Can Someone define Top/Mid/Low Tier schools?

[Willy38]

How is a school put into one of these categories?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Bulbasaur]

it's very subjective and everyone will have their own interpretation of the tiers. personally, I believe top tier is the top 30 medical schools on the US News rankings. Mid tier is anywhere from 31-85, and low tier would be the ones that are unranked. Keep in mind that some schools do not submit the survey forms to the US News place so they are automatically unranked, so being unranked does not necessarily imply that the school is bad.

This is just my own opinion though. I'm sure others have different interpretations.

 

[Willy38]

it's very subjective and everyone will have their own interpretation of the tiers. personally, I believe top tier is the top 30 medical schools on the US News rankings. Mid tier is anywhere from 31-85, and low tier would be the ones that are unranked. Keep in mind that some schools do not submit the survey forms to the US News place so they are automatically unranked, so being unranked does not necessarily imply that the school is bad.

This is just my own opinion though. I'm sure others have different interpretations.

Thanks, I'm assuming you are talking about the research USnews rankings?

 

[drumstix]

it's probably based on how much money they have lol:

TOP: $$$$$$$$ (ocean's eleven level money, get the team together)
MID: $$$ (would still rob)
LOW: $ (broke -- not worth risking the jail time)

 

[Lord Osis]

Top: Schools that accepted you
Mid: Schools that waitlisted you
Low: Schools that you did not apply to

 

[Bulbasaur]

Thanks, I'm assuming you are talking about the research USnews rankings?

Yes, mainly the US News research rankings. Nobody really pays attention to the primary care rankings.

I would also like to note what an above poster kind of mentioned. Money (school endowment + research funding) is a big part of the equation when US News does it's rankings. There is a list that NIH publishes every year that ranks the medical schools and their affiliated hospitals solely by research funding given to them by the NIH. Since all medical schools and their affiliated teaching hospitals get 99% of their research $$ from the NIH, the NIH ranking is a pretty accurate reflection of the level of research schools are involved in. I don't have the link right now but for the most part, the NIH rankings are more or less the same as the US News research rankings. The only differences you will see is that in the NIH list, affiliated teaching hospitals are ranked separately; that is why HMS is only ranked 22nd on the NIH list since a lot of their funding goes to BWH and MGH, not to mention they probably receive tons of private donations as well.

 

[BeancheBlanco]

Go to the US News "best medical schools in the country" list. Click on rankings by research. Take that list and divide it into 3 equal sections. Schools in the top section are "top tier", schools in the middle section are "mid-tier", schools in the bottom section are "low-tier". It's not rocket science. They're just meaningless labels used by people because they don't want to admit they care about the US News ranking website.

 

[wiloghby]

Thanks, I'm assuming you are talking about the research USnews rankings?

Yes, but even then.. it's even more arbitrary because USNews has 2 sets of rankings. There is the research rank and there is the primary care rank...and the primary care rank is called the "program rank" if you are using the filter or search features. But most people on SDN use the research rank. To complicate matters, there are many schools which are highly ranked in one list but not the other.

Best of luck figuring it out.

Also, the new USNews rankings are released on 3/11. So if you want to use that data, wait until next week.

Personally, I like the USNews data, but not for the rankings. Often times they will have the IS/OOS breakdown and show you how many interview invites go to each group. You can see average scores for STEP 1 and STEP 2 CK as well. It's a good way to come up with a rough list of realistic schools to apply to and has more info on your actual admissions prospects than the MSAR has.

Of course, I would then still buy MSAR and check out the specific admission requirements for each of the schools of interest, along with the 10th-90th %ile for MCAT and GPA (USNews only has the average values...starting next year they are wisely switching to median values).

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

Go to the US News "best medical schools in the country" list. Click on rankings by research. Take that list and divide it into 3 equal sections. Schools in the top section are "top tier", schools in the middle section are "mid-tier", schools in the bottom section are "low-tier". It's not rocket science. They're just meaningless labels used by people because they don't want to admit they care about the US News ranking website.

More like the top 25 are the top tier then split the rest in half and that gives you mid and low.

 

[Bulbasaur]

More like the top 25 are the top tier then split the rest in half and that gives you mid and low.

So then a school like Mayo is mid tier? That's why I did top 30 instead of top 20 or 25.

