Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
When does that actually happen?
-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
It's Time to Retire Premed
Started by Obscure
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
When does that actually happen?
I like one of my undergrad professor's approaches to grading. It was an adjusted scale type of thing. If exam questions wound up being more difficult than he intended and the whole class tanked an exam, it accounted for that without resorting to curving the class. People were graded on their mastery of the material not in comparison to the performance of their peers.
Basically, in a class of several hundred people, the avg. points earned by the top three students was set to be 100% and then the scale was set from there at your standard 94% A , whatever B, etc.
So if there were 1000 pts available for the semester and the three highest scoreres got 990, 987, 986 then the avg of those three, 987, was set as the 100% mark and 927 was 94% or the bottom of the A's.
It seemed to work well and pretty much everyone was happy with it.
Basically, in a class of several hundred people, the avg. points earned by the top three students was set to be 100% and then the scale was set from there at your standard 94% A , whatever B, etc.
So if there were 1000 pts available for the semester and the three highest scoreres got 990, 987, 986 then the avg of those three, 987, was set as the 100% mark and 927 was 94% or the bottom of the A's.
It seemed to work well and pretty much everyone was happy with it.
Woah, are we from the same UG? Are you from California?
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Nope, far from it.
Read this article earlier, and I agree with certain points. Yes, I think certain courses that are required for entrance into medical school, have not proven themselves to be useful. At least not beyond what I would deem necessary to have a functional knowledge. Also, I think a lot of the change will need to happen at the undergraduate level. I went to a school where if you earned an "A," you got an "A". Your biggest competition was yourself, and it fostered a feeling of unity between my classmates and I. It saddens me when I hear how cutthroat other undergraduate programs are. Really, it's ridiculous, and it needs to change.
I don't know how I would handle medical school if it was as cutthroat as some of these premed programs were.
I don't know how I would handle medical school if it was as cutthroat as some of these premed programs were.
It seems that the strategy described is more common than you would think (I had an undergrad prof who did the same).
Not saying it happens, just saying it should not happen.
My ochem class took the ACS final last semester, and the girl sitting right behind me cried for the final 30 minutes 🙁🙁
Super sad when it happened and I didn't say anything to the TAs because I wanted her to be able to finish, but pretty funny story to tell now that its history 🤣
Also, 60 out of 200 students had to drop the class because they were failing
Most of the premed stress comes from an inner competitive drive. I remember when I was in undergraduate, every science/math class felt brutal even though at some I did well. I can't say about other people but no one in my family even remotely does medicine and the fact that I put so much weight on my shoulders to not only do well but also to try getting into a good program is magnanimous. Some days I get really frustrated at myself and quiet displeased that more than my failures, it is my anxiety that gets the best of me. What anxiety is there for someone who still is in their 20s yet acts like someone having their midlife crisis? Other days, I recall the anxiety only strikes at times when it finally hits me that I don't have much time to prepare for all this and this is the only chance I've got. This I get, sometimes when people say to chill, I view everything through a trivial lens. Medicine is also a pretty dangerous game in it of itself. Overlooking better opinion from my parents, I decided at a naive age to major in a subject that "I thought was preparatory for medical school and would offer me a great job" over a challenging engineering degree that matched more with my strengths. Because we premeds are too proud of ourselves for taking the hard road/crazy, we are essentially (not unless you succeed lol, but still I am sure you must have felt something like this at some point in your life) complete idiots trying to secure a gambling chance. I love the idea of medical school but clearly for those that come from backgrounds unequipped with its rigorous external and internal requirements, putting all the eggs in one basket is not a smart move. That also includes working a job you don't necessarily like at all and assuming your gap year is being spent for a good reason. But clearly, if you want it, you'll most likely risk your formative years to this goal without realizing that it isn't the end of the road.
