How important are preclinical grades?

[DermViser]

---

Members don't see this ad.

By the same token, if you accept the premise that dummies exist in medical school (whether you want to use MCAT, GPA, medical school grades, Step I, IQ, whatever as this metric), it sure seems pretty important to have a way to designate those few who are not dummies, no? Seems like a relative grading scale would be a perfect way to do that.

I just don't see what tangible gain a medical student gets by working hard to get an "A" in a class, and then on top of that having to work harder (at least psychologically) to beat Johnny and Suzy.

 

[username456789]

I just don't see what tangible gain a medical student gets by working hard to get an "A" in a class, and then on top of that having to work harder (at least psychologically) to beat Johnny and Suzy.

No one is forcing any student to break their back for honors. If getting an A and being recognized as someone who mastered the material is enough, great! As many on SDN will tell you, that is the main goal. If someone chooses to challenge themselves further still to attain Honors on top of that, that's their decision.

 

[DermViser]

Class got me more points on Step 1 than review books.

Don't underestimate the importance of minutia in class. That's where the real big scores come with respect to high board scores. Every idiot will know that Crohn's disease is skip lesions, etc etc etc, but not too many people will know that anti-NMDA antibodies are responsible for teratoma-induced seizures. If you really want to score 250+ on Step 1, you have to know both and no review source will cover the second factoid.

This is highly professor-specific though. It's not as if professors cover certain minutiae they're supposed to cover.

 

[notbobtrustme]

This is highly professor-specific though. It's not as if professors cover certain minutiae they're supposed to cover.

true, but it still stands that I missed minutia on my test that other students will have gotten because their class covered that minutia while I got some minutia because my class covered it. The key being is that I learned the garbage, if one ignored that stupid factoid (or similar factoids) because it wasn't in FA/Uworld/Pathoma, then they are selling themselves short because that minutia is what is responsible for the big scores. Any idiot can score a 230. To get to that next level, you have to understand that everything is high yield.

 

[colbgw02]

By the same token, if you accept the premise that dummies exist in medical school (whether you want to use MCAT, GPA, medical school grades, Step I, IQ, whatever as this metric), it sure seems pretty important to have a way to designate those few who are not dummies, no? Seems like a relative grading scale would be a perfect way to do that.

But we already have that. It's class rank. It seems to me that getting honors under this construct is beating out classmates for the sake of being them.

 

[DermViser]

true, but it still stands that I missed minutia on my test that other students will have gotten because their class covered that minutia while I got some minutia because my class covered it. The key being is that I learned the garbage, if one ignored that stupid factoid (or similar factoids) because it wasn't in FA/Uworld/Pathoma, then they are selling themselves short because that minutia is what is responsible for the big scores. Any idiot can score a 230. To get to that next level, you have to understand that everything is high yield.

Well that's bc the Step 1 average now is 230, it's no longer 215 like it was in 1999. I just can't believe people are reviewing professor syllabi for Step 1 purposes.

 

[colbgw02]

No one is forcing any student to break their back for honors. If getting an A and being recognized as someone who mastered the material is enough, great! As many on SDN will tell you, that is the main goal. If someone chooses to challenge themselves further still to attain Honors on top of that, that's their decision.

I don't see how this is germane. No one is forcing the student to work hard enough to get an A/get a B/pass/get into medical school either. The point is that honors is being held up as the gold standard, and medical students want to meet that standard. It's the same idea as someone upset that they got a B, which is still "above average", because they wanted an A.

 

[DermViser]

But we already have that. It's class rank. It seems to me that getting honors under this construct is beating out classmates for the sake of being them.

Exactly! As if preclinical grades and clinical grades alone won't stratify people enough.

 

[username456789]

I just can't believe people are reviewing professor syllabi for Step 1 purposes.

I'm almost certain no reasonable person is. People enforcing the importance of dominating the M1/M2 material are likely talking about during classes, not during dedicated Step I study time.

It's more of a condemnation of those who say "just focus on what's in Pathoma/RR Path/FA during the year, and if it's not in those books don't worry about memorizing it for the class exams."

