md-2020's guide to getting into medical school for sub-par STEM students

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

md-2020

The Immaculate Catch
7+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2015
Messages
2,301
Reaction score
3,116
As a student that has struggled to get good grades in STEM/BCPM courses since high school, I thought I'd share the tips and pointers that I've picked up through this process to maximize acceptance chance. I know a ton of other people get sunk by the sGPA or BCPM electives that screw over their grades, so this is definitely not something only I dealt with.

Some tips might be toeing the ethics line, but hey, you gotta do what you gotta do, right?

Step 0: Before College
1. Take as many APs/IBs as possible, so you can test the **** out of those cut-throat intro bio/chem/phys lectures. Free up space for electives (that I'll explain later). Getting a 4/5 on an AP exam is light years easier than even a B in a 500 person first year lecture.

2. Know what school you're signing up for. Life's a bitch, and truth is grade inflation/deflation can make or break an app. Obviously you have to consider other factors when choosing between UG schools, but make sure you do thorough research on this before settling on a college. In example, I'd choose Brown over MIT for pre-med any day of the week (disclaimer: Brown is probably the most chill UG experience for future docs--school wide P/F, no rank, no official GPA, no grad requirements, #1 grade inflation in America, extreme preference for its' own UGs @ Alpert Med, decent prestige, tons of EC opportunities, good Fin aid--out there, so definitely apply there and roll the dice).

3. Aim high. You never know what school you might get into or how much financial aid you could get (most Ivys & peers are very good about this) without trying. Despite the vehement denial of some people on these boards, where you go to school matters. And top private schools tend to inflate, once again. Grade inflation is your friend; who cares if 90% of the people in your class got an A, as long as you do too, game over baby.

Step 1s: Early on in your UG career
1. Don't major in BME/ChemE/Bio/[insert any flashy life science field here]. If you're NOT GOOD at something, don't study a major that'll require you to study it a ton. Choose something like Psychology, Human Development, English, etc--whatever you're good and and something you can 3.8+ in. Do research on what's "easier" at your school. In the grand scheme of things, med schools don't really care what you studied.

2. For hard sciences, take only the mandatory pre-reqs. Regardless of what your misinformed advisers may tell you, these are limited to: 1 year of bio (and lab). 1 year of gen chem (and lab). 1 year of physics (and lab). 1 year of orgo (some only do 1 semester, I'd recommend 1 year for maximum options) and lab. 1 semester of biochem (preferably over the summer, it's easier that way). Make sure you take the easiest course track, for non-majors (ie. non calculus phys, non-accelerated chem, etc etc). Do not get greedy and forget why you are reading this: YOU SUCK AT SCIENCES. Remember: in this case, less is more.

3. Research and load up on "fluff sciences," the courses at every school that are condescendingly easy yet are still BCPM. Ecology, astronomy, evolution, botany come to mind. Look at 300 and 400 level electives with funny or cool titles: often, these are classes that profs teach for their own enjoyment and personal interest. This means grading is super chill. Look for electives geared towards freshmen, they're generally easy AF. This can boost your sGPA significantly, and is worth whatever potential scrutiny there may be.

4. Be friends with upperclassmen. They'll give you the low down on where the cruise control sections are. Check your school/online for potential ratings systems (like Northwestern's CTECs, or websites like RMP.com).

5. Know freshman forgiveness/allowance policies. Some schools have special rules for new students that allows for complete grade removal. When in doubt, ask your UG studies office: no need to keep that C on the transcript if it can be cut.

6. Fully utilize add/drop period. Not sure about a course? Sit in for a couple weeks, and ask youself the tough q's: Can I do well here? Do not be afraid to drop it if the answer is not a firm "yes."

These should hopefully boost the numerical part of the problem (sGPA) to an acceptable level.

Step 2s: Outside of the classroom
1. Do research. To continue compensating for below avg pre-req performance, do kick-ass research (which isn't that hard) and get a pub/poster/conference + awesome EC science LOR.

2. Rack up clinical/nonclinical volunteering, clubs, sports, whatever you're interested in. You're not a STEM savant, so show the adcom who you are. Get involved in as many things as possible, but make sure your grades don't slip.

