Are You Better Off Attending a Less Competitive Med Scool?

[Dedikated2liftn]

Hey all, I'll be an M1 this fall, and I've posted on a few allopathic threads previously. So far the advice has been helpful, so I thought I'd go ahead and throw this one out there. Anyway, it's obviously too late for me to choose now (although I'm still waitlisted at a few places); however, I figure if you're shooting for a competitive residency, that it could potentially make things easier (i.e. with variables such as class rank, clinical evals., etc). Admittingly, it's not the ideal reason to choose a school; however, I'm sure that more than a few medical students have done it. Thoughts????

BTW: The title is a typo; I'm not ******ed (well most of the time, haha).

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[SomeDoc]

When you start med school, you'll meet people who went to no-name state schools, and some who went to private, brand-name schools, and in the end, you'll all be in the same boat. The equalizer: standardized tests. I say be wise, and go for the cheapest school and where you'll be happy man, all else being considered. It's not the name of the school that'll open doors for you; its how well you do. Same thing's going to happen once you're finished with residency. People who went to different residencies end up working in the same hospital.

 

[Instatewaiter]

It could be or then again maybe not... who could know. It's not as if someone has gone through 2 programs... and even the second time through the material is easier.

 

[njbmd]

Choosing medical schools is a pre-med issue and therefore this thread is moved to preallo. Medical students read and respond to threads in preallo and may follow and respond to this one if desired.

 

[MrBurns10]

I figure if you're shooting for a competitive residency, that it could potentially make things easier

There are two things I see wrong with your assumption: one is that it's always easier to be at the top of your class at a less competitive med school, and the second is that it's necessary to be at the top no matter where you go. Regardless of where you go, I promise you're going to have tons of classmates who are as smart or smarter than you. Besides, students at lesser known schools are all thinking the same thing: "I go to Lesser Known SOM, I have to be at the top to get into X competitive specialty!" Whereas your classmates at a top school may have done better in undergrad, the pressure to be at the top is also less. So it really could go either way.

I'm not saying always go to the best school you get into, but I also don't think your reasoning for going to a less competitive school is sound either. Go where you think you'll be happiest...and if said school is considerably cheaper, don't even think twice.

 

[Excelsius]

...it's always easier to be at the top of your class at a less competitive med school, and the second is that it's necessary to be at the top no matter where you go. Regardless of where you go, I promise you're going to have tons of classmates who are as smart or smarter than you. Besides, students at lesser known schools are all thinking the same thing: "I go to Lesser Known SOM, I have to be at the top to get into X competitive specialty!" Whereas your classmates at a top school may have done better in undergrad, the pressure to be at the top is also less. So it really could go either way.

Good point. I am assuming they do curve in med schools. The problem might be figuring out if the given med school is competitive. I am not sure we can always assume higher rank/GPA/MCAT score means more competitive.

You might want to search this forum since there have been other discussions like this. There was also a lot of good information in this thread: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=511126.

Your question can probably be rephrased: is it better to take easier classes? Only you can answer that based on your skills.

 

[TheRealMD]

Trying to game the system only leaves you worse off than before

 

[spospo]

i'm going to agree with somedoc here and say that standardized tests are the equalizer. from what i hear, grades from years 1 and 2 matter very little. if you think about it, beyond those actual numbers, your school doesn't necessarily have that much impact on what you take with you into the residency application process. step I and II? up to you. research? up to you. LORs? again, up to you. as far as M3 evals, every school is different there, so i won't comment. a school isn't going to make you a great applicant. you are going to make yourself a great applicant.

 

[ChubbyChaser]

arent alot of the top schools p/f the first two years anyways?

 

[scarletgirl777]

.

