How is it fair....

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
PurpleLove said:
Yes, yes it does.
I'm not even going to argue with you, I need help/advice from people who know what it's like to struggle at a top, grade-deflating school.
When I get a 3.5-3.6, let me tell you, it will have a lot more weight than your 3.5-3.6.

By the way, people have said MCAT is the equalizer between easy/hard schools. I believe the average MCAT here is like a 37. Just saying.
Click to expand...
I believe you're wrong. Either way I went to a liberal arts school, non top 10 and did better than that but I guess I'm still an uneducated graduate that didn't learn anything. Some people choose schools because they actually like the atmosphere/learning environment, not because they are "crappy" and couldn't cut it at other "top" schools.
 
Willy38 said:
I believe you're wrong. Either way I went to a liberal arts school, non top 10 and did better than that but I guess I'm still an uneducated graduate that didn't learn anything. Some people choose schools because they actually like the atmosphere/learning environment, not because they are "crappy" and couldn't cut it at other "top" schools.
Click to expand...
Not saying that.
I got a full ride to many schools. If I went there I would hope people wouldn't assume I was dumb.
But, I'm saying there is no way you can compare rigors of say, DePaul to UChicago, and then call GPAs equal.
 
PurpleLove said:
Not saying that.
I got a full ride to many schools. If I went there I would hope people wouldn't assume I was dumb.
But, I'm saying there is no way you can compare rigors of say, DePaul to UC, and then call GPAs equal.
Click to expand...

Obviously. A UC makes DePaul look like a for-profit online school. We all know that
 
PurpleLove said:
Not saying that.
I got a full ride to many schools. If I went there I would hope people wouldn't assume I was dumb.
But, I'm saying there is no way you can compare rigors of say, DePaul to UC, and then call GPAs equal.
Click to expand...
I agree you can't compare exactly but either way the med school process is competitive. It sounds like you just bit off a little more than you could chew. But if this is a post finals thread then I can understand the whining a little more. Finals are stressful.
 
PurpleLove said:
Not saying that.
I got a full ride to many schools. If I went there I would hope people wouldn't assume I was dumb.
But, I'm saying there is no way you can compare rigors of say, DePaul to UC, and then call GPAs equal.
Click to expand...
so lets be honest for a second...
you turned down multiple full scholarships, probably at good schools, to pay full price for the school you're in.
How much of your decision was mostly because you wanted to go to a prestigious school?
 
terp720 said:
so lets be honest for a second...
you turned down multiple full scholarship, probably at good schools, to pay full price for the school you're in.
How much of your decision was mostly because you wanted to go to a prestigious school?
Click to expand...
Well I did get some outside scholarships, but other than that 100%.
 
terp720 said:
so lets be honest for a second...
you turned down multiple full scholarship, probably at good schools, to pay full price for the school you're in.
How much of your decision was mostly because you wanted to go to a prestigious school?
Click to expand...

Don't blame @PurpleLove She made a wise decision.
 
terp720 said:
so lets be honest for a second...
you turned down multiple full scholarships, probably at good schools, to pay full price for the school you're in.
How much of your decision was mostly because you wanted to go to a prestigious school?
Click to expand...
To be fair, many people do this for medical school. Can't really rag on her here.
 
Boolean said:
To be fair, many people do this for medical school. Can't really rag on her here.
Click to expand...

Exactly. People are mainly comparing between prestige and financial aid when there are more factors involved. The false dichotomy problem
 
PurpleLove said:
I seriously don't mean to be a bitch right now, I was in the past.
I know my GPA HAS to improve in order to even have a chance.
Click to expand...
Ok, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you dropped the elitist attitude. A 3.2 won't cut it for med school, especially considering the fact that the average GPA at UChicago is close to a 3.4.

If you want to have a decent chance of getting into med school, I'd say that you would need to get your science GPA up into the 3.4 - 3.5 range. Which means that you need to aim for at least 3.7 - 3.8ish in the upcoming semesters. 4.0 would be ideal.

GPA comes first. Take fewer credits, easier credits, cut down on ECs -- do whatever you have to do to get your science GPA into the target range of 3.7 - 3.8.

You'll have to take a long, hard look at your study habits. How many hours to you study for a given exam? How many practice problems do you do? Do you have a lot of distractions when you study? Find the smartest, best performing kids in your class and try to muscle your way into their study groups, then watch and learn by example. If you do get into a "smart kid" study group, you'll have to realize that they will hold you up to their standard. Read the relevant textbook chapters before you meet. Do the practice problems/practice exams. If you don't you will look woefully unprepared and you'll find that the other students will stop inviting you to study sessions.

