A Realistic GPA Target

[gobears19]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Hey guys,

I'm a second-year pre-med at UC Berkeley.

I'm posting here because my grades have me pretty worried right now. They're not horrible, but they are borderline enough to be causing me a good amount of stress.

I have a 3.696 cGPA and pretty much the exact same sGPA, but due to my struggles in Organic Chemistry I (and my attempting to take 12 units of science/BCPM classes) this semester there's a big chance that both GPA's will probably be going down to around a 3.65 or 3.68.

I am especially worried because I am Asian and a CA resident, both of which won't make it any easier for me to get into med school.

Around what GPA do I realistically need to not be "disadvantaged" at MD schools?

Also, I have heard from some peers that adcoms might be a littttttle more forgiving of Berkeley applicants due to the massive grade deflation we have here. Is that true?

[Regarding other parts of the application, I have not yet began preparations for the MCAT, and while I usually do pretty well on standardized testing, I hear that the MCAT is a different beast from the SAT. For extracurricular activities, the only substantial thing I have so far is research (one summer, ~480 hours of wet lab work at a medical school campus near my hometown, no publication).]

 

[benjamin94559]

I think a 3.7 is a pretty realistic target, but you might as well aim high and go for a 3.85+. I say this because it's only your second year and assuming you take more science courses 3rd and 4th year, you may well bring it up. I wouldnt lose any sleep at this point, you hit a snag second year and you still have time to improve. As long as you keep it above a 3.5 though I wouldn't be too concerned. However if your goal is MD and you barely have a 3.5-3.6 when applying, basically everything will depend on your MCAT score. (in terms of which tier of school you will be competitive for)

They might be alittle more forgiving of berkeley but I woudln't count on it. Plan for the worst hope for the best.

ECs, you should probably start to try and get some clinical experiences soon. Try and hit around 250 hours of direct clinical contact work before you have to apply.

 

[LizzyM]

If it is any consolation, the dip in sophomore year due to organic chemistry is a phenomenon that we see all.the.time. Don't worry about it. You should bounce back in junior year.

 

[Allergic to Toradol]

If it is any consolation, the dip in sophomore year due to organic chemistry is a phenomenon that we see all.the.time. Don't worry about it. You should bounce back in junior year.

This may be a petty question, but does Orgo hold any more weight than say a class like Physics 1? It seems like there is much more "leeway" given to a <B- in Orgo than any other class, so would getting A/A in Orgo1/Orgo 2 hold any extra weight? Just curious.

 

[theonlytycrane]

MCAT != SAT

 

[pseud0]

the mcat is both many times harder than the SAT and completely different.

Your GPA isn't terrible. Focus, but don't forget to enjoy yourself. If you don't end up with a high enough GPA for top MD schools, go for the second tier. If it's too low for that, go DO. You'll end up in medical school if you really want it.

 

[LizzyM]

This may be a petty question, but does Orgo hold any more weight than say a class like Physics 1? It seems like there is much more "leeway" given to a <B- in Orgo than any other class, so would getting A/A in Orgo1/Orgo 2 hold any extra weight? Just curious.

It all goes into sGPA. If sGPA is > 3.8, I don't really care what the grades are in individual classes. as sGPA goes lower, I might wonder how the applicant did in the pre-reqs. Most often o-chem is the lowest pre-med grade but it doesn't really matter. Doing really well in o-chem isn't really impressive... we have plenty of applicants with GPA of 3.95-4.0 and you know they did well in o-chem and everything else.

 

[Goro]

3.5

Around what GPA do I realistically need to not be "disadvantaged" at MD schools?

No.

Also, I have heard from some peers that adcoms might be a littttttle more forgiving of Berkeley applicants due to the massive grade deflation we have here. Is that true?

It is..as different as a lion from a house cat.
I hear that the MCAT is a different beast from the SAT.

Plenty of time to add shadowing, pataint contact volunteering, and non-clinical service.

For extracurricular activities, the only substantial thing I have so far is research (one summer, ~480 hours of wet lab work at a medical school campus near my hometown, no publication).]

 

[gobears19]

the mcat is both many times harder than the SAT and completely different.

Your GPA isn't terrible. Focus, but don't forget to enjoy yourself. If you don't end up with a high enough GPA for top MD schools, go for the second tier. If it's too low for that, go DO. You'll end up in medical school if you really want it.

