GPA vs more rigorous coursework

[Tetraoxygen]

---

Members do not see this ad.

At what point is it more worthwhile to take more difficult coursework and a heavier courseload in order to gain a strong background at the expense of GPA for someone pursuing MD/PhD? I realize higher GPA is better for the application process, but will the person with experience in harder courses do better in the long run? On the other hand, I'm not sure how getting a B (accounting for grade inflation) indicates mastery.

I'm interested because, currently, among the pre-MD/PhD students at my university, people either take really hard courses and don't do so well or take easier courses and have a high GPA, but what I feel is a more shallow understanding. Group 1 students argue that they will be able to conduct better research. Group 2 students argue that they will be able to get into better MD/PhD programs, learn more at that level, and do better research.

Which side is correct??😕

 

[Choculitis]

One other thing to consider is the relation between taking those harder courses and doing well on the MCAT. Without a really solid understanding of the basic science, you won't do well on the science sections, and taking humanities courses with difficult reading will probably help somewhat on the verbal.

 

[Tetraoxygen]

One other thing to consider is the relation between taking those harder courses and doing well on the MCAT.

It's my fault for not being sufficiently clear...
The more rigorous coursework I would like to insert into this balancing game are really tough courses like Partial Differential Equations and Biomechanics of Embryonic Development---the kind of courses that graduate students slog through with some difficulty. So far, people I've asked (adults and other uni students) fall into the following camps:
1. Unless you can get a solid A in that course, you aren't ready for that level of coursework. Build up a foundation first and maintain your GPA. Doing B level work won't add to your understanding, and might even leave you with misconceptions.
2. It's a waste of time getting a solid/high A in an undergraduate course when you can really challenge yourself with a graduate level course, where you will learn more, but might pull out a worse grade. Additionally, taking high level courses comes with a certain amount of prestige, which factors into LORs.

What do you guys think?

 

[Choculitis]

Ahh, fair enough. So what makes these courses so hard—is it because they're a lot of work, difficult concepts, or because people don't have the necessary background knowledge?

As long as it isn't the last one, what about balancing each really hard course with an easy elective to help mitigate the extra effort you'll need to expend on the hard course?

 

[erikreinertsen]

From my limited experience as a senior majoring in bioengineering, having spoken to numerous MD/PhD admissions officers and other faculty, you want to both challenge yourself academically, but do very well...

It is difficult to compare an B in a hard class versus an A in an easy class. But it is very easy to compare an A in a DiffEQ class versus an A in basic math for life science majors.

Another factor is what you get out of the coures. Is the material relevant to your research, another extracurricular, or your future area of interest? I am a biomedical engineer by training, but I want to focus my graduate work on stem cells or cancer. An upper division MCDB course on those topics might be more challenging, but also highly relevant. Also, how much did you interact with the professor teaching the course?

In summary, the answer is not as clear-cut as we'd like it to be. I think there are other things to consider as well.

 

[PfNO22]

At what point is it more worthwhile to take more difficult coursework and a heavier courseload in order to gain a strong background at the expense of GPA for someone pursuing MD/PhD? I realize higher GPA is better for the application process, but will the person with experience in harder courses do better in the long run? On the other hand, I'm not sure how getting a B (accounting for grade inflation) indicates mastery.

Who cares? Isn't this all just about getting in? I could master the material then tear up all my tests and my GPA would suck.

 

[Tetraoxygen]

Who cares? Isn't this all just about getting in?

For me, this is between balancing getting in to a program and gaining the necessary background in undergrad to be a good position to do very well as a scientist later in my career.

 

[StIGMA]

If you can't get an A (or at least be close to one, eg: be among the top students in the class) you should not be taking the advanced coursework, be it graduate level or advanced undergrad.

GPA matters above all else. Your coursework wont be noticed among programs. If you do happen to take a few higher level courses and do poorly (B's) - how do you think that will look to the programs that are taking you on for only higher level courses?

Challenge yourself with the harder courses- but work hard enough to get the A. If you are not smart enough to get the A, or if you have not done the background coursework yet, or if you are not willing to work hard enough, then don't take it!

Your undergrad background will only take you so far- and from that point you will move on once you are in graduate school. Your undergraduate degree/prereq's/prior research experience is the necessary background to be a good scientist later in your career- because it gets you into graduate school (and a better graduate school if you don't tank your GPA)! You really are not gaining much by taking advanced coursework earlier other than for your own satisfaction. Same goes for piling on a heavy load- if you can't handle it, don't do it (because you clearly aren't getting the benefit of the courses if you aren't succeeding in them)!