 

[RySerr21]

i'm going to agree with somedoc here and say that standardized tests are the equalizer. from what i hear, grades from years 1 and 2 matter very little. if you think about it, beyond those actual numbers, your school doesn't necessarily have that much impact on what you take with you into the residency application process. step I and II? up to you. research? up to you. LORs? again, up to you. as far as M3 evals, every school is different there, so i won't comment. a school isn't going to make you a great applicant. you are going to make yourself a great applicant.

isn't step I testing what you have learned during the first two years?? i'd imagine someone with higher grades would do better on step I (i dont know too much about what is on step II). unless the person w/ the lower graded started to work harder for some reason.

 

[Law2Doc]

Hey all, I'll be an M1 this fall, and I've posted on a few allopathic threads previously. So far the advice has been helpful, so I thought I'd go ahead and throw this one out there. Anyway, it's obviously too late for me to choose now (although I'm still waitlisted at a few places); however, I figure if you're shooting for a competitive residency, that it could potentially make things easier (i.e. with variables such as class rank, clinical evals., etc). Admittingly, it's not the ideal reason to choose a school; however, I'm sure that more than a few medical students have done it. Thoughts????

BTW: The title is a typo; I'm not ******ed (well most of the time, haha).

Doesn't work this way. The range between top and bottom is too small. You are still thinking "college" where the range between the best university and the least esteemed CC is vast. But there are only 120 allo schools and each only has 150 or so students. So everyone is pretty solid. All the "average" people who made you look so good in college has been truncated away by admissions. Every school is going to have people smarter than you and not as smart as you. The average GPA/MCAT for a top school is, say, 3.8/35, while for a less competitive school it's 3.5/30. That means everyone in either school got at least A-/B+ or better pretty consistently, and did decently on MCAT. So anyone in either type of school tended to get their share of A's in undergrad, and has the ability to beat you out numerically on a given test. And you better believe that folks work harder in med school than college. In fact, the dudes who never worked in college for A's often find themselves suddenly having to work much harder in med school, which results in superstar status for some, and bottom of class status for others -- it is simply new territory for everyone. If you were going to end up in the middle of a top school, I submit that you probably will end up not much better than that in a lower ranked school. It's all about your abilities and how hard you work, wherever you go. All med schools are going to be harder than college, and all will provide you with more competition than you are contemplating right now. The key is to focus on yourself, now how your peers are doing. It really differs from college in this way, and makes med school more survivable.

In terms of evals, it's less about your intelligence or more about your personality. So the outgoing go-getter who everybody loves is often going to be able to impress an attending in a short couple of weeks much more readilly than the dude who had a 4.0/40. So this probably pans out pretty evenly from the better to worst ranked schools. At the big schools the names may be bigger, but the LORs may be freer flowing at the small schools, but who knows.

Bottom line is, this is not a fruitful exercise and probably will only serve to lull you into a false sense of security. Expect to be given a run for your life wherever you go. You are leaving college where you did well to something very different, where you have no track record, and your grades simply don't give much, if any, evidence where you will end up in the class rank.

 

[whoisthedrizzle]

isn't step I testing what you have learned during the first two years?? i'd imagine someone with higher grades would do better on step I (i dont know too much about what is on step II). unless the person w/ the lower graded started to work harder for some reason.

Step I testing does cover the first two years, but people that get good grades won't necessarily have high scores for the same reason that 4.0 pre-meds don't always do great on the MCAT.

 

[spospo]

isn't step I testing what you have learned during the first two years?? i'd imagine someone with higher grades would do better on step I (i dont know too much about what is on step II). unless the person w/ the lower graded started to work harder for some reason.

i agree with whoisthedrizzle here obviously. you could barely pass all your classes and then rock the boards. yes, it could be because they started working harder. if your school is simply P/F, all you have to do is get that 70 (that is the cut off at my school). you can work harder and get that 92 if you want, but it still going to get that P just like the guy with a 73.

pretty much every school covers the same things in the first 2 years. it may be presented in a different order, in a different manner, but everyone gets the same info for the most part. if they don't, you still have to consider the fact that everyone has access to the same review books.

sorry, that got long