Help on choosing schools to apply!

[charles17]

Hi, I'm an applicant for this yr's cycle and would really appreciate any advice on choosing which schools to apply. I have a list of 37 med schools currently, but would like to narrow down the list abit.

Any comments would be appreciated, Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[146233]

I see you're a CA resident. Do you have your heart set on remaining in CA? If not, I'd pare down the list of UC schools you apply to - that's an easy place to start. You can also probably knock off Cleveland and Virgina Commonwealth. Are you VERY interested in research? If not, watch out for UChicago, Harvard, and Hopkins (and Yale makes you write a thesis). While your numbers are very good, they aren't STELLAR, so unless you really like Texas, consider dropping Baylor.

That's 13-14 schools you could live without. Of course, the ultimate choice is yours - you could apply to all of them and simply not fill out secondaries if you don't feel like it.

My suggestions are just off the cuff comments. Without more details like your EC's, research experience, etc., you shouldn't really expect any of us to be able to make well-informed suggestions. Add more to your mdapps profile and perhaps others can be more helpful.


Best of luck,
-z

 

[Old ortho]

Hi, I'm an applicant for this yr's cycle and would really appreciate any advice on choosing which schools to apply. I have a list of 37 med schools currently, but would like to narrow down the list abit.

Here's my stats/list of schools that I've just uploaded:

http://www.mdapplicants.com/viewprofile.php?myid=07904

Any comments would be appreciated, Thanks!

I would drop a few OOS state schools and top 10 schools like the previous post said. Maybe 30 should be enough.

 

[alwaysaangel]

I would look at MSAR and cut the ones that are way above your numbers (JH, Harvard, etc). Unless you have some AMAZING ECs those will just be a waste of money.

Then when you've cut based on numbers I would look at what each school puts emphasis on. Some schools emphasize primary care, some research, some rural health, some community health. Not to say that everyone who goes to these schools must do this, but in general you'll be happier at a school similar to your goals, you'll also be more likely to be accepted.

Then I would cut out schools by geography. Would you REALLY be happy in upstate New York? Chicago? etc. I realized after spending a lot on primaries and secondaries that I had way over applied and would never want to go to school in those places. So really look at geography and figure out if you would be miserable at one of those schools and remove it.

 

[gsmithers68]

Since you do have a good MCAT and a decent GPA I say give the reach schools a shot. Who knows what can happen there. I would nix a few of the other schools personally. I feel like Albany, SUNY upstate, VCU, Rochester, Tufts, Northwestern, Cincinatti, and Miami could have a little more research done on them to see if they are really worthwhile places for you to apply based upon how many out-of-staters they take, whether you like the location, and if you can afford the school (Tufts is damn expensive). I would try and narrow down your 'safety' school list to 4 or 5 rather than 8-10. I take it you have a lot of research experience judging by your choice of research oriented schools so I think you should keep some of the Ivies that others may say to leave out. Just my 0.02

 

[diosa428]

Try breaking it down like this:

Super reaches - Harvard, Hopkins, Columbia, UCSF, UPenn, Yale, Stanford
Reaches - Cornell, Dartmouth, UCLA, Vandy, NYU, UChicago, Northwestern
Baylor, Emory and Georgetown go somewhere in here, but not sure where
About right - Case Western (Cleveland Clinic too? not sure), URochester, prob UVA, USC, UCD, UCI, UCSD, Ohio State
A little bit lower - Tufts and GW
"Safties" - NYMC, Albany, VCU

The others I don't know what to do with, b/c I don't know anything about them. And some of these categories might be a little off (it's a very rough estimate). Things to think about - Georgetown has an expensive secondary and is really tough to get into (tougher than their admissions info makes it seem) and they are religiously-affiliated. They basically make you kiss their a** to get in there. GW also has an expensive secondary and gets a lot of applications b/c everyone wants to use them as a safety, so they often put ppl with stats higher than their averages on "hold" or just outright reject them. Northwestern, NYU, same deal, lots of apps, and NYU is notorious for throwing out the applications that they don't get to by the time their interview season is over, so apply early. Have you thought about location at all? Coming from Cali, do you really want to move to Ohio? Or Rochester? Also, if you like NY, maybe add Mt. Sinai and AECOM rather than NYMC and Albany, which are in worse locations. That's about all I have to offer though... unless you want to get rid of some of your reaches.