So, there is no point where taking more difficult coursework is worth lowering your GPA as far as MD/PhD admissions are concerned.

 

[runner08]

I disagree somewhat. I took pretty challenging courses, and got mostly A's but some B's, ending up with a GPA of ~3.7. I think I benefited immensely from challenging myself intellectually; it taught me how to think deeply about difficult problems and pushed the limits of my understanding. The admissions process went well for me, and I ended up at my top choice of schools.

This is almost definitely true if you'd end up with a GPA lower than this though - even with a 3.7 I was really nervous.

 

[ablavar]

If you can't get an A (or at least be close to one, eg: be among the top students in the class) you should not be taking the advanced coursework, be it graduate level or advanced undergrad.

GPA matters above all else. Your coursework wont be noticed among programs. If you do happen to take a few higher level courses and do poorly (B's) - how do you think that will look to the programs that are taking you on for only higher level courses?

Challenge yourself with the harder courses- but work hard enough to get the A. If you are not smart enough to get the A, or if you have not done the background coursework yet, or if you are not willing to work hard enough, then don't take it!

Your undergrad background will only take you so far- and from that point you will move on once you are in graduate school. Your undergraduate degree/prereq's/prior research experience is the necessary background to be a good scientist later in your career- because it gets you into graduate school (and a better graduate school if you don't tank your GPA)! You really are not gaining much by taking advanced coursework earlier other than for your own satisfaction. Same goes for piling on a heavy load- if you can't handle it, don't do it (because you clearly aren't getting the benefit of the courses if you aren't succeeding in them)!

So, there is no point where taking more difficult coursework is worth lowering your GPA as far as MD/PhD admissions are concerned.

I would really hope most adcoms give *some* preference to the harder courses.

I worked my ass off in a 400-level Computational Neuroscience course my last semester of college, while most seniors were taking 100-level biology courses to bump up their sGPA.

 

[mrsanator]

I would really hope most adcoms give *some* preference to the harder courses.

I worked my ass off in a 400-level Computational Neuroscience course my last semester of college, while most seniors were taking 100-level biology courses to bump up their sGPA.

Most adcoms don't have the time or frankly the inclination to do the detailed evaluation you're asking for. Furthermore, it's really hard to judge rigor based on the data in a transcript.

At my undergrad institution the hardest A's to earn were in the 100-200 tier of science classes. I took a "graduate student" level biology class in my junior year that involved playing with PCR and drinking beer the 100-level students brewed in lab (who were under 21). Hard to tell that from a course number and title.

I think Stigma's advice is best. There's plenty of time for advanced coursework. The most important things are GPA, MCAT, and research experience. Make sure those things are all great before increasing academic rigor. MCAT material is covered in introductory classes, and the way to raise MCAT scores is to practice, not to take advanced coursework.

 

[PfNO22]

I think Stigma's advice is best. There's plenty of time for advanced coursework. The most important things are GPA, MCAT, and research experience.

GPA and MCAT really serve to set a baseline candidates must achieve. Once past that line, non-quantitative aspects enter into the analysis. I think a candidate interested solely in GPA and MCAT will ultimately fail as will one who ignores them.

 

[StIGMA]

Just to be clear- I am not saying to 'not challenge yourself' or 'not increase the rigor of your courses unnecessarily.'

I took 3000 and 4000 level courses as a freshman and sophomore, and I took graduate level courses my senior year. However, I was prepared for them and did well. If you will do well in them (you can talk to the professor, see how the grading is done, etc.), then by all means take them.

Non-quantitative measures of an applicant are rec letters, interview, personal essays, and research experience. They may involve advanced coursework insofar is it adds to your story, but do not expect an admissions committee to sift through your transcript.

 

[Lil Mick]

I started graduate work fairly early and took mostly upper division courses in several different academic areas. As long as you're above a 3.7, I doubt that it matters. The difference between a 3.8 with a very difficult load and a 3.9 with an easier load is probably negligible. I'd go for the harder classes. They will better prepare you for research and the MCAT, and they'll give you an intellectual challenge 🙂

 

[texasguy]

Members of the admissions committee don't know how difficult one course is versus another one at the undergraduate level. Remember that many of the members of an admissions committee may not have even completed their undergraduate work in the US. Therefore, shoot for the high GPA. You'll learn how to be a scientist in graduate/medical school right now you just want to get into the best program possible...

