GPA vs. College

[funtertaining15]

I've noticed that a lot of my friends who are premed and go to state colleges/ etc. tend to have 3.95 + GPAs, with many having a straight A consistency. I'm happy for them, but I also wonder if the college you attend/ GPA is considered by medical schools. For example, if you have a 4.0 from a state school vs. someone with a 3.4-3.5 from John Hopkins or a top 20 school, which do you think would be favored if that were the only deciding factor? I've taken classes at a community college vs the school I go to, and I feel that it's much easier to get an A in sciences classes there vs. a college like mine. I was just wondering what you all have to say about this. I hit a rough spot my first semester of freshman year, but I've been working really hard to get my GPA up to a 3.5, which I'm praying I'll hit by the end my spring semester before applying, and then I wonder, maybe I should've just gone to my state school...I def. don't regret my decision because it has helped me define who I am today... but there's always that "what if.."
Anyways, what do you all think? ^_^

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Goro]

This has been asked mulitple times in these forums. No, the quality of your college isn't going to help you if you have a non-competitive GPA or MCAT score. Neither does your major, or if you have two majors.

Just do well, and you'll be fine.

And yes, you should work hard, because medical school is a LOT harder than whet you're going through right now.

I've noticed that a lot of my friends who are premed and go to state colleges/ etc. tend to have 3.95 + GPAs, with many having a straight A consistency. I'm happy for them, but I also wonder if the college you attend/ GPA is considered by medical schools. For example, if you have a 4.0 from a state school vs. someone with a 3.4-3.5 from John Hopkins or a top 20 school, which do you think would be favored if that were the only deciding factor? I've taken classes at a community college vs the school I go to, and I feel that it's much easier to get an A in sciences classes there vs. a college like mine. I was just wondering what you all have to say about this. I hit a rough spot my first semester of freshman year, but I've been working really hard to get my GPA up to a 3.5, which I'm praying I'll hit by the end my spring semester before applying, and then I wonder, maybe I should've just gone to my state school...I def. don't regret my decision because it has helped me define who I am today... but there's always that "what if.."
Anyways, what do you all think? ^_^

 

[sinombre]

And yes, you should work hard, because medical school is a LOT harder than whet you're going through right now.

I used to ignore this all the time, but it's definitely true. You may as well learn how to work hard and get A's now OP, because it gets much harder in med school.

 

[TheWeeIceMan]

For example, if you have a 4.0 from a state school vs. someone with a 3.4-3.5 from John Hopkins or a top 20 school, which do you think would be favored if that were the only deciding factor?

4.0 at a state school and it's not even close.

 

[Goro]

True, but the preference for in-state students is a separate issue. Even a 3.4 for someone at say, Oakland College in MI, can more likely garner an II at MSU, compared to a 4.0 from someone applying from TX or CA.

Particular med schools (like Brown) also like thier own UG students.

4.0 at a state school and it's not even close.

 

[TheWeeIceMan]

True, but the preference for in-state students is a separate issue. Even a 3.4 for someone at say, Oakland College in MI, can more likely garner an II at MSU, compared to a 4.0 from someone applying from TX or CA.

Particular med schools (like Brown) also like thier own UG students.

I agree. However, OP asked to decide between the two, with GPA being the only factor. If we take it outside of a vacuum then it gets more tricky.

 

[notbobtrustme]

Just about the only school that'll get you some slack for GPA deflation is Johns Hopkins.

Otherwise, your 3.3 at super-hard U is gonna suck. Also, FWIW, most Ivies have a reputation for serious grade inflation, not deflation.

 

[Long Way to Go]

Just about the only school that'll get you some slack for GPA deflation is Johns Hopkins.

Please provide proof for this assertion.

 

[funtertaining15]

True, but the preference for in-state students is a separate issue. Even a 3.4 for someone at say, Oakland College in MI, can more likely garner an II at MSU, compared to a 4.0 from someone applying from TX or CA.

Particular med schools (like Brown) also like thier own UG students.

