Do adcoms pay attention to certain courses, such as physiology, or just give attention to GPA

[deleted738762]

I have taken quite a few physiology courses over the years, simply because I like studying it and I think most of what you learn in medical school has a lot of physio in it. Would someone who has excelled in many physiology courses stand out to an adcom? Or do to they just glance over the courses and pay more attention to GPA.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gyngyn]

gpa

 

[deleted738762]

gpa

Serious? If so, Im assuming it's because it's unrealistic to view at all the applicants courses? Well let's say you weed out what students look good, then do you compare courses?

 

[TheBiologist]

Serious? If so, Im assuming it's because it's unrealistic to view at all the applicants courses? Well let's say you weed out what students look good, then do you compare courses?

I am wondering the same

 

[gyngyn]

Serious? If so, Im assuming it's because it's unrealistic to view at all the applicants courses? Well let's say you weed out what students look good, then do you compare courses?

Everybody has a gpa.
We only get into the "weeds" much, much later (if at all).
We don't compare applicants to each other.

 

[deleted738762]

Everybody has a gpa.
We only get into the "weeds" much, much later (if at all).
We don't compare applicants to each other.

I see. However, surely you pay attention to patterns in transcripts if anything, right? Such as trends, but not courses?

Also, if you don't compare applicants to each other, then what criteria do you use to judge? Just standards you set? If one applicant had 200 hours of volunteering the other had 300, you might then choose the one with 200 because you don't compare. Or, did you mean you don't compare when it comes to courses?

 

[TheBiologist]

Everybody has a gpa.
We only get into the "weeds" much, much later (if at all).
We don't compare applicants to each other.

do you consider what they majored in?

 

[gyngyn]

I see. However, surely you pay attention to patterns in transcripts if anything, right? Such as trends, but not courses?

Also, if you don't compare applicants to each other, then what criteria do you use to judge? Just standards you set? If one applicant had 200 hours of volunteering the other had 300, you might then choose the one with 200 because you don't compare. Or, did you mean you don't compare when it comes to courses?

Schools vary on how they screen candidates.
Year to year grades are visible.
Quality and quantity of participation are considered.
We don't compare candidates with regard to any particular parameter.

 

[gyngyn]

do you consider what they majored in?

Not usually. Vocational majors can be viewed darkly by some members.

 

[deleted738762]

Not usually. Vocational majors can be viewed darkly by some members.

So, what your telling is me is just to keep my GPA high, with a hint of fluff classes because they really don't pay attention to that?

 

[gyngyn]

So, what your telling is me is just to keep my GPA high, with a hint of fluff classes because they really don't pay attention to that?

Your education is uniquely your own. Find your way and we will notice you.
Distinguish yourself in your chosen field of study.

 

[deleted738762]

Your education is uniquely your own. Find your way and we will notice you.
Distinguish yourself in your chosen field of study.

How can I distinguish myself in my education if you don't look at the courses I take?

 

[fball22]

How can I distinguish myself in my education if you don't look at the courses I take?

Do research with one of those physiology professors, publish, get a good LOR.

 

[RangerBob]

How can I distinguish myself in my education if you don't look at the courses I take?

Research, thesis, capstone projects, paid work, etc. Stuff you can put on a CV (nobody lists their GPA on a CV--though people do list if they graduated with honors).

I was an art major, so I had a senior art project, art exhibitions, portfolios, etc. If you're a science major you should have something to show for the work you've been putting in--research, presentations, etc.

Also, think about how much time it would take adcoms to actually look one by one through all your courses. Then think about if they're doing that for every applicant--that's an unrealistic amount of time. Plus, there's really nothing to gain. Why would taking more physio courses give you a leg's up over someone who took history courses instead? The physio courses don't make you any more likely to do better in medical school.

I don't think any of my interviewers even asked about any specific classes. I even had three W's and not a single interviewer asked about them. I got an A in quantum chemistry, which was quite hard, and no one asked me about that. They did note my significant GPA improvement in post-bac and my MCAT, which are spelled out in AMCAS. They also did ask me about what kind of camera I used...

In the end, it comes down to your interviewers saying something along the lines of "definite admit--gold star," "possible admit," "definite wait-list," and "reject." If all three interviewers say you're a gold-star applicant and one of the best they've seen, the Dean of Admissions is almost certainly going to admit you regardless of what your major, GPA, or course selection was (you already made the cut when the screened you for the interview--what's there to gain by looking class-by-class?). Now, it's possible that you're able to impress one of those interviewers by talking about the courses you took, but lets be honest--no one's all that impressed by the courses we take. They're impressed by what we do with that knowledge, whether we demonstrate initiative, our sense of compassion and commitment to our fellow humans, and (often overlooked by applicants) whether we're a likeable person.

You want your interviewer to leave the interview with the gut feeling that you belong at that university and that you will be a great physician.

 

[deleted738762]

Research, thesis, capstone projects, paid work, etc. Stuff you can put on a CV (nobody lists their GPA on a CV--though people do list if they graduated with honors).

I was an art major, so I had a senior art project, art exhibitions, portfolios, etc. If you're a science major you should have something to show for the work you've been putting in--research, presentations, etc.