Step 3: MCAT
1. Study for as long as you can, as hard as you can, and as often as you can. Like it or not, the MCAT is not an in-depth test of complex scientific subjects. Like the SAT/ACT it's a rudimentary covering of lessons that are really basic in nature. It's much more about testing strategy than content mastery. Enough practice will make perfect. That means just overload the practice problems until you can do it in your sleep.

Step 4: Playing Games with AMCAS
1. Here comes the fun part. AMCAS will verify your course listings (what you initially classify each course as) against your transcript and make edits as necessary. The truth: they're not as stickler about the boundaries of BCPM as SDN is. If it is even remotely science-y, put it down as a Bio/Chem/Phys/Math/Astronomy or whatever, and put the onus on them to change it if necessary. Chances are they won't, as long as it's reasonable. If you have a syllabus on hand, ask them to reclassify any courses that they do change in round 1, and submit the syllabi as proof of science material covered.

Note: you should submit the first day to allow time for potentially delayed verification during this process and still be an "early applicant" in the cycle as a whole.
I got courses that blatantly weren't even science counted as BCPM.


So as a student that is sub-par in sciences, the things you need to worry about are: 1. sGPA, 2. MCAT, and 3. ECs. Do the bare minimum in areas you won't excel in, and max out other areas that most other pre-meds overlook. You'll get in.

My "true" sGPA is atrocious by MD school standards (low enough for Carib lol), and yet these strategies have immensely boosted my chances, and led to an already very successful cycle. Some of the above things I didn't realize until later, so implement them early and you will be golden.

Peace out.
 
Last edited:
Good work.

Step 0: Before College
1. Take as many APs/IBs as possible, so you can test the **** out of those cut-throat intro bio/chem/phys lectures. Free up space for electives (that I'll explain later).

Yeah I really have to stress this. Usually, you will hear cynics and skeptical adcoms dismissing AP/IBs to be meaningless for various reasons, as follows:

1. AP/IBs don't resemble college-level material (which is utterly false)
2. Many schools don't accept AP credit

#2 is a very exaggerated issue because essentially all medical schools are willing to accept AP/IB credits provided you have taken upper level courses in the prereqs. Sadly, we have very few stubborn schools that somehow believe in #1 and will not accept any AP/IB credits even despite taking upper level courses. Personally, I find this policy to be grossly irrational, but can't change the school policy. The best way to deal with this is to always consult the MSAR and maybe the school websites.

But I strongly agree with your point that testing out of those irritating intro level courses is a very significant boon. Rest of your advice is good, but this requires specific additional focus.
 
Calling it now that all of SDN rips me a new one for that. Seriously though dude thanks for posting this, awesome advice!
 
I think we can agree the importance of GPA by itself is heavily exaggerated. Context matters. MCAT and ECs matters. Undergrad name and rigor matter. It's for these reasons that someone with a sub-3.5 GPA but with strong MCAT and ECs will have significant success in the MD cycle over someone with a 4.0 GPA, poor MCAT and bland ECs.
 
This is amazing. Id say one more thing to consider:

Weave every aspect of your app together if possible. What I believe has worked well for me so far is having a very cohesive story that explains almost every activity I did. PS tells a story which is reflected in the clinical exposure I got, and research is relevant to the clinical stuff and PS. Volunteering and leadership are related and again there is a link to clinicals. Classes taken are in areas that complement some other aspect of your app. If you can articulate all of these thinks, it works super well.

Thank you for posting this, it seems like you really put a ton of time into this and I'm sure it'll help a lot of people. It should be stuck somewhere
 
@md-2020 's strategy in 6 words : "Have literally everything else except GPA"

I have a similar strategy, except less of everything and I'm not a 2-sport Division 1 athlete. Same GPA though
 
uhhh no offense dude but I just checked your MDapps and I hardly think you have the credentials to be giving advice. Try again when you hit a 528 MCAT
Calling it now that all of SDN rips me a new one for that. Seriously though dude thanks for posting this, awesome advice!
If you make a joke like that you need the cojones to not explain that it was a joke right after.
 
