can you believe this stuff?

BU Medical Sciences
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
A

A. Caveman

would you guys be shocked if i told you that I know a girl with these numbers:

MCAT 21
GPA 3.55 (*got an AA from a community college, so that's 60 credits of easy classes, then went to an average difficulty school and all she has to show for it is that gpa. she's graduated now)
RESEARCH: she was on a howard hughes scholarship or something so she did what was required as far as research...nothing exceptional
EC'S: nothing special. run of the mill type of stuff

OK, so this girl seems very unimpressive. I believe she might be an URM, but how the heck does that make up for her numbers.
she's teaching high school biology for this year off, since she graduated spring 2001.

here's the crazy part:

this girl has an interview at George Washington AND at Temple. can someone explain how that's possible...because i just got put on hold (pre-interview) at GW and it doesn't make sense.
Members don't see this ad.
 
Hmm... I'm thinking she slept with somone... or maybe a few people. Are you sure she had a 21?!?
 
I just read that and I'm like #)(*#%()*#$%()#*%.
Perhaps she has more to her than what she told you? Or maybe she has family members on the admissions board?

Perhaps she discovered something during her research with HHMI? I mean if she just did research with HHMI and found nothing, I don't think that's a reason why she got in because I was on the same thing and GW said "SCREW YOU LEC," of course in my interpretation of their letter.

Haha, Sea-Dragon crackes me up...good one :clap:

Whatever the case, I am happy she got in but I am still going #)(%R*#()*%.

Okay, I just reread A.C's post and I am going #)(*#)(%* again :(
 
Members don't see this ad :)
i was rejected pre-interview at georgetown and einstein, put on hold for an interview at GW and i got interviews at stanford, cornell, columbia, emory, sinai, nyu, and pitt, among other places. go figure.

a bunch of really stellar applicants i know were rejected from many less-than-elite private schools (not that they aren't great_ it's just that my friends had WAY above their average stats).
i think that these schools can see when someone just applies as a safety and they dont want to waste their "precious interview slots" on someone who would never attend.
 
It could have just been a mistake! Admissions Com. have been known to do that... remember the whole Stanford mess when the Adcom sent interview invites to all the people who were meant to get rejects and rejects to all the people who were meant to get interview invites?
 
sea_dragon,

when did that mix-up at stanford happen? this year?
 
A. Caveman, what are run of the mill EC's?
 
screw it..if she got the interviews, she probably deserves them in some way. more power to her.

PS. basic filler stuff that wasn't meaningful. run of the mill ec's = filler.
 
Rather than putting this girl down and saying she is "unimpressive" and has "filler ECs" (what the heck does that mean anyway when half the questions of this board are - what ECs do med schools like?), accept this as proof once again that schools look at a variety of things when choosing whom to interview, and that, yes, getting into med school is a crapshoot.

A good friend of mine who is w/o a doubt one of the most intelligent women I have ever met received a low 20's on her MCAT. Some people don't read fast enough to do well on these tests. (Unfortunately she did not get in...she would have made an excellent doctor.)

And since when are community college science classes so much harder than senior college science classes? Guess what? All of the basic science classes across the country use the same few text books. And for those of you who don't follow the news, here's a recent headline you can search for: "rampant grade inflation at Harvard."
 
Originally posted by YBee:
•Rather than putting this girl down and saying she is "unimpressive" and has "filler ECs" (what the heck does that mean anyway when half the questions of this board are - what ECs do med schools like?), accept this as proof once again that schools look at a variety of things when choosing whom to interview, and that, yes, getting into med school is a crapshoot.

And since when are community college science classes so much harder than senior college science classes? Guess what? All of the basic science classes across the country use the same few text books. And for those of you who don't follow the news, here's a recent headline you can search for: "rampant grade inflation at Harvard."•••

I agree that putting down an applicant like that doesn't do anyone any good. But let's face it; a lot of us have worked damn hard, have excellent stats, tons of research and volunteering, and still can't land more than a couple interviews (let alone an acceptance). So, when you hear stories about someone with 21 MCAT landing interviews and getting accepted, it's got to make you want to vent... ya know!

My friend knows of a girl who got into UCSD med with 22 MCAT. She had connections.
Click to expand...
 
