Higher GPAs (ie, above 3.9) start working against you?

[thebillsfan]

So i read on this thread a couple years ago something on this thread which read along the lines of, "adcoms don't care what your gpa is after you get a GPA above 3.9 or 3.95, so you're better of spending time on something else." i was wondering what everyone's thoughts were on this statement. is something like a 3.98 effectively no different than a 3.90, and could the time one spends garnering those extra couple hundredths be better spent doing something else? if so, what? it would mean the diff btw getting an A and an A- in just a few more classes, and depending on what college you go to, that isn't a huge amount of extra time youd be saving.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[TexasPhysician]

If you aren't doing other things, then yes this probably works against you. There is little difference between a 3.96 and a 3.91. If you can add research or quality volunteer activities that you otherwise don't have, that .05 drop in gpa would be VERY worth it.

 

[Siverhideo1985]

How are you going to decide when to stop studying to get exactly an A- vs an A?

I dunno about you but I never possessed the magical ability to know exactly when I had studied enough to get an A or A-...what if you are wrong and you cut back on studying and then you end up with a C or a B-?

Just do your best in academics while maintaining some EC activities. There is no formula that will tell you to invest that half hour on Thursday afternoons into volunteering instead of studying more for your ochem test.

 

[TexasPhysician]

I dunno about you but I never possessed the magical ability to know exactly when I had studied enough to get an A or A-...what if you are wrong and you cut back on studying and then you end up with a C or a B-?
.

You could have picked up that magical ability before passing Go. Kicking yourself aren't you?

 

[funkymunkytoes]

I see what the OP is getting at. It seems that EVERYTHING else equal, an admissions committee would prefer a 3.90 to a 4.0, just because there is something unsettling about a 4.0 applicant. I don't know, that's just my take, hopefully I'm never one day on a committee!

 

[BlueElmo]

I see what the OP is getting at. It seems that EVERYTHING else equal, an admissions committee would prefer a 3.90 to a 4.0, just because there is something unsettling about a 4.0 applicant. I don't know, that's just my take, hopefully I'm never one day on a committee!

You know, I kind of agree. For some reason, 3.9 seems more impressive than 4.0. Now isn't that weird?😕

 

[Mattabet]

And if you start telling people you got a 4.1, that works against you too.

 

[Vido]

Yes sure it will hurt you. If your GPA is 3.9 it would be extremely hard to show the adcom people an upward trend in you GPA! If that's your GPA, you are doomed.

 

[NoMoreAMCAS]

I dunno about you but I never possessed the magical ability to know exactly when I had studied enough to get an A or A-...what if you are wrong and you cut back on studying and then you end up with a C or a B-?

Being incredibly lazy, I have become pretty accurate with this. I always do just barely enough to get an A.

 

[Siverhideo1985]

lol...its funny how things get twisted on SDN with a bunch of neurotic pre-meds obsessing hours on end about their GPAs.

a 4.0 is worse than a 3.9...yea, ok.

 

[takhara]

lol...its funny how things get twisted on SDN with a bunch of neurotic pre-meds obsessing hours on end about their GPAs.

a 4.0 is worse than a 3.9...yea, ok.

I think I know what they're getting at. When I see a 4.0, the thought in the back of my head is that they must have gone to an easy grading school where getting an A in every class wasn't too difficult. I went to a top liberal arts college where even the hardest working geniuses didn't get 4.0 (esp if they were science majors). If these folks went to their local state school, I'd have to imagine they'd have no trouble getting a 4.0. When an adcom sees a 3.9 from Amherst or Williams, does that not look better than a 4.0 from a state school? That being said, I wouldn't throw out an application from a 4.0 applicant

 

[swamprat]

4.0 gpa ? get a life

 

[orrghead16]

I purposefully got a bunch of A-'s these last few semesters to compensate for possible 4.0 prejudice.

The University thought I was crazy when I challenged an 'A' to make sure I got an A-.

