Large animal advantage?

[Capella]

Also, just because she says she's going into large animal medicine doesn't mean that the adcoms will believe here. Lots of people sincerely (or not so sincerely) say they're going into LA, but end up not doing it.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[cyrille104]

Hello? NOT EVERYONE is going to become a clinician. Some of us are interested in research, lab diagnostics, etc. I myself came in with basically NO clinical experience - a few weeks at a small clinic only to fulfill the silly requirement.

Just because you don't have the clinical hours does NOT mean you cannot be dedicated to the veterinary field. It is outrageously elitist and incorrect to think so, and it bugs the hell out of me every time someone implies that because us "research folk" or "non-clinical folk" , who aren't interested in/have no experience in the clinic, that we shoudn't have been allowed into vet school - which is basically what you just said.

jesus christ another person who needs to get over himself. If you want to do research go get a ****ing PhD.

 

[nyanko]

jesus christ another person who needs to get over himself. If you want to do research go get a ****ing PhD.

I want to do research, but I also want to end up as faculty at a vet school. That's why I'm applying to a DVM program (though I plan on doing a PhD as well).

However I do think that clinical experience is just as important as research experience (and have a good 4000 hours of it) because you need to understand the breadth of the profession before you decide you're going to go into it.

 

[clawsbeatskin]

jesus christ another person who needs to get over himself. If you want to do research go get a ****ing PhD.

Where would vet med be today without DVM researchers? In my opinion, clinicians (both DVM and MD) are nothing but glorified mechanics. Something's wrong, they fix it. End of story. Researchers identify the mechanisms and associated physiology to create the drugs clinicians use to do their work. Let's see how far a clinician can get without using ANYTHING that wasn't influenced by the work of a DVM researcher.

 

[VAgirl]

jesus christ another person who needs to get over himself. If you want to do research go get a ****ing PhD.

There are a lot of ways that DVMs (rather than people with PhDs alone) are critical in research. I bet chris0333 could speak to this. It would also be nice if you stopped telling people to get over themselves.

 

[cyrille104]

Where would vet med be today without DVM researchers? In my opinion, clinicians (both DVM and MD) are nothing but glorified mechanics. Something's wrong, they fix it. End of story. Researchers identify the mechanisms and associated physiology to create the drugs clinicians use to do their work. Let's see how far a clinician can get without using ANYTHING that wasn't influenced by the work of a DVM researcher.

Maybe, but I think it's the VMD researchers who have really progressed veterinary medicine

Seriously, those people also have PhDs

 

[clawsbeatskin]

As a side note, Cyrille, you used to be helpful when you were a pre vet.

Did your first semester as a vet student make you cranky?

 

[cyrille104]

As a side note, Cyrille, you used to be helpful when you were a pre vet.

Did your first semester as a vet student make you cranky?

What? I was never helpful! Don't accuse me of such a thing.

And yes, I am dead on the inside.

Also, everyone calm down. I know veterinary researchers are important. More than half of my experience was research.

 

[Moonpaw]

Where would vet med be today without DVM researchers? In my opinion, clinicians (both DVM and MD) are nothing but glorified mechanics. Something's wrong, they fix it. End of story. Researchers identify the mechanisms and associated physiology to create the drugs clinicians use to do their work. Let's see how far a clinician can get without using ANYTHING that wasn't influenced by the work of a DVM researcher.

You sound just like my second semester biochem professor. He HATED pre-meds, loved the future grad students, and yet had an insane amount of respect for pre-vets...although that didn't help when I still did badly in his class and he told me that getting into vet school is so hard that no matter how good my stats are, I should have a plan B...not just if I didn't get in this year, but a serious plan B, in case I NEVER got in.

 

[AuburnPreVet]

As a side note, Cyrille, you used to be helpful when you were a pre vet.

Did your first semester as a vet student make you cranky?

I think vet school tends to make people bitchy. It has for me.

 

[I See You]

If you have a sub 3.0 GPA, work hard to improve it and do not listen to these people telling you about how a sub 3.0 gpa can't get you into vet school. Everyone's situation is different and the total application is evaluated not just your gpa. Julie, are you now the "decider"? You alone does not decide who is accepted or not so don't tell people they can't get in with a sub 3.0 gpa. adcoms weigh different things before deciding who should be accepted. And before you think for a second I have a 3.0 gpa. I do not. get a grip.

