4.0 stanford or 4.0 berkeley

[Rednawz]

Which is more impressive?'

EDIT: Biological science major

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[liveoak]

4.0 from el camino community college.

 

[chiapet874]

By itself a 4.0 anywhere doesn't mean all that much. We have to see your peripherals.

 

[Stumpyman]

^ Where's the MCAT? Extra curriculars? Volunteering? Community service?

By itself a 4.0 isn't worth much.

 

[Rednawz]

4.0 isn't worth much? You are either a super genius, or go to a school with grade inflation.

 

[raltima07]

4.0 isn't worth much? You are either a super genius, or go to a school with grade inflation.

Or we are applying to medical school, which isn't a complete numbers game.

 

[Slack3r]

Which is more impressive?'

EDIT: Biological science major

Do you have a 4.0 at both those institutions? If you don't, who cares?

 

[n3xa]

 

[gettheleadout]

4.0 isn't worth much? You are either a super genius, or go to a school with grade inflation.

LOL no.

 

[LizzyM]

Equal but...

would also look at number of courses taken P/F, number of honors courses taken, course load per term, and the number of course withdrawals (protecting the gpa). There might also be an assessment of the rigor of the courses taken (advanced level courses vs mostly entry level) and the breadth of coursework.

 

[chiapet874]

4.0 isn't worth much? You are either a super genius, or go to a school with grade inflation.

I laughed

 

[circulus vitios]

This thread is beyond stupid. You're either playing what-if, or you honestly believe you can get a 4.0 at each school when you haven't even started college.

 

[Rednawz]

Equal but...

would also look at number of courses taken P/F, number of honors courses taken, course load per term, and the number of course withdrawals (protecting the gpa). There might also be an assessment of the rigor of the courses taken (advanced level courses vs mostly entry level) and the breadth of coursework.

Thanks for responding LizzyM! Actually in terms of P/F and course load, I have a semester where I only took intro to bio (satisfy med school requirement) intro to history and intro to sociology and units for research. This was the spring semester of my junior year, AND I took the history for P/F. I did well in my other classes. The reason I had such a light load was to give me time to study for MCATs, which turned out ok.

How will the strangeness of this semester be viewed adcoms? I took the intro level classes to satisfy breadths. Every other semester has heavy in the sciences averaging approx 16-17 units.

 

[gettheleadout]

Thanks for responding LizzyM! Actually in terms of P/F and course load, I have a semester where I only took intro to bio (satisfy med school requirement) intro to history and intro to sociology and units for research. This was the spring semester of my junior year, AND I took the history for P/F. I did well in my other classes. The reason I had such a light load was to give me time to study for MCATs, which turned out ok.

How will the strangeness of this semester be viewed adcoms? I took the intro level classes to satisfy breadths. Every other semester has heavy in the sciences averaging approx 16-17 units.

*Only one MCAT*

Also, you still haven't told us which of the two you attend or why you even mentioned both of them, so what's going on, OP?

 

[IlDestriero]

Please! Stanford!

Berkeley's a bunch of nutters!

 

[liveoak]

Equal but...

would also look at number of courses taken P/F, number of honors courses taken, course load per term, and the number of course withdrawals (protecting the gpa). There might also be an assessment of the rigor of the courses taken (advanced level courses vs mostly entry level) and the breadth of coursework.

Incredible. 🙄

 

[Rednawz]

*Only one MCAT*

Also, you still haven't told us which of the two you attend or why you even mentioned both of them, so what's going on, OP?

Haha sry, for some reason I like to stick the "s" at the end.

I actually do attend Berkeley and have managed so far a 4.0 in sciences going into my senior year. However humanities haven't been as good so my cum is lower.

I made the post because I was wondering how adcoms, or how people percieve adcoms, to take into consideration an applicants schools environment when assessing their GPA. I used Berkeley and Stanford because they represent schools at opposite ends of the spectrum.

So what would be more impressive? Achieving a 4.0 (or whatever close to 4.0 gpa you have) from Berkeley and having managed to survive "the curve" weeder classes sometimes over a thousand people large and then upper divisions where you are competing with fewer, yet overall a much more intelligent group. Or having that similar situation at Stanford, which to be honest I don't know much about considering I don't attend there.

Maybe someone from Stanford or someone from another "elite" private school could share their experience with grades and how they were/are being perceived in the application process. All I have heard of those types of schools are the malicious "grade inflation" rumors.

 

[Big Dog]

I actually do attend Berkeley and have managed so far a 4.0 in sciences going into my senior year. However humanities haven't been as good so my cum is lower.

Then you wouldn't have done that well at Stanford, either. Cal's (and UCLA's) Hume/Lit classes offer plenty of easy A's.

I used Berkeley and Stanford because they represent schools at opposite ends of the spectrum.

Huh?

Berkeley's reputation for grade deflation is just that, a reputation earned in the dark ages. But it is no longer true. Check out Cal's mean graduating gpa and compare to many other top colleges. (Sure, it ain't as high as Stanford's, Yale's, and particularly Brown's, but no other college is either, not even Harvard.) Check out Cal's mean Frosh class gpa, which is 3+; Frosh year is when students take all of those so-called "weeder" courses. Check out the mean gpa for MCB, a top major for premeds -- MCB's gpa is higher than that of the Philosophy department. And to be an MCB major, one has to get thru the "weeder" courses. Obviously, someone earns A's in those courses.

