Does Engineering help or hurt?

[jawdoc]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I am an engineer, went through the pain of it all and now am on the verge of applying.

Pre-med advisor said med schools look down upon engineers (attend a top tier university). Engineering professors say the opposite. What are your thoughts?

Does it help? Do we get some gpa leniency/boost? Comparisons would be good (like x.xx gpa as bio vs y.yy gpa engineering)

Bioengineering, specifically. If you were wondering.

 

[Dr Van Helsing]

What you major in does not matter, so long as you fill the medical school requirements. Schools can generally discern whether or not you had a more difficult major; they will take that factor into account when reviewing your application. Engineering majors, from my understanding, don't get any kind of special treatment. If you were a music major and an adept violinist, you would get noticed. Otherwise, majors don't really matter. Adcoms will look at your application as a whole: volunteering, EC, research, shadowing, MCAT, GPA. However, anything below a 3.0 could set off some red flags. What is your s and c GPA, if you do not mind me asking?
But to summarize my rant, it does not matter what you major in; you can't get in with a 2.5, even if you're an astrophysictthermodynamicistprosthetic3dprinter major. I am sure you can work with a 3.0 for DO, 3.4-3.5 would be preferable for MD, but GPA is just one variable in the equation.

 

[redpanda]

I am an engineer, went through the pain of it all and now am on the verge of applying.

Pre-med advisor said med schools look down upon engineers (attend a top tier university). Engineering professors say the opposite. What are your thoughts?

Does it help? Do we get some gpa leniency/boost? Comparisons would be good (like x.xx gpa as bio vs y.yy gpa engineering)

Bioengineering, specifically. If you were wondering.

It will probably not change anything in med school admissions although there will be some intangible notation of a demanding curriculum in the mind of the person evaluating your application. What it will help is your job prospects should you not be immediately going to med school or should you want an internship that pays nicely during undergrad.

 

[mimelim]

As a general rule of thumb, logic and critical analysis goes a long way when it comes to figuring these things out.

#1 When a pre-med adviser says that "med schools" look down on engineers, who exactly are they referring to? Adcoms?
#2 Why would "med schools" look down on engineers? How does this logically compute in your head?
#3 Pre-med advisers are notorious for being out of touch with reality when it comes to medical school admissions having never been through the process themselves and in virtually every case having never sat on an adcom. They are hand waving with indirect statistics as their justification for everything.
#4 What exactly is an engineering professor's standing for telling you anything about the perspectives of "med schools"?
#5 Why would engineering majors get a 'boost'? How can anyone compare generically two majors? The following have just as much an impact, if not MORE of an impact than a raw major designation.
a) What school you are at.
b) Your course load.
c) What other extenuating circumstances there are (working full time, taking care of family, etc)

Your GPA is not compared directly with other applicants. It is a single metric in a complex thought/decision process. It has a single purpose: To give a view of your academic prowess. It is incomplete and by itself, completely useless which is why we need to know a, b and c to understand what it means in conjunction with your MCAT score. Putting all of that together gives a pretty good picture of whether or not you will be able to survive the continuous academics of medical training.

 

[Goro]

Majors mean nothing to us. What's important is that you do well. I am unconvinced that a 3.4 GPA in Engineering is equivalent to a 3.9 in Biology.

It's an n=1, but I had one student who was an Engineering major who struggled for over a year in medical school. He kept saying ad nauseum that "As an engineers, I was trained to think this way..."

He finally stopped when one of my clinical colleagues said to him: "Your days as an engineer stopped when you put on that white coat".

I am an engineer, went through the pain of it all and now am on the verge of applying.

Pre-med advisor said med schools look down upon engineers (attend a top tier university). Engineering professors say the opposite. What are your thoughts?

Does it help? Do we get some gpa leniency/boost? Comparisons would be good (like x.xx gpa as bio vs y.yy gpa engineering)

Bioengineering, specifically. If you were wondering.

 

[ratman7]

b) Your course load.

How does course load factor in? Is it based on minimum number of credit hours per semester (>12) or based on difficulty of courses taken each semester?

 

[cyclopes93]

sometimes as a person who has done well in analytical math and chemistry, I make the mistake of seeming arrogant about that ability since so many complain about not having it. However, I can tell you that I have obtained great respect for those that can handle biology and anything related to it at my undergraduate. The truth is that I have learnt I used to be quite weak in that field and that I only got high marks because I stayed put with my strengths and just ignored biology by disregarding it. I've seen too often that people do what they are strong at so that their gpa wouldn't suffer or that they would get a job at the end. That is alright but be mindful that you are in college to challenge yourself and to improve your weak sides. If you want to be an engineer because that makes you a better student at the end of the day, then do it because I know lots of people who are and are getting stellar grades. However, don't say that it is harder than biology or that it will make your application look stronger because I have certainly lost favor or taste of that notion. All fields in medicine are certainly filled with extensive training (esp if you go to great programs), I would keep engineering and medicine both in perspective so that they align with each other and not clash so that you always know how your degree could benefit you when you become a doctor. I met an engineering graduate who later became a surgeon and to this day he regrets his decision to go into medicine.