 

[Gene Therapist]

Try breaking it down like this:

Super reaches - Harvard, Hopkins, Columbia, UCSF, UPenn, Yale, Stanford
Reaches - Cornell, Dartmouth, UCLA, Vandy, NYU, UChicago, Northwestern
Baylor, Emory and Georgetown go somewhere in here, but not sure where
About right - Case Western (Cleveland Clinic too? not sure), URochester, prob UVA, USC, UCD, UCI, UCSD, Ohio State
A little bit lower - Tufts and GW
"Safties" - NYMC, Albany, VCU
.

You do have some nice stats and I wouldnt worry to much youll get in somewhere. you should pick probably:

Super Reaches(3)-harvard, hopkins,ucsf
Reaches (3)-cornel,ucla,dartmouth
About right (6)-UCI,UCD,USC,UCSD,OhioState,Urochester

And even though you wont need these because I am sure youll get into higher ranked/better schools:

"Safeties" (4)-Drexel, Temple, GW, Albany

That is a shorter list with the best schools picked out for each section that I have either heard have great programs or have first handed interviewed there myself. ALthough for the safeties I picked the easiest to get into as well they are safeties and you shouldnt need them.

Good Luck though and let me know if you have specific questions about the schools I listed as Ill try to answer them as best I can.

 

[uhohspaghettio]

Georgetown is not reach for him

 

[pennybridge]

I would look at MSAR and cut the ones that are way above your numbers (JH, Harvard, etc).

define "way above" please.

hopkins --> 3.84 34.5 averages (ie. half above/half below)

OP --> 3.70 35

it's not the raw numbers that will keep him/her out of those schools, it's the low verbal score (and that M might hint at poor personal statements/essays, but who knows really?)

 

[Old ortho]

Remember that the OP is east Asian from Cali. I would apply broadly to more mid and low tier instead of high tier.

 

[alwaysaangel]

define "way above" please.

hopkins --> 3.84 34.5 averages (ie. half above/half below)

OP --> 3.70 35

it's not the raw numbers that will keep him/her out of those schools, it's the low verbal score (and that M might hint at poor personal statements/essays, but who knows really?)

JHU averages are 3.88, 3.9 and 11, 12, 12 Q
Harvard averages are 3.85, 3.85 and 11, 12, 12 R

OP is 3.71, 3.61 and 9, 13, 13 M

He is lower on everything except PS and BS. Since verbal is what med schools look at the most its going to hurt him, and unless you're way above those school averages or discovered the cure to cancer you're just wasting your money.

He asked for opinions and I just wouldn't waste my money if I were the OP. But if money isn't an issue for him then he should go for it.

 

[diosa428]

Harvard, Hopkins, UCSF, Stanford, etc, are reach schools for everyone. I have friends with fabulous stats (4.0, 36) that didn't get in. They have acceptance rates of like 4-5%. But, if the OP wants to try, that's his decision.

 

[dochoov]

Since verbal is what med schools look at the most its going to hurt him, and unless you're way above those school averages or discovered the cure to cancer you're just wasting your money.

Do med schools really place a greater importance on the verbal score? Why? Can you support this?

 

[alwaysaangel]

Do med schools really place a greater importance on the verbal score? Why? Can you support this?

I work for Princeton Review and its what we teach based on what research they've done with adcoms. Its also what my undergrad advisor said - so I'm gonna say that yeah theres a lot of truth to it.

Basically the idea is that in med school you have to process a lot of brand new material very quickly and verbal is most representative of your ability to do this. While Bio and Physical Science are partially base knowledge you already have and partial integration of new information.

Also, supposedly studies have been done and your verbal score is most representative of your success in med school and on the Step 1 but I've only heard of such studies never actually seen one.

 

[Gene Therapist]

Do med schools really place a greater importance on the verbal score? Why? Can you support this?

