Does it matter what undergrad you go to?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Members do not see this ad.
That is why the MCAT is weighted more than GPA. A lot of people bitch about that, but it is the "great equalizer". An inflated 3.8 will not help you on the MCAT.

As for that posted test; it isn't any harder than the stuff I was getting at UT last fall. That prof curved to a B-. I'm taking org2 at CC this summer. The prof is IIT and Cambridge educated and has taught all over the world (top schools down to CC). His tests take 2-4 hrs and are not easy. The next test is take-home since over half the class is failing.

For what it's worth, the toughest org prof in central TX has a main office at the local CC (though he teaches all over) and he does not curve. I've seen bright pre-meds at UT Austin brought to tears at mere mention of his name.
 
Well this thread seems to have become more defending whether one's school has grade inflation or not. It seems rather funny to me that the students from Cornell are justifying the difficulty of the school by showing everyone an orgo test. Cornell is a great school, no doubt about it, and everyone knows that, but is there a real need to show us a test just so you can make your school look better. Look, there is a problem with the elitist private school attitude that I have always hated. I know this attitude cause i go to one of those institutions, Emory. Now, lots of private school students look down on regular public schools (exceptions UVa, Berkeley, UMich, UNC, UCLA). Personally it doesn't matter where you go to school as long as you do your best and are happy there. I'm not going to lie and say prestige isn't a factor, but it is far from the most important factor. I have asked admission counselours at Baylor, Cornell, and Northwestern Med School, and none of them said that where you attend undergrad makes much of a difference. Private school students tend to look at themselves differently in comparision to public school students. As much as people would deny it, that's part of that elitist private school attitude. Hell I know I do it at times. I have asked friends from the northeast why northeasterners look down upon public schools, and they say that it is because there are no good public schools there. Oh yea and if anyone cares orgo and most sciences classes at Emory are curved to a B-/C+ avg 🙄
 
What it really depends on is the smarts and how hardworking your classmates are at the school you are at. If you are at PennState, the avg. SAT I score in your class is at most 1100 wheras at Cornell it's probably about 1400. So a B- at PSU (middle of the curve) does NOT equal one at Cornell. Places like Wake Forest, Sewanee, Haverford, Swarthmore, and REED....will have 1350-1500 avg SATs in their class and STILL have Cs as their average grade....those places are the least inflated of all schools (avg. GPA between 3.1-3.2). Hopkins Cornell and UChicago have similar levels (avg GPA of 3.3) of grade inflation, while Stanford and Harvard have the worst (GPA avg of 3.5).

Bottom line -- MCAT above 31, your GPA is probably accurate. (i.e. you worked hard = good grades, you didn't = bad grades)

MCAT less than 25 but GPA in the 3.7+ range -- you are either a bad standardized test taker (possible, but not as likely), or your school or course of study is not very demanding.

MCAT above 35 and GPA <3.5 -- you drank/smoked up/overslept/ate too much. I know many people in this category.

If you are at PSU and get a 40 on your MCAT, you are probably just as qualified as the guy who gets a 39 from Yale. But your grades should be near perfect; otherwise you didn't work as hard as you should have...
 
i would like to say what others have said already

go to a better school only if you think you can hang with the best. I would say that maintaining a 3.5+ gpa would get you through a lot of primary screenings.

otherwise, be like me and get your azz kicked like i did at berkeley. Even 'bonus points' can't help me. I bet my 3.1 gpa won't even make it past 80% of the primary screenings.


and while we're on the subject of comparing schools... I heard that Stanford has a 3.3 gpz average, while berkeley has a 2.7 gpa average, like cornell. Pretty cut-throat here.
There are too many nerds here that memorize too much and don't sleep 😛 They all kicked my azz. :laugh:
 
just a little note..
U of Chicago...does not have any inflation.
we called it deflation. the avg gpa is more like 2.9, but people do very well on the MCATS. (i have many friends with 3.0 gpa but 36 MCAT). grades don't indicate knowledge at u of c.

if u apply to pritzger, they know this better than anyone and they wont count out u fo c kids based on the number game.

it is a great school...but a killer for pre-med
if u can hack it there as pre-med you are GOLDEN
(yeah i had a rough time)
 
With regards to the Cornell Organic Chem Exam.