 

[Siverhideo1985]

I think I know what they're getting at. When I see a 4.0, the thought in the back of my head is that they must have gone to an easy grading school where getting an A in every class wasn't too difficult. I went to a top liberal arts college where even the hardest working geniuses didn't get 4.0 (esp if they were science majors). If these folks went to their local state school, I'd have to imagine they'd have no trouble getting a 4.0. When an adcom sees a 3.9 from Amherst or Williams, does that not look better than a 4.0 from a state school? That being said, I wouldn't throw out an application from a 4.0 applicant

the comparison was 3.9 vs 4.0, not 3.9 from school x vs 4.0 from school y

 

[karayraisu]

How are you going to decide when to stop studying to get exactly an A- vs an A?

We don't even have +'s/-'s....lol.

 

[SiR99]

The weird thing is that I dont even think the cut off is 3.9, its more like a 3.8 and at one particular top 10 school a 3.8 and a 4.0 get the same points added to the applicant.

I think a 3.9+ is mostly for a school like Harvard, but then again you need something more then grades to get into that school.

 

[dw2158]

4.0 gpa ? get a life

take that back before ksmi comes to kick your @ss.

and this thread? makes me wanna

 

[thebillsfan]

well i think we'd be hard pressed to say for certain that a 3.9 would beat out a 4.0, all else being equal. that'd be ridiculous. but, the point is that all else rarely is equal, and we've heard numerous times that adcoms would take a 3.9 with ECs than a 4.0 with none.

but that wasn't really my original question. I'm talking about a situation where you're at a high GPA, say above a 3.95 but maybe no 4.0, and still have stellar ECs. Is it worth it to afford a small drop in GPA, maybe to a 3.85, to start looking around for new types of ECs, something to expand your repertoire?

 

[circulus vitios]

4.0 gpa ? get a life

I don't even know how it's possible to get a 4.0. Even if you screw up on a quiz or two, there goes the 4.0. Are these 4.0 students the same pre-meds dorks that argue for over single point on a quiz?

 

[johncalvin]

The weird thing is that I dont even think the cut off is 3.9, its more like a 3.8 and at one particular top 10 school a 3.8 and a 4.0 get the same points added to the applicant.

I think a 3.9+ is mostly for a school like Harvard, but then again you need something more then grades to get into that school.

What do you mean by "cutoff."? Please do explain further.

I ask because I brought up my GPA (just barely) to a 3.82 this semester. Should I have tried to get a 3.79?

 

[johncalvin]

I think I know what they're getting at. When I see a 4.0, the thought in the back of my head is that they must have gone to an easy grading school where getting an A in every class wasn't too difficult. I went to a top liberal arts college where even the hardest working geniuses didn't get 4.0 (esp if they were science majors). If these folks went to their local state school, I'd have to imagine they'd have no trouble getting a 4.0. When an adcom sees a 3.9 from Amherst or Williams, does that not look better than a 4.0 from a state school? That being said, I wouldn't throw out an application from a 4.0 applicant

I'm sure the adcom views all grades within the context of the school; i.e., they look at the school name, and then begin checking the grades. Many adcoms already have a built-in constant (grade inflation constant) they multiply your scores by in order to judge applicants on the same plane.

 

[vickpick]

I don't even know how it's possible to get a 4.0. Even if you screw up on a quiz or two, there goes the 4.0. Are these 4.0 students the same pre-meds dorks that argue for over single point on a quiz?

yeap, 👍 you have successfully figured out the personality of 4.0 students..

 

[Siverhideo1985]

What do you mean by "cutoff."? Please do explain further.

I ask because I brought up my GPA (just barely) to a 3.82 this semester. Should I have tried to get a 3.79?

yes...actually its much better if you could go to about a 3.69...that way schools won't sort you out...

 

[ksmi117]

take that back before ksmi comes to kick your @ss.

and this thread? makes me wanna

Haha... no @ss-kicking here, but seriously

well i think we'd be hard pressed to say for certain that a 3.9 would beat out a 4.0, all else being equal. that'd be ridiculous. but, the point is that all else rarely is equal, and we've heard numerous times that adcoms would take a 3.9 with ECs than a 4.0 with none.

but that wasn't really my original question. I'm talking about a situation where you're at a high GPA, say above a 3.95 but maybe no 4.0, and still have stellar ECs. Is it worth it to afford a small drop in GPA, maybe to a 3.85, to start looking around for new types of ECs, something to expand your repertoire?