No they do not. Some schools yes, all of them? NO. Which ones? No one really knows. Anyone saying othewise is ridiculous!

I work for Princeton Review and its what we teach based on what research they've done with adcoms. Its also what my undergrad advisor said - so I'm gonna say that yeah theres a lot of truth to it.

Basically the idea is that in med school you have to process a lot of brand new material very quickly and verbal is most representative of your ability to do this. While Bio and Physical Science are partially base knowledge you already have and partial integration of new information.

Also, supposedly studies have been done and your verbal score is most representative of your success in med school and on the Step 1 but I've only heard of such studies never actually seen one.

Right because companies who are in the buisness for PROFIT wouldnt skew things in their favor to make more money. Verbal is the easiest section to increase your score in (do it by reading alot and comprehending) (bio.phys-reqires knowledge and comprehension). Since their job is to increase the scores and its easier to increase verbal of course they will say "its the most important one". Please take an econ class before you fill pre-meds heads with such non sense of verbal being proven to be rated more. Give me a break.

Studies that I HAVE READ MYSELF AND SEEN (not only on speculation and crapy 2nd hand stories) point toward your GPA as being the best predictor of your success in medical school, as it is medical SCHOOL not medical TEST. The mcat is a better predictor of how you will do on the STEP 1 ETC.

OP- with all that being said apply to hopkins etc, your numbers are fine (lower in some areas but higher in others) do not listen to those telling you you will never make it and that it is a waste of you money, it just shows how jealous others can be of your possible success (ie. becasue they couldnt get in they put down everyone else). Just go for it! IMHO!

 

[alwaysaangel]

Right because companies who are in the buisness for PROFIT wouldnt skew things in their favor to make more money. Verbal is the easiest section to increase your score in (do it by reading alot and comprehending) (bio.phys-reqires knowledge and comprehension). Since their job is to increase the scores and its easier to increase verbal of course they will say "its the most important one". Please take an econ class before you fill pre-meds heads with such non sense of verbal being proven to be rated more. Give me a break.

Studies that I HAVE READ MYSELF AND SEEN (not only on speculation and crapy 2nd hand stories) point toward your GPA as being the best predictor of your success in medical school, as it is medical SCHOOL not medical TEST. The mcat is a better predictor of how you will do on the STEP 1 ETC.

OP- with all that being said apply to hopkins etc, your numbers are fine (lower in some areas but higher in others) do not listen to those telling you you will never make it and that it is a waste of you money, it just shows how jealous others can be of your possible success (ie. becasue they couldnt get in they put down everyone else). Just go for it! IMHO!

The bolded is where you gave away your ignorance.

Blah, blah, blah troll.

Being more subtle this time I see. You won't last long. You always give yourself away by following me around in threads and responding to me - its pretty pathetic. Ignoring you until the mods have enough evidence to ban you.

 

[dochoov]

I work for Princeton Review and its what we teach based on what research they've done with adcoms. Its also what my undergrad advisor said - so I'm gonna say that yeah theres a lot of truth to it.

Basically the idea is that in med school you have to process a lot of brand new material very quickly and verbal is most representative of your ability to do this. While Bio and Physical Science are partially base knowledge you already have and partial integration of new information.

Also, supposedly studies have been done and your verbal score is most representative of your success in med school and on the Step 1 but I've only heard of such studies never actually seen one.

Ok. I see your point, but I've also seen evidence to say otherwise. First of all, look at the Hopkins/Harvard MCAT averages, or any other schools for that matter: verbal scores are typically lower than the sciences by one point. So how can they be more important?

Also, I saw a post once in the MCAT forums with a link to a study that said that the BS score correlated most with STEP I. But since I can't directly reference that, I guess I'm just as bad as you.

The only reason I care is because I have a very similar, yet slightly more alarming breakdown than the OP: PS-13 VR-8 BS-13 W-O

So I'm just worried. And I feel that I've hijacked this thread. Sorry OP.

I think you should probobly drop some of the top tier and OOS that you really don't care for. If I were you, I would pick one top tier, in addition to your realistic choices, and go for that. Either way, you'll get in somewhere great with your stats.