Last edited:
I was lucky that my class wasn't "curved" except in a way that helped raise grades as one poster said above
not a fan of curving anyway
also, I agree that physicians need *some* background in chemistry & physics, cmon kids, they're the basis of how we understand our shared reality and the human body is a meatbag made of chemicals with a physical fluid pump as its powerhouse
keep in mind, those chemistry and physics courses are meant to make *anyone* taking them competent in those disciplines, including people who are going on to be, gasp, chemists & other basic science occupations
some institutions may be able to offer a "health" track for them but not all
so boo hoo, no doctor/ad com cries for anyone that was made to do "extra" work to get to where we are
the world does not revolve around pre-meds
essentially in order for the pre-meds to obtain the requisite chemistry & physics knowledge needed for their career they are "forced" to take a course that is aimed at providing a one size fits all science background, including that needed by majors
on some ways it's impossible to predict exactly who needs what info when, so that is why education is so broad
when you read a patient's chart or interview them, you're going to be exposed to a lot of extraneous info there too
welcome to life
most of us are/feel overworked at some point, and so I get why it's tempting to fanstasize about all the stuff that could be "cut out" but again, if you look at the necessity of the course including what it includes, plus an acceptance that there's many practical reasons that life has the red tape it does, maybe that makes it easier to stfu
not a fan of curving anyway
also, I agree that physicians need *some* background in chemistry & physics, cmon kids, they're the basis of how we understand our shared reality and the human body is a meatbag made of chemicals with a physical fluid pump as its powerhouse
keep in mind, those chemistry and physics courses are meant to make *anyone* taking them competent in those disciplines, including people who are going on to be, gasp, chemists & other basic science occupations
some institutions may be able to offer a "health" track for them but not all
so boo hoo, no doctor/ad com cries for anyone that was made to do "extra" work to get to where we are
the world does not revolve around pre-meds
essentially in order for the pre-meds to obtain the requisite chemistry & physics knowledge needed for their career they are "forced" to take a course that is aimed at providing a one size fits all science background, including that needed by majors
on some ways it's impossible to predict exactly who needs what info when, so that is why education is so broad
when you read a patient's chart or interview them, you're going to be exposed to a lot of extraneous info there too
welcome to life
most of us are/feel overworked at some point, and so I get why it's tempting to fanstasize about all the stuff that could be "cut out" but again, if you look at the necessity of the course including what it includes, plus an acceptance that there's many practical reasons that life has the red tape it does, maybe that makes it easier to stfu
I would have to agree with some of the previous posters on here. At HYPSM, I was probably one of the less talented students in class. Sometimes it was a real struggle to keep up when my classmates were super academically gifted. Oh, and you know that legend about "grade inflation?" Had a blast with it in humanities, but unfortunately it didn't carry over to the sciences. I didn't end up with a horrible GPA only because I put in an insane amount of hours for all my classes. Didn't really have the time to concentrate on anything else. After I graduated, I took classes at two local state schools to boost GPA + show upward trend. The difference was real. I just studied for exams for a few hours the day before and spent the rest of the time during stuff to boost my clinicals/EC/research. 4.0 so far. If I had used the same study habits at my other school, my GPA woulda definitely tanked.
As for competition, I never experienced cutthroatness whether it be HYPSM or state school. However, what I can say is that at low ranked state school, the stress levels are a lot lower because a) the tests aren't written in a super complicated way to make you question whether the 1000 hours you put in for a certain class really had any effect at all and b) the students, in general, care less about the whole premed thing.
As for competition, I never experienced cutthroatness whether it be HYPSM or state school. However, what I can say is that at low ranked state school, the stress levels are a lot lower because a) the tests aren't written in a super complicated way to make you question whether the 1000 hours you put in for a certain class really had any effect at all and b) the students, in general, care less about the whole premed thing.
Last edited:
I thought it wasn't a serious article and just anticipated punchlines the whole time. The first couple lines were hilarious.
The work/material itself is not difficult. It's the grind and commitment that makes it tough. It's all part of the weeder system.
1. Can you survive the individual general science courses?
2. Can you survive the 2.5 years of all science courses?
3. Can you not only survive but do well in these courses?
4. Can you do well in these courses while still balancing extracurricular activities that show your interest in the field?
5. Can you do well in these courses, balance extracurriculars, AND demonstrate that you have a life/can be a regular person?
#5 is the most difficult. I know many pre-meds from my alma mater that could do up to #4 but when it came to being a social person they were very difficult to make plans with. Maybe they're able to turn off this lack of social aptitude in interviews, maybe not.
Things would be better if we had a more Uk- like grading system. You get a "first" (3.7+), an "upper second" or 2:1 (3.5-3.7), "lower second" or 2:2 (3.3-3.5) etc. It frames grades into reasonable blocks that actually mean something: A student, A-/B+ student, B+ student, etc. One of the worst things premeds do, in my opinion, is hyper focus on granular differences, often between objective metrics like GPA and MCAT and neglect the bigger picture.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Lol I broke every single piece of lab glassware I owned during my lab practical when it fell out of my drawer...didn't exactly shatter my hopes and dreams rofl
And these people tend NOT to get into medical school. We've seen them and rejected them at my school.
I agree with everything except the work/material being not difficult. There were several difficult concepts presented to me in undergrad that required a lot of effort and time to master. Sure, for the most part, course material is low in complexity and high in volume. However, it's a gross exaggeration to say that all the undergrad material was easy.
Everyone's experience differs of course.
