Let's bash Johns Hopkins UG

[calvnandhobbs68]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Congratulations nets445 you've succeeded in making many fall for the most obvious troll thread of all time (1st post, 1st thread, Title: Let's bash Johns Hopkins UG).

You could learn a thing or two flatearth.

 

[Midifelder10]

This is not a joking matter, it is rather serious stuff. Not trying to be arrogant but put yourself in top 10 engineering school with avg ACT of 32 and global competition and then take classes with curve of C+ and your medical dream are set back by few years. Perception here is that you were lazy but the truth is far from that. You could barely keep your head above water and end up with 3.1 GPA which no one understand how difficult it was. Even the admissions committee shows no mercy. They think you are not good enough. Very frustrating.

 

[flatearth22]

This is not a joking matter, it is rather serious stuff. Not trying to be arrogant but put yourself in top 10 engineering school with avg ACT of 32 and global competition and then take classes with curve of C+ and your medical dream are set back by few years. Perception here is that you were lazy but the truth is far from that. You could barely keep your head above water and end up with 3.1 GPA which no one understand how difficult it was. Even the admissions committee shows no mercy. They think you are not good enough. Very frustrating.

But kids in the Honors College get 32's on their ACT all the time 🙄

 

[sliceofbread136]

But kids in the Honors College get 32's on their ACT all the time 🙄

2240 sat, honors engineering at UT.

 

[drizzt3117]

But kids in the Honors College get 32's on their ACT all the time 🙄

My freshman year of UG there were like 4 kids who had perfect SAT scores (older form of 1600 pt test when a couple hundred people per year got perfect scores). High test scores were as ubiquitous at top schools as high MCAT scores at Wash U 😉

 

[Midifelder10]

But kids in the Honors College get 32's on their ACT all the time 🙄

Are the curve for honors classes at C+? I dont think so.

 

[Dwan]

2240 sat, honors engineering at UT.

Were you top of the class at UT though or did you have a C+ avg like many of the 2240 SAT people at Hopkins? From my experience in the honors program at a state school, the majority (not all) do very well academically, while at some top schools, this doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Midifelder10]

Bottom line is if 32 ACT class is curved at C+ then with 32 ACT in high school you are graduating with less than 3 GPA. Not fair but so is life.

 

[Ignatius M.D.]

This is not a joking matter, it is rather serious stuff. Not trying to be arrogant but put yourself in top 10 engineering school with avg ACT of 32 and global competition and then take classes with curve of C+ and your medical dream are set back by few years. Perception here is that you were lazy but the truth is far from that. You could barely keep your head above water and end up with 3.1 GPA which no one understand how difficult it was. Even the admissions committee shows no mercy. They think you are not good enough. Very frustrating.

Agreed. Very frustrating.

I can tell you all from personal experience as a transfer, and from second hand accounts of at least a dozen other pre-meds that were in my transfer class, that many-a-4.0 dropped below 3.5 after transferring to a rigorous university for pre-meds (<15% acceptance rate and 50% range for ACT is 33-35 to give you perspective). In fact, I was just talking to my friend today who transferred from ASU, and she remarked that she had a 4.0 there with minimal studying (i.e. only the night before) but a 3.3 here while studying harder. I've heard the same from friends that transferred from UI-UC, Villanova, Syracuse, UT, and many others. No one is saying that all students at top schools are smarter than all students at lower ranked schools. In fact, I have many friends at unranked schools that I consider more intelligent than myself. It's just that the students (at Hopkins for example) are all hard working and very intelligent, while you get more variation at 95% of universities. With no grade inflation, this means plenty of smart kids get mediocre grades (usually only 15-20% allowed in the A/A- range). Admissions is not very forgiving of this either, which is why you encounter such strong opinions on the subject.

 

[Ignatius M.D.]

Congratulations nets445 you've succeeded in making many fall for the most obvious troll thread of all time (1st post, 1st thread, Title: Let's bash Johns Hopkins UG).