Once your GPA gets there, you can start slowly layering ECs and higher numbers of credits back into your schedule.

The next big hurdle will be the MCAT. You'll need a good score to overcome your low GPA, so make sure you leave yourself plenty of time to prepare. I took six weeks to study, but I had a very firm grounding in the basic sciences. If you feel a little rusty, you may need eight or even ten weeks. Don't try to layer on volunteering, or classes, or a research position as many students do. MCAT prep is much more demanding than SAT prep, and you won't have time for these other things. MCAT studying is all about having a rigorous schedule and doing as many practice problems as possible. These threads might help:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/30-mcat-study-habits-the-cbt-version.503250/
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/thr...92t-mix-stop-rushing-to-take-the-mcat.602186/
 
Last edited:
Euxox said:
Ok, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you dropped the elitist attitude. A 3.2 won't cut it for med school, especially considering the fact that the average GPA at UChicago is close to a 3.4.

If you want to have a decent chance of getting into med school, I'd say that you would need to get your science GPA up into the 3.4 - 3.5 range. Which means that you need to aim for at least 3.7 - 3.8ish in the upcoming semesters. 4.0 would be ideal.

GPA comes first. Take fewer credits, easier credits, cut down on ECs -- do whatever you have to do to get your science GPA into the target range of 3.7 - 3.8. Once your GPA gets there, you can start slowly layering ECs and higher numbers of credits back into your schedule.

In the next semester, you'll have to take a long, hard look at your study habits. How many hours to you study for a given exam? How many practice problems do you do? Do you have a lot of distractions when you study? Find the smartest, best performing kids in your class and try to muscle your way into their study groups, then watch and learn by example.
Click to expand...
I will do all of this, I just hope I'm not reaching my potential at a 3.2.
Thank you.
 
Boolean said:
To be fair, many people do this for medical school. Can't really rag on her here.
Click to expand...

I think med school and UG are different. If you know you're going to med school after UG, there's really a big reason not to put yourself $240K in debt for UG
 
Euxox said:
Ok, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you dropped the elitist attitude. A 3.2 won't cut it for med school, especially considering the fact that the average GPA at UChicago is close to a 3.4.

If you want to have a decent chance of getting into med school, I'd say that you would need to get your science GPA up into the 3.4 - 3.5 range. Which means that you need to aim for at least 3.7 - 3.8ish in the upcoming semesters. 4.0 would be ideal.

GPA comes first. Take fewer credits, easier credits, cut down on ECs -- do whatever you have to do to get your science GPA into the target range of 3.7 - 3.8.

You'll have to take a long, hard look at your study habits. How many hours to you study for a given exam? How many practice problems do you do? Do you have a lot of distractions when you study? Find the smartest, best performing kids in your class and try to muscle your way into their study groups, then watch and learn by example. If you do get into a "smart kid" study group, you'll have to realize that they will hold you up to their standard. Read the relevant textbook chapters before you meet. Do the practice problems/practice exams. If you don't you will look woefully unprepared and you'll find that the other students will stop inviting you to study sessions.

Once your GPA gets there, you can start slowly layering ECs and higher numbers of credits back into your schedule.
Click to expand...

@Euxox saves the day with bold constructive criticism! :clap::clap::clap::clap:
 
terp720 said:
I think med school and UG are different. If you know you're going to med school after UG, there's really a big reason not to put yourself $240K in debt for UG
Click to expand...
I didn't know I wanted to be a doctor back then, so I thought I should have the name of the school on my resume to fall back on.
 
PurpleLove said:
More like,
professor: So why are you here?
me: I'm not doing as well as I would like to?
professor: *looks up grades* you do very well on exams, what do you need help with?
me: uh
Click to expand...

Sorry but I wouldn't say a 3.2 science GPA is good.
 
knv2u said:
Sorry but I wouldn't say a 3.2 science GPA is good.
Click to expand...
I know, but they think it is. They're the professor and see a whiny girl complaining about B+s when there are people who get C-s.
 
BamaNicole said:
a GPA at X school has the same weight as a GPA at y school.


A 3.2 at Yale doesn't mean a 4.0 at State University. This is a point you haven't grasped.
Click to expand...

I disagree with you and there is even disagreement among the adcoms that post here. Goro said it doesn't make a difference to him but his colleagues on his adcom have considered it for borderline candidates, LizzyM has said that it does make a difference, and Gyngyn appears to agree with you but I thought she might have once remarked something similar to Goro (but double check the very last part). Regardless, your post is written as if it is absolute to adcoms that A GPA at school X is equal to the numerically same number B GPA at school Y. I think this is an errant assumption on your part, and to be sure, there are variations among schools. I would place a higher value on a MIT GPA than I would say, from an unranked third/fourth tier undergraduate school. Not all A grades are created equally.