 

[erikreinertsen]

Members of the admissions committee don't know how difficult one course is versus another one at the undergraduate level. Remember that many of the members of an admissions committee may not have even completed their undergraduate work in the US. Therefore, shoot for the high GPA. You'll learn how to be a scientist in graduate/medical school right now you just want to get into the best program possible...

I'd respectfully disagree, but of course, generalizations are generalizations. I've spoken to two MD/PhDs involved with the adcoms at UCLA and UCSD, both without engineering backgrounds, but both them and a UCLA adcom staff have confirmed that there is a clear difference between the workload and academic rigor of psychology vs engineering vs biology, and that these are factors taken into account. However, they did point out that there is no excuse for having a dead GPA in a hard major. You have to still do well. But I wouldn't be surprised if a mid-to-high 3's engineer or systems bio major was considered competitive against an upper 3's "soft" science major; I certainly know who I respect more.

But for MD/PhD it boils down to research and letters after a cutoff, no?

 

[cdonahue]

I've always found toeing this line to be dangerous, but the conversation is always interesting.

I have a BS & almost-MS in EE, and have been heavily involved in teaching both undergraduate EE courses, as well is introductory physics. One of the professors I got to spend a lot of time working with was the type who didn't think much of GPAs (he was a college drop out for a bit, went back for a PhD in nuclear physics, etc, etc...).

At any rate, while a focus on a strong GPA is certainly important in this process, I lament the lack of willingness to make mistakes and learn from them that tends to come along with the territory. I've learned a lot from performing poorly in classes in the past (admittedly, mostly due to immaturity). Of course, this isn't free reign to take classes way out of your league and blow them off, but it also isn't the end of the world.

 

[Neuronix]

Therefore, shoot for the high GPA.

I agree with this within reason. You don't want to go part-time to do it (i.e. take a long time to graduate) and I'm sure there's other odd scenarios one can conjure up, like majoring in phys ed or something really bizzare. I mean, yeah there might be SOME level of forgiveness for say the 3.5 chem engineering major vs. the 3.8 social science major. That's a tough call at the adcom level. But the 3.0 chem engineering major is going to get destroyed.

So I would say yeah maybe your hard major/prestigious undergrad institution might be worth .2 or .3 GPA points. But you're putting in a LOT of work to get up to that 3.6 bar where you really want to be. We can talk about how wrong or right this might be. The reality is adcoms can't really judge different undergrad institutions, majors, or coursework. They don't really have time to sit there and pick transcripts with generic sounding course names apart. And in the end, the pre-med's best friend the US News rankings only cares about that matriculated GPA number.

As always,
Your 3.9 GPA state school psych major moderator.

 

[Tetraoxygen]

As always,
Your 3.9 GPA state school psych major moderator.

But Neuronix, you had deep knowledge of computers and coding! so that is not really comforting.

 

[bd4727]

I agree with this within reason. You don't want to go part-time to do it (i.e. take a long time to graduate) and I'm sure there's other odd scenarios one can conjure up, like majoring in phys ed or something really bizzare. I mean, yeah there might be SOME level of forgiveness for say the 3.5 chem engineering major vs. the 3.8 social science major. That's a tough call at the adcom level. But the 3.0 chem engineering major is going to get destroyed.

So I would say yeah maybe your hard major/prestigious undergrad institution might be worth .2 or .3 GPA points. But you're putting in a LOT of work to get up to that 3.6 bar where you really want to be. We can talk about how wrong or right this might be. The reality is adcoms can't really judge different undergrad institutions, majors, or coursework. They don't really have time to sit there and pick transcripts with generic sounding course names apart. And in the end, the pre-med's best friend the US News rankings only cares about that matriculated GPA number.

As always,
Your 3.9 GPA state school psych major moderator.

I agree with Neuronix and many other posters on this thread, that overall it is not worth it for your application to compromise high GPA for tough courses.