 

[julieDVM]

If you have a sub 3.0 GPA, work hard to improve it and do not listen to these people telling you about how a sub 3.0 gpa can't get you into vet school. Everyone's situation is different and the total application is evaluated not just your gpa. Julie, are you now the "decider"? You alone does not decide who is accepted or not so don't tell people they can't get in with a sub 3.0 gpa. adcoms weigh different things before deciding who should be accepted. And before you think for a second I have a 3.0 gpa. I do not. get a grip.

As a matter of fact, i do happen to be a "decider."

And guess what? If you happen to have a GPA below a 3.3 you wont be even seeing me in an interview at my school this year, because applications are strong enough that candidates needed at least a 3.3 to score an interview.

I can pretty confidently say that if you've got a GPA below 3.0 then you wont be getting into vet school. And quite frankly, people with GPAs below 3.0 SHOULDN'T be getting into vet school. If you're not intelligent enough to get at least a B+ average, or you didn't work hard enough (and therefore don't deserve to get in) or whatever - then you do not belong in vet school, nor do you belong in a profession that is (despite what some may say) highly academic and very intellectually demanding.

I'm tired of all the GPA coddling that happens. You need to meet the academic benchmark to get into vet school - and that benchmark exists because its very challenging work and veterinarians have a lot of responsibility. Vet school SHOULD be hard to get into, and GPAs are a fantastic way of assessing peoples ability to succeed. They may not be the only indicator of your potential success, but they're a pretty damn good one.

If you dont like it - then too friggin bad. I'm not apologizing for my hard-ass attitude on this subject, nor am i going to apologize for insensitively telling someone who has little chance of gaining admissions to vet school to find an alternate career. Sometimes reality bites... deal with it.

 

[david594]

Julie, you have far more insight into this than anyone else here. So I guess my only real question for you(other than what school your at ) is if graduating with a 3.0 makes any future attempts at vet school a lost cause? Or does going back and doing a second bachelors in animal science or biology with a much stronger GPA(3.5, 3.7, 3.8+?) at least give an applicant a competitive chance?

 

[julieDVM]

Julie, you have far more insight into this than anyone else here. So I guess my only real question for you(other than what school your at ) is if graduating with a 3.0 makes any future attempts at vet school a lost cause? Or does going back and doing a second bachelors in animal science or biology with a much stronger GPA(3.5, 3.7, 3.8+?) at least give an applicant a competitive chance?

Going back and getting a 2nd degree, and excelling at it demonstrates to me as an evaluator that you are committed to getting into vet school. The unfortunate part of the application process is, applicants are screened by their numbers before i even see their folders. The secretaries in the admissions office compile everybody's stats and ranks them from top to bottom. They then pass off all the applications to the adcomm members and we review them. The bottom quarter is automatically dropped, and I usually dont see those files. But your last 45 hours and your pre reqs are important - if they are up there in the 3.5 range, then chances are i'm going to get a look at your file, and if even though your overall GPA may not be that stellar (like 3.2ish), I'm going to see what you've been doing in school since your first degree, and i'll be able to take that into consideration.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

jesus christ another person who needs to get over himself. If you want to do research go get a ****ing PhD.


That's brilliant.....wow. It's impossible to be offended by such an immature remark, so you'll forgive me if I don't take the bait I do plan to get my PhD after I get my DVM, as I do not intend to be an animal/veterinary researcher who knows jack about the very animals they are researching (a trend I find alarmingly common in most "only-PhDs" in veterinary research).

 

[I See You]

The Decider Julie,
I do not give a S>>> if you are an adcom. The point remains schools look at the total applicant not just gpa. I am not a prevet and I am not applying to vet school but I know for a fact that vet schools look at all aspects of an application. You need to get over your self and stop passing your opinions as facts.

 

[dvm'08]

Well if you're not a pre-vet and you're not applying to vet school then id say you have very little, if anything, to do with this conversation

 

[lailanni]

I'm curious too.... what area is Julie from?

