GPA Rumor

[MasterMD]

---

Members do not see this ad.

The best way to compare grade inflation at schools is to look at what the honors cut-off is. This is an indication of what is considered outstanding work at the school. For example, places like Harvard has the honors cut off set at something like 3.7 (they actually had to increase it to this!) and a school like University of Chicago, the honors cut off is 3.25. if it's considered an honor to get 3.25+, then you gotta treat that GPA a little differently than the equivalent or even higher from Harvard.

Ah but I am bitter and biased!

no. at berkeley it is a 3.7 ish... you are soooo far off if you think berkeley has grade inflation.

 

[MasterMD]

I disagree. I got a 36 this past April and barely have a 3.4 at a top tier private university, with a lower BCPM. The median in our pre-med classes is never above a B, sometimes it's even a C. I would know.

👍

::EDIT::

because i just agreed with a stanfurd student..... 😱

GO BEARS!!

 

[Anastasis]

here's what an adcom lady from Stanford said at the old pre-meds conference last year. they take the competitiveness of a program and assign it a number from 1-5 and then use that in a formula with your GPA. she used Oberlin as an example of a 5, meaning one of the hardest in terms of GPA. if you went to two schools, they use the number for the one you spent more time at or graduated from or something (i remember because i thought "oh crap" because I took my science classes at Oberlin but graduated from my local state school) so, they know about grade inflation at each school apparently and deal with it on an individual basis. but that's separate from other factors: brand name appeal for harvard etc., alum preference for alma mater, etc. coming from a rich people school is always going to help you out in life. that's why the rich people set it up that way. they're not as dumb as you think...

That makes sense. Thanks for the insight 😀

 

[coralfangs]

here's what an adcom lady from Stanford said at the old pre-meds conference last year. they take the competitiveness of a program and assign it a number from 1-5 and then use that in a formula with your GPA. she used Oberlin as an example of a 5, meaning one of the hardest in terms of GPA. if you went to two schools, they use the number for the one you spent more time at or graduated from or something (i remember because i thought "oh crap" because I took my science classes at Oberlin but graduated from my local state school) so, they know about grade inflation at each school apparently and deal with it on an individual basis. but that's separate from other factors: brand name appeal for harvard etc., alum preference for alma mater, etc. coming from a rich people school is always going to help you out in life. that's why the rich people set it up that way. they're not as dumb as you think...

how are they going to judge the difficulty of your program though?

 

[riceman04]

no, i dont think they add points to the GPA but if you're from a more competitive school (whatever that means), your overall "points" (GPA+MCAT+ETCETC) goes up a few points. (I talked to an adcomm at BU about this)

yes I will second this.

they add points to your overall score that they calculate...not to your gpa...and being a top tier school does not guarantee that every school will add points to your score...there are some schools that take the known grade inflation into account...I heard it directly from an adcomm's mouth

 

[Kuba]

I disagree. I got a 36 this past April and barely have a 3.4 at a top tier private university, with a lower BCPM. The median in our pre-med classes is never above a B, sometimes it's even a C. I would know.

You do know better, but maybe ur school is an exception. I have heard from many people at top schools that almost noone gets below a B in premed classes.
They may have been exaggerating tho.

 

[etf]

I'd belive that that's currently the case at most places.

apparently not at the places i applied to.

 

[iceman77_7]

👍

::EDIT::

because i just agreed with a stanfurd student..... 😱

GO BEARS!!

haha, I guess miracles do happen. First this, then maybe we'll win Big Game. 🙂 (I want to win the axe just once in my four years here!)

 

[sit down lucy]

You do know better, but maybe ur school is an exception. I have heard from many people at top schools that almost noone gets below a B in premed classes.
They may have been exaggerating tho.

I disagree. I got a 36 this past April and barely have a 3.4 at a top tier private university, with a lower BCPM. The median in our pre-med classes is never above a B, sometimes it's even a C. I would know.

Hey, let's listen to the kids who go to those schools and not the rumors you've heard from your neighbor's uncle's cousin's dog's friend who knew people at HYP/MIT/Hopkins/etc. Let's be reasonable here, people.