Yeah I have no problem at all going to a "second tier" MD school. If at all possible I'd prefer to stay on the West Coast, but I would be happy to go to med school in, say, New Jersey or Texas.

 

[efle]

You're doing just fine! People tend to do better after sophomore year and a 3.7 is solid regardless, and at a school like Cal predicts doing plenty well on the MCAT. You're already open to leaving CA so at this point just keep up the good work + EC building.

 

[gobears19]

If it is any consolation, the dip in sophomore year due to organic chemistry is a phenomenon that we see all.the.time. Don't worry about it. You should bounce back in junior year.

That's a relief to hear, and from what I can tell a lot of my peers here are going through that same "dip."

In your experience, do you think I will get any "leeway" at all from having gone to a grade-deflated school?

 

[gobears19]

3.5

Plenty of time to add shadowing, pataint contact volunteering, and non-clinical service.

For extracurricular activities, the only substantial thing I have so far is research (one summer, ~480 hours of wet lab work at a medical school campus near my hometown, no publication).]

In your opinion, would it be wiser to pursue more research experience in hopes of getting a publication/LoR, or get started asap on stocking up clinical experiences/volunteering?

 

[LizzyM]

In your opinion, would it be wiser to pursue more research experience in hopes of getting a publication/LoR, or get started asap on stocking up clinical experiences/volunteering?

You have research. You can't get in with more research but no clinical experience/volunteering and committees value participation over the long haul rather than a short term experience close to the time when the application is submitted (e.g. winter of junior year then apply in spring of junior year).
Start now and you'll have 18+ months of clinical experience and volunteering. Shadowing is becoming an unwritten requirement. Some work or volunteering in a clinical setting around patients is expected and you should also get involved in some community engagement that helps people who need help (kids in poor households, elders, disabled, homeless, refugees, etc). Mentor or tutor a kid, visit shut-ins, work in a pantry or soup kitchen or homeless shelter, etc, etc. Start now and build a history of engaging for at least 4 hours per month, every month in community service and try to get at least 8 hours/month of clinical exposure through employment (that will be more than 8 hr/mo) or shadowing and volunteering. Don't do more than 50 hours of shadowing. There really are diminishing returns and the time is better spent doing something than just watching.

 

[Goro]

Only if it's a known feeder to a med school(s). BTW, interviewers and Adcom members will most likely have no idea if your school is grade deflating or not.

In your experience, do you think I will get any "leeway" at all from having gone to a grade-deflated school?

 

[JustAPhD]

Hey guys,
I have a 3.696 cGPA and pretty much the exact same sGPA,

Not terrible at all. Keep it up.

but due to my struggles in Organic Chemistry I (and my attempting to take 12 units of science/BCPM classes)

Many applicants take 12 science credits every semester. Plus, no one likes excuses.

this semester there's a big chance that both GPA's will probably be going down to around a 3.65 or 3.68.

You're dropping 0.04 pts. That's not going to make nor break you.

 

[gobears19]

Only if it's a known feeder to a med school(s). BTW, interviewers and Adcom members will most likely have no idea if your school is grade deflating or not.

That's actually kinda alarming to hear,

I had always thought adcoms were universally aware of the "big-name" grade-deflators like Berkeley or Princeton, and that some just chose to willfully ignore it to keep their average matriculant GPA stats high.

Would UC Berkeley be considered a big enough feeder (especially in California) to get that 0.1-0.2 of leeway?

 

[gobears19]

Not terrible at all. Keep it up.


Many applicants take 12 science credits every semester. Plus, no one likes excuses.


You're dropping 0.04 pts. That's not going to make nor break you.

Yeah, I know my grades aren't terrible, but looking at average matriculant data makes me terribly nervous about even the slightest drop.

No need to be snarky about the 12 units thing. I took 12 BCPM units my first semester (gen chem, math, and a bio class), and just feel exhausted because that same number of units I'm taking this time around feels like double the course load.

 

[Goro]

You thought wrong.

I had always thought adcoms were universally aware of the "big-name" grade-deflators like Berkeley or Princeton, and that some just chose to willfully ignore it to keep their average matriculant GPA stats high.

Maybe, but keep in mind that there are so many qualified CA pre-meds, that you're competing with a large pool of UC students who have GPAs > yours. Occasionally, at our own Adcom meetings, someone will say "He got a 3.4 GPA from XXX school, that has to count for something", and we all nod our heads, ignore the commenter's desires, and then go on to the next candidate.

