Importance of Rigor to Adcoms?

[carolina910]

I am really curious about how adcoms view courseload and EC rigor, because honestly, it doesn't seem like they care very much. I'll just give a general overview of 2 applicants. They each did all pre-med reqs, both at a prestigious undergrad school.

Applicant 1: Highest Rigor
GPA: 3.6 (upward trend) MCAT: 33
Course of Study: Psychology and Chemistry Major and Math Minor, overloaded most semesters, 5 grad courses
ECs: >1000 hours research (thesis, 2 conferences, 1 publication), >1000 hours clinical volunteering, plus other involved activities (president of junior class, a capella group, etc).
Current outcome: 2 II

Applicant 2: Okay Rigor
GPA: 3.85 MCAT: 37
Course of Study: Psychology Major and Spanish Minor, never overloaded, no grad courses
ECs: >1000 hours research (only thesis), ~250 hours volunteering (some clinical, some other), other minor hobbies/involvements
Current outcome: 9 II

Why is the outcome of Applicant 2 so much better than Applicant 1 thus far? I think it's still early and I think they're a great applicant sans the low GPA and good but not stellar MCAT. Do you think they'll be okay?

Is it worth it to take on a harder courseload for a lower GPA? From what I've seen, the answer is unequivocally no, unless it lowers your GPA minimally. It seems a little bit like the system is rigged in favor of those who supplement their pre-med courses with fluffy courses and/or majors that may be intellectually stimulating but still easy to get straight A's.

@LizzyM @Goro @gyngyn what has been your experience with this? Would admissions people really see Applicant 2 as THAT MUCH better than Applicant 1 just because of higher stats?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[piii]

What a completely useless post lol nice humblebrag brah

 

[mimelim]

I would caution against reading too much into a comparison between two applicants as we do NOT compare applicants side by side when it comes to offering interviews or acceptances. You are ignoring personal statements, letters of recommendation, and marginalizing ECs by making them in hours format which in the aggregate can have a large impact on acceptances, interviews and rarely, secondaries.

When it comes to interview invites, numbers are the first screen, especially early in the season. Some schools will shotgun invite everyone with strong stats with a complete application and no red-flags. The candidate with the 0.3 higher GPA AND 3 point higher MCAT is going to get priority the lower stats applicant. Does that mean that they will be ignored? No. But, their time will be later in the cycle.

 

[LizzyM]

I see two applicants from the same school. Both have checked the right boxes. One has a higher GPA, higher MCAT and has demonstrated proficiency in Spanish as much as a minor in that subject can demonstrate. Clearly one is better on those metrics than the other. The more rigorous course of study does not make up for lower GPA and MCAT.

If both had 3.6/33 then rigor might come into play or we might pass over both in search of those who have it all.

 

[gyngyn]

I like #2.

 

[Lawpy]

Sad to say, but #1 really isn't more rigorous than #2. I usually recommend against class overloading, so that you can do well in lighter courseload and excel in activities. But as far as the subject goes, adding a chemistry major and few grad classes doesn't make the coursework suddenly more rigorous. It's not like we're comparing an engineering/physics major with a biology major, but even so, rigor is of minor importance compared to good GPA and good MCAT.

#2's plan is excellent.

 

[md-2020]

@OP, you have far better stats than your friend and you know just as well as everyone else on this thread that's the reason why you're having more success.

 

[carolina910]

Thanks everyone for your answers. I think I was a little naive coming into this process. When I decided to apply, people (advisors, friends) repeatedly told me that applicants with lower stats could be better applicants than people with higher stats if they had some combination of better ECs, more medical knowledge, better rigor, more life experiences etc. After reading all of your responses I guess my question seems kind of stupid...

 

[Law2Doc]

... The more rigorous course of study does not make up for lower GPA and MCAT...