With this said, I will agree with you and the others that a 3.2 science GPA isn't going to cut-it and it doesn't matter where it is from. And I don't think that grading differences and differences in rigor equate to the amount that the OP is ascribing to it either. I think she is taking it too far in one direction, and you are taking a bit too far in the other.
 
knv2u said:
I disagree with you and there is even disagreement among the adcoms that post here. Goro said it doesn't make a difference to him but his colleagues on his adcom have considered it for borderline candidates, LizzyM has said that it does make a difference, and Gyngyn appears to agree with you but I thought she might have once remarked something similar to Goro (but double check the very last part). Regardless, your post is written as if it is absolute to adcoms that A GPA at school X is equal to the numerically same number B GPA at school Y. I think this is an errant assumption on your part, and to be sure, there are variations among schools. I would place a higher value on a MIT GPA than I would say, from an unranked third/fourth tier undergraduate school. Not all A grades are created equally.

With this said, I will agree with you and the others that a 3.2 science GPA isn't going to cut-it and it doesn't matter where it is from. And I don't think that grading differences and differences in rigor equate to the amount that the OP is ascribing to it either. I think she is taking it too far in one direction, and you are taking a bit too far in the other.
Click to expand...

I think the main point is, unless you attend a Top 20, don't expect GPA leniency.
 
catzcradle said:
@PurpleLove, why do you want to be a doctor?
Click to expand...
I mean I think it comes down to two things I can talk about in depth, but I want to heal people (ever since my dad got sick at like age 5) and the human body is amazing and I want to learn more about it and how it works outside of an Anatomy course.
 
knv2u said:
I disagree with you and there is even disagreement among the adcoms that post here. Goro said it doesn't make a difference to him but his colleagues on his adcom have considered it for borderline candidates, LizzyM has said that it does make a difference, and Gyngyn appears to agree with you but I thought she might have once remarked something similar to Goro (but double check the very last part). Regardless, your post is written as if it is absolute to adcoms that A GPA at school X is equal to the numerically same number B GPA at school Y. I think this is an errant assumption on your part, and to be sure, there are variations among schools. I would place a higher value on a MIT GPA than I would say, from an unranked third/fourth tier undergraduate school. Not all A grades are created equally.

With this said, I will agree with you and the others that a 3.2 science GPA isn't going to cut-it and it doesn't matter where it is from. And I don't think that grading differences and differences in rigor equate to the amount that the OP is ascribing to it either. I think she is taking it too far in one direction, and you are taking a bit too far in the other.
Click to expand...
And if I don't, post-bacc... 🙁
 
Agent B said:
I think the main point is, unless you attend a Top 20, don't expect GPA leniency.
Click to expand...
also top20 does not equal a 0.8 point GPA boost. which I think actually was the topic of another thread once...

edit: oops that was really in response to knv2u's post
 
PurpleLove said:
I know, but they think it is. They're the professor and see a whiny girl complaining about B+s when there are people who get C-s.
Click to expand...

This just isn't true. They will see how determined you are and it can only help you. Unless professors at UC don't care about their students.
But you don't have to listen to me and just keep up the 3.1 GPA. How dare I, a measly DePaul grad, give advice to a sophomore at UC anyway?

Protip: consider changing the way you treat other people who are on the same career path as you. God forbid you are accepted to medical school with students from non-ivy league state schools like ISU or even Eastern IL!
 
terp720 said:
also top20 does not equal a 0.8 point GPA boost. which I think actually was the topic of another thread once...
Click to expand...
Right, but I would also question the university in which someone can get all As in. In that case, I would put most weight on the MCAT.
 
Nearly 3.3, but I agree. How did you improve?
cjcarter said:
This just isn't true. They will see how determined you are and it can only help you. Unless professors at UC don't care about their students.
But you don't have to listen to me and just keep up the 3.1 GPA. How dare I, a measly DePaul grad, give advice to a sophomore at UC anyway?

Protip: consider changing the way you treat other people who are on the same career path as you. God forbid you are accepted to medical school with students from non-ivy league state schools like ISU or even Eastern IL!
Click to expand...
 
terp720 said:
also top20 does not equal a 0.8 point GPA boost. which I think actually was the topic of another thread once...

edit: oops that was really in response to knv2u's post
Click to expand...