 

[alwaysaangel]

Ok. I see your point, but I've also seen evidence to say otherwise. First of all, look at the Hopkins/Harvard MCAT averages, or any other schools for that matter: verbal scores are typically lower than the sciences by one point. So how can they be more important?

You have primarily science majors taking the MCAT and applying and as a whole we do better on the science sections than on the verbal section. So even if the science averages are on average better than the verbal averages its just as likely to be a reflection of the pool of applicants as it is to be a reflection of how those applicants are chosen.

Also, I saw a post once in the MCAT forums with a link to a study that said that the BS score correlated most with STEP I. But since I can't directly reference that, I guess I'm just as bad as you.

Yeah finding them is always tough. I looked last night - found a couple from England but nothing from the US. However, frankly I see no reason why the Princeton Review would have us teachers lie. Verbal is the hardest section to improve upon and there is not benefit to them by making up that verbal is more important than Bio/PS. The only thing Princeton Review wants to do is to have successful test takers and successful applicants. THAT pushes along their ability to make money so I don't see why they would lie to applicants about something so central to the application process. A friend of mine who teaches Kaplan is told that verbal is more important as well, so it is also constant across prep companies.

The only reason I care is because I have a very similar, yet slightly more alarming breakdown than the OP: PS-13 VR-8 BS-13 W-O

So I'm just worried. And I feel that I've hijacked this thread. Sorry OP.

Threads on SDN always get hijacked, and frankly not to be mean but you should worry. Thats a very unbalanced MCAT and its going to be an uphill battle the whole way. If you'd messed up your writing score they could just look more closely at your essays and it wouldn't be a big deal. But having that 8 in verbal will be a tough sell. Apply broadly and be prepared to explain why you got an 8 in interviews (shouldn't come up much, a lot of interviews are closed and they can't see your score, but some are open and they will ask about it). I would search mdapps and see where people with verbal near yours have been successful just to get a bit of an idea. But definitely apply broadly.

Good luck.

 

[dochoov]

Here is a link to a wikipedia article that references the study I was talking about:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCAT#_note-1

Text highlight: "Unsurprisingly, it is the MCAT Biological Sciences score which most directly correlates to success on the USMLE Step 1 exam, with a correlation coefficient of .553 vs .491 for Physical Sciences and .397 for Verbal Reasoning."

Here is the link to the thread I saw this on awhile ago:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=378180&highlight=correlates+STEP

The consensus on this thread was that, like you said, verbal is the most important. But the only reason to believe this has come from nothing other than speculation based on rumor. I certainly don't want you to think that I'm calling you a liar; you're just passing on the information that you have taken to be true.

Since I haven't been able to find any evidence showing that verbal scores are more important than science scores in predicting medical school success--as measured by board scores--I don't believe they are as important in that regard. Obviously there is more to being a doctor than board scores, and as far as I know, neither MCAT nor GPA predict the quality of physician someone will develop into. (There are many difficulties with this type of study). Below is a link to a review/study published in the BMJ that discusses some of these issues:

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7343/952#B22

Instead of just having faith in the information I read on SDN, I would like to see actual evidence, in the form of a study or the words of at least one ADCOM, showing that verbal scores are more important.

 

[alwaysaangel]

Instead of just having faith in the information I read on SDN, I would like to see actual evidence, in the form of a study or the words of at least one ADCOM, showing that verbal scores are more important.

I'll talk to my bosses and see if I can get anything from them.

 

[Gene Therapist]

Here is a link to a wikipedia article that references the study I was talking about:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCAT#_note-1

Text highlight: "Unsurprisingly, it is the MCAT Biological Sciences score which most directly correlates to success on the USMLE Step 1 exam, with a correlation coefficient of .553 vs .491 for Physical Sciences and .397 for Verbal Reasoning."

Here is the link to the thread I saw this on awhile ago:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=378180&highlight=correlates+STEP

The consensus on this thread was that, like you said, verbal is the most important. But the only reason to believe this has come from nothing other than speculation based on rumor. I certainly don't want you to think that I'm calling you a liar; you're just passing on the information that you have taken to be true.

