How important is your BCMP gpa?

[Buddhasmash]

---

Members don't see this ad.

If you were to get something like a 3.7 cumulative gpa but end up with a 3.0 in BCMP, will that kill your chances? Is it still possible to get in with those sorts of stats?

 

[jyb5011]

Anything's possible, you'll just have to apply and see...

 

[hiyaman]

I think having a discrepancy that big would be a red flag.

 

[gettheleadout]

I think having a discrepancy that big would be a red flag.

I agree, if anything I would say BCPM gpa can make up for a slightly lower cumulative, like 4.0 BCPM and 3.5 cumulative or something, but I would think since med school classes are all sciences they would look at one's BCPM as a predictor...

 

[cfx]

There has to be a reason why amcas calculates it seperately, right? I suspect adcoms use it as another means of trying to compare apples to apples. But maybe I'm wrong...

 

[Narmerguy]

If you were to get something like a 3.7 cumulative gpa but end up with a 3.0 in BCMP, will that kill your chances? Is it still possible to get in with those sorts of stats?

I think a performance like that would suggest to them that you have difficulty in handling your sciences. It's still possible, but I think the importance of your MCATs would be enhanced in this situation to show that you can master the science material.

 

[gravitywave]

it's another wet noodle they can lash you with, along with crappy cGPA, crappy MCAT, crappy volunteering, crappy LORs, crappy research...

jump through the hoops fido, jump! good dog!!

 

[DocBell]

Just from my personal experience so far my lower science gpa is killing me. I had an interview yesterday (sort of it was a guaranteed one so it doesn't mean they are actually considering me....who knows?) and was told that my transcript made me look like I had no work ethic b/c my science gpa is lower than my cumulative but my MCAT is solid. I am assuming an app with the numbers you mentioned would raise the same concerns.

It is a rough place to be if you majored in a science but I would really try to get it up.

 

[Dianyla]

Will it kill your chances? Maybe, but not necessarily. It doesn't help, and you'd better have a good reason for that 3.0, as well as an upward trend.

it's another wet noodle they can lash you with, along with crappy cGPA, crappy MCAT, crappy volunteering, crappy LORs, crappy research...

jump through the hoops fido, jump! good dog!!

You win the "best post I've seen on SDN in months" award!

 

[nutritiontomed]

All that matters is MCAT don't listen to anyone that tells you otherwise

 

[barcoderider]

I've always heard that BCPM is more important than cGPA.

 

[Dirt]

BCPM matters a lot. Anything below 3.3 or so will be discussed as a negative aspect of your app at any allopathic school in the country.

That is not to say that it can't be overcome elsewhere in your app.

 

[Oxygen206]

I've always heard that BCPM is more important than cGPA.

So would it be reasonable to think that if the stats were reversed (cGPA = 3.0 and sGPA = 3.7) the applicant would be better off?

 

[Wiingy]

Just from my personal experience so far my lower science gpa is killing me. I had an interview yesterday (sort of it was a guaranteed one so it doesn't mean they are actually considering me....who knows?) and was told that my transcript made me look like I had no work ethic b/c my science gpa is lower than my cumulative but my MCAT is solid. I am assuming an app with the numbers you mentioned would raise the same concerns.

It is a rough place to be if you majored in a science but I would really try to get it up.

+1

I'm applying this cycle with a pretty abysmal BCPM (~3.0) and a bad cGPA (< 3.5) but a solid MCAT (35+) and lots of research experience. The process has been weird - I've had four interview invites ranging from top 20s to bottom 20s (not that the rankings matter but they trend pretty well with admissions competitiveness, and therefore #'s). I've also had four rejections (and what I'm assuming are another 6 or so "silent rejections") - again, some from top schools and some from the traditional "safety" schools.

Granted, n=1, but I think that fit and careful school selection is more important than the numbers. I have a clear idea of what I want from a med school, looked for schools with a similar mission, and focused on them. Do numbers matter? Hell yes. I'm sure that my low GPAs were a major factor in the admissions process and reading of my application, and I would venture that they will continue to keep me out of some schools (with 5000+ applicants, a school has to screen somehow, and #s are the most convenient way to do so).

A low BCPM isn't going to make the process any easier, but it's not a death sentence either.

 

[Adria0]

.

 

[gravitywave]

So would it be reasonable to think that if the stats were reversed (cGPA = 3.0 and sGPA = 3.7) the applicant would be better off?

here's the deal. all the pieces have to be there ie nearly every part of your application must be competitive. it can be acceptable to have one or two components out of whack, but then you have to be prepared to make up for that in other areas - and even then it may not be enough. I would have to think that the first pass over an application is screening for minimum standards. In the case of a 3.0 for cGPA vs sGPA, i don't know which is worse. it's a massive handicap either way. truthfully the grades that dragged you down are going to have to be OLD (think five+ years) and you'll be a lot better off with an upward grade trend.

I have a follow-up question specific to non-science majors who do not take many science courses past the medical school requirements.

Do such students get any leniency? Not saying that those who take more science courses have it easier with respect to BCPM because I would die if I had to take that many science courses, but they do have more padding if they completely bomb one science/math course ("bomb" being relative to other science grades...i.e. all A's and one C).

you're describing me. we don't get leniency, you have to be prepared to show good numbers. but i think the knife cuts both ways on this one. If you take a ton of science then yeah, more courses would cushion the impact of a D. but if you take the minimum or close to it (like in a post-bac), true you don't have to take as much science - but your margin for error is pretty close to zero. if you were like me, needing science credits as well as GPA repair, you have to ace every course.

 

[ThaliaNox]

I have a follow-up question specific to non-science majors who do not take many science courses past the medical school requirements.

Do such students get any leniency? Not saying that those who take more science courses have it easier with respect to BCPM because I would die if I had to take that many science courses, but they do have more padding if they completely bomb one science/math course ("bomb" being relative to other science grades...i.e. all A's and one C).

Why should someone get leniency in this case? You admit yourself you wouldn't want to take more science courses. One could as easily make the argument that a higher cumulative GPA in such an applicant is "padded" by "easy" nonscience classes. I've never heard someone say they're afraid that their 300 level history or business or sociology class will just ruin their GPA. I've heard lots about how bad physical chemistry, molecular biology or other upper level hard sciences can smash a GPA. A lower science GPA from someone who has taken only the required courses makes the school think you might not handle the sciences well. Med school is, after all, almost all sciences.

The final moral though is that a high GPA in anything trumps a lower GPA in anything else. Period. Doesn't matter if it is astrophysics or asian studies. But yeah, a low science GPA with a nonscience major is a flag. Hell, it's a flag with science majors too. Thing is that in those cases it generally comes with a lowish cumulative too!

 

[fizzgig]

i would think to some degree the sGPA would be more important to have higher, but as others point out if you ace what you wanted and screwed off in all your other classes (in the adcom's eyes) to produce a huge discrepancy, you still may run into problems.

adria i definitely wouldn't think there's leniency. a nonscience major doesn't have much diffusing effect, true, if he only takes the prereqs. but the science/math major with all that diffusing effect... the classes he's bringing his D up with are not only difficult, they're the type of difficult class that medical admissions happens to value. since they are apparently strict about how the class MUST be from bio/chem/phys/math, you can end up with sciencetheycareaboutGPA and cGPA which is 'the rest of your science/math' by majoring in a science that isn't one of those. i have quite a pile of ENGR classes that i don't think will be included because they're not the particular science AMCAS is querying for.

 

[orthomyxo]

All that matters is MCAT don't listen to anyone that tells you otherwise

Good luck with that.