Is the Masters of Nutrition at Columbia a SMP?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Premedapplicant

Full Member
10+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2009
Messages
154
Reaction score
0
Hey guys!

Just looking at SMP programs - I've read some threads etc but just want to clarify -

Does Columbias Masters in Nutrition have the same level of coursework as Georgetown and BU's SMP's? It doesn't seem to as the courses are not those taken as a MS1 so it seems like it wouldn't serve that purpose?

The upshot is that it is in NYC so I wouldn't have to more (sweet apt set up currently)

Any thoughts?

Also, how is Drexel's SMP viewed?

Members don't see this ad.
 
It is not viewed as a traditional SMP since you're not taking classes with M1s. The whole point of SMP is to prove that you can handle medical school material. I think if you really want to improve your shot landing at a med school, apply to the traditional SMPs.
 
I'm posting this here instead of in the Postbacc section in the hope that it will be seen by more people (and therefore get the benefit of more knowledge/opinions).

So far I am on four waitlists this year. I hope dearly to get off one of them, and that would solve all of my problems. In the meantime, I've decided to apply to some Master's programs.

I applied to six and have, so far, gotten into three: The MSMS at Univ. South Florida, the MS in Physiology in Cincinnati, and (as this thread would suggest), the MS in Nutrition at Columbia.

My knowledge of their MS in Nutrition, for starters, came directly from the AAMC's list of "academic-record enhancers". And that's supposedly an official source. But the consensus on SDN over the years (which I've been Googling) makes it seem like it is no less than a piece of crap and more worthless than doing anything else with your time.

There are a few positive posts I could find:
(1) http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=5822273&postcount=1/
(2) http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=5196067&postcount=9

But I also found a lot of people saying that ad coms looked unfavorably (not just neutrally, but unfavorably) upon "non-traditional/non-SMP" Master's programs. It seems to me as though unless you're doing a Master's in something totally non-related (like, material and packaging sciences), there would seem to be benefit in broadening your horizons, but maybe I'm not ad com material.

The other thing is that I'm not quite looking for this to boost my record: my stats are "okay": ~3.5 sGPA, ~3.7 cGPA, 30Q MCAT, and I'm studying to retake the MCAT this summer (though decision on that is still pending).

So my question is, although the program is expensive (and that is no doubt a minus instead of a plus), would it be a minus for my record if I decided to go? Here's a link to their planned curriculum for the coming year. The course descriptions seem to indicate that they will undoubtedly tie in to such things as physiology, metabolism, biochemistry, and disease, all of which will be encountered in med school.

I know this was a long post, but does anyone have any thoughts?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Yeah, the idea of adcoms looking at non-SMP Master's programs unfavorably sounds like BS. Only if you didn't do well, then they could look at it unfavorably. I don't know how much better a MS in Biomedical Science would be than an MS in Nutrition...but if the courses are pretty similar, I don't see why there would be much of a difference.
 
I think for you itd be a fine program to go to, you don't need a traditional smp.

I'm posting this here instead of in the Postbacc section in the hope that it will be seen by more people (and therefore get the benefit of more knowledge/opinions).

So far I am on four waitlists this year. I hope dearly to get off one of them, and that would solve all of my problems. In the meantime, I've decided to apply to some Master's programs.

I applied to six and have, so far, gotten into three: The MSMS at Univ. South Florida, the MS in Physiology in Cincinnati, and (as this thread would suggest), the MS in Nutrition at Columbia.

My knowledge of their MS in Nutrition, for starters, came directly from the AAMC's list of "academic-record enhancers". And that's supposedly an official source. But the consensus on SDN over the years (which I've been Googling) makes it seem like it is no less than a piece of crap and more worthless than doing anything else with your time.

There are a few positive posts I could find:
(1) http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=5822273&postcount=1/
(2) http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=5196067&postcount=9

But I also found a lot of people saying that ad coms looked unfavorably (not just neutrally, but unfavorably) upon "non-traditional/non-SMP" Master's programs. It seems to me as though unless you're doing a Master's in something totally non-related (like, material and packaging sciences), there would seem to be benefit in broadening your horizons, but maybe I'm not ad com material.

The other thing is that I'm not quite looking for this to boost my record: my stats are "okay": ~3.5 sGPA, ~3.7 cGPA, 30Q MCAT, and I'm studying to retake the MCAT this summer (though decision on that is still pending).