Sure, at other schools you get similar tests. You would expect nothing less, because organic chemistry is the same everywhere.

The difference is, that in Cornell's Organic Chemistry class, you cover a lot more material than the same course at state schools. Also, you go much more into depth in each subject. If you've seen similar prelims at UT-Austin or whatever, the difference is, that there the class probably has a mean of 40 on the test. At Cornell, it's around 80, and the class is curved to a B-.
 
While I dont know the validity of the above data (since its linked to a messageboard), I have to say I would not be too terribly surprised if the data was relatively accurate.

I think people, including many posting on this thread, have a tendency to way overestimate their undergrad's difficulty to rationalize their grades and the amount of time they spend working.
 
The vast majority of students entering at all of the above schools came in with 4.0 GPAs for their high schools. Many were valedictorians or top 5% of class. For those 50% of Harvard students that get B's or C's in their classes, even just occasionally, Harvard would seem to be a very difficult place to keep up good grades.

"A recent study found more than 50 percent of grades at Harvard were either A or A-minus and over 90 percent of the university's students graduate with honors." (from the third site posted by thewebthsp)

My point is that even if your school has grade inflation, when you're competing with the best in the nation for your grades, it can feel like "cut throat competition."
 
To Shantanu Thakur: "The difference is, that in Cornell's Organic Chemistry class, you cover a lot more material than the same course at state schools. Also, you go much more into depth in each subject."

Please explain how an organic chemistry class at Cornell would actually cover more material and/or be more "in depth" than an organic chemistry course at UC Berkeley. Seeing as Berkeley is the #1 chemistry program in the country, I don't think it would really be possible to find chemistry courses that cover more material than the ones taught at Berkeley. I think organic chemistry is hard no matter where one goes to take it. However, one would only expect that the schools that are at the top of the departmental rankings would have the best programs, best professors, best research, etc. As a result, wouldn't the classes at the top cover more material as well as going to "in depth" into the material? I posted the links to the National Research Council rankings of chemistry departments as well as the US News rankings for chemistry departments.

To see the US News rankings: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/grad/rankings/phdsci/brief/che_brief.php

To see the National Research Council rankings: http://stat.tamu.edu/~jnewton/nrc_rankings/area28.html

"Long Live the Order of the Golden Bear."
 
Originally posted by ShantanuThakur
With regards to the Cornell Organic Chem Exam.

Sure, at other schools you get similar tests. You would expect nothing less, because organic chemistry is the same everywhere.

The difference is, that in Cornell's Organic Chemistry class, you cover a lot more material than the same course at state schools. Also, you go much more into depth in each subject. If you've seen similar prelims at UT-Austin or whatever, the difference is, that there the class probably has a mean of 40 on the test. At Cornell, it's around 80, and the class is curved to a B-.
Click to expand...

I actually havent seen any of the numbers for the public schools, but it has nothing to do with the material. There are ACS standards to many Orgo classes. The classes dont differ between schools too significantly, however the students do.
 
honestly, if you have a desire to be surrounded by an intellectually curious and dynamic student body, then by all means transfer. BUt understand that you sacrifice your 4.0 in the process. I had the chance to attend a small 7 year med program and turned it down for Penn, only to receive a 3.3. Granted, I've my time here-and have worked pretty hard in the process--yet I've just been notified that I won't be sent a secondary from a very low ranked med school.. Coming from a top undergrad certainly doesn't secure anything except for prestige--med schools aren't lenient with Ivy leaguers and their peers. With that said, be prepared to work much harder for the same grades at NWestern. The competition in premed sci classes is usually fierce at top U's, with many bright people receiving B's and C's.