 

[DermViser]

No one is forcing any student to break their back for honors. If getting an A and being recognized as someone who mastered the material is enough, great! As many on SDN will tell you, that is the main goal. If someone chooses to challenge themselves further still to attain Honors on top of that, that's their decision.

Yes bc why be proud that you got a 95, the real prize is the "Honors" gold star that says you beat Johnny, Suzy, David, etc. That type of person will be a treat to work with on the wards both for fellow students and residents.

 

[username456789]

Yes bc why be proud that you got a 95, the real prize is the "Honors" gold star that says you beat Johnny, Suzy, David, etc. That type of person will be a treat to work with on the wards both for fellow students and residents.

I was a goddamned delight to work with!

Seriously though, you are the master of invoking Burnett's Law here under the guise of fighting for the little guy.

Stop accusing high achievers of malicious intent.

 

[DermViser]

I'm almost certain no reasonable person is. People enforcing the importance of dominating the M1/M2 material are likely talking about during classes, not during dedicated Step I study time.

It's more of a condemnation of those who say "just focus on what's in Pathoma/RR Path/FA during the year, and if it's not in those books don't worry about memorizing it for the class exams."

I was thinking more a board review text for each subject, rather than just limiting it to Pathoma/RR Path/FA -- which is absolutely foolhardy IMHO, unless you had a VERY strong base in basic sciences.

 

[DermViser]

I was a goddamned delight to work with!

LOL! I'm sure you were. 🙂 Maybe you were good-looking as well, which helped.

I'm just saying the natural feelings that it conjures up. When you've been on that speed for 2 years, it's hard to then switch it off in MS-3. Edit: Just realized your school still designates "Honors" as the top X% of all clerkship rotators in that clerkship as well.

 

[DermViser]

I was a goddamned delight to work with!

Seriously though, you are the master of invoking Burnett's Law here under the guise of fighting for the little guy.

Stop accusing high achievers of malicious intent.

How, in God's name, am I invoking Burnett's Law here? You surely can not deny the inherent competitive feelings the grading policy creates.

 

[username456789]

LOL! I'm sure you were. 🙂 Maybe you were good-looking as well, which helped.

I'm just saying the natural feelings that it conjures up. When you've been on that speed for 2 years, it's hard to then switch it off in MS-3. Edit: Just realized your school still designates "Honors" as the top X% of all clerkship rotators in that clerkship as well.

I hear what you're saying, but having spent 4 years at a school like mine, I just didn't see this occur. I will say, the people who consistently knocked M1/M2 out of the park overlapped strongly with the people who dominated the clinical years as well. And almost all of them were a pleasure to work with/be around.

I will of course concede that there are probably some people in the middle/back of the pack who resort to some underhanded things to try to gain an edge. But no one would ever take them seriously.

 

[DermViser]

I hear what you're saying, but having spent 4 years at a school like mine, I just didn't see this occur. I will say, the people who consistently knocked M1/M2 out of the park overlapped strongly with the people who dominated the clinical years as well. And almost all of them were a pleasure to work with/be around.

I will of course concede that there are probably some people in the middle/back of the pack who resort to some underhanded things to try to gain an edge. But no one would ever take them seriously.

(Just kidding)

 

[FIREitUP]

THIS. PDs know that there will be a LOT in residency that you won't like doing. Someone who comes in believing that working hard in preclinical courses is irrelevant and all that matters is Step 1 (as if they are mutually exclusive) is really seeing things as black-and-white, when it's actually gray.

That being said, there are people who've done really well when it comes to preclinical grades but don't do as well when the exam is standardized. So one doesn't necessarily guarantee another.

that's a bit of a stretch, man. so not focusing so much on preclinical grades (mainly because of the bull**** minutiae) implies that someone would be less inclined to deal with the tedium of residency? i would argue that there is enough bull**** minutiae on step 1 that if someone is able to do well on that, then by your logic, they should be more than equipped to handle the annoyances in residency.

 

[DermViser]

that's a bit of a stretch, man. so not focusing so much on preclinical grades (mainly because of the bull**** minutiae) implies that someone would be less inclined to deal with the tedium of residency? i would argue that there is enough bull**** minutiae on step 1 that if someone is able to do well on that, then by your logic, they should be more than equipped to handle the annoyances in residency.