Regarding grade inflation and CC. I'm not from Harvard, but I always wonder why people make such a big deal about grade inflation. Okay, so maybe Harvard should give some Cs, but the way their curve seems to work is very few get A, a little more get A-, more get B+, most get B and then comes B- and maybe C+. It's a typical bell curve, and considering the brains of most people there, it's a lot more difficult to be the best there to receive the A.

Now, in terms of community college, I have experience with this part. I took 1 class in high school at a CC and it was the absolute easiest class I've ever taken. I barely studied (basically because there was nothing to study!) and I got an A. It was intro bio which some people use as their bio requirement for med school. It seems like if you have any initiative to do any type of work, it's the easiest A in the world.

Just my .02
 
Quick thing about Harvard grade inflation--we mostly get B+--it is generally difficult to get anything higher. (Granted, there are still many, many people who get As, but these are people who have gotten As most of their lives--why would their work ethic stop once they got into college? It's one of the reasons Harvard does not give merit scholarships--to whom would they give them?)

And regarding the girl in question--she's a HS bio teacher. That's her selling point. Adcoms are looking for people who are a little different from the norm, and grown-ups with power love teachers (even if they don't want to pay them!).

mma
 
Originally posted by mma:
•Quick thing about Harvard grade inflation--we mostly get B+--it is generally difficult to get anything higher.
mma•••

well, in the recent controversy over the grade inflation at harvard, it was reported that half of all grades handed out are A-/A. HALF. so the majority of people do not get B+'s. i'm not doubting your post, as you imply that you're a harvard student, but it seems to me that a large portion of the grades handed out in general are very high.

a lot of schools hand out grades based on a bell-curve distribution. it's just a matter of at which letter grade they decide the mean should indicate. so it sounds like at harvard the mean was the B+/A- cutoff. for the majority of my undergrad courses (i did not attend harvard), the mean was the C/C+ cutoff, or if i was lucky, C+/B-.

as others have pointed out, the fact that this girl is getting interviews just goes to show you that adcoms recognize that numbers aren't the definitive predictor of competency as a med student or doctor. if she's interviewing , apparently adcoms see something in her application that was highly interesting to them, and it's up to them to decide what's important. and a howard hughes fellowship isn't something to take lightly--that's very impressive.
Click to expand...
 
Members don't see this ad :)
In my original "B+ is the average" post, I was referring to intro science classes and core courses, in which this happens to be the case. In some classes the mean is an A-, but that is generally in the more advanced classes. So, basically, yes, most students are getting A/A-, but most students are not taking intro classes. Also, at Harvard, we have to take a minimum of 14 courses in our majors, which is more than at most schools--after so many courses in one subject, it is not unreasonable for most of the people in a class to be getting As.

I am not denying that we have grade inflation at all. Yes, we absolutely do. Most schools do have some measure of grade inflation--better grades for the students leads to better grad school/employment placement stats for the schools which, in turn, leads to more alumni money which leads to a bigger endowment which brings in bigger name faculty which increases the schools' ranking in US News...

..which is why getting into med school is about so much more than numbers. Numbers are important, but so is being an interesting, genuine human being. The most important qualities of a person cannot be measured by standardized exams or grades.

Good luck!

mma
 
As someone who used to teach at Harvard I disagree with this claim that somehow all grades are inflated at Harvard. Some professors undoubtedly did inflate grades. There are some professors that do this at every school, not just Harvard. There are also many Harvard professors with poor attitude to teaching or their students who, for a variety of reasons, just don't give out A-grades (one of my ex-colleagues was infact pulled infront of the Dean specifically because he had not awarded an A in the last 5 years). However, as someone else pointed out a lot of Harvard students (note - not all of them, and not all the time) are very intelligent, highly motivated students. A lot of them deserve an 'A'. I have taught the exact same courses at various other academic institutes and on average there is a bell-curve - but in general the Harvard students were in the top range of this.

I also agree that what this person had going for her was that she was a biology teacher. This indicated that she had an interest in biology and science, and had a genuine desire to help and teach. These are all excellent characteristics for a doctor. If she came up with a decent answer as to why she wanted to go into medicine as opposed to continuing to serve people as a teacher I would think she would make an attractive candidate.
 
