Legitimate Curiosity--Selection Process for Top Tier Schools?

[FutureSurgical]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I feel as if with Top Tier (even 2nd tier) they have a legitimate screening process that pretty much auto-rejects any applicants without a certain sGPA/MCAT score?

My very good friend living in Canada told me that all 12 or so Med Schools there are so competitive that they have a screening process that looks for a certain GPA. One example he told me is that "University of Toronto SOM screens you out if you don't make an 11 on the verbal section of the MCAT."

Now, I know that that isn't in the US, but nevertheless, does it still apply to schools like Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Yale, etc.? Because lower-tier schools don't screen you out per se (unless you have lower than a 2.0 cGPA), but rather consider other factors such as course load, upward trends in GPA, amount of involvement, family and financial factors, etc. I've looked at the trends of top tier schools and the cGPA always stays above a 3.799 mean cGPA (Johns Hopkins averages at 3.92).

 

[darkjedi]

Different schools do things differently. Generally speaking every application gets at least one go through. The reason GPAs/MCATs is so high is because they can afford to be picky. Those with less than perfect stats can still make the cut, but they will have to be really outstanding somewhere else in their application.

 

[Law2Doc]

I feel as if with Top Tier (even 2nd tier) they have a legitimate screening process that pretty much auto-rejects any applicants without a certain sGPA/MCAT score?

My very good friend living in Canada told me that all 12 or so Med Schools there are so competitive that they have a screening process that looks for a certain GPA. One example he told me is that "University of Toronto SOM screens you out if you don't make an 11 on the verbal section of the MCAT."

Now, I know that that isn't in the US, but nevertheless, does it still apply to schools like Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Stanford, Vanderbilt, Yale, etc.? Because lower-tier schools don't screen you out per se (unless you have lower than a 2.0 cGPA), but rather consider other factors such as course load, upward trends in GPA, amount of involvement, family and financial factors, etc. I've looked at the trends of top tier schools and the cGPA always stays above a 3.799 mean cGPA (Johns Hopkins averages at 3.92).

There is no such thing as a Tier system in med school, that's a College thing. People tend to rank schools based on research rankings as it's thought that research $ is a reasonably good proxy for prestige. However this is imperfect, and there are places which don't do as much research but are in popular geographic areas that also can be very selective. Most US allo schools (even your so called "lower tier") use the screen function to only see applicants with the requisite scores. Where they set that screen function depends on the number of applications they receive and what they need to do to get things down to a manageable level, what their mission is (a state school may look at a wider range for in-staters), etc. But yeah, if you are applying with below a 3.0 or a 25 there are plenty of schools that will never really read your application. A place that receives 10,000 application for 150 spots may tell the computer it only wants to see applicants with at least a 3.5/32 and get the number down to a couple of thousand. And so on. Again this isn't just schools at the tops of the rankings -- all schools that get a lot of applications set screens, they just set them at different thresholds based in the number of applications it is feasible to look at. And all schools will make exceptions (so called "courtesy interviews") now and then.

 

[mimelim]

The hard cut offs for schools is lower than you would think. At the same time, if you have a low GPA or MCAT and nothing in your application screams, "LOOK AT ME", it is pretty easy to toss into the rejection pile.

 

[mrh125]

Vanderbilt is number-obsessed. Their holistic screening involves auto-sending secondaries to all of those with high mcat scores, and so far their screening process has just entailed sending more of the same. as for the other ones, one would hope they're a tad better than that

 

[soccerusa]

I would be careful not to get too down on Vandy just based on the secondary screen. As a competitive institution that does us a favor by screening secondaries to save applicants money, I think it makes perfect sense to auto send secondaries to high stat applicants. Secondaries go to applicants who the school believes have a realistic shot at acceptance. They are just confirming what was said above - high stat applicants are more competitive and if you have lower stats they need to read the rest of your application to see if you have that "wow' factor.