You forgot to mention back tests from upperclassmen lol
I've found this often to be counterproductive, because you end focusing on memorizing test material from last year, which professors with half a work ethic will change. To each his own though, definitely something that could be helpful.

You also run the risk of expulsion, which I'm not a fan of. Small risk granted, but stranger things have happened.

@md-2020 's strategy in 6 words : "Have literally everything else except GPA"
"Shortcut your way to a decent GPA and then try to have lots of bright and shiny EC distractions."
 
I've found this often to be counterproductive, because you end focusing on memorizing test material from last year, which professors with half a work ethic will change. To each his own though, definitely something that could be helpful.

You also run the risk of expulsion, which I'm not a fan of. Small risk granted, but stranger things have happened.
lol yeah
I had some friends who used a back test on a exam and got caught. Luckily, they got away with it because the professor would have to admit to using almost the same test from the year before to the university.
 
"Certified concert pianist" 😛

Other than that killer stuff on your mdapps. Also great post too! It all seems true from my anecdotal evidence.
 
1. AP/IBs don't resemble college-level material (which is utterly false)
Agreed. The only thing it doesn't emulate from college is the 2.5 GPA class curve. If AP's + more electives isn't enough I don't know what is.
 
1. AP/IBs don't resemble college-level material (which is utterly false)

So true. My AP Physics course in high school was way more difficult than the joke that was intro-level physics in college (which is all that is required for pre-meds).
 
Re: old exams from upperclassmen

Some professors are cool with it, while others are not. And I'm pretty sure the latter group is in the minority. So when in doubt, just ask.
 
@md-2020 's strategy in 6 words : "Have literally everything else except GPA"

I have a similar strategy, except less of everything and I'm not a 2-sport Division 1 athlete. Same GPA though

@md-2020 With respect, the middling GPA strategy only works if you're from a top school. If you're from a directional state school and you try that approach, you're ******
 
Last edited:
@md-2020 With respect, the middling GPA strategy only works if you're from a top school. If you're from a directional state school and you try that approach, you're ******
I disagree, if you can get it to 3.5+ no matter where you're from you're competitive. Even on SDN (the birthplace of high standards and neuroticism) no one rips on a 3.5 sGPA.
 
lol, those poor newbs with 3.5 sGPA
that's equivalent to bronze 5? applications go straight to the shredder, auto-reject
I disagree, if you can get it to 3.5+ no matter where you're from you're competitive. Even on SDN (the birthplace of high standards and neuroticism) no one rips on a 3.5 sGPA.
 
I disagree, if you can get it to 3.5+ no matter where you're from you're competitive. Even on SDN (the birthplace of high standards and neuroticism) no one rips on a 3.5 sGPA.

I think that if you have a 3.5 from anywhere, but that's your weakest link (stellar ECs, stellar MCAT, stellar letters), then you're going to be fine. It's when you have a 3.5 and are lacking elsewhere that you're in trouble. 3.5 is on the low end of acceptable for GPA, and your sGPA better not be lower than that too.

As per Table 24 (https://www.aamc.org/download/321508/data/factstable24.pdf), you have a 36.4% chance of acceptance with a 3.4-3.6. With a 31-33 MCAT, you have a 48% chance of acceptance. With a 33-35, you have a 62% chance. So, you're only really at better than even odds with a 32+ on your MCAT if you have a 3.5, and those still aren't fantastic odds.
 
Wedge, I'm indeed referring to a 3.5 sGPA, not overall GPA. I'd expect cGPA to be higher, since this is a guide for people weak specifically in BCPM (and hopefully stronger elsewhere!).
 
uhhh no offense dude but I just checked your MDapps and I hardly think you have the credentials to be giving advice. Try again when you hit a 528 MCAT

I was going to say something along the lines of this. I think its safe to say that if you got an II from Harvard, that you are not "struggling" with much of anything academically related.
 
Wedge, I'm indeed referring to a 3.5 sGPA, not overall GPA. I'd expect cGPA to be higher, since this is a guide for people weak specifically in BCPM (and hopefully stronger elsewhere!).

Sure thing, which then assumes that you're sitting on something like 3.7/3.5 which definitely puts you in better shape than 3.5/3.5.
 