Premeds *already* have the freedom to major in whatever they want so long as the basic science courses are covered. I think we can all agree some basic science knowledge is useful, and many schools don't even have strict requirements anymore. I also don't think it's fair to take away from those who are interested in advanced science courses and force them to take classes like Ethical Sociology or Great texts of the Western Tradition, just as it isn't fair for the obverse to be true.
Box checking and competitive grading is a product of the high amount of competition. If you force students to focus more on humanities and social service or whatever, students will box check that as well (they already do). Also, can you imagine an English essay class filled with premeds and graded according to a curve? You want to increase the randomness of the process that's how you do it.
This just reduces the bin size and does nothing about the problem of discrepancies in grading across institutions or grade inflation. If University A inflates its grades, a first from there will be easier to get than from University B, which does not inflate its grades. The problem is still there - you've just reduced the bin size of grades so that the problem becomes easier to hide.
There's actually a lot of stuff from premed that carries over to MS1 and Step 1. Plus premed exists more as a form of quality control than anything else- we want the best, so we make sure they can pass through the frying pan before we toss them in the fire. To call premed the most dehumanizing part of medical training is ridiculous- my courses weren't graded on a curve, and people tended to help each other out and be supportive. It's not like you're directly competing with the person next to you, but a lot of premeds act as if that is the case. Your classmates are a fraction of the tens of thousands of apps and aren't going to appreciably affect your chances in any way.
I actually had a lot of fun in undergrad, nfc what all the whining is about. Of course, I didn't decide on the med route until after most of my grades were back, so I wasn't really feeling the heat- just goes to show you how much perspective changes how you view things. Premeds do it to themselves, it's all in their damn heads.
I actually had a lot of fun in undergrad, nfc what all the whining is about. Of course, I didn't decide on the med route until after most of my grades were back, so I wasn't really feeling the heat- just goes to show you how much perspective changes how you view things. Premeds do it to themselves, it's all in their damn heads.
Last edited:
I dont care about discriminating based on grades. I care about students stressing out about earning all As instead of all As and a couple of Bs instead of doing something more worthwhile with their time
That original article was super sensational in my opinion...
Suddenly the girl next to me dropped her container. Her grade, her future, her hopes depended on that powder falling to her feet. When the container hit the floor, sending white dust across the floor, a nearby classmate pumped his fist and blurted out, “Yes!”
That is a class-A example of over-dramatic, sensational writing. I can't stop laughing at that.
On a real note, yes, pre-med tracks are competitive, yes the core sciences are not the easiest thing in the world. But, so what...?
Suddenly the girl next to me dropped her container. Her grade, her future, her hopes depended on that powder falling to her feet. When the container hit the floor, sending white dust across the floor, a nearby classmate pumped his fist and blurted out, “Yes!”
That is a class-A example of over-dramatic, sensational writing. I can't stop laughing at that.
On a real note, yes, pre-med tracks are competitive, yes the core sciences are not the easiest thing in the world. But, so what...?
I don't think you understand that the 1/2.1/2.2/3 classification used in the British system refers to your degree and not to how grading works. They still hand out percent grades - if your overall grade (analogous to a cumulative GPA here) falls within certain percentile ranges, you get classified into 1/2.2/2.2/3 class. So while it may clump grades together for adcoms and make it harder to distinguish applicants that have similar grade ranges, students will still stress about achieving a certain percentage to get into those degree classifications. So instead of stressing out about earning all A's, it's stressing out about earning 70%+. Given, since there are fewer bins, one has more breathing room, but people who tend to stress about grades also tend to have that kind of personality where they would also stress about achieving a first class degree by achieving the percent marker.
but the breathing room is certainly an upgrade over worrying about getting a 91 (A-) versus a 93 (A)
I just read the article and was struck by the thought that ho could a HMS student, who has served on admissions, NOT see the forest for the trees???
Challenge and being stressed because you want to do better is a good thing! They should definitely stay. I'd just like it if challenging yourself was actually valued.
Harvard is trying to catch up to Yale in the "feel good nonsense" department, if only so that they can prove they crush them at literally everything they do.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The chem lab inventory workers must love you
I didn't go a single lab without breaking something. I'm just clumsy af
Old joke:
Harvard man and Yale man go into the bathroom to pee.
Harvard guy finishes first, goes to sink to wash hands.
Yale guy finishes and goes to leave.
Harvard guy: At Harvard, they taught us to wash our hands after using the bathroom
Yale guy: At Yale, they taught us not to pee on our hands.
Harvard man and Yale man go into the bathroom to pee.
Harvard guy finishes first, goes to sink to wash hands.