I agree -there is no disagreement that a 3.2 is bad and no one would give you that much consideration for undergraduate institution.

Edited: Rather, my post was to challenge the categorical, unqualified statement of another poster effectively saying that all GPAs with the same magnitude are treated equally. I beg to differ on that one point. The nature of the classes, institution, grading policies, etc. are all relevant.
 
knv2u said:
I agree -there is no disagreement that a 3.2 is bad and no one would give you that much consideration for undergraduate institution.
Click to expand...

yeah. now I just want to find that thread that brought up that exact thing. And LizzyM and other adcoms said (like you said) there is some consideration but not THAT much. there are too many of these threads to keep track of!
 
PurpleLove said:
Nearly 3.3, but I agree. How did you improve?
Click to expand...

I already gave you advice. Go to professors office hours and explain your situation and how you want to improve. If UC offers tutoring or anything like SI sessions, attend them. They are there to help you and I'm sure you won't be the only one there given how hard it is.
 
cjcarter said:
I already gave you advice. Go to professors office hours and explain your situation and how you want to improve. If UC offers tutoring or anything like SI sessions, attend them. They are there to help you and I'm sure you won't be the only one there given how hard it is.
Click to expand...
I did this, but they are not helpful for the most part. I always attend office hours. There hasn't been one professor in which I did not. 🙁
 
And OP, you're only a sophomore. If you spend your time working at your classes instead of arguing with anonymous people on an internet forum, you can improve your grades. A post bacc will also bring up your GPA. MD isn't out yet (unless your GPA doesn't improve a good bit).
 
PurpleLove said:
LMFAOOOOOOOOOOO DEPAUL HARD. Okay, I'm dying of laughter, please stop.
If I transferred, it would be to a school like Depaul/Loyola. Please, hun. All my friends who didn't do jack **** in high school went to Depaul and continued to do jack **** and get As.

No.... Because it's all test-taking, nothing to do with hardness. I get tutors and they ask me what I need help with, well nothing.
I go to professors and they tell me to stop.
Click to expand...
They tell you to stop - stop making a fool out of yourself
 
moisne said:
They tell you to stop - stop making a fool out of yourself
Click to expand...
Exactly, "You fool, there are many other people who need more help than you, stop wasting my time".
 
knv2u said:
I disagree with you and there is even disagreement among the adcoms that post here. Goro said it doesn't make a difference to him but his colleagues on his adcom have considered it for borderline candidates, LizzyM has said that it does make a difference, and Gyngyn appears to agree with you but I thought she might have once remarked something similar to Goro (but double check the very last part). Regardless, your post is written as if it is absolute to adcoms that A GPA at school X is equal to the numerically same number B GPA at school Y. I think this is an errant assumption on your part, and to be sure, there are variations among schools. I would place a higher value on a MIT GPA than I would say, from an unranked third/fourth tier undergraduate school. Not all A grades are created equally.

With this said, I will agree with you and the others that a 3.2 science GPA isn't going to cut-it and it doesn't matter where it is from. And I don't think that grading differences and differences in rigor equate to the amount that the OP is ascribing to it either. I think she is taking it too far in one direction, and you are taking a bit too far in the other.
Click to expand...


Is there a system in place that pits an A from state u against an A from a top 20? I leaning towards no. No matter where you are you still have to learn the same material.
 
BamaNicole said:
Is there a system in place that pits an A from state u against an A from a top 20? I leaning towards no. No matter where you are you still have to learn the same material.
Click to expand...
Debatable.... The level to which you need to know the same material isn't always the same.
 
terp720 said:
yeah. now I just want to find that thread that brought up that exact thing. And LizzyM and other adcoms said (like you said) there is some consideration but not THAT much. there are too many of these threads to keep track of!
Click to expand...

I know, and the messages aren't always consistent either. Goro added that part about his other adcom members on like two out of several posts concerning the issue. I think the problem is that some people pull out those tidbits and try to use them as a crutch to make up for lackluster grades. It isn't going to work. To a top allopathic medical school, strong grades from a strong undergraduate institution will help, but for mediocre scores will render you SOL as they can fill the class with stronger candidates as it is and are looking for reasons to reject people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

O
How bad is it? Academic IA
Replies
5
Views
962
Goro
Goro
BlatantPlatitude
Is it over?
Replies
18
Views
3K
wysdoc
wysdoc
E
Is it okay to quit my job?
Replies
4
Views
566
LunaOri
LunaOri
goodbob
Is it worth reapplying by any chance?
Replies
5
Views
728
goodbob
goodbob
L
How is my application looking so far?
Replies
5
Views
388
FairEver
F
Top