@md-2020 if you always struggled in science courses, how did you know you wanted to pursue medicine, and why did it appeal to you? It seems a bit counterintuitive to me, it was my strength in science and fascination with physiology that drew me to it. Did you just love the material in spite of not finding it easy, or is your drive unrelated to science interest?

I'm a bit surprised that people who would want to avoid taking any extra science courses would then want to subject themselves to an extremely rigorous study of that material.
 
I disagree, if you can get it to 3.5+ no matter where you're from you're competitive. Even on SDN (the birthplace of high standards and neuroticism) no one rips on a 3.5 sGPA.

I have to strongly disagree here. I go to a state school that most people have never heard of in Texas. Heck, due to the name change of my school due to a merger, pretty much no one in Texas knows of us. We get made fun of by the bigger schools in Texas (UT Austin and TAMU) for not being a "real" school, and flawed perceptions of our reputation make for a good punchline in living rooms across our state.

For me, a 3.5 would have killed my Top 20 chances even though I have a strong MCAT to go along with it. There is no way I would have been able to do as well as I am currently doing in the cycle if my GPA was anything less than a 3.9+. Your experience is different since you come from (presumably) an Ivy, and to quote @DokterMom, who is an ADCOM in Texas, she and her fellow colleagues go gaga over someone from Princeton just based on the undergrad label. Not that I'm criticizing her - I'm just calling it as it is. Heck, an ADCOM I recently interviewed with told me to my face during the interview that he equated Yale undergrad with a "strong applicant" :eyebrow:

And to give you an idea of what our state schools expect of us - let alone bigger schools - the median GPA of accepted students at Texan med schools hovers around 3.8-3.9. Keep in mind that the population of accepted kids is largely made up of kids from our own state schools.

I really wish @gettheleadout, who went to a state school, could stop by this thread
 
I have to strongly disagree here. I go to a state school that most people have never heard of in Texas. Heck, due to the name change of my school due to a merger, pretty much no one in Texas knows of us. We get made fun of by the bigger schools in Texas (UT Austin and TAMU) for not being a "real" school, and flawed perceptions of our reputation make for a good punchline in living rooms across our state.

For me, a 3.5 would have killed my Top 20 chances even though I have a strong MCAT to go along with it. There is no way I would have been able to do as well as I am currently doing in the cycle if my GPA was anything less than a 3.9+. Your experience is different since you come from (presumably) an Ivy, and to quote @DokterMom, who is an ADCOM in Texas, she and her fellow colleagues go gaga over someone from Princeton just based on the undergrad label. Not that I'm criticizing her - I'm just calling it as it is. Heck, an ADCOM I recently interviewed with told me to my face during the interview that he equated Yale undergrad with a "strong applicant" :eyebrow:

And to give you an idea of what our state schools expect of us - let alone bigger schools - the median GPA of accepted students at Texan med schools hovers around 3.8-3.9. Keep in mind that the population of accepted kids is largely made up of kids from our own state schools.

I really wish @gettheleadout, who went to a state school, could stop by this thread

What? Isnt Texas one of the "lucky" states for MD admissions?
 
I have to strongly disagree here. I go to a state school that most people have never heard of in Texas. Heck, due to the name change of my school due to a merger, pretty much no one in Texas knows of us. We get made fun of by the bigger schools in Texas (UT Austin and TAMU) for not being a "real" school, and flawed perceptions of our reputation make for a good punchline in living rooms across our state.

For me, a 3.5 would have killed my Top 20 chances even though I have a strong MCAT to go along with it. There is no way I would have been able to do as well as I am currently doing in the cycle if my GPA was anything less than a 3.9+. Your experience is different since you come from (presumably) an Ivy, and to quote @DokterMom, who is an ADCOM in Texas, she and her fellow colleagues go gaga over someone from Princeton just based on the undergrad label. Not that I'm criticizing her - I'm just calling it as it is. Heck, an ADCOM I recently interviewed with told me to my face during the interview that he equated Yale undergrad with a "strong applicant" :eyebrow:

And to give you an idea of what our state schools expect of us - let alone bigger schools - the median GPA of accepted students at Texan med schools hovers around 3.8-3.9. Keep in mind that the population of accepted kids is largely made up of kids from our own state schools.