At my (top 5) private institution, it is departmental policy in at least the biology, chemistry, and physics departments to curve classes around a B or B-. Classes typically taken by premeds (read the year of bio, chem, and physics we all take) are *always* curved around at B-/C+; meaning half of all students enrolled get below that. The kids you see applying to med school from the top schools/Ivies are those who survived the intro courses.

Grades aren't inflated; it's just that those who realize they can't hack it as a pre-med are smart enough to get out early. They switch majors and then go to law school or something. But (at least here) there are definitely a TON of pre-meds or former pre-meds who got C+'s or below in their intro science classes.

 

[MasterMD]

haha, I guess miracles do happen. First this, then maybe we'll win Big Game. 🙂 (I want to win the axe just once in my four years here!)

baby steps 😉

 

[Kuba]

Hey, let's listen to the kids who go to those schools and not the rumors you've heard from your neighbor's uncle's cousin's dog's friend who knew people at HYP/MIT/Hopkins/etc. Let's be reasonable here, people.

At my (top 5) private institution, it is departmental policy in at least the biology, chemistry, and physics departments to curve classes around a B or B-. Classes typically taken by premeds (read the year of bio, chem, and physics we all take) are *always* curved around at B-/C+; meaning half of all students enrolled get below that. The kids you see applying to med school from the top schools/Ivies are those who survived the intro courses.

Grades aren't inflated; it's just that those who realize they can't hack it as a pre-med are smart enough to get out early. They switch majors and then go to law school or something. But (at least here) there are definitely a TON of pre-meds or former pre-meds who got C+'s or below in their intro science classes.

fair enough... but I did hear straight from students. Doesn't mean they were telling the truth tho.

 

[iceman77_7]

fair enough... but I did hear straight from students. Doesn't mean they were telling the truth tho.

I think we can reconcile all this by saying that most successful pre-meds don't get anywhere below a B in their pre-med classes, hence, one could argue that "pre-med" grades are inflated. As Lucy said, you don't hear from the other pre-meds, they just go quietly into the night I guess. I'm trying to buck that trend by hopefully being a successful pre-med without a spectacular GPA.

 

[ahumdinger]

Just curious, how many of you had multiple choice tests in your pre-med classes?

 

[MahlerROCKS]

here's what an adcom lady from Stanford said at the old pre-meds conference last year. they take the competitiveness of a program and assign it a number from 1-5 and then use that in a formula with your GPA. she used Oberlin as an example of a 5, meaning one of the hardest in terms of GPA. QUOTE]

Northwestern does the same thing

 

[zach1201]

Just curious, how many of you had multiple choice tests in your pre-med classes?

None.

 

[amnesia]

taking classes at hyp are harder and better prep than state school.
they should add points for the ancient three.

the media will scream at hyp about grade inflation when most of those ppl are just jealous they couldn't attend. this then puts more pressure on the student and is unhealthy. back in the day once you got into hyp, you'd basically be guarenteed a degree. bush and gore and kerry passed barely, but look where they ended up. grades don't matter much since most ppl in hyp are bound to do great things in life.

when i was interviewed for harvard undergrad, the person who was interviewing me was a doctor. he said that some of the ppl writing the books also were involved in the creation of the mcat. so you'd basically be getting taught by the best teachers around... yp included.

 

[MasterMD]

taking classes at hyp are harder and better prep than state school.
they should add points for the ancient three.

the media will scream at hyp about grade inflation when most of those ppl are just jealous they couldn't attend. this then puts more pressure on the student and is unhealthy. back in the day once you got into hyp, you'd basically be guarenteed a degree. bush and gore and kerry passed barely, but look where they ended up. grades don't matter much since most ppl in hyp are bound to do great things in life.

when i was interviewed for harvard undergrad, the person who was interviewing me was a doctor. he said that some of the ppl writing the books also were involved in the creation of the mcat. so you'd basically be getting taught by the best teachers around... yp included.

i don't know if i agree or not because i have no experience with this... but i wouldn't assume because they were involved in the creation of the mcat they are the best teachers around... well accomplished and good teacher are not the same thing. some of the best teachers i have had have been my graduate student intructors and junior college class teachers from when i was in high school... their heads are not so far up in the clouds that they can't see the students anymore....

i have had some nobel laureate profs who can't teach worth crap... and some that are amazing... the better the school, the better they are at research in general and at picking out the best student body... it doesnt really say THAT much about the teaching quality.

oh and i'm not bitter.. i got into a top ten but chose in state tuition..

