High MCAT/Low GPA vs Low MCAT/High GPA

[WilsonFan]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Think admissions prefer a high test score with low GPA (for sake of argument, 39S, 3.1 GPA) or a low test score with a high GPA (29Q, 4.0 GPA)?

In other words, better to be seen as smart but lazy or diligent but stupid (without explanation of discrepancy)?

(disclaimer: obviously sick test days, life crises, etc. apply - no offense taken, please)

 

[redlight]

i want to say 3.1 is too low.

 

[WilsonFan]

The exact grades don't matter, this is a hypothetical I'm posing - my point with the specifics is that the "low" scores aren't excessively low, and "high" scores aren't excessively high.

 

[Brent8927]

I've heard that when there is a discrepancy between GPA and MCAT, the MCAT is likely to be more heavily considered as it is an objective measure of an applicants ability compared with other pre-meds. It may not necessarily be fair since some people don't test well, but it is generally much more accurate to compare MCATs than GPA's, since different schools grade differently (I hear MIT grades very tough, whereas you hear at other schools that A's are handed out like candy).

Personally though, I'm in the low GPA/high MCAT category, so I'm probably biased towards information that says I'm better off than the reverse! I'm sure that someone could argue a case that high GPA/low MCAT is better off.

 

[Slowpoke]

i like this game, can I play?

what would you rather have.

45MCAT / 2.5GPA or 4.0GPA from Hahvahd / 25 MCAT

 

[WilsonFan]

what would you rather have.

45MCAT / 2.5GPA or 4.0GPA from Hahvahd / 25 MCAT

Trick question. 4.0 at Hahvahd = 2.5GPA anywhere else 😎

 

[Slowpoke]

I've heard that when there is a discrepancy between GPA and MCAT, the MCAT is likely to be more heavily

Personally though, I'm in the low GPA/high MCAT category, so I'm probably biased.

🙄

 

[redlight]

yes, im familiar with hypothetical scenarios...
a 3.1 in terms of gpa is WAY lower than a 29 mcat. isn't the matriculant avg a 32 or so?
i think 3.3 would be more appropriate.

i'd def pick the 29Q person.

and for sure, a 4.0 at harvard = 4.0 everyone else(lol, ok, almost).. i think there have only been 6 4.0s at harvard (as of 2008...since 1982)

 

[Brent8927]

🙄

I could be misinterpreting your sarcastic smiley (it actually just looks like a smiley to me) but it's true... a 3.5 is considered a low GPA for medical school...

Lol... anywhere else I have a solid GPA, but for medical school I'm at the bottom of the pack 🙁

 

[MilkmanAl]

Wait, on what planet is a 3.1 equivalent to a 29? Regardless, I'd rather have the low MCAT. That's easier to fix by a long shot.

 

[Brent8927]

i like this game, can I play?

what would you rather have.

45MCAT / 2.5GPA or 4.0GPA from Hahvahd / 25 MCAT

It'd be great just to say I went to "Hahvahd." 😀

But you have to say it just like that.

 

[WilsonFan]

God FINE, I replace my 3.1 comment with a cGPA of 3.55 and sGPA of 3.45. Happy?

 

[Slowpoke]

getting a 4.0 from hahvahd got this girl on the news.

She works at blockbuster.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NLI1XDZZPs

 

[redlight]

getting a 4.0 from hahvahd got this girl on the news.

She works at blockbuster.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NLI1XDZZPs

and she was a D1 athlete.

 

[drizzt3117]

only the umpteenth time this has been discussed...

IME really high MCAT and adequate GPA (3.6/40) will get you more mileage than really high GPA and adequate MCAT (4.0/30-31) FWIW.

 

[JeetKuneDo]

I wonder how many engineers from MIT get a 4.0 gpa?

 

[drizzt3117]

I wonder how many engineers from MIT get a 4.0 gpa?

very few, in my experience. I think it must happen sometimes, but I would be surprised if there were too many... 3.6-3.7 is a very good GPA there.

 

[redlight]

very few, in my experience. I think it must happen sometimes, but I would be surprised if there were too many... 3.6-3.7 is a very good GPA there.

i know at least one guy who did it. i knew he was bright but i was shocked when i found out (in the 'wow, that's kinda creepy' way).

 

[RapplixGmed]

Losing a 4.0 should be like a rite of passage.

Got my first college B in my first semester. Felt bad for a while but got over it and didn't stress about grades for the rest of the time because I knew I didn't have to keep up the facade of perfection. Probably saved my sanity in all the later engineering classes.

But yea, a high mcat/low gpa is stronger, especially if the gpa comes from a tough institution or was from decades ago. A 41/3.5 from hardvard is going back to hardvard, a 41/3.5 from podunk state is going somewhere tops but probably not hardvard. A 28/4.0 from hardvard is going to a top 50 school probly. A 28/4.0 from podunk isn't going anywhere.

However, a mcat is much easier to quickly boost than a gpa. Theres a tradeoff both ways.

 

[DO2Be2013]

Should also consider how old the 3.1 (or whatever) is and whether it's the result of four years of solid B's or the product of a poor, unfocused college performance a decade ago coupled with a recent 4.0 in a substantial number of rigorous post-bac classes...

