About the "magic' formula...GPA*10+MCAT...issues and questions:

[Tartheheel]

---

Members do not see this ad.

So I recall reading on some thread about a year ago that you can judge your competitiveness at a given school by the formula GPA*10 + MCAT = and then if you're far below that for a given school's average that school would be a "reach", if you're near it, that would be a "maybe?", and if you're way above it, that would be a "maybe safety?"

If that's so which of the two variables in this formula would be more important i.e. which should I really focus on raising??

The reason I ask is because by the time a premed finishes her/his junior year, raising a GPA from a 3.8 to 3.9 is quite impossible. It's always difficult to raise a GPA that's already high because it seems to be buffered there due to the huge number of credits.

However, it is totally possible to bump a 35 to a 36 MCAT doing lesser work...

So does this mean that a 3.8 GPA, 35 MCAT would be perceived the same as a 3.9, 34 MCAT?? I just find that hard to believe since taking that GPA up is a lot harder to do.

OR even better...would a 3.8 GPA, 38 MCAT be better than a 3.9 GPA, 34 MCAT??? (ALL ELSE EQUAL)

What are you're thoughts on this "magic formula"??

And, if someone has their GPA buffered in that 3.8 region, should he/she focus on raising the MCAT (easier), OR raising that GPA (by overloading with credits of stuff that's probably not going to be useful and will be taking time away from studying from the MCAT?)


Thanks!!! 🙂

 

[Genesis12]

if you have around a 3.8/35 MCAT, it would behoove you to focus more on your extracurrics, letters of rec, clinical experiences, and interview skills as those stats will make you competitive at just about any school in the nation given a diverse range of experiences. obviously, if you have a glaring disparity between GPA/MCAT, then do what's necessary to pull up the deficient stat (i'm talking like MCAT 29 GPA 3.7 or MCAT 38 GPA 3.1)

 

[majik1213]

if you have around a 3.8/35 MCAT, it would behoove you to focus more on your extracurrics, letters of rec, clinical experiences, and interview skills as those stats will make you competitive at just about any school in the nation given a diverse range of experiences. obviously, if you have a glaring disparity between GPA/MCAT, then do what's necessary to pull up the deficient stat (i'm talking like MCAT 29 GPA 3.7 or MCAT 38 GPA 3.1)

🙁

 

[167649]

So does this mean that a 3.8 GPA, 35 MCAT would be perceived the same as a 3.9, 34 MCAT?? I just find that hard to believe since taking that GPA up is a lot harder to do.

This depends, for some raising the MCAT would be harder, raising the GPA would just take more time.

You're thinking too hard about all this. If your really in that range you don't really have to worry about numbers anyways. It is good to just do as well as you can numbers wise, and then apply broadly.

 

[BigRedder]

I hope those numbers were hypothetical. If not, please stop it.

FWIW, retaking the MCAT and getting one point higher is not going to mean anything to an ADCOM, as it can be chalked up to practice effect and/or luck.

 

[flaahless]

I believe the "magic formula" and other numbers-based forumulas used to estimate an applicant's chances are futile. Would a 3.8/38 be seen better than a 3.9 34, all else equal? Some would say so, but how often is all else equal? Very rarely. I don't believe there is a significant difference between 90th and 99th percentile on the MCAT other than 1 or 2 more questions in each section.

I recommend expanding your eduation outside of the academic arena. Shoot for solid gpa, a good MCAT, and great life experiences and interpersonal skills and you should do very well.

 

[pedro4199]

The formula should be used to give you a ballpark figure. But other things matter, too, like in-state vs. OOS.

I have come to realize that GPA matters more than the MCAT. I’m not saying having a good MCAT isn’t important, but if you are looking to go to a top 10 school, you won’t be considered as competitive as other top applicants unless you have a 3.8+ GPA.

 

[SketchLazy]

So I recall reading on some thread about a year ago that you can judge your competitiveness at a given school by the formula GPA*10 + MCAT = and then if you're far below that for a given school's average that school would be a "reach", if you're near it, that would be a "maybe?", and if you're way above it, that would be a "maybe safety?"