Since I haven't been able to find any evidence showing that verbal scores are more important than science scores in predicting medical school success--as measured by board scores--I don't believe they are as important in that regard. Obviously there is more to being a doctor than board scores, and as far as I know, neither MCAT nor GPA predict the quality of physician someone will develop into. (There are many difficulties with this type of study). Below is a link to a review/study published in the BMJ that discusses some of these issues:

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/324/7343/952#B22

Instead of just having faith in the information I read on SDN, I would like to see actual evidence, in the form of a study or the words of at least one ADCOM, showing that verbal scores are more important.

SOrry but you will not find evidence for verbal being rated higher as it is a farce. Look at the people saying that it is and you will see that the schools they got into are not top tier. Not even applied to them.(ie, jealousy) I am sure if you had a lowe biological section they would have said "yeah biology section is the most important section, my friend told me so". They are just rying to dicourage you since they could not get as far. Forget them. Ill give you some proof. My friend had a 41 mcat (13,14,14) got rejected at hopkins (got into harvard-so do not feel bad for her) while my other friend got a 33 (7,14,12) and will be matriculating there in the fall. SO i hardly think that verbal is the most important. She had some good volunteering that I think made up for any other low areas and she was fine. As long as you have good EC and volunteering, Research you should be fine.

 

[pennybridge]

yeah, sorry angel, I'm with the rapist on this one. There's waaaay too many examples of people getting into top research schools with low verbal scores to dissuade someone from spending the paltry $75.00 or whatever it costs to apply there.

while I believe, personally, that verbal should be more significant, the MCAT verbal section is a bit biased. I know a few people who score terribly on the verbal section but in real life have no problem communicating or understanding written material.

The fact of the matter is that you can teach damn near anybody how to be a doctor, and top medical schools simply have their pick of the litter. If the admissions committee likes what you've done in research, they won't give two ****s about your low verbal score on teh mcat considering they've met you in person for the interview.

As long as you're not below a 7 on verbal, you stand a chance at an interview anywhere (except maybe washU lol)

 

[alwaysaangel]

yeah, sorry angel, I'm with the rapist on this one. There's waaaay too many examples of people getting into top research schools with low verbal scores to dissuade someone from spending the paltry $75.00 or whatever it costs to apply there.

while I believe, personally, that verbal should be more significant, the MCAT verbal section is a bit biased. I know a few people who score terribly on the verbal section but in real life have no problem communicating or understanding written material.

The fact of the matter is that you can teach damn near anybody how to be a doctor, and top medical schools simply have their pick of the litter. If the admissions committee likes what you've done in research, they won't give two ****s about your low verbal score on teh mcat considering they've met you in person for the interview.

As long as you're not below a 7 on verbal, you stand a chance at an interview anywhere (except maybe washU lol)

Fair enough. I never told the guy not to apply. I said what the base belief of most important section was and I told him to apply broadly. Of course he'll do well if he's done some incredible research or community service. But assuming he is a typical applicant it will be an uphill battle. I simply warned him. Better than him going in thinking that verbal is unimportant and applying to all the top schools and wasting a lot of money. I even said if money wasn't an issue he should go ahead and apply. I'm not quite sure where the disagreement is here...

 

[dochoov]

Fair enough. I never told the guy not to apply. I said what the base belief of most important section was and I told him to apply broadly. Of course he'll do well if he's done some incredible research or community service. But assuming he is a typical applicant it will be an uphill battle. I simply warned him. Better than him going in thinking that verbal is unimportant and applying to all the top schools and wasting a lot of money. I even said if money wasn't an issue he should go ahead and apply. I'm not quite sure where the disagreement is here...

I had previously planned on applying to many top tiers; Hopkins was my dream. My GPA is 3.9+ and I have good extracurriculars, but now that I have an 8 in VR, I see that my chances of actually getting accepted to one of the top 10s went from almost non-existent to non-existent.

