I was thinking about it and wondering if graduating in 4 years is looked at differently (more positively) than graduating in 5 when considering admissions to medical school. For instance, if someone takes 15+ hours a semester and graduates in 4 years with somewhat lower grades than someone who takes 12 hours each semester or less and graduates in 5 years, who would be looked upon more favorably by admissions?
Does the number of years spent in undergrad affect admissions?
- Thread starter zachjm2
- Start date
I assume those are preferred but I'm still wondering if being able to show that you can handle a heavy workload and do well carries extra weight in a decision. I just have known some pre-meds who were only taking 2 or 3 classes a semester while other people like myself take 6 or 7 classes. I would think that taking less classes would not look as good on an application.
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 623
- Reaction score
- 7
Agreed. Many schools realize that today's students rarely take the traditional path of 4 straight years through college and then off to medical school. In some instances it may come up during an interview, but it typically doesn't matter during the screening process. Higher MCAT, GPA / better EC's stands out much more than an extra year or two of school.
-admissions committee interviewer / senior medical student
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2007
- Messages
- 623
- Reaction score
- 7
This depends on what you're doing with your time. 3 or 4 classes are acceptable if you also work fulltime to support your spouse and children. While course-load may be looked at, the difference between 4 and 5 years is still relatively small. Now if you take 8 years to get a BS, thats a different story.
