Bio-major 3.4 vs non-sci major 3.6

[A6project]

As we are all anxiously waiting for interview invites, I just had a random thought.

At this point, it doesn't matter cuz we all applied but I just would like to know your guys opinions on this.

Biology major 3.4 GPA vs. Non-sci major 3.6 GPA ?????

Hopefully, admission staff won't look down on my application just because non-sci majorers have higher GPA than mine.

this whole waiting things drive me crazy. I even had dreams about it.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[amalgamgrillz]

As we are all anxiously waiting for interview invites, I just had a random thought.

At this point, it doesn't matter cuz we all applied but I just would like to know your guys opinions on this.

Biology major 3.4 GPA vs. Non-sci major 3.6 GPA ?????

Hopefully, admission staff won't look down on my application just because non-sci majorers have higher GPA than mine.

this whole waiting things drive me crazy. I even had dreams about it.

I think it's a little more complex than that. In that case, I think they would look at DAT scores. If your biology is that much better than a non-bio major, then your biology DAT score should be higher.

They'll also take into consideration that you've had extensive exposure to upper level biologies, like immuno, micro, anatomy, cell phys, genetics, embryo etc.

 

[V5RED]

Biology is considered the easiest of the sciences. There are plenty of difficult non science majors like Accounting, Writing, History, etc. Unless you are in something like Chemical Engineering or Math your major is probably not a bear relative to others.

I have no idea how dental applications work, but I am guessing you get a chance to improve your application and reapply if you fail this cycle.

I would try to avoid looking down on other majors though. That mentality is pointless. Just do the best you can with what you have earned thus far.

 

[93geo]

I don't think that its that easy. For example you may have a lower gpa than someone who majors in something that is known to be an easy college major (communications), but in a case like that the adcoms would probably look at the difficulty of the classes you took and it might end up in your favor. I would think that if you were up against someone who majored in something that has a reputation for being difficult (chemical engineering) and your gpa is lower than that person, the adcoms might not be in your favor.

 

[TwentyTwelve]

I won't get into a shouting...errr...typing war here over science majors versus non-science. All I know as a non-science major was that I put in waaaaay more work than a lot of my science major friends. Some of those friends are pharmacy/dental/med students now. As someone mentioned before there are just too many checks and balances for a difference in GPA to be that big of a deal. There is the DAT, science GPA, letters of rec, and more that could show a lower overall GPA was worth more than a higher non-science. I would find it very surprising if dental schools solely looked at different major GPA's side by side and made a decision for the higher non-science without looking at how the previously mentioned stats lined up.

For instance a communications major with a 3.8 scores an 18/19/18 while a bio major with a 3.4 scores a 22/23/21 with good science LOR and more science classes taken. Which one looks better? Obviously the science major...thats the beauty of the DAT which puts everyone, regardless of major/school/background, on the same level. Now if the communications major scores very well...such as 23/23/23 then obviously they are at an advantage because they achieved high marks in science classes and the DAT plus they have an added skill set from their alternative degree.

Sorry for the long winded response but it brings up a good discussion point...what is favored more if both people in both majors are successful?

 

[Jackson-Ave-Dental]

This is the reason why your app has 3 GPAs...

oGPA
sGPA
BCP

 

[Threeleggedcrow]

I agree that its more complicated than a science 3.4 vs a nons-science 3.6. But if you're looking strictly at GPA and everything else about the two candidates are identical (DATs, LOR, ECs, etc.) then I would argue that the person with the 3.6 is at the advantage. So strictly speaking major does not matter. Unless of course as people mentioned you had a difficult engineering major, and even then only a very slight benefit.

 

[slm266]

this question gets asked several times each cycle. Doesnt do you any good to speculate, just get the highest GPA and quit worrying about the other guy.

 

[PDizzle]

IMO 3.6 > 3.4. I'm just using simple math here!

Seriously tho, get the highest GPA you can. This avoids cutoffs, get lots of interviews and get's you in. A nice science major helps, dont get me wrong, but your question put you over the 3.5 mark, which in my non-adcom opinion is a good goal to reach.

 

[Jackson-Ave-Dental]

this question gets asked several times each cycle. Doesnt do you any good to speculate, just get the highest GPA and quit worrying about the other guy.

Well said.

 

[invictusx]

I'm not a biology major (chemistry minor, though); in fact, I did POORLY in my intro bio class in college. I'm an economics major and I pulled off a 22 on the biology sector of the DAT.

The DAT is used as a baseline to account for any grade inflation. If someone has a 4.0 GPA and a 18 AA, then the GPA received is questionable.

 

[MuskieMan33]

I would view a 3.6 better than a 3.4 regardless of someone being an accounting, psych, econ, chem, business, or bio major. A 3.6 is a 3.6 whether it is a bio or psych major. Of course some classes are easier and harder for different people.

This thread makes me think of this video.
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojjmLZ5LOWU[/YOUTUBE]

 

[slm266]

This thread makes me think of this video.
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojjmLZ5LOWU[/YOUTUBE]

Zzzzzzz. Maybe the video gets better


Edit: skip past the first 6 minutes