Also, in regards to the 'no one with below a 3.0 should get into a vet school', I feel like pointing out the caribbean schools. Their incoming average is around a 3.0. So obviously some incoming students there are below a 3.0.

Now if those same below 3.0 GPA students drop out and don't make it through vet school, I can't say.

But they are admitted, and they (presuming they don't drop out) become vets. And the world still spins. And who knows, they could be fantastic vets.

I just want to say it's possible. They don't have a shot at Julie's school, but they have a shot somewhere else.

You know, one door closes and a window opens and such...

 

[david594]

Julie is right. You don't have a competitive shot anywhere in the USA with a sub 3.0 GPA. It takes serious work to get a GPA up from a 3.0 to be on the radar for any US school.. It appears at least half the schools in the US wont even look at you with a sub 3.0 GPA.

Average acceptance rate across the board for vet school is right around 50%. I bet if they had the breakdowns listed we would see that the average acceptance rate for someone with a sub 3.0 would be well under 5%. Sure, "Anything is possible", but people need to know the reality of the situation.

 

[pressmom]

I agree with Julie. None of you guys have been in vet school. I had a 3.8 coming in and let's say I don't have a 3.8 in vet school. It's harder that you could ever imagine and if you can't keep above a 3.3 in your basic classes, then you probably won't do well in vet school.

I'm not saying don't apply, but also don't expect to get an interview at every school. (And also don't be surprised if you don't get an interview at all.) And if you really want to be a vet and can't get in at an American school, then consider the Caribbean.

 

[bakaduin]

The Decider Julie,
I do not give a S>>> if you are an adcom. The point remains schools look at the total applicant not just gpa. I am not a prevet and I am not applying to vet school but I know for a fact that vet schools look at all aspects of an application. You need to get over your self and stop passing your opinions as facts.

Thats not entirely true. As Julie said, and as it happens at every vet school Ive asked, atleast a quarter of the applications are cut by secretaries/a dean, on GPA/GRE score alone. This is before your personal statement is read, before your explanations. Now if your application makes it to the adcoms of course all aspects of your application are taken into account and flaws in one section can be made up in another. GPA certainly isnt the only indicator of what makes a good vet student but it really is the best schools have to measure possible academic success in vet school.

 

[Hobiecat1642]

I guess it depends on the school, but to what extent do you think that other sections of the application can compensate for flaws such as low GPA/GRE?
Personally, I applied for the first time this year with a really poor GRE Q score. It was below 500, and I just couldn't seem to raise it in time. My V score was 670, my GPA is 3.6 cumulative, 3.5 prereq, and I have a lot of experience, good LORs, etc. However, I think that none of these things will make up for the quantitative, and I really doubt I'll get any interview invites or acceptances this year.

 

[BobDog]

How did this become a PhD bashing thread? Sure you can become a veterinary scientist with a DVM only, but dedicating a significant amount of time to a program that teaches you how to do all aspects of science (i.e. Writing grants, designing experiments, managing the work of technicians etc...) will only enhance your ability to contribute to vet med. The PhD isn't for everyone, but it CERTAINLY isn't a waste of time.

 

[m&ossyducks]

Gosh, JulieDVM is harsh, she is also somewhat realistic... Glad I have not applied to her school though...

 

[chris03333]

jesus christ another person who needs to get over himself.

Hey I resemble that remark!

 

[I See You]

my point is: it is possible to get accepted with a sub 3.0 gpa if you have a strong gre and strong EC's. I am not saying it is easy to get in with a 3.0 or under but it is possible. get over yourself julie. Your school is only one school, there are other schools

 

[julieDVM]

my point is: it is possible to get accepted with a sub 3.0 gpa if you have a strong gre and strong EC's. I am not saying it is easy to get in with a 3.0 or under but it is possible. get over yourself julie. Your school is only one school, there are other schools

I dont need to get over myself. I got into vet school, I got an internship, and i got into a competitive residency. I know what it takes to excel in this field, and I had to work very hard to get where I am today. Hence i have no sympathy for those who fail to meet the criteria.

If you happen to be one of the people that have gotten into vet school in the US with a sub 3.0 GPA then i implore you to post your stats so you can give all the other hopeful sub-3.0 GPAers out there some hope.