Originally posted by oldernotwiser:
•As someone who used to teach at Harvard I disagree with this claim that somehow all grades are inflated at Harvard. •••

well, i don't know if you wrote this in response to my previous post, but i wasn't saying that all grades from all professors in all departments were inflated. i highly doubt that would be the case *anywhere*. i totally agree that the exact grade distribution depends on the course, the professor, the department, the school, etc, etc. but the statement about 50% of all grades being at least an A- was describing the grade trend school-wide, as it was publicized and as i understood it--NOT that in every single course, half of all grades were an A- or A. but anyway....

the point was that we, as applicants, really can't evaluate someone else's competitiveness in the med school application process, because it can be difficult to objectively and fairly judge someone else as we are people who have a stake in the process too, and because we don't even know what criteria matter anyway. i laugh at threads started by people who post their stats and ask if they can get into med school. sure, we can post our opinions, but how can we know?? there are too many things that factor into the equation, and in the end it's a crapshoot anyway. so to be honest, i'm NOT shocked that this girl is getting interviews, because apparently temple and GW liked something about her application and thought it spoke volumes about her ability to be a competent med student and physician. do we really know enough about her to judge her, and isn't it a little presumptuous to assume that the only reason she got interviews was because the schools screwed up?? funny how often we all cry foul about the MCAT's ability to really predict an applicant's ability to succeed in med school, and now there is disbelief that someone with a 21 is more worthy of an interview than someone with a higher score. come on. we all work hard to get to this point and everyone brings something different to the table.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Premed315U:
•Regarding grade inflation and CC. I'm not from Harvard, but I always wonder why people make such a big deal about grade inflation. Okay, so maybe Harvard should give some Cs, but the way their curve seems to work is very few get A, a little more get A-, more get B+, most get B and then comes B- and maybe C+. •••


This is not true... read the article in The Economist (I think it was one of the December issues)... HALF of all the grades given at Harvard are A's.

I don't mean to be mean... but I don't care what this girl did... with those numbers... she shouldn't get into medical school. Especially since she took the MCAT twice!! It's not like she took it once and just by some lack of judgement didn't study at all. If she had taken it and gotten a 21, then retook and got a 28 or something... that's different. But a 21 on the second time around after an 18!!? She needs to go into different field.
Click to expand...
 
My defending Harvard is the last thing I ever thought I would do (I had no love for the school while I was there--at all). But I think in this case Harvard may be being unfairly picked on. Why is it controversial or problematic that the mean is set high in many courses at Harvard? Do Harvard students come out of college knowing any less than students from other schools? Do we perform more poorly in grad school or professional school because our mean was set higher in undergrad classes? Shouldn't everyone at any school who deserves an A get an A, even if it means the whole class is getting an A?

Again, grade inflation happens at many, many institutions--top tier and otherwise.

I am really, really so sorry about being defensive about this. I am not even applying to med schools through Harvard--I did all my pre-med work at Tufts. And if any other negative thing had been said about Harvard, I'd probably laugh it up and agree, but, for some reason, this gets me. I think it is because, while there are some real idiots at Harvard, most of the students I knew really were bright and worked very, very hard. I could not begrudge them an A just because they got slightly above mean in a course--they really did in most cases deserve the A.

By the way, Harvard definitely gives out Cs. I got one. ;)

mma
 
MMA, I agree. If you compare people getting A/A- from Harvard to those getting an A/A- from any lower tier school, the A- or even B+ student at Harvard would probably have a much better background in the topic. Thinking about it, there is probably more grade inflation in bad schools because almost (not all, just almost) no one puts much effort into their studies. So the whole standard is much lower. Whereas at Harvard, you must work much harder to keep up. The workload is also much more at Harvard than at a lower tier school. I'm not a Harvardite, but I have a friend there and friends at state schools. The Harvard friend does work constantly and my friends at the state school do maybe 1 hour of work/week! One of my friends complained that she had to take algebra, and a class where she had to write a 5 page paper. She's also doing very well in her classes.
 