 

[Remy LeBeau]

This isn't law school.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

So then a school like Mayo is mid tier? That's why I did top 30 instead of top 20 or 25.

I guess 30 is okay then. There's no real arbitrary line. Just a guesstimate by all of us.

 

[BeancheBlanco]

So then a school like Mayo is mid tier? That's why I did top 30 instead of top 20 or 25.

how about y'all compromise and call the top 25 + Mayo the "top-tier"?

 

[Bulbasaur]

I guess 30 is okay then. There's no real arbitrary line. Just a guesstimate by all of us.

Sorry; I'm not trying to come off as snarking or w/e even though it may have sounded like that. I just wanted to emphasize that different people will have different interpretations.

 

[darkjedi]

For applicants the only value 'tiering' has is to define where your applications have the best shot. In that manner it's probably more helpful to focus on medians and stats. There's no question that there is at least some correlation to US news but undervalue schools like Mayo Clinic, which I would consider very competitive.

For rough purposes I would probably say
>36/3.9 = upper tier
~33/3.7 = middle tier
<30/3.5 = lower tier

There will be a thousand different ways to mix and match those numbers, and another reason why differentiating what is high, middle or low tier rather pointless

 

[drumstix]

related: what are the actual Ivy League universities? i remember seeing someone who went to Harvard making fun of someone at Columbia (was it?) saying it's not actually an Ivy League..

Warning: image may not be entirely accurate according to which Ivy League douche you ask​

 

[Reckoner]

related: what are the actual Ivy League universities? i remember seeing someone who went to Harvard making fun of someone at Columbia (was it?) saying it's not actually an Ivy League..

Warning: image may not be entirely accurate according to which Ivy League douche you ask​

The Ivy League is an athletic conference, consisting of teams from those eight schools. That map is accurate. Your Harvard acquaintance was probably just being an ass.

 

[Lucca]

You know what I call top two? Second place.


But seriously, the school you matriculate to is automatically the best medical school in the world.

You should give them your money.

 

[rain4venus]

related: what are the actual Ivy League universities? i remember seeing someone who went to Harvard making fun of someone at Columbia (was it?) saying it's not actually an Ivy League..

It was probably Cornell....but yeah, all those schools are Ivy League. Ivy League isn't the same kinda thing as "top tier" - there's actually an objectively correct answer (as opposed to the arbitrary lines dividing med school tiers), and that guy was most likely just being a douche.

 

[Espadaleader]

I split all schools into Category A and Category B. Category A includes roughly the top 40 in US News. I consider everything in Category A roughly equivalent. Harvard, Cleveland Clinic, UVA, Case Western, Einstein, Rochester, BU etc. All of these schools have phenomenal research, education, residency, and training opportunities. Category B is everything not in Category A.

I am going to be very honest. At any medical school you will be a great doctor but outside of the top 40 in US News the overall opportunities medical schools offer tends to drop. You will not have the same research and clinical opportunities at Tufts, GW, SUNY Buffalo, VCU etc. that you would at Harvard, Rochester, Mayo etc. You can actually see the differences in facilities, research funding opportunities, financial aid etc. Also note that in general, outside the top 40 financial aid is much different than inside the top 40.

Now, some people talk about which schools are better within Category A "BU vs. Harvard vs. Rochester" etc. I honesty believe in the medical community you can come out of all three of those schools with the similar "prestige", research, and clinical skills. But, some people may want to split hairs, and in my case I split Category A into Category A-1 and Category A-2. Category A-1 are schools in the "top 10" roughly. Harvard, Yale, Hopkins, Duke, Columbia, Stanford, UCLA etc. I would also throw schools like Mount Sinai in there too. These schools are truly superior. Research, clinical opportunities, curriculum financial aid etc. Category A-2 are the other schools I did not list. For example, Cleveland Clinic. I consider it elite, but its not Harvard or Hopkins.

You can go to any medical school and be successful. Any medical school you go becomes the "best" medical school for you. I get that. However, I think it is important to remember than schools are considered "better" than others.

I also understand that for most students there is no reason to make tiers because the chances are it won't really matter. You got into two medical schools. Go to the one with more financial aid. Simple. For some students that are holding 4, 5, 6, 7 or more offers, tiering helps the decision process easier. For example, I have a friend I met at Hopkins. He got in there, got in at Cleveland, and GW. He withdrew from GW immediately because he wasn't going to go GW over Hopkins or Cleveland (CatA>CatB). However, now he is strongly considering Cleveland over Hopkins because Cleveland's aid would be substantially better than Hopkins. (Both CatA).

