MCAT and GPA ranges

[voodooMD]

I've recently been reviewing a few MD programs' class profiles. As one would expect the mean MCAT is 30 or higher and GPA is at least 3.6. What I'm curious about is that the range includes low 20's for MCAT and around 2.5 for GPA. I've noticed this stat in top 50 schools, not just the lower tiered schools or DO programs. Am I right to assume that these are most likely scores of URMs? It seems difficult to believe that a Caucasian or Asian with either/or would gain acceptance.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[chibrown01]

Seriously??
I HATE when people like you always blame lower scores on URM...I KNOW at least 20 asian/white people with 22 Mcats, and 2.8 GPA.
Worry about yourself and NO ONE ELSE!

 

[JoshUNCW]

 

[apumic]

lol...OP.... not necessarily, no. they could also be non-trads or trads w/ superior qualifications elsewhere. too many variables...

 

[dweji16]

I guess that makes me a freak of nature since I'm an Asian with a GPA in the 3.0 range...



but I am also a non-trad so I guess it makes sense...

 

[SusGob711]

I've recently been reviewing a few MD programs' class profiles. As one would expect the mean MCAT is 30 or higher and GPA is at least 3.6. What I'm curious about is that the range includes low 20's for MCAT and around 2.5 for GPA. I've noticed this stat in top 50 schools, not just the lower tiered schools or DO programs. Am I right to assume that these are most likely scores of URMs? It seems difficult to believe that a Caucasian or Asian with either/or would gain acceptance.

Remember that people come from a lot of different situations ande experiences. Like another poster mentioned, you may have a non-trad or it could just be a student who had a few rough semesters or didn't have the same pre-med motivation right out of high school but it's not to say these students might not be URMs. I think if anything it should be reassuring. It means adcoms can look at the whole package...they consider where you've been and where you're going and they don't totally discredit you for your mistake. Best of luck to you

 

[voodooMD]

I don't know why the minute race is brought up everyone immediately starts defending a position. I was not attempting to start a debate over affirmative action. In fact, I believe in it deeply. I'm an ORM that believes that society is better off when professions, such as those in medicine, are representative of the entire population. But that's not my point.

My point is that on this forum when someone posts a "what are my chances" thread and claims a sub-par GPA/MCAT the responses are invariably, "you have no chance - retake MCAT, do a post-bac". I understand that all applications are reviewed based on their own merits, but it just seems unlikely that a top 50 school would have allowances for great ECs, LORs, etc. At some point they have to say their acceptance can't be justified. Which led me to believe that the only remaining factor would be race.

It's statistically clear that URM's on avg score less and have lower GPAs than ORMs and Causcasians (http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table19-mcatpgaraceeth09-web.pdf). I'm just stating a truth. So they must account for the lower range.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

you aren't stating a truth, you are stating your assumption - a poor one at that. mistake #1 is grouping both the low mcat and low gpa into a single group.

 

[chelala]

Since you're so obviously internet savvy, why not look up the %s of acceptances for Asian/White applicants on the AAMC facts site?

Wait, what was the point of this thread again?

 

[voodooMD]

you aren't stating a truth, you are stating your assumption - a poor one at that. mistake #1 is grouping both the low mcat and low gpa into a single group.

The lower averages are a statistical truth. My supposition is that they account for the lower range, which I agree can't be entirely possible. I think SusGob had it right...adcoms look at the entire package more than most people assume. If they don't that means that my hypothesis was right. Unless someone has a better explanation.

 

[voodooMD]

Since you're so obviously internet savvy, why not look up the %s of acceptances for Asian/White applicants on the AAMC facts site?

Wait, what was the point of this thread again?

In 2009, 43.9% and 45.7, respectively.

 

[DocMcCoy]

The lower averages are a statistical truth. My supposition is that they account for the lower range, which I agree can't be entirely possible. I think SusGob had it right...adcoms look at the entire package more than most people assume. If they don't that means that my hypothesis was right. Unless someone has a better explanation.

Ding, ding. So why even bring up URM in your original post. Mentioning low stats + URM in the same thread = eventual derail/flame war/thread closure

 

[StormingWynn]

inb4 OP, not cool man, not cool.

 

[docelh]

Consider state schools who are mandated to lower acceptance standards for in-state residents. Or schools that lower standards for some non-trads to increase diversity. Or U-Dub, who has quotas to accept a specific number from lily-white states like Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Alaska, etc.

Host of reasons beyond, but not excluding URM.

This thread is terrible.

 

[voodooMD]

Honestly, I just like to fan the flame. I have no doubt I've done more work on rectifying socioeconomic disparities than any other poster on this thread. And I did it well before I decided to go to med school. Unlike most of you, whose service prob is limited to volunteering at a Big Brothers Big Sisters to fill a hole in your application.

