gpa improvement

[lola]

---

Members do not see this ad.

why is it that adcoms like to see improvement (at least according to people on this website)? what's wrong with starting out with a 3.7 freshman year and ending up with a 3.7 when you graduate? it seems like i have read of a lot of posters who started out with miserable grades, pulled off a 3.8 for their last two years, and got into med school. i mean no disrespect to those people, but why on earth would an adcom look more favorably upon that than someone who was consistent throughout? maybe i should have slacked off my freshman and sophomore years??? just a thought...

 

[tBw]

because they're afraid straight 4.0 students are smarter than them?

seriously, I don't think they do prefer an upward trend over a steady performance. But I think they prolly prefer an upward trending 3.3 than a downward one 😉

 

[PhT]

I've actually thought about this myself, and it doesn't seem to make alot of sense to me either. It just bothers me to know that someone who is getting C's right now might end up beating me out for a spot in Med. school because they finally decided that school was important midway through their sophomore year. Sure, the whole "I turned my life around" story is touching the first fifty times, but what about those who were willing to give everything they had from day one? I don't know about everyone else, but I'm sort of sick of hearing about those people who picked their noses for two years, figured out that doing so would land them a job swapping urinal cakes, and proceeded to apply themselves the next two years; resulting in "adcom's hero" status.

 

[sponch]

All things being equal, I think there are two things that an increasing GPA show:

1. The person has known failure and the assumption is that he or she has learned some humility from the experience. I think the perception is that many premeds have done well in school all their lives and have never really failed at anything.

2. It shows dedication; it shows that medicine is something they really want. I would say that it is much harder to go from a mediocre performance to a stellar one because of momentum. Doing well and not doing well isn't just an on-off switch.

This is not to say that people who've done consistently well do not have these two things -- it's just that you can safely assume that a person who's put effort into improving himself does.

All in all, I think anyone in their right mind would prefer a 3.7 for four years rather than a 3.3 the first couple of years and a 3.8 int he final two years. At least I would.

 

[Bounty]

I dont think anyone said that they PREFER an upward trend to a steady performance. I just think an upward trend can compensate somewhat for a lower gpa. Don't compare apples and oranges here people.

 

[Trix]

seriously, I don't think they do prefer an upward trend over a steady performance. But I think they prolly prefer an upward trending 3.3 than a downward one 😉 [/B][/QUOTE]

I must agree with Bounty

 

[YaFwiendToluene]

Originally posted by lola
why is it that adcoms like to see improvement (at least according to people on this website)? what's wrong with starting out with a 3.7 freshman year and ending up with a 3.7 when you graduate? it seems like i have read of a lot of posters who started out with miserable grades, pulled off a 3.8 for their last two years, and got into med school. i mean no disrespect to those people, but why on earth would an adcom look more favorably upon that than someone who was consistent throughout? maybe i should have slacked off my freshman and sophomore years??? just a thought...

I'm not sure if your statement was accurate about them "favoring" an upward trend...but it DOES give a good impression in favor of a gpa challenged applicant. An upward trend of grades will show that he/she has learned from their academic pitfalls and rose above them. Whether it's poor study habits, irresponsibility or even life crisis, It shows that you put forth the dedication and effort to CHANGE. Grades are nothing without desire...one is a function of the other...you can't have the grades without a strong desire and you can't have desire and not have the grades to show it. I've seen people with gpa's in the upper 2.0 range and they were pure einsteins..so do not think that you are the god of immortality with a high gpa. Medical colleges look for more than that...for all that we know...you could have memorized your way through college and not retained a thing. Understand? You still have the MCAT to weed you out from the fittest.

Cya.

 

[tms]

Originally posted by PhT
I don't know about everyone else, but I'm sort of sick of hearing about those people who picked their noses for two years, figured out that doing so would land them a job swapping urinal cakes, and proceeded to apply themselves the next two years; resulting in "adcom's hero" status.

And it's even pisses me off more when those same people rock the MCAT and have stellar ECs which exposed them to MDs who wrote them incredible LORs. Finally, they even interview wonderfully. Pretty crazy.

Glad my finger's still up to the second knuckle. And by the way, I'm sure most applicants with a steady 3.7 still have a better statistical chance for an interview.

 

[canadagirl]

If the point of grades are to show (1) that you can handle a heavy courseload and (2) that you are bright, then what's the difference what grades you got in your first year if you have great grades in your last couple years?

