Just my opinion

[juanatas84]

I do not know why people keep saying this school did not give me an invite because my stats are high and I go and pick another school. This is wrong. Schools don't just look for very high stats; it’s not as glamorous to them as to us predents.....Schools look for people they think fit their program.

Schools look for people they think fit their program.

....... If a student with a 23 AA and 3.8 GPA does not fit the mold they will not interview him/ her. It's not that D-School doesn't want to waste their time on students who may go elsewhere. They don't want to waste their time on non-valued students.

I agree D-schools are looking for applicants that have something to bring to the table. And if all you have is a high DAT and High GPA, sorry to say but the D-schools wants more than that. I believe that received an invite because D-schools liked something else in my application after noticing my GPA was sufficient enough and my DAT scores were ok. There are many of applicants that have much higher stats than I do, that did not get an invite. Applicants need to have the whole package which includes, excellent personal statement, excellent LOR's, shadowing/work experience, along with good GPA/pos bacc/Masters program and above average DAT scores. It is ok to be a little low in one of the five areas, just try not to be low in two or more of these five areas.

Concerning the GPA, if you have a very high GPA like ≥ 3.75 and very low DAT scores 16 or 17. That right there makes your GPA very much look inflated. What is even worse in my book is when the applicant has a science major. I believe that if you are a science major and have a 3.5 or above you should be able to score at lease an 18 on the OC, GC, Bio, and TS. I find it hard to believe that people with such high GPA’s scored so low. I went to UC Berkeley as an Integrative Biology Major and had a 2.85 science GPA, but I worked very hard in my classes. I was a little upset at my latest DAT scores because I know that I could have done much better. So applicants make up an excuse that it is a stupid test, or they are bad at test taking. You can retake the DAT after 90 days. It is just most applicants are like me, and wait until the last minute, then add an extra week on to that, then the decided to take their DAT leaving no time to retake if need be.

The DAT helps validate your GPA. That is why you see applicants with low science GPA’s like me get invites, while other applicants with high science GPA sitting in the sideline. It is probably because the applicants with low science GPA’s went to a more rigorous University and scored high on the DAT. As suppose to those students with higher science GPA’s and lower DAT scores may have came from less rigorous University. There are a few instances when an applicant comes from a very rigorous University that did not apply their selves and scored low on the DAT. As well as applicant who did come from a less rigorous University that did apply their selves who scored high on the DAT.

Lastly I truly believe you personality comes out in your writing. That is why it is called a personal statement, because not only do you write about your self but the true person that you are comes to life by the words you write. All any good reader has to do is pay attention to the tone and diction while reading your personal statement. Great readers can tell if a person is either arrogant, humble, optimistic, or pessimistic just by reading your personal statement. Each school is different in what type of applicant they want in their program. Ask your self out of the 2-4 thousand applicants I should be invited because........

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dentista123]

I agree D-schools are looking for applicants that have something to bring to the table. And if all you have is a high DAT and High GPA, sorry to say but the D-schools wants more than that. I believe that received an invite because D-schools liked something else in my application after noticing my GPA was sufficient enough and my DAT scores were ok. There are many of applicants that have much higher stats than I do, that did not get an invite. Applicants need to have the whole package which includes, excellent personal statement, excellent LOR's, shadowing/work experience, along with good GPA/pos bacc/Masters program and above average DAT scores. It is ok to be a little low in one of the five areas, just try not to be low in two or more of these five areas.

Concerning the GPA, if you have a very high GPA like ≥ 3.75 and very low DAT scores 16 or 17. That right there makes your GPA very much look inflated. What is even worse in my book is when the applicant has a science major. I believe that if you are a science major and have a 3.5 or above you should be able to score at lease an 18 on the OC, GC, Bio, and TS. I find it hard to believe that people with such high GPA's scored so low. I went to UC Berkeley as an Integrative Biology Major and had a 2.85 science GPA, but I worked very hard in my classes. I was a little upset at my latest DAT scores because I know that I could have done much better. So applicants make up an excuse that it is a stupid test, or they are bad at test taking. You can retake the DAT after 90 days. It is just most applicants are like me, and wait until the last minute, then add an extra week on to that, then the decided to take their DAT leaving no time to retake if need be.

The DAT helps validate your GPA. That is why you see applicants with low science GPA's like me get invites, while other applicants with high science GPA sitting in the sideline. It is probably because the applicants with low science GPA's went to a more rigorous University and scored high on the DAT. As suppose to those students with higher science GPA's and lower DAT scores may have came from less rigorous University. There are a few instances when an applicant comes from a very rigorous University that did not apply their selves and scored low on the DAT. As well as applicant who did come from a less rigorous University that did apply their selves who scored high on the DAT.