Tiering is flawed and imperfect. I'll give you that. But it helps a lot and I think it is necessary for some people.

*Fit is very important but you can find fit at every tier if you net is wide enough.

 

[gumdrops]

I thought these tiers were assigned by amount of NIH research funding in US News but I could be wrong.

In terms of where you'll get the best education? Any school at which you're willing to put in the effort.

You have the power.

 

[baconshrimps]

Top: USNWR 1-40
Middle: Everything else until you get to unranked.
Low tier: anything that is USNWR unranked and DO.

 

[solitarius]

Your "A-1" list sounds a lot like the Top 20. Mindblown.

 

[Espadaleader]

Your "A-1" list sounds a lot like the Top 20. Mindblown.

Actually A-1 should sound a lot like the top 10. Some top 20 programs I consider A-1 on a case by case basis. For instance Mount Sinai is A-2 but Mount Sinai/PORTAL is A-1

 

[drumstix]

Actually A-1 should sound a lot like the top 10. Some top 20 programs I consider A-1 on a case by case basis. For instance Mount Sinai is A-2 but Mount Sinai/PORTAL is A-1

What an elaborate gradient. So a for-profit school in Grenada or DO school is like a Z-26 then?

 

[xroc]

I think the discussion in this thread itself proves how stupid the top, middle. and bottom tier distinction really is.

 

[Espadaleader]

I didn't make this to blow minds

What an elaborate gradient. So a for-profit school in Grenada or DO school is like a Z-26 then?

Lmao. I don't have time for that!

 

[Espadaleader]

I think the discussion in this thread itself proves how stupid the top, middle. and bottom tier distinction really is.

Its not stupid if you have 23 interviews, go on 17 of them, get into all 17, have varying financial aid offers, and have to make very important decisions. I had to (and I still am) using tiers to guide my decisions because there are objective differences among schools. Just because you can be successful at any school doesn't mean ever school is equal.

 

[ace12345]

I think the discussion in this thread itself proves how stupid the top, middle. and bottom tier distinction really is.

To a degree making distinctions is dumb, yes. I'm sure there is not a huge difference between NIH funded #40 school and #41 school. Yet can we make general guidelines based on the resources available at different institutions (And if you've been on a number of interviews, the available of resources becomes apparent immediately)? I think we can, and I think, again to a degree, it can help tremendously in the decision making process.

I wish people, and I am certainly not blaming anyone, had been more transparent with things of this nature before I began interviewing. A lot of this "fit" talk is misleading. There are MAJOR differences between the schools in "different tiers," that absolutely should affect decisions on not only where to attend, but where to interview as well

 

[Willy38]

So what is the opinion on this hypothetical ? e.g. Someone gets into Harvard (20 percent tuition covered) and they get into their state school ( 90 percent tuition covered). ?

Its not stupid if you have 23 interviews, go on 17 of them, get into all 17, have varying financial aid offers, and have to make very important decisions. I had to (and I still am) using tiers to guide my decisions because there are objective differences among schools. Just because you can be successful at any school doesn't mean ever school is equal.

 

[ace12345]

So what is the opinion on this hypothetical ? e.g. Someone gets into Harvard (20 percent tuition covered) and they get into their state school ( 90 percent tuition covered). ?

There are far too many variables in this hypothetical, but I bet a lot of them relate to the resources and opportunities available at said state school (i.e. your personal system of tiering schools)

 

[loltopsy]

You can still get good research opportunities if you go to a big city, even if it's at a no-name institution. You simply do research with docs outside your school. It's not hard just email a lot of people, and you'll get a bite. Who wants to turn down free labor?

 

[Espadaleader]

So what is the opinion on this hypothetical ? e.g. Someone gets into Harvard (20 percent tuition covered) and they get into their state school ( 90 percent tuition covered). ?

This is the question that breaks the system. Honestly, I don't know. Because of my financial situation I will virtually have tuition paid at every school. 60-75% of COA will be covered by need based aid so fin aid is less of an issue. This question is about your gut feeling and just being honest. Some would go into the debt for Harvard some won't. What if you have children/wife etc. You're in Case and Harvard. Both offer you the same amount. Going to Harvard means you have to leave your wife and children. I bet most people would go to Case because family is the most important.

