Do Ad-Coms adjust for the varying rigor at different undergrad schools?

[sliceofbread136]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Daamn lol. Should've gone to UT... would've been better and cheaper.

Definitely gonna be researching ahead on residency so I dont drop the ball again.

The reputation won't make any difference, don't worry about that. Now the $$$... personally I wouldn't have paid more for Baylor, but I'm sure you had a good time there so I wouldn't worry about that either.

All you have to worry about is application fun

 

[Status Sciaticus]

The reputation won't make any difference, don't worry about that. Now the $$$... personally I wouldn't have paid more for Baylor, but I'm sure you had a good time there so I wouldn't worry about that either.

All you have to worry about is application fun

LOL ill let you know if I ever get that UTSW II.

 

[inycepoo]

Going to stand up a little bit for my compatriot here (Dbate, why can't I message you???), though it will give me away, but ah who cares.

Also, the 3.58 GPA is the average for the entire school.

All science classes at Yale are curved to a B+ (GPA=3.33). To get an A-, you have to be in the top 40%. To get an A, you have to be in the top 15%.

Being in the top 15% of a school like Yale is probably harder than being in the top 15% at pretty much every other school in the country.

So the line about grade inflation is bogus when you consider how hard it is to get an A or A-.

Could not agree more. In my view, most premeds here silently gun. They may not be obnoxious or arrogant about it, but their ability to synthesize material as they do and consistently go above and beyond expectations is mind-boggling, and I daresay this is not the norm around the country. (Note that I am not saying this is nonexistent at state schools, as I can only speak for us.)

Bias doesn't matter if you have objective data to back it up.

In that case, what you call bias is simply reality.

You haven't offered a shred of reasoning to believe that SAT/ACT and gpa aren't good metrics of caliber. Nor intelligently refuted anything I said.

But I wouldn't expect anything less from a state school kid.

P.S. Yeah, I am that big of a dick.

You are right. As I re-read it, what I wrote is not correct.

I should have said:

Over 75% of Wisconsin students are below the bottom 25% of Yale students.

Okay, as a fellow troller who believes in the art form very deeply, that is just plain goddamn funny. lollllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

Um, the average MCAT of Yale students is a 34. What do you think the average MCAT score of Wisconsin premeds is?

Couldn't find a better example of my comments after the first quote. I never thought this was that impressive until I realized what the percentiles were.

In short, I stick to what I've said before: not everyone at Yale truly deserve the preferential treatment that we're given, as I do know a couple of real slackers who will get away with the tiniest amount of work if given the chance, and you'd never guess it looking that their stats (they're "average"). How adcoms want to view us is honestly a choice of their own, and while I don't support this sentiment as wildly as I should seeing as how it benefits me (see Clarence Thomas on affirmative action), there are legitimate reasons behind such a philosophy. There are obviously state school and public Ivy kids who are smarter and better equipped to deal with med school than us, but roughly on average, such preferential treatment just may be justified.

 

[Dbate]

Going to stand up a little bit for my compatriot here (Dbate, why can't I message you???), though it will give me away, but ah who cares.

I don't have the option for private messaging. It is not a personal thing, but I disabled it in general. I was getting odd messages from random people.

Could not agree more. In my view, most premeds here silently gun. They may not be obnoxious or arrogant about it, but their ability to synthesize material as they do and consistently go above and beyond expectations is mind-boggling, and I daresay this is not the norm around the country. (Note that I am not saying this is nonexistent at state schools, as I can only speak for us.)

Yeah, it gets really intense. I always imagined it wouldn't affect me, but by senior year I was studying for at least 1 week before every test. And for finals, I was studying until 3 or 4 am the night before the test and then woke up at 7 am to get more studying in before taking the test. All to end up just barely making an A-.

Okay, as a fellow troller who believes in the art form very deeply, that is just plain goddamn funny. lollllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

One of my fears is that some people won't realize the intent of my posts, and think I'm serious when I say some of these things 🙁

Couldn't find a better example of my comments after the first quote. I never thought this was that impressive until I realized what the percentiles were.

Its crazy considering that the best med schools in the country have averages for matriculants in the 35-36 range. Basically, the average rando premed at Yale is on par with matriculated students at Cornell, Columbia, UCSF, and (close to) Harvard.