There's a difference between learning basic science minutiae, and what I actually said "working hard in preclinical courses" with regards to the med student who believes that it doesn't matter how he does in his basic science courses, bc it's only Step 1 that matters.

 

[guitarguy23]

Our Surgery clerkship director told us that they DO factor in preclinical grades a good bit when considering an applicant. His justification was that a person who drops a 260 on Step 1 with mediocre preclinical grades can just study for an exam without being able to bust their butt over the long term. That is concerning when you are trying to select applicants for 5-6 year program.

It makes sense to me, if everything was equal, yeah I would take the person with all "A's" the first two years vs the coaster who studied hard for only a month or two.

 

[FIREitUP]

There's a difference between learning basic science minutiae, and what I actually said "working hard in preclinical courses" with regards to the med student who believes that it doesn't matter how he does in his basic science courses, bc it's only Step 1 that matters.

working hard on clinical courses in medical school boils down to memorizing minutiae because phd's don't know medicine and have no idea how to teach. step 1 is not the only thing that matters, but learning the underlying concepts that are tested on step 1 as opposed to memorizing BS that is taught throughout the preclinical years will serve you during clinical years much more, from my experience. i did not study one lecture in second year, but rather focused on understanding and learning the pathophysiology/microbiology/pharmacology. i've retained much more of this information than my peers and i coasted through third year. n=1, though.

 

[Brain Bucket]

Our Surgery clerkship director told us that they DO factor in preclinical grades a good bit when considering an applicant. His justification was that a person who drops a 260 on Step 1 with mediocre preclinical grades can just study for an exam without being able to bust their butt over the long term. That is concerning when you are trying to select applicants for 5-6 year program.

It makes sense to me, if everything was equal, yeah I would take the person with all "A's" the first two years vs the coaster who studied hard for only a month or two.

I call BS. Anyone who scored 260 mastered the material. Obviously, since you have to pick one, you go with the one that did better, but that takes nothing away from the 260.

That attitude just pisses me off. I have great pre-clin grades, so it doesn't really matter, and i know this is different, but throughout academia the attitude "yeah, you did great, but why did you do worse in this particular instance?" is pervasive. I was asking one of the deans here for a letter of reference, and while looking at my grades for MS-1, he said, yeah you did great, 5, 5, 5, 5... but why did you get a 4.5 in Epidemiology? He knows full well that the prof of epidemiology doesn't give ANYONE a 5.

 

[guitarguy23]

I call BS. Anyone who scored 260 mastered the material. Obviously, since you have to pick one, you go with the one that did better, but that takes nothing away from the 260.

That attitude just pisses me off. I have great pre-clin grades, so it doesn't really matter, and i know this is different, but throughout academia the attitude "yeah, you did great, but why did you do worse in this particular instance?" is pervasive. I was asking one of the deans here for a letter of reference, and while looking at my grades for MS-1, he said, yeah you did great, 5, 5, 5, 5... but why did you get a 4.5 in Epidemiology? He knows full well that the prof of epidemiology doesn't give ANYONE a 5.

I would rather not go into the discussion of whether someone absolutely has to master the material to get a 260, just suffice it to say I know of plenty of people who are just that good at taking a test. I'm willing to bet a fair proportion of students DO get a 260 without studying hard the first two years and making "C" level pre-clinical grades. They can just cram, remember it for the test, and just crush it with their inherent test taking skills.

It is BS that educators do that though. I would just grin and be mindful of the fact that I was probably one of the few students who got 5's with a 4.5.

 

[Brain Bucket]

I would rather not go into the discussion of whether someone absolutely has to master the material to get a 260, just suffice it to say I know of plenty of people who are just that good at taking a test. I'm willing to bet a fair proportion of students DO get a 260 without studying hard the first two years and making "C" level pre-clinical grades. They can just cram, remember it for the test, and just crush it with their inherent test taking skills.

That's where we disagree.

 

[Psai]

Class got me more points on Step 1 than review books.