 

[BrownianMotion]

Ok, so I went to a local state school for my first two years (University of South Florida) where class avg. are around C/C- for the pre-med classes. I pulled a 3.8+ easy. I, then, transferred to Johns Hopkins for my last two years of undergrad (one down, one to go). At JHU, I got a 3.3 and had to work my behind off for it. I can honestly say the rigor at some top-tier schools, such as JHU, is extremely tough. It's true their class averages are around B, but the thing is, if you can be class average at a school like Hopkins, it is cake to be in the top ten percent of your class at a state school (like me, for example)....

 

[amnesia]

BILAL, if I didn't know you but you said you graduated from JHU I would think you're really smart. See, the common person hiring people like at goldman sachs WILL offer you a job. JHU is an awesome school.

I think at a school as rigorous as JHU, harvard, princeton, or duke most people say it's safe to assume you were a star student and probably won't need your grades.

 

[BrownianMotion]

PS

I have no regrets about transferring though...I'd do it again if I had to...

 

[zach1201]

The ONLY reason I regret going to my current school is that I know I could easily pull a 3.9+ at state school. But I couldn't have been taught by a Nobel Laureate at my state school, that's for sure.

 

[solitude]

I think at a school as rigorous as JHU, harvard, princeton, or duke most people say it's safe to assume you were a star student and probably won't need your grades.

Nah, you can't just assume somebody is a star student simply because of their undergrad institution. Trust me, I go to school with some of these fools. There are a ton of dodos at JHU, Harvard, Princeton, Duke, and the others, just like at your average TTT. It's all relative, though. As others have noted, this topic has been beaten to death on these boards, and it's really not worth anybody's time discussing.

The following generalizations should apply to nearly everybody on here:

1. If you go to a top school and do well, then great, stop bragging. You'll get into a great med school.
2. If you go to a top school and don't do well, bummer dude, you'll probably get into a few med schools but not great ones.
3. If you go to a "lesser" school and do well, you might get into a good med school, even a great one. Stop whining and go for broke.
4. If you go to a "lesser" school and don't do well, you will struggle to get into med school. Stop whining, because if you couldn't hack it there then you won't hack it in med school.

That is all.

 

[R.P. McMurphy]

Wasn't a joke.


The GPA field isn't level. I do know for a fact that in the upcoming years, medical schools will put more weight on MCAT scores rather than GPAs. This comes directly from the Dean of Admissions for University of Colorado.

They probably already put more weight on MCAT. The AAMC has published studies that show a much stronger correlation between MCAT score and USMLE score than GPA and USMLE.

Note, however, this correlation indicates only how well you might handle a medical school curriculum and says nothing about what kind of doctor you will be 🙂

I still don't get the joke about the genitellia falling off though

 

[R.P. McMurphy]

You also have to remember that "top tier" is only determined by bull**** US News and World Report rankings and is basically driven by $$$$$ and historical factors.

With that said, maybe the reason that IVY league schools have such inflated grades is because the prestige attracts the smarter students, and maybe they get high GPA's because the curriculum is not actually that much more rigorous than a state schools?

I am only suggesting this because of a personal story. I had a friend who transferred from an IVY to a state school because of the costs. He had a 3.6 at the IVY his first year and a 3.66 at the state school his second-not really a huge difference in my opinion. From what he told me, the classes were not really all that different and used many of the same textbooks.

What was the difference? He said the main difference was that at the IVY league, his 3.6 wasn't that great, while at the state school, it was the ****

Just something to think about

 

[science_boy]

You also have to remember that "top tier" is only determined by bull**** US News and World Report rankings and is basically driven by $$$$$ and historical factors.

With that said, maybe the reason that IVY league schools have such inflated grades is because the prestige attracts the smarter students, and maybe they get high GPA's because the curriculum is not actually that much more rigorous than a state schools?

I am only suggesting this because of a personal story. I had a friend who transferred from an IVY to a state school because of the costs. He had a 3.6 at the IVY his first year and a 3.66 at the state school his second-not really a huge difference in my opinion. From what he told me, the classes were not really all that different and used many of the same textbooks.