Originally posted by Sea_dragon:
•

But a 21 on the second time around after an 18!!? She needs to go into different field.•••

so because she can't score high on the MCAT, she is therefore not suited to be a doctor? isn't this the same logic that people on SDN tend to argue *against*? how does one thing automatically mean the other? do you mean to tell me that someone with a 4.0GPA/40 MCAT who has done nothing in life but study will make an excellent doctor, but someone with lower numbers and highly in-depth clinical experiences 'needs to go into a different field' because their low MCAT score will preclude their ability to relate to patients, to make the right diagnosis, etc, etc? this girl will have more of an uphill climb to be admitted, sure, but it's not your business to decide what she can and cannot do with her life. everyone i know in med school tells me that getting in is way harder than staying in, so it's most likely not a question of her being able to handle the work. we all know (or at least i thought we all did) that numbers aren't the be-all and end-all of this process.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by sandflea:
•

so because she can't score high on the MCAT, she is therefore not suited to be a doctor? •••


First off, a 21 is not just "not high" it's well below average. Of course I don't think someone needs to have high MCAT scores to be a good doctor... but they should at least be able to score near the average.

I realize I'm not being very PC, but that's just what I think. If you can't get at least an average MCAT score after your second try you shouldn't go to medical school. That's just my opinion.


Let's cut out the feel-good BS... if you can't get an average score on the MCAT (at least a 24). You certainly wouldn't be able to pass the USLME. If you can't pass the USLME you won't be able to practice medicine in the USA. IT'S AS SIMPLE AS THAT!

Yes, people with not so high MCAT scores can make great doctors.... but these people at least get 25, 26 or 27's. This girl couldn't get better than a 21!!
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by mma:
•My defending Harvard is the last thing I ever thought I would do (I had no love for the school while I was there--at all). But I think in this case Harvard may be being unfairly picked on. Why is it controversial or problematic that the mean is set high in many courses at Harvard? Do Harvard students come out of college knowing any less than students from other schools? Do we perform more poorly in grad school or professional school because our mean was set higher in undergrad classes? Shouldn't everyone at any school who deserves an A get an A, even if it means the whole class is getting an A?

Again, grade inflation happens at many, many institutions--top tier and otherwise.

I am really, really so sorry about being defensive about this. I am not even applying to med schools through Harvard--I did all my pre-med work at Tufts. And if any other negative thing had been said about Harvard, I'd probably laugh it up and agree, but, for some reason, this gets me. I think it is because, while there are some real idiots at Harvard, most of the students I knew really were bright and worked very, very hard. I could not begrudge them an A just because they got slightly above mean in a course--they really did in most cases deserve the A.

By the way, Harvard definitely gives out Cs. I got one. ;)

mma•••


I'm not trying to critize. I think Harvard SHOULD have grade inflation. I figure... if you can be average amoung the countries top students... you deserve an A :D
But what do I know?
Click to expand...
 
I don't mean to be mean... but I don't care what this girl did... with those numbers... she shouldn't get into medical school ••

I would say the adcom's have so much experience w/all kinds of applicants, I would have faith in them to choose who gets acceptected/rejected. :cool:
Click to expand...
 
I don't have too much of a problem with the fact that a girl with these numbers can get an interview, 2 no less. I have a problem knowing that I have a better application than what was described here and yet I have yet to receive any interviews at all. There has to be something that is on her application that is stellar for her to receive 2 interviews. I also know a couple of people that got bad news from GW with much higher MCAT scores and stonger applications. More power to her I guess, but why wouldn't the ADCOMs at least interview those people when they are willing to give this girl a chance. If we only really knew what certain ADCOMs really look for......
 
It's not cool to put applicants down. I personally don't care about anyone elses' application; I care about working hard and putting my best application forward.