Interesting you mention Texas, because it's actually where I'm from, but I go to school out of state. I'm hoping to get in to a certain Texas school specifically, so I guess we'll see. I just have to get through the MCAT first. But thanks, everyone, for your inputs. I appreciate it.

 

[Plue00]

Just about the only school that'll get you some slack for GPA deflation is Johns Hopkins.

Otherwise, your 3.3 at super-hard U is gonna suck. Also, FWIW, most Ivies have a reputation for serious grade inflation, not deflation.

Don't forget the types of students at Ivies/top schools... it's not filled with your average high school slackers like 95% of schools out there.

 

[notbobtrustme]

Please provide proof for this assertion.

LizzyM

 

[Cambover]

Don't forget the types of students at Ivies/top schools... it's not filled with your average high school slackers like 95% of schools out there.

Apparently they're filled with people who negatively stereotype 95% of schools. Sorry to be harsh. I understand your point and agree with it to some extent, but you have to realize how pretentious that sounded.

 

[darkjedi]

Don't forget the types of students at Ivies/top schools... it's not filled with your average high school slackers like 95% of schools out there.

yikes

 

[darkjedi]

There is definitely some bias towards pedigree in admissions, but as Goro has stated, GPA/MCAT still trumps whatever school you came from.
If you did poorly coming form an Ivy, you will not fare well in the admissions process despite your college name. However, coming from a reputable college definitely helps you if you also managed to do well in college.

The bias towards Ivys is borderline ridiculous at the more top tier schools however.

Just about the only school that'll get you some slack for GPA deflation is Johns Hopkins.

Otherwise, your 3.3 at super-hard U is gonna suck. Also, FWIW, most Ivies have a reputation for serious grade inflation, not deflation.

Princeton is another school notorious for it's grade deflation that is sometimes recognized by adcoms.

 

[knv2u]

Why people continue to spread this reputation without any experience is beyond me. The recent articles about Harvard may be statistically accurate, but their conclusions are sensationalist. I don't attend Harvard, but Harvard students have told me that the average medical school applicant has a mid-3.6 GPA and a 35 MCAT. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a bunch of schools that have a lower average GPA accompanying a 35 MCAT (excluding a couple of other elite schools like MIT, Princeton, etc.).

I'm not opining either way, but I think a lot of the reputation results from the average GPA of certain Ivies versus other undergraduate institutions of equal rigor. For instance, you equate or suggest strong similarity between Harvard and MIT. The average GPA of an MIT undergrad is around 3.3 compared to Harvard's 3.5-3.6 and when I applied to college, MIT actually had higher average SAT scores and at least equal high school GPAs (the class averages were constant more or less).

 

[gettheleadout]

Why people continue to spread this reputation without any experience is beyond me. The recent articles about Harvard may be statistically accurate, but their conclusions are sensationalist. I don't attend Harvard, but Harvard students have told me that the average medical school applicant has a mid-3.6 GPA and a 35 MCAT. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a bunch of schools that have a lower average GPA accompanying a 35 MCAT (excluding a couple of other elite schools like MIT, Princeton, etc.). And if my experience at a comparable institution is any indication, most Harvard students probably only study for the MCAT on the side while working full-time during the summer.

The idea here is not to suggest that Harvard is superior to all other schools, but just to point out that grades at Harvard are not necessarily unearned, as Harvard's reputation for "grade inflation" might suggest. Perhaps science lecture courses with B/B+ averages (the publicized A- average comes mostly from other courses) help the bottom students avoid bad grades, but competing for A/A- with people who score 35 to over 40 on the MCAT is not an easy task.

lol maybe they should be studying full-time if Harvard's average is only 35.

 

[mcloaf]

Don't forget the types of students at Ivies/top schools... it's not filled with your average high school slackers like 95% of schools out there.

 

[TheWeeIceMan]

I always enjoy how some people that attend Ivies make "subtle" references to the schools they attend even in situations that don't call for it. Oh, and by subtle I mean blatantly obvious.

 

[mcloaf]

How about Harvard students have things to do that are more meaningful to them than marginally improving their chances at getting into medical school?