Yale guy finishes and goes to leave.
Harvard guy: At Harvard, they taught us to wash our hands after using the bathroom
Yale guy: At Yale, they taught us not to pee on our hands.
Isn't this originally a Winston Churchill joke?
I don't understand how a written article could use so many words to describe absolutely nothing on the topic it's trying to address. I mean it's pretty alarming if the OP's central point is having no pre-requisites for entrance into medical school would actually be more beneficial to the entire application process.
I've heard a 3 school version.
The Harvard guy washes up to his elbows, uses a ton of soap and water, 2 feet of paper towels...and proclaims Harvard taught us to cleanse properly.
The UC Berkeley guy uses a quick splash of water and the tiniest piece of paper to dry and proclaims Berkeley taught us not waste Mother Nature's resources.
The last "insert your favorite college here" guy just walks right out and proclaims "insert school" taught us not to pee on our hands.
Always a cute joke. 🙂
How many Yale students does it take to change a lightbulb?
None--New Haven looks better in the dark.
How many Harvard students does it take to change a lightbulb?
One--he holds the bulb and the world revolves around him.
Yes. Someone needs to beat Nathaniel Morris about the head an neck with a wet noodle.
I shudder every time someone brings up the HuMed (now FlexMed) program at Mt. Sinai (abstract here). Find the full paper and read the fine print. Sure, the students don't take the MCAT, but here is what they had to do to get into the program (emphasis added):
Admission decisions are based on high school and college transcripts, two personal essays, three letters of recommendation, SAT scores (minimum verbal score of 650, or ACT equivalent), and two interviews at Mount Sinai.
They just substituted one standardized exam for another. Traditional Sinai matriculants have an average MCAT of 35. HuMed/FlexMed students aren't sociology majors from Louisiana Tech. They are high performing liberal arts students coming from elite colleges and universities. According to the paper, three quarters of them went through a prematriculation program, they averaged 6 points less on Step 1 than the non-HuMed students, and were twice as likely to fail Step 1 (4% vs. 2%).
This will not extrapolate.
It's possible Im just totally missing something but I guess I'm kind of confused by what you find problematic about the FlexMed program specifically.
By and large this is a program that emphasizes different things than direct MD admission. I wouldnt say it is easier though at all to get in and from what I've seen talking to some I know involved in the program rather it might actually be the opposite. In many ways it just replicates what college admission has become. Everybody has high stats(where stats are largely SAT scores, freshmen transcripts and HS transcripts) so the emphasis is really on those who have distinguished themselves outside of the classroom in the most compelling and unique ways. And the Flex program really does go after those who have done so in rather compelling and unique ways. In other words the standards for ECs are just different than for direct MD admission where you still regardless of how openly we want to admit it a fairly large number of matriculants at top 20 schools have a combination of top notch stats and largely standard ECs that arent distinguishable from the rest of the giant applicant pool or really stand out.
There are some mixed results. The Step 1 results are lower on average and their is a 2% chance increase in failure(their 4% overall failure is still below the national avg). But there is also a greater likelihood HuMed students go on to the underserved areas of medicine(primary care and psychiatry) than non HuMed Mt Sinai students by about 10%.
Really the point of a program like this is a school like Mt Sinai sees value in having matriculants like this with a different set of strengths than your typical matriculants. Typical Sinai matriculants might tend to be older(ie more mature) and have higher academic qualifications. But these from the Hu program have strengths in other ways seen through their involvement in activities outside the classroom and how unique/compelling and impactful they are. In turn the characteristics these activities highlight about such applicants bring a different element to the class clear Sinai sees value in. A common complaint about how admission works currently is there is too much emphasis on stats, too much box checking that occurs and not enough emphasis on characteristics that are most relevant to the best physicians. Programs like these serve as one way to counter this trend and get more people into areas of medicine currently underserved.
Not sure I really see how a slight decline in Step 1 scores is that problematic: if anything like I said you could argue top schools use the MCAT as a bragging tool more than what it was designed for where 34's are shunned upon by them as is currently. Programs like these find applicants who are different than the standard top 20 matriculant with different strengths. Whether or not it is for the better can be argued. But I dont really buy the 6 pt drop in Step 1 scores or other things cited as significant causes for concerns.
Last edited:
It is well known that the FlexMed program has a preference, either explicit or implicit, for students from top universities. It's not your English major from no-name state school getting in. These are students who are already performing at a high level. They figure that hey, if you can get into one of those top schools and do well in English there, you're likely to be able to do well in whichever profession you choose.
