do medical schools take into account grade deflation in undergrad?

[Superfluous94]

This question just popped into my mind. I go to a top 10 undergrad and they grade deflate pretty heavily, and i truly worked hard for my 3.6. would medical schools account for this at all (even a little)? thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Goro]

Admissions deans may, but your typical Adcom member like me will know nothing about what school is grade inflating or deflating.

We DO know the quality of students from feeder UG schools.

Your 3.6 GPA will be fine, no matter where you went to college.

 

[aldol16]

If your school is a powerhouse regularly sends students into good medical programs, then those programs will be familiar with the curriculum at your school. But if your school just randomly deflates and isn't well known, then chances are nobody is gonna know about it.

In terms of taking it into account, there's really no numeric correction factor that they apply just because you went to a certain school. It's not like they say "Oh, this kid went to MIT which deflates a bit so we're going to tack on 0.2 to his GPA." Schools will review your application holistically, whatever that means to them.

 

[Superfluous94]

If your school is a powerhouse regularly sends students into good medical programs, then those programs will be familiar with the curriculum at your school. But if your school just randomly deflates and isn't well known, then chances are nobody is gonna know about it.

In terms of taking it into account, there's really no numeric correction factor that they apply just because you went to a certain school. It's not like they say "Oh, this kid went to MIT which deflates a bit so we're going to tack on 0.2 to his GPA." Schools will review your application holistically, whatever that means to them.

well the school is definitely known, it's been ranked top 10 forever

thanks for the info.

 

[efle]

The good news is that some schools give a little brownie points for the selective alma mater.

The bad news is that the similarly well known inflating schools get that too. So being from somewhere like MIT is helpful, but not going to make your 3.6 look better than a 3.6 over at Hahvahd

 

[aldol16]

The bad news is that the similarly well known inflating schools get that too. So being from somewhere like MIT is helpful, but not going to make your 3.6 look better than a 3.6 over at Hahvahd

For some reason, this reminded me of a website some years back like mitrejects.com or something that re-directed you to the Harvard site. They must have taken it down because the only one I can find now is www.stanfordrejects.com

 

[efle]

For some reason, this reminded me of a website some years back like mitrejects.com or something that re-directed you to the Harvard site. They must have taken it down because the only one I can find now is www.stanfordrejects.com

That's hilarious

 

[Princeton Medical Student]

From a purely statistical point of view, it's kinda hard to say. However, from what I've seen grade inflation/deflation gets evened out by MCAT pretty hard.

 

[Danny L]

The medical school associated with your undergrad will most likely consider the difficulty of your school and adjust your GPA. Other schools it's tough to say although you will probably get some sort of bump since you go to a t20

 

[The Broccoli Industry]

Jeez...I don't get why it's so hard for adcoms to tell what schools grade deflate (especially since it should be their jobs).

Princeton, Berkeley, Caltech, Cornell, JHU, Wash U, BU, MIT, UChicago, UPenn (lesser extent).

Engineering deflates.

I know there's a lot of variability amongst schools but it doesn't take a genius to figure out the schools I mentioned deflate. This should be especially true for adcoms, who likely have ample data regarding their student performance and the undergrad schools/GPA they came from.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[ChymeofPassion]

Jeez...I don't get why it's so hard for adcoms to tell what schools grade deflate (especially since it should be their jobs).

Princeton, Berkeley, Caltech, Cornell, JHU, Wash U, BU, MIT, UChicago, UPenn (lesser extent).

Engineering deflates.

I know there's a lot of variability amongst schools but it doesn't take a genius to figure out the schools I mentioned deflate. This should be especially true for adcoms, who likely have ample data regarding their student performance and the undergrad schools/GPA they came from.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

I'd guess that many of them know about grade deflation, but why would they take a 3.5 from one of those schools (even if they would have received a 5.3 at their state school) when there are plenty at that school that did better (3.8+) also applying for a select number of seats. It doesnt matter if said person would have done better elsewhere, they made their bed. Luckily, this why the MCAT is so important.

 

[bannie22]

probably not.

 

[Med Ed]

Jeez...I don't get why it's so hard for adcoms to tell what schools grade deflate (especially since it should be their jobs).

Princeton, Berkeley, Caltech, Cornell, JHU, Wash U, BU, MIT, UChicago, UPenn (lesser extent).

