Age Question for Admission Committe Members

[wi girl]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Even though the post is quoted later, I just wanted to apologize again, and remove the post. I realize now how inflammatory and prejudiced it sounded. I'm relatively positive we all think various parts of our respective programs were difficult, very few people get through their pre-reqs without hard work, time, and effort (if you did, I'll buy your secret formula).

Once again, my apologies.

 

[BobDog]

Anecdotal evidence. Even so, you can't judge the quality of an education by the pace at which things are taught.

 

[VAgirl]

I just wanted to explain why I know Cornell does look at the school; in our Organic chem program, we cover in a semester what **most** state schools cover in a year. I know this because my best friend is at a state school, we have the SAME books, and she was surprised when I told her what chapter we were on ... she remarked that the material for a year at her school was what we cover in a semester. BY THE CHAPTER COMPARISON. Just thought I'd put that out there ...

Just to play devil's advocate, if this is your only piece of information, then all you really know is that Cornell covers twice the amount of material covered by that state school in the same amount of time. And if that's all you know, what you don't know is whether you're school is covering material twice as fast as the norm/average, or whether your friend's school is covering material half as fast as the norm/average.

 

[Weazlebub]

we cover in a semester what **most** state schools cover in a year.

bollox.. keep telling yourself that while you're writing your tuition check.. might make it seem less painful.

 

[wi girl]

Too true. I agree that it was anecdotal. But we do know that Cornell vet school weights the school's "academic rigor" and they have crazy intense intro bio and chem sequences (lots of material in a small amount of time). Kinda thought there might be a correlation ...

Addendum: I really don't even like orgo, and would rather not have learned a bunch of inapplicable things. Nor do I necessarily think that my program was better in any way. I just was thought it was interesting, as I said, that Cornell has hard sequences, and weights the schools. I really didn't mean to denigrate anyone's school. Sorry.

 

[alliecat44]

Okay, folks, here's the deal:

1. Some schools are perceived as more difficult to get in to, and some are perceived as easier.
2. Some schools that are perceived as difficult to get in to have certain majors that are harder than others, and some schools that are perceived as easier to get in to have certain majors that are harder than others.
3. Some teachers within majors that are harder than others at schools that are perceived as difficult to get in to grade harder than others, and some teachers within majors that are harder than others at schools that are perceived as easier to get into grade harder than others.
4. As a corollary to item three, substitute the word "easier" for "harder."
5. The GRE is a standardized test that some people find easier and some people find more difficult.
6. Some of the people who find the GRE easier take no prep classes/hardly study and do well. Some of the people who find the GRE harder take prep classes and study like demons and do well. Some people who find the GRE harder take no prep classes/hardly study and do not do very well. Some people who find the GRE easier take prep classes, study, and do very well. Some people who find the GRE harder take prep classes, study, and do pretty well.
7. ...

etc etc ad infinitum.

What do we have? Short of some majic forumula--or asking people at an individual's school "Who taught this course? How does the instructor rank in 'difficulty' within other instructors teaching the same course at your school? How does this instructor rank in 'difficulty' amongst other instructors teaching this subject at other schools around the country?" for each and every course--and assuming that it's POSSIBLE to have objective answers from someone about these questions--it is absolutely impossible to truly compare academic rigor across programs and across schools.

I can say with reasonable confidence that physics is a more difficult major than communications--but it certainly isn't more difficult for the physics genius to whom statics calculations come very easily and they don't even have to take notes in class. And communications certainly isn't an easy major for someone whose second language is English, or who has dyslexia.

The GRE is supposed to be an "equalizing" test. Schools go by minimum GPA cutoffs because they have to have SOMETHING with which to thin the herd. Unfortunately, the GRE is not a perfect test. And unfortunately, I imagine those of you arguing for your own schools' academic rigor to be taken into account would LOVE IT if the application asked you how many hours of studying you did for the GRE, just to get a true picture of what your score really means.

The real world doesn't care if you studied an hour for your 1350 or worked your a** off for it. So why should the schools? They don't, and so they don't ask. Likewise most don't rank academic rigor. Same thing. Short of asking for a standardized IQ test, the GRE is the most "standard" thing we've got.

And because there are so many reasons for choosing an undergraduate institution, there's no way that ranking by academic rigor could possibly be even remotely fair or even accurate (see above).

Sorry for the long-winded post...wasn't even going to comment on this thread, but man....!!! 😡

 

[BobDog]

Too true. I agree that it was anecdotal. But we do know that Cornell vet school weights the school's "academic rigor" and they have crazy intense intro bio and chem sequences (lots of material in a small amount of time). Kinda thought there might be a correlation ...

Addendum: I really don't even like orgo, and would rather not have learned a bunch of inapplicable things. Nor do I necessarily think that my program was better in any way. I just was thought it was interesting, as I said, that Cornell has hard sequences, and weights the schools. I really didn't mean to denigrate anyone's school. Sorry.