Would UC Berkeley be considered a big enough feeder (especially in California) to get that 0.1-0.2 of leeway?[/QUOTE]

 

[gobears19]

You have research. You can't get in with more research but no clinical experience/volunteering and committees value participation over the long haul rather than a short term experience close to the time when the application is submitted (e.g. winter of junior year then apply in spring of junior year).
Start now and you'll have 18+ months of clinical experience and volunteering. Shadowing is becoming an unwritten requirement. Some work or volunteering in a clinical setting around patients is expected and you should also get involved in some community engagement that helps people who need help (kids in poor households, elders, disabled, homeless, refugees, etc). Mentor or tutor a kid, visit shut-ins, work in a pantry or soup kitchen or homeless shelter, etc, etc. Start now and build a history of engaging for at least 4 hours per month, every month in community service and try to get at least 8 hours/month of clinical exposure through employment (that will be more than 8 hr/mo) or shadowing and volunteering. Don't do more than 50 hours of shadowing. There really are diminishing returns and the time is better spent doing something than just watching.

Thank you so much for the constructive input.

I'll definitely keep that advice in mind when I start planning my next semester

 

[gobears19]

You thought wrong.

I had always thought adcoms were universally aware of the "big-name" grade-deflators like Berkeley or Princeton, and that some just chose to willfully ignore it to keep their average matriculant GPA stats high.

Maybe, but keep in mind that there are so many qualified CA pre-meds, that you're competing with a large pool of UC students who have GPAs > yours. Occasionally, at our own Adcom meetings, someone will say "He got a 3.4 GPA from XXX school, that has to count for something", and we all nod our heads, ignore the commenter's desires, and then go on to the next candidate.

Would UC Berkeley be considered a big enough feeder (especially in California) to get that 0.1-0.2 of leeway?

[/QUOTE]

Well, that's extremely disappointing and surprising to hear that some admission committees are completely unaware of grade deflation, since employers (and anecdotally, MD/PhD programs) seem to be very aware that it's much harder to get good grades at schools like Cal or JHU than at mid-level state schools or grade-inflating schools.

Would the MCAT, then, be used to "equalize" the differences in undergrad rigor?

I'm not asking for or expecting adcoms to excuse a 3.4 or anything that low. I'm just wondering if me having a slightly subpar/borderline GPA (~3.65-3.7) will severely effect my chances, and whether undergrad rigor might be enough to "make up" for that small (~0.1) deficit.

 

[Goro]

It's a seller's market and med schools can afford to turn away many talented students.

The MCAT is indeed one of the great equalizers.

Sometimes you have to apply with the app you have, warts and all, and then see how things shake out.




Well, that's extremely disappointing and surprising to hear that some admission committees are completely unaware of grade deflation, since employers (and anecdotally, MD/PhD programs) seem to be very aware that it's much harder to get good grades at schools like Cal or JHU than at mid-level state schools or grade-inflating schools.

Would the MCAT, then, be used to "equalize" the differences in undergrad rigor?

I'm not asking for or expecting adcoms to excuse a 3.4 or anything that low. I'm just wondering if me having a slightly subpar/borderline GPA (~3.65-3.7) will severely effect my chances, and whether undergrad rigor might be enough to "make up" for that small (~0.1) deficit.[/QUOTE]

 

[benjamin94559]

That's actually kinda alarming to hear,

I had always thought adcoms were universally aware of the "big-name" grade-deflators like Berkeley or Princeton, and that some just chose to willfully ignore it to keep their average matriculant GPA stats high.

Would UC Berkeley be considered a big enough feeder (especially in California) to get that 0.1-0.2 of leeway?

Princeton grade deflated HA

 

[aldol16]

Well, that's extremely disappointing and surprising to hear that some admission committees are completely unaware of grade deflation, since employers (and anecdotally, MD/PhD programs) seem to be very aware that it's much harder to get good grades at schools like Cal or JHU than at mid-level state schools or grade-inflating schools.

MD/PhD programs care much, much more about your research experience than 0.05 grade points. Also, employers don't really care about your GPA. This is a naive characterization of employers. Tech companies will care about your technical skills/training and will do technical interviews to distinguish applicants. Finance and consulting firms care about pedigree and connections. That's how you get a job at those firms. What most undergraduates don't realize is that nobody in the real world cares about GPA. They're a lot more interested in whether you're a competent person in the workplace, not whether you could memorize 20 physics equations.