 

[mimelim]

How does course load factor in? Is it based on minimum number of credit hours per semester (>12) or based on difficulty of courses taken each semester?

The majority of adcoms that look over your application will not look at the details of your course load. It is too much work for too little yield. They aren't going to calculate your credit hours and how on earth would they know how difficult different classes are outside of their field at a different institution? On average, at most institutions that you interview at (most schools have ~3 adcom readers of every applications), one of them will eyeball your course load and get a feel for it. This isn't something that is compared between applicants directly. The way that I have seen it used at a committee meeting is person A will say, "His GPA is kinda low." Person B will say, "Oh ya, but I noticed, he has a 3.5, but hey he was taking 19-23 credits every semester doing Econ at U of Chicago." Person A, "Oh I didn't really notice, makes sense."

You can replace Person B's comment with, "Oh ya, he has a 3.5, but was working 40-50 hours a week to support his family." Or many other things. There is NO excuse for poor grades. You have to be able to cut it academically or you will be miserable in medical school and are a setup for failure. This is about giving context to a very inaccurate measure of academic performance.

 

[jawdoc]

Wow, this post was definitely a success. Good to know about the process. My stats are irrelevant, but one good thing is that I took 20+ credits each semester to make up GPA, which is good enough for medical schools now.

But another question I had was that would 1 or 2 bad grades- talking C or D- in premed courses be justified by hard courseload (qualitatively and quantitatively)?

 

[mimelim]

Wow, this post was definitely a success. Good to know about the process. My stats are irrelevant, but one good thing is that I took 20+ credits each semester to make up GPA, which is good enough for medical schools now.

But another question I had was that would 1 or 2 bad grades- talking C or D- in premed courses be justified by hard courseload (qualitatively and quantitatively)?

The pre-reqs for medical school are the classes that most closely replicate what medical school classes are like. They are not meant to teach or give foundation or any of that. (It is common for medical students to say that you will cover all of undergrad microbiology or biochem in the first couple of days of class) C's and D's mean something went wrong. Either the student is incapable of doing the work, they underestimated their abilities or they took on too much. None of which are consistent with a student that will be able to perform at a high level in medical school. A poor grade early on in undergrad are not the end of the world. This is what people refer to when they say, "upward trend", ie you aren't the same student that you were as a Freshman.

What it really comes down to is, "Are you as a student right now, on graduation, ready to take on medical school academically?" It is a complex question and you can NOT say, "oh ya, I had a 4.0 I am ready" or, "he has a 3.4, so he isn't ready." This is the theory behind doing post-bacc work. Yes, it raises GPAs, but more importantly it gives a forum to prove that someone can handle the rigors of medical school. D's are a pretty big red flag. Not a complete and total application killer, but they are a flag. Something that needs to be looked into careful.

 

[cidem2065]

Wow, this post was definitely a success. Good to know about the process. My stats are irrelevant, but one good thing is that I took 20+ credits each semester to make up GPA, which is good enough for medical schools now.

But another question I had was that would 1 or 2 bad grades- talking C or D- in premed courses be justified by hard courseload (qualitatively and quantitatively)?

If they're prereqs they'll need to be at least a C+ to count, but in general one or two bad grades are okay if they look like an exception. Understanding a particular grade in the context of other classes in a given semester seems fairly subjective and may be a lot to ask from an admissions officer.

 

[Goro]

No poor grade is justified by anything. We expect you to do well. Medical school will be a lot harder than your UG work. That said, a C or 2 here or there won't kill your app. Even a single F won't be lethal, except in the minds of over-anxious pre-meds.

Wow, this post was definitely a success. Good to know about the process. My stats are irrelevant, but one good thing is that I took 20+ credits each semester to make up GPA, which is good enough for medical schools now.

But another question I had was that would 1 or 2 bad grades- talking C or D- in premed courses be justified by hard courseload (qualitatively and quantitatively)?

 

[justadream]

No poor grade is justified by anything. We expect you to do well. Medical school will be a lot harder than your UG work. That said, a C or 2 here or there won't kill your app. Even a single F won't be lethal, except in the minds of over-anxious pre-meds.

Does "poor" start at C+ and below?

 

[Feelgood Inc]

Doesn't help/hurt in professional school applications due to grades, major help for probably everything else.

 

[Dr.Zoidberg]

Majors mean nothing to us. What's important is that you do well. I am unconvinced that a 3.4 GPA in Engineering is equivalent to a 3.9 in Biology.