I have no doubt that Cornell is a great school, and you will leave there with a great education. I am just trying to point out that there really is no way to reliably rate the academic rigor of one school vs. another. I would bet that organic chemistry is crazy intense at most schools 😀. I know Cornell vet weighs the strength of your academic curriculum, which I think is great. They should. Someone who loaded up on upper level classes and proved themselves should be given all of the consideration possible, but where they did all of this work isn't as relevant. At least not to me. 😀 But Cornell and some other schools evidently think otherwise. Hopefully someday they will let me on an adcomm and I can have some say in what is important and what isn't 😀.

 

[BobDog]

Okay, folks, here's the deal:

1. Some schools are perceived as more difficult to get in to, and some are perceived as easier.
2. Some schools that are perceived as difficult to get in to have certain majors that are harder than others, and some schools that are perceived as easier to get in to have certain majors that are harder than others.
3. Some teachers within majors that are harder than others at schools that are perceived as difficult to get in to grade harder than others, and some teachers within majors that are harder than others at schools that are perceived as easier to get into grade harder than others.
4. As a corollary to item three, substitute the word "easier" for "harder."
5. The GRE is a standardized test that some people find easier and some people find more difficult.
6. Some of the people who find the GRE easier take no prep classes/hardly study and do well. Some of the people who find the GRE harder take prep classes and study like demons and do well. Some people who find the GRE harder take no prep classes/hardly study and do not do very well. Some people who find the GRE easier take prep classes, study, and do very well. Some people who find the GRE harder take prep classes, study, and do pretty well.
7. ...

etc etc ad infinitum.

What do we have? Short of some majic forumula--or asking people at an individual's school "Who taught this course? How does the instructor rank in 'difficulty' within other instructors teaching the same course at your school? How does this instructor rank in 'difficulty' amongst other instructors teaching this subject at other schools around the country?" for each and every course--and assuming that it's POSSIBLE to have objective answers from someone about these questions--it is absolutely impossible to truly compare academic rigor across programs and across schools.

I can say with reasonable confidence that physics is a more difficult major than communications--but it certainly isn't more difficult for the physics genius to whom statics calculations come very easily and they don't even have to take notes in class. And communications certainly isn't an easy major for someone whose second language is English, or who has dyslexia.

The GRE is supposed to be an "equalizing" test. Schools go by minimum GPA cutoffs because they have to have SOMETHING with which to thin the herd. Unfortunately, the GRE is not a perfect test. And unfortunately, I imagine those of you arguing for your own schools' academic rigor to be taken into account would LOVE IT if the application asked you how many hours of studying you did for the GRE, just to get a true picture of what your score really means.

The real world doesn't care if you studied an hour for your 1350 or worked your a** off for it. So why should the schools? They don't, and so they don't ask. Likewise most don't rank academic rigor. Same thing. Short of asking for a standardized IQ test, the GRE is the most "standard" thing we've got.

And because there are so many reasons for choosing an undergraduate institution, there's no way that ranking by academic rigor could possibly be even remotely fair or even accurate (see above).

Sorry for the long-winded post...wasn't even going to comment on this thread, but man....!!! 😡

Amen. All that great writing in spite of vet school pressures. Very nice.

 

[alliecat44]

Amen. All that great writing in spite of vet school pressures. Very nice.

Well, it's no doctoral thesis (but almost as long! 🙂 ). Thanks, BobDog!

 

[Kara31191]

As a person in their 30's, I can tell you that the person I am now is radically different than who I was 10 years ago. I am infinitely more patient, and wiser than I was at 23, and I make much smarter decisions. I have also lived outside of academia in the "real world" for a long time, which I think will make the transition from school to private practice much less traumatic for me than for someone who has been going to school continuously since they were five. And there is no danger that I am going to school just because I can't imagine what else I am going to do after college, as I already have a successful career.

Please don't take this as me saying that all of you 20 somethings are immature. I am just saying that the person you are now will be very different from the person you are in your 30s. That's why the divorce rate for people getting married in their 20s is so much higher than those getting married in their 30s, because the person you will be is not completely formed yet at 20.
I know you won't believe me, but it's true. Ask your parents.

I would say though that being older is only really an advantage if you have used the extra time to become a better person and a potentially more successful vet. And I am sure that 95% percent of you kids will be just fine as vets. Though if I don't get in, I reserve the right to blame it "on those meddling kids"

Just to add something here. This may be irrelivant to the current conversation however I believe that everyone is different. I've met 30 year olds that act like they're teenagers, 20 year olds that act like they're 50, and teenagers who should already be adults! Age really doesn't make any difference.

However, if I started to learn about veterinary medicine a year before I applied, I'm pretty sure I'd be nervous about going. If I reach a certain comfort level in a clinic, life may be easier.

Maybe what I should say is that the "experience" section could also show a sense of maturity. Someone who is less educated about the field is not going to know what they are getting in to.