Caveman, unless you sat down with this appicants AMCAS application, you'll never know the real story. Many people are very modest when it comes to describing themselves, so maybe aside from her low MCAT she had some really great things.
 
well i didn't find out about her stuff from her..i found out from others. i was shocked to see that an interview that could have gone to somebody vastly more qualified (namely me!) was given to her instead. all sympathy aside, those numbers make me want to puke. i saw her studying for the mcat to improve on her 19...she barely freaking studied. it pisses me off that she's getting these chances when she clearly hasn't earned them as much as others have. i can't even sympathize with her because she didn't bust her ass, so i just don't care about her medical career..the girl was talking about taking the lsat and applying to law school cuz she's not even that into medicine. i've got qualifications that run circles around her's, and i'm gonna get the same number of interviews?? well then hell yeah i'm gonna scream rape! you other people are getting just as screwed here. anyway, i found out she's puerto rican so she's a URM. that still does not compensate for her low ass numbers and lack of serious, dedicated effort. i haven't seen her amcas, but i know her enough to be pretty sure about what's in there. i don't know her secret, but maybe she used her ankles as earings on the pictures she sent to adcoms.... i'm just speculating <img src="graemlins/laughy.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughy]" />

anyway, so be it..we all lose on this one...and i brought it up cuz there's surely many more like her. total crap. by the way..how did this thread turn into a fruitless discussion about harvard's grade inflation? please folks, stick to the subject.
 
Hey Guys
I truly believe that all of us who want to study medicine hard enough deserve and should be given a chance to study it. Every single one of us is working as hard as possible to be competitive and get in a school. But we need to understand that this person could have had issues and problems that led to the dismal MCAT score. May be her essay had some real convincing reason and desire that awarded her the interview spots.
The fact is that none of us know whatthe adcom saw in this candidate. Anyhow, I think I can make this assumption that getting accepted to a school is as much as game of luck as it a game of numbers. So, let's just wait can see what happens in the end.
A. Caveman: Do keep us all posted.
Good luck to all.
Ciao
 
I wish UCLA gave 50% A's!!!!!!!! Instead we gotta fight for the 10% A's that they hand out...oh well .
 
Just my .02, but it seems that you can't possibly know her well enough considering you JUST found out she's Puerto Rican.
 
Caveman maybe your stats are wayyyyy too good for those schools and they knew that there was no way in hell that you would go there?

What does it matter if that girl gets an interview? Maybe she had a really stellar personal statement? Maybe English is not her first language? Maybe she's overcome significant hardships during her life? Maybe she has more extracurricular activities than you know about? Maybe her letters of rec made her walk on water?

..or lastly...maybe AMCAS sent out the wrong mcat with her application (hey it happened to me! they dropped my score by 12 points...maybe they raised hers..who knows)

Whatever the case may be she didn't steal your interview. I guarantee you that there are other people with your same stats that probably got interviews....so it boils down to something that they/she had or did that you didn't do. Whatever the case may be, your time would be better spent by focusing on what you're doing and not worrying about what other people are doing.
 
Cave-

Your anger is entirely justified. We're told from day one (from adcoms, advisors, and med students) that your MCAT score is your identity in this vulgar process - NOW, AFTER MANY OF US HAVE WORKED OUR @$$es OFF TO GET A DECENT SCORE IS NOT THE TIME TO "CONSIDER OTHER FACTORS!" THIS SHOULD BE A MERITOCRACY!

Personally, I think adcoms are so prideful and full of powerlust that they intentionally make the process less of a meritocracy and more of a random game. It solidifies their power.
 
Originally posted by idiot:
•Cave-

We're told from day one (from adcoms, advisors, and med students) that your MCAT score is your identity in this vulgar process - NOW, AFTER MANY OF US HAVE WORKED OUR @$$es OFF TO GET A DECENT SCORE IS NOT THE TIME TO "CONSIDER OTHER FACTORS!" THIS SHOULD BE A MERITOCRACY!

•••

I don't agree at all that we are told the MCAT is all that counts. If MCAT score were the only factor people would be admitted without an interview or essay or practice vision based purely on MCAT. The system is far from perfect but these additional factors are included to try and take into account 'merit' in other areas.
Click to expand...
 
Idiot I completely disagree with you. From day 1 I was told that if I had a really high MCAT, a really high GPA, tons of volunteer and extracurricular stuff...then I still couldn't be 100% sure that I'd be accepted. I was told from day 1 that the whole process depended alot on luck and that there was no rhyme or reason to the process.
 