I'm involved in this thread simply to get the facts straight. I agree with much of what you said. I think scoring below a 10 in any one section causes problems for many applicants. I was just questioning why many people claim that VR is more important than the other two sections.

 

[pennybridge]

I see that my chances of actually getting accepted to one of the top 10s went from almost non-existent to non-existent.

this is incredibly false, but if it's what you want to believe, don't apply to those schools then.



this is what we sane people like to call a "self fulfilling prophecy"

if you don't apply, you won't get in, therefore you're right, even though you're a loser.

 

[Ari Gold]

Fair enough. I never told the guy not to apply. I said what the base belief of most important section was and I told him to apply broadly. ...

you did tell the guy not to apply to those schools:

I would look at MSAR and cut the ones that are way above your numbers (JH, Harvard, etc). Unless you have some AMAZING ECs those will just be a waste of money....

and it honestly sounds like your talking to a dude with 3.4 and 29. i know you have some second thoughts about your schools but how can you tell the OP to cut all his reaches??? thats the only way to guarentee he wont get into one

and btw i worked for TPR too and this myth was just perpetuated and never backed up, and coincidentally we offered a 'Verbal Accelerator" to those who wanted to bump their VR score up even more, so i wouldnt go around quoting that like scripture.

 

[dochoov]

this is incredibly false, but if it's what you want to believe, don't apply to those schools then.



this is what we sane people like to call a "self fulfilling prophecy"

if you don't apply, you won't get in, therefore you're right, even though you're a loser.

Let's be real here. If I apply, I won't get in, and then I'll have lost 75 bucks in addition to my rejection. Then I'm a bigger loser.

Of course nothing will stop me from applying to Hopkins, despite the prospective stomach ulcers I would never get the pleasure of developing from their grading system.

 

[charles17]

Thanks for all your responses. It's interesting to see such a controversy surrounding low verbal scores. My personal take is that it should not be a problem unless there is communication problems (for non native speakers) or bad grades in english classes. As for the importance of MCAT scores for predicting later success in medical school, I read a couple studies that looked into this long time ago. If anyone is interested, you should have no trouble finding them in a journal called "Academic Medicine." The nature of these studies is that of correlation. For instance, one study found a high correlation between MCAT verbal and Step 1, 2 scores on USMLE. Being a doctor involves alot of communication and I wouldn't be surprised that MCAT verbal and writing scores would be indicators of one's later clinical skills. I believe another study has confirmed this in the same journal. Adcoms would probably be concerned when they see a low verbal/writing score, but it would probably depend on the individual or medical school. At the end, numbers can't really justify who the person is, and it would probably be left to your other abilities/experience to impress these people.

On another note, I am trying to figure out a reasonable way of applying "broadly" to different schools:

According to my criteria,

"safeties" that I like (location, reputation, etc.):
Creighton, VCU, Miami, Cincinnati, NYMC

"realistic" places where I'd be competitive + like:
USC, UC Irvine, Rochester, OSU, Georgetown

"selective" schools where I might have a chance for an interview:
Case, UCLA, Emory, Dartmouth, Michigan, Baylor, Vanderbilt, Pitt, UVA

"reach" schools:
Yale, Penn, Stanford, Pritzker, UCSF


My goal is to get into a "selective" or "realistic" schools. The list above includes the schools that I definitely want to apply. But I want to make sure I have a good base of safety schools that would assure me that I'd be a doctor no matter what. If there's a school that I miscategorized, please let me know! Also, feel free to comment on my list and any sort of your reasoninig would be welcome~

 

[pennybridge]

Let's be real here. If I apply, I won't get in, and then I'll have lost 75 bucks in addition to my rejection. Then I'm a bigger loser.

Of course nothing will stop me from applying to Hopkins, despite the prospective stomach ulcers I would never get the pleasure of developing from their grading system.

well to each his own, but if 75 bucks got me a 5000:1 shot at hopkins I'd gladly pay it.

this is your career here, people, everyone who bitches and whines about $100 here, or $50k in loans there, it is CLEAR you have no concept of how money works in the real world.

