Do medical schools consider where you went for undergrad?

[efle]

Then there would be no reason to interview him/her to begin with - it would have been a waste of an interview space that could have been given to someone with a 3.8 or 3.9 who would have had a realistic chance of getting in, in your scenario. I would be very surprised if a 3.5 was the only thing keeping anybody out of HMS.

It's a staircase analogy thing. Or ladder I guess, if you prefer that to LizzyM's version. I don't think an interview means your 3.5 has been overlooked. I think it means they want to meet you and talk to you just in case you're actually worth overlooking the 3.5 for. I stand by what I said before, you better be really ****ing special if you're going to get into Harvard with a GPA a quarter point deep into the bottom 10%. It isn't impossible, but then again neither is getting into a US MD school with a bottom decile MCAT. Doesn't mean "a 485 won't keep you out of MD school" becomes accurate !

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[aldol16]

It's a staircase analogy thing. Or ladder I guess, if you prefer that to LizzyM's version. I don't think an interview means your 3.5 has been overlooked. I think it means they want to meet you and talk to you just in case you're actually worth overlooking the 3.5 for. I stand by what I said before, you better be really ****ing special if you're going to get into Harvard with a GPA a quarter point deep into the bottom 10%. It isn't impossible, but then again neither is getting into a US MD school with a bottom decile MCAT. Doesn't mean "a 485 won't keep you out of MD school" becomes accurate !

I think you over-emphasize the importance of stats. Yes, you need a really good story for HMS to accept you with a 3.5, even if you have a phenomenal MCAT score. But if they're interviewing you to see if you're worth overlooking the GPA for, then that means your GPA isn't keeping you out. You're within striking distance and the rest of your application will determine whether you get in. HMS interviews what, a little over 10% of their applicants? These are already a self-selecting group of people and this student with the 3.5 GPA fared better than 90% or so of applicants - many, if not most, with higher GPAs than him or her. I never said you will be on the same rung as everybody else - I actually directly said that you will start out on a lower rung. So all you're saying is what I'm saying in different words.

 

[efle]

I think you over-emphasize the importance of stats. Yes, you need a really good story for HMS to accept you with a 3.5, even if you have a phenomenal MCAT score. But if they're interviewing you to see if you're worth overlooking the GPA for, then that means your GPA isn't keeping you out. You're within striking distance and the rest of your application will determine whether you get in. HMS interviews what, a little over 10% of their applicants? These are already a self-selecting group of people and this student with the 3.5 GPA fared better than 90% or so of applicants - many, if not most, with higher GPAs than him or her. I never said you will be on the same rung as everybody else - I actually directly said that you will start out on a lower rung. So all you're saying is what I'm saying in different words.

And I think you over-emphasize how close an interview means you are to an admit! A school doesn't maintain a 3.93 median and ~3.75 10th by frequently overlooking mediocre GPAs. Interviews they can be much, much more liberal with.

And yes, I do agree with what you originally said about being at the bottom end of the staircase - I just wanted to really emphasize how extraordinary (aka ****ing special) you better be if spending a while speaking to you more about your story is going to let you climb all the way up that staircase.

 

[aldol16]

And I think you over-emphasize how close an interview means you are to an admit! A school doesn't maintain a 3.93 median and ~3.75 10th by frequently overlooking mediocre GPAs. Interviews they can be much, much more liberal with.

And yes, I do agree with what you originally said about being at the bottom end of the staircase - I just wanted to really emphasize how extraordinary (aka ****ing special) you better be if spending a while speaking to you more about your story is going to let you climb all the way up that staircase.

Around 7000 apply, around 1000 interviewed, around 230 admitted? Numbers are numbers. 14% interviewed, 23% of those interviewed are accepted. Yes, they're both big cuts but by being interviewed, you've beat out 86% of the competition - a sizable chunk with GPAs higher than 3.5. They're much more liberal with who they accept post-interview (23%) than those they choose to interview (14%) although the competition is much tougher post-interview. You can maintain a 3.75 10th percentile in a class of 160 by overlooking 16 mediocre, or even ****ty, GPAs. You could have 16 *******es with 0.1 GPAs and that wouldn't change your 10th percentile one iota. But chances are, those 16 people have lower GPAs with great stories (no Nobel Prizes needed).

 

[Lawpy]

HMS isn't going to reject someone with a 3.5 and 520 MCAT just because they have a 3.5. That statement shouldn't be taken too far though - it also doesn't mean that somebody with a 3.5 and 520 starts on the same rung of the ladder as someone with a 3.8 and 520. It just means that there's more to make up for - but making up is possible.

It's a staircase analogy thing. Or ladder I guess, if you prefer that to LizzyM's version. I don't think an interview means your 3.5 has been overlooked. I think it means they want to meet you and talk to you just in case you're actually worth overlooking the 3.5 for. I stand by what I said before, you better be really ****ing special if you're going to get into Harvard with a GPA a quarter point deep into the bottom 10%. It isn't impossible, but then again neither is getting into a US MD school with a bottom decile MCAT. Doesn't mean "a 485 won't keep you out of MD school" becomes accurate !