Also, think about how much time it would take adcoms to actually look one by one through all your courses. Then think about if they're doing that for every applicant--that's an unrealistic amount of time. Plus, there's really nothing to gain. Why would taking more physio courses give you a leg's up over someone who took history courses instead? The physio courses don't make you any more likely to do better in medical school.

I don't think any of my interviewers even asked about any specific classes. I even had three W's and not a single interviewer asked about them. I got an A in quantum chemistry, which was quite hard, and no one asked me about that. They did note my significant GPA improvement in post-bac and my MCAT, which are spelled out in AMCAS. They also did ask me about what kind of camera I used...

In the end, it comes down to your interviewers saying something along the lines of "definite admit--gold star," "possible admit," "definite wait-list," and "reject." If all three interviewers say you're a gold-star applicant and one of the best they've seen, the Dean of Admissions is almost certainly going to admit you regardless of what your major, GPA, or course selection was (you already made the cut when the screened you for the interview--what's there to gain by looking class-by-class?). Now, it's possible that you're able to impress one of those interviewers by talking about the courses you took, but lets be honest--no one's all that impressed by the courses we take. They're impressed by what we do with that knowledge, whether we demonstrate initiative, our sense of compassion and commitment to our fellow humans, and (often overlooked by applicants) whether we're a likeable person.

You want your interviewer to leave the interview with the gut feeling that you belong at that university and that you will be a great physician.

I see what you're saying. Research is really hard to come by, plus I don't have time because I'm working. I guess being a chem TA would hold some merit because I'm doing something with my knowledge?

 

[RangerBob]

I see what you're saying. Research is really hard to come by, plus I don't have time because I'm working. I guess being a TA would hold some merit because I'm doing something with my knowledge?

I think being a TA always looks really good--it's a job (you typically get paid and/or get some of your tuition paid), and you're teaching as well. It's a great experience. I was TA'd physics and photography and I loved it.

If you're working in addition to a full course load it does make it tougher to find research, etc. But you might be surprised at what you might still be able to do--if you talk with your professors, upperclassmen, etc., you might be able to line something up. But you don't want to over-commit--it's better to be committed deeply to a few things than superficially to a lot of things. If I were in your shoes, I would prefer the TA route (I never liked research much). I think it's a lot more fun as well. I'm not sure what an Adcom actually prefers to see--I think they'd both look good, and I think the best thing to do is do whatever you think you'll be better at and enjoy more, as that helps cement a LOR and may help be a stepping stone to something bigger.

For the record, I had no research experience prior to medical school. I wasn't interested in it, and I also really didn't have the time (I was a career changer who did a post-bac, was working on getting all A's, had two volunteer jobs, plus worked 20-32hrs as a case manager, so the last thing I wanted to was do research that bored me just to check off a box for my application).

 

[Goro]

I do look at all the courses taken and am More in favor of people who take coursework that mimics those courses that will be taken in medical school. However this does not mean I will reject people who say, major in history or music, and have only taken the prerequisites.

That said you still need to excel no matter what course work you are taking. Thus it does not matter what you major in or minor in as long as you do well.

Different Adcom members view coursework in different ways. I have a colleague who routinely will give interviewees poor numbers because they don't have one particular course.

This particular course is not a requirement at our school. So the rest of the Adcom has to rescue the interviewees from my colleague's Wrath.

Upward grade trends are always good. Downward Trends are not good. Seriously not good.

I have taken quite a few physiology courses over the years, simply because I like studying it and I think most of what you learn in medical school has a lot of physio in it. Would someone who has excelled in many physiology courses stand out to an adcom? Or do to they just glance over the courses and pay more attention to GPA.

 

[deleted738762]

I do look at all the courses taken and am More in favor of people who take coursework that mimics those courses that will be taken in medical school. However this does not mean I will reject people who say, major in history or music, and have only taken the prerequisites.

That said you still need to excel no matter what course work you are taking. Thus it does not matter what you major in or minor in as long as you do well.

Different Adcom members view coursework in different ways. I have a colleague who routinely will give interviewees poor numbers because they don't have one particular course.

This particular course is not a requirement at our school. So the rest of the Adcom has to rescue the interviewees from my colleague's Wrath.

Upward grade trends are always good. Downward Trends are not good. Seriously not good.

Haha what course would help to take to end his wrath? Just out of curiosity.

 

[deleted738762]

I think being a TA always looks really good--it's a job (you typically get paid and/or get some of your tuition paid), and you're teaching as well. It's a great experience. I was TA'd physics and photography and I loved it.

If you're working in addition to a full course load it does make it tougher to find research, etc. But you might be surprised at what you might still be able to do--if you talk with your professors, upperclassmen, etc., you might be able to line something up. But you don't want to over-commit--it's better to be committed deeply to a few things than superficially to a lot of things. If I were in your shoes, I would prefer the TA route (I never liked research much). I think it's a lot more fun as well. I'm not sure what an Adcom actually prefers to see--I think they'd both look good, and I think the best thing to do is do whatever you think you'll be better at and enjoy more, as that helps cement a LOR and may help be a stepping stone to something bigger.