If that's so which of the two variables in this formula would be more important i.e. which should I really focus on raising??

The reason I ask is because by the time a premed finishes her/his junior year, raising a GPA from a 3.8 to 3.9 is quite impossible. It's always difficult to raise a GPA that's already high because it seems to be buffered there due to the huge number of credits.

However, it is totally possible to bump a 35 to a 36 MCAT doing lesser work...

So does this mean that a 3.8 GPA, 35 MCAT would be perceived the same as a 3.9, 34 MCAT?? I just find that hard to believe since taking that GPA up is a lot harder to do.

OR even better...would a 3.8 GPA, 38 MCAT be better than a 3.9 GPA, 34 MCAT??? (ALL ELSE EQUAL)

What are you're thoughts on this "magic formula"??

And, if someone has their GPA buffered in that 3.8 region, should he/she focus on raising the MCAT (easier), OR raising that GPA (by overloading with credits of stuff that's probably not going to be useful and will be taking time away from studying from the MCAT?)


Thanks!!! 🙂

This 'formula' really just gives you a ballpark estimate of how competitive you are at a certain school based on numbers alone. Some schools weigh MCAT more than they weigh GPA and vice versa. Some weigh them equally. Therefore, you should only use it as a rough estimate of your chances of interview at a given school.

 

[annndyr]

I spoke with several committee members and the info i received was unanimous...

The official formula for competitiveness is actually: (GPA*10 +MCAT) / (Undergrad institution * 0.1)

It corrects for grade inflation.

 

[LizzyM]

I call this the LizzyM score and if you search on it you'll find some references to it from about a year ago.
You should compare your score to the comparable score using the average gpa and MCAT for the school that interests you. I suggest subtracting 1 from a school's Lizzy score to adjust for the fact that a school may consider you if you are a bit below the avg.

A 3.8/38 is a 76, 3.9/34 is 73. Granted there isn't much difference between a 38 and a 34 on the MCAT in percentiles but the 38 may look impressive, particularly if it is a well balanced 12 13 13. The 34 isn't going to look as good, particularly if it is unbalanced or low in one area.

Some will argue that MCAT levels the playing field because regardless of whether the school suffers from grade inflation, light course load, easy courses, etc everyone is evaulated in the same way. Others will counter that the MCAT is the snapshot of one day's performance and anyone can have a good or bad day (or two or three).

Looking at the gpa, one might look more deeply into the courses taken, the gpa by year, the gpa for BCPM and gpa for all other and total. Some applications will have an explanation for a poor semester or a poor year and that can be factored in by the adcom in reading the application.

The formula just gives you an idea of where you have a good, fair or poor shot of being interviewed. I'd like to see people target their applications wisely rather than choosing to apply everywhere or applying to 10 schools with stats well above their own, and two schools that are "in their league" only to cry when no interview offers come along.

 

[0Complications]

I spoke with several committee members and the info i received was unanimous...

The official formula for competitiveness is actually: (GPA*10 +MCAT) / (Undergrad institution * 0.1)

It corrects for grade inflation.

Where are they getting the points for undergrad institution?

 

[ChubbyChaser]

I spoke with several committee members and the info i received was unanimous...

The official formula for competitiveness is actually: (GPA*10 +MCAT) / (Undergrad institution * 0.1)

It corrects for grade inflation.

that seems unfair to me, if you have a 3.5 and 30 candidate at a school ranked as a 1, that would give him a score of 750, if you have a 45 and 4.0 student at a school given a score of 5, he would only have a 170.

THat doesnt seem fair IMO, are the schools ranked from 0 to 1 or how are they ranked?

 

[LizzyM]

I spoke with several committee members and the info i received was unanimous...

The official formula for competitiveness is actually: (GPA*10 +MCAT) / (Undergrad institution * 0.1)

It corrects for grade inflation.