 

[efle]

Around 7000 apply, around 1000 interviewed, around 230 admitted? Numbers are numbers. 14% interviewed, 23% of those interviewed are accepted. Yes, they're both big cuts but by being interviewed, you've beat out 86% of the competition - a sizable chunk with GPAs higher than 3.5. They're much more liberal with who they accept post-interview (23%) than those they choose to interview (14%) although the competition is much tougher post-interview. You can maintain a 3.75 10th percentile in a class of 160 by overlooking 16 mediocre, or even ****ty, GPAs. You could have 16 *******es with 0.1 GPAs and that wouldn't change your 10th percentile one iota. But chances are, those 16 people have lower GPAs with great stories (no Nobel Prizes needed).

This assumes the exact opposite of the staircase analogy though - that it is two series of cuts that are unrelated to each other. The staircase/ladder view would be that the 14% that are most overall impressive get an interview, the interview day moves people up or down some amount, and then the best quarter of the final staircase ordering gets offered an admit. Nothing about these numbers says that bottom end of the staircase has had their GPAs overlooked, or that they have to be anything short of amazing to climb up to the upper end of the staircase!

 

[aldol16]

This assumes the exact opposite of the staircase analogy though - that it is two series of cuts that are unrelated to each other. The staircase/ladder view would be that the 14% that are most overall impressive get an interview, the interview day moves people up or down some amount, and then the best quarter of the final staircase ordering gets offered an admit. Nothing about these numbers says that bottom end of the staircase has had their GPAs overlooked, or that they have to be anything short of amazing to climb up to the upper end of the staircase!

Here's the problem. I'm looking at the whole staircase. You're focusing on the top few steps. If you're standing at the bottom of the staircase, you can look up and say that someone on the top few steps is really close to getting to the top. But if you're at the bottom of the top 10 steps, you're going to look up and say that you're not closer to the top than the people who are in front of you - you're far compared to them. But you still beat everybody below you - the majority of applicants. Again, many if not most of those applicants had higher GPAs than this person. Yet he or she ended up above 86% of them. Read that as you will.

 

[efle]

Here's the problem. I'm looking at the whole staircase. You're focusing on the top few steps. If you're standing at the bottom of the staircase, you can look up and say that someone on the top few steps is really close to getting to the top. But if you're at the bottom of the top 10 steps, you're going to look up and say that you're not closer to the top than the people who are in front of you - you're far compared to them. But you still beat everybody below you - the majority of applicants. Again, many if not most of those applicants had higher GPAs than this person. Yet he or she ended up above 86% of them. Read that as you will.

That's fair enough. I had an 80+ LizzyM and didn't get an HMS interview, so it's true stats aren't everything, even at the interview stage. Your student's story was obviously worth more than my GPA was to them, regardless of whether they came into interview day at the bottom rung!

 

[dr.Breezy]

And I think you over-emphasize how close an interview means you are to an admit! A school doesn't maintain a 3.93 median and ~3.75 10th by frequently overlooking mediocre GPAs. Interviews they can be much, much more liberal with.

And yes, I do agree with what you originally said about being at the bottom end of the staircase - I just wanted to really emphasize how extraordinary (aka ****ing special) you better be if spending a while speaking to you more about your story is going to let you climb all the way up that staircase.

I can vouch for how an interview is hardly a certainty of anything. Though not HMS, I interviewed at a top 10 with one of the lowest post interview acceptance rate and I had a <3.5 gpa. I am naturally good at interviewing, and know it wasn't the interview that kept me out because the interviewer themselves said it was one of the best interviews they've had. But alas I still got rejected and I think it had to do with the school not being able to get over my gpa, or perhaps My story wasn't amazing enough for them to make them look past my gpa.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[aldol16]

That's fair enough. I had an 80+ LizzyM and didn't get an HMS interview, so it's true stats aren't everything, even at the interview stage. Your student's story was obviously worth more than my GPA was to them, regardless of whether they came into interview day at the bottom rung!

Right? Even if they came in bottom rung, they came in! That's more than most of us can say.

 

[On_The_Way_Up]

Median GPAs at med schools would suggest otherwise. What I'm saying is school name counts when you have high stats.

Lol then the answer is YES. To everyone saying it doesn't matter at all....it does. A 3.8 from Harvard has a more impressive app then someone with a 3.8 from a school like Bethune Cookman.

 

[BrainBuff]

As a HYP Grad, I can confirm that quite a few friends who were able to get into Duke, Harvard, and/or Stanford with average GPAs (3.5) and unspectacular MCAT scores had a very difficult time getting into Florida schools. We're talking no interviews at places like USF or UF (Depending on the person). So it appears that while elite private med schools may take pedigree into account (and may have a track record of admitting HYP students with average GPAs that do quite well in med school), many state schools couldn't care less and will interview the 3.9 UState grad before the 3.5 HYP grad.

This is my guess and n<10, so it's not exactly a scientific observation.

Some schools do not give interviews to students that come from certain schools just because adcoms feel they won't be matriculating. It may have to do more with that fact and less with GPA. Florida schools are notorious for that. I know of several Harvard acceptances with no interviews at USF.

There is no doubt that some schools prefer students from specific schools. At Penn, about 50% of the students come from undergrad ivies.
Also, Brown premeds have the highest admissions rate at 10 SOMs: Tufts, NYU, Mt Sinai, Penn, U Mass, BU, Columbia, Yale, UCSF and Harvard (in that order). Harvard likes its own and Yale undergrads primarily, and so on.

I think it is helpful to know where one's undergrad is getting premeds admitted and apply to those schools for sure.