I think that you should do what makes you happy, not sit here trying to analyze the minds of adcoms.

I don't even know how it's possible to get a 4.0. Even if you screw up on a quiz or two, there goes the 4.0. Are these 4.0 students the same pre-meds dorks that argue for over single point on a quiz?

No.

yeap, 👍 you have successfully figured out the personality of 4.0 students..

ok... maybe a little @ass-kicking.

 

[veaselhaufen]

This idea is completely and utterly ridiculous. And untrue.

 

[vickpick]

ok... maybe a little @ass-kicking.

ouch... knuckles right in the head! that hurt!

but seriously, stop arguing with professors for points 😛..








jk..

 

[Beta Cell]

I don't even know how it's possible to get a 4.0. Even if you screw up on a quiz or two, there goes the 4.0. Are these 4.0 students the same pre-meds dorks that argue for over single point on a quiz?

This thread is kind of silly. You're implying anyone who has a 4.0 spends their life trying to keep it which simply isn't true. I have a 4.0 and I've never once argued for a point. I came pretty close to losing it in a 1-credit class (Analytical Chemistry Lab), but I managed to squeak it out (by 1.45%!). I'm usually scared to complain to professors about points because a lot of them seem to be petty and may remember you when the next test rolls around.

I definitely have plenty of time to spare. I simply know when I have to be studying and not out partying like some of the other premeds and when I have time to let loose a bit.

 

[disorder]

What about a 4.0 with stellar EC's?

don't even worry.

 

[ksmi117]

What about a 4.0 with stellar EC's?

Keep up your good grades and your involvement and you have nothing to worry about. You know as well as I do that a 4.0 =/= bad EC's. But there will be people who will try to discredit your achievements no matter what you have done. My advice... stop asking about it. It will only bring arguing.

 

[circulus vitios]

ksmi: I'm not trying to downplay your 4.0 as a math major (which is amazing), but don't you get more leeway on tests when compared to like a bio major? There are multiple ways to math proofs. If you answer a bio question wrong...you're wrong.

 

[ksmi117]

ksmi: I'm not trying to downplay your 4.0 as a math major (which is amazing), but don't you get more leeway on tests when compared to like a bio major? There are multiple ways to math proofs. If you answer a bio question wrong...you're wrong.

Eh... it's not that simple. For math problems, generally there are multiple ways to do something. For proofs, there are less. And they are long and involved, much easier to screw something up. I've found all of my Biology classes easier simply because they are memorization. Yeah, if you forget something it sucks. But in math, if you can't understand a concept, you are screwed. Memorization does not help you much in upper level math, you have to understand the logic and theory behind everything.

 

[vickpick]

it is true that a 4.0 doesn't mean bad EC's... but it will in my case 🙁... im just too shy to approach people and get into stuff..

 

[Beta Cell]

Keep up your good grades and your involvement and you have nothing to worry about. You know as well as I do that a 4.0 =/= bad EC's. But there will be people who will try to discredit your achievements no matter what you have done. My advice... stop asking about it. It will only bring arguing.

I realized after posting that that some people would think I was talking about myself (regarding the stellar EC's, which I DEFINITELY think I don't have). The post is edited to say more of what I wanted to say now (I was hoping I had caught it before anyone else had seen it too, 😡).

Eh... it's not that simple. For math problems, generally there are multiple ways to do something. For proofs, there are less. And they are long and involved, much easier to screw something up. I've found all of my Biology classes easier simply because they are memorization. Yeah, if you forget something it sucks. But in math, if you can't understand a concept, you are screwed. Memorization does not help you much in upper level math, you have to understand the logic and theory behind everything.

[Backing ksmi up on this one]

To put it lightly, I would say that the pure mathematics classes you take (Abstract Algebra, Analysis, Advanced Calculus, Complex Anything, etc) are several magnitudes harder than any biology I've ever taken. Proofs don't have too many correct ways to approach them. I can memorize anything given enough time but pure math requires a thorough understanding behind a lot.