Lastly I truly believe you personality comes out in your writing. That is why it is called a personal statement, because not only do you write about your self but the true person that you are comes to life by the words you write. All any good reader has to do is pay attention to the tone and diction while reading your personal statement. Great readers can tell if a person is either arrogant, humble, optimistic, or pessimistic just by reading your personal statement. Each school is different in what type of applicant they want in their program. Ask your self out of the 2-4 thousand applicants I should be invited because........

2.85 GPA? That's not well rounded, so you made up for your low GPA in other fields including Post bac and extra curriculars?

Also, how many people actually have a 3.75 and a 17AA? Not too many..that's the exception in my opinion. We don't have any facts to prove this. At least non posted as of yet.

Also a 2.85 at a hard university is equivalent to maybe a few points lower at an "easier" or lower tier university. But not an unbelievably significant difference like you are implying. Without facts, both of our statements are purely opinion.

 

[dentista123]

going by your predents, why do you think you have not heard from UCSF and UCLA? Just a question, not attacking you in any way.

 

[Danny289]

Where is that "2.85" GPA you are talking about? I know it was in your undergraduate. you took lots of classes for your postbac and rasied your GPA. Problem solved!

 

[dentista123]

Where is that "2.85" GPA you are talking about?

I made it bold in my first quote from him..look up to my quote from the OP

 

[UofT09]

going by your predents, why do you think you have not heard from UCSF and UCLA? Just a question, not attacking you in any way.

+1


Schools are looking for Stats + Personality, the whole package! you may get an interview from those mediocre schools if you are lacking in some departments, but you can be sure that with a low score or gpa or bad LOR you won't be hearing from Harvard, UCSF, UCLA, UMaryland etc.

I agree with some of OP's statements, for example, DAT is just a confirmation of your abilities. I agree if anyone can pull 3.5+ there shouldn't be a problem of getting over 20. Many of my canadian friends and i all have around 3.3 gpa, yet none of us has gotten below 20AA 20TS... maybe it's just because we come from schools that focus on testing, or maybe we have grade deflation .

 

[dentista123]

+1


Schools are looking for Stats + Personality, the whole package! you may get an interview from those mediocre schools if you are lacking in some departments, but you can be sure that with a low score or gpa or bad LOR you won't be hearing from Harvard, UCSF, UCLA, UMaryland etc.

I agree with some of OP's statements, for example, DAT is just a confirmation of your abilities. I agree if anyone can pull 3.5+ there shouldn't be a problem of getting over 20. Many of my canadian friends and i all have around 3.3 gpa, yet none of us has gotten below 20AA 20TS... maybe it's just because we come from schools that focus on testing, or maybe we have grade deflation .

Naturally my next question is, are there people at your university that get A's? Are your classes curved? At graduation, how many people have a 4.0? Without pure facts, these arguments are very hard to stand by.

 

[FutureDent020]

My quote in the original post is concerning ASDOH and all the commotion about people being rejected with good stats. Just clarifying. I don't have much insight with other schools

 

[dentalmagnet]

In you opinion, what do you think a 3.8+ GPA at a tier 3 university should be at a UC school or Canadian school?

 

[dentalmagnet]

For me, my high GPA didn't scare me into studying my eyes out for the DAT. I went into the DAT with under a month of studying...so, I messed up on math. But other than that, I did pretty well and relied heavily on my GPA and undergraduate degree from a "lower tier" univeristy.

If I had your 2.85 undergrad GPA (from anywhere), NO DOUBT I would have studied 3 months/10 hours a day and probably would have scored 3 points higher. But I didn't feel that it was necessary and I was content with a 20+ AA.

I'm not saying that people with 3.0's do study 3 months strait. But honestly, there is a lot more pressure and I'm sure they are at least tempted to put in double what a 4.0 student does.

 

[skiphotsauce]

For me, my high GPA didn't scare me into studying my eyes out for the DAT. I went into the DAT with under a month of studying...so, I messed up on math. But other than that, I did pretty well and relied heavily on my GPA and undergraduate degree from a "lower tier" univeristy.

If I had your 2.85 undergrad GPA (from anywhere), NO DOUBT I would have studied 3 months/10 hours a day and probably would have scored 3 points higher. But I didn't feel that it was necessary and I was content with a 20+ AA.

I'm not saying that people with 3.0's do study 3 months strait. But honestly, there is a lot more pressure and I'm sure they are at least tempted to put in double what a 4.0 student does.

I have to disagree with this. I think that it is stupid to study less for the DAT just because you have a high GPA. If anything, people with a high GPA are harder workers, and probably will study more for the DAT.

Sure those with lower GPAs need to score higher, but I think it is rare for people to go into the DAT with your mentality. I think that is bad advice for anyone looking to study for the DAT.

 

[dentalmagnet]

I have to disagree with this. I think that it is stupid to study less for the DAT just because you have a high GPA. If anything, people with a high GPA are harder workers, and probably will study more for the DAT.