What was the difference? He said the main difference was that at the IVY league, his 3.6 wasn't that great, while at the state school, it was the ****

Just something to think about

It doesn't really matter how smart your student body is, If there's a normally distributed curve like there's "supposed" to be, then a certain amount of As can be given out, a certain amount of Bs, and so on. No matter how smart the students in a school are, the average GPA should be around the same for all college classes because most college classes are curved. If one school has a higher GPA average, that means the profs in that colleges are giving out more As and the curve is more friendly than other schools. It doesn't mean the course is more rigorous, it just means it's curved heavier. Would you rather take a very rigorous class where 30% of the students get A's. Or an easier class where only 15% of the students get As? It's not just how much coursework there is or how much more rigorous a class is in determining how difficult a class is. If it is true that a school like Harvard does have a higher average GPA when compared to other schools, it means they're handing out more As, although the material may be very rigorous,

 

[KingTutATL]

Princeton had to limit the number of A's it was giving out a year or two ago and capped the # of A's that could be given out to 20 or 25%

 

[R.P. McMurphy]

It doesn't really matter how smart your student body is, If there's a normally distributed curve like there's "supposed" to be, then a certain amount of As can be given out, a certain amount of Bs, and so on. No matter how smart the students in a school are, the average GPA should be around the same for all college classes because most college classes are curved. If one school has a higher GPA average, that means the profs in that colleges are giving out more As and the curve is more friendly than other schools. It doesn't mean the course is more rigorous, it just means it's curved heavier. Would you rather take a very rigorous class where 30% of the students get A's. Or an easier class where only 15% of the students get As? It's not just how much coursework there is or how much more rigorous a class is in determining how difficult a class is. If it is true that a school like Harvard does have a higher average GPA when compared to other schools, it means they're handing out more As, although the material may be very rigorous,

I think you are missing my point. It actually has everything to do with how smart your student body is.

So, the Ivy League schools generally tend to attract smart, competitive students.....the cream of the crop from top high schools. These student usually carry their strong academics into college. Is it any surprise that these universities might have inflated grades? No. It has nothing to do with teachers "handing out more A's".... it has more do with students getting those A's. You talk about normal distributions, but what kind of professor is going to give students who get an 85 a C? Professors at these schools simply cannot justify giving students who master the majority of the material low grades simply to "fit a normal distribution" Who would want to go to a school that gives a 2.0 GPA for getting averages in the 80's? Nobody, and that is why many professors are "handing out" these A's....not because they feel like it, but because the students are actually earning it.

So if these inflated schools are so rigorous, you would think that it would make up for these inflated grades....but apparently that is not what is happening, so that is why I suggested that maybe they aren't as rigorous as everyone thinks.

 

[iceman77_7]

I think you are missing my point. It actually has everything to do with how smart your student body is.

So, the Ivy League schools generally tend to attract smart, competitive students.....the cream of the crop from top high schools. These student usually carry their strong academics into college. Is it any surprise that these universities might have inflated grades? No. It has nothing to do with teachers "handing out more A's".... it has more do with students getting those A's. You talk about normal distributions, but what kind of professor is going to give students who get an 85 a C? Professors at these schools simply cannot justify giving students who master the majority of the material low grades simply to "fit a normal distribution" Who would want to go to a school that gives a 2.0 GPA for getting averages in the 80's? Nobody, and that is why many professors are "handing out" these A's....not because they feel like it, but because the students are actually earning it.

So if these inflated schools are so rigorous, you would think that it would make up for these inflated grades....but apparently that is not what is happening, so that is why I suggested that maybe they aren't as rigorous as everyone thinks.

Well said. I agree completely.

 

[science_boy]

I think you are missing my point. It actually has everything to do with how smart your student body is.

So, the Ivy League schools generally tend to attract smart, competitive students.....the cream of the crop from top high schools. These student usually carry their strong academics into college. Is it any surprise that these universities might have inflated grades? No. It has nothing to do with teachers "handing out more A's".... it has more do with students getting those A's. You talk about normal distributions, but what kind of professor is going to give students who get an 85 a C? Professors at these schools simply cannot justify giving students who master the majority of the material low grades simply to "fit a normal distribution" Who would want to go to a school that gives a 2.0 GPA for getting averages in the 80's? Nobody, and that is why many professors are "handing out" these A's....not because they feel like it, but because the students are actually earning it.