To add to what UCLA2000 said, it also really matters how you come across in your personal statement, what you have done with your time and your life, how committed you seem to the field of medicine, and how unique you are. Anything that distinguishes positively you from the rest (surely grades and scores and working as a drone in a lab and volunteering 5 hours a week at a hospital don't cut it--most people applying to med school have these credentials) will be looked upon favorably by an adcom and will bring you just that much closer to being accepted.

It takes more than numbers to get into school. And this is how it should be.

mma
 
No, what we're told is that the foundation of a medical school application is numbers. Once academic competency has been demonstrated, ECs, volunteer time, "practice vision," ability to sound sincere in print...etc, guide the final decisions.

UCLA2000, you were told excellent numbers don't GUARANTEE an acceptance? Of course not - but, the converse should be true, namely, poor numbers should exclude an acceptance.

What we are commenting on is the frustration of a fellow applicant who has a strong MCAT (did his job), yet is being overlooked while someone over 1 st dev below the national average is busy interviewing.

Anybody want to challenge me and post that what their advisor EMPHASIZED to them about getting into med school was how to articulate their "practice vision," or where to spend 8hr/wk volunteering????? Scores were emphasized to all of us, they're supposed to be your invitation to interview. Everything else should come into play AFTER that.
 
mma-

You said

...anything to establish yourself as unique comes into play...more than academic credentials...every applicant has those....

That's Cave's outrage!! Not everyone has the academic credentials, namely, the girl he is referring to. If she did, there wouldn't be any complaint.
 
I am not saying that scores don't matter--they obviously do. What I am saying is that they are not everything. You can have perfect scores, but still be unconvincing--maybe all you have is scores or some "filler" ECs or no obvious commitment or are in some other was NOT special. Conversely, you can have below average scores but be just the opposite--perhaps you have published an important paper, show some dedication to research or to urban or rural medicine, have overcome extreme personal hardship, seem like a really cool person.

The point is, scores a foundation. Some foundations are stronger than others, but all foundations are just useless deposits of concrete on the ground if nothing is built on top.

mma

And regarding the scores of the girl in question--yes, they are not as high. But she must have something else going for her, which maybe many people with the normal higher scores don't. (And I mean more than being a URM. I know someone who is non-URM, who has a 22MCAT and still got into 2 med schools. This year.)
 
idiot, welcome to the real world buddy. in business, you don't always see the guy with the best GPA or best scores get the job. you have other factors, personality, ambition, diversity, and most important, contacts that come into play. med school is no different. admissions officers know that MCAT and GPA scores themselves don't make a great doctor. there are so many other intangibles that it's foolish to say because you have a 35 and that other person has a 30, you are more qualified. it's tough, and like any other field, luck is involved.

btw, whoever told you that MCAT and GPA are the sole reasons for admissions is a joke.
 
How confident would you feel applying with a 21? And exactly how much damn personality comes across in a one-page essay written specifically to convince the reader of your endless compassion, ambition, maturity, endurance, and charisma?

My point is not that "other considerations" are not important or not a factor, rather that they should be used to make final decisions between otherwise equally credentialed applicants, not as a substitute for pounding the academic pavement.

By the way, any more advice you could give me about "the real world" would be greatly appreciated and gaurded like a precious jewel.
 
idiot, tell me the percentage of people with 21 that get accepted. then find out those with a 30 or 35 and i think you'll see that this system is actually more of a meritocracy than not. you're focusing on a few individuals out of tens of thousands that got interviews with lower scores, and i would bet that there's something in their application, whether it be in the recs, work experience, URM status or essays that distinguises them.

UCLA2000, you were told excellent numbers don't GUARANTEE an acceptance? Of course not - but, the converse should be true, namely, poor numbers should exclude an acceptance.••

i think the converse of the 1st statement is that poor numbers does NOT guarantee a rejection.

anyways, scores don't always make the doctor and there will be cases where the student with lower scores will get accepted over one with higher stats because the adcoms think that person is a good fit in their school or has a special quality that would make them a better doctor. but, in the end, scores generally dictate acceptance rates.
Click to expand...
 