I don't buy this... undergrad institution is a categorical variable. Some of the most prestigious schools also have had the most inflation. Plus, why divide MCAT by the school's inflation rate?

 

[0Complications]

that seems unfair to me, if you have a 3.5 and 30 candidate at a school ranked as a 1, that would give him a score of 750, if you have a 45 and 4.0 student at a school given a score of 5, he would only have a 170.

THat doesnt seem fair IMO, are the schools ranked from 0 to 1 or how are they ranked?

I'm wondering the same thing and am thinking along your lines with a score from 0 to 1, but you're numbers are a bit off:

3.5/30 = 65
1*.1 = .1

So, 65/.1 = 650

 

[ChubbyChaser]

I'm wondering the same thing and am thinking along your lines with a score from 0 to 1, but you're numbers are a bit off:

3.5/30 = 65
1*.1 = .1

So, 65/.1 = 650

lol sorry,

 

[0Complications]

I don't buy this... undergrad institution is a categorical variable. Some of the most prestigious schools also have had the most inflation. Plus, why divide MCAT by the school's inflation rate?

Ok, this is exactly what I wanted to hear.

How do schools view undergrad institution? Is it just a subjective review or is it something discussed among the committee?

 

[ChubbyChaser]

Ok, this is exactly what I wanted to hear.

How do schools view undergrad institution? Is it just a subjective review or is it something discussed among the committee?

I hope its just subjective. My school doesnt have the big time research money that the State schools do, but they educate us just as well.

 

[0Complications]

I hope its just subjective. My school doesnt have the big time research money that the State schools do, but they educate us just as well.

I feel the same way. My professors focus on their students not on research, so we don't have a large research name either, but we get a fantastic education for pennies on the dollar when compared to other state schools.

 

[annndyr]

It's simply a joke, people. I'm sorry to cause some confusion. Attempting to generate an equation for a process like this is nearly pointless. As Lizzy pointed out, while you can throw some relations into an equation, their are too many subjective features to the process that make it difficult.

e.g. If a school has an MCAT cutoff (say, 22), but you have a 4.0 GPA... somehow the formula is going to still be relatively nice to you. Doesnt make much sense.

In my humble opinion, your best option for objectively selecting schools to which you should apply is to list (for each school):

1. Average MCAT for last yrs matriculating class
2. Average GPA for last yrs matriculating class

Then, to detemine safety vs reach, look at the range in the MSAR for both variables. If you sit on the low end of a schools 'range,' consider it a reach, etc. Of course, this is assuming your application is solid in most respects.

And lastly, you'll want to somehow filter that list based on schools that you would be happy to attend.

 

[nevercold]

Once you pass 33 on the MCAT and 3.7 in your GPA, I'm not sure there's much to remark on unless you are super stellar in one or the other (3.96-4.0 or 39+). Otherwise you are just very competitive and *well* within the range accepted by competitive schools.

The adcom is not going to compare a 3.9/34 to a 3.8/35 in the manner you are describing. It is unlikely they would compare a 3.9/34 to a 3.8/38 in the manner you are describing unless there are section-specific differences (statistically speaking, it would be quite reasonable for each to get a 36 the next time they took the exam). At that point it will come down to other elements of coursework, extracurriculars, personality, drive, etc.

 

[LizzyM]

Some schools have a reputation; some are known for grade inflation, others are known to be tough. At some schools one major is known to be easy and another to be very difficult. In some cases, the LOR from the committee will point out that there is no grade inflation at the school and that the median gpa is 2.95 or some such. Other schools will give you the gpa and class rank in a LOR and sometimes I'm just shocked that, for example, a 3.75 ranks at the 70th percentile (top 30% of the graduating class). So, adcoms get to know their "feeder schools" and have a qualitative assessment of it in mind when evaluating an applicant.