Don't underestimate the importance of minutia in class. That's where the real big scores come with respect to high board scores. Every idiot will know that Crohn's disease is skip lesions, etc etc etc, but not too many people will know that anti-NMDA antibodies are responsible for teratoma-induced seizures. If you really want to score 250+ on Step 1, you have to know both and no review source will cover the second factoid.

anti-nmda antibodies what the heck lol

 

[Kevin Baker]

I have to disagree on needing to know minutiae for step 1. There are some questions that test minutiae. The key to answering them is knowing the 4 other options, which are not minutiae, realizing they can't be right, and going with the one weird option you can't rule out.

Most PD surveys have pre clinical grades ranked very low in regards to what they are expecting. Other stuff derived from grades like class rank and AOA is ranked higher, but even that pales in comparison to how they rank auditions, 3rd year grades, and step scores.

Maybe other schools have better lectures, but I found the best use of my time in learning material and in reviewing for step was using other resources than lectures. I'd say class covered ~75% of First Aid and about 2/3 of Pathoma and/or Goljan. If I had to do it over again, I'd invest in a comprehensive class (Kaplan?) during the pre clinical years, a qbank, and minimally focus on grades and lectures just so I wouldn't fail anything. I did this with DIT during 2nd year and my grades shot up consequently, though I still listened to lectures just reviewed them less.

I have friends who sacrificed grades and spent time on board review and scored well, friends who did this and scored poorly as they needed more structure, friends who did well and went to class, and friends who did poorly and went to class. Find what works for you and do it but don't assume pre clinical grades mean squat compared to your step scores and don't assume what works for others will work for you. Do what you can to raise your step score. That may mean not caring about grades. It may not. Definitely experiment with different styles until you find what fits but don't be afraid to go against the grain.

 

[ketosisevangelist]

It's like they're trying to get students to be more competitive with each other, I just don't understand why they would include that silly honors distinction. Uncurved grades are whatever, but as soon as you put a limit as to how many students can achieve something, you automatically foster competition.

You want students hating each other. Yes.

If you didn't , you'd hate the instructor for not teaching.

The learning in medicine is all FBL.

Fear Based Learning

Fear of looking stupid when you're asked about something you can only learn from an app. Because we know that prof ain't teaching you anything.

The resident teaches the student. The profs are just miserable and have to be profs to pay for their wives' vanity and the legal bills of their kids.

 

[amvet70]

I'm an incoming MS1 in a US MD program with a graded curriculum. I'm hoping to match into a competitive residency. Is it a terrible idea to treat my examinations as P/F and focus on step-relevant material and important info at the expense of minutia? I've always heard that preclinical grades "don't matter" and that due to the sheer volume of information I'll end up forgetting everything that I learned within a few weeks of studying it anyway. I always intuitively thought that it would make far more sense to focus on the important/relevant information and consistently refresh it instead of binging and purging on whatever I need to make the A on any given block exam.

OP :In your experience, what step-relevant material???? In your experience what is important/relevant in medical school???

Random thoughts about importance of preclinical courses:

For Step 1, I scored +265. Although I did use several resources (FA, UWorld, DIT, Goljan,etc), I always thought that my outcome was grounded in my staying on top of all the preclinical material from day 1.

The below is exact language from my MSPE regarding my first two years in med school.

“….. performed superiorly in the preclinical curriculum, earning a grade of Honors in eight of eight graded blocks throughout the first two years. … further demonstrated …. superior fund of basic science knowledge with … score of ….. on Step 1 of the USMLE.”

The following are quotes from my third year evals from early third year evals when most of my knowledge was being drawn from preclinical material

“……excellent knowledge database…”

“…Excellent knowledge…””

The below is from MSPE summary

“….overall academic performance throughout medical school has been "Superior,"”

OP, if seeking a competitive residency, you want to put forth strongest app possible which would include your preclinical years. What language do you think competitive residencies want to see in MSPE, evals, etc. Language that says your knowledge and performance throughout med school was good or satisfactory or adequate, or superior??? Take a guess.

I agree that third year is far more critical, but don't minimize importance of preclinical years as your performance will show up later and come into play especially for competitive residencies.

 

[operaman]

OP :In your experience, what step-relevant material???? In your experience what is important/relevant in medical school???

Random thoughts about importance of preclinical courses:

For Step 1, I scored +265. Although I did use several resources (FA, UWorld, DIT, Goljan,etc), I always thought that my outcome was grounded in my staying on top of all the preclinical material from day 1.