You could learn a thing or two flatearth.

. It seems like most people are responding to everyone but the OP. Trololol.

 

[flatearth22]

Agreed. Very frustrating.

I can tell you all from personal experience as a transfer, and from second hand accounts of at least a dozen other pre-meds that were in my transfer class, that many-a-4.0 dropped below 3.5 after transferring to a rigorous university for pre-meds (<15% acceptance rate and 50% range for ACT is 33-35 to give you perspective). In fact, I was just talking to my friend today who transferred from ASU, and she remarked that she had a 4.0 there with minimal studying (i.e. only the night before) but a 3.3 here while studying harder. I've heard the same from friends that transferred from UI-UC, Villanova, Syracuse, UT, and many others. No one is saying that all students at top schools are smarter than all students at lower ranked schools. In fact, I have many friends at unranked schools that I consider more intelligent than myself. It's just that the students (at Hopkins for example) are all hard working and very intelligent, while you get more variation at 95% of universities. With no grade inflation, this means plenty of smart kids get mediocre grades (usually only 15-20% allowed in the A/A- range). Admissions is not very forgiving of this either, which is why you encounter such strong opinions on the subject.

Sadly, self-righteous egalitarians will never buy this. Honors College brah....Honors College

 

[jagibbs07]

C+/B- in most science/premed classes and B in most other classes.

Thats what all universities curve to for their science classes. I don't see how thats grade deflation at all. Means the AVERAGE student is getting a B. Theres nothing to complain about.

 

[nets445]

Thats what all universities curve to for their science classes. I don't see how thats grade deflation at all. Means the AVERAGE student is getting a B. Theres nothing to complain about.

Except when your in a class full of people who don't take school seriously + maybe 5% who do take it seriously (lower schools), it is a lot easier to be "average" than when you're in a class full of people who take it seriously and try extremely hard studying (top schools)

 

[synthmonsterjax]

-

 

[KnuxNole]

But if they earned the A or B, does it really matter?

If 30%-40% for example are able to get an A, for most schools isn't that still an A?

 

[Perth Domer]

My Undergrad (Notre Dame) takes a lot of transfers. Most kids see a pretty big drop off. Some don't fall off as much. But every one of them will tell you it's orders of magnitude harder than State Schools/lower ranked privates. When you start off with kids averaging a 33 on the ACT, top 1-3% of their HS classes, letter winners etc. the competition is harder. On the other hand it makes you better able to handle the stress of med school. Deal with it.

 

[nets445]

But if they earned the A or B, does it really matter?

If 30%-40% for example are able to get an A, for most schools isn't that still an A?

Yes it matters because when you earn the A in a lower school, you earn it via less rigorous competition from your peers whereas if you earn an A in a top school, you earn it via more rigorous competition from your peers.

 

[Lexicon0]

Sadly, self-righteous egalitarians will never buy this. Honors College brah....Honors College

You laugh, but a ton of students at my "honors college" have been accepted to t10 med schools. Individual effort and motivation FAR outweigh undergraduate prestige imo..

 

[synthmonsterjax]

You laugh, but a ton of students at my "honors college" have been accepted to t10 med schools. Individual effort and motivation FAR outweigh undergraduate prestige imo..

So, rank 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 but not top 1 - 5? 😛

 

[Thego2guy]

You laugh, but a ton of students at my "honors college" have been accepted to t10 med schools. Individual effort and motivation FAR outweigh undergraduate prestige imo..

Agree. Also as has been said before, a 3.9 from a no-name will always beat a 3.6 from a top ranked UG.

 

[jagibbs07]

I had a choice between UT and JHU. UT ftw. They basically throw a 4.0 at you.