 

[alwaysaangel]

you did tell the guy not to apply to those schools:



and it honestly sounds like your talking to a dude with 3.4 and 29. i know you have some second thoughts about your schools but how can you tell the OP to cut all his reaches??? thats the only way to guarentee he wont get into one

and btw i worked for TPR too and this myth was just perpetuated and never backed up, and coincidentally we offered a 'Verbal Accelerator" to those who wanted to bump their VR score up even more, so i wouldnt go around quoting that like scripture.

Oh good grief. I said UNLESS he has some amazing ECs (therefore never said he has no shot or he shouldn't) and I stand by my opinion that its a pretty big waste of money to apply to top 10s unless you're at/above their averages or have some amazing ECs. But its an anonymous internet forum he shouldn't take anything anyone says as scripture.

As far as the verbal thing - its also something my premed advisor told me, something an adcom from UCSF once said at a pre-med Q & A night, and if you google it you can find a lot of high reputation universities pre-med pages perpetuating the same rumor. I have a very hard time believing that someone someday with no basis in reality or information from adcomms decided that they would start a rumor that verbal was the most important and it just became the norm. But I guess its possible. Unlikely, but possible.

This site is FOR INFORMATION. I gave the information I had and cited it as such and if you have a problem with that then ok...don't know what you want me to do about it.

 

[pennybridge]

This site is FOR HEARSAY

fixed. anonymity (whatever little bit we actually have) makes it unrealistic to believe anything we read on these forums as "actual information." Every shred of text on this site is opinion, no more.

 

[Gene Therapist]

you did tell the guy not to apply to those schools:



and it honestly sounds like your talking to a dude with 3.4 and 29. i know you have some second thoughts about your schools but how can you tell the OP to cut all his reaches??? thats the only way to guarentee he wont get into one

and btw i worked for TPR too and this myth was just perpetuated and never backed up, and coincidentally we offered a 'Verbal Accelerator" to those who wanted to bump their VR score up even more, so i wouldnt go around quoting that like scripture.

Yeah I worked there too and found out that verbal is not the most important. As I stated in my other posts. I was told by someone higher up in the company too not from the trainer or fellow teachers (who are mostly just uninformed pre-meds themselves as shown by others who calaimt o have worked for them not you ari) This other person who quotes it like scripture is pure nonsense and probably made up this rumor between recess and lunch.

OP-Just apply! No try, you cry-----because they might have accepted you!

 

[Gene Therapist]

fixed. anonymity (whatever little bit we actually have) makes it unrealistic to believe anything we read on these forums as "actual information." Every shred of text on this site is opinion, no more.

Actually NOT! All my posts come notarized.

 

[abc123xyz]

Thanks for all your responses. It's interesting to see such a controversy surrounding low verbal scores. My personal take is that it should not be a problem unless there is communication problems (for non native speakers) or bad grades in english classes. As for the importance of MCAT scores for predicting later success in medical school, I read a couple studies that looked into this long time ago. If anyone is interested, you should have no trouble finding them in a journal called "Academic Medicine." The nature of these studies is that of correlation. For instance, one study found a high correlation between MCAT verbal and Step 1, 2 scores on USMLE. Being a doctor involves alot of communication and I wouldn't be surprised that MCAT verbal and writing scores would be indicators of one's later clinical skills. I believe another study has confirmed this in the same journal. Adcoms would probably be concerned when they see a low verbal/writing score, but it would probably depend on the individual or medical school. At the end, numbers can't really justify who the person is, and it would probably be left to your other abilities/experience to impress these people.

On another note, I am trying to figure out a reasonable way of applying "broadly" to different schools:

According to my criteria,

"safeties" that I like (location, reputation, etc.):
Creighton, VCU, Miami, Cincinnati, NYMC

"realistic" places where I'd be competitive + like:
USC, UC Irvine, Rochester, OSU, Georgetown

"selective" schools where I might have a chance for an interview:
Case, UCLA, Emory, Dartmouth, Michigan, Baylor, Vanderbilt, Pitt, UVA

"reach" schools:
Yale, Penn, Stanford, Pritzker, UCSF


My goal is to get into a "selective" or "realistic" schools. The list above includes the schools that I definitely want to apply. But I want to make sure I have a good base of safety schools that would assure me that I'd be a doctor no matter what. If there's a school that I miscategorized, please let me know! Also, feel free to comment on my list and any sort of your reasoninig would be welcome~

Consider adding MCW or Drexel on your safeties list.. also be aware that Georgetown may not be as receptive due to high number of applicants.