The below is exact language from my MSPE regarding my first two years in med school.

“….. performed superiorly in the preclinical curriculum, earning a grade of Honors in eight of eight graded blocks throughout the first two years. … further demonstrated …. superior fund of basic science knowledge with … score of ….. on Step 1 of the USMLE.”

The following are quotes from my third year evals from early third year evals when most of my knowledge was being drawn from preclinical material

“……excellent knowledge database…”

“…Excellent knowledge…””

The below is from MSPE summary

“….overall academic performance throughout medical school has been "Superior,"”

OP, if seeking a competitive residency, you want to put forth strongest app possible which would include your preclinical years. What language do you think competitive residencies want to see in MSPE, evals, etc. Language that says your knowledge and performance throughout med school was good or satisfactory or adequate, or superior??? Take a guess.

I agree that third year is far more critical, but don't minimize importance of preclinical years as your performance will show up later and come into play especially for competitive residencies.

This. My experience has been almost identical.

As for being able to bang out a 260 plus after mediocre class grades, I suppose anything is possible but maybe not that probable. In my class, we had 8 people with 260+ scores. All of them honored everything or almost everything (15/16 H's on transcript) during preclinical years. Of the people in the class who honored everything preclinical, step scores were all over 250. It makes sense that the people who work hard and excel in one area can do so in another. I guess you probably could focus just on boards and ignore classes and MAYBE get by, but it's one heck of a risk. Remember that the NBME is continuing to revise the Step exams so they aren't as beatable with brute force memorization. It's kind of like how the only way to really lose weight is diet and exercise -- the only reliable way to do well on boards is hard work from day 1.

 

[DermViser]

Remember that the NBME is continuing to revise the Step exams so they aren't as beatable with brute force memorization. It's kind of like how the only way to really lose weight is diet and exercise -- the only reliable way to do well on boards is hard work from day 1.

Exactly. The test question formats have changed drastically within the last decade since the introduction of putting the test on computer. So much more can be done now that wasn't possible before when the test was on paper.

It wouldn't shock me at all if the NBME bought all the board review books and said ok, let's test it in a way that can't be found in these board review books.

 

[DermViser]

For Step 1, I scored +265. Although I did use several resources (FA, UWorld, DIT, Goljan,etc), I always thought that my outcome was grounded in my staying on top of all the preclinical material from day 1.

The below is exact language from my MSPE regarding my first two years in med school.

• “….. performed superiorly in the preclinical curriculum, earning a grade of Honors in eight of eight graded blocks throughout the first two years. … further demonstrated …. superior fund of basic science knowledge with … score of ….. on Step 1 of the USMLE.”

The following are quotes from my third year evals from early third year evals when most of my knowledge was being drawn from preclinical material

• “……excellent knowledge database…”
• “…Excellent knowledge…””

The below is from MSPE summary

• “….overall academic performance throughout medical school has been "Superior,"”

OP, if seeking a competitive residency, you want to put forth strongest app possible which would include your preclinical years. What language do you think competitive residencies want to see in MSPE, evals, etc. Language that says your knowledge and performance throughout med school was good or satisfactory or adequate, or superior??? Take a guess.

I agree that third year is far more critical, but don't minimize importance of preclinical years as your performance will show up later and come into play especially for competitive residencies.

Humble brag...

 

[Dr. Zombie]

Exactly. The test question formats have changed drastically within the last decade since the introduction of putting the test on computer. So much more can be done now that wasn't possible before when the test was on paper.

It wouldn't shock me at all if the NBME bought all the board review books and said ok, let's test it in a way that can't be found in these board review books.

MCAT deja vu

 

[PL198]

Exactly. The test question formats have changed drastically within the last decade since the introduction of putting the test on computer. So much more can be done now that wasn't possible before when the test was on paper.

It wouldn't shock me at all if the NBME bought all the board review books and said ok, let's test it in a way that can't be found in these board review books.

No way.. McGraw hill and Kaplan are worth 1000000x what the NBME is.