Heck, even my top two instate choices (UTSouthwestern and Baylor) have lower MCAT averages than Yale's premeds.

 

[Dbate]

A good example to illustrate my point about the rigor of the school mattering when interpeting GPA is this:

At Yale, the science classes are curved to a B+.
The average MCAT score of premeds applying (not those accepted) from Yale is a 34.


If we considered the MCAT to be just an undergrad exam given to students for a class, then that means to get a B+ you would need to get a 34 on the MCAT.

To get an A would require you to get at least a 36 or 37 on the MCAT.


This is why people at top schools look at a high GPA average and don't believe there is grade inflation. It takes a ton of effort and intelligence to just be average, let alone to excel.

 

[alpinism]

A good example to illustrate my point about the rigor of the school mattering when interpeting GPA is this:

At Yale, the science classes are curved to a B+.
The average MCAT score of premeds applying (not those accepted) from Yale is a 34.


If we considered the MCAT to be just an undergrad exam given to students for a class, then that means to get a B+ you would need to get a 34 on the MCAT.

To get an A would require you to get at least a 36 or 37 on the MCAT.


This is why people at top schools look at a high GPA average and don't believe there is grade inflation. It takes a ton of effort and intelligence to just be average, let alone to excel.

Just in case you're not trolling, you do realize that just because the average Yale student applying has a 34 doesn't mean the average Yale student taking the MCAT gets a 34? Even at Yale, there are plenty of people who take the MCAT and don't get a high enough score to apply or who have to take the test multiple times (you are a perfect example).

I mean let's be honest, Yalies are just a bunch of crimson rejects...






(And George W. Bush)

 

[mcloaf]

Just in case you're not trolling, you do realize that just because the average Yale student applying has a 34 doesn't mean the average Yale student taking the MCAT gets a 34? Even at Yale, there are plenty of people who take the MCAT and don't get a high enough score to apply or who have to take the test multiple times (you are a perfect example).

I mean let's be honest, Yalies are just a bunch of crimson rejects...






(And George W. Bush)

He's pretty much full troll at this point.

You just had to break up the Yale pep rally going on ITT.

 

[inycepoo]

Just in case you're not trolling, you do realize that just because the average Yale student applying has a 34 doesn't mean the average Yale student taking the MCAT gets a 34? Even at Yale, there are plenty of people who take the MCAT and don't get a high enough score to apply or who have to take the test multiple times (you are a perfect example).

How's he a perfect example? He has a 35. Are you saying that's not high enough or he took it multiple times?

The average is indeed 34, even 35 if you round. Anecdotally, I haven't heard of a single person scoring low enough on the MCAT that has precluded their applying. Believe that as you may, but where'd you get "plenty of people from"? Generalization?

 

[Status Sciaticus]

How's he a perfect example? He has a 35. Are you saying that's not high enough or he took it multiple times?

The average is indeed 34, even 35 if you round. Anecdotally, I haven't heard of a single person scoring low enough on the MCAT that has precluded their applying. Believe that as you may, but where'd you get "plenty of people from"? Generalization?

what he was saying was that the 34 is the average for the students applying during a given cycle. Naturally more people take the MCAT than apply (70K examinations vs. 40K applications). And I am sure the average of 34 they use is the best score.

So a Yale student couldve scored a 25, but on the next one scored a 35. And Yale will take the 35 for their statistics not average it to a 30 and use that.

 

[Euxox]

There are also plenty of people who go to state schools that do poorly on the MCAT and then don't apply, so I don't understand why you think that discredits the Yale MCAT average while leaving state school MCAT averages holy and unquestionable. I'm also willing to wager that the premed attrition rate at state schools is a lot higher, so if anything their average MCAT scores are probably more inflated than Yale's.

P.S. My school was founded by a bunch of Yalies, so I might be a bit biased. 🙂

 

[inycepoo]

what he was saying was that the 34 is the average for the students applying during a given cycle. Naturally more people take the MCAT than apply (70K examinations vs. 40K applications). And I am sure the average of 34 they use is the best score.

So a Yale student couldve scored a 25, but on the next one scored a 35. And Yale will take the 35 for their statistics not average it to a 30 and use that.

