Does Undergrad Matter?

[agirlwithdrdreams]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I go to a state school. I am aiming high for medical school (T20 or so). Will my state school undergrad choice hold me back?

Obviously being a smaller and less "prestige" school has disadvantages, including fewer opportunities, less hype, seen as less-than, etc. But will it really be a deciding factor for adcoms? Will my GPA be seen as less than someone with the same GPA at one of the T20 or so undergrads?

 

[Damson]

For premeds, where you attend undergrad has minimal significance. State schools are just fine.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Really only matters if you go to HYP (and even then, not a ton). Otherwise it’s all the same. No one sees your state school as less-than. No one who matters anyway.

 

[LunaOri]

It may make some difference, but won't prevent you from getting into medical school. Yes, the same GPA from a top 20 school (one without grade inflation) will be seen as "better" than the same GPA from a minor state college, but this is only one part of your application. Pay attention to all the other factors (MCAT, ECs, clinical, volunteer, maybe research) which have little or nothing to do with the rank of your undergrad school, and you'll be fine.

 

[deleted1082375]

I have specifically had faculty tell me it does matter in the admissions process.

Just using Penn as an example here. I have zero affiliation with them.

Would you fare better having a 3.7 from Penn State or from a low to mid tier state school? Penn State all the way. More competition and better students at Penn.

But if we're talking a 3.7 from a low to mid tier and a 3.4 from Penn, then the difference should be obvious.

The great equalizer is the MCAT. Do your best. If you have a good GPA, MCAT, and clinical experiences, it shouldn't be a problem getting in somewhere. Top tier schools tend to select students from other top tier schools (it's a pedigree thing). Not saying it's impossible but it could be an uphill battle. At the end of the day, going to any school with a good research center and reputation will be adequate. The school won't make you a better doctor, that's on you.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

This has been debated numerous times on SDN. Please check past threads.

 

[Gilakend]

It matters, how much differs and no one could give you a straight answer. Like others have said a 3.7 from HYPSM means more than a 3.7 from Billy-Bobs Community College that's connected to the bowling alley.

FWIW I went to an unranked (like 95% acceptance, open admissions) state school and go to T20 med school. My best advice is just to take advantage of what you have. I had TONS of opportunities just by asking and sending a random email whereas people at bigger schools tend to have to fight much harder for opportunities (going into my freshman year I had already been offered spots for 2 paid lab positions, which eventually yielded a pub my sophomore or junior year. Literally, all I did was spend like 25 min searching for and applying for these. I had exactly 0 experience or knowledge of anything science or lab-related). This compared to some of my classmate's experiences who went to top-tier UGs is vastly different. So while it might not have the resources in terms of quantity of the HYPSM of the world, they were MUCH more accessible to me.

So, yes it matters, but what matters much more is doing well. It would be more of a deciding factor for interview invites in my opinion than adcom decisions. Anybody who, after having met them, would make an acceptance decision based on a UG should not be an adcom imo. So in conclusion, do well and be a normal, likable person at interviews and you'll do great.

 

[ingobingo]

I have specifically had faculty tell me it does matter in the admissions process.

Just using Penn as an example here. I have zero affiliation with them.

Would you fare better having a 3.7 from Penn State or from a low to mid tier state school? Penn State all the way. More competition and better students at Penn.

But if we're talking a 3.7 from a low to mid tier and a 3.4 from Penn, then the difference should be obvious.

The great equalizer is the MCAT. Do your best. If you have a good GPA, MCAT, and clinical experiences, it shouldn't be a problem getting in somewhere. Top tier schools tend to select students from other top tier schools (it's a pedigree thing). Not saying it's impossible but it could be an uphill battle. At the end of the day, going to any school with a good research center and reputation will be adequate. The school won't make you a better doctor, that's on you.

Just to clarify, are you referring to the University of Pennsylvania (in Philadelphia, PA) or Pennsylvania State University (in State College, PA)? I'm from PA and Penn/UPenn is typically referring to the University of Pennsylvania whereas Penn State/PSU is typically referring to Pennsylvania State University.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

These arguments are generally moot because if an applicant from Penn and an applicant from Unknown State both have a 3.7, the same MCAT score, the same ECs, the same quality PS and secondaries, the same quality of LORs, and interviewed the same, and Med School wanted them both, they would just accept them both. It’s not a zero sum game.

Just go to the school that will give you the smallest amount of debt and do your best while you’re there. You might get a boost from HYPSM, but it is not so significant that it is worth being concerned about. (And the P in HYPSM is not Penn.)

 

[mvsrocks]

I heard the following from an adcom at a big research school (my UG): adcoms have a lot of experience with different schools and how well students from those schools tend to do in med school. Therefore, if you go to a tough school and have a low GPA, you may be given some slack. In fact, they gave an example where they knew the difference between two biochem courses at my UG, one easier than the other but both fulfilling the pre-req. They even knew different letter writers from my school and their reputations. Thus, I believe going to a tough UG and doing well is beneficial. However, going to a cheaper in-state school and doing well is also fine.

Tl;dr: just go wherever is cheap and you can do well at

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Consensus seems to be that having a higher GPA is better than going to a more prestigious undergrad. I've also seen that applicants attending T20 undergrad schools may get a slight bump in consideration but it's nothing significant. I read a thread once where a guy from Tufts was asking if his school is "respected" in the admissions process, and from the responses it kinda just seems like everything past the T20 just gets lumped in all together. Which doesn't make too much sense, but whatever. Since pre reqs are graded on a curve, going to a school that is lower in the rankings will usually mean that being to the right end of the bell curve in these classes is a lot easier at these schools.

Doesn't make too much sense to me that a biomedical engineer from MIT with a 3.4 would be of lower consideration than a 3.9 psych major somewhere like ASU, but what do I know

My N=2 BME grads from JHU (#1 in BME, not MIT) did not get much love with lower GPA despite above 95 percentile MCAT and 2 gap years. So stats rule especially for ORMs.

 

[deleted1082375]

Just to clarify, are you referring to the University of Pennsylvania (in Philadelphia, PA) or Pennsylvania State University (in State College, PA)? I'm from PA and Penn/UPenn is typically referring to the University of Pennsylvania whereas Penn State/PSU is typically referring to Pennsylvania State University.

read more closely.

 

[ingobingo]

read more closely.

Oh shoot, haha. I had to look at your reply, then read your original comment, and repeat 2-3 more times before I actually understood the original post... Got it!