Low gpa sympathy

[MawbleIM]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Do adcoms have sympathy for low gpa applicants if they have a valid reason or are they viewed just like any other low gpa applicant?

For example:

student A: has a low gpa because they’re first two years they didn’t know what they wanted to do or were enjoying college life and not putting effort into the classroom

Student B: suffered severe trauma; maybe had to work full time; lots of family issues etc.

Are these both viewed the same if they have the same gpa, or do adcoms ever look deeper ?

 

[Blueprint Med School]

Some secondaries will have prompts for you to explain any grades below a B- (give or take). Otherwise, you won't really have a chance to explain yourself unless it's part of your PS (but don't put it in your PS just for the sake of putting it in).

Kevin W, MCAT Tutor
Med School Tutors

 

[MawbleIM]

Having a low GPA with or without a reason doesnt provide any evidence of the ability to succeed in medical school. What really matters is you grade trends and postbacc work if any to prove you can do handle it

That’s a good point, so I guess to maybe further my question or make it more precise, say the two have the same trend.

Like if both students maybe have a 3.2 overall with last 30 ish credits of a 3.9+ in postbacc. Is student B given a little more leniency due to situations (resilience) or are they both viewed the same gpa wise?

This is obviously a hypothetical but I was just curious about this because I’ve seen people who have low gpa who have been through some tough tough stuff, while others who just didn’t care about grades and school and I’m wondering if they are viewed equally because to me they shouldn’t be

 

[Morningnight]

I don't think sympathy is the right word for it. Being able to bounce back from a difficult start of college or work through family struggles can speak to your maturity, adaptability, and resilience. All of those traits seem to be looked upon favorably by admissions.

Academics are still important because admissions need to know that you can handle the rigor of medical school.

 

[KnightDoc]

That’s a good point, so I guess to maybe further my question or make it more precise, say the two have the same trend.

Like if both students maybe have a 3.2 overall with last 30 ish credits of a 3.9+ in postbacc. Is student B given a little more leniency due to situations (resilience) or are they both viewed the same gpa wise?

This is obviously a hypothetical but I was just curious about this because I’ve seen people who have low gpa who have been through some tough tough stuff, while others who just didn’t care about grades and school and I’m wondering if they are viewed equally because to me they shouldn’t be

OTOH, anyone can tell a story, regardless of whether or not it is true. The important thing to remember is that, while a story can be very interesting and add some color to an application, med schools are not charities and are not in the "sympathy" business, so admission is not so much about giving a break to someone with a hard luck story versus collectively selecting from among tens of thousands of highly qualified applicants to produce the best possible set of doctors.

People who have demonstrated resilience and overcome adversity demonstrate traits that are valuable in future physicians. So do people who have demonstrated consistent levels of academic excellence. That's why both groups are successful, albeit sometimes at different tiers of school.

The direct answer to your question is that some schools will choose to focus on the 3.9+ post-bacc, and will look past what happened before. The story is interesting, but probably isn't going to matter nearly as much as simply getting one's act together and going from <3.0 to 3.9+. Other schools will never get past the poor early performance, regardless of the story behind it.

One person being "deserving" because they have a subjectively compelling story while another was just lazy or immature, and finally gained focus and pulled it together, really doesn't enter into it. Nor should it, since anyone could create a story if that became a deciding factor.

 

[Goro]

I don't think sympathy is the right word for it. Being able to bounce back from a difficult start of college or work through family struggles can speak to your maturity, adaptability, and resilience. All of those traits seem to be looked upon favorably by admissions.

Academics are still important because admissions need to know that you can handle the rigor of medical school.

In addition, admissions committees want to see evidence of good choice making. Trying to bulldoze your way through undergraduate when you're not at your best is a sign that one is not making good choices.

In your example of the of the students who both have a 3.2 GPA and then reinvented themselves in a post back, both would be accepted.

 

[MawbleIM]

I don't think sympathy is the right word for it. Being able to bounce back from a difficult start of college or work through family struggles can speak to your maturity, adaptability, and resilience. All of those traits seem to be looked upon favorably by admissions.

Academics are still important because admissions need to know that you can handle the rigor of medical school.

That’s a good point and well said!

 

[MawbleIM]

In addition, admissions committees want to see evidence of good choice making. Trying to bulldoze your way through undergraduate when you're not at your best is a sign that one is not making good choices.

In your example of the of the students who both have a 3.2 GPA and then reinvented themselves in a post back, both would be accepted.

In response to your first paragraph, what if the student addressed that they knew it was a mistake (after the fact) to do something like that and learned from it.

 

[Goro]

In response to your first paragraph, what if the student addressed that they knew it was a mistake (after the fact) to do something like that and learned from it.

It's eady to talk the talk. We want to see people walk the walk.

 

[voxveritatisetlucis]

Extenuating circumstances can offset a blemish on an application but the blemish will usually reduce the volume of interviews/acceptances extended.