I don't think people are asking enough questions about the extent of race in the application process. I think all of you detractors prevent an honest debate by hiding behind some veil of moral righteousness. You have no idea what you're even defending. In a few years those of you who actually become doctors will be the same people that refuse service to URMs on Medicaid. You all know it. If you think that conducting an analysis on the impact of race on the application process is taboo than I don't think you have the intellectual curiosity to be a successful physician.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

Honestly, I just like to fan the flame. I have no doubt I've done more work on rectifying socioeconomic disparities than any other poster on this thread. And I didn't well before I decided to go to med school. Unlike most of you whose service prob is limited to volunteering at a Big Brothers Big Sisters to fill a hole in your application.

I don't think people are asking enough questions about the extent of race in the application process. I think all of you detractors prevent an honest debate by hiding behind some veil of moral righteousness. You have no idea what you're even defending. In a few years those who actually become doctors will be the same people that refuse service to URMs on Medicaid. You all know it. If you think that have any honest analysis of the impact of race on the application is taboo than I don't think you have the intellectual curiosity to be a successful physician.

aaaaaand thus we come to the unavoidable end of this thread where we conclude you are a pretentious dbag.

 

[jboz]

Ha wow angry much? Reeeelllllaaaaaaaax big fella, I think it was a legit conclusion if you already had the idea that URM's get easier admissions (not saying I agree with anything, just saying it's a good conclusion)

it's not a "legit conclusion" it's an ignorant assumption...

 

[voodooMD]

aaaaaand thus we come to the unavoidable end of this thread where we conclude you are a pretentious dbag.

Such quick wit. I can tell you are a true scholar and a man of tremendous intellect.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

Such quick wit. I can tell you are a true scholar and a man of tremendous intellect.

i try hard, although i obviously fall well short of the vanguard of social justice that you are

 

[slowbutsteady]

 

[voodooMD]

it's not a "legit conclusion" it's an ignorant assumption...

There is data that certainly doesn't refute my conclusion. What's your source? That's what I thought...you have no idea what you're talking about. How about you come back when you stop watching House and start reading something other than Maxim.

 

[slowbutsteady]

Honestly, I just like to fan the flame. I have no doubt I've done more work on rectifying socioeconomic disparities than any other poster on this thread. And I did it well before I decided to go to med school. Unlike most of you, whose service prob is limited to volunteering at a Big Brothers Big Sisters to fill a hole in your application.

I don't think people are asking enough questions about the extent of race in the application process. I think all of you detractors prevent an honest debate by hiding behind some veil of moral righteousness. You have no idea what you're even defending. In a few years those of you who actually become doctors will be the same people that refuse service to URMs on Medicaid. You all know it. If you think that conducting an analysis on the impact of race on the application process is taboo than I don't think you have the intellectual curiosity to be a successful physician.

Yeah, good idea. Let's discuss racial inequality and society's attempts to equalize the playing field.

As we all know, that will go well on an internet forum. It is a haven of intellectual curiosity and there is rarely any vitriol.

And, of course, there aren't any insecure premeds who would rather blame their failures on anyone but themselves.

Play on.

 

[voodooMD]

i try hard, although i obviously fall well short of the vanguard of social justice that you are

Yes, my record is laudable, but I'm sure your experience has resulted in a better perspective and greater understanding of low income minorities. I'm sure you're just having a difficult time articulating that. I can tell you're a real wordsmith.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

Yes, my record is laudable, but I'm sure your experience has resulted in a better perspective and greater understanding of low income minorities. I'm sure you're just having a difficult time articulating that. I can tell you're a real wordsmith.

I can only hope to learn more at the feet of the true master of logic and articulation that you are, as has been aptly demonstrated here. I wonder and tremble at how effortlessly you convert cynics into believers

 

[slowbutsteady]

Yes, my record is laudable, but I'm sure your experience has resulted in a better perspective and greater understanding of low income minorities. I'm sure you're just having a difficult time articulating that. I can tell you're a real wordsmith.

This guy has 15 posts.

Prediction: He will be banned before he has 50.

Can someone set up a poll?

 

[docelh]

voodoo,

When you had solicited feedback on the other forum, I remember quite a few people said you were in decent shape being from Texas. I remember expressing my own incredulous view that Texas seems to really lower the bar for its in-state residents. How is preference for in-state residents different from URMs? Certainly, even you can agree that the highest stats for state schools will be from the OOS'ers.

The bulk of funding for the U.S. medical industry comes from the federal government. Some state universities like Michigan have really no preference for in-staters, but those like Texas apparently are willing to lower the MCAT notch down 10 points. What's the basis for that?

Preferences often come from federal/state mandates. The federal government is the most active in legislating anti-discrimination laws with regards to affirmative action. The federal government is the biggest distributor of money to schools. Either way, that's life.

 

[voodooMD]

voodoo,

When you had solicited feedback on the other forum, I remember quite a few people said you were in decent shape being from Texas. I remember expressing my own incredulous view that Texas seems to really lower the bar for its in-state residents. How is preference for in-state residents different from URMs? Certainly, even you can agree that the highest stats for state schools will be from the OOS'ers.