So if these inflated schools are so rigorous, you would think that it would make up for these inflated grades....but apparently that is not what is happening, so that is why I suggested that maybe they aren't as rigorous as everyone thinks.

Um I've heard of professors at my University that give out lower grades because the mean is usually a C+/B- no matter what the mean on the test is whether its a 85 or a 40. That's why a lot of kids do hate taking "easy" classes because one or two stupid mistake on a test can bring your grade down. And besides, the teachers should be making the tests so the mean on the test should allow for a normal distribution. You can make ANYTHING hard on a test. You can make basic calculus difficult if you wanted too. The professors shouldn't be making the tests too easy anyways so the average grades shouldn't even be in the 80s. My "basic calculus" teacher even had to resort to putting material on the tests that had absolutely nothing to do with what we've learned in the class to drop the mean down to below a 50 percent. So in that case, teachers shouldn't be shifting the curve and giving out more As just becaused they "handed out" easy tests.

 

[Mister Pie]

At my school, there have been classes where the mean is curved to C+/B-. It doesn't matter if it was 90% or 40%. Usually though, if the mean on one of the midterms is 90%, the prof will just make the next midterm (or final) incredibly difficult to spread the grades out so they can slam a curve on it.

 

[doublehh03]

there are tests that average 90%.

wow, that is just ridiculous no matter where you go.

 

[science_boy]

At my school, there have been classes where the mean is curved to C+/B-. It doesn't matter if it was 90% or 40%. Usually though, if the mean on one of the midterms is 90%, the prof will just make the next midterm (or final) incredibly difficult to spread the grades out so they can slam a curve on it.

Yes I've heard that professors do that. I've even heard of some professors who change the value of a certain midterm if everyone did well. For example, if a midterm was supposed to be 20% of the grade and then everyone did extremly well, the professor would then make the midterm worth 5% instead of 20% of the grade and add that 15% to another test and make that test more difficult of course. 🙂

 

[R.P. McMurphy]

Um I've heard of professors at my University that give out lower grades because the mean is usually a C+/B- no matter what the mean on the test is whether its a 85 or a 40. That's why a lot of kids do hate taking "easy" classes because one or two stupid mistake on a test can bring your grade down. And besides, the teachers should be making the tests so the mean on the test should allow for a normal distribution. You can make ANYTHING hard on a test. You can make basic calculus difficult if you wanted too. The professors shouldn't be making the tests too easy anyways so the average grades shouldn't even be in the 80s. My "basic calculus" teacher even had to resort to putting material on the tests that had absolutely nothing to do with what we've learned in the class to drop the mean down to below a 50 percent. So in that case, teachers shouldn't be shifting the curve and giving out more As just becaused they "handed out" easy tests.

This is my entire point. Schools where the averages are 85+ need to solve the problem by actually making the tests more rigorous for all those IVY legaue brainiacs so that the averages are pulled back down to say, a 70. Giving a kid with an 85 a C does not solve the problem because if you know 85% of a subject, you should not be considered average in my opinion, although at those schools you are "average"

The point is, these schools need to stick to one philosophy or the other. 1) Either make the cutoffs for a C higher to acount for higher averages, or make the tests harder. I don't think it's right for AAMC to give more weight to these supposive "hard schools" who also happen to have the highest average GPAs. If they are hard, they should not have the highest amount of A's, they should have roughly the same amount as other schools, given that the student body is probably smarter.

Note: I am using the argument that many of the IVY legaue schools have been experiencing continous grade-inflation over recent years. I know this does not apply to all "top-tier" schools, but I am just making a generalization.

 

[science_boy]

This is my entire point. Schools where the averages are 85+ need to solve the problem by actually making the tests more rigorous for all those IVY legaue brainiacs so that the averages are pulled back down to say, a 70. Giving a kid with an 85 a C does not solve the problem because if you know 85% of a subject, you should not be considered average in my opinion, although at those schools you are "average"

The point is, these schools need to stick to one philosophy or the other. 1) Either make the cutoffs for a C higher to acount for higher averages, or make the tests harder. I don't think it's right for AAMC to give more weight to these supposive "hard schools" who also happen to have the highest average GPAs. If they are hard, they should not have the highest amount of A's, they should have roughly the same amount as other schools, given that the student body is probably smarter.