Guy's...I was definitely very shocked with grade inflation procedure's. I came from 3rd world country about 8 yrs ago and Harvard and stanford are the two universities that I would do anything to get inn. But obviously it's very competitive and I was just not that material i guess.Getting into to UC was just like harvard for me..someone who had spent 17 years without speaking english, but however... I did took every class that was offered by harvard or yale's alumi. My point here is I was very crazy about harvard and some people I met had a big ego's about where they went and all that half hour of B/S, later I also learned that harvard gives out first preference to their alumni's kids..but do u guys think that all those alumni jr's are 4.0 student or they are all very intelligent, but if for eg: bush can get in to harvard's MBA program with a very below average scores infact he was social science major at yale's undergrad and never took upper division math class. Several months ago when bush was runing for an office times came out with their academic history, if i remembered correctly he didn't score more then 1200 on sat's, then him getting into grad program shows that this system is definitely very unfair or Corupt. Let's see for instance, harvard grad get out with 3.8 and do average or little above average on MCAT he do have about 30% chance, but in my school where we had 300-500 students in O'chem lecture class and the curve set was barely C-, so getting a "b" in o'chem must be not that far off from harvard's "A" cause most undergrade students had above 1450 on their sat's. Well anyways just a thought. But I would still luv Harvard.
 
loverboy, SATs and grades were scaled very differently 30+ years ago, so you can't really compare Bush with this issue.
 
Corleone thanks for saving me the time by posting that response. It's exactly what I was thinking too.

Poor scores don't GUARANTEE that you will be denied....but they sure as hell don't help your application.

Look at the percentage of people that get in with low scores and you'll realize that they must have had something going for them. I know someone from UCLA with a 3.97 and 36 MCAT. He's been denied from damn near every school he applied to (without an interview). He interviewed at 2 schools and he is pretty sure he'll get denied.

Why? Well because he's one of those really smart people with almost no social skills. Do YOU want a doctor like that?
 
just because some CC classes are easy doesn't mean they all are. utter bs.

So there are no easy courses at universities? Really? news to me.
 
Like I said, the scores should be an invitation to interview - THEN other factors used to distinguish amongst the academically proven. If your friend is a deadbeat, no, I don't want him as my doctor. Remember, not everyone that gets interviewed get accepted. All the "icing" should come into play during the interview stage.

Don't forget we're discussing the decision by at least two adcoms to grant an interview to someone who scored 1 st dev below the national average - IN LIGHT of the fact that one of our own, with a nice score, 30+, 3 st devs above the ave, currently has no interviews. The system is designed to find the most compentent and compassionate candidates. Compentency is easy to determine, it's fairly objective and rests on numbers. The other side should be determined in the interview stage. Basically, the most compassionate of the competent should be accepted. This is the design and when you see flagrant violations, anger is justified.
 
As far as the Harvard thing is concerned:

I think it's unfair to say that Harvard is inherently more difficult than the State U. There are plently of state univerities out there that are very well respected and hard as hell to get A's at. UMichigan, UTexas, UWashington, UNebraska all come to mind. I knew plently of kids that went to Harvard (I went to undergrad in Boston as well) that were above-average. But they were not all gifted geniuses either. I would say the kids I know from MIT and Rice are, in the main, far more intelligent. There is a huge amount of grade inflation at Harvard (and other private schools, as well). I'm not sure if all of these students deserve to get a B or higher. I will say that they all think that they do.
I think there is an over-the-top mystique about Harvard that is a bit unjustified. It's just not all that.

P.S. I've worked 3x harder at the state school that I'm doing my post-bacc at than the entire 4 years at my "top-tier" private school.
 
Like I said, the scores should be an invitation to interview - THEN other factors used to distinguish amongst the academically proven. If your friend is a deadbeat, no, I don't want him as my doctor. Remember, not everyone that gets interviewed get accepted. All the "icing" should come into play during the interview stage. ••

Most schools do not use only GPA and MCAT scores to decide whom to interview. If they did this, they would miss out on offering admission to some applicants who, despite having lower than average scores, have strengths in other areas. That is the reason the personal statement, coursework, exteracurricular activities, letters of recommendation, etc are included on the primary and secondary applications. I would much rather that admissions committees look at the whole package rather than just grades and test scores. Some people are just not good test-takers and others struggle for good grades or may have experienced hardships that are partially responsible. Therefore, it would be myopic to look only at "the numbers" at the pre-interview stage.