I don't think people should be rewarded for doing badly to start with, but I also think that people shouldn't be _penalized_ for having done badly to start with. If you can show the required achievement levels for long enough and recently enough to show the qualities above, then that should be sufficient. (Then again, my grades are 3.3, 4, 4, 4 so I'm biased 😛 )

 

[tms]

Originally posted by canadagirl
I don't think people should be rewarded for doing badly to start with, but I also think that people shouldn't be _penalized_ for having done badly to start with. If you can show the required achievement levels for long enough and recently enough to show the qualities above, then that should be sufficient.

First...excellent grades C.girl.

Secondly...I agree. And who gets rewarded for having bad grades. NOone. If you have a 3.7 all the way through, you either have the worst ECs, can't string more than 3 words together, or have no interpersonal skills if you don't at least get an interview. And if you don't get accepted...either the wetness behind the ears is showing or see above.

Finally...Who gives a **** if you got a C in some intro physics class or gen chem and then got A's in modern or statistical physics or physical chemistry or membrane biophysics.

 

[BEETLEVH]

I've actually thought about this myself, and it doesn't seem to make alot of sense to me either. It just bothers me to know that someone who is getting C's right now might end up beating me out for a spot in Med. school because they finally decided that school was important midway through their sophomore year. Sure, the whole "I turned my life around" story is touching the first fifty times, but what about those who were willing to give everything they had from day one? I don't know about everyone else, but I'm sort of sick of hearing about those people who picked their noses for two years, figured out that doing so would land them a job swapping urinal cakes, and proceeded to apply themselves the next two years; resulting in "adcom's hero" status.

That has to be the most ignorant post. I can only suppose you've gone through life flawlessly? I'm inclined to say that I feel sorry for you on account of your ignorance. I happen to be one of those people that "picked their nose for two years". Except, I did anything but pick my nose. I saw more hardship in those two years than I would wish upon anyone. Probably learned more than you have in a lifetime. I also happen to know some of the people that weren't extremely productive at first and had no real reason, like I did, to lack success at school. They did then realize it and hit the ground running.
Look, if you've been fortunate enough to not have any problems up until now, then so be it. However, you're more ignorant than I thought if you really think that you'll lead an unblemished life. As a final note, I'm quite certain that few, if any, of those people you loathe turn into "adcoms heros".

 

[galen]

Haha This discussion reminds me of the Bible story of the prodigal son. As a kid when I read this, I always thought that it was unfair for the son who stayed home for yrs and mucked out the stables while his bro went out and whored around drinking and spending $, that when the prodigal finally wised up & stumbled home, that he got more luv from papa and also the fatted calf.(watchout Lola)
I guess it's just human nature for adcoms to love the repenter more than the boring slogger.

 

[Sweetest Thing]

So...you mean, there may be hope for me yet?

I received a horrible horrible GPA my first year and first semester of second year due to terrible terrible family problems that were beyond my control.

If I keep my marks up, bring them up, I'll hopefully finish with a 3.3-3.4-3. around that range.

Will I have a chance?

 

[PhT]

BEETLEVH - Thank you for speaking your mind, as you could probably tell, I have a similar approach to posting. As for your comments about my post being ignorant, I can see why you may have come to this conclusion. In my post, I failed to mention that my unkind senitments applied to those students who have all the brains and potential in the world, but choose to designate the first two years of college to f*$king around. This does not apply to people who had a tough time with school due to family or personal problems. Whether or not this was the case in your situation, I don't know. However, if you do belong to the group of individuals who are aware of their potential from the get-go, yet decide to treat college like a joke, I have no respect for your academic turnaround. And, as such, I believe such individuals have no place competing with those who had the dedication and ambition to apply themselves from day one. As for your comment about never enduring hardships in my life, where do you get this idea from? Unlike those who feel they must compensate for their underachievement by including a sob-story autobiography, I believe that a person's performance (in and out of the classroom) speaks for itself. Before you start tossing around insulting adjectives, take a long look at yourself and your own obviously deeply-rooted insecurities. Be wary of throwing stones if you live in a glass house yourself.