 

[mrh125]

I would be careful not to get too down on Vandy just based on the secondary screen. As a competitive institution that does us a favor by screening secondaries to save applicants money, I think it makes perfect sense to auto send secondaries to high stat applicants. Secondaries go to applicants who the school believes have a realistic shot at acceptance. They are just confirming what was said above - high stat applicants are more competitive and if you have lower stats they need to read the rest of your application to see if you have that "wow' factor.

if they're going to holistically screen they should do it to all applicants, regardless of MCAT scores, otherwise they're losing site of the bigger picture.

 

[GoPelicans]

Vanderbilt is number-obsessed. Their holistic screening involves auto-sending secondaries to all of those with high mcat scores, and so far their screening process has just entailed sending more of the same. as for the other ones, one would hope they're a tad better than that

35 MCAT 3.7 GPA, Vanderbilt was the only top 20 that sent me an II lol

 

[Essee]

Vanderbilt is number-obsessed. Their holistic screening involves auto-sending secondaries to all of those with high mcat scores, and so far their screening process has just entailed sending more of the same. as for the other ones, one would hope they're a tad better than that

35 MCAT 3.7 GPA, Vanderbilt was the only top 20 that sent me an II lol

I on the other hand, had a 38 and 3.7+, and did not pass their secondary screen lol. It's definitely not all numbers based.

 

[thegypsyqueen]

Check out the MSAR. Not every school uses hard cutoffs but it is important to know what they realistically are looking for. Hopkins 10th percentile GPA is a 3.7 for instance. So only 10 percent of their students have a GPA below this and I bet it isn't much below 3.7 and probably is mostly their URM students and students with crazy ECs and super high MCATs.

 

[mrh125]

Check out the MSAR. Not every school uses hard cutoffs but it is important to know what they realistically are looking for. Hopkins 10th percentile GPA is a 3.7 for instance. So only 10 percent of their students have a GPA below this and I bet it isn't much below 3.7 and probably is mostly their URM students and students with crazy ECs and super high MCATs.

because .1 gpa above the national avg is such an informative metric. oh wait it isnt. this admissions process underscores taking the most trivial characteristics and pretending they're meaningful. you shouldn't need to be urm to be considered with a 3.6.

 

[Lamel]

because .1 gpa above the national avg is such an informative metric. oh wait it isnt. this admissions process underscores taking the most trivial characteristics and pretending they're meaningful. you shouldn't need to be urm to be considered with a 3.6.

It's not only URMs though, it's everyone that brings something extra to the table to make up for their relatively low GPA.

Honestly you seem to really hate the fact that medical schools are stats heavy, but you know that MCAT+GPA are the foundation of academic competence right? Of course they are going to be the first things looked at. I think your disappointment with your MCAT scores is manifesting itself as bitterness towards the emphasis placed on academic metrics; I guarantee that you wouldn't be that upset about it if you had a very high MCAT (I suppose that is natural though).

 

[soccerusa]

because .1 gpa above the national avg is such an informative metric. oh wait it isnt. this admissions process underscores taking the most trivial characteristics and pretending they're meaningful. you shouldn't need to be urm to be considered with a 3.6.

I think you should just come to terms with the idea that medical school and medicine in general are highly demanding pursuits that require academic success. You can always quibble away about what is/is not a significant difference between applicants, but it comes down to this: applicants with better scores are on average stronger applicants. Yes there are always people with tough circumstances or cool life stories; however, MCAT/GPA will still be the most important way students are evaluated (especially when screening). We all knew this when we started down the premed road. Some students just perform better then others and are now seeing the reward for their hard work.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

because .1 gpa above the national avg is such an informative metric. oh wait it isnt. this admissions process underscores taking the most trivial characteristics and pretending they're meaningful. you shouldn't need to be urm to be considered with a 3.6.

It's a process where across the country, there are twice as many applicants as there are seats.

It's a process where at an individual institution, especially a prestigious one, there are fifty applicants for every seat.

You're going to be evaluated based on your entire application, including the numbers. The fact that you don't get a secondary and/or interviewed doesn't mean you weren't "considered".