I know plenty of individuals who have great numbers, but who are egotistical, anti-social people who care nothing about others. We would be doing a disservice to not screen out these people.

Patients want doctors who are compassionate and who listen to them. Although you may not realize it, medicine is much more an art than a science in many ways. It requires doctors who are not only intelligent and competent, but who can show compassion and develop a rapport with patients.
Click to expand...
 
well spoken vader.

i'm just glad that idiot is not the head of admissions at the schools i applied to! :p
 
everybody here is right...and idiot is just as right, if not more right than anyone else. he's not making ridiculous claims. all he's saying is that numbers should reflect who gets interviewed more than other qualities. yes, personal characteristics should be weighed very carefully, but if you can't cut the numbers (make up for low mcat with strong gpa or vice versa), then how can you be expected to cut them in medical school. med schools don't only look for people that will make good doctors because they're 'so darn sweet.' they look for people that will do well in medical school AND make good doctors because they're 'sweet.' being very sweet don't make up for incompetence at the numbers portion because then they can't trust you in medical school classes. for those reasons places use numbers for the most part in determining who gets interviewed. i don't know much about this girl, and i did JUST find out she's puerto rican, but i know her enough to tell you that her research is slack, her personal statement must be slack (she hasn't done anything THAT special and she's not an impressive person who's overcome odds...in fact, she's almost not an URM because she's wealthy as hell and has never been "disadvantaged") and obviously her numbers just don't cut the mustard. her application is weak, and i'm fairly sure of this. her ec's suck too...this isn't a girl who's spent hours in a nursing home or whatever..i know her..she's a jappy, scrubby girl and student. let's say i'm wrong...let's say her personal statemnt is pulitzer prize worthy. it's a goshdarn masterpiece! that still don't make up for her numbers or work (in work i include efforts at EC's, etc). how can people trust her to do well in medical school enough to grant her an interview which greatly improves her chances of acceptance. an interview means you're acceptable. how the hell does anyone have the impression (they're wrong..i know this) that she's gonna make it in medical school. by the way..no amount of "compassion" and other bullcrap is gonna make up for a professional's incompetence. and i'm willing to wager that a person who can't make the grades will not a competent doctor make. perhaps she'd be a great nurse and listen to patient's stories, and hug them all night and day...but she won't be very responsible or hardworking at keeping them healthy. i believe that schools believe this too...so why the hell are they giving this scrub a chance. that chance should go to someone who will honor the profession, not eat **** all day as she does...that slot should have gone to one of us....

i've made Many points in this post...when you reply don't overlook anything i've written. i have noticed that in idiot's posts, he covers many points and when i read people's replies to his post, they seem to have overlooked some things he said, because they make inquiries or state things that he's already talked about..they're not rebutting him, they say it like idiot forgot to think about this...that would irritate someone who's gone through the trouble of writing this much. before you post, make sure you've read everything i wrote. thanks
 
I agree with most of you on this topic, (including you caveman), but I cannot pass full judgement on someone who I don't know. You're all right...gpa/mcat/recs/EC's/research/personality etc are all factors, but I am sure there was SOMETHING substantial that stuck out on her application, and that's why a school took a chance and interviewed her. I think it would be unfair to say "I barely know her but I'm sure there's nothing special about her"...how do any of us know? Maybe she has an inside connection, maybe she HAS overcome a huge obstacle in life and isn't so willing to share it w/everyone, maybe she has a medical condition that exposed her into the field from early on...etc...the point is, we can only speculate...but then again, what do I know? I'm just a predental student :rolleyes:

Good luck to everyone :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

soapjala
  • Question
Gap Years, Medical Jobs, Waiting for Interviews and Stuff
Replies
1
Views
460
Reanox24
Reanox24
I
Looking for guidance for rec letters/other stuff
Replies
4
Views
420
jailedgoat
J
H
  • Question
Do I have to do clinical stuff for my gap year?
Replies
8
Views
992
frosty42
F
O
I have reason to believe I have a bad LOR - but my application has been submitted. What can I do?
Replies
2
Views
948
eigen
eigen
L
Repeating stuff from primary in secondaries
Replies
1
Views
444
stickgirl390
stickgirl390
Top