 

[valacious]

Don't put too much emphasis on stats. Of course they're important but extra-curriculars matter almost as much if not more. Not to toot my own horn but I have pretty good stats (3.75, 39R) and I've only gotten six interviews, none from top-tier schools (unless you count WashU which is pretty much just interested in stats). Why? I have almost zero clinical experience and no "leadership" experiences. I've talked to people with way less impressive stats that have gotten way more love because they've spent a lot of time with patients. Although its not exactly working in my favor, this seems extremely fair to me. As long as you are past the 3.5/30 cut-off or close to it you should be fine provided you have solid extra-curriculars.

 

[LizzyM]

Don't put too much emphasis on stats. Of course they're important but extra-curriculars matter almost as much if not more. Not to toot my own horn but I have pretty good stats (3.75, 39R) and I've only gotten six interviews, none from top-tier schools (unless you count WashU which is pretty much just interested in stats). Why? I have almost zero clinical experience and no "leadership" experiences. I've talked to people with way less impressive stats that have gotten way more love because they've spent a lot of time with patients. Although its not exactly working in my favor, this seems extremely fair to me. As long as you are past the 3.5/30 cut-off or close to it you should be fine provided you have solid extra-curriculars.

3.5/30 will get you an interview at some schools but I would venture to guess that you could go 0 for 10 at the top tier schools, even with some clinical exposure, etc. with "only a 3.5/30. Know the school's average (as you say, Wash U is infamous for its love of high scores) and choose your list of schools accordingly.

 

[ChubbyChaser]

Some schools have a reputation; some are known for grade inflation, others are known to be tough. At some schools one major is known to be easy and another to be very difficult. In some cases, the LOR from the committee will point out that there is no grade inflation at the school and that the median gpa is 2.95 or some such. Other schools will give you the gpa and class rank in a LOR and sometimes I'm just shocked that, for example, a 3.75 ranks at the 70th percentile (top 30% of the graduating class). So, adcoms get to know their "feeder schools" and have a qualitative assessment of it in mind when evaluating an applicant.

what if you are applyiing to out of state programs that wouldnt know your institution? Do they consult some handbook giving info about the schools.

 

[LizzyM]

If your school sends 10 or more applicants to a school each year (applicants, not matriculants) there is a good chance that the adcom is familiar with your undergrad institution even if it is not "in state". In some cases, the reputation of the school is well known, even if it sends few applicants to med school each year (e.g. West Point). Schools that send fewer than 10 (particularly the small, liberal arts colleges) often send an insert along with the committee LOR describing the rigor of the school and its averages.

If all else fails, a quick search will turn up the school's web site and a gauge of the admissions standards, size, etc of the school can be determined.

 

[TheRealMD]

Perhaps, one might use some kind of formula for trying to figure out where you might get an interview. Anything more than that is a fairytale.

 

[Bacchus]

I didn't read.

 

[the10isplyr]

A 3.8/38 is a 76, 3.9/34 is 73.

how're you deriving those numbers?

 

[Jathin]

LizzyM, quick question about the formula you presented -- I understand most schools create different pools for different types of students (ie. URMs are treated in a pile completely exclusive of caucasians/asians/etc.) However the median MCAT/GPA presented in the MSAR is race-blind. Wouldn't it make sense for those in the non-URM pile to add a couple of points to the score?

 

[Tartheheel]

I call this the LizzyM score and if you search on it you'll find some references to it from about a year ago.
You should compare your score to the comparable score using the average gpa and MCAT for the school that interests you. I suggest subtracting 1 from a school's Lizzy score to adjust for the fact that a school may consider you if you are a bit below the avg.

A 3.8/38 is a 76, 3.9/34 is 73. Granted there isn't much difference between a 38 and a 34 on the MCAT in percentiles but the 38 may look impressive, particularly if it is a well balanced 12 13 13. The 34 isn't going to look as good, particularly if it is unbalanced or low in one area.

Some will argue that MCAT levels the playing field because regardless of whether the school suffers from grade inflation, light course load, easy courses, etc everyone is evaulated in the same way. Others will counter that the MCAT is the snapshot of one day's performance and anyone can have a good or bad day (or two or three).