 

[North meets South]

Vanderbilt is number-obsessed. Their holistic screening involves auto-sending secondaries to all of those with high mcat scores, and so far their screening process has just entailed sending more of the same. as for the other ones, one would hope they're a tad better than that

Vanderbilt absolutely does not auto-send secondaries to individuals with a high MCAT and likewise they do not auto-reject anyone with a low MCAT.

Perhaps you should take a few days off from SDN and thinking about medical schools. Your resentment/bitterness won't serve you well in life, regardless of whether or not you're accepted to medical school.

 

[ThisCouldBeYou]

if they're going to holistically screen they should do it to all applicants, regardless of MCAT scores, otherwise they're losing site of the bigger picture.

Some schools are more direct about how they first evaluate applicants. Does Vandy say they are evaluating students holistically? (Don't think so.)

Which one do you prefer: the schools that outrightly take your application fee and lead you on to write a complicated secondary (but don't claim they evaluate applications holistically) or the ones that admit they'll pre-screen and if you fit their criteria, will send you a secondary?

I wish all schools that automatically send out their secondary and take my money are evaluating the application holistically, but I'm certain they don't all do that.

 

[thegypsyqueen]

because .1 gpa above the national avg is such an informative metric. oh wait it isnt. this admissions process underscores taking the most trivial characteristics and pretending they're meaningful. you shouldn't need to be urm to be considered with a 3.6.

You act like 0.1 GPA increase means nothing but the fact is that 3.0 is abysmal for US Allo and 4.0 is literally the maximum. So, with such a narrow window, yeah 0.1 GPA matters. I wouldn't call GPA trivial neither...

 

[soccerusa]

You act like 0.1 GPA increase means nothing but the fact is that 3.0 is abysmal for US Allo and 4.0 is literally the maximum. So, with such a narrow window, yeah 0.1 GPA matters. I wouldn't call GPA trivial neither...

Excellent point!

 

[mrh125]

Vanderbilt absolutely does not auto-send secondaries to individuals with a high MCAT and likewise they do not auto-reject anyone with a low MCAT.

Perhaps you should take a few days off from SDN and thinking about medical schools. Your resentment/bitterness won't serve you well in life, regardless of whether or not you're accepted to medical school.

check the vanderbilt secondary thread for this year yo

 

[mrh125]

You act like 0.1 GPA increase means nothing but the fact is that 3.0 is abysmal for US Allo and 4.0 is literally the maximum. So, with such a narrow window, yeah 0.1 GPA matters. I wouldn't call GPA trivial neither...

i need said gpa was trivial. there's literally nothing that a 3.7 gpa proves that a 3.6 gpa doesnt. it's picking people over other people over complete trivialities and whether or not they know the answer to like 1-2 more jeopardy trivia questions. if they're going to have a selection system they should make it off of something meaningful.

 

[ace12345]

i need said gpa was trivial. there's literally nothing that a 3.7 gpa proves that a 3.6 gpa doesnt. it's picking people over other people over complete trivialities and whether or not they know the answer to like 1-2 more jeopardy trivia questions. if they're going to have a selection system they should make it off of something meaningful.

Here's the thing though: When you have 200 applicants all with a 35 MCAT and 3.6 gpa, and 200 applicants with a 35 MCAT and 3.65 gpa, and 200 applicants with a 35 MCAT and 3.7 gpa, what do you do? They need to decide somehow!

And you may think that a few jeopardy questions don't matter, but actually they do. Why? Because one of those applicant worked really hard to get those jeopardy questions right! Do they deserve to be rewarded for said activity?

Here's the great thing though: You can still get into really, really good schools with 3.6gpa! Top 20 schools. Do you need to strengthen other areas of your application? Absolutely, but it can be done. I promise.

 

[thegypsyqueen]

i need said gpa was trivial. there's literally nothing that a 3.7 gpa proves that a 3.6 gpa doesnt. it's picking people over other people over complete trivialities and whether or not they know the answer to like 1-2 more jeopardy trivia questions. if they're going to have a selection system they should make it off of something meaningful.

