Does graduating from a prestigious school help when applying DO?

[virtuoso735]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Just wondering if coming from a prestigious school (Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc.) helps in applying to DO programs? I know that students from prestigious schools tend to shoot more for MD programs, so maybe there is a chance that students from highly ranked schools are not seen very often in the applicant pool, thereby giving them an advantage at DO schools? I'm not bashing DO schools in any way, as I am seriously considering applying to them. Just curious.

 

[DocEspana]

Absolutely if its an Ivy league. It definitely means something. But it also means quite a bit if its any major name brand school.

A casual observation of the composition of all the medical schools I've seen well enough to understand the composition of (so.. n=3. My own, my cousins, and my best friends, 2 DOs and a mid-level MD) the smartest kids in the class tend to be from less well known schools and the weaker kids, but not necessarily the worst, tend to be from the Princetons, NYUs, UCLAs, etc.

Now its a generalization that is pretty damn loose, but it would probably hold up more often than not. I guess the simplest explination is that being from a big name school adds something to your application that a no-namer needs to make up for with their performance/quantitative academic qualifications.

 

[Sophocles]

I completely disagree my friend, although I'm biased. But, I believe that I can speak from a much broader paradigm. I have been in both a regular school and an ivy league, and let me tell you that it is a completely different animal. I have never studied so hard in my life, and the amount of material that I am learning here is something that I cannot compare to anything I have ever encountered. But, I don't know if it actually helps in a committee's decision; obviously, I hope it does.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Absolutely if its an Ivy league. It definitely means something. But it also means quite a bit if its any major name brand school.

A casual observation of the composition of all the medical schools I've seen well enough to understand the composition of (so.. n=3. My own, my cousins, and my best friends, 2 DOs and a mid-level MD) the smartest kids in the class tend to be from less well known schools and the weaker kids, but not necessarily the worst, tend to be from the Princetons, NYUs, UCLAs, etc.

Now its a generalization that is pretty damn loose, but it would probably hold up more often than not. I guess the simplest explination is that being from a big name school adds something to your application that a no-namer needs to make up for with their performance/quantitative academic qualifications.

I feel like that's weird since a huge number, if not the majority of medical school students are from the top 50 or Ivies.

 

[DocEspana]

I feel like that's weird since a huge number, if not the majority of medical school students are from the top 50 or Ivies.

true. That may confound the observation if its not a 50-50 split but rather a handful of people from lesser known schools at each of the three cases i know about.

my opinion that being from a top school def helps, that remains. My analysis as to why may be premature.

 

[ronaldo23]

Absolutely if its an Ivy league. It definitely means something. But it also means quite a bit if its any major name brand school.

A casual observation of the composition of all the medical schools I've seen well enough to understand the composition of (so.. n=3. My own, my cousins, and my best friends, 2 DOs and a mid-level MD) the smartest kids in the class tend to be from less well known schools and the weaker kids, but not necessarily the worst, tend to be from the Princetons, NYUs, UCLAs, etc.

Now its a generalization that is pretty damn loose, but it would probably hold up more often than not. I guess the simplest explination is that being from a big name school adds something to your application that a no-namer needs to make up for with their performance/quantitative academic qualifications.

In my experience it's the opposite. Those from prestigious schools (I'm referring only to the ones that happen to be very grade DEFLATED like hopkins, uchicago, berkeley) often have GPAs going into med school on the range of ~3.2-3.3, owed largely to the difficulty of their undergrad institution and the competition within. But its these students tend to crush the tests/boards compared to the 4.0 state schoolers from weaker institutions.

But the best predictor of how well you'll do in medical school is probably your MCAT score and overall work ethic, not the school you attended or your GPA.

 

[Goro]

Not just Ivy League. we have a view on our AdCom that, say, a 3.5 from Loyola or Rice is worth more than a 4.0 from No-Name state, or SMU.

Just wondering if coming from a prestigious school (Harvard, Yale, Stanford, etc.) helps in applying to DO programs? I know that students from prestigious schools tend to shoot more for MD programs, so maybe there is a chance that students from highly ranked schools are not seen very often in the applicant pool, thereby giving them an advantage at DO schools? I'm not bashing DO schools in any way, as I am seriously considering applying to them. Just curious.

 

[IamaBanana]

In my experience it's the opposite. Those from prestigious schools (I'm referring only to the ones that happen to be very grade DEFLATED like hopkins, uchicago, berkeley) often have GPAs going into med school on the range of ~3.2-3.3, owed largely to the difficulty of their undergrad institution and the competition within. But its these students tend to crush the tests/boards compared to the 4.0 state schoolers from weaker institutions.

But the best predictor of how well you'll do in medical school is probably your MCAT score and overall work ethic, not the school you attended or your GPA.

I agree. Ivies, top 50s, all these things aren't what you want to look at. It's about grade inflation and some of the ivies are the worst offenders. Schools know which schools inflate, which ones deflate, and make their decision based on that. Also the apparent challenge of your classes factors in. If you went to an ivy that is a known for inflation and your major required very few (or you just avoided) advanced science courses then no, it won't help. Adcoms are savvy dudes.