Princeton ended its deflation experiment in 2014. By the fall of 2015 it posted its highest ever average semester GPA (3.400).

 

[cactusman]

Jeez...I don't get why it's so hard for adcoms to tell what schools grade deflate (especially since it should be their jobs).

Princeton, Berkeley, Caltech, Cornell, JHU, Wash U, BU, MIT, UChicago, UPenn (lesser extent).

Except that's not a complete list. Reed, Swat, Harvey Mudd, and maybe some more LACs (small but many produce a lot of pre-meds). If you call WashU deflated then you should probably include Vandy. Not to mention almost every public is deflated in comparison to similarly selective privates, so you can probably throw on UMich, UCLA, UCSD, etc. as highly selective institutions which are deflated.
Pretty soon it becomes a long list of schools whose policies may change too often for med schools to keep up.

 

[DBC03]

It's nearly impossible to compare GPAs from different schools. I had a pretty low engineering GPA from a very selective grade-deflating Ivy (and this was back in the day). I can't tell you how excited I was when I walked into class at my post-bac and the teacher said he doesn't curve. Everyone else was disappointed, but my only experience with a curve was that it ALWAYS brought you down. You'd get a 93.5% in a class and you'd be lucky to walk off with a B+ - most likely you'd get a B. Try comparing that to a school where you can get an A- in some classes with an 88%.

Also, exams are different, teaching styles are different, there are so many differences that it's really hard to compare students from different schools in different programs. My guess is that it is easier if adcoms have experience with students from particular schools or post-bac programs.

I agree that the MCAT evens it out to some extent, but that can also make it even more difficult for some students when the MCAT/GPA divide is huge. And many adcoms still believe that the MCAT is just one test on one day (true) and that it does not necessarily indicate a student's ability to perform in medical school.

 

[fourandtwo]

Interesting point. I was just chatting with my girlfriend about this. She's in a community college and the AVERAGE GPA of its students are a 3.7. I was very surprised, thank you for bringing this up!

 

[DBC03]

Princeton ended its deflation experiment in 2014. By the fall of 2015 it posted its highest ever average semester GPA (3.400).

Oh my goodness, does this mean I was actually an "average to above average" student? I always thought I was in the fifth quintile

 

[Goro]

If your school is a powerhouse regularly sends students into good medical programs, then those programs will be familiar with the curriculum at your school. But if your school just randomly deflates and isn't well known, then chances are nobody is gonna know about it.

In terms of taking it into account, there's really no numeric correction factor that they apply just because you went to a certain school. It's not like they say "Oh, this kid went to MIT which deflates a bit so we're going to tack on 0.2 to his GPA." Schools will review your application holistically, whatever that means to them.

Every now and then when we're reviewing the fate of an interviewee, someone might say, "but s/he got a 3.3 at school name...that has to count for something". We ponder that for about a second, and then move right along.

Occasionally when someone goes to a school that none of us have heard, the wily old Admissions dean might chime in with "it's a good school" or "I've never heard of them either"

Jeez...I don't get why it's so hard for adcoms to tell what schools grade deflate (especially since it should be their jobs).
Princeton, Berkeley, Caltech, Cornell, JHU, Wash U, BU, MIT, UChicago, UPenn (lesser extent).
Engineering deflates.

I know there's a lot of variability amongst schools but it doesn't take a genius to figure out the schools I mentioned deflate. This should be especially true for adcoms, who likely have ample data regarding their student performance and the undergrad schools/GPA they came from.

But it's NOT our job to know what schools inflate/deflate. It's our job to teach medical students. Adcom members are volunteers. It's YOUR job to do well, no matter where you go. And no one puts a gun to your head and says "go to Cal Tech or else", either.

Always remember that it's a seller's market. MD schools can afford to turn away the 3.4 kid from Caltech because there are plenty of 3.7s from Berkeley (but my school will take both!)

 

[popholdinitdown]

Admissions deans may, but your typical Adcom member like me will know nothing about what school is grade inflating or deflating.

We DO know the quality of students from feeder UG schools.

Your 3.6 GPA will be fine, no matter where you went to college.