Edit nevermind I'm dumb , you meant literally buy the books and review proof the tests, not buy the companies out

 

[medstudent7860]

I have a question guys. So I am at a combined BA/MD US med program, meaning that I got into med school after high school and am finishing both degrees somewhat simultaneously. When I started, I thought that I'm already in med school and that my undergrad grades won't matter so I got a ~3.2 undergrad gpa (could've done a LOT better there...), whereas my med school gpa is ~3.7. I didn't know when I was starting off that my school actually reports the combined undergrad/med gpa and uses that to pick AOA students. My combined gpa is a 3.49. I don't know what my class rank is, but it's annoying now because a lot of my peers got 4.0s in the undergrad portion because it was a lot easier and didn't do as well with their med school gpa but their combined average is higher than mine. I think my class rank is in the 50% area. Do you think this will negatively affect my application?

 

[DermViser]

I have a question guys. So I am at a combined BA/MD US med program, meaning that I got into med school after high school and am finishing both degrees somewhat simultaneously. When I started, I thought that I'm already in med school and that my undergrad grades won't matter so I got a ~3.2 undergrad gpa (could've done a LOT better there...), whereas my med school gpa is ~3.7. I didn't know when I was starting off that my school actually reports the combined undergrad/med gpa and uses that to pick AOA students. My combined gpa is a 3.49. I don't know what my class rank is, but it's annoying now because a lot of my peers got 4.0s in the undergrad portion because it was a lot easier and didn't do as well with their med school gpa but their combined average is higher than mine. I think my class rank is in the 50% area. Do you think this will negatively affect my application?

Depends. What tier is your med school in? How is class rank calculated on your MSPE? I think it also depends what specialty you're going for. Don't these programs have you finish your undergrad first?

 

[medstudent7860]

Depends. What tier is your med school in? How is class rank calculated on your MSPE? I think it also depends what specialty you're going for. Don't these programs have you finish your undergrad first?

It's an average school. Class rank is calculated by the combined gpa, and yeah we finish undergrad first but get the degrees together at the end. Not sure yet what specialty I'm going for

 

[DermViser]

It's an average school. Class rank is calculated by the combined gpa, and yeah we finish undergrad first but get the degrees together at the end. Not sure yet what specialty I'm going for

Well average can mean a whole lot of things. Usually in medical schools we talk about: top tier, mid-tier, and low-tier med schools. So is class rank only based off of GPA only or other factors? I'm guessing your clinical rotations are also letter graded as well?

 

[medstudent7860]

In that case it's low-tier. Class rank is only based on gpa. Clinical rotations are Honors/HP/Pass, etc., so they are not factored into the class rank.

 

[DermViser]

In that case it's low-tier. Class rank is only based on gpa. Clinical rotations are Honors/HP/Pass, etc., so they are not factored into the class rank.

I guarantee you that your clinical rotations are factored into your class rank as well as into AOA nomination. They may not be letter graded to where they contribute to a numerical GPA on a university transcript, but they definitely do contribute to your class rank and comprise a huge portion of it. Usually things like: preclinical grades (assuming you didn't go to a "true" P/F school), clinical grades, and sometimes Step 1 score are calculated together in a school-specific formula to determine what your class rank is. Probably good to ask your Student Affairs office to ask how this is calculated and how this will be displayed on your MSPE.

Some schools write an exact ordinal rank, some tell which segment of the class you fall in, and others use "code words" on the MSPE which give away where you fall in the class: i.e. Medstudent7860 will make a superior/excellent/good/very good house officer (and then a rubric on the MSPE tell what those words mean with respect to percentage).

Once you know where you stand in the class, and know your board scores, you'll know which specialties are still within reach, and which ones are a long-shot. Sucks that your undergraduate performance is included when that's not the case for everyone else. Did they not tell you guys ahead of time?

 

[medstudent7860]

They didn't tell us. Thanks a lot for your help!!

 

[PL198]

Lol they use your undergrad gpa? So your entire class is bs/md? I thought most of these programs added direct entries to fill any empty spots. I'm in one as well and that's what ours does, + some others

 

[DermViser]

Lol they use your undergrad gpa? So your entire class is bs/md? I thought most of these programs added direct entries to fill any empty spots. I'm in one as well and that's what ours does, + some others

There was another thread, I believe in Pre-Allopathic recently where they were in a combined program where the undergrad and medical school were interwoven together.
Edit: yes, here: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/accelerated-baccalaureate-md-program.1081755/#post-15396282

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Humble brag...