The bulk of funding for the U.S. medical industry comes from the federal government. Some state universities like Michigan have really no preference for in-staters, but those like Texas apparently are willing to lower the MCAT notch down 10 points. What's the basis for that?

Preferences often come from federal/state mandates. The federal government is the most active in legislating anti-discrimination laws with regards to affirmative action. The federal government is the biggest distributor of money to schools. Either way, that's life.

You are a critical thinker. Congrats, most people on here are obviously not. These other guys just don't get it, and sadly they never will.

 

[voodooMD]

I can only hope to learn more at the feet of the true master of logic and articulation that you are, as has been aptly demonstrated here. I wonder and tremble at how effortlessly you convert cynics into believers

I just got you from throwing mindless, fragment insults into forming complete, well-thought sentences. You actually sound like an adult now. Good for you.

 

[FlowRate]

Good thread.

I have $5 on bleargh.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

I just got you from throwing mindless, fragment insults into forming complete, well-thought sentences. You actually sound like an adult now. Good for you.

Thank you master, I live to serve, though I humbly submit that you prove I've been throwing 'fragment insults.' What global problem will you solve now, since certainly by your glorious actions socioeconomic disparities have now been rectified?

 

[voodooMD]

Thank you master, I live to serve, though I humbly submit that you prove I've been throwing 'fragment insults.' What global problem will you solve now, since certainly by your glorious actions socioeconomic disparities have now been rectified?

Again, you can denigrate me after you've done more than help some kid with his science project. I'm willing to bet you haven't done much with your life other than trying to figure out a way to get your ******* into med school.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

Again, you can denigrate me after you've done more than help some kid with his science project. I'm willing to bet you haven't done much with your life other than trying to figure out a way to get your ******* into med school.

The wordsmith has left us. For shame.

 

[beautifulyou]

wow...

 

[TaylorMDhopeful]

I've recently been reviewing a few MD programs' class profiles. As one would expect the mean MCAT is 30 or higher and GPA is at least 3.6. What I'm curious about is that the range includes low 20's for MCAT and around 2.5 for GPA. I've noticed this stat in top 50 schools, not just the lower tiered schools or DO programs. Am I right to assume that these are most likely scores of URMs? It seems difficult to believe that a Caucasian or Asian with either/or would gain acceptance.

I believe that it is very hard to say that it is "most likely" that these are the scores of URMs. While overall URMs have lower matriculant scores as a group (which in itself shouldn't be looked at as a stat because there are so many confounding variables), there are so few URMs matriculating at each "top 50" school that its very hard to say that they are the ones with the low score without some prior knowledge of their candidacy or some pre-conceived notion about URMs in general. People of all ethnicities, backgrounds and creeds get into medical school with lower stats if they are up to par or beyond in other areas. I would argue that since the overall # of ORMs greatly exceeds URMs it is more likely that it is the ORM who has a low score in the class. There is no data for every accredited medical school in the country and their URM versus ORM averages for accepted students that says that URMs are getting in everywhere with lower grades and scores while others are not. There are many other groups (non-traditionals, state resident requirements, etc) that get into medical school with lower stats.

Edit: Already banned....damn.

 

[Brigade4Radiant]

The lower averages are a statistical truth. My supposition is that they account for the lower range, which I agree can't be entirely possible. I think SusGob had it right...adcoms look at the entire package more than most people assume. If they don't that means that my hypothesis was right. Unless someone has a better explanation.

VoodooMD you are very prejudiced against URMS. I believe you think they are "taking your spots" right?

So what if URMs get in at a higher % with lower stats more ORMs still get in with low stats. If an ORM gets in with low stats is it grade AA???

924 Asains got in a span of 3 years with MCATs equal or below 26

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table25-a-mcatgpagridasian.pdf


4521 White applicants got in a span of 3 years with MCATs of 26 or below

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table25-w-mcatgpagridwhite.pdf


2409 Black applicants got in with MCATs of 26 or below and below in a span of 3 years

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table25-b-mcatgpagridblack.pdf

1653 Hispanic applicants got in with MCATs of 26 or below and in a span of 3 years

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table25-h-mcatgpagridhispnic.pdf
So you are very wrong in assuming that the lower range of scores are due to URM

Since 4062 URMs get in with MCATs of 26 or below it is due to AA but if 5475 ORMs get in with 26s and below it is due to hard work

This reminds me of a famous poetry line by Chappelle "White people, White people...if a white person does well it's success!!! Black people, black people...if a black person does well it's suspect!!!"

Also while the HBCUs have lower stats than average MD schools accoriding to the 2009 MSAR Meharry and Howard had MCAT avgs of 26 and Morehouse had an MCAT avg of 27 and the overall GPA of those is a 3.5. Which means that they are on the same level of upper quartile of D.O schools.

 

[ksmi117]

Closing since the OP was banned as a troll.