So my question is, although the program is expensive (and that is no doubt a minus instead of a plus), would it be a minus for my record if I decided to go? Here's a link to their planned curriculum for the coming year. The course descriptions seem to indicate that they will undoubtedly tie in to such things as physiology, metabolism, biochemistry, and disease, all of which will be encountered in med school.

I know this was a long post, but does anyone have any thoughts?
 
A traditionla SMP has no value other than proving that you can manage the material in medical school. If you don't get into medical school you have a MS degree that has no value among employers (you have no knowledge, skills and ability acquired in the SMP that employers are looking for).

Some of the other "record enhancer" masters programs, do provide you with knowledge, skills and abilities that are useful to physicians but also in demand if you don't get into medical school.

Due to grade inflation, etc, the non-SMP record enhancers will not help with a poor gpa, and if you do poorly you will be in a deeper hole than you were previously.

A MS will not help a lower than ideal MCAT and if that's what needs improvement, the MS is not the place to go. Rather I'd recommend getting a job that is related to research or clinical services but with enough time to devote to prepping for a retake of the MCAT.
 
Thanks, for your comments LizzyM. I was hoping you'd reply to this thread.

I wouldn't be doing any program, either at USF or Columbia, to boost my "stats" (MCAT/GPA), which (if I am interpreting them correctly) are not really poor (are they, SDN?). I'd be doing these programs just to enhance my experiences over the next forced gap year. The benefit of USF would be to help my MS1 go more smoothly. The benefit of Columbia would be a continuation of my genuine interested in nutrition; we had to write a statement of purpose and I had plenty to say.

BUT I don't want to waste time/money if the ad com point of view is, "That was completely pointless."

If I'm reading your post correctly, it seems to say (and this is highly truncated), "A Master's program can help you in two ways: (1) to get you into med school, (2) to get you further in another career path. If you do poorly in it, or its scope is small, you're out of luck on both counts."

I wish I could find a fine research lab to work in, but I haven't had luck so far. But that reminds me of another possible benefit of a Master's program: Getting into the swing of hard educational work before getting into med school.

What I'd like to know is: Is there anyone out there who took a non-trad and is now a successful med student?
 
AAMC has a list (with a great search system) of post-bacs, SMPs and other MS programs that are record enhancers.
I actually used this list and the Columbia Nutrition program popped up (but strangely, not the other Columbia post-bac). So that's why I thought it would be a good record-enhancer, until I got in and started hearing otherwise!

For anyone interested, this is the list:
http://services.aamc.org/postbac/
 
I'm posting this here instead of in the Postbacc section in the hope that it will be seen by more people (and therefore get the benefit of more knowledge/opinions).

So far I am on four waitlists this year. I hope dearly to get off one of them, and that would solve all of my problems. In the meantime, I've decided to apply to some Master's programs.

I applied to six and have, so far, gotten into three: The MSMS at Univ. South Florida, the MS in Physiology in Cincinnati, and (as this thread would suggest), the MS in Nutrition at Columbia.

My knowledge of their MS in Nutrition, for starters, came directly from the AAMC's list of "academic-record enhancers". And that's supposedly an official source. But the consensus on SDN over the years (which I've been Googling) makes it seem like it is no less than a piece of crap and more worthless than doing anything else with your time.

There are a few positive posts I could find:
(1) http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=5822273&postcount=1/
(2) http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showpost.php?p=5196067&postcount=9

But I also found a lot of people saying that ad coms looked unfavorably (not just neutrally, but unfavorably) upon "non-traditional/non-SMP" Master's programs. It seems to me as though unless you're doing a Master's in something totally non-related (like, material and packaging sciences), there would seem to be benefit in broadening your horizons, but maybe I'm not ad com material.

The other thing is that I'm not quite looking for this to boost my record: my stats are "okay": ~3.5 sGPA, ~3.7 cGPA, 30Q MCAT, and I'm studying to retake the MCAT this summer (though decision on that is still pending).

So my question is, although the program is expensive (and that is no doubt a minus instead of a plus), would it be a minus for my record if I decided to go? Here's a link to their planned curriculum for the coming year. The course descriptions seem to indicate that they will undoubtedly tie in to such things as physiology, metabolism, biochemistry, and disease, all of which will be encountered in med school.

I know this was a long post, but does anyone have any thoughts?

Those really impressive acceptances. Where did you end up going?
 
Top