 

[lalalala]

Sweetest thing, there is definitely hope for you. prove your worth in your upper level sciences. also important to note that people w/ upward trends who tend to succeed usually have 30+ MCATs as well. explain your problems tactfully in your PS if you feel like it (alot of people would recommend you not, since you may not want to waste valuable space on something that can be explained elsewhere), or have your pre med committee advisor person (if you have one) note the marked improvement in your grades and mention how the circumstances in your life now are much different than a few years ago. good luck

 

[Sweetest Thing]

wow...

thanks so much lalala..i think this is possibly the best news i've heard all year long.
I have hope!

 

[LetMeInPlease]

This situation reminds of alcholic politicians. If you have one politician who is a recovering alcoholic and another who is not, you always hear about what great survivors the alcoholics are and how they've overcome so much to get to where they are. I feel bad for the nonalcoholic politicians though, cause they don't get any of that respect cause they never were alcoholics. That always bugs me. So, if you're going to be a politician-doctor, be an alcoholic for the first two years of college and get lots of bad grades and then mid-sophomore year sober up and start getting good grades. That way you will be a recovering alcholic with an upward trend in grades. You will be the best doctor-politician ever.

 

[PhT]

Ha, good analogy about the politicians. With a few understandable exceptions, it describes some candidates perfectly.

 

[BEETLEVH]

PHT - I do understand where you're coming from and it can be rather frustrating to see someone who possesses immense potential screw around for a while and then end up remaining in contention. However, no matter who they are they have their own demons. I know of a few of those types myself and I can say with confidence that their flippant exterior doesn't always correctly represent their intentions. A lot of people I have met were very smart but had problems with some very specific aspects of life. By the way, when I told you I had learned more in those two years that you will in a lifetime is hopeful, you'd be better off to never go through what I went through. I just didn't like the insinuation that someone out there, namely yourself, would think I didn't deserve a shot just because I hadn't led an error-free college career. Since you say that those are not the type of people you are talking about then it would seem we have nothing more to bandy about.

 

[PhT]

BEETLEVH - Agreed. If I've offended you or the colleagues of yours that you mentioned, I apologize. I'm sure you, and everyone else here for that matter, can agree that the Med. school admissions process is stressful enough without making enemies along the way. I spoke before I thought, and I hope my uneducated stereotyping did nothing to ruin the integrity of this thread.

 

[Dyeb]

My freshman year 1st semest I got below a 2.0 and than was diagnosed with ADD over christmas Break. I returned to school with answers and explanations that I had been searching for my whole life. I promptly got a 3.5 while actually truthfully being able to study for the first time in my life. I had to learn how to study for the first time my Freshman year in college. I just finished the first semester of my sophomore year with a 4.0. Now you are telling me that I deserve to be punished for this first semester and have it affect the rest of my life. the majority of people arrive at college without a clue as to what they are gonna do with the rest of their lives. It takes some people longer to solve this riddle but it doesn't make them better candidates for medical school. I think medical schools should consider all but I believe that a sub par first few semesters should in no way hurt a applicants chance. I congratulate those who were able throughout highschool and college to bring down perfect and consistent grades, but I believe with that those who have suffered and been less than perfect have a far better view on reality. When it comes down to it the doctoral profession is far more than being a bookworm and medical schools know this so they don't look who straight A's throughout their school career, rather they look at who will make the best doctor, which is grades and numerous other factors added in.

 

[Bevo]

Im not sure how the upward trend helps.

I suffered in my undergrad, basically wasn't getting any real help from advisors and encouragement. I looked for help in the wrong places and when it backfired on me I gave up on myself and stopped caring about anything academic. Since starting my my post bacc I struggled through my first year because of depression and just not knowing how to study. I never had to until then. Since Fall of 01 my gpa has gone 3.15 to a 3.5 to a 3.0 (Anatomy and Phys over the summer...I think only 3 people had a higher grade than me too :| but that doesn't matter).. then to a 3.7 this last fall.
Even if you count my 1st year pb classes they are a good deal higher than my undergrad classes. But Im still being rejected by schools because of my gpa. Everyone sees the cumalative score and not the 2.5 years of straight science courses as a full time student I have taken.

If I could Id rather go back and kick my ass and start over. I think people who are consistent have a slight edge. I think the trend only helps those who had 2-3 bad semesters but since then have done well. Those first couple semesters drag them done to a slightly below competitive gpa.
I just wish I didn't have 8 semesters and 130 hours of courses to drag me down.