I don't think med schools should be preferentially filled with every IVy leaguer who applies--but that greater consideration is given to students who are from very competitive pools.
 
Originally posted by BerkeleyPremed
To Shantanu Thakur: "The difference is, that in Cornell's Organic Chemistry class, you cover a lot more material than the same course at state schools. Also, you go much more into depth in each subject."

Please explain how an organic chemistry class at Cornell would actually cover more material and/or be more "in depth" than an organic chemistry course at UC Berkeley. Seeing as Berkeley is the #1 chemistry program in the country, I don't think it would really be possible to find chemistry courses that cover more material than the ones taught at Berkeley. I think organic chemistry is hard no matter where one goes to take it. However, one would only expect that the schools that are at the top of the departmental rankings would have the best programs, best professors, best research, etc. As a result, wouldn't the classes at the top cover more material as well as going to "in depth" into the material? I posted the links to the National Research Council rankings of chemistry departments as well as the US News rankings for chemistry departments.

To see the US News rankings: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/grad/rankings/phdsci/brief/che_brief.php

To see the National Research Council rankings: http://stat.tamu.edu/~jnewton/nrc_rankings/area28.html

"Long Live the Order of the Golden Bear."
Click to expand...

I've noticed you're pretty vocal and strong opinioned for someone that isn't applying to school for another two years. First of all those rankings are for GRADUATE programs. Whether or not that has any influence on the undergrad program is debateable.

BTW I went to Cal too.
 
Originally posted by exmike
I've noticed you're pretty vocal and strong opinioned for someone that isn't applying to school for another two years. First of all those rankings are for GRADUATE programs. Whether or not that has any influence on the undergrad program is debateable.

BTW I went to Cal too.
Click to expand...


I went there too. and yes, people like to use the Graduate school rankings to rank undergrad, which is erroneous in itself.

IMO... berkeley undergrad sucks. Ochem is thoroughly taught, but i wouldn't give "Teacher of the year" award to the professor.

berkeley is hard because the next guy is just as aggressive as you are. To get that higher grade, you only have to answer one more question correctly on an exam than your peers do.

I am currently doing my post-bacc work at CalState LA, and I must say that the profs here are as good, if not better, than the profs at berkeley........ when it comes to teaching.
 
My quick reply:

Stay at uic - if you do well uic won't limit you from getting into schools...
 
Hey tylerdred,

After clogging your thread with irrelevant stuff about grade inflation, I figure I owe it to you to at least address your question.

First, if you have a perfect GPA at U. of Illinois at Chicago, then it sounds like your are a bright and very motivated student. Other posters have hinted that you can expect your GPA to plumet in transfering to the more competitive school. I don't think you will find this to be the case. It takes hard work to get good grades at a top school, but your 4.0 demonstrates hard work. As long as you don't give up the minute you set foot on Northwestern's steps, I would expect you would continue to achieve at a very high level.

My uncle did 2 years at Cal State Chico and got a 4.0. He then managed to gain acceptance to Berkeley as a transfer in the College of Chemistry. Even though his 4.0 was from Chico, his grades at Berkeley remained around 3.95. After working overseas for awhile, he applied to M.B.A. programs and was accepted at Wharton, Yale, Columbia, U. of Chicago, and Stanford. He would never have even been looked at at any of those programs with a degree from Chico, and he would not have landed the overseas job that got his career going without the Berkeley name.

I think transferring is a very smart move. You saved two years of private school tuition by starting at your state school, so essentially you will be getting the Northwestern name for half the price of other students there. And if you can turn your 4.0 at U. of Illinois into above a 3.8 at Northwestern, your bid for medical school will be improved.

Good luck.
 
To Link26: "I went there too. and yes, people like to use the Graduate school rankings to rank undergrad, which is erroneous in itself."