Ranking and putting schools in tiers works only as a guide. You have to include personal things too. I am in my early 20s, no children, no wife or fiancee, no debt from undergrad, very poor so will get max financial aid etc. I can say that I will go to the schools I put in my top tier because I have no obligations and will have minimal debt burden. Look, if I was 30 with $50,000 in undergrad debt will a wife and a baby on the way and I lived in California and would have to leave my wife and children to go to Harvard when I could go to UC Riverside, motherF***a damn top ten school, I would go to UC Riverside in a heartbeat.

Top tier for a 30 year old with a wife and 50k in debt and a newborn may be location, family support etc. I don't care about that right now. I will in 10 years though. Top tier for me is research funding, clinical experience etc.

Top tier is different for everyone. I would use the US News as a guide and then tailor it to your own personal needs.

 

[xroc]

Its not stupid if you have 23 interviews, go on 17 of them, get into all 17, have varying financial aid offers, and have to make very important decisions. I had to (and I still am) using tiers to guide my decisions because there are objective differences among schools. Just because you can be successful at any school doesn't mean ever school is equal.

Don't get me wrong - I agree with you to some degree. What I was trying to say is that the top tier argument is stupid. It's kind of silly that while people are obsessed with the notion of "top tier" schools, there is no consistent definition or agreement of what a top tier school is. It ranges anywhere from top 10 schools, to top 40 schools, to top 3 schools, to top 10 + cherry picking a few random schools, etc.

 

[WolfofSDN]

Its not stupid if you have 23 interviews, go on 17 of them, get into all 17, have varying financial aid offers, and have to make very important decisions. I had to (and I still am) using tiers to guide my decisions because there are objective differences among schools. Just because you can be successful at any school doesn't mean ever school is equal.

Sorry if this is going over my head, but whom are you referring to?

 

[Espadaleader]

Sorry if this is going over my head, but whom are you referring to?

myself

 

[WolfofSDN]

myself

lol

 

[sourdoughllama]

Its not stupid if you have 23 interviews, go on 17 of them, get into all 17, have varying financial aid offers, and have to make very important decisions. I had to (and I still am) using tiers to guide my decisions because there are objective differences among schools. Just because you can be successful at any school doesn't mean ever school is equal.

Wait, did I just gain a lot of weight, or did your huge ass ego just create its own gravitational pull?

 

[Espadaleader]

Wait, did I just gain a lot of weight, or did your huge ass ego just create its own gravitational pull?

Why are you cursing and throwing shade my way?

 

[WolfofSDN]

Why are you cursing and throwing shade my way?

Espadaleader, we get it. You're smart. You've been accepted to every med school under the sun. But you're coming off as a little conceited. Perhaps off topic, but are you shorter than the average male? Because it seems like you're exhibiting little man's syndrome. And your username strengthens my argument. EspadaLEADER? Settle down, Napoleon.

 

[baconshrimps]

Why are you cursing and throwing shade my way?

Dude seriously, don't brag about the schools you were accepted to when you don't even have an MDapps. Seriously, the whole 17 medical school thing is a bit over-the-top, and usually the only people who make that kind of splash at medical schools are URMs, so unless you want to be called out on your URM status as opposed to an admissions system operating as a meritocracy, stop bragging about your 17 acceptances. Honestly, it would have been sufficient to say "I've been accepted to a range of schools and I am trying to figure out what my best option will be," but instead you've been opting to pat yourself on the back and maybe try and sway the minds on SDN into further stroking your ego. Seriously, I've been accepted to 5 schools (that's 12 less than you if we're keeping score) but your 17 is far less impressive to me.

My name is Rufus, and that's the trufus.

Lets hear some stats and back it up with MDapps. Otherwise, drop the demi-god act, it's annoying.

 

[WolfofSDN]

Dude seriously, don't brag about the schools you were accepted to when you don't even have an MDapps. Seriously, the whole 17 medical school thing is a bit over-the-top, and usually the only people who make that kind of splash at medical schools are URMs, so unless you want to be called out on your URM status as opposed to an admissions system operating as a meritocracy, stop bragging about your 17 acceptances. Honestly, it would have been sufficient to say "I've been accepted to a range of schools and I am trying to figure out what my best option will be," but instead you've been opting to pat yourself on the back and maybe try and sway the minds on SDN into further stroking your ego. Seriously, I've been accepted to 5 schools (that's 12 less than you if we're keeping score) but your 17 is far less impressive to me.

