Need advice on my stats

[gujuDoc]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I am a graduating senior with a 3.88 science GPA and 3.87 overall GPA in Biological Science major at one of those UC schools in Cali. I am pretty sure that I will get the Summa Cum Laude honor at graduation . I got the National Dean's list and Golden Key award (are they any important? ). I have great research experience with a paper published in the undergraduate research journal with poster presentation award at the symposium. I have good volunteering experience with two hospitals. I hold a leadership role at one of these hospital recently. I also have great LORs from my PI, MDs, PhDs, and a DO from shadowing. I involved in premed clubs, but I was only an intern for one ( I don't know if that counts for leadership or not). However, my first MCAT score is 24P with a 6 on verbal😡. I took it last August with limited studying/ watching World Cup😳 . My question is what kinda MCAT score do I need to get in order to get acceptances at California medschools as well as those mid-level medschools around the US? I don't care about those top schools like John-Hopkin. What about DO schools?

I apologize for the long paragraph. Any real advises will be appreciated.

For DO schools you are golden. If you, however, want an MD school it is my strong advice that you study like you've never studied before for the MCAT. Take practice tests and topical tests, etc. Review the material til you know it cold and learn to find what strategies are and aren't working for you and determine why you aren't getting the results you are hoping. Try to analyze whether it is due to anxiety/pressure, strategical, or and error in knowledge. Maybe you are missing a certain type of question or something. Things like that should be taken into consideration.

But take it again and try to improve your score a good 6-7 points if possible and I think you could get in somewhere in the US.

 

[pennybridge]

Ok now you're just being really degrading to all the UC students who are really busting their asses off to get good grade.

yes. Yes I am. People who "bust their asses" for undergrad grades are ridiculous and deserve to be made fun of.

You think it's easy to get high GPA, but your science GPA is low.

yes. I agree with both of those statements of fact.

What does that make you?

lazy. Uninterested in the bacterial flora of bovine rumen. Scholar of daytime television.

Why didn't you "plan" your GPA to be better than low?

busy doing important things like research and going to the beach.

Try to be not so bitter about your fellow UC students who really earn their number.

"earn" is so subjective. You can get a high GPA and still be a complete idiot. I judge people based on whether or not they are idiots. It seems more practical in everyday life.

Although I agree with you that GPA is only a part of the whole application, it still is an important part.

Sure. Getting Cs can't be good.

Don't make it sound like you could have gotten a 4.0 if you wanted to.

i could have. psychobio, marine bio, anthro, take your pick. I took upper division science classes that were interesting (as interesting as undergrad science courses can be) and had prerequisites like Don't Be a Tool 101 and Yes We Read Actual Science Papers 102. Come play in my sandbox and you won't feel so bad about skating through with a few Bs.

BTW UC is a top university system in the US, so I think the high GPA should/will mean more than you made it out in your bitter post.

Yeah you'd think so, but it doesn't. People on admissions committees are real people, not some sort of hivebrain that thinks logically all the time.

a 4.0 at cal state Fresno looks better than a 3.7 at UCI for two reasons: (1) 4 > 3.7 and (2) how many people who go to cal state Fresno care enough about school to keep getting straight As, let alone want to be doctors.

My point is not that UC GPA means nothing, it is that the mere fact that someone who gets a 3.0 at UCLA could get a 4.0 at Calstate Long Beach proves GPAs are fickle altogether, and above a certain point don't give an accurate representation of academic grasp, achievement, or ability to excel at any particular job (like being a doctor)

Personally I think the UCs should get rid of like 40 of their science "majors" because they're completely redundant (and useless for 90% of their students). Pre-med students should take their prereqs and their upper division classes should be practical and research based. Christ, the PSYCH KIDS are doing research projects in their third year, and Molecular Bio kids can get their degree without ever writing an original hypothesis.

Oh well, I guess I ask too much from a bloated apathetic system that's just a cover for funding faculty research. At least their med schools have a clue.