Hi Goro, I was wondering what constitutes a "Feeder school"?
For example, my top 15 undergrad's "medical school acceptance report" shows like 10-15 acceptances to Gtown every year, same with schools like Rosalind Franklin, Loyola, Rush. Our applicant pool is around ~200 ish. Would we be considered "Feeder school" to these schools? If not, what constitutes as so?

Also, my advisor (who's an MD and pretty knowledgeable about the process) says "Yeah we don't do well at _____ school for some reason" for some schools. Is there an opposite of a "Feeder school"? I've always wondered these things lol.

Thanks

 

[Goro]

Hi Goro, I was wondering what constitutes a "Feeder school"?
For example, my top 15 undergrad's "medical school acceptance report" shows like 10-15 acceptances to Gtown every year, same with schools like Rosalind Franklin, Loyola, Rush. Our applicant pool is around ~200 ish. Would we be considered "Feeder school" to these schools? If not, what constitutes as so?

Sounds like it. 15 kids to Gtown each year represents ~8% of the matriculants there.

Also, my advisor (who's an MD and pretty knowledgeable about the process) says "Yeah we don't do well at _____ school for some reason" for some schools. Is there an opposite of a "Feeder school"? I've always wondered these things lol.
I've never heard of an "anti-feeder", It may be that your kids get crowded out by stronger applicants. Or there's the inbreeding issue common to some of the Top Schools.

 

[Doctor-S]

I don't know whether a school deflates or inflates grades - especially since class requirements, professors, testing protocol and grades differ between school-to-school. Instead, I prefer to review the application packet, in its entirety.

 

[aldol16]

Always remember that it's a seller's market. MD schools can afford to turn away the 3.4 kid from Caltech because there are plenty of 3.7s from Berkeley (but my school will take both!)

Well, they can have fun with the Stanford rejects then (www.stanfordrejects.com).

 

[aldol16]

Princeton ended its deflation experiment in 2014. By the fall of 2015 it posted its highest ever average semester GPA (3.400).

Deflation there mainly affected the humanities and social science departments. I think I read somewhere that the science departments weren't really impacted by grade deflation because their grade distributions were always lower than what the "quota" mandated anyway.

 

[DBC03]

Deflation there mainly affected the humanities and social science departments. I think I read somewhere that the science departments weren't really impacted by grade deflation because their grade distributions were always lower than what the "quota" mandated anyway.

When I was there (back in the Stone Age), the science and engineering classes often gave letter grades based on a normal distribution, so you really had no idea what kind of grade you would get until well after the final and it really just gave you an idea of how you fit within the rest of the class, not how well you did in terms of coursework.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[aldol16]

When I was there (back in the Stone Age), the science and engineering classes often gave letter grades based on a normal distribution, so you really had no idea what kind of grade you would get until well after the final and it really just gave you an idea of how you fit within the rest of the class, not how well you did in terms of coursework.

My colleagues who went there more recently tell me that it's still the same - they assign ranks to everybody in the class based on scores and fit those ranks to a normal curve. Science courses were curved to a B+ average, I believe. So there were never more than 30% As awarded in a science course to begin with. It's a good way to normalize grades between classes since one professor teaches a course differently from another professor and you might get an easy one or a hard one. So if you assume that the class composition remains relatively invariable, you can assign a 'fair' grade by normalizing everybody's grades like that.

 

[efle]

I've always wondered if they got rid of their policy for the sake of their student's applications to professional schools, or because they were having yield issues with HYS being more attractive for their easier grading...

 

[aldol16]

I've always wondered if they got rid of their policy for the sake of their student's applications to professional schools, or because they were having yield issues with HYS being more attractive for their easier grading...

I doubt it was because of professional school applications. That only makes up a small-ish portion of each class and their official line was always that grade deflation never affected professional school admissions for their students. Good students will continue to be good students. My colleagues always said that for them, grade deflation was more of an excuse for not doing well in a class. It's easier to blame the system than to blame one's own studying habits, etc. I think it had more to do with student health and remaining competitive with peer schools.

 

[cactusman]

I've always wondered if they got rid of their policy for the sake of their student's applications to professional schools, or because they were having yield issues with HYS being more attractive for their easier grading...

The Princeton Class of 2017 had a yield rate slightly higher than Yale's (but lower than H and S) so I doubt this was the issue.
Edit: http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2013/09/20/web-yheadline-here-57/

 

[aldol16]

The Princeton Class of 2017 had a yield rate slightly higher than Yale's (but lower than H and S) so I doubt this was the issue.