 

[BobDog]

Well, it's no doctoral thesis (but almost as long! 🙂 ). Thanks, BobDog!

My dissertation is done!!! Sent it out on Friday. Yay!! Now I just have to get grilled by my committee and hopefully they don't go too overboard with the corrections. 😀 😀 😀 😀

 

[alliecat44]

😀 Yay, BobDog! 😀 Congrats!!! How exciting--you must be sooo relieved. Somehow, I think you'll hold up to the committee's scrutiny just fine!

Have a beer (or three) for me! Congratulations again!

 

[nyanko]

My dissertation is done!!! Sent it out on Friday. Yay!! Now I just have to get grilled by my committee and hopefully they don't go too overboard with the corrections. 😀 😀 😀 😀

Awesome!

It's not even on the same planet, but when I defended my undergraduate honors thesis my committee members were sooooo awful. There was my chair, who was fine, and the guy we collaborated with the whole time who was also pretty fine, but the two other profs asked me a lot of hard questions that nobody has even answered yet in the entire field of polyamine research! And if my chair saw I was struggling and tried to interject to help, he got a stern look and a "I asked her, not you." And I was only an undergraduate!!

It went over the allotted time by an hour and I missed a physics exam as well. I honestly thought they might not pass me (that would have sucked..) but they did, and maybe it helped build my character or some such other bull, but I'm glad that's over!

 

[philomycus]

I don't think the system is broke, and there will not be a much better way to even things out anytime soon. They need another factor to weigh in b/c of the massive amount of applicants, and that's where the GRE comes in. Yes it sucks for people who do crappy on the general GRE. But they have got to use something, so the GRE is it.

I personally did crappy on the general GRE. I hate the darn thing, but I understand that it's part of the process that's necessary. I KILLED the biology GRE. And since when you send one school your generals, they also see the subject, I think it helped me last year get and interview and one school and waitlisted on another (although I didn't get in last year). Even though at one school is wasn't a required test, they mentioned to me in my "post mortem" that the subject score did help my app. They didn't say a word about my general test and didn't suggest to me to even re-take it (although I know it would help).

But saying that the GRE accurately predicts success in vet school from someone who is not an adcom is ridiculous. Only they have those numbers to track those students with various scores and follow them to know who well they did or did not do. So unless you have the data in your hands, you really can't argure the point with a lot of merit.

All you can do is try to get your application as competitive as it can be and the rest is up to the system. Whining about the GRE sucking doesn't help your chance on getting in. Maybe b/c 'm an older non-trad I don't see thre reason in worrying about things you can't control. I can try to control (with effort) what I get on the test, but I can't control how a school will use my score.

 

[cyrille104]

You're kidding right? Do you have that kind of time? I don't.

Eh, dropping topic

 

[philomycus]

Good posts alleicat and Weazle 👍

It comes down to this: students are to take responsibility for thier own education. Period. It's not an adcoms job to do research to find out how rigours your life has been. if you want them to know, put it in your PS.

 

[Weazlebub]

Good posts alleicat and Weazle 👍

It comes down to this: students are to take responsibility for thier own education. Period. It's not an adcoms job to do research to find out how rigours your life has been. if you want them to know, put it in your PS.

Amen Brother squirrel 😍

 

[aggiedonk]

Stop sweating the "age factor" and reducing things to GPA, GRE scores and some animal experience hours. While it may be the world to younger applicants, older ones have a load of maturity and experience to bring to the table. And that means DIVERISTY. And that *is* what an adcom wishes for their classes.[/quote]

Gosh thanks,
I feel better,
I'm new here and an older applicant. I've been in scientific research for many years now and have decided to go back to what I always wanted to do - veterinary medicine. It's a hard thing to do after you have accomplished alot in another field so you've got to give us that. The way I have heard it is that "no one can predict what you will contribute to the field or when - could be in ten years could be in five". This application process is nerve wracking enough - I don't want to worry about how old I am!😳

 

[philomycus]

aggiedonk Welcome to the forums! I like your avatar! I love donkeys! 🙂 I'm old(er) too. There are quite a few of us on here.

 

[aggiedonk]

Thanks Philomycus
Glad to know it!
That's my baby donkey on there, I live with five of them.🙂
Your squirrel's pretty cool, too.

 

[loo]

As an older applicant, I was asked the question "Where do you see yourself in 20-40 years?"

"Hopefully...alive and practicing", I said. *Laughter breaks out*

I can really see it from the adcom's view, though. How do you narrow down the field and compose a diverse class? This is no easy feat and part of the reason why we, as applicants, wait so long to find out our final status. I believe that they try their hardest to look at everybody's application.

I've learned two things about the application process and veterinary medicine in general:

1. If you are patient, you'll eventually get your needs met.
2. Passion, persistence and determination are good things when applied judiciously.

No system is perfect.