 

[Chargers]

yes. Yes I am. People who "bust their asses" for undergrad grades are ridiculous and deserve to be made fun of.



yes. I agree with both of those statements of fact.



lazy. Uninterested in the bacterial flora of bovine rumen. Scholar of daytime television.



busy doing important things like research and going to the beach.



"earn" is so subjective. You can get a high GPA and still be a complete idiot. I judge people based on whether or not they are idiots. It seems more practical in everyday life.



Sure. Getting Cs can't be good.


i could have. psychobio, marine bio, anthro, take your pick. I took upper division science classes that were interesting (as interesting as undergrad science courses can be) and had prerequisites like Don't Be a Tool 101 and Yes We Read Actual Science Papers 102. Come play in my sandbox and you won't feel so bad about skating through with a few Bs.


Yeah you'd think so, but it doesn't. People on admissions committees are real people, not some sort of hivebrain that thinks logically all the time.

a 4.0 at cal state Fresno looks better than a 3.7 at UCI for two reasons: (1) 4 > 3.7 and (2) how many people who go to cal state Fresno care enough about school to keep getting straight As, let alone want to be doctors.

My point is not that UC GPA means nothing, it is that the mere fact that someone who gets a 3.0 at UCLA could get a 4.0 at Calstate Long Beach proves GPAs are fickle altogether, and above a certain point don't give an accurate representation of academic grasp, achievement, or ability to excel at any particular job (like being a doctor)

Personally I think the UCs should get rid of like 40 of their science "majors" because they're completely redundant (and useless for 90% of their students). Pre-med students should take their prereqs and their upper division classes should be practical and research based. Christ, the PSYCH KIDS are doing research projects in their third year, and Molecular Bio kids can get their degree without ever writing an original hypothesis.

Oh well, I guess I ask too much from a bloated apathetic system that's just a cover for funding faculty research. At least their med schools have a clue.

Ok first of all, what happened to you at your undergrad school? seriously, did they actually and physically abused you up to the point that you can't even stand the sight of the word UC? That's kinda sad. BTW which UC school did you go to?

Secondly, not all UC school curricula are the same. At my UC school, premed students have to take hard upper division courses like imminology, developmental bio, advance biochem, bio of cancer, virology, infectious diseases, neurology, anatomy, physiology, phamarcology and many more while doing actual research at medical school. Tons of people have their projects presented and and awarded every year with publication too. So classes like psychobio, marine bio, anthro for easy A don't satisfy the requirement for graduation. That's from Biological Science ciriculum. There are many subspecialty majors that I don't want to list here.

 

[michiganblue08]

Originally Posted by Chargers
I am a graduating senior with a 3.88 science GPA and 3.87 overall GPA in Biological Science major at one of those UC schools in Cali. I am pretty sure that I will get the Summa Cum Laude honor at graduation . I got the National Dean's list and Golden Key award (are they any important? ). I have great research experience with a paper published in the undergraduate research journal with poster presentation award at the symposium. I have good volunteering experience with two hospitals. I hold a leadership role at one of these hospital recently. I also have great LORs from my PI, MDs, PhDs, and a DO from shadowing. I involved in premed clubs, but I was only an intern for one ( I don't know if that counts for leadership or not). However, my first MCAT score is 24P with a 6 on verbal😡. I took it last August with limited studying/ watching World Cup😳 . My question is what kinda MCAT score do I need to get in order to get acceptances at California medschools as well as those mid-level medschools around the US? I don't care about those top schools like John-Hopkin. What about DO schools?

I apologize for the long paragraph. Any real advises will be appreciated.


1.) all of the UC's shouldn't be lumped into one, they have a very large range of difficulty.

2.) stop trying to validate your poor MCAT score by saying that you go to a UC and have a great gpa. According to the career center website at berkeley, there is no one with a gpa greater than a 3.8 who has an MCAT score lower than 30 when applying (meaning u probably don't go to UC berkeley or even UCLA.)

http://career.berkeley.edu/MedStats/2005seniors.stm

I don't really have any advice to give you that hasn't already been said but you gotta do better than the 50% percentile on the MCAT for them to take your GPA seriously. Most of the people who do the same or worse than that go to podiatry school.

