CC clarifications??

[michiganblue08]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Can anyone tell me why CC sucks so bad on SDN and in the application process (especially when it comes to BCMP)?? There are plenty of four year universities that accept just about anyone with a pulse, so how can these CC classes be so much easier than such universities? And now people are saying that some CC's are "prestigious" and there is a heirarchy of CC's. How can a CC that accepts anyone with a HS diploma be "prestigious"?

 

[GreenShirt]

Well bottom rung 4 university=CC, however top 10 university > CC.

 

[Droopy Snoopy]

Some people like to jet off to the junior college down the road after they get a C in Organic at the university. That looks bad. But it's not so much that the classes are easier (they are, I went to a CC for a year and a half), it's that spending 2 years at a CC kind of puts you behind the pitch as far as the rest of your app is concerned. Two-year colleges are generally ill-equipped to deal with pre-professional students in terms of opportunities for research, volunteerism, leadership activities, etc. Most of the instructors are not Ph.D's and therefore of lesser value when it comes to LORs. Plus in terms of gpa, being able to mix it up a little in terms of easy/hard classes helps those attending a university from the start, whereas spending 2 years at a CC means you're taking all lower-level stuff followed by strictly upper level stuff after transfer. So instead of having your transition adjustment during freshman year followed by three years of progress, you leave open the possibility of the sticker shock followed by a downward trend with the harder coursework.

 

[Flopotomist]

Some people like to jet off to the junior college down the road after they get a C in Organic at the university. That looks bad. But it's not so much that the classes are easier (they are, I went to a CC for a year and a half), it's that spending 2 years at a CC kind of puts you behind the pitch as far as the rest of your app is concerned. Two-year colleges are generally ill-equipped to deal with pre-professional students in terms of opportunities for research, volunteerism, leadership activities, etc. Most of the instructors are not Ph.D's and therefore of lesser value when it comes to LORs. Plus in terms of gpa, being able to mix it up a little in terms of easy/hard classes helps those attending a university from the start, whereas spending 2 years at a CC means you're taking all lower-level stuff followed by strictly upper level stuff after transfer. So instead of having your transition adjustment during freshman year followed by three years of progress, you leave open the possibility of the sticker shock followed by a downward trend with the harder coursework.

I agree with SOME of the points above, and disagree with others.

In terms of quality of education, I have been at both a 4 yr UC (UCSC) and a CC, and frankly found the CC gave me a BETTER education (smaller class size, more access to the prof. etc) so disagree with the suggestion that the 4 year is by default academically better.

Having said that, there is a stigma associated with the 2 yr schools, but that stigma is IF you are a student at a 4 yr and then go take the classes at a 2 yr school while you are enrolled at the 4 yr.

If you are a non-trad, and need pre-reqs, I think it is a perfectly fine way to go.

The poster above IS correct though in suggesting that you will be limited in what access you will have with regards to research opportunities doing this. It also isn't ideal if you are looking for a good LOR as a LOR from a CC won't be viewed as well (unfortunately).

 

[TexPre-Med]

I did my traveling. 3 four year universities and 1 CC. The CC was by FAR the easiest thing I have ever done in my life. I made the stupid mistake of taking a chem class in CC had it put me FAR behind. I aced the class (straight 100's) and learned nothing.

It is only a research project of n=1 (take it for what it is worth), but I would stay as far away from CC's as possible.

 

[michiganblue08]

I did my traveling. 3 four year universities and 1 CC. The CC was by FAR the easiest thing I have ever done in my life. I made the stupid mistake of taking a chem class in CC had it put me FAR behind. I aced the class (straight 100's) and learned nothing.

It is only a research project of n=1 (take it for what it is worth), but I would stay as far away from CC's as possible.

I'm not talking about LOR's and the application process. Again, WHY is it EASIER than "average" four year universities? do CC's just have a higher gpa average in general? It doesn't make sense for for a guy at Podunk U to sail through cc. Not when the average student is the same and classes are curved to a certain degree.

 

[michiganblue08]

In terms of quality of education, I have been at both a 4 yr UC (UCSC) and a CC, and frankly found the CC gave me a BETTER education (smaller class size, more access to the prof. etc) so disagree with the suggestion that the 4 year is by default academically better.

Was the CC a lot easier for you?

 

[mahasanti]

I went to a CC for two years and found it easier than my university (for the most part). Maybe one of the reasons is that they had to grade a lot easier in order to not flunk the whole class! They just didn't expect as much from the students and you could get away with a lot of stuff that just doesn't fly at the university. I hardly studied at all to get A's at the CC. I was in the library way too much to pull A's at the university.

 

[aspirationMD]

I have mixed feelings about this, though I lean more towards CC being easier (I am at one currently, well dual enrolled anyway) Strangely, my writing grade is far worse at the CC, I somehow got a C on one paper and that frankly (up until then) had never happened. At the university I got mostly A's on my papers. I won't take any science courses except maybe an intro to chem here at the CC, because I feel like I'd learn more at the university and I worry about how it will look to adcoms. I will say all of my current teachers have Ph.D's, though two of them are retired. I definitely feel like they are just as good as any University Prof's.

 

[kakashi74]

I'm not talking about LOR's and the application process. Again, WHY is it EASIER than "average" four year universities? do CC's just have a higher gpa average in general? It doesn't make sense for for a guy at Podunk U to sail through cc. Not when the average student is the same and classes are curved to a certain degree.

You have to look at the type of people going to CC's. GENERALLY they are the ones who were not so hot in high school and couldn't get in to a 4 year. Whether the prof says so or not, every class is in some sense curved. So if you are in a classroom full of these not so hot people, of course it will be easier to get an A. The prof has to teach at a level where most of the students understand.
There are some who did not do so good in HS, but decided to turn their life around. They start out at a CC, transfer to a 4 year and do well. However, the majority of those at a CC can not compete at the same level.

 

[postbacker]

Not all CCs are created equal...there are CCs that are feeders for Harvard undergrad and plenty of other "top tier" 4 year schools have these kinds of linkages...where I live, CCs have guaranteed admission for the top students to finish college at the top tier state flagship university...

Unlike the "conspiracy theories" on this forum, people don't typically go to CCs for the purpose of gaming med school admissions - they go because CCs accommodate students with full time jobs by having evening classes, and they have fees and tuition that are very affordable (they charge by the hour - a 3 hour course at my local CC costs less than $300, all fees included - at the nearby 4 year public, first it is not possible to enroll part-time in a degree program, and the cost per course for instate students is much, much higher than the CC)...

It is fun to read all the angst on SDN over CCs, majors, undergrad school rankings, etc. A high percentage of the posters on this forum are still in college and still have the "rankings" and "superiority" mindset they had when applying for college, and they just can't seem to understand what med school admissions is really about: academic excellence demonstrated by high grades and high MCAT, combined with a demonstrable passion for medicine, with no magic "major" or any short list of "highly ranked" undergrad schools having any edge in the process...

Wherever you go to college, and whatever your major, strive to be in the top 1 to 2 percent of your class, and you will be well on your way to medical school...

 

[GreenShirt]

It doesn't have to do with the quality of the education. It's the student body that's the difference because the students you're competeing with at a good university are tougher to beat on a curve than the students you'll encounter at a CC. In other words, it'll be easier to get an A in a class full of CC students than a class full of students filtering into top 10 med schools.