Sounds to me like your a bitter vet school reject more than anything else.

 

[JerseyisCutest]

..

 

[I See You]

Let me just say I will start medical school this fall and I have a 3.5 science gpa and a 3.44 overall gpa. I have never applied or had the intent to apply to vet school (i like what you guys do though). My stats are not relevant to this, the point i am making remains.

 

[lailanni]

I can think of reasons, but what is exactly is your's for not telling us what school you are at? I think it would make everything a little more legit.

I agree.

I mean, since you can't trust random things from the internet, she could actually be some big ol grizzly guy living in a trailer, eating a bag of chips and getting his jollies off scaring the 3.0 gpa pre-vets.

But I could also see why she would like some confidentiality. Any hint to an area though?

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Ha, that's funny, because you were "outrageously" offended before by far less malicious comments

I think it was the devolvement into one of the cruder words of profanity in your case. You can't get mad at a swearing two-year old who doesn't know what the words mean.

Have fun with that PhD...why don't you just do a DVM/PhD program and at least do it for free

Not quite sure what you mean by "for free" here. A PhD program by itself will actually pay (not much, but it will, a la resident) but a DVM/PhD will pay certainly less. I did not like the DVM/PhD programs I looked at because of scheduling (i.e. you take 2 yrs as a PhD student, then do 2 as a DVM student, the switch back, etc....) I also took the advice of several DVM/PhD researchers are Wake Forest whom I interned with over the summer, saying that the danger of those program lies in getting everything finished on time since it is an integrated program - if you are unlucky and fall behind, as is common in research, you will end up with neither a DVM OR a PhD.

Anyway, jumping back to topic.

I am sure people with lower GPAs were accepted, but I think the *reason* you got such grades also has a large role to play. If you were overworked, going through a rough time in your life, made some bad decisions and you a) realize it and b) are working to change it, then yes, you would have a shot. But if it because you just don't have the "stuff" to succeed in a highly rigorous academic program....different story.

Because like I said, people don't want to hear it, but grades and GRE scores ARE the main predictors of how you will do academically in vet school - which is 75% of your time. Now, if you are a super duper clinician that every one loves, that's great...but you won't survive your first three years of classes - and adcoms know that.

 

[bakaduin]

I agree.

I mean, since you can't trust random things from the internet, she could actually be some big ol grizzly guy living in a trailer, eating a bag of chips and getting his jollies off scaring the 3.0 gpa pre-vets.

But I could also see why she would like some confidentiality. Any hint to an area though?

Whether Julie is an adcom or not in reality her message is still the same and holds the same amount of truth. Few, if any, vet students get into school with a sub 3 GPA. Here is straight from the AAVMC website on MINIMUM GPA to apply:

Auburn: 3.0
UCDavis: 2.5
Colorado:3.2
Florida:3.0
UGA:3.0
Illinois: 2.75 (But adds "Please be aware if you do not significantly exceed minimum GPA requirements, you will likely NOT be a competitive applicant."
Iowa: 2.5 Resident (3.25 Non Resident)
Kansas State- 2.8 (But adds in bold " This is a very competitive process and meeting minimum requirements does not ensure acceptance into our program"

Thats just a few schools and just the minimum requirements. Really what Julie said isnt new information to any of us. Its a tough, competitive environment out there and GPA is a big part of it. There certainly is a chance that some people get in with around a 3.0 GPA but its not common.

 

[Duke07]

I'm sure this has been hashed out at another point, but just wondering if the quality of the school matters. A 3.0 at one school is prob different from a 3.0 at another. Although, even if you have a 3.0 at Harvard, you would probably have to be pretty amazing in all other aspects to get an interview.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

I'm sure this has been hashed out at another point, but just wondering if the quality of the school matters

It may....but not too much. It is very hard to judge a school's "quality" - it is a lot more about what you put into your work than how your school is judged. The vast majority of those college rankings are completely useless and based on poor data. The "quality" of schooling is much more precise than the institution as a whole. For example, an architecture grad from my undergrad school (technically "second-tier") would be hired before a Harvard architecture grad. Why? Because our Arch program is #1 in the nation. Even though on paper, Harvard "looks" like a better school. And what if you did a rinky-dink major at an Ivy League school? You'd have a good GPA but wouldn't be up to snuff.