Note: I am using the argument that many of the IVY legaue schools have been experiencing continous grade-inflation over recent years. I know this does not apply to all "top-tier" schools, but I am just making a generalization.

Well chances are, if you make the test more rigorous, the kid who got an 85 during the "easier" test would still end up with a C even if they took the more rigorous test. But anyways, I do agree that the AAMC shouldn't give the same weight to "top-tier" schools with grade inflation because you can look at statistics to see which schools have a significantly higher GPA average.

 

[mynamewastaken]

Well chances are, if you make the test more rigorous, the kid who got an 85 during the "easier" test would still end up with a C even if they took the more rigorous test. But anyways, I do agree that the AAMC shouldn't give the same weight to "top-tier" schools with grade inflation because you can look at statistics to see which schools have a significantly higher GPA average.

what people don't seem to understand is if the majority of people on this board HAD to take med school pre reqs at Princeton many of the people complaining about grade inflation would not be applying to med school.

 

[JDUB44]

I think possibly so, because i have heard this from my pre-med advisor and several others in the know that UT mem for one add to my schools gpa because the sciences are so much harder than the other state schools not to mention any names (UT knoxville, UT Martin, pretty much anything in the UT system sucks balls and ETSU, MTSU, etc.) I go to a heavy engineering school. Anyways they say they add about .2, but I think this is mostly because students from my undergrad have tended to do really well in med school at UT mem so I guess they just know they're gonna get quality students. Take it for what its worth.

 

[JDUB44]

Princeton had to limit the number of A's it was giving out a year or two ago and capped the # of A's that could be given out to 20 or 25%

Thats crazy, 25%, should be more like like 5-10%, crap everyone must get and A, what a load. easy Ivy's. don't want junior flunking out since daddy donates a crap load. Bah humbug.

 

[topdogg82]

we can only really use our personal experiences but coming from florida, most of my hs mates went to UF (a pretty decent state school). a lot of the kids i know there have 3.8+, and many with 3.9+, but the thing is they brag to me about how they barely do any work to achieve that even compared to high school. on the other hand, i've had to work my ass off here at duke to barely get a 3.7 (thanks mostly to non-science classes), b/c getting an 'A' in a premed class with a bunch of gunners and the average usually a B- is a bitch.

 

[BrownianMotion]

we can only really use our personal experiences but coming from florida, most of my hs mates went to UF (a pretty decent state school). a lot of the kids i know there have 3.8+, and many with 3.9+, but the thing is they brag to me about how they barely do any work to achieve that even compared to high school. on the other hand, i've had to work my ass off here at duke to barely get a 3.7 (thanks mostly to non-science classes), b/c getting an 'A' in a premed class with a bunch of gunners and the average usually a B- is a bitch.

I second you coming from Tampa and seeing my friends at USF sleep and get 4.0s and at JHU, I'm working my behind off trying to crack the Dean's List...

 

[geno2568]

heres the issue with many of the "top-tier" schools (like Cornell, where I'm from)
The quality of the students is very high. So a test that would be a 50 mean at a local college might have a mean of 80 there, thus screwing over people's grades, since evrything is still graded on a curve. Also, by the time you hit soph and junior year, only the cream of the premed crop is left....the rest have dropped out to business majors, and are no longer there to lower the curve. But the means are still in the B's. Except now, everybody in the class is a very comptetive premed who probably broke 30 on the mcats, does research, and put time into clinical work. These are all tier-1 calibur students, but only about 30% will get tier-1 calibur grades in the class. Thats why we need our grades boosted; not because of low means, and not because our classes are tougher (which they probably are), but because the competition drives down our curved grade.

