Would the people that were accepted into MSTP programs in the country mind posting their GPAs and MCATs. I realize this is not everything, but it's something.
GPAs and MCATs
- Thread starter Res-J
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2001
- Messages
- 1,066
- Reaction score
- 18
Your MCAT score is excellent and the GPA is fine. If the rest of your application is strong, you should be a great applicant.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2002
- Messages
- 250
- Reaction score
- 0
MSTP must be like 5X harder to get into. Scores that are considered awesome for MD are average for MSTP. To be honest, I dont even really think Im competitive enough for MSTP from the way people are making it sound (I have 3.8 and 38T, but everyone else's post Ive read on this board has higher stats).
You guys are RIDICULOUSLY impressive!
You guys are RIDICULOUSLY impressive!
J
jot
hah - you're just fine. your mcat is higher than ave - and your gpa is right on the mark. its the other stuff and your interview that make you ---
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2001
- Messages
- 1,066
- Reaction score
- 18
Listen to jot... he knows what he's talking about.
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2002
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 0
What I've learned from this process is that the high GPA-MCAT scores are a lot more dime-a-dozen than you may think. Tons of people are smoking the MCAT, and tons more ripped the curves in U-grad science courses.
I think the interviews are the killer: My experience is that people go into interviews too conservative, hoping not to fail, because they rely on their scores and MCATs. Cats gotta start taking some risks to try and separate themselves from the pack and their is no other way to do this than interviews.
So basically...your 3.6 and 39 MCAT tell me absolutely nothing about you. I cannot comment on your candidacy. If you are a nice guy(like you sound) and can do some science than your fine like everyone else has said. If you are a jerk(like lots of other applicants)and can't do science if it ain't in the form of a problem set(like a whole lot of other people with high numbers) than your going to have a hard time.
Sorry I don't sound sugary like everyone else, but somebody gotta bring it to you clean.
OUT.
I think the interviews are the killer: My experience is that people go into interviews too conservative, hoping not to fail, because they rely on their scores and MCATs. Cats gotta start taking some risks to try and separate themselves from the pack and their is no other way to do this than interviews.
So basically...your 3.6 and 39 MCAT tell me absolutely nothing about you. I cannot comment on your candidacy. If you are a nice guy(like you sound) and can do some science than your fine like everyone else has said. If you are a jerk(like lots of other applicants)and can't do science if it ain't in the form of a problem set(like a whole lot of other people with high numbers) than your going to have a hard time.
Sorry I don't sound sugary like everyone else, but somebody gotta bring it to you clean.
OUT.
- Joined
- May 29, 2002
- Messages
- 1,330
- Reaction score
- 0
I am very worried about those two factors as well. I think that I may not even get any interviews It's really starting to bum me out now, because this physics class is going to plunder my gpa. WEll, maybe it's time to look into something else, adn then get my numbers up and apply later....
I dislike phyiscs with a passion
It's really starting to bum me out now, because this physics class is going to plunder my gpa. WEll, maybe it's time to look into something else, adn then get my numbers up and apply later....I dislike phyiscs with a passion
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2002
- Messages
- 1,283
- Reaction score
- 12
I asked Brian Sullivan here at the WashU MSTP about a different question and this answer came along as part of it...
He said as far as MCAT and GPA go, admissions is based 5% on each of those and 90% on your research experience (which, along with whether you are a nice guy or a jerk, is what the interviews are trying to get out of you). So study your projects with a passion and get talkin with your PI(s).
He said as far as MCAT and GPA go, admissions is based 5% on each of those and 90% on your research experience (which, along with whether you are a nice guy or a jerk, is what the interviews are trying to get out of you). So study your projects with a passion and get talkin with your PI(s).
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2002
- Messages
- 267
- Reaction score
- 0
That makes me feel a little better, thanks newquagmire.
I think each school is a little different. For some, numbers matter most, and research is secondary. For others, research exp is more important than GPA/MCAT. Who knows? Remember, there is always someone that gets in with stats that are 3 S.D. away from the mean. (I'm talking below the mean )
Not something to brag about, but at least you got in right?
I think each school is a little different. For some, numbers matter most, and research is secondary. For others, research exp is more important than GPA/MCAT. Who knows? Remember, there is always someone that gets in with stats that are 3 S.D. away from the mean. (I'm talking below the mean
)Not something to brag about, but at least you got in right?
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2001
- Messages
- 169
- Reaction score
- 0
The last post is certainly correct. I've known plenty of friends with paltry 30S MCAT and 3.8 GPA's who are finishing up MD/PhD programs in perfectly nice places like Emory. They happened to have excellent research credentials as undergrads and their research advisors wrote them nice letters and made calls on their behalf. As far as I can tell, they are publishing as many papers (or more) as their higher scoring colleagues and are very well thought of individuals.
Your mileage may vary...
Your mileage may vary...
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 14,915
- Reaction score
- 8,847
What is excellent research exactly? You just need to show that you have commitment to research. If you've been working in a lab for a few years, or done a bunch of summers, or took a post-bacc year or SOMETHING along these lines you're alright. You don't need to have first authored papers or have worked independantly in an HHMI lab to get into a MSTP (although it may help...). How much can be expected of undergraduates anyways?
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2002
- Messages
- 14,915
- Reaction score
- 8,847
So how does he get his idea of who is "talented" in research? The only ways I can think of are LORs and interviews. I don't know anyone who would have you work in their lab and then give you a bad LOR. Then it's just up to you to know your research!
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2002
- Messages
- 69
- Reaction score
- 0
Actually I disagree.
Of course no one will give a "bad" recommendation, but there is a big difference in the level of enthusiasm the writer has for you which can correlate with how "talented" you are at research. I mean, there's a big difference between someone who says "so and so worked in my lab, he's a smart guy, I do recommend him to md/phd" and "so and so is absolutely the most brilliant person i have ever worked with, he/she walks on water and I anticipate he/she will become a research god with billions of grants".
Of course no one will give a "bad" recommendation, but there is a big difference in the level of enthusiasm the writer has for you which can correlate with how "talented" you are at research. I mean, there's a big difference between someone who says "so and so worked in my lab, he's a smart guy, I do recommend him to md/phd" and "so and so is absolutely the most brilliant person i have ever worked with, he/she walks on water and I anticipate he/she will become a research god with billions of grants".
