Does upward trend play a big factor?

[dmd87]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hi all,

I'm new to this, so thought I'd ask away. Anyone know if upward trend plays a big role in admissions?

 

[razblo]

I know it's significant and it's something they look for but I don't know how significant it is.

 

[dmd87]

Thanks! Also, does doing well in upper year science courses (anat, physio etc) help overcome a lower end cumulative GPA? I've heard in the past it does, but I don't know if its really a myth or what the deal exactly is.

 

[doc3232]

It is a well known fact that upper division classes are often easier than the pre-reqs that are actually weed-out classes.
That's why 90% of students have an upward trend. Hence, most upward trends mean nothing.

 

[playa2652]

I wouldn't say it's a well-known fact that upper-division courses are easier. I would say that since most people take gen bio and gen chem their first or second year that they have a harder time initially, but eventually learn to develop better study methods and know their limits/strengths on the material they are learning. Also, to the OP, upward trend does play a significant factor. I averaged about a 3.0 gpa overall and science for my first two years in undergrad, and then I got 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.7, 3.65 for my last semester. I would have gotten a 4.0 if I didn't have to take biochemistry, but luckily I was able to pull off a B-. The point I am trying to make is that upper division courses are going to be more detailed and difficult since it's not touching the surface anymore. However, it is easier to some degree since most people study harder for these classes since their relevance in dental school is significantly higher. I don't think UCSF (my #1 choice school, which I am attending this fall) would have even considered me for an interview if I didn't have an improving GPA.

 

[tinman831]

It is a well known fact that upper division classes are often easier than the pre-reqs that are actually weed-out classes.
That's why 90% of students have an upward trend. Hence, most upward trends mean nothing.

No it's not.

 

[dl9006]

It is a well known fact that upper division classes are often easier than the pre-reqs that are actually weed-out classes.
That's why 90% of students have an upward trend. Hence, most upward trends mean nothing.

lol i don't know if i would say that....

it depends on what courses you take i suppose


i found 3rd yr organic chem much harder than any 2nd yr org chem courses that i took.

for me, i found 3rd year to be the most brutal yr.

endless labs with many tedious reports combined with less standardized teaching(ie messy, crappy notes from senior profs who can't teach) made my life in 3rd yr a living hell

 

[yuppers]

I wouldn't say it's a well-known fact that upper-division courses are easier. I would say that since most people take gen bio and gen chem their first or second year that they have a harder time initially, but eventually learn to develop better study methods and know their limits/strengths on the material they are learning.

I think that in the upper level courses students began to get into the stuff that they enjoy and want to learn about. Also the knowlegde builds on itself. Therefore, we see a upward trend. Study methods would already be in place after the 1st or 2nd semester when we all realized that college was not high school. just my 2 cents.

 

[doc3232]

Fine...you got me on a technicality, but nonetheless a majority of students have this upward trend and it is not due to an increased effort.

 

[preOMFS]

Fine...you got me on a technicality, but nonetheless a majority of students have this upward trend and it is not due to an increased effort.

I'd have to disagree. I think it has to be due to an increased effort. How can you get better grades in a class that's harder without studying more. It may be the case for some, but the majority of students with upward trends probably tried harder in their later years. I know this was the case for me.

 

[tinman831]

a majority of students have this upward trend

No they don't.

Where are you pulling these statistics from? It might be a good idea to show some data to back up your assertions. 🙂

 

[razblo]

I'd have to disagree. I think it has to be due to an increased effort. How can you get better grades in a class that's harder without studying more. It may be the case for some, but the majority of students with upward trends probably tried harder in their later years. I know this was the case for me.

I agree. I was used to gen ed classes where I'd just show up and get A's and then I realized I had to put effort into the sciences to do well.

 

[doc3232]

No they don't.

Where are you pulling these statistics from? It might be a good idea to show some data to back up your assertions. 🙂

There was a chart of gpa's during each year in college of students at my school that had all these stats.
First and second years had low (relative) gpa's (for those years) and third/fourths had higher gpa's.

Also, upper division classes ALWAYS have better curves than the pre-req ones like bio, chem etc (again at my school).


Well...it's only my school so I won't say anything else, but I still believe in what I said.

 

[uclaDDS101]

Fine...you got me on a technicality, but nonetheless a majority of students have this upward trend and it is not due to an increased effort.

I see this at my school too. Lower division sciences are often very competitive and serve as weeder classes. Although some upper div science classes can be harder here (e.g., physiology, higher level biochem, etc.), the majority of science major classes are less competitive (and thus relatively easier) in the latter years.

 

[razblo]

I see this at my school too. Lower division sciences are often very competitive and serve as weeder classes. Although some upper div science classes can be harder here (e.g., physiology, higher level biochem, etc.), the majority of science major classes are less competitive (and thus relatively easier) in the latter years.

I definitely agree for physiology. Physiology is taught in the largest lecture hall on my campus which holds ~300 students and the teacher told us after the first test that he expected ~50% of the class to fail or drop the class because that's historically what happens.

 

[preOMFS]

I definitely agree for physiology. Physiology is taught in the largest lecture hall on my campus which holds ~300 students and the teacher told us after the first test that he expected ~50% of the class to fail or drop the class because that's historically what happens.

Physiology is a lower division at your school? Must be a pretty light class.