Take a problem like this, for instance:

Alan and Barbara play a game in which they take turns filling entries of an initially empty 2008 × 2008 array. Alan plays first. At each turn, a player chooses a real number and places it in a vacant entry. The game ends when all the entries are filled. Alan wins if the determinant of the resulting matrix is nonzero; Barbara wins if it is zero. Which player has a winning strategy?

You need a fundamental understanding of linear algebra and what not to be able to answer it. If anyone thinks they have the answer (or would like help with it), feel free to PM me as it's actually a fun problem.​

 

[longhorn09]

Let me raise another related issue:

Will a higher GPA north of 3.9 harm you in the eyes of STATE SCHOOLS adcoms? I mean, if you got the sky-high GPA (and MCAT maybe), they might think that you are not serious about applying to these schools and you just wanna use them as your back up.

 

[Hurricane95]

I think what you mean is diminishing returns after a certain cutoff GPA? Yes that's true, the benefits curve starts to flatten out a bit. But a higher GPA is never going to hurt you, that's ridiculous.

All this means is that there are other things more worth your time (volunteering, shadowing, research, etc.) than studying a ton more to raise your GPA from 3.91 to 3.92. If you have to pick one, do the former because a 0.01 difference in the 3.9 range is almost meaningless.

 

[Beta Cell]

Let me raise another related issue:

Will a higher GPA north of 3.9 harm you in the eyes of STATE SCHOOLS adcoms? I mean, if you got the sky-high GPA (and MCAT maybe), they might think that you are not serious about applying to these schools and you just wanna use them as your back up.

I think what you are referring to is 'yield protection.' Look up 'Tufts Syndrome' if you want more information on the topic, but as far as I know, medical schools don't really try to actively protect their yield.

 

[ksmi117]

Let me raise another related issue:

Will a higher GPA north of 3.9 harm you in the eyes of STATE SCHOOLS adcoms? I mean, if you got the sky-high GPA (and MCAT maybe), they might think that you are not serious about applying to these schools and you just wanna use them as your back up.

I'm also nervous about this. But I think the problem may lie in people not being enthusiastic about the state school in the secondary/interview. If you act like you think you are better than the school, then of course they aren't going to want you there no matter your scores.

 

[Beta Cell]

I think what you mean is diminishing returns after a certain cutoff GPA? Yes that's true, the benefits curve starts to flatten out a bit. But a higher GPA is never going to hurt you, that's ridiculous.

All this means is that there are other things more worth your time (volunteering, shadowing, research, etc.) than studying a ton more to raise your GPA from 3.91 to 3.92. If you have to pick one, do the former because a 0.01 difference in the 3.9 range is almost meaningless.

Is that you in your picture? If so, 😎

 

[mvenus929]

ksmi: I'm not trying to downplay your 4.0 as a math major (which is amazing), but don't you get more leeway on tests when compared to like a bio major? There are multiple ways to math proofs. If you answer a bio question wrong...you're wrong.

I'm a bio major. I got very high As in all my bio classes. The classes that caused me not to have a 4.0 were two history classes and an ASL class. Though I still can't figure out why my grade dropped in the ASL class...

Also, the vast majority of my bio tests were essay questions. You can get partial credit on an essay question.

And as a complete side note, I don't study biology by memorizing. I study by understanding concepts and applying them to the question at hand. And that's how my biochem professor taught his class... not to just memorize the mechanisms, but to understand why a cell went into lactic acid production and why water was produced at the end of the CAC.

 

[toys4life]

Is that you in your picture? If so, 😎

I got the exact same question, if it is, can you give me your number 😛

 

[ChubbyChaser]

I think thats the dumbest thing Ive heard, get as high a gpa as possible while still keeping an outside life.

 

[veaselhaufen]

Let me raise another related issue:

Will a higher GPA north of 3.9 harm you in the eyes of STATE SCHOOLS adcoms? I mean, if you got the sky-high GPA (and MCAT maybe), they might think that you are not serious about applying to these schools and you just wanna use them as your back up.

