Do ADCOMs weight based on undergrad ranking?

pasiley

Full Member
May 23, 2012
256
0
    This post kind of confuses me. Are you saying the prestigious schools are the only ones that test beyond regurgitation? If so then that is a large assumption. It seems the level of critical thinking would depend on alot of things, such as major. As an engineer, all I really do is think critically. That wouldn't be true for someone like a bio major.

    Since you seem to care so much about background I'll give you mine. I am a biomedical engineer at UT austin with a 3.98. I could've gone to johns hopkins for undergrad but I felt I fit better at UT.

    Maybe this is just me but I consider UT to be a good school in line with UCLA. Check out their pages on college board. Very similar student bodies, both state schools.

    I would look at a UT-Austin student more favorably than one from say podunk university which is unranked. I would hope Texas schools make that distinction.
     

    sliceofbread136

    Full Member
    10+ Year Member
    Nov 5, 2011
    4,972
    2,951
      I'm sorry that's just plain false. While a 3.3 is extreme, a 3.6 vs a 4.0 is a more reasonable argument. There's no question a 3.6 from a school like Princeton will hold way more weight than a 4.0 from a no name state school. The problem is sometimes the grade inflation/deflation is not in-line with the prestige of the school. Many top-tier schools inflate, while others deflate. Then there are schools like mine who aren't as recognizable as the Ivy-league, but who's administration still are terrible people.

      It seems like people have somehow ignored that LizzyM has already provided her input on the matter.

      This is true, those upper upper schools obviously get some slack and some bonus points due to their school name. This is more than likely highly variable though. Honestly I'd put it overall as a con for top tier schools. However, like I said earlier top tier school also have their fair share of advantages.
       
      About the Ads

      MDforMee

      Sweet Cheeks
      Aug 29, 2012
      790
      149
      1. Pre-Medical
        This post kind of confuses me. Are you saying the prestigious schools are the only ones that test beyond regurgitation? If so then that is a large assumption. It seems the level of critical thinking would depend on alot of things, such as major. As an engineer, all I really do is think critically. That wouldn't be true for someone like a bio major.

        Since you seem to care so much about background I'll give you mine. I am a biomedical engineer at UT austin with a 3.98. I could've gone to johns hopkins for undergrad but I felt I fit better at UT.

        I'm glad you asked.

        Here's why tests at harder schools are based more on a critical thinking approach:

        When you test in a regurgitation style, there is an upper limit to performance.

        That limit is set by memorizing all material.

        Many students at more selective schools are capable of memorizing all material, and therefore, getting similar scores on the tests.

        This is due to the curriculum in high school, that is based mostly on memorization. And, since college admission is based on high school performance, and the SAT (a memorization based test, that, ironically, used to be correlated to IQ, before they changed it), you get a roughly homogenous -- performance wise -- distribution of students at different schools, aligned by their academic abilities in a memorization-based capacitance.

        When you establish a grade curve, you are setting strict numbers on how many students achieve certain grades.

        Hence, when you have a grade curve requirement, you must set the bar on the test in a way that creates a standard distribution.

        Therefore, you MUST test in a way that is not regurgitative.

        Hence, harder schools have harder exams.

        This isn't hearsay. It's a fact.

        Why is it that medical schools test in a critical thinking style? Well, that should be obvious, by now.

        The point I'm alluding to is that preparation for -- and success in -- medical school depends in no small part on preparation through experience with critical thinking style exams.

        And full circle: going to a hard school, and not majoring in an easy subject, prepares you for the rigors of medical school.

        If you think that I don't have experience with medical students, you're sadly mistaken.

        Further, is it some mystery beyond the scope of human intelligence what board and step exams are, and what types of questions they ask?

        Absolutely not.
         

        MiracleforMD

        Full Member
        Jun 29, 2011
        711
        2
        1. Pre-Medical
          There are so many logical fallacies and just plain ******ed lines of thinking in this thread that when I thought about replying to any of them, I literally became bewildered and had to stop reading....at the middle of page 1.
           

          lobo.solo

          Full Member
          10+ Year Member
          May 4, 2011
          1,950
          126
          1. Medical Student
            I am sure ones' undergrad is taken into consideration. I am also sure that the admin process involves many factors as well. All that being said, I think that to consider all those who went to top universities as smarter and/or more competent than those who went to lower rank undergrads is a mistake. First, many factors are involved when choosing an undergrad institution; money is a big issue for some people, who are the first attempting to get higher education. The idea of limiting med school admission to those who went to top universities is enraging as it doesn't reward pure merit but reinforces exclusivism.
             

            pasiley

            Full Member
            May 23, 2012
            256
            0
              I am sure ones' undergrad is taken into consideration. I am also sure that the admin process involves many factors as well. All that being said, I think that to consider all those who went to top universities as smarter and/or more competent than those who went to lower rank undergrads is a mistake. First, many factors are involved when choosing an undergrad institution; money is a big issue for some people, who are the first attempting to get higher education. The idea of limiting med school admission to those who went to top universities is enraging as it doesn't reward pure merit but reinforces exclusivism.