 

[Sinfest]

Not just Ivy League. we have a view on our AdCom that, say, a 3.5 from Loyola or Rice is worth more than a 4.0 from No-Name state, or SMU.

I doubt that

 

[IamaBanana]

ESPECIALLY at DO schools, because with an average GPA of 3.5 you're in extreme inflation/deflation zone.

 

[zoomzoom123]

I doubt that

Why do you doubt that? I clearly graduated from one of those hahaha

 

[DocEspana]

See I'm confused now because everything ive ever heard, experienced, and had explained to me suggests that all state schools and regionally known privates will deflate GPAs and have solid reasoning for doing so. While ivys, and nationally known privates have incentive to inflate grades. Sports players, who always have inflated grades being the exception in all cases.

It would make me think that the GPA observation you made is not actuallu accurate because it incorrectly identifies who has inflated and deflated grades. Which leads me back to my original suggestion, the school name, regardless of gpa, is a positive factor. If you don't have the school name, you have to make up for that elsewhere, as most people will have the name brand school. This why a given student from a lesser known undergrad who makes it in is more likely (im my unscientific observations) to be a top of the class student than a name brand student picked at random.
P

If this holds true at other places besides tourony, touroca, and umdnj-newark is what will differentiate this as trend instead of an isolated phenomena

Edit: not that my understanding of who inflates and doesnt is intrinsically correct, but its the same grouping and reasoning I've heard from multiple sources discussing the trend. I'm hesitant to believe state schools inflate when I've never heard that before and I've heard solid logic explained for why they should never inflate. I just need to hear the logic for your end (id type mine if I weren't in sign out eight now editing this. Maybe later today)

 

[donkeykong1]

I'm a fellow Ivy leaguer, and yes it was brought up at my MD and DO interviews. Not sure if it helped though.

 

[Sinfest]

Why do you doubt that? I clearly graduated from one of those hahaha

A difference of 0.5 in GPA is HUGE. Your schools name isn't going to make up for a gap that large.

If the gap were much smaller, let's say 3.5 GPA from UC Berkeley vs. 3.6 GPA from CSU Channel Islands, then I could believe it.

 

[zoomzoom123]

A difference of 0.5 in GPA is HUGE. Your schools name isn't going to make up for a gap that large.

If the gap were much smaller, let's say 3.5 GPA from UC Berkeley vs. 3.6 GPA from CSU Channel Islands, then I could believe it.

Yea, I agree 0.5 is a big difference, but the name definitely has some sort of advantage. I still wonder how AdComs compare GPAs from all these different types of schools.

 

[IamaBanana]

Sports players, who always have inflated grades being the exception in all cases.

Absolutely untrue. What sports are we talking about? What division? What major? Do you really think that the tenured protein biochemistry professor is going to give a break to some jock just because he plays a sport? Sorry to react strongly but I hear this a lot and almost exclusively from people who didn't play sports. I played a contact DIII sport for a crappy team, worked my butt off, spent vast amounts of time and energy, and got zero leniency academically. Lots of times I would have games the night before a big test and it sucked. The only reason sports players sometimes get higher GPAs is because they take courses like Geology 101 (Rocks for Jocks). The culture of relaxed grading on athletes is very much a thing of the past. If anything, I found more resistance from professors than my classmates when asking for help because of the stereotype that comes with being an athlete.

Example: I had to make up a bio lab because I had a game during the scheduled lab (U. policy said that is an excused absence: games over class, class over practice). A girl was there. Prof walked in, said "what's her excuse?" TA says "She said she didn't feel well." "And him?" "He thinks he's some sort of big time [redacted] player." No sarcasm, completely serious.

I have a huge amount of respect for the guys who can take the high level courses, play a high time commitment sport, and still get great GPAs. They worked for it, they didn't get a free pass in anything.

 

[ronaldo23]

See I'm confused now because everything ive ever heard, experienced, and had explained to me suggests that all state schools and regionally known privates will deflate GPAs and have solid reasoning for doing so. While ivys, and nationally known privates have incentive to inflate grades. Sports players, who always have inflated grades being the exception in all cases.

It would make me think that the GPA observation you made is not actuallu accurate because it incorrectly identifies who has inflated and deflated grades. Which leads me back to my original suggestion, the school name, regardless of gpa, is a positive factor. If you don't have the school name, you have to make up for that elsewhere, as most people will have the name brand school. This why a given student from a lesser known undergrad who makes it in is more likely (im my unscientific observations) to be a top of the class student than a name brand student picked at random.
P

If this holds true at other places besides tourony, touroca, and umdnj-newark is what will differentiate this as trend instead of an isolated phenomena

Edit: not that my understanding of who inflates and doesnt is intrinsically correct, but its the same grouping and reasoning I've heard from multiple sources discussing the trend. I'm hesitant to believe state schools inflate when I've never heard that before and I've heard solid logic explained for why they should never inflate. I just need to hear the logic for your end (id type mine if I weren't in sign out eight now editing this. Maybe later today)

While Ivies are known for being large grade inflators, the pre-med and science classes are very rarely like this. The reputation has more to do with fluff liberal arts departments (like sociology) than anything else. Even at Harvard (a school with a very strong inflation reputation), in the sciences the curve is typically set to a B-. Sure, at a state school it may be set to a C, but it doesn't matter how much they deflate or inflate, as you have to consider the intelligence of the student body which far outweighs anything else in determining one's GPA. It is substantially easier to "beat the curve" of individuals averaging a 3.2 and 1050 SAT over those with a 4.0/1560 SAT (old scale) at Harvard. I don't care how badly Harvard inflates: even if their average was curved to a B+ in orgo (which its not) it would still be harder to get a B+ than an A at a bad state school.