Nah, that's not likely. Not to sound elitist or anything, but non-Yalies have no clue what we're like and our capabilities. I'm not even too sure what I'm up against most of the time, so taking science classes is always an "oh crap" bet. I'm sure H/P are the same. Our premed attrition happens virtually all during freshman year when they realize it's not what they want to do, not because they can't make the grade.

As mentioned above, even if it does happen on a large scale, which I'm sure it doesn't, that means other schools face even higher problems, and so all of our scores decrease and I still don't see how that changes anything.

Also, this average of 34 isn't advertised widely to the public; it's only for internal use to guide our own applicants, so there's no PR issue that they'd try to inflate the scores. It'll only harm us applicants, and that's not something they want to do because we treat our precious 95% acceptance rate highly.

It's funny. I don't believe this subject will ever be in controversial, and we all only tend to side with the side we're most familiar with, therefore leaving the others to accuse that we're biased they have no clue and vice versa. This will forever remain an Ivy vs. non-Ivy argument, the the former will be looked upon as arrogant and condescending when all we're doing is stating the truth because we go to school with some scary people.

 

[Dbate]

How's he a perfect example? He has a 35. Are you saying that's not high enough or he took it multiple times?

The average is indeed 34, even 35 if you round. Anecdotally, I haven't heard of a single person scoring low enough on the MCAT that has precluded their applying. Believe that as you may, but where'd you get "plenty of people from"? Generalization?

I did take the MCAT twice. The first time I basically only had two weeks to prepare because I was doing an internship in Europe over the summer, so I didn't really have time to study before my September test date.

I retook in January for my current score. Either way, the central argument still stands.

 

[Status Sciaticus]

Nah, that's not likely. Not to sound elitist or anything, but non-Yalies have no clue what we're like and our capabilities. I'm not even too sure what I'm up against most of the time, so taking science classes is always an "oh crap" bet. I'm sure H/P are the same. Our premed attrition happens virtually all during freshman year when they realize it's not what they want to do, not because they can't make the grade.

As mentioned above, even if it does happen on a large scale, which I'm sure it doesn't, that means other schools face even higher problems, and so all of our scores decrease and I still don't see how that changes anything.

Also, this average of 34 isn't advertised widely to the public; it's only for internal use to guide our own applicants, so there's no PR issue that they'd try to inflate the scores. It'll only harm us applicants, and that's not something they want to do because we treat our precious 95% acceptance rate highly.

It's funny. I don't believe this subject will ever be in controversial, and we all only tend to side with the side we're most familiar with, therefore leaving the others to accuse that we're biased they have no clue and vice versa. This will forever remain an Ivy vs. non-Ivy argument, the the former will be looked upon as arrogant and condescending when all we're doing is stating the truth because we go to school with some scary people.

Its apples and oranges.

Ivy leagues also have better professors, facilities, and resources. It would only be logical that their caliber would be higher due to their endowment.

State schools have more students from lower income families and a lot more first generation college students. Also they take more instate students due to their mission.

I'm not saying that its an excuse to be used for students who score lower than what they expected, but it is a mitigating factor.

Regarding the attrition rate, I really cant comment. It could be higher at Yale because of the reason you stated, but for the same reason it could be lower because they were qualified to get accepted in the first place.

We would need aggregate data regarding this point.

I did take the MCAT twice. The first time I basically only had two weeks to prepare because I was doing an internship in Europe over the summer, so I didn't really have time to study before my September test date.

I retook in January for my current score. Either way, the central argument still stands.

what was your first score?

 

[Dbate]

what was your first score?

I got a 30 (11 PS, 11 VR, 8 BS).

I had to prioritize with the limited amount of time so I focused entirely on PS, since I had taken chem a long time ago and the physics we learn in school is not related to MCAT physics basically at all (except E+M).

I had always been strong in Verbal without ever studying before (790 SAT CR, 36 ACT Reading), so I knew Verbal wouldn't be a problem.

I also tried to wing the Bio mostly from memory and it was obvious why I did poorly.

 

[inycepoo]

Its apples and oranges.

Ivy leagues also have better professors, facilities, and resources. It would only be logical that their caliber would be higher due to their endowment.

State schools have more students from lower income families and a lot more first generation college students. Also they take more instate students due to their mission.

I'm not saying that its an excuse to be used for students who score lower than what they expected, but it is a mitigating factor.