Bro so did i haha, and throw Georgetown and Rice into that picture. Im here scoring the highest in the class seventy percent of the time and killing all the curves. UT is the bomb for pre med

 

[jagibbs07]

Except when your in a class full of people who don't take school seriously + maybe 5% who do take it seriously (lower schools), it is a lot easier to be "average" than when you're in a class full of people who take it seriously and try extremely hard studying (top schools)

I'm sorry bro but its your own fault for going to JHU. you knew it would be cutthroat didn't you? I had options like that two including rice and georgetown but i chose UT, best decision even breezing by with 4.0 through frosh year

 

[SunsFun]

You laugh, but a ton of students at my "honors college" have been accepted to t10 med schools. Individual effort and motivation FAR outweigh undergraduate prestige imo..

I wouldn't say it out loud here. If they did they must have had fairly decent MCAT which wouldn't make any sense since their weaker competition in class and less effort on prereqs wouldn't prepare them as well. Heads of some people could explode here.

And freaking lol at the idea that top schools don't heavily curve. Not every top school is like JHU or UChicago. Tons of them give out A's just as much as state schools.

 

[SunsFun]

Agreed. Very frustrating.

I can tell you all from personal experience as a transfer, and from second hand accounts of at least a dozen other pre-meds that were in my transfer class, that many-a-4.0 dropped below 3.5 after transferring to a rigorous university for pre-meds (<15% acceptance rate and 50% range for ACT is 33-35 to give you perspective). In fact, I was just talking to my friend today who transferred from ASU, and she remarked that she had a 4.0 there with minimal studying (i.e. only the night before) but a 3.3 here while studying harder. I've heard the same from friends that transferred from UI-UC, Villanova, Syracuse, UT, and many others. No one is saying that all students at top schools are smarter than all students at lower ranked schools. In fact, I have many friends at unranked schools that I consider more intelligent than myself. It's just that the students (at Hopkins for example) are all hard working and very intelligent, while you get more variation at 95% of universities. With no grade inflation, this means plenty of smart kids get mediocre grades (usually only 15-20% allowed in the A/A- range). Admissions is not very forgiving of this either, which is why you encounter such strong opinions on the subject.

This kind of proves my point actually. Top 500 kids at huge state university that enrolls 10,000 students a year are probably just as good on average as 500 kids all whom went to a top.

Now the amount of personal anecdotes and assumptions (including mine) is ridiculous. There is absolutely no data (as much as some people would like to make SAT's for the entire school relevant here) on this and there shouldn't be any because it doesn't matter.

 

[Midifelder10]

Agreed. Very frustrating.

I can tell you all from personal experience as a transfer, and from second hand accounts of at least a dozen other pre-meds that were in my transfer class, that many-a-4.0 dropped below 3.5 after transferring to a rigorous university for pre-meds (<15% acceptance rate and 50% range for ACT is 33-35 to give you perspective). In fact, I was just talking to my friend today who transferred from ASU, and she remarked that she had a 4.0 there with minimal studying (i.e. only the night before) but a 3.3 here while studying harder. I've heard the same from friends that transferred from UI-UC, Villanova, Syracuse, UT, and many others. No one is saying that all students at top schools are smarter than all students at lower ranked schools. In fact, I have many friends at unranked schools that I consider more intelligent than myself. It's just that the students (at Hopkins for example) are all hard working and very intelligent, while you get more variation at 95% of universities. With no grade inflation, this means plenty of smart kids get mediocre grades (usually only 15-20% allowed in the A/A- range). Admissions is not very forgiving of this either, which is why you encounter such strong opinions on the subject.

I could not have put it any better. What makes it so difficult is to get an A you have to be a SD above the median. Easy to say suck up and do it but downright impossible to execute.

 

[Midifelder10]

Top few at good schools are every bit as good as top school kids but the curves are based on the entire class. try beating a 35/36 ACT for an A and you realize life is a beeech.

 

[Midifelder10]

But if they earned the A or B, does it really matter?

If 30%-40% for example are able to get an A, for most schools isn't that still an A?

You do not earn a letter grade A. Never. Highest for Thermo or Fluid Dynamics is 40 and 35/100 is a comfortable A. No one ever gets a 100. Never ever.