 

[diosa428]

Thanks for all your responses. It's interesting to see such a controversy surrounding low verbal scores. My personal take is that it should not be a problem unless there is communication problems (for non native speakers) or bad grades in english classes. As for the importance of MCAT scores for predicting later success in medical school, I read a couple studies that looked into this long time ago. If anyone is interested, you should have no trouble finding them in a journal called "Academic Medicine." The nature of these studies is that of correlation. For instance, one study found a high correlation between MCAT verbal and Step 1, 2 scores on USMLE. Being a doctor involves alot of communication and I wouldn't be surprised that MCAT verbal and writing scores would be indicators of one's later clinical skills. I believe another study has confirmed this in the same journal. Adcoms would probably be concerned when they see a low verbal/writing score, but it would probably depend on the individual or medical school. At the end, numbers can't really justify who the person is, and it would probably be left to your other abilities/experience to impress these people.

On another note, I am trying to figure out a reasonable way of applying "broadly" to different schools:

According to my criteria,

"safeties" that I like (location, reputation, etc.):
Creighton, VCU, Miami, Cincinnati, NYMC

"realistic" places where I'd be competitive + like:
USC, UC Irvine, Rochester, OSU, Georgetown

"selective" schools where I might have a chance for an interview:
Case, UCLA, Emory, Dartmouth, Michigan, Baylor, Vanderbilt, Pitt, UVA

"reach" schools:
Yale, Penn, Stanford, Pritzker, UCSF


My goal is to get into a "selective" or "realistic" schools. The list above includes the schools that I definitely want to apply. But I want to make sure I have a good base of safety schools that would assure me that I'd be a doctor no matter what. If there's a school that I miscategorized, please let me know! Also, feel free to comment on my list and any sort of your reasoninig would be welcome~

I'm not sure it's safe to consider state schools where you're out of state as "safeties" just because their averages are lower than yours. Often they have much higher criteria for out of state students. But I don't know anything about Miami or Cinncinati so I could totally be wrong. Just something to consider.

 

[diosa428]

Consider adding MCW or Drexel on your safeties list.. also be aware that Georgetown may not be as receptive due to high number of applicants.

I agree. Georgetown also has somewhat deceptively low GPA and MCAT averages b/c they accept a certain number of SMP students that have low numbers. But since they're averages are below the OPs numbers, I'm sure he still has a good shot.

 

[diosa428]

One more thing - OP, I see that you took Harvard and Hopkins off your list. I hope you didn't do that just because everyone has been discouraging you. They are certainly reach schools, but you will (hopefully) only go through this process once, and once it's over you don't want to be sitting around thinking "what if I HAD applied...".

 

[nick_carraway]

One more thing - OP, I see that you took Harvard and Hopkins off your list. I hope you didn't do that just because everyone has been discouraging you. They are certainly reach schools, but you will (hopefully) only go through this process once, and once it's over you don't want to be sitting around thinking "what if I HAD applied...".

I completely agree!

If you have the money, I say go for it! You only want to apply once and I don't know about you, but I've had plenty of regrets during college; studying more, sleeping more, making it to office hours more, getting more out of my classes, taking the mcat earlier.

I'm not going to dump my dream schools simply because I don't think I can get in. If I just gave up, I'd always have that tinge of doubt and the burning question of what if. I don't want to regret another decision from these last 4 years and so I'm going to apply to crazy schools. If I don't get in, oh well. But if I do, imagine.

SDNers polled earlier this season showed 50% of them had underestimated their competitiveness. You never know what could happen, OP. Good luck!

 

[charles17]

Thanks for your encouragement! I guess I'll give it a try insofar as I can fill out those secondaries..lol