A very low GPA is probably akin to an IA/conviction. As somebody who applied with and without a bad one, I had much less success this cycle, needing to apply to 55ish schools to get the same ~15II I got previous cycle only applying to 30ish. Point being, somebody with a blemish maybe needs to apply to more schools due to the fact that a lower percentage will give the application more scrutiny/consideration of circumstances after seeing the low gpa

This all depends on how low you’re talking about and improvement you’ve shown.

 

[Angus Avagadro]

Med schools have the success of their students as a priority. Schools cannot replace a 2nd year student who fails out, or cannot pass boards, because there is no one to transfer into that slot. Secondly, good students who match into good residencies enhance the schools reputation and attracts more good students. So schools are wanting to accept a safe bet on academic achievement most of the time. Reinvention is most certainly a thing, but many schools will screen them out due to low grades or sub par mcat. I believe this is trending upwards for accepting students who have successfully undergone reinvention. Good luck and best wishes!

 

[cincincyreds]

Do adcoms have sympathy for low gpa applicants if they have a valid reason or are they viewed just like any other low gpa applicant?

For example:

student A: has a low gpa because they’re first two years they didn’t know what they wanted to do or were enjoying college life and not putting effort into the classroom

Student B: suffered severe trauma; maybe had to work full time; lots of family issues etc.

Are these both viewed the same if they have the same gpa, or do adcoms ever look deeper ?

Adcoms are ALWAYS looking for a trend UP!!!

 

[MawbleIM]

Adcoms are ALWAYS looking for a trend UP!!!

True! Was just always curious if adcoms looked at those situations differently or the same!!

 

[LizzyM]

Overarching Question: Does this candidate have what it takes to succeed at our school???

Response: Look at that undergraduate GPA! It is terrible!

Rebuttal:

1) Yes, but the applicant was a clarinet major at a conservatory in Ohio at the time and decided on medicine at age 26 after playing in an opera company orchestra for a few years.

2) Yes, but the applicant mentions in the PS, and has a committee letter describing the terrible situation that occurred freshman year when the family home and several family members were lost in a wild fire.

3) Yes, but the applicant describes not being a very serious student until deciding to be pre-med in the second semester of junior year. That seems to be the reason for the post-bac classes. The application shows a strong upward trend. The MCAT is above our average, too.

I've heard/seen variations on all three scenarios and I do believe that we've ended up interviewing (and maybe admitting) applicants from situations such as these.

Non-traditional applicants who had a career before medicine are treated most leniently, adcoms do have great sympathy for people who overcame personal tragedy that affected their college careers, and while least lenient with applicants who started out by squandering their opportunities, there are times when even those applicants can get interviews and offers of admission.

 

[Goro]

Overarching Question: Does this candidate have what it takes to succeed at our school???

Response: Look at that undergraduate GPA! It is terrible!

Rebuttal:

1) Yes, but the applicant was a clarinet major at a conservatory in Ohio at the time and decided on medicine at age 26 after playing in an opera company orchestra for a few years.

2) Yes, but the applicant mentions in the PS, and has a committee letter describing the terrible situation that occurred freshman year when the family home and several family members were lost in a wild fire.

3) Yes, but the applicant describes not being a very serious student until deciding to be pre-med in the second semester of junior year. That seems to be the reason for the post-bac classes. The application shows a strong upward trend. The MCAT is above our average, too.

I've heard/seen variations on all three scenarios and I do believe that we've ended up interviewing (and maybe admitting) applicants from situations such as these.

Non-traditional applicants who had a career before medicine are treated most leniently, adcoms do have great sympathy for people who overcame personal tragedy that affected their college careers, and while least lenient with applicants who started out by squandering their opportunities, there are times when even those applicants can get interviews and offers of admission.

Key point here is that people have reinvent themselves to prove that they can handle med school.

I didn't know that my learned colleague's school rewarded reinvention!

 

[LizzyM]

Key point here is that people have reinvent themselves to prove that they can handle med school.

I didn't know that my learned colleague's school rewarded reinvention!

It depends on the definition of "terrible". (e.g. 3.60 is not "terrible" most places but it is in the rarified air of the T20s).

 

[NegativeMargin]

You have a lot of people more important than me answering this here, but I think I could add some small perspective given my experience: I don't know if I ever received sympathy per say, with a 1.0 GPA from 2010-2011 and a 3.75 from 2018-present despite it being that many years removed it was still a talking point in the majority of my interviews. Many asked upfront and explicitly if they thought I could handle the rigors of medical school given my academic history, and while they were pleased with my answer I could definitely tell it was a chief concern for them.

And of course, nothing I'm saying here is to try and take away from what anyone else has said. It was definitely important for me to "reinvent" myself, as in use that failure and turn it into a positive throughout my entire application, and paint a clear picture of a path forward of consistent academic excellence from that point of failure to the present.

I even had some interviewers try and dig some sort of excuse out of me, whether it be some disadvantage from living most of my life under the poverty level to being Native American, they were great at wording things in a way that would allow me to bury myself if I wasn't persistent in taking ownership of my failures, and continuing to ask slightly different questions with the common pitfalls within them. N=1, but everyone has liked my answers so far, given their decisions.