 

[Ignatius M.D.]

This kind of proves my point actually. Top 500 kids at huge state university that enrolls 10,000 students a year are probably just as good on average as 500 kids all whom went to a top.

Now the amount of personal anecdotes and assumptions (including mine) is ridiculous. There is absolutely no data (as much as some people would like to make SAT's for the entire school relevant here) on this and there shouldn't be any because it doesn't matter.

Right, so now pretend that those 500 kids at the large uni were pulled out and forced to compete with one another. Assume that less than 20% were able to make As. This means that many of them have less than desirable GPAs does it not? I agree about personal anecdotes and lack of data, but that very lack of data is the only reason why I bother with the anecdotes. I would hope that the account of more than a dozen people would provide rudimentary "proof". It matters because everyone here is trying to achieve something very difficult, something which hinges on numbers unfortunately. This includes MCAT.

To be fair I've noticed that simple preparedness is a big factor. By this I mean that everyone in my general chemistry and calculus classes had taken AP courses in those subjects and passed the tests, so the material was already familiar to them. (you have to get a 5 to test out here)

 

[Midifelder10]

Agree. Also as has been said before, a 3.9 from a no-name will always beat a 3.6 from a top ranked UG.

So true.

 

[Midifelder10]

Just to add fuel to fire I know students from state school with 4.0 GPA not cracking 30 on MCAT. In my school a 4.0 GPA happens once in a decade and 3.5 gets comfortably a 33-36 score on MCAT. GPA is a huge component so my advise is to stay the heck away from JHU's of the world. You will be on receiving end of a conversation with admissions officer telling you your high MCAT somewhat offsets you GPA. Me thinks are you freaking kidding me.

 

[Midifelder10]

Right, so now pretend that those 500 kids at the large uni were pulled out and forced to compete with one another. Assume that less than 20% were able to make As. This means that many of them have less than desirable GPAs does it not? I agree about personal anecdotes and lack of data, but that very lack of data is the only reason why I bother with the anecdotes. I would hope that the account of more than a dozen people would provide rudimentary "proof". It matters because everyone here is trying to achieve something very difficult, something which hinges on numbers unfortunately. This includes MCAT.

To be fair I've noticed that simple preparedness is a big factor. By this I mean that everyone in my general chemistry and calculus classes had taken AP courses in those subjects and passed the tests, so the material was already familiar to them. (you have to get a 5 to test out here)

I had a 4 in AP chemistry. I thought I would get an easy A in Chem I but I was surprised when i ended with a B+. That is shock and awe.

 

[synthmonsterjax]

I had a 4 in AP chemistry. I thought I would get an easy A in Chem I but I was surprised when i ended with a B+. That is shock and awe.

I got a 1 on the AP Chemistry exam; I never took chemistry and thought I could self-study in a few days for the test. Got high A's in gen chem. 😛

 

[sliceofbread136]

I know many people at state schools with a 40+ MCAT. Point is that even though on average a top school will have smarter kids, you should rly judge each person's intelligence individually because some state school kids are simply geniuses.

That being said, state school classes are not anywhere near as challenging as top tier classes. Regularly I'll get bored of studying the material and stop, but it's ok because I know 80% of my class is ******ed and all my classes are curved based on how everyone else did.

 

[drizzt3117]

Agree. Also as has been said before, a 3.9 from a no-name will always beat a 3.6 from a top ranked UG.

Like all things, it just depends. I think I had between a 3.5-3.6 from a top 5, did my pre-reqs at a top postbac and had just over a 3.7 when I applied and got into most of the top 10 schools whereas many people with 3.9s didn't even get interviews. Many students at top schools have a lot going for them.

 

[ppfizenm]

Like all things, it just depends. I think I had between a 3.5-3.6 from a top 5, did my pre-reqs at a top postbac and had just over a 3.7 when I applied and got into most of the top 10 schools whereas many people with 3.9s didn't even get interviews. Many students at top schools have a lot going for them.

They have name recognition. There isn't even any indication that they are capable at what they are supposed to be doing. Not true for some of them I know but others get in purely on connections, get jobs from those connections, and then do the same things for their own connections. It's disappointing that the schools didn't take a hit when the stock market tanked in 2008 given that such a large amount of the people working for the firms are legacy cases from these places.

 

[KnuxNole]

You do not earn a letter grade A. Never. Highest for Thermo or Fluid Dynamics is 40 and 35/100 is a comfortable A. No one ever gets a 100. Never ever.

lol, well that's engineering. I'm sure there are PLENTY of majors where people are getting in the 90s. For "pre-med" purposes in biology/chem majors, where it's NO surprise that people can get a 90%+ in O-chem, physics, bio, chem, etc. Since, if they are SMART, they should get a high percentage, which I'm sure happens in a good amount.

 

[Midifelder10]

lol, well that's engineering. I'm sure there are PLENTY of majors where people are getting in the 90s. For "pre-med" purposes in biology/chem majors, where it's NO surprise that people can get a 90%+ in O-chem, physics, bio, chem, etc. Since, if they are SMART, they should get a high percentage, which I'm sure happens in a good amount.

Unfortunately it does not. If the school has decided only a SD above median gets an A then 90's is just not happening.

 

[drizzt3117]

They have name recognition. There isn't even any indication that they are capable at what they are supposed to be doing. Not true for some of them I know but others get in purely on connections, get jobs from those connections, and then do the same things for their own connections. It's disappointing that the schools didn't take a hit when the stock market tanked in 2008 given that such a large amount of the people working for the firms are legacy cases from these places.

I don't know a lot of people who got into MIT (my undergrad) or Caltech through their connections.

 

[ppfizenm]

I don't know a lot of people who got into MIT (my undergrad) or Caltech through their connections.

Ivies.

 

[KnuxNole]

Unfortunately it does not. If the school has decided only a SD above median gets an A then 90's is just not happening.

But what if the median is in the 70s(which is normal)? Or if only 1SD, maybe an 80? idk

Personally I roll my eyes at uber-competititve people in general, since my motto in my life is to be very chill, since life is short xD

 

[drizzt3117]

Ivies.

Meh, people talk about people getting in with their connections but for the most part the quality of their students is much higher than state schools in my experience as a teacher/tutor in Boston, LA, NYC, etc.

 

[Midifelder10]

I don't know a lot of people who got into MIT (my undergrad) or Caltech through their connections.

Fact - MIT and CALTECH admission process is lot more fair than the Ivy league school. MIt and CALTECH is pretty much cream of the crop Ivys are too but they do get some iffy students also but still all those kids are amazing.

 

[Midifelder10]

But what if the median is in the 70s(which is normal)? Or if only 1SD, maybe an 80? idk

Personally I roll my eyes at uber-competititve people in general, since my motto in my life is to be very chill, since life is short xD

I wont say it is uber competitive but in their minds while screwing the kids over they think they are being fair. I asked that question and their response was what if 1000 students are taking physics in 4 different classes and one prof hands out more A's then others, is that fair to other students? Bell curve is then an equalizer.

 

[ppfizenm]

Meh, people talk about people getting in with their connections but for the most part the quality of their students is much higher than state schools in my experience as a teacher/tutor in Boston, LA, NYC, etc.

I was listening to a wall street guy the other day talk about how it's (wall street and America in general) become a culture of who you know rather than aptitude for the position. I can offer anecdotal evidence on the subject. My friend went to Princeton. 4.0 physics major and worked with computers as well. Was up one of Goldman Sach's internships, the highly paid kind. He lost out after three interviews to someone who's parents knew somebody. I know a bunch of the guys working on wall street too. They have Ivy labels, lots of money to toss around, and not much else behind the scenes.

I agree that you will find a larger percentage of idiots at state schools but that doesn't mean by any stretch they are limited at the upper levels.

 

[ppfizenm]

Fact - MIT and CALTECH admission process is lot more fair than the Ivy league school. MIt and CALTECH is pretty much cream of the crop Ivys are too but they do get some iffy students also but still all those kids are amazing.

Fact. Periods and commas help separate words into thoughts so we can understand what you mean.

 

[synthmonsterjax]

Unfortunately it does not. If the school has decided only a SD above median gets an A then 90's is just not happening.

On a "bell curve," I don't think +1 SD is sufficient for an "A." I think it's closer to +1.4 SD based on z-scores.

 

[circulus vitios]

Yes it matters because when you earn the A in a lower school, you earn it via less rigorous competition from your peers whereas if you earn an A in a top school, you earn it via more rigorous competition from your peers.

It all balances out. Competition is fierce at a top ranking school, but no one forced you to attend a top school. Even if you don't do as well as a state school pre-med, the name of your undergrad institution still has some (small?) pull on med school admissions.

 

[drizzt3117]

I was listening to a wall street guy the other day talk about how it's (wall street and America in general) become a culture of who you know rather than aptitude for the position. I can offer anecdotal evidence on the subject. My friend went to Princeton. 4.0 physics major and worked with computers as well. Was up one of Goldman Sach's internships, the highly paid kind. He lost out after three interviews to someone who's parents knew somebody. I know a bunch of the guys working on wall street too. They have Ivy labels, lots of money to toss around, and not much else behind the scenes.

I agree that you will find a larger percentage of idiots at state schools but that doesn't mean by any stretch they are limited at the upper levels.

Yeah, connections are important but not everything. I used to work in IB so I know how it works; the hiring process is pretty hard and most of the people who are there are extremely qualified, at least at the top firms. People will always find excuses for why they aren't hired/accepted (URMs, nepotism, etc) but in IB and in the corporate world, the bottom line is the bottom line; if you aren't making the company money, you aren't going to be around long. Yes who you know is important but you also need to be able to do the job, at least in IB; there aren't many people around who don't pull their own weight. Are some people who are more qualified not hired? Sure, but that's the way the world works.

 

[ppfizenm]

Yeah, connections are important but not everything. I used to work in IB so I know how it works; the hiring process is pretty hard and most of the people who are there are extremely qualified, at least at the top firms. People will always find excuses for why they aren't hired/accepted (URMs, nepotism, etc) but in IB and in the corporate world, the bottom line is the bottom line; if you aren't making the company money, you aren't going to be around long. Yes who you know is important but you also need to be able to do the job, at least in IB; there aren't many people around who don't pull their own weight. Are some people who are more qualified not hired? Sure, but that's the way the world works.

If you are arguing from your point of view it be hard to say my friend wasn't qualified as his back up plan was a Harvard PhD in physics where he is now.

Regardless, making money and qualified to be there are entirely separate things. If you look at the traders who were making millions for the top companies in mortgage backed securities they were doing little more than selling a product. They had no understanding of what it was they were actually doing.

 

[drizzt3117]

If you are arguing from your point of view it be hard to say my friend wasn't qualified as his back up plan was a Harvard PhD in physics where he is now.

He has no idea what they were looking for in a candidate. This is a common theme when it comes to people not getting what they want.

Regardless, making money and qualified to be there are entirely separate things. If you look at the traders who were making millions for the top companies in mortgage backed securities they were doing little more than selling a product. They had no understanding of what it was they were actually doing.

That's a very simplistic argument; that being said, I would argue that they knew exactly what they were selling. It's the buyers who didn't know that they were buying, or didn't care. Purchasing a small piece of a large agglomeration of high-risk debt is not diversifying your investment.

In any case, the financial crisis can't be summarized in one paragraph. There were a lot of very smart people involved in many aspects of the collapse; but one should keep in mind that said people were on both sides. People don't only make money when the stock market goes up. As many billionaires were made on the short side of the street as fortunes were lost on the long side.