That being said, I would keep in mind that at most places anything over about 3.7-3.75 is placed into the same bin. So that leaves leeway for some tough courses, you just have to be cognizant about balancing your schedule to remain above this range. It would be a shame for bright people or just someone really interested in something to not take a course because they were afraid it would hurt their chances, especially given how much money you are paying for tuition. So just be smart about it and don't over do it. But don't get caught up in the notion that a few B's in tough classes are what is keeping people out of MSTPs, because I guarantee you that is not the case.

 

[kathrasis]

As always,
Your 3.9 GPA state school psych major moderator.

I don't know why but my butt suddenly feels quite sore and hurt.

 

[Narmerguy]

I agree with Neuronix and many other posters on this thread, that overall it is not worth it for your application to compromise high GPA for tough courses.

That being said, I would keep in mind that at most places anything over about 3.7-3.75 is placed into the same bin. So that leaves leeway for some tough courses, you just have to be cognizant about balancing your schedule to remain above this range. It would be a shame for bright people or just someone really interested in something to not take a course because they were afraid it would hurt their chances, especially given how much money you are paying for tuition. So just be smart about it and don't over do it. But don't get caught up in the notion that a few B's in tough classes are what is keeping people out of MSTPs, because I guarantee you that is not the case.

Really at a 3.75? That seems rather low, I had always considered that range to be 3.85+ as I think there's a measurable difference between a 3.95 applicant and a 3.75 applicant.

 

[delirium81]

Really at a 3.75? That seems rather low, I had always considered that range to be 3.85+ as I think there's a measurable difference between a 3.95 applicant and a 3.75 applicant.

Really? What's the measurable difference between someone who was a 3.95 bio major at a school with major grade inflation and someone with a 3.75 biomedical engineering major at a school with far less grade inflation?

 

[solitude]

Really? What's the measurable difference between someone who was a 3.95 bio major at a school with major grade inflation and someone with a 3.75 biomedical engineering major at a school with far less grade inflation?

that's comparing apples and oranges. The question is, ceteris paribus, does having a higher GPA increase your chances? The answer is a resounding yes. At some point it just does not matter, and I agree that the threshold is higher than 3.75.

 

[delirium81]

that's comparing apples and oranges. The question is, ceteris paribus, does having a higher GPA increase your chances? The answer is a resounding yes. At some point it just does not matter, and I agree that the threshold is higher than 3.75.

Well sure, ceteris paribus, I agree that higher GPAs always win out. That's a no brainer. But the whole point of this thread was discussing what happens when things are not ceteris paribus and how much committees are willing to take that into consideration. I just think that a blanket statement that a 3.75 is too low is an over simplification. Either way, it's definitely not the kind of GPA that will get you immediately thrown into the "rejected" pile.

 

[PfNO22]

Well sure, ceteris paribus, I agree that higher GPAs always win out. That's a no brainer. But the whole point of this thread was discussing what happens when things are not ceteris paribus and how much committees are willing to take that into consideration. I just think that a blanket statement that a 3.75 is too low is an over simplification. Either way, it's definitely not the kind of GPA that will get you immediately thrown into the "rejected" pile.

Yes, there is a statistically significant difference in matriculation for applicants with 3.75 GPA and 3.85.

But the truth is, someone matriculated in 2010 with a 2.7, so......
I don't think the choice was between a 2.7 and a 2.6.

If your GPA is not nearly perfect, you need another way to stand out.

If your GPA is bad, you need a way to prove you can actually study.


AND, almost half of all MD-PhD applicants were accepted for MD-PhD somewhere on their list, so apply broadly.

 

[PfNO22]

that's comparing apples and oranges. The question is, ceteris paribus, does having a higher GPA increase your chances? The answer is a resounding yes. At some point it just does not matter, and I agree that the threshold is higher than 3.75.

I think people should just do what they want to do and stop checking requirements off a list. I think that will make you happier in the long run, and why go through this whole process if it's not about ultimately being happy? Sad doctors are bad doctors.

 

[Choculitis]

I think people should just do what they want to do and stop checking requirements off a list. I think that will make you happier in the long run, and why go through this whole process if it's not about ultimately being happy? Sad doctors are bad doctors.

Agreed. In first year I signed up for a bunch of clubs, volunteer organizations, etc because that's what I thought med schools wanted, and I ended up doing practically nothing for any of them. Since then, I've been doing stuff that I'd be doing regardless of its effect on med school admissions, and I've been much more engaged. Granted, it remains to be seen how well my applications go (in particular, I'm regretting not having stuck with doing research during the school year), but I think that you'd have a hard time putting in the necessary effort to do well in any major or activity if it's not something you want to do.