It's not 1-2 more jeopardy questions though. That is ridiculous. It means they aced 3 or 4 more CLASSES than the other person. That is huge.

 

[mrh125]

It's not 1-2 more jeopardy questions though. That is ridiculous. It means they aced 3 or 4 more CLASSES than the other person. That is huge.

lmao no. try again getting an A- vs an A isnt even that much of a diff to begin with. talk about forcing meaning out of absolute statistical noise.

Here's the thing though: When you have 200 applicants all with a 35 MCAT and 3.6 gpa, and 200 applicants with a 35 MCAT and 3.65 gpa, and 200 applicants with a 35 MCAT and 3.7 gpa, what do you do? They need to decide somehow!

And you may think that a few jeopardy questions don't matter, but actually they do. Why? Because one of those applicant worked really hard to get those jeopardy questions right! Do they deserve to be rewarded for said activity?

Here's the great thing though: You can still get into really, really good schools with 3.6gpa! Top 20 schools. Do you need to strengthen other areas of your application? Absolutely, but it can be done. I promise.

lol oh damn man i better get strengthening :O XD

 

[thegypsyqueen]

lmao no. try again getting an A- vs an A isnt even that much of a diff to begin with. talk about forcing meaning out of absolute statistical noise.



lol oh damn man i better get strengthening :O XD

Keep telling yourself that but adcoms care. Good luck with your application cycle.

 

[ace12345]

lmao no. try again getting an A- vs an A isnt even that much of a diff to begin with. talk about forcing meaning out of absolute statistical noise.



lol oh damn man i better get strengthening :O XD

Very appropriate response for your activity thus far. Word of advice: Don't act like this in the event you get interviews. I wish you the best.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Bottom line is you don't like the metric because by the metric you don't measure up. You feel you're a special snowflake that medical schools are missing out on.

 

[mysdnhandle]

Top tier schools want people who aren't obsessed with top tier schools. So since you asked this, you're definitely out. Caribbean for you.

 

[mimelim]

It's not 1-2 more jeopardy questions though. That is ridiculous. It means they aced 3 or 4 more CLASSES than the other person. That is huge.

No, it isn't. The difference between a 3.6 and a 3.7 between two given applicants is meaningless. It is the difference between a couple of classes, an A vs. an A- here or there. The only way that you could compare those two applicants would be if they went to the same school and took the exact same classes. Otherwise it is apples and oranges. Nobody has the same course schedule and nobody has the same application and this comparison never comes up.

Do not misinterpret what I wrote. Grades matter. The higher your GPA is, statistically the better you will fare. There is a big difference between a 3.4 and a 3.8. (trust me, I had a 3.4 😉). There is a big difference between a 3.6 and a 4.0. Nobody doesn't make it into medical school because they had a 3.65 instead of a 3.7. People who claim otherwise don't understand the application process. There is a dividing line somewhere in there of what is significant to each adcom. This likely varies a lot. But, saying there is a huge difference between a 3.6 applicant and a 3.7 applicant is just silly and defies logic.

 

[thegypsyqueen]

No, it isn't. The difference between a 3.6 and a 3.7 between two given applicants is meaningless. It is the difference between a couple of classes, an A vs. an A- here or there. The only way that you could compare those two applicants would be if they went to the same school and took the exact same classes. Otherwise it is apples and oranges. Nobody has the same course schedule and nobody has the same application and this comparison never comes up.

Do not misinterpret what I wrote. Grades matter. The higher your GPA is, statistically the better you will fare. There is a big difference between a 3.4 and a 3.8. (trust me, I had a 3.4 😉). There is a big difference between a 3.6 and a 4.0. Nobody doesn't make it into medical school because they had a 3.65 instead of a 3.7. People who claim otherwise don't understand the application process. There is a dividing line somewhere in there of what is significant to each adcom. This likely varies a lot. But, saying there is a huge difference between a 3.6 applicant and a 3.7 applicant is just silly and defies logic.

