR's....

 

[Mufasa01]

Look I am really sorry and don't want to hurt anyones feelings but there does need to be some standards upheld for getting into medical school allo and osteopathic. Rite now Osteopathic medicine is expanding at a very quick rate and there is a danger that the average requirments will continue to slip lower than they already do. While this may bennefit some who just have to become a doctor even though they could not bring themselves to study hard enough to get a B or B+ average, it will further taint the reputation of osteopathic medicine as the school for wanna-be M.D.s. I personally believe that the cut off should be at least a 3.0 and a 26 MCAT at the very lowest.

 

[MoosePilot]

Look I am really sorry and don't want to hurt anyones feelings but there does need to be some standards upheld for getting into medical school allo and osteopathic. Rite now Osteopathic medicine is expanding at a very quick rate and there is a danger that the average requirments will continue to slip lower than they already do. While this may bennefit some who just have to become a doctor even though they could not bring themselves to study hard enough to get a B or B+ average, it will further taint the reputation of osteopathic medicine as the school for wanna-be M.D.s. I personally believe that the cut off should be at least a 3.0 and a 26 MCAT at the very lowest.

Oh? Why a 3.0 and a 26? I think it should be a 2.5 and a 35...

Everyone's got different standards and different areas of achievement. Don't knock someone else's if you don't know everything they did to get there.

 

[Nate]

Everyone faces obstacles, it is how we deal with them that matters. In our accepted student day recently the Dean asked us how many of us faced challenges and obstacles to get here. Naturally, we all raised our hands. He then went on to say that the reason we are here is because of how we handled them. I believe that you should go back and retake some classes to boost your GPA over a 3.0 which is clearly stated as the least desirable GPA at some schools. You will also need to do well on the MCAT. If you can counter your low GPA with other aspects of your application (most importantly the MCAT) than you should do well but the least you can do is boost that GPA over the 3.0 mark in my opinion unless, of course, you have graduate work that you did well with.

 

[Kazema]

In our accepted student day recently the Dean asked us how many of us faced challenges and obstacles to get here. Naturally, we all raised our hands. He then went on to say that the reason we are here is because of how we handled them.

Dude I was totally there!

 

[MoosePilot]

Everyone faces obstacles, it is how we deal with them that matters. In our accepted student day recently the Dean asked us how many of us faced challenges and obstacles to get here. Naturally, we all raised our hands. He then went on to say that the reason we are here is because of how we handled them. I believe that you should go back and retake some classes to boost your GPA over a 3.0 which is clearly stated as the least desirable GPA at some schools. You will also need to do well on the MCAT. If you can counter your low GPA with other aspects of your application (most importantly the MCAT) than you should do well but the least you can do is boost that GPA over the 3.0 mark in my opinion unless, of course, you have graduate work that you did well with.

My point was that when setting arbitrary standards, you lose reasonable flexibility. You also leave room for humorous irony.

For instance, I might think a 3.0 is a fine level for GPA, but would prefer a minimum MCAT of 30. I might think (for devil's advocacy) that a 26 is ridiculously low. If feel like a 26 is ridiculously low and you feel a 3.0 is ridiculously low, does it really mean anything?

Avoid arbitrary standards. Be flexible. Accept signals of competence however they come.

 

[Nate]

I understand your point completely MoosePilot. I understand set-backs, changes, and re-dos. However, after 4 years of undergrad or however long and however many classes it takes to complete the 128 + credits, you have room to screw up significantly and make up for it, you have time to face obstacles and trials and overcome them. How much more flexibility and room for "humorous irony" do you need? In all, if you still come up short after all of that, I don't feel it too preposterous to suggest going back and fixing it up a bit to a presentable level; a level which some schools have bluntly suggested as a bare minimum. The AACOMAS even seduces one to go back and fix a few grades by dropping retaken classes’ grades from the GPA. There is only so much the "rest of one's application" can make up for. Of course this is only our advice and it is to be taken for what it is worth, but I feel the OP should think more about how to stand up against the competition and not so much about matching the exceptions.

And one last thing, if one can show signals of competence, like MoosPilot stated, despite a sub 3.0 GPA then more power to them. Something sensational ala 35+ MCAT or a superb level in a Masters program for instance. However, I still feel that bringing up the GPA over a 3.0 would be a more probable road to travel.