It's an n=1, but I had one student who was an Engineering major who struggled for over a year in medical school. He kept saying ad nauseum that "As an engineers, I was trained to think this way..."

He finally stopped when one of my clinical colleagues said to him: "Your days as an engineer stopped when you put on that white coat".

I studied engineering in college, and I know exactly this type of person. They're pretty insufferable. This attitude stems from engineering pride, which is essentially the common opinion among engineers that they are smarter than everyone else. This idea essentially comes from two places. First, we end up watching about 50% of the people in our major throw their hands up and drop out in favor of a less rigorous course. Biology is a popular option. Second, engineers are taught that many of the skills used in medicine/biology (memorization, non-quantitative reasoning, etc...) are insufficient and relatively useless ("fluffy").

The above, along with the bonding effect of suffering in a group, creates a camaraderie among engineers, and chances are this student is still hanging on to that. He's looking around and wondering why the "memorizers" are suddenly capable and why "surface-level" thinking is suddenly being rewarded. The truth is, the subjects are just... different. I'm a true believer in the engineering mindset, and I think anyone is more capable for having been taught to think that way, but it's still no substitute for a good head and solid intuition.

As for the difficulty, engineering is harder. I would consistently put more work into my engineering courses for similar or worse grades than in biology, math, English, etc... (both upper and lower level), but a 3.4 is not a 3.9 in any other major. It's a 0.2-0.3 GPA difference at best, and that's for students with equal credit loads at equal schools. The kid double majoring in biochem and statistics is just as impressive, as is the kid working 10-15 hours a week on top of classes.

 

[WedgeDawg]

I studied engineering in college, and I know exactly this type of person. They're pretty insufferable. This attitude stems from engineering pride, which is essentially the common opinion among engineers that they are smarter than everyone else. This idea essentially comes from two places. First, we end up watching about 50% of the people in our major throw their hands up and drop out in favor of a less rigorous course. Biology is a popular option. Second, engineers are taught that many of the skills used in medicine/biology (memorization, non-quantitative reasoning, etc...) are insufficient and relatively useless ("fluffy").

The above, along with the bonding effect of suffering in a group, creates a camaraderie among engineers, and chances are this student is still hanging on to that. He's looking around and wondering why the "memorizers" are suddenly capable and why "surface-level" thinking is suddenly being rewarded. The truth is, the subjects are just... different. I'm a true believer in the engineering mindset, and I think anyone is more capable for having been taught to think that way, but it's still no substitute for a good head and solid intuition.

As for the difficulty, engineering is harder. I would consistently put more work into my engineering courses for similar or worse grades than in biology, math, English, etc... (both upper and lower level), but a 3.4 is not a 3.9 in any other major. It's a 0.2-0.3 GPA difference at best, and that's for students with equal credit loads at equal schools. The kid double majoring in biochem and statistics is just as impressive, as is the kid working 10-15 hours a week on top of classes.

Just as an aside, at my school, the average departmental GPA for engineering is higher than that of math, biology, chemistry, and physics (as well as some others). Not going to post the source here for privacy reasons, but PM me if you're interested.

Not that this is the case at all schools or that it somehow proves engineering is easier than biology, chemistry, etc, but I think it's very difficult to compare these things with so many other factors in play.

 

[ProudMD]

Does "poor" start at C+ and below?

To me, a "poor" science grade starts at B- and below. B is an average science/prereq grade, and everything higher than and including B+ is good. Having said that, multiple poor grades will not keep you out of medical school if the overall package is solid.

 

[Dr.Zoidberg]

Just as an aside, at my school, the average departmental GPA for engineering is higher than that of math, biology, chemistry, and physics (as well as some others). Not going to post the source here for privacy reasons, but PM me if you're interested.

Not that this is the case at all schools or that it somehow proves engineering is easier than biology, chemistry, etc, but I think it's very difficult to compare these things with so many other factors in play.

I'm not surprised. There's a lot of pressure now to raise GPAs since so many other fields are seeing the value of the engineering mindset. Students need to be competitive in grad school admissions. I would need to see the "weed out" rate before making any assumptions based on GPA, and I would also caution that while two classes might be curved to a B, one may require much more work than the other.

Having lived it, I really do think that engineering classes had a higher standard. It was assumed that most of us would be entering the workforce right out of undergrad, so the expectations was that you acted like a professional. If the professor gave one week for a project that would take 20 hours, the students just buckled down and did it. We complained amongst ourselves, but extensions were off the table. Meanwhile, in my cell biology class, which was 90% pre-med, there were nearly riots when the professor doubled up the weekly homework, which you could do in 2-3 hours while watching tv. There was an incredible amount of hand holding, and a palpable difference in the demeanor and professionalism of the students. For awhile I even resented pre-meds for it. (Then I became one...)