I can see the "quality" of an individual's major or department mattering, but not the "quality" of the school itself.

 

[JerseyisCutest]

.

 

[nyanko]

If I remember correctly, she said that her school doesn't even look at people with a gpa below 3.3, or something like that, so I'm guessing we can rule out that she's not at any of those schools?

No, what she said was that those with below a 3.3 were eliminated before the adcom even got to see their files this year because of the competition. There were people below that, they just got lopped off in the first round of eliminations by strict numbers.

 

[VAgirl]

Iowa: 2.5 Resident (3.25 Non Resident)

Where did you see that? On their fact sheet on the AAVMC site, they say:

"The cumulative undergraduate GPA must be at least 2.50, but non-resident applicants with a GPA less than 3.20 are currently not competitive."

That's a different statement to me (not to mention a slightly different GPA). Especially as someone who has at least 3 different GPAs (undergrad, grad, and all courses combined), I read something a little different in that statement.

 

[JerseyisCutest]

..

 

[julieDVM]

I can think of reasons, but what is exactly is your's for not telling us what school you are at? I think it would make everything a little more legit.

Once this application cycle is over, i'd be happy to tell you all. I've given advice to people both publically and via PM, and i do not want to give anybody an unfair advantage over another potential applicant.

That is my major reason... that and this forum is supposed to be anonymous

 

[Hobiecat1642]

lailanni, I love that your default "internet stranger" is "some big ol grizzly guy living in a trailer, eating a bag of chips." That's awesome.

 

[philomycus]

Oh, and I loved your monorail cat by the way, so adorable and funny.

I concur. Monorail cat was the best post in this thread by far.

 

[alliecat44]

If you happen to be one of the people that have gotten into vet school in the US with a sub 3.0 GPA then i implore you to post your stats so you can give all the other hopeful sub-3.0 GPAers out there some hope.

Sounds to me like your a bitter vet school reject more than anything else.

julieDVM,

With all due respect, I understand your points regarding the importance of realism and the unlikelihood of someone with a comparatively low GPA being able to handle the academic rigor of a veterinary program. Really, I do. And I know that many applications leave you shaking your head going, "you MUST be kidding"--even with tremendously high GPAs. (A high GPA, after all, does not alone signify dedication to the profession as has been discussed earlier.) However, this forum is full of dedicated and passionate students, for the most part--and many non-traditionals. I for one resent the implications by you and by others that a low GPA necessarily indicates a lower level of intelligence or ability to excel in a program so rigorous.

I realize my situation is very unusual:

Undergrad GPA: 2.9-3.0 (depending on how it was calculated)
Science GPA: 3.0
GRE: V--720 Q--710 A--6.0
Extenuating personal circumstances surrounding undergrad GPA (homelessness of family at 17 due to bankruptcy and persistent psychological issues affecting academic performance)
Kennel attendant at 15, SA tech at 16, specialty (ICU/ER) tech at 17--Juggling 4 AP courses with 45-hour workweeks, staying hours after my shift ended to talk with interns about such things as ECGs and pleural effusion classification, as well as to observe cases and procedures. Continued to work 80 to 100-hour weeks in ICU over summers, breaks, etc. My supervisors were two boarded intensivists.
Specialty surgery technician with two fellows of surgical oncology for 3 years, having primary emergency anesthetist duty (including running thoracotomy anesthesia by myself + ventilator at 3am, etc). Though I fully admit I'd rather do anesthesia for a right adrenalectomy with concurrent vena cavotomy than scrub in on one.
Head neurology technician/practice management responsibilities for 3 years. More proficient at localizing lesions than some referring vets I know.

Your school would have thrown my application out in the first batch.

Now, I'm a vet student with a 3.7 GPA (though it's early, of course), class president, and was the only student ASKED to work in the ICU by the clinician with the most intimidating/demanding reputation in the entire teaching hospital.

Your school would have (and probably did, at some point) rejected me in the first batch.