I have no problem with the FlexMed program itself, but every year since that damn paper came out someone stands up at a national meeting and tries to use it as evidence for abolishing the MCAT. All that program has shown is that Princeton English majors can survive medical school if you make them go through the prerequisites while keeping a 3.5 GPA. IMHO that's not a huge surprise.
I think the key is "Princeton English majors." The reason why the program caters to the elite universities is because a "Princeton English major" is not equivalent to a "state school English major." Would you feel more comfortable if the authors had qualified their findings with "already high-achieving students" or something like that? Because I think it's definitely an implicit assumption that's rarely made explicit and so people start arguing about it.
My problem with that program is the same problem I have with BS/MD or other similar programs. Top students with great potential are being locked into a contract essentially with a school. That doesn't sound very "liberating" to me. It's a great deal for the schools and a poor deal for its students, cuz it's not like they get to go to Sinai for free or anything.
There are a lot of people out there who are very, very standardized testing. Especially in America, for some reason. I feel like people can't wrap their heads around the idea that a metric can still be useful while being imperfect.
The whole situation comes off as a little disingenuous. Sinai flaunts FlexMed as a means to allow college students to get into medical school "unencumbered by traditional pre-med requirements."
Unencumbered, eh? Well, here are the requirements the program does have:
See? No need to worry about all those pesky pre-med requirements! Major in whatever you like, just make sure you have SAT scores >1350, and take biology, chemistry, physics, two labs, ethics, stats, public health, write a senior thesis, get some in depth exposure to human illness, and become proficient in a foreign language.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Well, it does eliminate Orgo, one semester of physics, and one semester of math while requiring a couple extra classes and a thesis. And no MCAT. I think the requirements reflect the mission of the program to encourage broader understanding of the humanities and liberal arts, as the extra classes are likely required by top private/liberal arts colleges anyway. Consider Columbia's Core Curriculum.
I think the thesis also helps ensure quality control - the reasoning is that if you can write a good thesis on English literature, you are likely to be able to handle the demands of medical school.
So I think they're not conning students because this is in fact different from the "traditional" pre-med requirements. It does cater to a very small set of people because not everyone goes to a top school, but I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.
I would be interested in figuring out how much of pre-med is cutthroat vs perceived cutthroat.
I went to a top "pre-med unfriendly" school and I didn't consider it cutthroat in the slighest (which isn't to say that it wasn't challenging to keep up and stressful or that I even did well). People always studied together and helped each other out- and we were curved just because averages were normally ~50.
I knew plenty of people who had breakdowns, but it was all self-inflicted worrying and "if I get less than an A I can't get into med school" type stuff. So I think no matter what the premed process is they would be breaking down. And then there are those people who would complain about how they have to stay up all night studying in the library when they actually spend hours of their time ordering food, eating, building blanket forts, playing computer games, talking, and complaining about how much they have to do. It's just part of the premed culture that everything is supposed to be difficult, high-pressure, and filled with complaining and competition when it only needs to be like that if you want it to be
I love E&M though. Geometry, integrals, lots of things that made sense to me. Relevant to neuro and cardio and lots of medical technology and diagnostic equipment. I would get rid of kinematics and focus more on fluid dynamics instead. As far as I know, you won't need to know anything about projectiles in medicine unless maybe if you do crime scene work
Edit: oh, actually maybe ortho needs some of the kinematics/mechanics semester of physics for shearing forces and other forces that could cause bone breaks and repairs. So I guess all of physics is good
Last edited:
There must be some brilliant allegory here that we are all missing.
I've come to realize people will often use whatever logic about the "importance of the MCAT" they want to support whatever their pre-determined belief or argument is. That's really what you're citing is: if we dont like the MCAT personally we'll use whatever logic or "evidence" we can to denigrate it's importance. People will bring up those AAMC charts that show low GPA/low MCAT matriculants graduate just fine to justify their anti MCAT stances.
Talk about legacies, URMs/affirmative action etc and that ilk and suddenly when you bring up the average URM matriculant is about 5X more likely to fail Step 1 than the average white/ORM and youll get the responses of "stats arent everything--the MCAT is just one test that isnt really what medicine is like" and "as long as they graduate eventually what's the big deal" line. Meanwhile someone with a 3.3/30 who isnt a military vet, legacy, URM etc will have to address all kinds of questions about "how prepared are they to handle medicine" "stats and the MCAT are the best predictor of success so low stats are too risky" "graduation rates are a very poor indicator of success and we dont want people wholl merely pass but thrive in med school etc". And then youll have top schools shunning 33's and 34's of the world on the MCAT in the name of keeping their stats as high as possible, not because there is any objective evidence to support the idea a 34 vs 37 is some significant difference.
Last edited:
