Anyone here have a low cGPA but a really high sGPA?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
When I apply I'll probably have a sGpa thats above the national average, and a cGpa thats below the national average. I had an abysmal first semester, and none of the classes were science, so that's how it turned out that way.
 
I have a much higher sci gpa. I did much better in my sci pre-reqs than my engineering classes.
 
I have a 3.1 overall GPA and a 3.9 sGPA. I'm a non-traditional who messed up in undergrad, but luckily, I wasn't a science major.
 
That profile is just unreal.

That's probably how mine will look. I spent two years in a horribly boring computer major, and I hated it so my GPA is horribly low (2.2ish). I only took 2 math/science courses and averaged a C in them. Now I'm "starting over" and preparing myself for four more years of undergrad, and it's very possible that if I get A's in all the math/science classes I take, I'll have a GPA way below the MD cutoff, but a BCPM/sGPA right in the sweet spot, which I'm hoping that that and a strong MCAT performance will land me a spot in an allopathic school.

EDIT: not implying I'll get a 43 on the test though lol, but i can definitely get it up to around a 3.1 or a 3.2
 
Mine is the opposite. Ugh, science. 😉
 
What kind of loser only gets a 43? He should've worked harder.
 
my sGPA is 4.0 while my cGPA us 3.92... so yes, many times it is the other way around...
 
What kind of loser only gets a 43? He should've worked harder.

Losers who have extremely low self-esteem, needing them to post false MCAT scores, and yet require themselves to post a "reasonable" MCAT score.
 
not implying I'll get a 43 on the test though lol, but i can definitely get it up to around a 3.1 or a 3.2

that's what she said?

my sGPA is 4.0 while my cGPA us 3.92... so yes, many times it is the other way around...

okay, get real: neither of those is a low GPA. i do not think your situation is what the OP had in mind with the original question. 🙄
 
that's what she said?



okay, get real: neither of those is a low GPA. i do not think your situation is what the OP had in mind with the original question. 🙄


Oh, I see, lol...

yea, gosh, no wonder I was thinking this question was stupid, I was understanding the question wrongly..
 
I'm the same way...3.9 science and 3.4something cgpa...18 hours of very difficult german classes is pulling the average down. 😛 I'm hoping that they see the fact that I got a fellowship from the department that the german grades werent due to gross idiocy.
 
I'm the same way...3.9 science and 3.4something cgpa...18 hours of very difficult german classes is pulling the average down. 😛 I'm hoping that they see the fact that I got a fellowship from the department that the german grades werent due to gross idiocy.

I feel your pain with German classes. I've got more than 18 hours worth, but they seemed to love subjective grading. I'd spent 2 weeks working on a paper that was proofread by a Ph.D. in German Applied Linguistics and a native German. I'd then get back the paper with "C, I just don't don't like your ideas here." If you ever feel like a professor is out to get you then you should be the only male in a german feminist lit course.
 
I feel your pain with German classes. I've got more than 18 hours worth, but they seemed to love subjective grading. I'd spent 2 weeks working on a paper that was proofread by a Ph.D. in German Applied Linguistics and a native German. I'd then get back the paper with "C, I just don't don't like your ideas here." If you ever feel like a professor is out to get you then you should be the only male in a german feminist lit course.

lol
 
If you ever feel like a professor is out to get you then you should be the only male in a german feminist lit course.


Dude, everyone knows that if you're the only guy in a feminist lit class, then you've either had a sex change awhile ago or you're trying to go out with the girls in the class.
 
Yes, I have the same trouble. My cGPA (due to one awful semester) is very low, a 3.36 and I do well in my lab this summer, a 3.39 which I think is really low in terms of the applicant pool. My sGPA on the other hand is a 3.85 or a 3.9 so, I don't know really.

I'm just going to prep my face off for the MCAT, take it in Aug and hope I get in. Strong letters of recommendation will hopefully count and I'm pretty sure I'm going to publish a paper in the biopsychology department at my college.

Does anyone know which MD schools prefer you to do well in? The sGPA or cGPA?
 
Its certainly interesting to hear everyone's stories on why their GPAs are unbalanced in an opposite fashion to what is normally seen in an unbalanced GPA. I wonder how this is treated by an ADCOM. Naturally, you would think that they would be most interested in applicants that have consistantly done well in their studies. But what about the case above where an applicant has no knowledge or interest in medicine and begins his college career cruising through a non-science major, earning average (C+) marks. Then falls in love with medicine, realizes how competitive it is, and performs really well in a new major (3.8ish), like biology or chem? They would end up with a low cGPA but a high sGPA. Additionaly, their later non-science coursework would be consistant with their science courswork, suggesting that the low cGPA is not a matter of ability, rather a matter of motivation and interest.

From what I have been told, the cGPA is most important. However, a Northwestern admissions person gave a presentation at my school. She was asked which is more important. She said that they look most heavily at the sGPA, but both are important. So I would assume that in most cases, the cGPA is most important, but some schools may look more heavily at the sGPA. But I am certainly no authority on this.

Maybe some adcoms could chime in? LizzyM, anyone?
 
We have the exact same stats. I'm worried that my 3.2 overall gpa would ruin my chance of Med school. Will a 30 MCAt fix that descrepancy?

I have a 3.1 overall GPA and a 3.9 sGPA. I'm a non-traditional who messed up in undergrad, but luckily, I wasn't a science major.
 
Its certainly interesting to hear everyone's stories on why their GPAs are unbalanced in an opposite fashion to what is normally seen in an unbalanced GPA. I wonder how this is treated by an ADCOM. Naturally, you would think that they would be most interested in applicants that have consistantly done well in their studies. But what about the case above where an applicant has no knowledge or interest in medicine and begins his college career cruising through a non-science major, earning average (C+) marks. Then falls in love with medicine, realizes how competitive it is, and performs really well in a new major (3.8ish), like biology or chem? They would end up with a low cGPA but a high sGPA. Additionaly, their later non-science coursework would be consistant with their science courswork, suggesting that the low cGPA is not a matter of ability, rather a matter of motivation and interest.

From what I have been told, the cGPA is most important. However, a Northwestern admissions person gave a presentation at my school. She was asked which is more important. She said that they look most heavily at the sGPA, but both are important. So I would assume that in most cases, the cGPA is most important, but some schools may look more heavily at the sGPA. But I am certainly no authority on this.

Maybe some adcoms could chime in? LizzyM, anyone?

This closely describes me. B- undergad average in English Lit and Philosophy, worked for 3 years, went back and did my post-bac, got good grades, volunteered, did well on the Mcat (35), and applied to a lot of schools. 8 interviews (one at a top five school), two acceptances.

You aren't going to get into Harvard but if you demonstrate your ability to grow, mature, atone (make sure nothing else in your app is lacking), and learn from mistakes, a poor non-science GPA won't necessarily keep you out of med school.

And in case anyone's wondering: non-URM.
 
Top