Do you even know what the graduate school rankings are based on? They're based on the quality of the faculty and the breadth of research conducted at the given institution. Wouldn't these factors also influence undergraduate students? Don't the same professors who teach graduate students at Cal also teach undergrads? I understand that the graduate school rankings are certainly more geared towards people interested in research for a possible career in teaching and/or a career as a research scientist. I know we can't "rank" undergraduate programs based on the graduate school criteria, but we can certainly get an overall feel for the quality of the faculty as well as the breadth of material covered. I never said that I would rank Berkeley over Cornell for undergrad. I just said that I'm sure Berkeley's organic chemistry courses would be just as comprehensive and difficult as organic chemistry courses at Cornell or at any other institution for that matter.

"Long Live the Order of the Golden Bear."
 
Hi,

It is true that graduate school rankings can be used as an indicator of undergraduate strengths (in the department so ranked). My school was ranked first in the country for its biomedical engineering graduate program. The BME faculty at my school are some of the top researchers in the field, and they were also teaching the undergraduate courses. As significant as that, my school also received a boatload of money for research in this field and related fields, and had top-of-the-line equipment and cutting-edge research going on. This is important because many undergraduates in this department were involved in research, and research provides excellent opportunities to learn beyond what is taught in class.

The classes in this department were of the most difficult, challenging, thorough, and hands-on classes in the school. I think this is generally the rule for top-ranked (departmentally, at least) institutions, and not the exception.

Oh yeah, the organic chemistry classes at my school were also pretty damn tough. I don't think Cornell has the market cornered on difficult courses.

--Vinoy
 
I think it barely matters what school you go to with the major difference being that your MCAT will matter more if you go to a school that the admissions people don't know of... Your mcat validates your gpa... just my 2 cents.
 
well I go to a **** school
 
Elite schools do get an edge, I have found multiple references to people coming out of schools like Amherst, Duke (my skool) etc that have gpa's that would throw out a normal premed from the pool (gpa's of over a 3.0-3.2 do not ruin a person's chances... though they're diminished). I even found a site ... I think UF's that said that a student with a 3.1 science gpa from Duke was considered a GOOD student. Of course, a school like Duke has a MCAT ave. of 32... this nubmer is based on accepted students (of course this may be slightly skewed up b/c acceptances go from 90-100% depending on the year). The point is that our ave. is a 32 MCAT... do you realize how horrible this makes our classes?

UNFORTUNATELY a place that produces such massive numbers on the MCAT still burns jackasses like myself who chem/physics double majored or some engineers, and get lower gpa's (ie 3.0-3.4). It's hard to imagine a person from NC State getting rejected w/ a 3.9 32 mcat from most med skools... My gpa kind of sucks, but I know enough to be positive that I could easily get a 3.8+ at state. And State isn't even a bad school.

Kids w/ high gpas and good mcats from a place like Duke or schools like it make up most of the best med schools. Face facts. The numbers are insane when you consider how many people make up a med school class. It's the lower/middle schools that burn the elite school posers such as myself .....

Duke's AVE gpa was listed at a 3.3, I could believe that. However, poli sci/econ/psycho/social psy/BAA/ etc etc inflate the ave by quite a bit. Every chem class I had at Duke was ave.d at a c+/b- ... though I know of no one to get a F.

All my opinion... but I'm fairly certain of most of what I said...
pz

😛

The 3.0 35 MCAT'er has spoken.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
In terms of the time of day, does it matter when I submit secondaries?
Replies
8
Views
2K
pablo213
pablo213
L
  • Locked
What does it take to get into Stanford BRUH
Replies
3
Views
2K
chilly_md
chilly_md
F
Does the type of research I do matter?
Replies
10
Views
781
2026PreMed
2026PreMed
L
SDN Article: Does College Ranking Matter for Medical School Admissions?
Replies
0
Views
451
Lee Burnett
L
F
Can I still go to Med School with an Engineering Undergrad?
Replies
14
Views
2K
FlowRate
FlowRate
Top