This. The first guy double majoring was probably a waste if the goal was specifically for med school -- either single major and spending the time to do a little better would have gone much further. The second guy could have actually even decreased his rigor by not graduating early or not bothering with a minor and still would have gotten the nod if both were coming from the same college with similar ECs and the second one had higher numbers. It's not all about the numbers but things like double majors and minors matter least of all and shouldn't ever be looked at as a good strategy for med school. You do that for yourself, not med school -- they won't care. In fact a guy #3, who did just the prereqs, majored in, say, fine arts, and had neither a double major nor a minor, with similar ECs and similar numbers to guy #2 would have done as well, or better than #2, and probably would have had a much better time in college. The notion that you need to do a rigorous "premed" major(s) to get into med school died in 1980. These days many people feel balance and non-science interests actually often trump "cookie cutter". You can only interview so many bio jors with stndrd ECs before they look the same. Don't try to game the system by assuming adcoms will audit what you have accomplished and give you credit for rigor. A lot of the "smarts" you need to show for med school is being "smart" enough to not take a course or EC load that will hinder your GPA. Just saying.

 

[carolina910]

Is it also true that schools review and offer IIs to higher stat applicants first? I've seen a lot of threads that say that higher stat applicants will be more likely to get all of their IIs in July and August whereas lower stat applicants may have to wait to mid-fall to get some momentum. I had previously assumed that they review applicants in order of complete date.

 

[Goro]

Both will get IIs.

It's not a zero sum game.

Rising trends are always good.

Known feeders schools are better than unknown schools, but still doing really well anywhere will get rewarded.

For the top 25's, the guy with 3.6/33 is closer to average, and so will have a harder time getting into the top 25s, unless some aspect of his ECs are >> avg.

Majors are irrelevant. Adcoms care about people doing well, period. Do you think taking and acing Spanish coursework will be a piece of cake, BTW?

One should take the course load that one feels comfortable doing, and, more importantly, enjoys.

I am really curious about how adcoms view courseload and EC rigor, because honestly, it doesn't seem like they care very much. I'll just give a general overview of 2 applicants. They each did all pre-med reqs, both at a Top-10 undergrad school.

Applicant 1: Highest Rigor
GPA: 3.6 (upward trend) MCAT: 33
Course of Study: Biology and Chemistry (Double Major), overloaded half the time, 3 grad courses
ECs: >1000 hours research, >1000 hours clinical volunteering (EMT)
Current outcome: 1 II (from the school where they went to undergrad)
Applied to: 30 schools (10 in Top-25, 20 mid and lower tier).

Applicant 2: Okay Rigor
GPA: 3.9 MCAT: 36
Course of Study: Biology Major and Spanish Minor, never overloaded, no grad courses, graduated 1 year early
ECs: >1000 hours research, ~250 hours volunteering (some clinical, some other)
Current outcome: 9 II (7 from Top-25s)
Applied to: 22 schools (12 in Top-25, 10 mid-tier)

Why is the outcome of Applicant 2 so much better than Applicant 1 thus far? I feel bad because my friend Applicant 1 is feeling very discouraged and is afraid of not getting in this cycle. I think it's still early and I think they're a great applicant sans the low GPA and good but not stellar MCAT. Do you think they'll be okay?

Is it worth it to take on a harder courseload for a lower GPA? From what I've seen, the answer is unequivocally no, unless it lowers your GPA minimally. It seems a little bit like the system is rigged in favor of those who supplement their pre-med courses with fluffy courses and/or majors that may be intellectually stimulating but still easy to get straight A's.

@LizzyM @Goro @gyngyn what has been your experience with this? Would admissions people really see Applicant 2 as THAT MUCH better than Applicant 1 just because of higher stats?

It seems lazy taking basically only the bare minimum to finish everything in order to graduate a year early and save tuition money. I guess it is kind of obnoxious to be complaining about doing too well in the application cycle, but is it warranted for me to feel guilty about taking an easier path than some other premeds who are now suffering because of it?

 

[mwsapphire]

^ Isn't trend in grades more significant , almost, than the gpa itself? ( I was looking up research experience and this thread came up)

I would say the 3.6 applicant can be seen as as academically strong as the 3.85 if the 3.6 had an upward gpa trend , or like, if you took out the freshman year grades they had a 3.9 or something...