 

[TriagePreMed]

Both 4.0's would be worth the same.

And if you think Cal isn't a grade deflator, try taking some classes there.

 

[CoolWhipp]

Really? Average GPA is higher than philosophy?

Then you wouldn't have done that well at Stanford, either. Cal's (and UCLA's) Hume/Lit classes offer plenty of easy A's.



Huh?

Berkeley's reputation for grade deflation is just that, a reputation earned in the dark ages. But it is no longer true. Check out Cal's mean graduating gpa and compare to many other top colleges. (Sure, it ain't as high as Stanford's, Yale's, and particularly Brown's, but no other college is either, not even Harvard.) Check out Cal's mean Frosh class gpa, which is 3+; Frosh year is when students take all of those so-called "weeder" courses. Check out the mean gpa for MCB, a top major for premeds -- MCB's gpa is higher than that of the Philosophy department. And to be an MCB major, one has to get thru the "weeder" courses. Obviously, someone earns A's in those courses.

 

[Political]

Haha sry, for some reason I like to stick the "s" at the end.

I actually do attend Berkeley and have managed so far a 4.0 in sciences going into my senior year. However humanities haven't been as good so my cum is lower.

I made the post because I was wondering how adcoms, or how people percieve adcoms, to take into consideration an applicants schools environment when assessing their GPA. I used Berkeley and Stanford because they represent schools at opposite ends of the spectrum.

So what would be more impressive? Achieving a 4.0 (or whatever close to 4.0 gpa you have) from Berkeley and having managed to survive "the curve" weeder classes sometimes over a thousand people large and then upper divisions where you are competing with fewer, yet overall a much more intelligent group. Or having that similar situation at Stanford, which to be honest I don't know much about considering I don't attend there.

Maybe someone from Stanford or someone from another "elite" private school could share their experience with grades and how they were/are being perceived in the application process. All I have heard of those types of schools are the malicious "grade inflation" rumors.

Im sorry did anyone else find that kinda funny?

anyways, the general rule of thumb is a 4.0 from Stanford would look a bit better than one from berkley, but i doubt it would get you more interviews; all things equal

 

[zamzee]

Im sorry did anyone else find that kinda funny?

anyways, the general rule of thumb is a 4.0 from Stanford would look a bit better than one from berkley, but i doubt it would get you more interviews; all things equal

"The general rule of thumb"? Unless you've been on the adcom of multiple schools, that "rule of thumb" is your opinion. A 4.0 from any elite school, Berkeley or Stanford included, is awesome because it means you did well at an exceptional school. In my mind, though, I would think a 4.0 means more from Berkeley because I went there and there is definitely grade deflation in the sciences. However, I don't think adcoms will give a damn about the nuances of schools like that. This thread is pointless.

 

[Morsetlis]

I agree. This thread is pointless.

 

[dbeast]

Haha sry, for some reason I like to stick the "s" at the end.

I actually do attend Berkeley and have managed so far a 4.0 in sciences going into my senior year. However humanities haven't been as good so my cum is lower.

I made the post because I was wondering how adcoms, or how people percieve adcoms, to take into consideration an applicants schools environment when assessing their GPA. I used Berkeley and Stanford because they represent schools at opposite ends of the spectrum.

So what would be more impressive? Achieving a 4.0 (or whatever close to 4.0 gpa you have) from Berkeley and having managed to survive "the curve" weeder classes sometimes over a thousand people large and then upper divisions where you are competing with fewer, yet overall a much more intelligent group. Or having that similar situation at Stanford, which to be honest I don't know much about considering I don't attend there.

Maybe someone from Stanford or someone from another "elite" private school could share their experience with grades and how they were/are being perceived in the application process. All I have heard of those types of schools are the malicious "grade inflation" rumors.

Reading the first bolded statement followed by the second one makes this thread irrelevant. Why not just write "What's Cal's reputation with adcoms?". Actually, I'll save you the trouble, its reputation is good.

 

[ranson]

It's obvious that a 4.00 at Stanford looks better.

 

[sirenomelia]

Im sorry did anyone else find that kinda funny?

anyways, the general rule of thumb is a 4.0 from Stanford would look a bit better than one from berkley, but i doubt it would get you more interviews; all things equal

Thought I was the only one. Had to re-read that one twice.

 

[chiapet874]

It's obvious that a 4.00 at Stanford looks better.

under what arbitrary metric are you using to determine this "obvious" fact of yours?

 

[gettheleadout]

It's obvious that a 4.00 at Stanford looks better.

It's obvious that a 4.00000 from Stanford looks better than a 4.0 from Berkeley. 🙄

 

[Slack3r]

I used Berkeley and Stanford because they represent schools at opposite ends of the spectrum.

End of what spectrum? You have an ultra prestigious private school on one hand and arguably the best public institution in the country on the other. How are those different ends of any spectrum?