Regarding the attrition rate, I really cant comment. It could be higher at Yale because of the reason you stated, but for the same reason it could be lower because they were qualified to get accepted in the first place.

We would need aggregate data regarding this point.

Oh no, I definitely meant that attrition is lower. 99% positive.

Yes it's apples and oranges. So I don't understand all the squabble about comparing across institutions. Broken system? Hella yes.

 

[inycepoo]

I got a 30 (11 PS, 11 VR, 8 BS).

I had to prioritize with the limited amount of time so I focused entirely on PS, since I had taken chem a long time ago and the physics we learn in school is not related to MCAT physics basically at all (except E+M).

I had always been strong in Verbal without ever studying before (790 SAT CR, 36 ACT Reading), so I knew Verbal wouldn't be a problem. I also tried to wing the Bio mostly from memory and it was obvious.

What physics did you take? 170 series? 150 perhaps if you're older? Lol

 

[Dbate]

Its apples and oranges.

Ivy leagues also have better professors

This is a common misconception. From my experience at only one school (so it is limited), the professors are rather terrible. They have no incentive to teach because they know the students will just teach the material to themselves and their research is the only thing that matters for career advancement. Coupled together this results in very poor instruction in the hard sciences (chem, math, and physics moreso than bio).

 

[Dbate]

What physics did you take? 170 series? 150 perhaps if you're older? Lol

I took 180 first semester and 171 second semester (didn't take multivariable calc and it was recommended for the second semester of the 180 series).

Together, I learned very little useful physics.

 

[Euxox]

Ivy leagues also have better professors, facilities, and resources. It would only be logical that their caliber would be higher due to their endowment.

While I do think that Ivy league schools have great facilities and resources, this enhances the quality of extracurricular education, not in-class learning. The quality of in-class learning is 10% about the how good the professor is at teaching (which isn't really related to college rank in my opinion) and 90% about the work ethic of the student.

State schools have more students from lower income families and a lot more first generation college students. Also they take more instate students due to their mission.

I'm not saying that its an excuse to be used for students who score lower than what they expected, but it is a mitigating factor.

No one is "blaming" state school students for having lower MCAT averages. We are just stating that it is a fact. Whether or not that fact is a result of lower socioeconomic status is besides the point.

Anyway, all of this debating is dancing around the truth that everyone knows but neither side of the argument likes to admit. Rigorous schools get a small GPA boost in med school admissions. A 3.4 at Yale might beat out a 3.6 at OSU, but a 3.0 at Yale certainly won't.

 

[inycepoo]

This is a common misconception. From my experience at only one school (so it is limited), the professors are rather terrible. They have no incentive to teach because they know the students will just teach the material to themselves and their research is the only thing that matters for career advancement. Coupled together this results in very poor instruction in the hard sciences (chem, math, and physics moreso than bio).

Untrue. Yale will not grant tenure to a professor who has abysmal course evals. Check out Tobias Golling in 200/201; he needed to get his stuff together for 201 in order to stay.

The horrible chem and physics professors you're speaking of probably got tenure before this policy, came tenured at another college, or seriously let their teaching skills falter post-tenure. As for math, the upper level class past 225 (lin alg) are solid. It's the grad students in calc that can be hit or miss.

Upper level bio, biochem, and physics are pretty solid, though they're hard as f***.

 

[Dbate]

Untrue. Yale will not grant tenure to a professor who has abysmal course evals. Check out Tobias Golling in 200/201; he needed to get his stuff together for 201 in order to stay.

The horrible chem and physics professors you're speaking of probably got tenure before this policy, came tenured at another college, or seriously let their teaching skills falter post-tenure. As for math, the upper level class past 225 (lin alg) are solid. It's the grad students in calc that can be hit or miss.

The professors I am referring to are quite old and have been at Yale for a while, so it is believable that it occurred before the change.

One huge example is Sidney Altman. The man won a Nobel prize, but is a terrible professor. For math, I only took one semester of MATH 115 because that is all I needed for my major. But others who took 120 and such said it was pretty rough.

 

[inycepoo]

The professors I am referring to are quite old and have been at Yale for a while, so it is believable that it occurred before the change.