For the record, I had no research experience prior to medical school. I wasn't interested in it, and I also really didn't have the time (I was a career changer who did a post-bac, was working on getting all A's, had two volunteer jobs, plus worked 20-32hrs as a case manager, so the last thing I wanted to was do research that bored me just to check off a box for my application).

That's a great answer. I might use some aspects of this if I ever get asked about my lack of research. Very helpful, thank you.

 

[pseud0]

Physio isn't even a prereq...

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

I see what you're saying. Research is really hard to come by, plus I don't have time because I'm working. I guess being a TA would hold some merit because I'm doing something with my knowledge?

That's a load of crap. You can make time for research. Research != wet lab.

 

[fball22]

I see what you're saying. Research is really hard to come by, plus I don't have time because I'm working. I guess being a TA would hold some merit because I'm doing something with my knowledge?

I found a professor to work with and got credit for research, 2 credit hours a semester, we were in the lab 3 hours a week with a 1 hour meeting. So total 4 hours a week, I wouldn't say that's a huge commitmitment (plus the credits were Bio credits and went towards my sGPA). Research has been talked about in every interview so far. Definitely glad I had the experience. I was also able to build a good relationship with my research mentor who wrote me a LOR, helped me build a list of schools to apply to, and helped me with mock interviews.

Being a TA is also a good option, I enjoyed doing it and it also led to a solid LOR.

 

[gyngyn]

Serious? If so, Im assuming it's because it's unrealistic to view at all the applicants courses? Well let's say you weed out what students look good, then do you compare courses?

We don't compare courses. We do look at the whole application.

 

[deleted738762]

That's a load of crap. You can make time for research. Research != wet lab.

Making time is one thing, but finding it is difficult when every opportunity gets filled up. You act like it's so easy.

 

[deleted738762]

Physio isn't even a prereq...

That makes 0 sense. Physiology is an important course in medical school hence why I asked my question. Just because it isn't a pre-req does not mean it is insignificant. Plus, I know you learn more physiology than physics and organic chemistry combined in medical school, and those are pre-reqs.

 

[NecrotizingFasciitis]

I obviously have no idea what ADCOMs look at, but I'm sure you're fine OP, stop freaking out. If you like physiology, and have time in your course schedule to take more upper-level phys. courses, do it. Succeeding in upper-level science courses will always look good.

 

[deleted738762]

I obviously have no idea what ADCOMs look at, but I'm sure you're fine OP, stop freaking out. If you like physiology, and have time in your course schedule to take more upper-level phys. courses, do it. Succeeding in upper-level science courses will always look good.

Not freaking out. I just asked a question to get an adcoms perspective.

 

[pseud0]

That makes 0 sense. Physiology is an important course in medical school hence why I asked my question. Just because it isn't a pre-req does not mean it is insignificant. Plus, I know you learn more physiology than physics or organic chemistry combined in medical school, and those are pre-reqs.

Yeah you take physio in med school. You have to focus on doing well on the prerequisites and worry about physio when you get in. If you take it as an elective in undergrad that's your business but Noone is gunna be like "oh wow he took a&p, serious business"

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Making time is one thing, but finding it is difficult when every opportunity gets filled up. You act like it's so easy.

It is. I've been on a bunch of projects, most of which I started on my own. Find a professor and ask them to help you start a project. You might have to ask more than one, but the hardest part of finding an opportunity is just asking the right people. If you are at a super huge competitive university, then a lot of the profs will probably be busy with their own labs and have tons of students. So go to the prof who doesn't have a ton going on and probably has more time to help you. That's what I did, and it worked out great.

I literally just emailed a professor and asked if he'd be willing to be an advisor for a project I had in mind, and he said yes. That was it.

 

[TheBiologist]

It is. I've been on a bunch of projects, most of which I started on my own. Find a professor and ask them to help you start a project. You might have to ask more than one, but the hardest part of finding an opportunity is just asking the right people. If you are at a super huge competitive university, then a lot of the profs will probably be busy with their own labs and have tons of students. So go to the prof who doesn't have a ton going on and probably has more time to help you. That's what I did, and it worked out great.

I literally just emailed a professor and asked if he'd be willing to be an advisor for a project I had in mind, and he said yes. That was it.

This is going to be true; I probably asked 15 people over the course of 7 months before I found the project I'm working on now, but it was worth it

Professors will be filled up, some won't take ugrads, some won't want you after an interview, and some just won't respond to your emails

you do have to be persistent

 

[deleted738762]

It is. I've been on a bunch of projects, most of which I started on my own. Find a professor and ask them to help you start a project. You might have to ask more than one, but the hardest part of finding an opportunity is just asking the right people. If you are at a super huge competitive university, then a lot of the profs will probably be busy with their own labs and have tons of students. So go to the prof who doesn't have a ton going on and probably has more time to help you. That's what I did, and it worked out great.

I literally just emailed a professor and asked if he'd be willing to be an advisor for a project I had in mind, and he said yes. That was it.

How did you start a project on your own without any prior experience? Certainly you must have needed to ask a grand question that compelled the professor to try it.