Looking at the gpa, one might look more deeply into the courses taken, the gpa by year, the gpa for BCPM and gpa for all other and total. Some applications will have an explanation for a poor semester or a poor year and that can be factored in by the adcom in reading the application.

The formula just gives you an idea of where you have a good, fair or poor shot of being interviewed. I'd like to see people target their applications wisely rather than choosing to apply everywhere or applying to 10 schools with stats well above their own, and two schools that are "in their league" only to cry when no interview offers come along.

LizzyM, that's a fantastic formula and one I'll definitely be using when applying. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[0Complications]

how're you deriving those numbers?

It's just (GPA * 10) + MCAT.

So, (3.8 * 10) + 38 = 38 + 38 = 76 pts.

 

[brianmartin]

So does this mean that a 3.8 GPA, 35 MCAT would be perceived the same as a 3.9, 34 MCAT??

Basically yes. There are much more important factors than a .1 gpa or 1 point difference.

 

[Bacchus]

If your school sends 10 or more applicants to a school each year (applicants, not matriculants) there is a good chance that the adcom is familiar with your undergrad institution even if it is not "in state". In some cases, the reputation of the school is well known, even if it sends few applicants to med school each year (e.g. West Point). Schools that send fewer than 10 (particularly the small, liberal arts colleges) often send an insert along with the committee LOR describing the rigor of the school and its averages.

If all else fails, a quick search will turn up the school's web site and a gauge of the admissions standards, size, etc of the school can be determined.

I'd like to thank you for the advice I'm pulling from this. My university (~2800 undergrads) might have 15-20 people apply each year to medical school. I doubt 10 of us are going to apply to the same school. So, hopefully my request to include a grading scale, etc. will be well received. I couldn't see anyone going by our website when it lists only the average HS GPA of matriculants. Sure, program averages can be found but I know for my particular major I think I need to maintain a 2.5 (wow) to stay in the program. Is it common to receive these supplements with committee letters?

 

[LizzyM]

how're you deriving those numbers?

gpa*10+MCAT

As for the questions re URM; if you are a URM you can take a chance and apply to schools where your score is a few points lower than the school's score. Ditto students who grew up in poverty (e.g. public housing projects, migrant farm worker).

URMs make up such a small proportion of the school's admitted applicants that it is hardly worth considering that as a group they pull the mean down significantly (likely that they barely move the median at all). Also, at least in my experience, URM are not considered separately. Each applicants is considered on his/her merits includng what they would bring to the class in terms of diversity (and not only diversity in terms of race but other characterisitics as well). Every applicants stats are compared against the published mean for our previous matriculating class (on the school's web site and a better measure than the stats for accepted students which is inflated with all those superstars that we lost to those other top tier schools 😉).

Some schools offer a one or two page form letter describing the school. MIT does so, I think I've seen something similar from Haverford and Williams. If not, I've had some success looking at the admissions criteria for the school and a description of the incoming class. Getting into Williams is not the same being admitted to Bridgewater State College

 

[ChubbyChaser]

LizzyM what school are you an ADCOM for?

 

[LizzyM]

LizzyM what school are you an ADCOM for?

Undisclosed location.

SDN Forums Usage Policies preclude anyone from posting a guess. Please respect my privacy.

 

[VQuick]

how're you deriving those numbers?

Jeez, not to be mean, but the answer to your question was contained in the title of the thread, which you presumably clicked on to get here....

 

[Bacchus]

Some schools offer a one or two page form letter describing the school. MIT does so, I think I've seen something similar from Haverford and Williams. If not, I've had some success looking at the admissions criteria for the school and a description of the incoming class. Getting into Williams is not the same being admitted to Bridgewater State College

What happens if an applicant is well above these statistics you find? You'll never know, right?

 

[shiftingmirage]

There has been some talk about the increase in the number of applicants this year. I was wondering if any of you have/could project a ballpark figure on the number of students currently applying this year compared to previous years? Also, anyone know how many spots are available for first year MD programs in the US?