              I agree but many medical schools (Creighton and my state school) consider GPA more than the MCAT. The girl that went to the "easy" school I am finishing up my pre-reqs at who did better on the MCAT should be taken just as seriously if not more in the admissions process. Plenty of smart people go to lower tier schools and they deserve their spot as well.

              However, the person with a 3.8 and a 29 from a lower tier school probably has a better shot at many schools than the OP with a 3.3, even if he pulls a 34 on the MCAT. The OP worked harder and his score should show that, he should get recognition but instead the interview will probably go to the inflated 3.8 and 29 MCAT.

              The truth is, once you get below a 3.5 or 3.6 range. Unless you went to a big name school. People don't care how hard your undergrad was. My state school is very guilty of this.
               
              Last edited:

              idontcaureuknow

              Full Member
              Nov 17, 2011
              392
              4
              Schrodinger's Box
              1. Pre-Medical
                I'm glad you asked.

                Here's why tests at harder schools are based more on a critical thinking approach:

                When you test in a regurgitation style, there is an upper limit to performance.

                That limit is set by memorizing all material.

                Many students at more selective schools are capable of memorizing all material, and therefore, getting similar scores on the tests.

                This is due to the curriculum in high school, that is based mostly on memorization. And, since college admission is based on high school performance, and the SAT (a memorization based test, that, ironically, used to be correlated to IQ, before they changed it), you get a roughly homogenous -- performance wise -- distribution of students at different schools, aligned by their academic abilities in a memorization-based capacitance.

                When you establish a grade curve, you are setting strict numbers on how many students achieve certain grades.

                Hence, when you have a grade curve requirement, you must set the bar on the test in a way that creates a standard distribution.

                Therefore, you MUST test in a way that is not regurgitative.

                Hence, harder schools have harder exams.

                This isn't hearsay. It's a fact.

                Why is it that medical schools test in a critical thinking style? Well, that should be obvious, by now.

                The point I'm alluding to is that preparation for -- and success in -- medical school depends in no small part on preparation through experience with critical thinking style exams.

                And full circle: going to a hard school, and not majoring in an easy subject, prepares you for the rigors of medical school.

                If you think that I don't have experience with medical students, you're sadly mistaken.

                Further, is it some mystery beyond the scope of human intelligence what board and step exams are, and what types of questions they ask?

                Absolutely not.

                :eek: Scary logic there man. I see what you are getting at, and in general, I may agree. But your opinion on school hierarchy as fact is a tad bit disconcerting. A major part of learning depends on the professors one seeks out. Maybe it's harder to find "easy" profs at harder schools, not debating that, but you can and will find professors who force critical thinking at state schools. I sure as heck did, and am willing to put what I learned against any other student and say I'm competitive in knowledge base and critical thinking.
                 

                sliceofbread136

                Full Member
                10+ Year Member
                Nov 5, 2011
                4,972
                2,951
                  I'm glad you asked.

                  Here's why tests at harder schools are based more on a critical thinking approach:

                  When you test in a regurgitation style, there is an upper limit to performance.

                  That limit is set by memorizing all material.

                  Many students at more selective schools are capable of memorizing all material, and therefore, getting similar scores on the tests.

                  This is due to the curriculum in high school, that is based mostly on memorization. And, since college admission is based on high school performance, and the SAT (a memorization based test, that, ironically, used to be correlated to IQ, before they changed it), you get a roughly homogenous -- performance wise -- distribution of students at different schools, aligned by their academic abilities in a memorization-based capacitance.

                  When you establish a grade curve, you are setting strict numbers on how many students achieve certain grades.

                  Hence, when you have a grade curve requirement, you must set the bar on the test in a way that creates a standard distribution.

                  Therefore, you MUST test in a way that is not regurgitative.

                  Hence, harder schools have harder exams.

                  This isn't hearsay. It's a fact.

                  Why is it that medical schools test in a critical thinking style? Well, that should be obvious, by now.

                  The point I'm alluding to is that preparation for -- and success in -- medical school depends in no small part on preparation through experience with critical thinking style exams.

                  And full circle: going to a hard school, and not majoring in an easy subject, prepares you for the rigors of medical school.

                  If you think that I don't have experience with medical students, you're sadly mistaken.

                  Further, is it some mystery beyond the scope of human intelligence what board and step exams are, and what types of questions they ask?

                  Absolutely not.

                  There are way too many assumptions in this to state it as fact...
                   
                  Last edited:
                  About the Ads
                  This thread is more than 9 years old.

                  Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

                  1. Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
                  2. Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
                  3. Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
                  4. It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
                  5. Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
                  6. Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
                  7. This thread is locked.