 

[lilmissfickle]

heres the issue with many of the "top-tier" schools (like Cornell, where I'm from)
The quality of the students is very high. So a test that would be a 50 mean at a local college might have a mean of 80 there, thus screwing over people's grades, since evrything is still graded on a curve. Also, by the time you hit soph and junior year, only the cream of the premed crop is left....the rest have dropped out to business majors, and are no longer there to lower the curve. But the means are still in the B's. Except now, everybody in the class is a very comptetive premed who probably broke 30 on the mcats, does research, and put time into clinical work. These are all tier-1 calibur students, but only about 30% will get tier-1 calibur grades in the class. Thats why we need our grades boosted; not because of low means, and not because our classes are tougher (which they probably are), but because the competition drives down our curved grade.

If you were competitive enough to get into a tough school, and you chose to go to that school to reap the benefits (good rep, excellent opportunities, etc.) then you better be prepared to deal with the sacrifices (grades, sleep, or social life: pick two). Many students are smart and hard working enough to get into these competitive schools, but choose not to go...they deal with less competition, but also have to work harder to secure the same research opps/amazing LORs and make up for their undergrad's poorer rep. The reason that tough schools are regarded highly is because of the competition...an A at such a school signifies (or is supposed to signify) that you were able to beat out a ton of extremely smart and hardworking kids. If half the class gets As, then that A isn't any more special than an A at an average state school. You can't have it both ways, so quit whining.

 

[mynamewastaken]

If you were competitive enough to get into a tough school, and you chose to go to that school to reap the benefits (good rep, excellent opportunities, etc.) then you better be prepared to deal with the sacrifices (grades, sleep, or social life: pick two). Many students are smart and hard working enough to get into these competitive schools, but choose not to go...they deal with less competition, but also have to work harder to secure the same research opps/amazing LORs and make up for their undergrad's poorer rep. The reason that tough schools are regarded highly is because of the competition...an A at such a school signifies (or is supposed to signify) that you were able to beat out a ton of extremely smart and hardworking kids. If half the class gets As, then that A isn't any more special than an A at an average state school. You can't have it both ways, so quit whining.

no one is whining....except for when people tell US our school is easy when in reality, it's infinitely harder than yours....that actually does bother me. Agreed though...we chose to go where we went and if it screws us in the long run than it's our fault....also, one tiny caveat...I think it depends (obviously) on the individual....as hard as I think Penn is, there are plenty of kids who think it's easy to get A's....i just happen to be one of those students who worked really really hard to get there....and once you're there it gets harder again....the top top students just adjust, but people like me are trying to keep head above water ya know....it all depends.

 

[geno2568]

I'm not trying to have it both ways, I'm just justifying why adcoms need to give us a boost when looking at our grades.

and as far as reseach opps, thats not neccesarily true.
While we do have a lot more spots, we also have a lot more students that want to work in labs. We have about 300 premeds each year, not too mention all the prevets, predents, and straight bio majors (our bio major is big enough to be its own college). And, because this is a highly comptetive school, all these students are very qualified to work in labs.

As far as your amazing LOR's comment, a good personal relationship with whoever the writer is is much more important. My three lor's came from 1) a catholic priest who was an advisor of a club of mine, 2) my advisor quoting the lab tech i worked under, 3)my debate professor.....all people who knew me personally. Just because we have nobel prize winners in our faculty doesn't mean that we can get a lor from them.

finally, a good gpa is much more important than research or yur lor writer's name. The admission websites can stress the importance of the intangibles all they want, gpa and mcats are still the most important criteria. And no matter how much boosting the adcoms give my 3.5, it will never look like a 3.8, which i would have had had i went to a SUNY or something.

 

[lilmissfickle]

no one is whining....except for when people tell US our school is easy when in reality, it's infinitely harder than yours....

That's not necessarily true. I agree that Penn is more competitive than my school (Canadian university), but I don't think that your classes are necessarily a lot harder than mine, content-wise. In fact, any university can offer a very challenging curriculum, depending on which courses you take (for example, you could take the regular chem, bio, calc, physics first year or take the chem-for-chem-majors, calc-for-math majors, etc.). The reason I chose a canadian university over Penn, is because I knew I could get a comparible education (at the undergrad level, science is science, no matter how you slice it, and I'm an independent learner anyway), save $$ for med/grad school, and not have to do deal with as much of the bull**** that comes from going to a school where most students are highly competitive. It was a hard decision to make, because I knew I was giving up prestige, opportunities, and connections...but you know what? Every decision has pros and cons, and I'm so glad I made the decision I did.

that actually does bother me. Agreed though...we chose to go where we went and if it screws us in the long run than it's our fault....also, one tiny caveat...I think it depends (obviously) on the individual....as hard as I think Penn is, there are plenty of kids who think it's easy to get A's....i just happen to be one of those students who worked really really hard to get there....and once you're there it gets harder again....the top top students just adjust, but people like me are trying to keep head above water ya know....it all depends.