Yes, like taking time to post on SDN about how Harvard isn't super grade inflated, apparently.

 

[solitarius]

I'd take high GPA over college name, all else equal.

Btw, I noticed all these rigorous school/low GPA threads use Johns Hopkins undergrad as an example.

 

[sourdoughllama]

There is definitely some bias towards pedigree in admissions, but as Goro has stated, GPA/MCAT still trumps whatever school you came from.
If you did poorly coming form an Ivy, you will not fare well in the admissions process despite your college name. However, coming from a reputable college definitely helps you if you also managed to do well in college.

The bias towards Ivys is borderline ridiculous at the more top tier schools however.


Princeton is another school notorious for it's grade deflation that is sometimes recognized by adcoms.

It's SDN mantra to say your Ugrad doesn't matter but I agree with you that it does matter to an extent since it's a natural bias in my opinion. The elite colleges already get a little bit of slack in terms of GPA anyway. Harvard 4.0 >> Ghetto College 4.0. Regarding Harvard's grade inflation, it seems like people are justifying its GPA by comparing its student body to the rest of the country, which is not accurate. Each school curves within itself (including all the elite colleges that do not have such a high GPA average). Using that logic, the top 50 colleges should all have a 3.7 GPA average, and the bottom colleges should have like a 2.5 then.

 

[lauren2989]

I was accepted as well as offered 10+ interviews with a 3.3 GPA from Stanford...not sure this would have been the case had I attended my state school for undergraduate. All of my science classes were curved to a B (some bio B+), and I certainly did not slack off in undergrad.

I had a 3.8 post-bac GPA at my state school (physics, biochem, and advanced bio.) These classes were significantly easier not in that they covered different topics but because of learning expectations and how the tests were written (predominately exact regurgitation of material, very little problem solving or critical out of the box thinking.)

Not a critique of any programs just a comment on my own experiences. My personal belief is that my school mattered quite a lot.

 

[TheWeeIceMan]

I was accepted as well as offered 10+ interviews with a 3.3 GPA from Stanford...not sure this would have been the case had I attended my state school for undergraduate. All of my science classes were curved to a B (some bio B+), and I certainly did not slack off in undergrad.

I had a 3.8 post-bac GPA at my state school (physics, biochem, and advanced bio.) These classes were significantly easier not in that they covered different topics but because of learning expectations and how the tests were written (predominately exact regurgitation of material, very little problem solving or critical out of the box thinking.)

Not a critique of any programs just a comment on my own experiences. My personal belief is that my school mattered quite a lot.

We would need quite a bit more information before determining if this could be the case. Could be any number of things that contributed to you getting 10 interviews. I think most people would agree that school prestige could be a soft factor in admissions, but saying it mattered "quite a lot" is pushing it.

 

[notbobtrustme]

Btw, I noticed all these rigorous school/low GPA threads use Johns Hopkins undergrad as an example.

Because it's literally one of a handful of schools where grade deflation works to your advantage. If you go to Alternate State U which is notorious for grade deflation, it hurts you significantly because the majority of adcoms won't care enough to do some research on Alternate State U. However, if an adcom sees a 3.3 from JHU, then he/she knows to cut some slack to the applicant.

It's the exact same argument that gets used for engineering majors and it works. An engineering 3.3 is like a 3.7 in any other major, but most adcoms won't really care to check that far. They'll see a 3.3 and rank you accordingly.

That's why the SDN mantra (GPA > school/major) comes up over and over. When there are 2500 applications to screen after the automatic filters remove the junk applications, there's only so much digging an adcom can do. Having that 3.8 stick out helps so much more than anything else.

 

[TotalDomination]

Just about the only school that'll get you some slack for GPA deflation is Johns Hopkins.