 

[MoosePilot]

I understand your point completely MoosePilot. I understand set-backs, changes, and re-dos. However, after 4 years of undergrad or however long and however many classes it takes to complete the 128 + credits, you have room to screw up significantly and make up for it, you have time to face obstacles and trials and overcome them. How much more flexibility and room for "humorous irony" do you need? In all, if you still come up short after all of that, I don't feel it too preposterous to suggest going back and fixing it up a bit to a presentable level; a level which some schools have bluntly suggested as a bare minimum. The AACOMAS even seduces one to go back and fix a few grades by dropping retaken classes’ grades from the GPA. There is only so much the "rest of one's application" can make up for. Of course this is only our advice and it is to be taken for what it is worth, but I feel the OP should think more about how to stand up against the competition and not so much about matching the exceptions.

And one last thing, if one can show signals of competence, like MoosPilot stated, despite a sub 3.0 GPA then more power to them. Something sensational ala 35+ MCAT or a superb level in a Masters program for instance. However, I still feel that bringing up the GPA over a 3.0 would be a more probable road to travel.

Well, it's one of those things that I personally have an interest in, because I have a 2.88 BPCM GPA (by AMCAS standards) and a 36 MCAT. So when someone gets all high and mighty and says nobody without at least a 3.0 should get in and oh, by the way, they should also have a 26 MCAT.... I find that funny. Sure you've got standards in your GPA, but if I start asserting there should be some quality standards on a standardized test... after all, it's the only way we can really compare across schools, isn't it? If you do all this work to get a 3.1 GPA and then can't even remember it well enough to take one simple test.... 🙄

See my point? Sure, standards are great, but my standards are going to differ from yours are going to differ from the next person's. Let's not get all inflexible about the standards.

 

[Kazema]

I think that there's a huge difference between a 2.8 that was earned with consistent B and C grades throughout 4 years and a 2.8 that was brought up from like a 1.7 by getting all A's and B's in the junior and senior year, for example. So the story behind the GPA is as important as the GPA itself I think.

On the other hand, AACOMAS is pretty generous about letting you fix your grades. My AMCAS Cum/BCPM is like 2.92/2.95, whereas my AACOMAS Cum/BCPM is like 3.1/3.5, since I got to completely "erase" several failing grades by retaking the course and getting an A.

So I think "standards" would actually make more sense for DO schools because the system is set up to let you make up for an early poor start. But in general I don't think strict standards/cutoffs are the way to go, especially for DO schools who really pride themselves on looking at "the whole applicant".

 

[mfrederi]

3 acceptances with a 2.7 GPA. Everything everybody says is right, it is ridiculous that I was accepted. My MCAT was high, which to me just confirms what a lazy (and busy, I was married and worked alot, but there are NO excuses in this game) person I was in undergrad and how I really did not deserve admission. I real feel it is a blessing from God to be where I am at. I was rejected the first time (as one would expect) and then enrolled in a postbacc program. However, my first 2 acceptances came after only being in postbacc for like 2 months, so I know they didn't have any grades or anything, so even just looking like you are trying to fix things helps. My last acceptance (to my current school, TCOM) came after completion of the postbacc with a 3.9 GPA. I will tell you though that despite what everybody may think, your undergrad grades don't mean jack in med school. An A in undergrad means that you studied about an hour per day per class in most classes I would guess, but don't know this from first hand experience (obviously more for some of the notoriously hard classes). This will get you remediation (or real close if you are a lucky student) in med school. People that were lazy in undergrad can do well in med school, many times it is just the pressure and pace that helps people rise to the challenge so to speak. Anyway, good luck to you. 2.85 is going to make your life a lot harder, and I would probably start finding some back doors (e.g. post bacc, retaking some classes, get to know some people on the adcoms, etc).

 

[Nate]

I am not getting high and mighty at all and I am sorry that you feel that way. I stated my opinion, which was asked for, about a sub 3.0 GPA. MoosePilot scored a 36 on the MCAT and that is quite remarkable, which I also believe I stated was one way to show "signals of competence" with a really low GPA. However, I also stated and still believe, that "fixing" your GPA is a more probable way of showing "signals of competence" than shooting for an improbable score on the MCAT. Sure there are people who make it in with sub 3.0 GPAs but they are the exception as far as I can tell and not the people that future applicants should try to resemble in order to be competitive. As you may notice there is always some remarkable piece to their application that gets them through. For instance, as I stated, a remarkable MCAT or some awesome post-bac graduate work.