I really wish @gettheleadout could stop by this thread

The two best Texas medical schools, UTSW and Baylor, have median GPAs in the 3.8s. Texas A&M, which I assume is somewhere in the middle, has a median GPA of 3.66 (http://medicine.tamhsc.edu/admissions/). Furthermore, as md-2020 clarified in a recent post, he's talking about sGPA. This relies on the assumption that you're a good student who just struggles with the sciences, meaning you have like a 3.6/3.5 or a 3.7/3.5 because you're doing well in your non-science classes, but not doing fantastically in your science classes. Even if you did have a 3.5/3.5, you could still be competitive from a random no-name state school provided your MCAT is high (for a 3.5/3.5 I'm talking like a 36 or a higher) and the rest of the package is there. 3.5 is by no means a death knell, though it's not exactly a blessing either.

We're also not talking about Top 20s - we're talking about getting into any US MD school. Top 20 is a whole different ballgame. Are your chances better with a 3.5 coming from a prestigious school? Yes, but that doesn't mean your chances are blown if you have a 3.5 from no-name state.
 
For me, a 3.5 would have killed my Top 20 chances even though I have a strong MCAT to go along with it. There is no way I would have been able to do as well as I am currently doing in the cycle if my GPA was anything less than a 3.9+.

I don't think @md-2020 intended to focus on the top 20. You are also lucky that you are in-state for Texas.

It's like if I said that getting a 509 would have killed my chances at top 20 when the question is about WAMC of getting into medical school.
 
The two best Texas medical schools, UTSW and Baylor, have median GPAs in the 3.8s. Texas A&M, which I assume is somewhere in the middle, has a median GPA of 3.66 (http://medicine.tamhsc.edu/admissions/). Furthermore, as md-2020 clarified in a recent post, he's talking about sGPA. This relies on the assumption that you're a good student who just struggles with the sciences, meaning you have like a 3.6/3.5 or a 3.7/3.5 because you're doing well in your non-science classes, but not doing fantastically in your science classes. Even if you did have a 3.5/3.5, you could still be competitive from a random no-name state school provided your MCAT is high (for a 3.5/3.5 I'm talking like a 36 or a higher) and the rest of the package is there. 3.5 is by no means a death knell, though it's not exactly a blessing either.

We're also not talking about Top 20s - we're talking about getting into any US MD school. Top 20 is a whole different ballgame. Are your chances better with a 3.5 coming from a prestigious school? Yes, but that doesn't mean your chances are blown if you have a 3.5 from no-name state.

Oh whoops. There I go mouthing off without reading the title. Yes, 3.5+ would be ok for a med school.

But don't forget UTMB, which has an average of 3.80 (http://www.utmb.edu/somstudentaffairs/admissions/admission_requirements.asp). Median is probably higher, and I think was around 3.9 for their class entering last year.

Tbh, TAMU is at the very bottom because of the way that they run their program. It was a big reason why I chose not to apply there.
 
@md-2020 if you always struggled in science courses, how did you know you wanted to pursue medicine, and why did it appeal to you? It seems a bit counterintuitive to me, it was my strength in science and fascination with physiology that drew me to it. Did you just love the material in spite of not finding it easy, or is your drive unrelated to science interest?
I'm a bit surprised that people who would want to avoid taking any extra science courses would then want to subject themselves to an extremely rigorous study of that material.
My interest in medicine is not really science related. It's more "real life" oriented, as I've worked with many many ortho, rehab, and ENT docs from my many years playing various sports. Really respect what they do, and when in college I got a chance to see the insides of their operation I decided it was for me. Oh, and also I threw away my econ degree after realizing that Wall St. is a hellhole.

Obviously I may end up in some other field/specialty but that's the initial drive for me.

I'd think many people enter medicine for reasons other than being into hard sciences, which really are no fun IMO.

I think its safe to say that if you got an II from Harvard, that you are not "struggling" with much of anything academically related.
I used the exact steps in my guide to overcome this. Out of the core pre-med pre-req sequence, my sGPA was + 3.0. I got a 3.3 overall GPA in HS. That's not great, AFAIK.

