Med School Adcom Formula Renders Post-Baccs Worthless?

[prolixity29]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I've had a chance to research the popular post-bacc programs, and I used to think that they were the best way to go. Recently, though, I had a fortuitous opportunity to speak with an optometrist and family friend who had some strong opinions about how to complete the pre-med requirements. He is a strong proponent of completing the core courses at a public university rather than a structured post-bacc.

Now, I've heard this line of argument before so I was not convinced until he shared with me something I have not heard before. He is an optometrist with decades of experience and he sits on the adcoms of two schools of optometry, one in Puerto Rico and another in Arizona. He claims that all healthcare adcoms, even med school adcoms, basically use the same admissions formulas to admit students, ranking them based on an applicant score that is determined accordingly:

(.95 x Core GPA) + (.85 x MCAT) + (.65 x Cum. GPA) = 95% of Applicant's Total Score, where "Core GPA" is defined as the required science and math classes for med school admission.

The remaining 5% then is some vague mix of letters of rec, personal statement, volunteer experience, etc. When students are ranked according to this formula the distribution resembles a bell curve that bulges to the right (mean is higher than median). Students are then admitted down the list.

In other words, based on this formula, your letters, statement, and outside experience are essentially meaningless unless you happen to fall at a cutoff point near the bottom of the class. Hence the remaining 5 percent in the formula.

Can anyone corroborate, even based on hearsay, the use of the above formula? Or others that put such an enormous weight on Core GPA and MCAT? Especially with regards to medical schools (as opposed to optometry/dental/vet schools)? I’ve done a little poking around on the net and I’ve seen other estimates that put the GPA/MCAT combo as low as 20 percent.

If the Core GPA and MCAT are really weighted this heavily, then this throws a lot of doubt on the necessity of post-bacc programs. Who cares about the quality of the post-bacc program when that's not really factored in? Simply taking classes at a public university and acing the MCAT by, say, studying your butt off for two years while working, probably offers you the highest chance of maximizing your Core GPA and MCAT scores at the lowest monetary cost. All the advising and whatnot offered by a formal post-bacc is just (expensive) icing on the cake.

Thoughts?

 

[Isoprop]

I highly doubt that even a few medical schools use a formula to base a decision. It is true that this is a "numbers game" but ranking students on the basis of a formula doesn't explain why some high GPA/MCAT students get rejected or why some low GPA/MCAT students matriculate. And I was specifically told by adcoms that there is no formula.

Futhermore, I was told by adcoms (the dean of a medical school) that GPA/MCAT is typically used as a measure of how well you will succeed in medical school. A good GPA and MCAT says "I will be a good medical student." But the more important question for adcoms is "will this applicant be a good doctor?" Now, if an adcom thinks you can't handle medical school, it won't matter if you have the greatest qualities to be a good doctor. But even if you can prove you are a good student, it won't guarantee that you are accepted to med school.

Now every school is different and will look for different qualities. There may even be one or two schools that uses a formula-based approach. Also, I can't speak for optometry school as I have no experience or knowledge in that arena.

Also, I think you are confused. Going to a public university to take undergrad classes after you graduate is doing a post-bacc. Post-bacc is doing work after you got a B.S./B.A. degree. It doesn't have to be formal or structured. Going to a structured vs going to a informal post-bacc is a matter of personal preference. I SUGGEST STUDENTS GO TO WHICHEVER SCHOOL THAT WILL HELP THEM GET THE HIGHEST GPA. Some need the structure to keep them on track while others prefer the flexibility. Each has its pros and cons but if you can get good grades in them, it won't matter at the end of the day.

Finally, a good MCAT score is essential for the low GPA applicant. While I said adcoms will consider the entire application before making the decision, if a student has a mediocre GPA and MCAT, the adcom won't take the rest of the application seriously because he or she will doubt that your success in med school even so the rest of your qualities become moot.

 

[NewmansOwn]

I can tell you for certain that the formula you mention is not used at my medical school.

I can also tell you that as the formula puts greater weight on GPA than MCAT score, it is unlikely to be used by most medical schools. Take a look at the following:

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table24-mcatgpa-grid-3yrs-app-accpt.htm

This chart suggests that MCAT performance is far and above the most important factor in med school admission.

Medical school admission is more competitive than ever before, so my advice would be to attend a formal postbac program simply so you'll stand out. There are thousands upon thousands of applicants with solid GPAs and great MCAT scores.

Let's say you're a do-it-yourselfer with a 3.7 GPA and a 33 MCAT. Your neighbor is a postbac student at a top program with the exact same credentials. I would argue that the postbac student will be offered admission over you due to the strong relationships postbac deans have with medical schools. These programs send ~100% of their students to good med schools every year, so MD adcoms see their students as safer bets -- a sulf-fulfilling prophecy, or tautology, if you will.

