- Joined
- Oct 28, 2002
- Messages
- 122
- Reaction score
- 27
Last edited:
Elite school GPA bump factor
- Thread starter doozenberg
- Start date
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2002
- Messages
- 250
- Reaction score
- 0
From the stats I have for Duke undergrad and US News, it looks like about .1 at most mid-tier medical schools. This value tapers off quickly for elite medical schools.
You also have to remember, medical schools know that elite schools are also plagued by grade inflation. For example, the avg GPA at Harvard is 3.7. So if a Harvard grad is competing against a University of Chicago grad, there might be some correction there as well.
You also have to remember, medical schools know that elite schools are also plagued by grade inflation. For example, the avg GPA at Harvard is 3.7. So if a Harvard grad is competing against a University of Chicago grad, there might be some correction there as well.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2000
- Messages
- 365
- Reaction score
- 1
i've heard similar to the above poster, except, that you get about .2 to .3 pts added to your gpa if you are from an ivy or another top school......and lose .2 to .3 if from a small private school...........and a friend of mine who's uncle was on the adcom at u of chicago said they have a pt system on the school, that is factored in with the rest of teh app.....such that a good school maybe worth like 5 and a crappy one a 1
nero
nero
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2002
- Messages
- 250
- Reaction score
- 0
Duke University gives out statistics for its accepted students. I was just comparing average values between Duke undergrads and national undergrads (from US News).
It seems for top 20 schools, the GPA gain might be around .1 (that is, Duke students with .1 GPA lower than national average still got in). This is of course completely unscientific, as other factors go into GPA. But I would not imagine adcoms giving more than .2 ever.
It seems for top 20 schools, the GPA gain might be around .1 (that is, Duke students with .1 GPA lower than national average still got in). This is of course completely unscientific, as other factors go into GPA. But I would not imagine adcoms giving more than .2 ever.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2002
- Messages
- 159
- Reaction score
- 0
I never heard about the 0.2 to 0.3 penalty for going to a small, private school either. While I do think that you get a small boost for going to an ivy/top ten, I don't think it's all that big of an advantage. In the case of deciding between a student with a 3.5 from an ivy and a 3.7 from a small school, I think the adcoms would compare the MCAT scores before they started playing guessing games with the GPAs.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2002
- Messages
- 250
- Reaction score
- 0
http://www.boston.com/globe/metro/packages/harvard_honors/
Towards the middle it says half of the grades given out are A or A-'s. Meaning 50% of grades are 4.0/3.7
You are correct though, I misinterpreted the information (which I had read a long time ago). Thanks for pointing that out. Needless to say, my point is maintained, for if 50% of the grades given out are 4.0/3.7, the avg. gpa must be incredibly high.
Towards the middle it says half of the grades given out are A or A-'s. Meaning 50% of grades are 4.0/3.7
You are correct though, I misinterpreted the information (which I had read a long time ago). Thanks for pointing that out. Needless to say, my point is maintained, for if 50% of the grades given out are 4.0/3.7, the avg. gpa must be incredibly high.
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2002
- Messages
- 1,302
- Reaction score
- 0
Yeah, and you only need a B- average in your major or so to get honors, or a B average overall, so like 91% of Harvard graduates receive it.
Stanford's grade inflation is supposed to be really bad too; from what I've heard, one of the most inflated.
I read the above article when it came out. It's a little misleading about Yale, actually. From what I've heard, Yale caps honors at 30% (5% summa, 10% magna, and 15% cum laude). However, you can receive "Distinction" in a major, which might account for the other 21% they're adding.
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2002
- Messages
- 92
- Reaction score
- 0
.
damn, 2.7 average for honors? is that right?
Also, I was wondering what the cut-off to get on the Dean's List is at different schools? At my school, you need a 3.7 gpa consecutive semesters and I thought that was standard across universities, but I have definitely heard of places where a 3.5 gets you on the Dean's List, and even a 3.0 at other schools.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2002
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 0
Just for the record, Stanford does NOT have grade inflation- not for the premed/science/engineering classes, anyway, which are as rigorous as heck. The Bio classes are not curved, so one quarter, only 5/500 people got A's. And there are lots of classes where no one gets an A.