I'm not asking for or expecting adcoms to excuse a 3.4 or anything that low. I'm just wondering if me having a slightly subpar/borderline GPA (~3.65-3.7) will severely effect my chances, and whether undergrad rigor might be enough to "make up" for that small (~0.1) deficit.

This is all in your head. A 3.65-3.7 GPA does not rule you out from top med programs. Yes, those programs are familiar with applicants from your school and although there likely isn't a numeric connection, they know your competencies.

 

[fball22]

Hey guys,

I'm a second-year pre-med at UC Berkeley.

I'm posting here because my grades have me pretty worried right now. They're not horrible, but they are borderline enough to be causing me a good amount of stress.

I have a 3.696 cGPA and pretty much the exact same sGPA, but due to my struggles in Organic Chemistry I (and my attempting to take 12 units of science/BCPM classes) this semester there's a big chance that both GPA's will probably be going down to around a 3.65 or 3.68.

I am especially worried because I am Asian and a CA resident, both of which won't make it any easier for me to get into med school.

Around what GPA do I realistically need to not be "disadvantaged" at MD schools?

Also, I have heard from some peers that adcoms might be a littttttle more forgiving of Berkeley applicants due to the massive grade deflation we have here. Is that true?

[Regarding other parts of the application, I have not yet began preparations for the MCAT, and while I usually do pretty well on standardized testing, I hear that the MCAT is a different beast from the SAT. For extracurricular activities, the only substantial thing I have so far is research (one summer, ~480 hours of wet lab work at a medical school campus near my hometown, no publication).]

I'm curious as to what you would categorize as grade deflation. What percentage of students in your organic chemistry class will/can receive an A at Berkeley?

 

[gobears19]

I'm curious as to what you would categorize as grade deflation. What percentage of students in your organic chemistry class will/can receive an A at Berkeley?

Around 10-12% in both Organic Chem classes will receive an A (+5-7% A-'s), although this is somewhat mitigated by the fact that our Organic Lab classes are very generously curved to about 40-50% A's. General Bio is curved to make it extremely difficult to get an A (only 7%), and much easier to get an A- (~10%).

Basically, our pre-med pre-reqs are curved similarly (just marginally harder) to at other public schools or even places like USC.

The problem is that grade deflation exists throughout many lower-div humanities and the upper-div bio classes, as well.

For math classes, we are thrown into the same classes as the very math-oriented students from Berkeley Engineering, Berkeley Statistics, Econ, and etc.

Upper-div classes in Molecular and Cell Biology (the biggest pre med major) are curved to a B or B-, which is barely better than the B-/C+ the lower-div "weeder classes" are curved to.

Even the "easy" pre-med major (Integrative Biology) is mostly curved to a B+ or B, which is difficult because at that point, everyone in your classes is made up of people who were talented and strong enough to survive the soul-crushing pre reqs.

Basically, there are almost no "easy A's" at Berkeley to make up for the difficult pre-reqs, like there are at other schools.

 

[Sardinia]

@gobears19 If no one cared about your grade deflated GPA, would you still stay at Berkeley?

No one = everyone excluding yourself.

 

[Sardinia]

If medical schools were to respect grade deflation at all the schools students claim are grade deflated, they would need to personally develop a heuristic method of testing that claim. And then, they would need to validate which professors taught which classes and then to see if they apply a rigid normal distribution curve and what that distribution actually entails. Students are not representative of mean GPAs as there are a variety of students with a variety of grades. Therefore a weak draw of GPAs from Berkeley for any given year could mean that the students simply didn't perform. After this, they would need to also run this assessment on almost every other school in order to verify the rigors of their program.

This is currently established by the MCAT serving as a barometer to gauge how much the pressure of a nationalized exam compares to the pressure of their 4-year curriculum. If medical schools want to measure relative academic integrity, then nationalized subject examinations by individual classes e.g. Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Organic, and Biochemistry will serve as a base line for comparison. This will orient all programs to be on the same page and serve as constructive feedback to both the institution and medical schools to a much more detailed look at evaluating the rigor of pre-med programs after collecting data over a span of years.

 

[gobears19]

@gobears19 If no one cared about your grade deflated GPA, would you still stay at Berkeley?

No one = everyone excluding yourself.