I agree with everything you said here, and it's great that you're taking responsibility for your decision, rather than whining about grades. I'm sure that there are absolutely great benefits to going to Penn (othewise I never would have applied there...lol), and I'd just like to say congrats on getting in and I hope that you love it there. It takes a lot of courage and determination to compete with the best of the best when you know that you need to work your ass off to compare. I need my 10 hrs of sleep and partying though...so I have a ton of respect for you.

 

[lilmissfickle]

and as far as reseach opps, thats not neccesarily true.
While we do have a lot more spots, we also have a lot more students that want to work in labs. We have about 300 premeds each year, not too mention all the prevets, predents, and straight bio majors (our bio major is big enough to be its own college). And, because this is a highly comptetive school, all these students are very qualified to work in labs.

You're still not getting it, though. The reason why you have a lot more spots is because there are a lot of qualified students. At some point, everyone needs to make a decision between being a big fish in a pond or a little fish in the sea. Both have their advantages and disadvantages, which is why you need to choose for yourself, based on a realistic view of your abilities and limitations.

You could either go to a regular school, really shine, and then seek out opportunities on your own (which requires resourcefulness and really being the top 1-2 students in your class) or go to a top-tier school, work your ass off to be in the top 10% and have an abundance of opportunities to choose from. If you know you're going to be in the bottom 75% of your class at a top-tier school, and you still want those top research opportunities then don't go to that school ...doing so isn't noble, it's stupid and detrimental to your goals. So pick a body of water and deal with it.

 

[zach1201]

In defense at top tier schools, I know that many ADCOMS realize which classes are more difficult at certain universities. When a person receives an A in an easy class, they won't put much stock into the grade. If a person receives an A in a prerequisite science course, the grade will hold more weight.

In the case of research opportunities, it really depends on the school you go to. Cornell has 10,000+ students and although many of them are highly qualified for those spots, they are more competitive for them. On the otherhand, if you went to a large state school, they too may have just as many research opportunities but wouldn't be as competitive.

You are correct though, there are two different "bodies of water". But don't you think coming out on top of an ocean (top-tier school) deserves some credit when compared to surviving a lake (lower-tier school).

 

[JDUB44]

no one is whining....except for when people tell US our school is easy when in reality, it's infinitely harder than yours....that actually does bother me. QUOTE]

Sounds like your whining pretty hard. But since your barely stayin above the water guess it will screw you in the long run. Guess daddy's money, that pays your outrageous tuition and bought you a seat at your ivy, won't make you any smarter will it? Sniffle, sniffle, my school could beat up your school.

 

[geno2568]

My daddy is only paying for some of my Cornell education; my work study, my loans, and New York State are paying the rest (and more than half 🙂). And the reason why I went to a competitive school, and the reason why I chose a difficult major, is because I would never compromise my education, and I would never play any of the "premed games". If I had to do it all over again, I would, even if it means a lower chance of acceptance. And if some adcoms don't accept this but would rather take someone that took the easy way, then to hell with them, I don't want to go to their school.

 

[MasterMD]

Thats crazy, 25%, should be more like like 5-10%, crap everyone must get and A, what a load. easy Ivy's. don't want junior flunking out since daddy donates a crap load. Bah humbug.

if it was 20-25% at my school i would have straight As... its more like 5-10%...

oh and i know my grades would be better because our profs post curves of how many students got what score on each midterm/final...

 

[R.P. McMurphy]

no one is whining....except for when people tell US our school is easy when in reality, it's infinitely harder than yours....that actually does bother me. QUOTE]

Sounds like your whining pretty hard. But since your barely stayin above the water guess it will screw you in the long run. Guess daddy's money, that pays your outrageous tuition and bought you a seat at your ivy, won't make you any smarter will it? Sniffle, sniffle, my school could beat up your school.