~ Chem E Chick
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2002
- Messages
- 644
- Reaction score
- 0
she meant in one class during a quarter...as in stanford is on the quarter system (vs. semester).
The average science GPA of applicants to med school from Stanford undergrad over the past three years is 3.44. Hardly inflated. Isn't that just about the national average? And these are the numbers for the pre-meds, not the school as a whole. Their average MCAT is 33. That said, I still don't know what the bump factor is. Oh, and a degree with distinction is awarded to the top 15% of grads (no summa, magna, etc. divisions).
I don't know about the statement, "And there are lots of classes where no one gets an A," though. It seems like a slight exaggeration.
P.S. No matter who wins Big Game, Cal can't get any post-season play! 😛
I don't know about the statement, "And there are lots of classes where no one gets an A," though. It seems like a slight exaggeration.
P.S. No matter who wins Big Game, Cal can't get any post-season play! 😛
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2002
- Messages
- 133
- Reaction score
- 0
yea...no post-season play sucks, but coming off a 1-10 season and after 7 (8?) years of disappointment losing to stanfurd, it's great to see our school excited about football again and hopefully beat you guys 🙂
sorry about the ucla game...we took out the 2nd string qb for you and you still can't beat a 3rd string.
P.S. and what's with 3 stanfurd students registering today and posting for the first time on this thread? are you all getting your friends (or 1 person making 3 names) to stand up for your school?!
Go Bears!!
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2002
- Messages
- 122
- Reaction score
- 27
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2002
- Messages
- 163
- Reaction score
- 0
I guess it depends on the school. But from what I hear most of the small private colleges and a even a number of ivy league schools have huge grade inflations going on. It is true that a lot of bright students are accepted into these schools and that some of the inflation is simply because the students do better. However when the average undergrad GPA at HARVARD is 3.7 and the GPA at my large upper tier state university is 3.0, I think that the gap is too big. I think that a 3.7 GPA from my school is at the very least equivalent if not more difficult to attain than a 3.7 gpa at harvard.
- Joined
- May 30, 2002
- Messages
- 360
- Reaction score
- 1
Originally posted by dpy
the dean's list cutoff at berkeley varies each semester, but it's usually around 3.91 with a minimum of 13 graded units.
by the way...Stanfurd's gonna lose this year!
I think more important is the % of students making Dean's List. At Berkeley, it's the top 4%. Go Bears!
- Joined
- May 30, 2002
- Messages
- 360
- Reaction score
- 1
Please excuse my poor use of grammar in the post above.
- Joined
- May 30, 2002
- Messages
- 360
- Reaction score
- 1
Originally posted by dpy
yea...no post-season play sucks, but coming off a 1-10 season and after 7 (8?) years of disappointment losing to stanfurd, it's great to see our school excited about football again and hopefully beat you guys 🙂
sorry about the ucla game...we took out the 2nd string qb for you and you still can't beat a 3rd string.
Go Bears!!
I'm looking forward to the Big Game too. Too bad the Bay Area doesn't get into it as much as they used to. It hasn't been much of a rivalry after the 7-game streak so I guess the drama is gone for most people...except the Cal faithful. I hope we play some good football this year: keep the penalties down (definitely no more personal fouls, that's just stupid), avoid injuries, and play/cheer our hearts out. It would be great to go out with a bang, espcially since Igber, Boller, Powell, Ward and Asomugha are all Seniors and maybe be leaving this year.
Either way, thank heavens for Tedford. He better stay! We can't have another Mariucci...look at what happened after that: Holmoe! Why, oh why didn't Kesser just fire him? Oh well, bygones.
And I can't believe we're bowl-disqualified due to Mike Ainsworth and what's his name who don't even play here anymore. Goodness gracious. Anyhow, I heard early on in the season that Cal was going to appeal, but seeing how we are doing only so-so in the Pac-10, I guess there's no point. And the NCAA is really being stingy with granting appeal requests.