Hence why the 3.2 students from prestigious and competitive schools can easily hold their own against 4.0 state kids in medical school.

 

[DocEspana]

Absolutely untrue. What sports are we talking about? What division? What major? Do you really think that the tenured protein biochemistry professor is going to give a break to some jock just because he plays a sport? Sorry to react strongly but I hear this a lot and almost exclusively from people who didn't play sports. I played a contact DIII sport for a crappy team, worked my butt off, spent vast amounts of time and energy, and got zero leniency academically. Lots of times I would have games the night before a big test and it sucked. The only reason sports players sometimes get higher GPAs is because they take courses like Geology 101 (Rocks for Jocks). The culture of relaxed grading on athletes is very much a thing of the past. If anything, I found more resistance from professors than my classmates when asking for help because of the stereotype that comes with being an athlete.

Example: I had to make up a bio lab because I had a game during the scheduled lab (U. policy said that is an excused absence: games over class, class over practice). A girl was there. Prof walked in, said "what's her excuse?" TA says "She said she didn't feel well." "And him?" "He thinks he's some sort of big time [redacted] player." No sarcasm, completely serious.

I have a huge amount of respect for the guys who can take the high level courses, play a high time commitment sport, and still get great GPAs. They worked for it, they didn't get a free pass in anything.

most if not nearly all division 1 programs. division 1 programs are well known for this, and I can personally testify as the relative of a division 1 basketball player and a division 1 football player. They make sure the smartest kids on the team always have to take the test in a separate room with the dumbest kids on the team . there are exceptions. duke comes to mind and other programs like duke . division 2 schools make no bones about it, they put pressure on the professors to raise the grades of the sports players or two make classes available that will enroll the entire team to give out A's and pad the gpa. My oen brother played for two different d2 lacrosse teams due to transfer and knows plenty of other transfers who say its thesame everywhere. and I played division 3 lacrosse, pathetic as it is , and had to do the same smart kid takes the test with the dumb kid technique .

Now 1. Yes two out of the three of these are more cheating than grade inflation and 2. This whole thing applies to the dinner athletes not the smarter ones. But the whole comment was a throw away overgeneralization to prevent someone from saying that state schools do inflate grades since everyone on this board who played sports can attest to theae things going on to keep the dinner players above the how limit. Never expected someone to take offense to it being overgeberalized. My bad.

 

[DocEspana]

Hence why the 3.2 students from prestigious and competitive schools can easily hold their own against 4.0 state kids in medical school.

Fair enough..... But my point was that the above comment is not what you see. Anecdotally the ivy students are *not* holding their own. Though i use only 3 schools as my basis. 2 DO and a midlevel MD. Obviously my whole commetary falls apart if its selection bias, and I doubt it would hold within the elite med schools. I think the dichotomy of midlevel ivy studets (and elite privates) with high scoring lesser names is required for any difference to show at all. If everyone is 3.9 and 34, then everyone is the same.

 

[retro]

As far as I'm aware of, most Ivy Leagues inflate the grades as if they are air balloons. But of course, not every Ivy Leagues would do this (Cornell is a major grade deflating school). On the other hand, most state schools are tough because they need to abide by the state law and can only give out A's to certain % of the class. In schools like UC, U of Michigan, etc with numerous pre-meds, it's even harder to obtain decent grades. We are not dealing with Business School MBA programs here (where school names are looked at thoroughly)...and I'm sure the admissions committees are not stupid enough to know what actually goes on in these institution. I don't think DO schools will give that much advantage for the applicants from prestigious schools as opposed to those from state schools at least.

 

[Sophocles]

As far as I'm aware of, most Ivy Leagues inflate the grades as if they are air balloons. But of course, not every Ivy Leagues would do this (Cornell is a major grade deflating school). On the other hand, most state schools are tough because they need to abide by the state law and can only give out A's to certain % of the class. In schools like UC, U of Michigan, etc with numerous pre-meds, it's even harder to obtain decent grades. We are not dealing with Business School MBA programs here (where school names are looked at thoroughly)...and I'm sure the admissions committees are not stupid enough to know what actually goes on in these institution. I don't think DO schools will give that much advantage for the applicants from prestigious schools as opposed to those from state schools at least.

I'm glad that someone actually corrected this. Although there are some schools like Harvard that inflate grades, Cornell and Columbia are known for deflating grades. Although I have seen some pretty easy majors in Columbia and many people have great GPA's in that respect, but grade deflations usually occur in majors in the sciences. But, I wonder if applicants that come from these schools simply have a WOW factor for medical schools? I don't know if it is justified but I am curious.