Not even a humble brag. Just a brag.

 

[DermViser]

Not even a humble brag. Just a brag.

I was waiting for him to use the infamous Radiology PD quote re: his accomplishments.

 

[amvet70]

Dermvisor:

Well average can mean a whole lot of things. Usually in medical schools we talk about: top tier, mid-tier, and low-tier med schools.

In thread “tier difficulty” Law2Doc posted:

"Sorry, while your comments on other topics are usually good, I think you are taking the uninformed pre-allo myth road on this one. Take it from someone who actually served on committees, or take it from the regular PD surveys, but school name is very much a Lesser factor, rarely entering into the discussion."

"It's less an IM thing and more an SDN thing. People like to think they are set. They don't like to think someone coming from a different path can pass them like they are standing still. So these myths persist. Yet when asked, PDs pretty universally state that school name is a lower or nonexistent factor. So who are you going to believe?"

Who does someone believe?

 

[DermViser]

Dermvisor:

In thread “tier difficulty” Law2Doc posted:

"Sorry, while your comments on other topics are usually good, I think you are taking the uninformed pre-allo myth road on this one. Take it from someone who actually served on committees, or take it from the regular PD surveys, but school name is very much a Lesser factor, rarely entering into the discussion."

"It's less an IM thing and more an SDN thing. People like to think they are set. They don't like to think someone coming from a different path can pass them like they are standing still. So these myths persist. Yet when asked, PDs pretty universally state that school name is a lower or nonexistent factor. So who are you going to believe?"

Who does someone believe?

Again this depends on the specialty in question, but if you take 2 applicants with the exact same grades, exact same board scores, exact same class rank, and they interview the same and one is from Vanderbilt and the other is from Meharry (which are both in Nashville), the Vanderbilt candidate will win out. The scenario in that thread was different and if you look at the match lists posted there, he's also wrong on that aspect.

 

[tco]

FWIW, no one from WVU ever gets an interview at Duke for radiology. Ever. We've had some pretty ballin' candidates over the last three years, too. So, to say if those people went to Duke, Hopkins, or Harvard, they still wouldn't have gotten interviews is absolutely asinine.

 

[PL198]

There was another thread, I believe in Pre-Allopathic recently where they were in a combined program where the undergrad and medical school were interwoven together.
Edit: yes, here: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/accelerated-baccalaureate-md-program.1081755/#post-15396282

BS/MD has pro/cons, but that thread seems pretty silly. Basically it just produces study machines which have no people skills/intelligence in dealing with anything not medicine and are very immature. I feel like I'm an exception to this ,but obviously I'm biased and everyone thinks they're a special snowflake. Anyway, I personally wouldn't have pursued medicine if I didn't go through BS/MD. The return on investment wasn't high enough in my opinion to take the risk/ extra effort/ time of traditional undergrad. It's really good for a select few, but 90 % of people in it aren't ready.

 

[DermViser]

BS/MD has pro/cons, but that thread seems pretty silly. Basically it just produces study machines which have no people skills/intelligence in dealing with anything not medicine and are very immature. I feel like I'm an exception to this ,but obviously I'm biased and everyone thinks they're a special snowflake. Anyway, I personally wouldn't have pursued medicine if I didn't go through BS/MD. The return on investment wasn't high enough in my opinion to take the risk/ extra effort/ time of traditional undergrad. It's really good for a select few, but 90 % of people in it aren't ready.

Oh, ok, you're in one that reduces time overall (6 or 7)? Part of the problem when you go thru these that I've seen is that there is no incentive to give you any scholarships by the institution in question and you have to accept the medical school, warts and all. You can't transfer out.

For example, Drexel has this type of program, and Drexel isn't that great of a med school even traditional candidates know this is a safety school.