I was in the low GPA/high MCAT boat (admittedly for D.O.) schools and I fared well. But I'm older, my GPA from college was 2.6 and my GPA in 70 credits of post-bacc sciences taken over two and half years while working full-time was 4.0... so my 3.09 overall was probably viewed quite differently. Your MCAT score is what it is... aren't too many ways to qualify it. With GPA there are so many factors... quality of undergrad and institutional grading policies, rigor of course selection, number of credits attempted per semester, length of time since college and any post-bacc courses, upward/downward trends, etc. The number tells much less of the story there than the MCAT score. Which is why it's the great standardizer.

 

[drizzt3117]

i know at least one guy who did it. i knew he was bright but i was shocked when i found out (in the 'wow, that's kinda creepy' way).

Gpa is also very major dependent... Getting a 4.0 (5.0 on 5 of scale) would be significantly easier in courses 14-15 as opposed to 6 or 10

 

[tiedyeddog]

I think a 3.1 cGPA is closer to a 24 on the MCAT...

 

[Helen Wheels]

I would like to think that a high GPA that shows a consistent pattern of diligence and academic ability over a period of years is weighed more than a test that occurs in one five hour span. However, I am struggling now to bring up a crappy MCAT score (and have a good GPA) so this is probably self-serving philosophy. 😉

 

[redlight]

Gpa is also very major dependent... Getting a 4.0 (5.0 on 5 of scale) would be significantly easier in courses 14-15 as opposed to 6 or 10

yeah, just like in every other school, some majors are harder than others. i can't comment on his exact major... don't remember. i want to say EE or bme/bio eng

 

[SteinUmStein]

A 28/4.0 from hardvard is going to a top 50 school probly. A 28/4.0 from podunk isn't going anywhere.

Are you sure about that? I think mdapplicants would say otherwise.

 

[RapplixGmed]

Are you sure about that? I think mdapplicants would say otherwise.

I was speaking from personal experience. I have a friend who has had a ton of trouble getting into a school with those scores from my school despite applying very broadly and having the most amazing personality I have ever encountered. I'm sure it can and has been done, especially with extraordinary extracurriculars or personality but you have to admit it is much harder if your 4.0 is from podunk compared to a top school. When admissions committees can't trust the grading or rigor of your gpa, your mcat is weighed much more heavily but if you tank that, your chances are kind of shot. Have a friend of a friend (lol ok this data is kind of sketch but just believe me? =D ) from harvard with close to those scores and had no such issues. However, there was another friend of a friend with great gpa and mcat at harvard but didn't apply broadly enough and didn't interview well and got into nowhere the first time around and is at VCU now after the second app cycle so gpa/mcat isn't everything.

 

[JSainte]

I have yet to take the MCAT, as I'm just starting the pre-med post-bacc year, but I have a lower GPA, and woulld like to believe that a low GPA/high MCAT will do more for you. You could have messed things up prior, gotten your **** together and your last year or two of school was 3.5+. Upward trend has to stand for something. Shows you got serious, you buckled down.

Also, if you're pulling a high GPA, especially in the sciences, you really should be doing well on the MCAT; so long as you study appropriately.

 

[njbmd]

Your entire application needs to be in the competitive range. In today's atmosphere of having far more applicants with both a competitive MCAT score and a competitive uGPA, we on the admissions committees do not have to have a preference. The preference is both not one or the other.

If you MCAT score is low, get it up. If your uGPA is not competitive, take some post bacc coursework and get that GPA up. Wishing, speculating and hoping doesn't get the job done. Fixing the problem gets the job done.

 

[DmytriE]

hahaha. I love this game. Let me play too since I'm actually in this boat...well kinda of. I have the MCATs in september and a 2.8 junior year.

 

[bamtuba]

Wishing, speculating and hoping doesn't get the job done. Fixing the problem gets the job done.

👍

Wiser words have rarely been spoken.😎

I love this game though because you can almost always guess what an applicant's strengths are by how they answer this question.

Always fun🙄

I'll take "I didn't get quite the MCAT I wanted so agree with high GPA for $1,000" Alex.

 

[anxiousteen]

...

 

[unDRdog]

Should also consider how old the 3.1 (or whatever) is and whether it's the result of four years of solid B's or the product of a poor, unfocused college performance a decade ago coupled with a recent 4.0 in a substantial number of rigorous post-back classes...

I was in the low GPA/high MCAT boat (admittedly for D.O.) schools and I fared well. But I'm older, my GPA from college was 2.6 and my GPA in 70 credits of post-back sciences taken over two and half years while working full-time was 4.0... so my 3.09 overall was probably viewed quite differently. Your MCAT score is what it is... aren't too many ways to qualify it. With GPA there are so many factors... quality of undergrad and institutional grading policies, rigor of course selection, number of credits attempted per semester, length of time since college and any post-bacc courses, upward/downward trends, etc. The number tells much less of the story there than the MCAT score. Which is why it's the great standardizer.