One huge example is Sidney Altman. The man won a Nobel prize, but is a terrible professor. For math, I only took one semester of MATH 115 because that is all I needed for my major. But others who took 120 and such said it was pretty rough.

Yeah Altman sucks. You'll notice that he no longer teaches, and Dellaporta, Kankel, and Breaker are not gonna reinstate him any time soon (genetics coordinator, director of UG studies, and department chair, all in bio, for non-Yalies). Ziegler is around because he's emeritus and can do whatever the hell he wants. All the younger professors are top-notch, especially the assistant ones fighting to stay. :thumbsup:

 

[Dbate]

Yeah Altman sucks. You'll notice that he no longer teaches, and Dellaporta, Kankel, and Breaker are not gonna reinstate him any time soon (genetics coordinator, director of UG studies, and department chair, all in bio, for non-Yalies). Ziegler is around because he's emeritus and can do whatever the hell he wants. All the younger professors are top-notch, especially the assistant ones fighting to stay. :thumbsup:

I took classes with all of the above.

Dellaporta was a huge D-bag to me and I thought his teaching was crap. Genetics was the ONLY bio class in my entire four years that I HAD to read the book to understand what was going on. Also his wife is a grade-A b*tch.

Kankel in Repro Bio was old and had this weird habit of using animations instead of lecture slides, so there were basically no powerpoint notes to go over before the test.

Ziegler for Orgo 1 was rough. But he was the fairest, most objective professor I had in college. Before the test he laid it out plain and simple, some of you are going to do well and some of you are not. Bam, honesty.


Ronald Breaker was nice in a kind of fake sort of way. Although he wouldn't hesitate to suggest that you are dumb (he pulled this on me). When I emailed him to ask my final grade in biochem, he took pains to point out that I just barely made an A-. Yes. He emphasized the just barely.
I am still going to rate him the highest of the bunch because I got a decent grade in Biochem.

 

[Cyphix]

What I'm realizing now more than ever is that there are many people on SDN who have the tendency to rationalize their school choices by downplaying the rigor of top schools. The truth is plain and simple: most people here have absolutely no idea. Most SDN users do/did not attend a top school (let's say HYPSM, I know there are other amazing schools but this is just to have a standard). Most SDN users do not understand the caliber of students (especially pre-meds) that attend these schools. Most SDN users have no idea what it's like to compete with hundreds of students who are in the 99th percentile in terms of academic achievement (SAT, GPA, MCAT, ACT, what have you). This is NOT to downplay anyone's achievement -- if you work hard, you should be proud of yourself despite where you end up. I'm just pointing out the evident ignorance at play in some of these comments. Think of it like a professional sports league -- everyone there has worked hard, but there's certainly a difference between the caliber of player in the championship team and that in a middle-ranked team. It's just math. It's just statistics. Rationalization is a common response, but it's not necessarily the most prudent one to have. In the end, everyone will get what he or she deserves.

 

[neusu]

You are right. As I re-read it, what I wrote is not correct.

I should have said:

Over 75% of Wisconsin students are below the Bottom 25% of Yale students.

Institutional charter notwithstanding (state school with a public mandate to educate people of the state vs private school to educate the best and brightest), the top 25% of Wisconsin undergraduates per year with an ACT of > 30 represents 1,806 people while the top 75% of Yale undergraduates per year with an ACT of > 31 represents 989 people.

Assuming a normal distribution (which if you're discussing percentiles I assume is true), there are more people at Wisconsin with a 35 or 36 on the ACT than Yale.

 

[TheLastofUs]

ITT some not so humble Yale brags 🙄

inb4 being called a "state school kid"

 

[inycepoo]

Institutional charter notwithstanding (state school with a public mandate to educate people of the state vs private school to educate the best and brightest), the top 25% of Wisconsin undergraduates per year with an ACT of > 30 represents 1,806 people while the top 75% of Yale undergraduates per year with an ACT of > 31 represents 989 people.

Assuming a normal distribution (which if you're discussing percentiles I assume is true), there are more people at Wisconsin with a 35 or 36 on the ACT than Yale.

Too lazy to check if your numbers are right.

Let's assume they're accurate. Yale has 5,200 undergrads, 1300 per class. U Wisconsin is gigantinormous. Are you serious right now? Did you not realize this when you multiplied the percentages by total enrollment to arrive at your calculations? It's the percentages that matter, not the sheer number.