I would also encourage you to consider linkages. Not only do they save you a ton of money and aggravation by avoiding a drawn-out glide year application process, but they allow you to be considered for admission in a much smaller pool -- you'll stand out in ways you cannot in the general application process. Not everyone feels that way, though, so see what you think when you start the program.

 

[deleted248403]

I dunno how I missed this.

There is definitely no formula used in med school admissions. The AMCAS book stresses that the applications go beyond the numbers. I don't have it on me right now but it says something to the extent of "The number of applicants accepted with a 3.5-4.0 outweighed those than those rejected, but still a substantial number of applicants were not accepted with greater than >3.5 GPA indicating the significance of a complete application"

The notion of a formula is ridiculous. If that was the case, every student with a >3.6 and a >31 MCAT would be accepted but i'm sure most of us know kids who had great stats but no-ECs and did not get in.

 

[Compass]

If that were true, why even bother with an interview? 5% never sold anyone. Highly doubtful of this.

 

[prolixity29]

Thanks to everyone who replied. I should have been better about staying on top of this thread, but alas, the holidays happened.

Newmansown: Great chart, but how did you come to that conclusion? I am guessing you are comparing the acceptance rates down the right-most column and along the bottom-most row? I am no statistician but can you really do that? Wouldn't those acceptance rates be affected by how the categories are defined? Please correct me if I'm missing something here.

Compass & robflanker: I think these are largely exceptions. I guess I should clarify what he was explaining. This is my fault for sloppiness. I guess it could not be thought of as a strict "formula" per se. I think what he meant was that one's acceptance (as calculated by the 95% in the above formula) was conditional on the outcomes of the 5%, which together comprise a litmus test of whether a candidate is a lunatic or freak and therefore not admittable. If this were true, it would explain how folks who ace the GPA/MCAT requirements are unable to get in. Legacies & other admissions politics would explain the other side of the pendulum, the accepted underachievers. So I guess yet another way of looking at it would be that for 95% of us, the 5% does not matter. For only 5% of students do the interview, personal statement, letters, extracurriculars actually make or break the applicant.

Since this is not a true "formula" in the mathematical sense of the word, it justifies the adcoms never admitting to using one. But it essentially is, since the vast majority of admissions decisions are probably made on the GPA and MCAT alone, which are numerical scores that can be used to rank applicants.

Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist here, but is it so hard to believe that they actually use a formula? Case in point: although admissions officers will not admit to using a formula for law school admissions, it is generally understood that GPA and LSAT account for almost everything in the eyes of law school adcoms. Couldn't it be the same for med schools?

 

[deleted248403]

It's no secret GPA/MCAT are important in Med school admissions, but this whole formula rendering post-bacs useless is stupid.

I think Newmansown has a bunch of kids in his med school class that did postbaccs.

Sorry to say but I think your adcom friend is full of it

 

[NewmansOwn]

Newmansown: Great chart, but how did you come to that conclusion? I am guessing you are comparing the acceptance rates down the right-most column and along the bottom-most row? I am no statistician but can you really do that? Wouldn't those acceptance rates be affected by how the categories are defined? Please correct me if I'm missing something here.

Certain approximations do have to be made to come to such a conclusion, but look at it this way:

A marginal candidate might be in the following 'block:'

GPA = '3.2 - 3.39'
MCAT = '24 - 26'

This candidate is sitting on a less-than-inspiring 20.7% chance of admission. Now, let's hypothetically assume this individual can either magically get a 4.0 or magically achieve a near-perfect MCAT score. Which should they choose? If they suddenly get bumped up to the '3.8 - 4.0' GPA box for their current MCAT score, they've now got a 47.8% chance of admission -- pretty much 50/50. But if they get bumped up to the '43-45' MCAT box for their current GPA, they enjoy a 70.9% chance of admission -- not bad at all.

Of course, a great MCAT score will almost never make up for a truly atrocious GPA. My only point was that, for most US MD schools, it is incorrect to say GPA is weighted more heavily than MCAT scores -- it is usually the other way around.

Furthermore, I'm not saying it is outside the realm of possibility for SOME formula to be a PIECE of the admissions decision at SOME medical schools -- I'm just saying the formula you provide is unlikely to be the one used and it doesn't follow that, even if such a formula factors in, a postbac is worthless since the formula is almost certainly not going to make 100% of the decision.

 

[PinkIvy08]

Lesson of the Day: don't listen to an optometrist j/k. But seriously, maybe if he had been an ophthalmologist (i.e. an MD) and been sitting on med school AdComs that would lend credence to his claim. However, he doesn't. Don't listen this him. That formula is nonsense!