Are Paus and Olson out for the rest of the season?
BananaSplit
Go Bears!
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2002
- Messages
- 4,697
- Reaction score
- 75
your grades aren't all that bad. i think with an overal GPA of about 3.5 you are still a competitive applicant. As long as you have done some other stuff with your time.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2001
- Messages
- 3,760
- Reaction score
- 1
Thanks, Cabruen, and Nefertari! 🙂
doozenberg, I graduated from Stanford with a 3.5 GPA (3.4 science, 3.6 other). With only a 30M MCAT I did pretty well for myself last year, applying as an August MCATer (14 interviews, 5 acceptances -- 1 top ten, and 6 waitlists, out of 23 applications).
Just try to bring up that science GPA a bit, and you should be fine (assuming your essays, LORs, EC's etc. are excellent). Being from Stanford is definitely a plus.😀
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2002
- Messages
- 316
- Reaction score
- 3
I agree with some other folks on here, who all said that there is less grade inflation in the science courses.
I went to a school with pretty significant grade inflation. Half of my class graduated magna cum laude, which is at least a 3.5 GPA. They are now putting a cap on the numbers receiving honors, so instead of purely going by GPA they will be going to class rank, with only a certain percentage of the class to recieve honors based on their rank. I guess this is similar to how an earlier poster described Yale's system.
But, grade inflation is MUCH MUCH less in the science departments than the humanities. This isn't a criticism, it was just the reality. Science folks also got shafted because no matter how many class hours the course was, it counted as the same number of credits as all other classes. So, all the science courses automatically had labs--so say you took Orgo, with four lecture hours and three lab hours per week. For that, you get one credit. Another person who takes a two hour a week seminar course also gets one credit, for nearly one quarter of the classwork. So, keeping a decent GPA in science at my school was much tougher, than doing so in humanities courses, which in my opinion somewhat offsets the grade inflation.
Also, just because there is significant grade inflation doesn't mean that everybody gets A+'s. What it means is that it isn't too much of an ordeal to land a B+ or an A-. But, you're still gonna have to work your little tail off to get A's or A+'s. Hardly ANYONE at my school got A+'s.
So that's my experience with grade inflation.
Also, I'm not sure about the gaining/losing points on your GPA based on your school. I'm sure big name schools maybe help, but there are also plenty of very small, very good colleges whose names also weigh pretty heavy with adcoms, so I don't think it's necessarily correct to say small private schools lose points off their GPA.
-TroutBum
I went to a school with pretty significant grade inflation. Half of my class graduated magna cum laude, which is at least a 3.5 GPA. They are now putting a cap on the numbers receiving honors, so instead of purely going by GPA they will be going to class rank, with only a certain percentage of the class to recieve honors based on their rank. I guess this is similar to how an earlier poster described Yale's system.
But, grade inflation is MUCH MUCH less in the science departments than the humanities. This isn't a criticism, it was just the reality. Science folks also got shafted because no matter how many class hours the course was, it counted as the same number of credits as all other classes. So, all the science courses automatically had labs--so say you took Orgo, with four lecture hours and three lab hours per week. For that, you get one credit. Another person who takes a two hour a week seminar course also gets one credit, for nearly one quarter of the classwork. So, keeping a decent GPA in science at my school was much tougher, than doing so in humanities courses, which in my opinion somewhat offsets the grade inflation.
Also, just because there is significant grade inflation doesn't mean that everybody gets A+'s. What it means is that it isn't too much of an ordeal to land a B+ or an A-. But, you're still gonna have to work your little tail off to get A's or A+'s. Hardly ANYONE at my school got A+'s.
So that's my experience with grade inflation.
Also, I'm not sure about the gaining/losing points on your GPA based on your school. I'm sure big name schools maybe help, but there are also plenty of very small, very good colleges whose names also weigh pretty heavy with adcoms, so I don't think it's necessarily correct to say small private schools lose points off their GPA.
-TroutBum
