- Joined
- Jun 29, 2016
- Messages
- 36
- Reaction score
- 8
But can I really? Has anybody here majored in something different than biology, neuro, cog sci, or any hard sciences and received acceptances from top med schools?
We really don't care.
I know someone who majored in Art History and now attends one of the top medical schools in the USA (think Harvard, Yale, Stanford.) One of the physicians that I shadowed majored in dance. My own physician majored in Anthropology. So yeah...But can I really? Has anybody here majored in something different than biology, neuro, cog sci, or any hard sciences and received acceptances from top med schools?
I don't care as long as they did well in it and do well on the MCAT.But would you respect a 3.8 in something "easy" (I'm thinking about Public Health for myself.) to the same degree as you would respect a 3.8 in Biology/Zoology/Neuroscience/Chemistry.
vocational majors
I don't care as long as they did well and do well on the MCAT.
Some of my colleagues have a dim opinion of vocational majors, though
No. Nursing, Physical therapy, Auto Shop...Would Political Science and Women and Gender Studies fall into the category of vocational majors?
But can I really? Has anybody here majored in something different than biology, neuro, cog sci, or any hard sciences and received acceptances from top med schools?
But can I really? Has anybody here majored in something different than biology, neuro, cog sci, or any hard sciences and received acceptances from top med schools?
What is considered vocational major? Electrical engineering and public health both can be referred as vocational?
But would you respect a 3.8 in something "easy" (I'm thinking about Public Health for myself.) to the same degree as you would respect a 3.8 in Biology/Zoology/Neuroscience/Chemistry?
Would Political Science and Women and Gender Studies fall into the category of vocational majors?
Just as an example, if you think Fine Arts is "easy", try writing an essay every two weeks on subjects like "The Jackson Pollack Retrospective at the Whitney", "Picasso's Blue Period" and "Influences of the Hudson River School on American Art" every two weeks. I minored in Fine Arts.
I have clinical colleagues who were English, Drama, Film Studies and Literature majors.
No
But isn't there a risk factor? I would love to major in history but I'm afraid of what I would do if I don't get into med school. I think that's why many people major in the sciences, so they have a decent plan B.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using SDN mobile
But isn't there a risk factor? I would love to major in history but I'm afraid of what I would do if I don't get into med school. I think that's why many people major in the sciences, so they have a decent plan B.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using SDN mobile
This is an issue for anyone going to college.
And besides, biology is the worst science to major in if you're looking for plan B
Not necessarily.
Compared to the other sciences, it's pretty bad due to limited scope and skills.
It depends upon what you're learning. Ecology? Not good. Molecular biology lab? . Much better.
Hmm but Plan B is still grad school. Or teaching. Are there other alternatives?
It depends upon what you're learning. Ecology? Not good. Molecular biology lab? . Much better.
Consulting if you interview well, come from a decent school, and have a decent GPA. You can also do lab work that, in some positions, pays okay (not well, but okay). You can also write for newspapers/magazines/journals if you are good at that (though the jobs are rarer than the ones I mentioned before). You could also work in certain start-ups.
Some don't care about specific requirements, either!Meds schools care about requirements more than/not major.
I know personally at least one from that list that claims to not care about requirements and markets how they don't but when you look at students they have only accepted a select couple that haven't met the standard requirements. One had shall we say connections and the other was a darn near perfect mcat and 4.0 but for certain reasons didn't have all of the classes but had others to make up for such.Some don't care about specific requirements, either!
Wake Forest
Vanderbilt
USC Keck
Stanford
Rush Medical College
Southern Illinois
Tulane
Albert Einstein
Hofstra
NYU
University of Cincinnati
Drexel
University of Pennsylvania
Sydney Kimmel
M University of South Carolina (Charleston)
University of Virginia
University of Michigan
University of Minnesota
Duke
UCSD
U Conn
U of Chicago
I know personally at least one from that list that claims to not care about requirements and markets how they don't but when you look at students they have only accepted a select couple that haven't met the standard requirements. One had shall we say connections and the other was a darn near perfect mcat and 4.0 but for certain reasons didn't have all of the classes but had others to make up for such.
Shooting to be a rare exception to the rule is statistically not a sound strategy for getting into med school. Most of us don't have the fortune to be child prodigies or have rich parents who donate wings.
I will say it would be nice if the standards were changed and better ones developed.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
What school? That's important
Very selective schools have no reason to accept anything less than what they perceive to be the "best."I know personally at least one from that list that claims to not care about requirements and markets how they don't but when you look at students they have only accepted a select couple that haven't met the standard requirements. One had shall we say connections and the other was a darn near perfect mcat and 4.0 but for certain reasons didn't have all of the classes but had others to make up for such.
Shooting to be a rare exception to the rule is statistically not a sound strategy for getting into med school. Most of us don't have the fortune to be child prodigies or have rich parents who donate wings.
I will say it would be nice if the standards were changed and better ones developed.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
Agreed, and I am all for flexibility, but then with 7000 applicants even with the best intentions one cannot spend the time needed on each application to find that oddly exceptional 3.0, 500 student. Perhaps at some point better methods will be found, as the number of applicants are increasing for many schools.Very selective schools have no reason to accept anything less than what they perceive to be the "best."
Changing the stated requirement provides them with the flexibility to do this without putting restrictions on themselves or the candidates.
Very few applicants will distinguish themselves sufficiently for any of these schools without the usual course requirements. It is a rare applicant that will do well without them.
My point is that requirements have become more fluid and that many schools have chosen to use their administrative time doing something more useful that approving transcripts and denying very well qualified applicants for lack of a specific course.
Schools who read every application can find them, without regard to "requirements."Agreed, and I am all for flexibility, but then with 7000 applicants even with the best intentions one cannot spend the time needed on each application to find that oddly exceptional 3.0, 500 student. Perhaps at some point better methods will be found, as the number of applicants are increasing for many schools.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
My very selective school ostensibly requires the classic premed courses. 4 sciences + labs and English. I have taken a grand total of 2 labs ever (not exaggerating). No physics, gen chem or bio labs. This was a deliberate choice I made due to what I'd read on SDN (thanks!) I have had no complaints with upcoming enrollment. Neither do I feel I would have at the other schools that accepted me (maybe the SUNY). If you look at my app/ECs you'll see I am the opposite of cookie cutter. So the system benefits those like me very greatlyVery selective schools have no reason to accept anything less than what they perceive to be the "best."
Changing the stated requirement provides them with the flexibility to do this without putting restrictions on themselves or the candidates.
Very few applicants will distinguish themselves sufficiently for any of these schools without the usual course requirements. It is a rare applicant that will do well without them.
My point is that requirements have become more fluid and that many schools have chosen to use their administrative time doing something more useful that approving transcripts and denying very well qualified applicants for lack of a specific course.
Yale right? Pretty gnarly with all the coming off waitlists at great schools and switching matriculations lol. congratsMy very selective school ostensibly requires the classic premed courses. 4 sciences + labs and English. I have taken a grand total of 2 labs ever (not exaggerating). No physics, gen chem or bio labs. This was a deliberate choice I made due to what I'd read on SDN (thanks!) I have had no complaints with upcoming enrollment. Neither do I feel I would have at the other schools that accepted me (maybe the SUNY). If you look at my app/ECs you'll see I am the opposite of cookie cutter. So the system benefits those like me very greatly
In my experience, the public schools tend to be more rigid in requiring coursework to be complete before enrollment. My ex-girlfriend is making up 2 classes and a lab this summer bc her UC is making her do so. I've known others with this problem, but never at private schools, much less the very selective ones.