Again this represents a single persons perceptions of 15 engineering courses and 5 biology courses at a single university. It's hardly conclusive. I'm simply adding to the piles of anecdotal evidence.

 

[WedgeDawg]

I'm not surprised. There's a lot of pressure now to raise GPAs since so many other fields are seeing the value of the engineering mindset. Students need to be competitive in grad school admissions. I would need to see the "weed out" rate before making any assumptions based on GPA, and I would also caution that while two classes might be curved to a B, one may require much more work than the other.

Having lived it, I really do think that engineering classes had a higher standard. It was assumed that most of us would be entering the workforce right out of undergrad, so the expectations was that you acted like a professional. If the professor gave one week for a project that would take 20 hours, the students just buckled down and did it. We complained amongst ourselves, but extensions were off the table. Meanwhile, in my cell biology class, which was 90% pre-med, there were nearly riots when the professor doubled up the weekly homework, which you could do in 2-3 hours while watching tv. There was an incredible amount of hand holding, and a palpable difference in the demeanor and professionalism of the students. For awhile I even resented pre-meds for it. (Then I became one...)

Again this represents a single persons perceptions of 15 engineering courses and 5 biology courses at a single university. It's hardly conclusive. I'm simply adding to the piles of anecdotal evidence.

Certainly. I think the lesson here for anyone reading is that colleges are quite heterogeneous and that you should look at your own situation before making any decisions based off of the information provided by others in different majors at different schools. At my school, not many people are weeded out of engineering, and those who are weeded out of premed are usually done so by either gen chem or orgo. These people end up deciding to go into economics and work in consulting, finance, or other relatively lucrative fields. Additionally, a lot of our engineers end up doing consulting work or applying to graduate schools (law, medical, or other) so I would assume that there is some pressure to keep the departmental gpa from being abysmal. I also agree that the work invested in two B median courses can be very different. It also depends where your strengths lie. For me, the hardest courses I've taken in college were in the social sciences and humanities, though I think I'm just naturally more adept in the sciences. For other people, it could very well be other way around, and I'm sure there are people who are great at engineering but struggle with economics, biology, or history. Performance can be easily quantified while difficulty is far more subjective.

 

[Goro]

yes.

Does "poor" start at C+ and below?

 

[bluejay456]

I think engineering helps a little bit during the interview phase. I know for almost every interview I attended I was asked why I chose engineering. Its important to stand out during this phase and have an interesting story for your choices. Not a lot of engineers apply/go to medical school. Also, just based on my personal experiences I do think engineers get grade boosts. I graduated from a top university in BME with a 3.5 cGPA (which based on SDN means I should be homeless lol) and this cycle has gone very well for me. I think as long as you can handle engineering and at least land a 3.4 (along with incredible everything else) you will be good application wise. Good luck OP!

 

[Lawgiver]

No poor grade is justified by anything. We expect you to do well. Medical school will be a lot harder than your UG work. That said, a C or 2 here or there won't kill your app. Even a single F won't be lethal, except in the minds of over-anxious pre-meds.

what about a F in two classes completely unrelated to pre-med courses? They would not even be considered soft sciences. And the reason for getting them were not academic. They are weighing down my cGPA. Would it be ok to write a note to consider my cGPA without these two classes?

 

[Goro]

If they're the only two bad grades, amidst a sea of As, then it might not be an issue, but expect to be grilled about them at interviews ( So, Lawgiver, what's up with these F's in your Sculpture and Drama classes"?)

Don't write a note or mention them in any way unless asked about them. It will only come off as making excuses. Sometimes you have to submit your app, warts and all.

what about a F in two classes completely unrelated to pre-med courses? They would not even be considered soft sciences. And the reason for getting them were not academic. They are weighing down my cGPA. Would it be ok to write a note to consider my cGPA without these two classes?

 

[justadream]

yes.

If you had like 3.95+ for your first 3 years but then 3.5 your last year (i.e.., from backloading lots of tough engineering classes to last year) but still had overall of like 3.8 overall for both cGPA and sGPA, would that last year be a red flag or would the solid overall GPA be enough to make it okay?

MCAT is decent (35+). It it makes a difference, the GPA would be from a top 20 school.

 

[Goro]

Probably won't be an issue, but our radar does goes up when we see poor upper year grades. Yours I would NOT call poor!

If you had like 3.95+ for your first 3 years but then 3.5 your last year (i.e.., from backloading lots of tough engineering classes to last year) but still had overall of like 3.8 overall for both cGPA and sGPA, would that last year be a red flag or would the solid overall GPA be enough to make it okay?

MCAT is decent (35+). It it makes a difference, the GPA would be from a top 20 school.