My name is Rufus, and that's the trufus.

Lets hear some stats and back it up with MDapps. Otherwise, drop the demi-god act, it's annoying.

Thank you. It needed to be said.

 

[WolfofSDN]

Why are you cursing and throwing shade my way?

Dude seriously, don't brag about the schools you were accepted to when you don't even have an MDapps. Seriously, the whole 17 medical school thing is a bit over-the-top, and usually the only people who make that kind of splash at medical schools are URMs, so unless you want to be called out on your URM status as opposed to an admissions system operating as a meritocracy, stop bragging about your 17 acceptances. Honestly, it would have been sufficient to say "I've been accepted to a range of schools and I am trying to figure out what my best option will be," but instead you've been opting to pat yourself on the back and maybe try and sway the minds on SDN into further stroking your ego. Seriously, I've been accepted to 5 schools (that's 12 less than you if we're keeping score) but your 17 is far less impressive to me.

My name is Rufus, and that's the trufus.

Lets hear some stats and back it up with MDapps. Otherwise, drop the demi-god act, it's annoying.

Also, he got a 33. I mean it's good, but it doesn't warrant the ego he has. /rant

 

[Espadaleader]

Please stop with all of the shade and negativity. I have nothing to prove to you or anyone on this forum. I never said I was better than anyone and I never will.

 

[Espadaleader]

I do have an MDApps but I don't want to post it on SDN because I don't want to get identified. The schools I got into are a fact. I am not going to sugar coat my success. It also doesn't mean I am better or worked harder than any of you. I know you guys worked hard and I respect that. Take what I say for what it is... Please don't distort what I say or attempt to attack my URM status. That's ridiculous.

 

[WolfofSDN]

Please don't distort what I say or attempt to attack my URM status. That's ridiculous.

And who did this?

 

[487806]

Wait, did I just gain a lot of weight, or did your huge ass ego just create its own gravitational pull?

Dude seriously, don't brag about the schools you were accepted to when you don't even have an MDapps. Seriously, the whole 17 medical school thing is a bit over-the-top, and usually the only people who make that kind of splash at medical schools are URMs, so unless you want to be called out on your URM status as opposed to an admissions system operating as a meritocracy, stop bragging about your 17 acceptances. Honestly, it would have been sufficient to say "I've been accepted to a range of schools and I am trying to figure out what my best option will be," but instead you've been opting to pat yourself on the back and maybe try and sway the minds on SDN into further stroking your ego. Seriously, I've been accepted to 5 schools (that's 12 less than you if we're keeping score) but your 17 is far less impressive to me.

My name is Rufus, and that's the trufus.

Lets hear some stats and back it up with MDapps. Otherwise, drop the demi-god act, it's annoying.

Sheesh. You guys are sure bitter because someone had a successful app cycle. Throw your envy aside and focus on what @Espadaleader is getting at. Sure, using himself may be an inadequate example, but attacking him out of envy is unwarranted.

 

[487806]

And who did this?

Strongly hinted below

Seriously, the whole 17 medical school thing is a bit over-the-top, and usually the only people who make that kind of splash at medical schools are URMs, so unless you want to be called out on your URM status as opposed to an admissions system operating as a meritocracy, stop bragging about your 17 acceptances.

 

[baconshrimps]

Sheesh. You guys are sure bitter because someone had a successful app cycle. Throw your envy aside and focus on what @Espadaleader is getting at. Sure, using himself may be an inadequate example, but attacking him out of envy is unwarranted.

Absolutely no envy. I'm going to my top choice MD school.
There is this thing called tact, and people are lacking. Evidently I'm not the only person who feels this way.

 

[487806]

Absolutely no envy. I'm going to my top choice MD school.
There is this thing called tact, and people are lacking.

How is it tactful? So since @Espadaleader had a successful cycle, he shouldn't use himself as an example because other applicants who weren't as successful would be offended? Seriously? And your implication that URMs primarily have this type of success is inaccurate and offensive. Let's avoid heading at that direction.

Focus on what @Espadaleader is arguing rather than attacking him for "boasting" his success.