Edit: http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2013/11/22/as-yale-talks-grade-deflation-princeton-pulls-back/

 

[cactusman]

Grade deflation ended years ago so this isn't a surprise. To see an effect, you'd have to go back to when grade deflation actually was a thing.

I think the Class of 2017 enrolled the year before they announced that deflation policies would be eliminated.

 

[aldol16]

I think the Class of 2017 enrolled the year before they announced that deflation policies would be eliminated.

Sorry, I edited above - I was thinking about the entering class of 2017. Class of 2017 was subject to grade deflation for one year, yes.

 

[efle]

It is insane to me that these schools have such high yields - mathematically speaking, for each one to be matriculating 70%+, the number of people admitted to multiple must be a tiny minority in each student body.

Is it because it's such a crapshoot even a superstar is likely to only land one HYPS seat? Do they have distinct flavors, so that someone might be impressive enough, but they can predict that person was totally gonna ditch them because they radiate a Yale vibe?

 

[cactusman]

It is insane to me that these schools have such high yields - mathematically speaking, for each one to be matriculating 70%+, the number of people admitted to multiple must be a tiny minority in each student body.

Is it because it's such a crapshoot even a superstar is likely to only land one HYPS seat? Do they have distinct flavors, so that someone might be impressive enough, but they can predict that person was totally gonna ditch them because they radiate a Yale vibe?

I've always thought HYPS had pretty interchangeable student bodies, although regional prestige (and convenience) definitely affects yield and they each have slight regional/state biases, so maybe that has a bigger impact than expected?

 

[enchantediris]

It is insane to me that these schools have such high yields - mathematically speaking, for each one to be matriculating 70%+, the number of people admitted to multiple must be a tiny minority in each student body.

Is it because it's such a crapshoot even a superstar is likely to only land one HYPS seat? Do they have distinct flavors, so that someone might be impressive enough, but they can predict that person was totally gonna ditch them because they radiate a Yale vibe?

I wonder if Early Decision plays a large part in the retention rates, as it's much more prevalent in college applications.

 

[aldol16]

It is insane to me that these schools have such high yields - mathematically speaking, for each one to be matriculating 70%+, the number of people admitted to multiple must be a tiny minority in each student body.

Is it because it's such a crapshoot even a superstar is likely to only land one HYPS seat? Do they have distinct flavors, so that someone might be impressive enough, but they can predict that person was totally gonna ditch them because they radiate a Yale vibe?

It's more of a crapshoot. There are many cross-admits, though - it's obviously much rarer to be admitted to HYPS than to any three of those, which in turn is much rarer than being admitted to any two of those. Taking the simple case of two schools, as long as the schools split the cross-admits evenly, meaning that the cross-admits are just as likely to attend one as the other, the cross-admit yield rate will still be 50% for each school. Add on the legacies who have really high yields and the early action/decision programs and you can get your 70%. But once you have cross-admits who are admitted to three schools, if you split the cross-admits evenly, your yield for that cohort goes down to 33%.

Of course in reality, the schools don't attract the cross-admits evenly. Harvard and Stanford have the name-brand recognition and the prestige. Princeton and Yale aren't far behind. But there's a definite difference.

 

[cactusman]

It's more of a crapshoot. There are many cross-admits, though - it's obviously much rarer to be admitted to HYPS than to any three of those, which in turn is much rarer than being admitted to any two of those. Taking the simple case of two schools, as long as the schools split the cross-admits evenly, meaning that the cross-admits are just as likely to attend one as the other, the cross-admit yield rate will still be 50% for each school. Add on the legacies who have really high yields and the early action/decision programs and you can get your 70%. But once you have cross-admits who are admitted to three schools, if you split the cross-admits evenly, your yield for that cohort goes down to 33%.

Of course in reality, the schools don't attract the cross-admits evenly. Harvard and Stanford have the name-brand recognition and the prestige. Princeton and Yale aren't far behind. But there's a definite difference.

And on top of the Harvard/Stanford name brand, there's the location difference again. A lot of people want to be in the Boston metro and a lot of people want to be in Silicon Valley.

Suburban New Jersey and a small, poor city in Connecticut are not very attractive to most college students.