The ignorance (yes, denial is a form of ignorance) to fact and undying desire to uproot a top school is dazzling.

 

[inycepoo]

What I'm realizing now more than ever is that there are many people on SDN who have the tendency to rationalize their school choices by downplaying the rigor of top schools. The truth is plain and simple: most people here have absolutely no idea. Most SDN users do/did not attend a top school (let's say HYPSM, I know there are other amazing schools but this is just to have a standard). Most SDN users do not understand the caliber of students (especially pre-meds) that attend these schools. Most SDN users have no idea what it's like to compete with hundreds of students who are in the 99th percentile in terms of academic achievement (SAT, GPA, MCAT, ACT, what have you). This is NOT to downplay anyone's achievement -- if you work hard, you should be proud of yourself despite where you end up. I'm just pointing out the evident ignorance at play in some of these comments. Think of it like a professional sports league -- everyone there has worked hard, but there's certainly a difference between the caliber of player in the championship team and that in a middle-ranked team. It's just math. It's just statistics. Rationalization is a common response, but it's not necessarily the most prudent one to have. In the end, everyone will get what he or she deserves.

I want to hug you.

Also, it's interesting that most top school kids do not downplay others as the latter like to downplay us, though it sometimes comes to that as we realize all sorts of rational thought has evaporated. (Plus, it's always funny.) We are merely stating facts, not trying to downplay your hard work.

So please stop downplaying ours. You have no idea what we're like, and we have no idea what your experiences are like. It's insulting.

 

[TheLastofUs]

What I'm realizing now more than ever is that there are many people on SDN who have the tendency to rationalize their school choices by downplaying the rigor of top schools. The truth is plain and simple: most people here have absolutely no idea. Most SDN users do/did not attend a top school (let's say HYPSM, I know there are other amazing schools but this is just to have a standard). Most SDN users do not understand the caliber of students (especially pre-meds) that attend these schools. Most SDN users have no idea what it's like to compete with hundreds of students who are in the 99th percentile in terms of academic achievement (SAT, GPA, MCAT, ACT, what have you). This is NOT to downplay anyone's achievement -- if you work hard, you should be proud of yourself despite where you end up. I'm just pointing out the evident ignorance at play in some of these comments. Think of it like a professional sports league -- everyone there has worked hard, but there's certainly a difference between the caliber of player in the championship team and that in a middle-ranked team. It's just math. It's just statistics. Rationalization is a common response, but it's not necessarily the most prudent one to have. In the end, everyone will get what he or she deserves.

This happens at tons of top 15 schools. Where do you think all the 2400s that the Ivies talk about rejecting go? The big issue is what happens when you go to a school with very similar academic caliber of students, yet your school doesn't grade inflate? Then you are in trouble.

 

[neusu]

Too lazy to check if your numbers are right.

Let's assume they're accurate. Yale has 5,200 undergrads, 1300 per class. U Wisconsin is gigantinormous. Are you serious right now? Did you not realize this when you multiplied the percentages by total enrollment to arrive at your calculations? It's the percentages that matter, not the sheer number.

The ignorance (yes, denial is a form of ignorance) to fact and undying desire to uproot a top school is dazzling.

Perhaps you didn't read between the lines so I'll make the connection for you. The top 75% at Yale fits within the top 25% at UW and many other large state schools. Students' individual preferences likely plays a role as to why "top" individuals attend where they do, a student choosing to attend Berkeley or Michigan over Harvard is no less competitive or intelligent.

FWIW I am at a top school, there is no need for arrogance and self righteousness.

 

[inycepoo]

This happens at tons of top 15 schools. Where do you think all the 2400s that the Ivies talk about rejecting go? The big issue is what happens when you go to a school with very similar academic caliber of students, yet your school doesn't grade inflate? Then you are screwed.

Okay I will slap a bitch if anyone ever says that science grades at Yale or HYPMS are inflated again. We are given higher averages due to the sheer toughness and extremely left-skewed (skewness is measure opposite to where most grades end up, so I'm saying most scores are in the >85 range, so no stats terminology is confused) distributions of our exams. Those with pure As in the sciences are sheer geniuses with unmatched work ethic.

Now in history or certain social sciences (women's, gender, and sexuality studies, ahem), inflation is rampant. But not natural sciences. At all.