I agree with this post...hopefully your right I'm hoping i fare a lil better than TI in his road to redemption!!! GPA is very dependent on many dif factors listed above. I think one Suck-***** semester where you bomb everything doesn't represent who you are "overall" if every other semester shows 3.9-4.0. I mean lets face it...sometimes we just fail. At least i do.... More power to the perfect ppl!! THE MCAT is a necessary evil that puts podunk joe against some sorta harvard superstar in a head to head match no holds bar contest if you will...The MCAT is the opportunity for guys like me, a blue collar student, to show what i got. I'm kinda thankful for it. Again not taking anything away from ppl who have busted their tails for contest high GPA's...good job... Everybody's life story is diff...but on the day of that test, it really doesn't matter....IMO

 

[surag]

Trick question. 4.0 at Hahvahd = 2.5GPA anywhere else 😎

actually thats not true...harvard is notorious for ******ed grade inflation. I know that one of the deans tried to change it and its improved since but a 3.8 GPA from any of the top 30 colleges wouldn't be far different or even in some cases better than harvards.

MIT is a beast...but I have a cousin there who says that anyone in there can do well if they work hard assuming they don't take ******ed math courses that are for future fields medalists.

 

[surag]

I also know that a lot of students graduate from MIT with a high GPA. and for the record MIT doesn't have a 4.0 GPA system...which shows how little you guys 'know' of other people. I'll bet none of you graduated from college yet or have gone on to medical school...this kind of discussion is such a waste of time...I'm not going to go on but I just wanted to point out that

1. MIT follows 5.0 system.
2. Getting into MIT is not impossible nor is doing well there.
3. the rockstars of MIT are insanely bright....the rest of the majority are smart but really hardworking
4. going to a top ten school and getting a 3.1 is meaningless...you still sucked in school and didn't try and chances are will have it tough getting into med school.

i went to an elite school with a 2.72 GPA and a 37 MCAT and am struggling to get into medical school now. I never went to class and studied maybe 2 days b4 exams, figuring I could coast my way through college much like I did in high school...didn't work out. the MCAT IMHO was easy enough that coasting allowed me to do well...but its very lopsided.

I'm good at math/physics/chem...so 14P 11V 12B...alas i realize only now that medicine is all about hard work not brains! JK

 

[chemolupusMD]

I was speaking from personal experience. I have a friend who has had a ton of trouble getting into a school with those scores from my school despite applying very broadly and having the most amazing personality I have ever encountered. I'm sure it can and has been done, especially with extraordinary extracurriculars or personality but you have to admit it is much harder if your 4.0 is from podunk compared to a top school. When admissions committees can't trust the grading or rigor of your gpa, your mcat is weighed much more heavily but if you tank that, your chances are kind of shot. Have a friend of a friend (lol ok this data is kind of sketch but just believe me? =D ) from harvard with close to those scores and had no such issues. However, there was another friend of a friend with great gpa and mcat at harvard but didn't apply broadly enough and didn't interview well and got into nowhere the first time around and is at VCU now after the second app cycle so gpa/mcat isn't everything.

I actually know a couple of ppl with those numbers who made it "somewhere" (multiple schools) and for the ones who r gonna start hating, NO they were not URMs.

 

[apumic]

👍

Wiser words have rarely been spoken.😎

I love this game though because you can almost always guess what an applicant's strengths are by how they answer this question.

Always fun🙄

I'll take "I didn't get quite the MCAT I wanted so agree with high GPA for $1,000" Alex.

hahahaha. So true!


btw, there are a series of charts published by the AAMC that answer this question. If you make a line running through the "50%" chance of acceptance to at least one medical school (ignoring all other factors), assuming non-URM status, and restrict the range on each dimension to those values w/ sample sizes of accepted applicants > 1000 (MCAT 24-45 & GPA 3.00-4.0), that line approximates points including 25/4.0, 28/3.60, 31/3.3, 34/3.2, 37/3.1, 43/2.7.
Of course, you should keep in mind that these values simply indicate what you'd need for a coin toss to determine that you get into some school, somewhere, anyway. You probably wouldn't like the choices at this level because there wouldn't be many. Also, the 2 people (out of 4) applying in the past few years who got in with 40+ MCATs and 2.7-ish GPAs probably had a lot of other things going for them as well and likely mitigated the effect of their GPAs through other factors (e.g., being a non-trad, high graduate GPA, excellent GPA in post-bacc work, etc.)


As far as the OP's original question, the AAMC data from 2005-2007 clearly indicates a preference for strong GPA/average (maybe mediocre) MCAT over a weak 3.1 and extremely strong MCAT (e.g., 39). 27-29 MCAT w/ 3.8-4.0 GPA was accepted somewhere 76% of the time (n=~4000) vs. only 57% for the 39-45MCAT w/ 3.0-3.2 GPA (n=28; the acceptance rate of 76% would be matched with GPA 3.2-3.4 w/ 78% acceptance rate, n=58). This would make sense since a 4.0/29, while not exactly balanced, is certainly closer to balanced than a 3.1/39. That kind of scoring may actually indicate high levels of "potential" but very low actual "performance."