 

[Choculitis]

If your GPA is not nearly perfect, you need another way to stand out.

And even with a perfect GPA, you still need another way to stand out at the best schools, haha

 

[texasguy]

I agree with this within reason. You don't want to go part-time to do it (i.e. take a long time to graduate) and I'm sure there's other odd scenarios one can conjure up, like majoring in phys ed or something really bizzare. I mean, yeah there might be SOME level of forgiveness for say the 3.5 chem engineering major vs. the 3.8 social science major. That's a tough call at the adcom level. But the 3.0 chem engineering major is going to get destroyed.

So I would say yeah maybe your hard major/prestigious undergrad institution might be worth .2 or .3 GPA points. But you're putting in a LOT of work to get up to that 3.6 bar where you really want to be. We can talk about how wrong or right this might be. The reality is adcoms can't really judge different undergrad institutions, majors, or coursework. They don't really have time to sit there and pick transcripts with generic sounding course names apart. And in the end, the pre-med's best friend the US News rankings only cares about that matriculated GPA number.

As always,
Your 3.9 GPA state school psych major moderator.

I completely agree. I was generalizing, of course. A lot of people on this thread are arguing between a 3.7 (difficult major) and 3.9 (easier major). While those of us who have attended undergrad in the last decade or so remember that there can be a HUGE difference in the amount of effort needed in one versus the other, a senior adcom member likely won't. To an an admissions committee, your publication record (and research experience, and true understanding/dedication to conducting translational research) will help distinguish you from others if you're in the same GPA range.

Granted, this is all geared towards the many premeds who choose their major to ensure a high GPA alone. If you're one of the few that is truly passionate about your major, then go for it. For instance, at many undergraduate institutions engineering majors tend to be one of the most difficult. It's also an area that biomedical research could really benefit from having students come from - the need for research in medical devices in cardiology, ortho, etc. is endless..

 

[solitude]

I think people should just do what they want to do and stop checking requirements off a list. I think that will make you happier in the long run, and why go through this whole process if it's not about ultimately being happy? Sad doctors are bad doctors.

Of course I agree. Pick a major that you like even if it doesn't happen to be "tough", take challenging courses and grad-level courses, rock the MCAT, get amazing grades, join clubs that interest you, do stellar research and get published, get to know your professors well, exercise daily, eat right, make lots of friends and be social, call your parents weekly, read for pleasure, take long vacations, and make time for love. That's all you have to do in college to maximize your odds to get into top MSTPs and to be happy. There will be tradeoffs. Good luck.

 

[Neuronix]

I think people should just do what they want to do and stop checking requirements off a list.

Totally! That's why I didn't take Organic Chemistry. What a waste of time that would be since I would never, ever use it again after the MCAT. And why the heck take that MCAT? What a pita that is! I mean, what does that have to do with being a physician? I'm not paying that $1000 to the AAMC for AMCAS or all those secondary fees either. It's so ridiculous that it costs so much.

And then I woke up, did all that crap, crushed step 1 and 2, kissed a lot of ass on wards, paid a ton to ERAS, and paid a ton to interview for TYs and residency. This process is all about checking requirements off a list.

 

[Tetraoxygen]

Pick a major that you like even if it doesn't happen to be "tough", take challenging courses and grad-level courses, rock the MCAT, get amazing grades, join clubs that interest you, do stellar research and get published, get to know your professors well, exercise daily, eat right, make lots of friends and be social, call your parents weekly, read for pleasure, take long vacations, and make time for love. That's all you have to do in college to maximize your odds to get into top MSTPs and to be happy.

That is so well said that I'm really going to follow it.

There will be tradeoffs. Good luck.

I will definitely need it... I like my major, even though it is "tough" and sometimes brutal.

 

[PfNO22]

Totally! That's why I didn't take Organic Chemistry. What a waste of time that would be since I would never, ever use it again after the MCAT. And why the heck take that MCAT? What a pita that is! I mean, what does that have to do with being a physician? I'm not paying that $1000 to the AAMC for AMCAS or all those secondary fees either. It's so ridiculous that it costs so much.

And then I woke up, did all that crap, crushed step 1 and 2, kissed a lot of ass on wards, paid a ton to ERAS, and paid a ton to interview for TYs and residency. This process is all about checking requirements off a list.