Otherwise, your 3.3 at super-hard U is gonna suck. Also, FWIW, most Ivies have a reputation for serious grade inflation, not deflation.

apparently sucks for kids who graduated with 3.3's from mit and uchicago, both of which deflate.

edit: i have strong feelings on this topic so i'll dip out of this conversation before I get into trouble haha

 

[knv2u]

You're correct, but if all schools compared themselves to MIT, they'd all be grade-inflated There are MIT students that have a 3.5 GPA but close to a 40 MCAT. I don't think it's reasonable for MIT to be the standard. Unfortunately, it doesn't stop non-MIT (or Princeton, etc.) students from saying it must be so easy to get a 4.0 at Harvard (I'm pretty sure 4.0s literally do not exist at my school).

An interesting point that hasn't already been mentioned is that at some of the Ivies (I know Harvard is this way), the standard course load is four courses. Most other schools, including those is the Top-20 are usually 15-16 credit hours per semester (which usually equates to approximately five courses). It could be an issue of fewer classes resulting in more study time. And even if one argues the classes are harder than some of the other Top-20 schools (which I don't think is necessarily the case), it is far easier to focus on four subjects and explore them thoroughly rather than five subjects even assuming that the loads would otherwise be comparable.

 

[phunky]

Doesn't matter where you did your undergrad or what you majored in. Just be the best.

You may think it's not fair. That's what the MCAT is for.

 

[gettheleadout]

How about Harvard students have things to do that are more meaningful to them than marginally improving their chances at getting into medical school? I'm glad you're proud of your 42 (as you should be), but not everyone's approach to the MCAT is to get the maximum score possible.

If Harvard is truly providing a near-best quality education to the near-top caliber students in the country, I expect the average Harvard premed to score in the 99th percentile on the MCAT, especially considering they're competing against a testing pool that not only averages 25, but includes people scoring in the single digits composite.

 

[solitarius]

If Harvard is truly providing a near-best quality education to the near-top caliber students in the country, I expect the average Harvard premed to score in the 99th percentile on the MCAT, especially considering they're competing against a testing pool that not only averages 25, but includes people scoring in the single digits composite.

The same can be said of Harvard Medical School.

Are they getting the top caliber medical school applicants?
Do they get the highest Step 1 scores? No
Do they do well in residency placements? Probably
Do they grade inflate their third year? Seems like it

Direction of this thread is silly.

 

[orangeman25]

I would think that the prestige of your college really only comes into play when all else is equal. If student A is from some prestigious institution and student B is from some random, small no-name school....student A gets the win

 

[chillaxbro]

Well if you get a low GPA from a ivy, you probably dont belong there

 

[Dwan]

If Harvard is truly providing a near-best quality education to the near-top caliber students in the country, I expect the average Harvard premed to score in the 99th percentile on the MCAT, especially considering they're competing against a testing pool that not only averages 25, but includes people scoring in the single digits composite.

I don't think anyone is saying that Harvard provides a better education than other institutions, but the students are high-caliber. There is obviously grade inflation compared to several similar top tier institutions, but it's still not easy to maintain an "average" gpa due to the student body. I don't know how you can scoff at a 35 average MCAT; this score is competitive enough to get into any school in the nation, esp. coming from Harvard. Are you studying for the MCAT to get into med school and become a doctor or to show off how many students you can beat?

 

[gettheleadout]

I don't think anyone is saying that Harvard provides a better education than other institutions, but the students are high-caliber. There is obviously grade inflation compared to several similar top tier institutions, but it's still not easy to maintain an "average" gpa due to the student body. I don't know how you can scoff at a 35 average MCAT; this score is competitive enough to get into any school in the nation, esp. coming from Harvard. Are you studying for the MCAT to get into med school and become a doctor or to show off how many students you can beat?

35 is nearly 10th percentile at several top med schools. Harvard has about 0.05% of the undergraduate students in the country and they score on average in only the top 5% of premeds that take the MCAT. That's a discrepancy of a factor of 100 for the top-ranked school in the country.

And actually, to answer your question, I studied hard for the MCAT precisely in order to prove my potential compared to students from more prestigious institutions. The average premed at my school scores in the mid-to-high 20's on the MCAT. I didn't try my hardest to get a 28 and slide into my state school, I tried my hardest to prove that I'm of the same caliber as the top students at the top schools in the country. And the thing is, I know there are a lot of people much more intelligent/talented than me, and if people want to argue that the students the fill these top schools (which I respect as prestigious, selective institutions) are so different from everyone else, then I will absolutely hold them to a very high standard.

Furthermore, I sure hope Harvard itself would argue that they provide a better education than most schools, otherwise I think that's pretty sad that the school with by far the largest endowment as well high selectivity and prestige factor can't make that claim.

 

[Cambover]

I would think that the prestige of your college really only comes into play when all else is equal. If student A is from some prestigious institution and student B is from some random, small no-name school....student A gets the win

Why? Why does institution make A better than B?

 

[Lucca]

Guys. Harvard has grade inflation.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/3/grade-inflation-mode-a/

QED. Median grade at Harvard is A-. Median grade at my school is a B and I'd say that's a level of inflation too.

 

[solitarius]

Guys. Harvard has grade inflation.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/3/grade-inflation-mode-a/

QED. Median grade at Harvard is A-. Median grade at my school is a B and I'd say that's a level of inflation too.

If true, that is just embarrassing. Sounds like Lake Wobegon. Maybe they should just move to Pass-Fail.

Why? Why does institution make A better than B?

C'mon man, you know what the real reason is.

 

[Lucca]

It is true. That's an article in The Crimson (Harvard's core news provider) and references top-administrators admitting it's a very big problem at the college. Really, this should be no surprise.

Also, you're crazy if you think an institution "bolsters" a candidate in some way. That's just unrealistic. It would have made sense 20 years ago when college admissions were cut and dry and better students always got into better schools but that simply isn't the case anymore. The top-20 is a crap-shoot and anyone attending a top-20 should know that.

There are two ways to attend a top university:

1. Buy an incredibly expensive primary and secondary education at feeder schools.
2. Luck.

 

[Cambover]

C'mon man, you know what the real reason is.

I don't doubt he's right that A would be picked. I've said so before myself. What I'm calling into question is that the institution is actually a meaningful difference. What if B had gotten into A's school, but received a full-ride at No-Name U? There are too many variables to say that institution truly matters in the grand scheme of things. It's what you do while there that does.

 

[solitarius]

I don't doubt he's right that A would be picked. I've said so before myself. What I'm calling into question is that the institution is actually a meaningful difference. What if B had gotten into A's school, but received a full-ride at No-Name U? There are too many variables to say that institution truly matters in the grand scheme of things. It's what you do while there that does.

As stated above, I would definitely choose a high GPA over a low GPA at an elite school.... but

elite undergrads are over-represented at elite med schools
and regular schools like to say they have a Harvard or Yale alum among the students at their med school.

At one of my interviews at a lower tier med school, there was an ORM med student with a 3.4 from an Ivy. Tell me an Oregon State alum with 3.4 could regularly pull that off..... There is inequality in educational access at all levels.

 

[Dwan]

35 is nearly 10th percentile at several top med schools. Harvard has about 0.05% of the undergraduate students in the country and they score on average in only the top 5% of premeds that take the MCAT. That's a discrepancy of a factor of 100 for the top-ranked school in the country.

And actually, to answer your question, I studied hard for the MCAT precisely in order to prove my potential compared to students from more prestigious institutions. The average premed at my school scores in the mid-to-high 20's on the MCAT. I didn't try my hardest to get a 28 and slide into my state school, I tried my hardest to prove that I'm of the same caliber as the top students at the top schools in the country. And the thing is, I know there are a lot of people much more intelligent/talented than me, and if people want to argue that the students the fill these top schools (which I respect as prestigious, selective institutions) are so different from everyone else, then I will absolutely hold them to a very high standard.

Furthermore, I sure hope Harvard itself would argue that they provide a better education than most schools, otherwise I think that's pretty sad that the school with by far the largest endowment as well high selectivity and prestige factor can't make that claim.

35-36 is the average MCAT at most top 10 institutions, and not everyone from a top-tier UG is necessarily aiming for those. I think a 7+ MCAT difference is very significant, regardless of what you personally expect of them. While you would have likely performed well at Harvard judging from your academic record, do you believe the majority of the of 3.5 GPA students at your school would be >middle of the pack at Harvard (seeing how many people think it is easier to get a higher GPA there due to inflation)? Also, no one is arguing that people more intelligent than you are filling the top schools; your GPA is about as high as it can get at your state school so there's no valid means of comparison, and if MCAT is the equalizer, you are a clear outlier in that respect, even amongst Harvard students.

 

[Cambover]

As stated above, I would definitely choose a high GPA over a low GPA at an elite school.... but

elite undergrads are over-represented at elite med schools
and regular schools like to say they have a Harvard or Yale alum among the students at their med school.

At one of my interviews at a lower tier med school, there was an ORM med student with a 3.4 from an Ivy. Tell me an Oregon State alum with 3.4 could regularly pull that off..... There is inequality in educational access at all levels.

Perhaps the kid from the Ivy did something exceptional of was heavily published? There are too many other factors factors besides GPA, ethnicity, and institution.

I will say that those who go to Ivies tend to already be highly successfully and motivated people, so there tends to be a higher percentage applying to the top programs. That does not make them necessarily "better" than their equal counterparts at "lesser" schools.

Is that how it plays out in reality? Probably not.

 

[gettheleadout]

35-36 is the average MCAT at most top 10 institutions, and not everyone from a top-tier UG is necessarily aiming for those. I think a 7+ MCAT difference is very significant, regardless of what you personally expect of them.

38 is 99th percentile, so I would be satisfied with Harvard's average being only 3 points higher, not 7.

While you would have likely performed well at Harvard judging from your academic record, do you believe the majority of the of 3.5 GPA students at your school would be >middle of the pack at Harvard (seeing how many people think it is easier to get a higher GPA there due to inflation)?

Of course not, but then again I think grades are utterly useless metrics anyway. There's no way to compare what a 3.5 at my school means to a 3.5 at Harvard. Heck, there's no way to compare what a 3.5 from one person at my school means to another person's 3.5 at my school. Coursework and evaluation are so unstandardized that I personally think grades are near meaningless and should be ignored in admissions. Honestly, I don't know what it's like at Harvard because I don't go there. Are classes typically curved such that students are competing against each other for grades? Is that rare? Who knows? On a side note I certainly don't think evaluation in that manner is fair. What I'm taking issue with is not whether it's true or false or good or bad that Harvard has grade inflation, it's the argument (to whatever end) that Harvard and other Ivy students are all the top 1% of college students.

Also, no one is arguing that people more intelligent than you are filling the top schools; your GPA is about as high as it can get at your state school so there's no valid means of comparison, and if MCAT is the equalizer, you are a clear outlier in that respect, even amongst Harvard students.

I certainly hope there are people more intelligent than me filling the top schools! Maybe I have an idealized perception of these schools.

 

[gettheleadout]

I will say that those who go to Ivies tend to already be highly successfully and motivated people, so there tends to be a higher percentage applying to the top programs. That does not make them necessarily "better" than their equal counterparts at "lesser" schools.

This is a good point that I've brought up before. The overrepresentation of top undergrads in top med school classes may be due to admissions bias for pedigree, but it could easily just be that students that go there (whether they're all the intellectual elite or not) are high-achievers.

 

[Dwan]

38 is 99th percentile, so I would be satisfied with Harvard's average being only 3 points higher, not 7.

Of course not, but then again I think grades are utterly useless metrics anyway. There's no way to compare what a 3.5 at my school means to a 3.5 at Harvard. Heck, there's no way to compare what a 3.5 from one person at my school means to another person's 3.5 at my school. Coursework and evaluation are so unstandardized that I personally think grades are near meaningless and should be ignored in admissions. Honestly, I don't know what it's like at Harvard because I don't go there. Are classes typically curved such that students are competing against each other for grades? Is that rare? Who knows? On a side note I certainly don't think evaluation in that manner is fair. What I'm taking issue with is not whether it's true or false or good or bad that Harvard has grade inflation, it's the argument (to whatever end) that Harvard and other Ivy students are all the top 1% of college students.

I certainly hope there are people more intelligent than me filling the top schools! Maybe I have an idealized perception of these schools.

I meant Harvard's MCAT average in reference to your UG institution's. It is true that grades are difficult to evaluate due to the variety of instructors and institutions, but they are standardized to some extent, at least among science courses within the same university. Within the same school, I still believe they are a valuable assessor of medical school success because they show consistency of performance and ability to balance time among other yearlong commitments (I know many who have horribly skewed MCAT scores one way or the other, and others who took a lot of time off solely studying for this test.) Experienced adcoms probably also have a general picture of the quality of students they get from each institution; if a certain school on average has many students with high GPA and non-corresponding MCATs, it may be viewed as an "easier" school. Overall, however, it seems like the MCAT is weighted more heavily than GPA (assuming the GPA is sufficiently high) unless you are from an institution known for its rigor. And I think you do have an idealized perception of the schools; Harvard (and other top-tiers) are definitely top 1% with regards to SAT and HS GPA, both of which are not the best predictors of college performance. The transition from HS to college is major, and if Harvard was actually top 1% compared to college students, no one who cared about their GPA would ever go to those schools.

 

[Dwan]

Perhaps the kid from the Ivy did something exceptional of was heavily published? There are too many other factors factors besides GPA, ethnicity, and institution.

I will say that those who go to Ivies tend to already be highly successfully and motivated people, so there tends to be a higher percentage applying to the top programs. That does not make them necessarily "better" than their equal counterparts at "lesser" schools.

Is that how it plays out in reality? Probably not.

While US News ranks likely had 0 meaning the date they were formed, I believe they have become "real" in the sense that people made it that way. Jobs search for those who are both qualified and from prestigious institutions to boost their reputation (notice the name starts to matter more as things get more competitive, whether we're talking about getting into top tier med schools, top tier or selective residencies, or good faculty positions). Med schools like to show off how many students they get from top undergraduate schools. Even students are always comparing themselves and their institutions with Harvard/etc and many people feel satisfaction when they perform better, or perceive that they do. As long as people believe these top tiers are "better," they will continue to offer advantages with their name while also claiming the most resources. I don't believe these differences are extreme, but they are noticeable.

 

[orangeman25]

Why? Why does institution make A better than B?

The short answer? Because that's how life works. It may not be fair but pedigrees exist for a reason and they do play a factor, albeit a small one. That's why I said "if all else was equal"

 

[LizzyM]

Just about the only school that'll get you some slack for GPA deflation is Johns Hopkins.

I don't believe I've ever said that. Princeton, U Chicago & Reed should be on that list. There are others I'm not going to think of right now.

 

[Burla]

There's no way to compare what a 3.5 at my school means to a 3.5 at Harvard. Heck, there's no way to compare what a 3.5 from one person at my school means to another person's 3.5 at my school. Coursework and evaluation are so unstandardized that I personally think grades are near meaningless and should be ignored in admissions.

I like this explanation. Some courses have curves while other don't. For example, my Orgo 1 didn't have a curve and my class average was like a 1.8 to weed out premeds. Yet, my Orgo 2 had a curve and no Adcom would be the wiser. Agree with comparing GPAs within the school as well. My Genetics class had a failing average + curve while my friend's was a high B w/o a curve. In the end, I feel that GPA = work effort

 

[orangeman25]

GPA vs MCAT...now that's interesting...

 

[Catman21]

I go to a pretty much completely unheard of state university, and still have Harvard, Dartmouth, Berkley, MIT doctorate science professors so yeah.. not exactly sure why your chem 2 at JH should be weighted any differently from my harvard doctorate triple PhD professor, just because your school has name recognition. The laws of colligative properties, kinetics, energetics, equillibrium, and thermodynamics dont change at JH nor do the concepts get trickier.