Sure those with lower GPAs need to score higher, but I think it is rare for people to go into the DAT with your mentality. I think that is bad advice for anyone looking to study for the DAT.

I definitely agree with what you are saying, but I did well in the sciences and I had other things going on at the time. It wasn't a suggestion for future students. But rather, an insight to someone with a high GPA.

I have friends that have 3.0's that are deciding to take an entire year off to study for the MCAT and LSAT. Two of my closest friends just say straight up, I have to do amazing on this or I won't have a chance.

I just wanted to point out the mentality of some people. I'm sorry if this isn't the majority and I definitely don't want to represent an entire group of pre-dental students in one post.

 

[dentalmagnet]

..

 

[ashlander]

I don't get why UC ppl complain about their program. It was YOUR decision to go there right?? BTW, they are not Ivy league schools to my eyes..just another state school to me.
Maybe b/c im not a californian?? Anyways, I don't see ppl from Ivys, or northwestern, washu, umich, uva, emory, standford, mit, uchicago, and all other very good schools complain that much..it seems like ppl from UCs..that have this problem?
I also go to a highly respected univ..and I agree that classes CAN be more difficult.. but to me that's just making excuses.
Any hard schools you go to, ppl DO get As..
Any school you go to you learn the same material. In orgo, you learn orgo. right??
This is my opinion.

 

[FutureDent020]

Hey ashlander, sorry to ask a dumb question, but when you say UC people, do you mean students who attend universities in California, UC Berkeley specifically, or Canadian Schools?

 

[cmills66]

well...this is my opinion. people with high stats want to place more emphasis on numbers in the admissions process while people with less than stellar stats want to place more emphasis on the "whole package". i think both groups are right and emphasis is placed on both.

 

[dentista123]

well...this is my opinion. people with high stats want to place more emphasis on numbers in the admissions process while people with less than stellar stats want to place more emphasis on the "whole package". i think both groups are right and emphasis is placed on both.

agreed. If you have a high GPA, you are going to root for your team. lol

 

[enfuego]

I don't get why UC ppl complain about their program. It was YOUR decision to go there right?? BTW, they are not Ivy league schools to my eyes..just another state school to me.
Maybe b/c im not a californian?? Anyways, I don't see ppl from Ivys, or northwestern, washu, umich, uva, emory, standford, mit, uchicago, and all other very good schools complain that much..it seems like ppl from UCs..that have this problem?

School rankings and reputation do not necessarily correlate with difficulty. There are top-ranked schools with ridiculous grade inflation, and there are lower-ranked schools that are challenging due to lack of inflation (or outright grade deflation). Grading policies aren't usually a factor in rankings.

There are various issues one might have with difficult grading policies. Really, the main issue is when students from those schools apply for jobs and graduate school, and they look mediocre compared to other applicants (since grade inflation is common at most schools).

 

[UofT09]

School rankings and reputation do not necessarily correlate with difficulty. There are top-ranked schools with ridiculous grade inflation, and there are lower-ranked schools that are challenging due to lack of inflation (or outright grade deflation). Grading policies aren't usually a factor in rankings.

There are various issues one might have with difficult grading policies. Really, the main issue is when students from those schools apply for jobs and graduate school, and they look mediocre compared to other applicants (since grade inflation is common at most schools).

Which highly ranked school has grade inflation? There's actually no point of us discussing this, admissions committee got everything figured out.
Good GPA+good DAT+good LOR+good ECs=win! end of story.
If you are lacking in any and is trying to talk your way out, you are in denial(that would include myself of course, trying to justify for my low gpa ha ha ha)

 

[FutureDent020]

Good GPA+good DAT+good LOR+good ECs=win! end of story.

Love it

 

[enfuego]

Which highly ranked school has grade inflation?

Lots of them? You actually got me curious to look for additional data. Average GPAs at Columbia, Dartmouth, Duke, Harvard, and Georgetown were over 3.4, and Stanford and Yale had average GPAs over 3.5 (all since 2006). That's a B+/A- as the average, which is pretty high. What's more relevant is how much average GPAs have changed over time. Every school I checked had some degree of inflation, but some have more than others. For example, between 1974/75 and 2005/06, UC Berkeley went from a 2.99 to a 3.27, but Harvard went from a 3.05 to 3.45. And Berkeley is ranked 21st in the nation by US News for 2010, so it's not a shabby school.
(For the record, I have a decent GPA (over 3.5) so this isn't out of any sort of bitterness, lol.)

Anyways, I agree with you. It's interesting to look at, but it's pointless. There are lots of variables that affect differences in GPA between schools. I think dental schools do consider where you went to undergrad, but it probably doesn't have a big influence. You have to do well regardless. The DAT is important because it's a standardized test, and there's always some schools that will appreciate a high DAT even if the GPA is a little low. Just shoot for the best, and then apply to the right schools.