Well, from what I can gather, almost everyone (especially in this state) knows very well about Cal's grade deflation, but regardless,

The answer is yes.

I chose Berkeley (over some private schools and UCLA) for a variety of reasons, and knew very well that grade deflation exists here.

Aside from the grading policies and the some downsides to being a public school, this place is honestly great. My freshman year in the dorms was one of the best years of my life, even accounting for the difficult course work. The big student body also makes it very easy to make friends, network, etc.

Also, I've lived most of my life in the Bay, and being close to home was decent factor in choosing my school as well.

 

[gobears19]

If medical schools were to respect grade deflation at all the schools students claim are grade deflated, they would need to personally develop a heuristic method of testing that claim. And then, they would need to validate which professors taught which classes and then to see if they apply a rigid normal distribution curve and what that distribution actually entails. Students are not representative of mean GPAs as there are a variety of students with a variety of grades. Therefore a weak draw of GPAs from Berkeley for any given year could mean that the students simply didn't perform. After this, they would need to also run this assessment on almost every other school in order to verify the rigors of their program.

This is currently established by the MCAT serving as a barometer to gauge how much the pressure of a nationalized exam compares to the pressure of their 4-year curriculum. I am personally in favor for subject examinations that are scheduled by the student following individual classes e.g. Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Organic, and Biochemistry. This will orient all programs to be on the same page and serve as constructive feedback to both the institution and medical schools to a much more detailed look at evaluating the rigor of the program after collecting data over a span of years.

I'm not asking med schools to arbitrarily add to my GPA. The MCAT exists for that purpose.

It just boils my blood when people try to say that grade deflation doesn't exist, and that I would be doing the same at a place like UCSD.

It might just be a California thing. I guess if you're from Ohio or Missouri or something, the concept of state schools being on such different levels is difficult to comprehend.

 

[Sardinia]

Every student in every school is told that their grades are deflated or that their program is more rigorous than the others. The only metric for outsiders to measure the value of your efforts at the end of any given course is the grade you are assigned at the end. Insisting that the Berkeley "B" is actually a State U "A+ or an S" at some other institution makes you look like a bigot who couldn't hack it. If you choose to stay in a grade deflating institution, then the onus is on you to carry it with a stiff lip. I'm sure you could easily sent a transfer application to any of the other "easy A" schools that are more than willing to accept an ex-Berkeley student.

 

[gobears19]

Every student in every school is told that their grades are deflated or that their program is more rigorous than the others.

Come on, man.

If you really think that scoring top 15% at a Berkeley chem class is "just as hard" as scoring top 15% in a UC Riverside chem class, I don't know what to say to you.

To take it up a notch (since much worse grade deflators than Berkeley do exist), do you really think that Johns Hopkins BME is "the same" as Fresno State's pre med track?

MCAT data backs up my line of reasoning, as do loads anecdotal evidence. A Berkeley B- may not be a Riverside A, but a Berkeley A- sure as hell would be a Riverside A.

I'm not asking that adcoms add to our GPA's or something arbitrary/inconsistent like that, and I'm not asking for "special treatment" since I believe in the MCAT as the great equalizer.

Sure, I knew what I was getting into and no, I do not regret my decision or want to transfer out.

But to say that "all students have it the same" is downright insulting to me, every other student at Cal, and especially to those pre meds at grade-deflating private schools.

 

[Sardinia]

I never said, "all students have it the same." I also never insinuated, "all students have it the same." I did state that all students receive a grade which is the only measurement outsiders have to evaluate how much academic effort you put into your classes. The fact that you aggrieve yourself over a misconceived notion is indicative that you value your home institution and home academics, but the gravity of significance you attribute to both factors does not appropriately reflect the reality of how a majority of people view those statistics.

 

[gobears19]

I never said, "all students have it the same." I also never insinuated, "all students have it the same." I did state that all students receive a grade which is the only measurement outsiders have to evaluate how much academic effort you put into your classes. The fact that you aggrieve yourself over a misconceived notion is indicative that you value your home institution and home academics, but the gravity of significance you attribute to both factors does not appropriately reflect the reality of how a majority of people view those statistics.

Sorry for the misunderstanding, then.

Yeah, I'm going to apply/operate under the assumption that most adcoms (though perhaps some will) won't care that my GPA is from Berkeley, and hope that my MCAT is good enough to bolster my borderline GPA.