 

[mcloaf]

Too lazy to check if your numbers are right.

Let's assume they're accurate. Yale has 5,200 undergrads, 1300 per class. U Wisconsin is gigantinormous. Are you serious right now? Did you not realize this when you multiplied the percentages by total enrollment to arrive at your calculations? It's the percentages that matter, not the sheer number.

The ignorance (yes, denial is a form of ignorance) to fact and undying desire to uproot a top school is dazzling.

It's funny because all he did is post numbers with no opinion whatsoever, and your response is to call him ignorant.

Yale is a great school. The beef ITT is with your whiny self-righteousness and militant desire to prove you're better because you go to Yale.

 

[TheLastofUs]

Okay I will slap a bitch if anyone ever says that science grades at Yale or HYPMS are inflated again. We are given higher averages due to the sheer toughness and extremely left-skewed (skewness is measure opposite to where most grades end up, so I'm saying most scores are in the >85 range, so no stats terminology is confused) distributions of our exams. Those with pure As in the sciences are sheer geniuses with unmatched work ethic.

Now in history or certain social sciences (women's, gender, and sexuality studies, ahem), inflation is rampant. But not natural sciences. At all.

So only HYPMS are deserving of higher averages, gotcha. What about a top 15 where the average in every premed class is a C+/B-? Those places aren't tough even though the GPA/SATs are nearly identical to those of HYPMS?

 

[inycepoo]

So only HYPMS are deserving of higher averages, gotcha. What about a top 15 where the average in every premed class is a C+/B-? Those places aren't tough even though the GPA/SATs are nearly identical to those of HYPMS?

Is this a hypothetical or do you actually know definitively (i.e., not anecdotal) of a top 15 curving like that? (Say Princeton and you're wrong. They're 30% As, no mandated distributions.)

 

[inycepoo]

It's funny because all he did is post numbers with no opinion whatsoever, and your response is to call him ignorant.

Yale is a great school. The beef ITT is with your whiny self-righteousness and militant desire to prove you're better because you go to Yale.

Matched only, if not more than, by the militant desire of others to downplay us just as much.

 

[TheLastofUs]

Is this a hypothetical or do you actually know definitively (i.e., not anecdotal) of a top 15 curving like that? (Say Princeton and you're wrong. They're 30% As, no mandated distributions.)

I know definitively, and this isn't a whine because I've done good, but just something to think about. Honestly though I agree with the basic point that HYPSM no adcom is going to adjust you down but I think some of the top 15 top 20 where adcoms have evidence of deflated grades can get an adjustment in the minds of adcoms.

Now outside of the top 20, I'm not too sure maybe Berkeley gets some bonus points.

 

[487806]

It's funny because all he did is post numbers with no opinion whatsoever, and your response is to call him ignorant.

Yale is a great school. The beef ITT is with your whiny self-righteousness and militant desire to prove you're better because you go to Yale.

Exactly. This thread just became fun to watch.

 

[sinombre]

Is this a hypothetical or do you actually know definitively (i.e., not anecdotal) of a top 15 curving like that? (Say Princeton and you're wrong. They're 30% As, no mandated distributions.)

I can confirm, I attended all 15 top-15 institutions.

 

[gettheleadout]

Nah, that's not likely. Not to sound elitist or anything, but non-Yalies have no clue what we're like and our capabilities. I'm not even too sure what I'm up against most of the time, so taking science classes is always an "oh crap" bet. I'm sure H/P are the same. Our premed attrition happens virtually all during freshman year when they realize it's not what they want to do, not because they can't make the grade.

🤣

Yes, us poor non-Ivy students can't possibly fathom the staggering intellect of a thousand Yalies.

Okay I will slap a bitch if anyone ever says that science grades at Yale or HYPMS are inflated again. We are given higher averages due to the sheer toughness and extremely left-skewed (skewness is measure opposite to where most grades end up, so I'm saying most scores are in the >85 range, so no stats terminology is confused) distributions of our exams. Those with pure As in the sciences are sheer geniuses with unmatched work ethic.

Now in history or certain social sciences (women's, gender, and sexuality studies, ahem), inflation is rampant. But not natural sciences. At all.

Though we can certainly fathom their maturity.