I don't think @md-2020 intended to focus on the top 20. .
+1000 This is for getting into MD schools in general.
 
Oh whoops. There I go mouthing off without reading the title. Yes, 3.5+ would be ok for a med school.

But don't forget UTMB, which has an average of 3.80 (http://www.utmb.edu/somstudentaffairs/admissions/admission_requirements.asp). Median is probably higher.

Tbh, TAMU is at the very bottom because of the way that they run their program. It was a big reason why I chose not to apply there.

Fair. I know next to nothing about Texas schools so I'll defer to you on that.
 
I would like to add some encouragement for students who think they suck at STEM. Try to get out of the mindset that you are bad at science. That's something you can change. Believe me, I was an art kid growing up and almost failed chem and physics in high school, but I fixed it and now I consider myself to be very good at STEM. These subjects just require a lot practice if they don't come naturally to you. Approach it like you would learning an instrument or a language or training for sports. Practice makes perfect. Do a few problems every day and do them seriously and figure out what is giving you the most trouble. And if you can't figure it out on your own, check and see if your school offers free tutoring.
 
A lot of the advice in here is both good and deeply saddening. Choose an inflated school, choose an easy major, skip the tough stuff whenever possible, load up on fluff, get advice on easy classes, interpret BCPM as loosely as possible. This stupid ****ing premed game.
 
A lot of the advice in here is both good and deeply saddening. Choose an inflated school, choose an easy major, skip the tough stuff whenever possible, load up on fluff, get advice on easy classes, interpret BCPM as loosely as possible. This stupid ****ing premed game.
I wouldn't go as far as advising people to choose an easy major. However, I'm all for avoiding soul crushing and gpa deflating programs/courses.
 
A lot of the advice in here is both good and deeply saddening. Choose an inflated school, choose an easy major, skip the tough stuff whenever possible, load up on fluff, get advice on easy classes, interpret BCPM as loosely as possible. This stupid ****ing premed game.

Life's a game, wanna plaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
 
A lot of the advice in here is both good and deeply saddening. Choose an inflated school, choose an easy major, skip the tough stuff whenever possible, load up on fluff, get advice on easy classes, interpret BCPM as loosely as possible. This stupid ****ing premed game.

Far worse are people gaming on volunteering
 
I wouldn't go as far as advising people to choose an easy major.
If you're sure medicine is where you want to go there is nothing wrong with a fluff major.

If medicine falls through, an econ or psych degree (no matter the school) is actually far more marketable than a "tougher" life science.
 
If you're sure medicine is where you want to go there is nothing wrong with a fluff major.

If medicine falls through, an econ or psych degree (no matter the school) is actually far more marketable than a "tougher" life science.
Really, psych degree gives you better options than something like Neuro or Biochem? I'd much rather have the latter

Though really its whoever is best/experienced with coding that wins in general
 
I agree there's nothing wrong with taking an easy major to do well. I just think its messed up that that is how this works. Students are essentially putting themselves at a disadvantage if they seek a challenge or dive into an interesting topic outside their comfort zone.
 
I agree there's nothing wrong with taking an easy major to do well. I just think its messed up that that is how this works. Students are essentially putting themselves at a disadvantage if they seek a challenge or dive into an interesting topic outside their comfort zone.

Yep. Something I've hated for a long time. People who can afford to take on those challenging majors usually dont end up with 3.6+ gpas either.

This is why so many intelligent engineers still have abysmal GPAs. Its just a lot harder than doing "biology"
 
Really, psych degree gives you better options than something like Neuro or Biochem?
Realistically the only things you could do with those science degrees is bench research and maybe teaching, which quite frankly in today's academia sucks. Openings are also hard AF to come by, bc of cheap adjuncts. Psych can let you do anything, even if you don't end up being a clinical psych/therapist (which pays surprisingly well and has a good lifestyle).
 
I agree there's nothing wrong with taking an easy major to do well. I just think its messed up that that is how this works. Students are essentially putting themselves at a disadvantage if they seek a challenge or dive into an interesting topic outside their comfort zone.
Unless you have the stuff to take the hard stuff and pwn it like your little noob

Then it's hellooooooo top 20
 
Top