 

[LizzyM]

What happens if an applicant is well above these statistics you find? You'll never know, right?

First, let me say that I've never seen a med school applicant from Bridgewater State College (BSC). However, let's look at the numbers: it admits 70% of all applicants and the average SAT is about 500 & 500. So, you take Physics I and II and Chem I and II and you do the best that the teachers there have ever seen. Would you have been the best that the teachers had ever seen if you were at Williams rather than BSC? (at Williams ~60% of the students scored >700 & 700 on SAT.) You are just in a different talent pool at one school in comparison with another. You might be a big fish in a little pond and your grades (4.0 in the small pond) might have been 4.0 in the big pond or they might have been lower. At that point, the adcom is going to use the MCAT more heavily than the gpa in determining if the applicant from a small time school is the cat's meow -- or not.

 

[ChubbyChaser]

Undisclosed location.

SDN Forums Usage Policies preclude anyone from posting a guess. Please respect my privacy.

K, it was worth a shot, thanks for all your help.

 

[SketchLazy]

K, it was worth a shot, thanks for all your help.

Unlike Stewart University, her reasons for being at an undisclosed location are legitamate.

 

[Bacchus]

First, let me say that I've never seen a med school applicant from Bridgewater State College (BSC). However, let's look at the numbers: it admits 70% of all applicants and the average SAT is about 500 & 500. So, you take Physics I and II and Chem I and II and you do the best that the teachers there have ever seen. Would you have been the best that the teachers had ever seen if you were at Williams rather than BSC? (at Williams ~60% of the students scored >700 & 700 on SAT.) You are just in a different talent pool at one school in comparison with another. You might be a big fish in a little pond and your grades (4.0 in the small pond) might have been 4.0 in the big pond or they might have been lower. At that point, the adcom is going to use the MCAT more heavily than the gpa in determining if the applicant from a small time school is the cat's meow -- or not.

Lovely. I guess I will push for a supplemental letter if at all possible. 😀

 

[littlealex]

Raising the MCAT is easy? What?
I had never ever thought that "oh, I'll just study more and bump my MCAT to a 40" because I know I can't.

 

[87138]

Raising the MCAT is easy? What?
I had never ever thought that "oh, I'll just study more and bump my MCAT to a 40" because I know I can't.

It's a lot easier than trying to turn a 3.0 GPA with 120 credits into a 3.5.

Edit: And we're not necessarily talking 36 to 40. But if yo're talking a bump from, say, a 28 to a 33-34, some diligent studying and a few hours to sit for one test can potentially fix it.

 

[majik1213]

I spoke with several committee members and the info i received was unanimous...

The official formula for competitiveness is actually: (GPA*10 +MCAT) / (Undergrad institution * 0.1)

It corrects for grade inflation.

that makes me a 29.86363636 .. oyy

 

[Asp]

I hope its just subjective. My school doesnt have the big time research money that the State schools do, but they educate us just as well.

Undergrad institutions exist to educate, yes, but more so they exist to credential.

 

[Asp]

A 3.8/38 is a 76, 3.9/34 is 73. Granted there isn't much difference between a 38 and a 34 on the MCAT in percentiles but the 38 may look impressive, particularly if it is a well balanced 12 13 13. The 34 isn't going to look as good, particularly if it is unbalanced or low in one area.

Isn't there close to a standard deviation between 34 and 38?

 

[ChubbyChaser]

Isn't there close to a standard deviation between 34 and 38?

its like 6-7% points. 91-92 as opposed to 98.

 

[0Complications]

Isn't there close to a standard deviation between 34 and 38?

According to this data it's about 2 standard deviations when looking at matriculants.

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2007/2007mcatgpa.htm


I'm sure that's a difference one could make up for with a night or two of studying...


I'm just kidding, but I do agree that there is a lot more that can be done with an MCAT score than a GPA in the same amount of time if you already have a number of classes under your belt, albeit not without a lot of work.