 

[inycepoo]

Perhaps you didn't read between the lines so I'll make the connection for you. The top 75% at Yale fits within the top 25% at UW and many other large state schools. Students' individual preferences likely plays a role as to why "top" individuals attend where they do, a student choosing to attend Berkeley or Michigan over Harvard is no less competitive or intelligent.

FWIW I am at a top school, there is no need for arrogance and self righteousness.

Accepted and accepted. Perhaps "ignorant" was too strong a diction, I apologize. That's a much different conclusion than your final line previously, which was made in response to the somewhat inappropriate jab (though out of jest) made by my compatriot.

It doesn't matter where you go. Neither does it ever. I wonder if my views would be taken differently if I said I went to Berkeley. Experience tells me that it would, sadly enough.

 

[487806]

Nah, that's not likely. Not to sound elitist or anything, but non-Yalies have no clue what we're like and our capabilities. I'm not even too sure what I'm up against most of the time, so taking science classes is always an "oh crap" bet. I'm sure H/P are the same. Our premed attrition happens virtually all during freshman year when they realize it's not what they want to do, not because they can't make the grade.

As mentioned above, even if it does happen on a large scale, which I'm sure it doesn't, that means other schools face even higher problems, and so all of our scores decrease and I still don't see how that changes anything.

Also, this average of 34 isn't advertised widely to the public; it's only for internal use to guide our own applicants, so there's no PR issue that they'd try to inflate the scores. It'll only harm us applicants, and that's not something they want to do because we treat our precious 95% acceptance rate highly.

It's funny. I don't believe this subject will ever be in controversial, and we all only tend to side with the side we're most familiar with, therefore leaving the others to accuse that we're biased they have no clue and vice versa. This will forever remain an Ivy vs. non-Ivy argument, the the former will be looked upon as arrogant and condescending when all we're doing is stating the truth because we go to school with some scary people.

This actually sounds more like HYP vs everything else argument. Unless you hear the same at Brown and Cornell 🙂smack:)

 

[TheLastofUs]

I can confirm, I attended all 15 top-15 institutions.

I was top 15 institution

 

[487806]

🤣

Yes, us poor non-HYP students can't possibly fathom the staggering intellect of a thousand Yalies.

Fixed.

 

[inycepoo]

🤣

Yes, us poor non-Ivy students can't possibly fathom the staggering intellect of a thousand Yalies.

Though we can certainly fathom their maturity.

That was not what I meant, though the jabs at maturity do more to demonstrate your own than anything else.

OP was referring to the phenomenon of being in a cell bio class where the average is a 92 before the final and thus scoring a 91 winds you up with a B+, thus granting a little justification to the preferential adcom treatment.

 

[imnamerican]

The beef ITT is with your whiny self-righteousness and militant desire to prove you're better because you go to Yale.

I'm pretty sure this isn't what he's trying to say, but I agree that his defensive tone is making him come off that way.

 

[mcloaf]

I'm pretty sure this isn't what he's trying to say, but I agree that his defensive tone is making him come off that way.

I think you're right, but I can only address the impressions he's giving with his posts.

 

[gettheleadout]

That was not what I meant, though the jabs at maturity do more to demonstrate your own than anything else.

Nice try. No reasonably intelligent person would equate calling you out as immature with saying what you did.

 

[inycepoo]

I'm pretty sure this isn't what he's trying to say, but I agree that his defensive tone is making him come off that way.

It wouldn't have become defensive if others didn't try to turn facts that were objectively stated against us and non-jokingly tried to undermine us in the first place. This was a peaceful thread before that.

I fight fire with fire.

(P.S. Plus typing this much this fast on an iPhone is pretty damn hard.)

 

[mcloaf]

(P.S. Plus typing this much this fast on an iPhone is pretty damn hard.)

Even for a Yalie?


😛

Couldn't resist.

 

[gettheleadout]

It wouldn't have become defensive if others didn't try to turn facts that were objectively stated against us and non-jokingly tried to undermine us in the first place. This was a peaceful thread before that.

I fight fire with fire.

(P.S. Plus typing this much this fast on an iPhone is pretty damn hard.)

"So much for those rigorous Yale chemistry classes!"

- See, this would be immature if I meant it to be an actual comment toward Yale. Recognizing immaturity isn't hard.