If you're able to converse normally for 30 to 60 minutes in an interview you will get in to tons of schools. State schools included. Stop worrying. If you're not able to act sociable then practice your interview skills rather than concerning yourself about your high gpa. You wouldn't believe how many interviewees look scared as ****/ act like weirdos out on the interview trail

With high stats, one's main objective is to act human and likeable. Talk about some passion of yours outside the medical realm. Present yourself as someone who other people like being around. This, ultimately, is the main point of the interview. They've already been impressed by you if you've been invited for an interview

 

[JJMrK]

I think I know what they're getting at. When I see a 4.0, the thought in the back of my head is that they must have gone to an easy grading school where getting an A in every class wasn't too difficult. I went to a top liberal arts college where even the hardest working geniuses didn't get 4.0 (esp if they were science majors). If these folks went to their local state school, I'd have to imagine they'd have no trouble getting a 4.0. When an adcom sees a 3.9 from Amherst or Williams, does that not look better than a 4.0 from a state school? That being said, I wouldn't throw out an application from a 4.0 applicant

Where?

 

[Beta Cell]

I think I know what they're getting at. When I see a 4.0, the thought in the back of my head is that they must have gone to an easy grading school where getting an A in every class wasn't too difficult. I went to a top liberal arts college where even the hardest working geniuses didn't get 4.0 (esp if they were science majors). If these folks went to their local state school, I'd have to imagine they'd have no trouble getting a 4.0. When an adcom sees a 3.9 from Amherst or Williams, does that not look better than a 4.0 from a state school? That being said, I wouldn't throw out an application from a 4.0 applicant

A 4.0 is a 4.0 and a 3.9 from some prestigioius school probably doesn't trump a state school 4.0. Would a 5.0 (4.0 on the the 4.0 scale) from MIT trump a 4.0 from a state school? Probably.

You have to compare apples to apples, but I can't see attaching that much significance to the school you attend. Also, once your GPA is 3.9+, my guess is they begin to look at your EC's/MCAT to see who they want to invite to interview.

 

[zpiff]

I'm also nervous about this. But I think the problem may lie in people not being enthusiastic about the state school in the secondary/interview. If you act like you think you are better than the school, then of course they aren't going to want you there no matter your scores.

I think that you've hit the nail on the head.

 

[Hurricane95]

I got the exact same question, if it is, can you give me your number 😛

Nope, im a guy. I just picked an avatar I would never get tired of looking at, no matter how many times I post.

 

[longhorn09]

Nope, im a guy. I just picked an avatar I would never get tired of looking at, no matter how many times I post.

She's real hot 😉

 

[SiR99]

What do you mean by "cutoff."? Please do explain further.

I ask because I brought up my GPA (just barely) to a 3.82 this semester. Should I have tried to get a 3.79?

Different schools have different cut offs for gpa.

Im going to use made up number to explain the REAL situation at this particular top ten school. But your efforts were not wasted because since different schools have different cut offs then you may have made one of the other schools cut offs.

Lets say that two students go to the same undergrad. The school first accounts for the undergrad you go to so both the people get the same points.

Then they look at your gpa. If you get above a 3.80 you get full points for the gpa category (lets say 10/10 points for your gpa). The other student has a 3.99, he also gets full points assigned to his profile for his gpa (10/10 points added).

 

[longhorn09]

Different schools have different cut offs for gpa.

Im going to use made up number to explain the REAL situation at this particular top ten school. But your efforts were not wasted because since different schools have different cut offs then you may have made one of the other schools cut offs.

Lets say that two students go to the same undergrad. The school first accounts for the undergrad you go to so both the people get the same points.

Then they look at your gpa. If you get above a 3.80 you get full points for the gpa category (lets say 10/10 points for your gpa). The other student has a 3.99, he also gets full points assigned to his profile for his gpa (10/10 points added).

I see, and all that left is your interview performance,right?

 

[SiR99]

I see, and all that left is your interview performance,right?

Yes, everyone who has an interview is considered to be on a level playing field.

Once you get an interview, they do not consider your numbers anymore.