Can somebody explain GPA trend?

[thinklikeaproton2019]

Hey guys!
I noticed on AAMC's guide GPA grade trend is listed as one of the "highest importance" metrics. Is this really looking at overall cumulative GPA for each year without taking into account the courses of each year? The reason I ask is because I feel like an upward trend is likely for most applicants, given that typically chem, ochem, bio, and physics are all taken within the first couple years of college? I definitely have an upward trend but this is mainly due to the fact that I didn't/don't have any more "weeder" classes during junior and senior year. My non weeder classes had been consistently high throughout all four years. I understand that science gpa is still the most important gpa metric, but is it still considered an "upward trend" even if classes are "easier?"

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[E.Hemingway]

My upper division classes were definitely not easier than my lower division ones, but that probably depends on major

 

[bioboy23]

I kind of wonder the same thing but from the other side. I had all of my easy classes at the beginning of college so aced most everything, but now in my last year and a half may get a couple B’s. I don’t think that’s really a “downward trend” but it’s not upward.

 

[AttemptingScholar]

People who know more, please correct me.

I would say sustained excellence is better than an upward trend to excellence. Small changes (A- to A) really doesn't mean anything. A small dip when you take Orgo is expected.

What I've been seeing trend means is for applicants who don't have roughly consistent grades, you assume the ADCOMs to review almost as if you only had the grades at the end. So if you 4.0'd your first two years and 3.0'd your second two, don't be too surprised if you get rejected from schools with a 3.5 average. Likewise, if you 2.0'd UG but 3.7'd a postbacc, apply like your cumulative is almost a 3.7 and hope you get past the auto screen.

The trend metric is thrown around to explain holistic reviews-- schools look at more than just the number at the end, but it really is for people who had large changes, where it might explain someone who buckled down (and only a few years actually predict their success in med school) or gave up (same thing).

As a shorter answer--it doesn't necessarily get taken into account on your application.

 

[DBC03]

My case may be a good example - I had a terrible freshman year - the result of a culmination of a number of factors, but largely due to a medication. So my GPA trend is 2.2 -> 3.5ish -> 3.6ish -> 3.7ish -> 4.00 (postbac). My science GPA is even more ridiculous with 1.8 -> 3.7ish -> 3.7ish -> 4.0 -> 4.0. While the average is fairly low (3.4ish), it becomes clear that the freshman year was a kind of fluke and that I eventually got over that. It's possible that adcoms may consider my GPA slightly differently than someone who got a 3.4 -> 3.4 -> 3.4 -> 3.4. On the other hand, a straight 3.7-3.8 GPA would have been better than just taking out my freshman year (even though that is what my GPA would be without it).

 

[Goro]

Hey guys!
I noticed on AAMC's guide GPA grade trend is listed as one of the "highest importance" metrics. Is this really looking at overall cumulative GPA for each year without taking into account the courses of each year? The reason I ask is because I feel like an upward trend is likely for most applicants, given that typically chem, ochem, bio, and physics are all taken within the first couple years of college? I definitely have an upward trend but this is mainly due to the fact that I didn't/don't have any more "weeder" classes during junior and senior year. My non weeder classes had been consistently high throughout all four years. I understand that science gpa is still the most important gpa metric, but is it still considered an "upward trend" even if classes are "easier?"

There are two trends Adcoms look for:
A rising trend where you start off at some baseline and improve to [even more] acceptable numbers OR

A steady trend of acceptable numbers right off the bat.

A U- or V-shaped trend is very common and isn't necessarily lethal.

What you take is less important that you doing well. In general, the last 2-3 years are given more weight than the entire GPA at a number of schools, especially your state schools.

 

[thinklikeaproton2019]

Thank you all for the responses!

 

[MareNostrummm]

My trend:

Freshman: 3.53 cGPA 3.42 sGPA
Sophomore: 2.60 cGPA 2.44 sGPA
Junior: 3.74 cGPA 3.73 sGPA
Senior: 3.80 cGPA 3.84 sGPA
Post bacc: 4.00 cGPA 4.00 sGPA

Cumulative: 3.55 cGPA 3.52 sGPA

So yeah... 3 years of straight A's still can't completely make up for a bad Sophomore year.

 

[Turkishking]

My trend:

Freshman: 3.53 cGPA 3.42 sGPA
Sophomore: 2.60 cGPA 2.44 sGPA
Junior: 3.74 cGPA 3.73 sGPA
Senior: 3.80 cGPA 3.84 sGPA
Post bacc: 4.00 cGPA 4.00 sGPA

Cumulative: 3.55 cGPA 3.52 sGPA

So yeah... 3 years of straight A's still can't completely make up for a bad Sophomore year.

At least you're in range for DO schools and low tier-mid tier MD's unless you get a competitive MCAT.

 

[TracingFruits]

Would it be seen as an upward trend to have something like:
Freshman: 3.00
Sophmore: 3.97
Junior: 3.80
Senior: 3.9/4.0(assumed)

 

[MareNostrummm]

At least you're in range for DO schools and low tier-mid tier MD's unless you get a competitive MCAT.

512 so I'm hoping low tier MDs will bite. Not sure about mid tiers.

 

[MareNostrummm]

Would it be seen as an upward trend to have something like:
Freshman: 3.00
Sophmore: 3.97
Junior: 3.80
Senior: 3.9/4.0(assumed)

That's great. Especially since your worst grades were freshman year, you could easily explain that in a secondary essay. Now you just have to do well on the MCAT.

 

[TracingFruits]

That's great. Especially since your worst grades were freshman year, you could easily explain that in a secondary essay. Now you just have to do well on the MCAT.

Managed to score a 520.
Thanks for the quick input! Would love to hear other perspectives as well.

 

[MareNostrummm]

Managed to score a 520.
Thanks for the quick input! Would love to hear other perspectives as well.

Lol 99th percentile MCAT... You have far surpassed whatever proof you needed to show you are academically qualified for medical school.

 

[TracingFruits]

Lol 99th percentile MCAT... You have far surpassed whatever proof you needed to show you are academically qualified for medical school.

First off, sorry for the thread hijack...
I believe I am qualified for medical school. Based on statistics, it would seem I would struggle for midtier schools. In my perspective, and this is the main reason I posted, I don't see it as an upward trend. This may be my own personal biases, but I see my freshman year as a combination of factors that lead to being unsuccessful: hopefully factors that I can convincingly explain without seeming petty. Anyways, I'll search through the forums or start my own thread on the issue at some point.

 

[AttemptingScholar]

First off, sorry for the thread hijack...
I believe I am qualified for medical school. Based on statistics, it would seem I would struggle for midtier schools. In my perspective, and this is the main reason I posted, I don't see it as an upward trend. This may be my own personal biases, but I see my freshman year as a combination of factors that lead to being unsuccessful: hopefully factors that I can convincingly explain without seeming petty. Anyways, I'll search through the forums or start my own thread on the issue at some point.

I would say this is a great reason an upward trend would be considered. You are an A student and should be viewed as such! Doing poorly freshman year isn't uncommon--plenty of people have never been academically challenged/don't know how to study, get homesick, have never had to take care of themselves before. I would say you have a steep upward trend.