I'm not saying I'm every applicant--and I definitely have my weaknesses and learn from my classmates, as they learn from me--but sweeping generalizations do not generally help the individual. And yes, that includes generalizations saying, "oh, you want it badly enough, you'll totally get in." Realism IS necessary, but a snotty attitude is not. "1 in 1000" odds don't really matter if YOU are that 1 in 1000.

One of my favorite stories: a friend of mine was told by a certain vet school that she would "never be a doctor." Last year she graduated salutatorian of her vet school class (at a different school, of course) and is now an intern at CSU, one of the most competitive internship programs in the country. She was a fellow "low-GPA-er."

 

[rosemma]

How about we all do the best we can and hope it's good enough. I think if I had under a 3.0 GPA I would have given it a shot anyway, while keeping in mind my chances are low.

However, just like a 4.0 isn't going to absolutely guarantee acceptance, a 3.0 doesn't absolutely guarantee rejection.

Also, for those against research... be happy we want to do it because it's less competition for you.

Good luck to all! And thanks to Julie.. whether we like her opinion or not, it's just that, an opinion. However, based on more experience than we have.

 

[I See You]

I hate sweeping generalizations as somebody already points out. You can't come here (well you can but it just absurd) telling people they should not be a vet if they have a sub 3 gpa. I am assuming we are all relatively intelligent individuals and we all know a sub 3 gpa makes it more difficult to be accepted but it is still possible. The Bitchy and the "too good and smart" attitude is wrong and does not help. I am saying all this not to defend the slackers but the ones who had to go through very difficult situations.

 

[JerseyisCutest]

..

 

[julieDVM]

Fair enough and I understand. Though I don't know how anonymous you are with your screen name having your real name (I'm assuming?) in it .

Here's another thing that's been bugging me: how do you manage to both be on an active ad comm and do a residency AND actively post on here? I thought someone mentioned you were a surgical resident, and I would imagine your hours aren't any laughing matter, and you'd be on call. I mean, it seems like a lot of the people who are just vet students don't have a lot of time to post on here, and I'm assuming your just as busy if not busier than that.

P.S. Monorail cat still rocks my world. Best post on here by far.

I'm just finishing my research weeks right now - and i'll be back on clinics next week - then my free time goes to zero.

This is my last year on the adcomm as next year i'll be a senior resident with no time whatsoever. The time constraints are sometimes a little overwhelming, but i usually manage.

And no - Julie is an alias, not my first name.

 

[Hollycozza]

I am also shocked (and somewhat appalled) that someone with only 30 hours of experience got in.

How much thought did they put into becoming a vet?

Something to shock all you guys in the US a bit further

One of my classmates had never been into a vet clinic before starting the degree!

Its true!

Very little of the admissions process here is ever based on experience, it is pretty much all marks. My colleague has a lot of experience in wildlife and spent a few years working at a zoo, and thats what he plans to do! But he had never been to a clinic and never had a pet!!!

 

[bclover]

At the risk of drawing out this discussion even further, I wanted to emphasize that it is oh so critical that young people (and, yes, I am qualified to use that term) understand the significance of maintaining solid grades while in college (read that as a minimum GPA of 3.0). Here we are obviously discussing vet school admissions, yes, and the result is that we will go on to even more rigorous classes, so this minimum criteria shouldn't surprise us - whether it is 3.0, 3.3 or whatever. However, I can also tell you from currently working for a Fortune 50 company that when we are interviewing candidates for hire if that person has a GPA less than 3.0 we won't even consider offering them a position - regardless how great they interview or their resume looks. (We had an example of this just this fall with an interviewee.) Reality is harsh, but it is real - so tell your friends!

 

[philomycus]

I didn't mind the part where she said "You'll probably never get in, find a plan B". I didn't mind that at all. That's constructive. But this.....

"Sounds to me like your a bitter vet school reject more than anything else."

...not needed.

Alliecat very nice response. If you ARE the one in the 1,000 that beat the odds, it does matter you you....very good point. And you never know until you try. One nice thing about being a non-trad student.... I'm already doing the plan B; I don't have to find one

 

[VAgirl]

You rule, alliecat!!

(And as if all that wasn't enough, she's the nicest person ever!)