This argument is ridiculous. I am out of here.

 

[FutureSurgical]

Here's a hypothetical situation. Lets say your an adcom at Vanderbilt with just ONE more seat and TWO more applicants.

Applicant A:

• 4.0 c/sGPA, 37 MCAT (even across the board)
• Member of the premed society and premed honor society
• No research
• ~30 hours of shadowing and ~30 hours of clinical volunteering from the summer between FR and SOPH year
• 3 LOR from professors telling you, in short, "Applicant made an A in the class and asked good questions"
• No other notable volunteer services outside of clinical setting

Applicant B:

• 3.48 cGPA; 3.40 sGPA (upward trend, explained in personal statement), 34 MCAT (even across the board)
• President of the Premed Honor Society at his university, as well as 2 other organizations not related to science
• Took part of research in the Biology Department (medically related)
• 5 LOR (3 science profs, 2 community-related) giving a personal account to how well this applicant excels in the subject/work he has done.
• ~100 hours of volunteering spread over 2 calendar years at a local hospital with ~50 hours of shadowing
• Volunteered at the Humane Society nearby for 2 years off and on

Looking at these two applicants, who would you choose? And be real. I would honestly choose Applicant B.

 

[Lamel]

Here's a hypothetical situation. Lets say your an adcom at Vanderbilt with just ONE more seat and TWO more applicants.

Applicant A:

• 4.0 c/sGPA, 37 MCAT (even across the board)
• Member of the premed society and premed honor society
• No research
• ~30 hours of shadowing and ~30 hours of clinical volunteering from the summer between FR and SOPH year
• 3 LOR from professors telling you, in short, "Applicant made an A in the class and asked good questions"
• No other notable volunteer services outside of clinical setting

Applicant B:

• 3.48 cGPA; 3.40 sGPA (upward trend, explained in personal statement), 34 MCAT (even across the board)
• President of the Premed Honor Society at his university, as well as 2 other organizations not related to science
• Took part of research in the Biology Department (medically related)
• 5 LOR (3 science profs, 2 community-related) giving a personal account to how well this applicant excels in the subject/work he has done.
• ~100 hours of volunteering spread over 2 calendar years at a local hospital with ~50 hours of shadowing
• Volunteered at the Humane Society nearby for 2 years off and on

Looking at these two applicants, who would you choose? And be real. I would honestly choose Applicant B.

Applicant C: The one with A's stats and B's activities.

 

[ems2doc]

Some schools have legit cut-offs, but they're usually pretty low. Maybe under 3.0 or so. All the rest get at least one look through.

 

[Lawpy]

Here's a hypothetical situation. Lets say your an adcom at Vanderbilt with just ONE more seat and TWO more applicants.

Applicant A:

• 4.0 c/sGPA, 37 MCAT (even across the board)
• Member of the premed society and premed honor society
• No research
• ~30 hours of shadowing and ~30 hours of clinical volunteering from the summer between FR and SOPH year
• 3 LOR from professors telling you, in short, "Applicant made an A in the class and asked good questions"
• No other notable volunteer services outside of clinical setting

Applicant B:

• 3.48 cGPA; 3.40 sGPA (upward trend, explained in personal statement), 34 MCAT (even across the board)
• President of the Premed Honor Society at his university, as well as 2 other organizations not related to science
• Took part of research in the Biology Department (medically related)
• 5 LOR (3 science profs, 2 community-related) giving a personal account to how well this applicant excels in the subject/work he has done.
• ~100 hours of volunteering spread over 2 calendar years at a local hospital with ~50 hours of shadowing
• Volunteered at the Humane Society nearby for 2 years off and on

Looking at these two applicants, who would you choose? And be real. I would honestly choose Applicant B.

Frankly i'd choose neither. A is good for stats but hardly did any ECs. B has average stats and average ECs. From a Top 20 perspective, both are rejected and someone better from the waitlist is given the acceptance