 

[dadaddadaBATMAN]

BS/MD has pro/cons, but that thread seems pretty silly. Basically it just produces study machines which have no people skills/intelligence in dealing with anything not medicine and are very immature. I feel like I'm an exception to this ,but obviously I'm biased and everyone thinks they're a special snowflake. Anyway, I personally wouldn't have pursued medicine if I didn't go through BS/MD. The return on investment wasn't high enough in my opinion to take the risk/ extra effort/ time of traditional undergrad. It's really good for a select few, but 90 % of people in it aren't ready.

Sorry but I find this a little confusing. The traditional curriculum has 11 years in it, 4 of which are relatively expensive (undergrad.) and 4 of which are extremely expensive (med school). I have no idea how tuition works in your system, but I can't see a medical school charging any less for the four years. So my guess would be you have 2 years of relatively less expensive education, 4 years of extremely expensive. Total 9 years in it.

So to me it seems you've saved two years of time, and two years of moderately expensive undergraduate education. You have also gained 2 potential years of income at attending salary.

This was received at the cost of restricting your undergraduate education, not enjoying a full undergraduate experience (which many successful pre-meds find time to do), and the flexibility of having an undergraduate degree.

I'm not judging you, but I guess I just can't see how those two years make the difference between "worth it" and "not worth it" to you. Do you mind filling me in on your reasoning?

 

[PL198]

Oh, ok, you're in one that reduces time overall (6 or 7)? Part of the problem when you go thru these that I've seen is that there is no incentive to give you any scholarships by the institution in question and you have to accept the medical school, warts and all. You can't transfer out.

For example, Drexel has this type of program, and Drexel isn't that great of a med school even traditional candidates know this is a safety school.

Transferring out from one is silly though. Like if someone has the stats to transfer out only having 2 years to do undergrad, then they're truly a machine. It's one thing to be neurotic at 20 & 21, but to transfer out you literally have to be neurotic at 17 & 18( I took the MCAT when I was 18). In my opinion, that's to the point where it's great if you can do it, but it's extremely impractical for nearly everyone. I still feel a school's quality isn't so important, so even though there's the whole argument that I'm probably a good enough student to get into a better school after 4 years, to me I'd rather go to a worse school 2 years earlier. Yeah the scholarships thing is silly, but honestly I feel that saving 2 yrs of one's life is basically invaluable.

Sorry but I find this a little confusing. The traditional curriculum has 11 years in it, 4 of which are relatively expensive (undergrad.) and 4 of which are extremely expensive (med school). I have no idea how tuition works in your system, but I can't see a medical school charging any less for the four years. So my guess would be you have 2 years of relatively less expensive education, 4 years of extremely expensive. Total 9 years in it.

So to me it seems you've saved two years of time, and two years of moderately expensive undergraduate education. You have also gained 2 potential years of income at attending salary.

This was received at the cost of restricting your undergraduate education, not enjoying a full undergraduate experience (which many successful pre-meds find time to do), and the flexibility of having an undergraduate degree.

I'm not judging you, but I guess I just can't see how those two years make the difference between "worth it" and "not worth it" to you. Do you mind filling me in on your reasoning?

Couldn't really disagree more. Well I had to pay much more tuition for my 2 years than someone who takes 15 credit hours/semester does, so I probably saved little to no money in terms of actual expenditure going to a bs/md. However I saved 2 years, which is way more valuable than any amount of "undergraduate experience", I still have an undergrad degree, and like you said get 2 more years at attending salary. I mean 2 years of your life is a pretty big deal in my opinion.. The undergrad portion was relatively difficult, but I mean it's just like preclinical medical school. You have more than enough time to do whatever you want, you just have to be dedicated to get that time. The whole thing about being guaranteed into medical school was huge as well. I have a set amount of conditions to meet during undergrad and if I did that, I was in, for sure. Yes if someone gets a decent MCAT and has a decent app they're going to get into somewhere, but I literally knew where I was guaranteed to go, provided I did decent. I'm not big on uncertainty, so the time + guarantee thing was huge to me. Removed a lot of stress about the whole process. Was probably a more competitive HS app than medical school one, so if I didn't get in to a bs/md, wouldn't have been interested in medicine at all, just because it didn't make sense logically to me. That doesn't mean I wasn't interested, but it's the whole " if the ROI isn't high enough for something, I don't care care how much you like it, it's stupid to make it your career" thing.