 

[lmorea]

Look I am really sorry and don't want to hurt anyones feelings but there does need to be some standards upheld for getting into medical school allo and osteopathic. Rite now Osteopathic medicine is expanding at a very quick rate and there is a danger that the average requirments will continue to slip lower than they already do. While this may bennefit some who just have to become a doctor even though they could not bring themselves to study hard enough to get a B or B+ average, it will further taint the reputation of osteopathic medicine as the school for wanna-be M.D.s. I personally believe that the cut off should be at least a 3.0 and a 26 MCAT at the very lowest.

Just for the record I asked this question on both the Allopathic and osteopathic forums, it had nothing to do with thinking osteopathic schools are subpar or because im a "wannabe M.D." I wish to go into primary care practice so i think that an osteopathic school would better prepare me for such an endeavor, but i am applying to both types of schools. And also for the record i got a 34 on my mcats, it was merely a question to help me decide whether or not to pursue a masters in medical science
Thank you to everyone who posted helpful replies

 

[Funkdoctor]

I think that there's a huge difference between a 2.8 that was earned with consistent B and C grades throughout 4 years and a 2.8 that was brought up from like a 1.7 by getting all A's and B's in the junior and senior year, for example. So the story behind the GPA is as important as the GPA itself I think.

On the other hand, AACOMAS is pretty generous about letting you fix your grades. My AMCAS Cum/BCPM is like 2.92/2.95, whereas my AACOMAS Cum/BCPM is like 3.1/3.5, since I got to completely "erase" several failing grades by retaking the course and getting an A.

So I think "standards" would actually make more sense for DO schools because the system is set up to let you make up for an early poor start. But in general I don't think strict standards/cutoffs are the way to go, especially for DO schools who really pride themselves on looking at "the whole applicant".

I could not agree with you and moose pilot more. I am not even going to apply allopathic because of a **** start to my undergrad. When I was a teenager I was a knucklehead. I went to an inner city school where the drop out rate was 14%+ and teachers in HS did not give a **** who attended class or not. I also came from a single parent household where I lived on bologna, peanut butter & jelly, and kool aid. Not trying to make any excuses for myself or say poor me because I never knew a childhood where I was not stressed to the max, but every gpa should be taken into context. Now that I am a full grown man and got away from all my friends who smoke weed, drink all day and have no ambition I am doing great. I am working full time, taking HEAVY course loads, gettting straight A's (lucky for me I'm a fast learner), and I workout 5-6 times a week! I am only getting 4.5-6 hours of sleep a night and recently it has been more like 4.5.

I guess that a spoiled kid who has had everything handed to him, never had to work, took light course loads, grew up in a nice neighborhood, and who's parents are college educated would be a much more qualified med school applicant than someone like me who is overcoming a stacked deck to get to where I'm at, and I know I'm not alone. I am sure half of all you who are reading this can (to a certain extent) relate to my situation.

I guess that is why anger fills me when I hear some brat from old money talk about how if you want to be a physician you can't go to a CC for your first 2 years (like some of us had a choice) and CC's are worthless. Even though my gen chem, and Ochem professors grade on competitive scales (very few A's). I guess these kind of people are under the impression that we used crayons, scissors, and coloring books on our chem tests, and in our chem labs at CC's. These same people will make the excuse, "oh I'm not a good standardized test taker", and "IQ scores aren't true judge of how smart you are" (I guess by their standards Einstein was a *****). Sorry for my ranting and raving, but I had a few minutes to myself and afer reading this thread wanted to get some **** off of my chest!

 

[UNE2009LMD]

2.85 is a very low gpa esp for getting into medical school. It all depends though on where you received these grades---a well-known and tough school like Johns Hopkins or an easier/lenient school.

Grades and MCATs are impt but don't necessarily think one or the other make or break you.

Ideally get a 3.4 science, 3.6 or higher cum and >25 MCAT for osteopathic med school. But again, you're a person, not a sheet of paper. Good luck

 

[aphasia]

Did anyone get accepted to schools with a 2.85 science gpa or lower?

I did
I was in the middle of taking only science post-bac classes when I got accepted, though. I had a 4.0 there.
They didn't have those transcripts, though.
So, draw your own conclusions.

 

[Bubblefish]

I got in med school with blessings from above. My MCAT scores were ok(well, kinda bad), but my GPA was fairly good due to straight A's in the last 2 years(3.5). I worked part time, full time, 2 jobs...etc...to get the experiences to build up my credential. I'm in debt because of the expensive med schools application process, but there's no doubt I would do this all over again if I didn't get in. KCOM was my first interview and I got the acceptance letter the following week. There's no shame in faults as long as you're willing to rectify it. I wished you the best of luck!!!