 

[GoLAClippers]

1.) all of the UC's shouldn't be lumped into one, they have a very large range of difficulty.

2.) stop trying to validate your poor MCAT score by saying that you go to a UC and have a great gpa. According to the career center website at berkeley, there is no one with a gpa greater than a 3.8 who has an MCAT score lower than 30 when applying (meaning u probably don't go to UC berkeley or even UCLA.)

http://career.berkeley.edu/MedStats/2005seniors.stm

I don't really have any advice to give you that hasn't already been said but you gotta do better than the 50% percentile on the MCAT for them to take your GPA seriously. Most of the people who do the same or worse than that go to podiatry school.

Actually, his Science section scores are pretty decent. Nevermind. OP, you need to get at least 10+ on your sciences and a 9 on your verbal to be competitive at the UCs. With your GPA, if you get 28- 30 next time, you can still get into a med school but don't expect to get into any UCs (or USC or other Cali schools). Apply broadly and only to very lower tier schools if you can't get 31+

 

[GoLAClippers]

Agreed with penny about bio199. Anyways, I think I m the underdog in this process of applying, especially for CA schools. I took the MCAT twice, OP. Also, English is my second language. But I m lucky enough to make it to a good CA school. So yeah, GPA, MCAT, ECs, LORs are important but you do need luck in this process. Feel free to PM me if you have any questions. Here is my profile.
http://mdapplicants.com/viewprofile.php?id=7679

I've heard that Vietnamese are also considered URM, so that probably helped your case. Damn it (for being Korean, Chinese, Japanese)!And who knows about the OP? He might be a Mexican-American URM from San Diego, and when he gets a 27 on the next MCAT, he might even get into UCSF for all we know 😱 While most of us will not even get an interview from UCSF or even UCLA or UCSD with 30 -33 MCAT 🙄 I am saying this because I've met this guy from USC that got an interview at SanFranz with 3.7 and 27.

 

[Anjlprincezz]

Ok now you're just being really degrading to all the UC students who are really busting their asses off to get good grade. You think it's easy to get high GPA, but your science GPA is low. What does that make you? Why didn't you "plan" your GPA to be better than low? Try to be not so bitter about your fellow UC students who really earn their number.

Although I agree with you that GPA is only a part of the whole application, it still is an important part. Don't make it sound like you could have gotten a 4.0 if you wanted to. BTW UC is a top university system in the US, so I think the high GPA should/will mean more than you made it out in your bitter post. Thanks for your comment anyway.

This has been said, but i think it needs to be reiterated, NOT ALL THE UCs ARE THE SAME... it's great that u go to a UC, congrats, but no offense to anyone but i don’t think a 3.87 at merced or santacruz = a 3.87 at cal or UCLA... in general science classes are curved i.e. you do worse if you have stiffer competition, like at a more academically competitive institution.

 

[Anjlprincezz]

OP is there a particular reason you are avoiding mentioning ur UG school? UC what?

 

[HumbleMD]

OP is there a particular reason you are avoiding mentioning ur UG school? UC what?

I called it earlier. Its totally Merced - they try to bank on the UC name all the time and hope people might mistake it for Berkeley...

 

[Chargers]

That's what I said in my earlier post. Not all UC school are prestigious. Fortunately, my UC school is on the top 10 of America college list😉.

 

[Chulito]

That's what I said in my earlier post. Not all UC school are prestigious. Fortunately, my UC school is on the top 10 of America college list😉.

I hate that I know this or care about it, but for what it's worth, the highest ranked public university according to US News is Berkeley, and I believe that they are #21 or #22 in the country. Perhaps your list is from a different source, however.

 

[pennybridge]

At my UC school, premed students have to take hard upper division courses like imminology, developmental bio, advance biochem, bio of cancer, virology, infectious diseases, neurology, anatomy, physiology, phamarcology and many more while doing actual research at medical school.

well I know for a fact then that you didn't go to UCLA (where I went) because there is no "premed" classification (you either apply to med school or you don't) and you don't "have to take" any upper division classes you don't want to if it's not required for your major.

for my major, which I chose based on the upper division classes offered, I "had" to take Immunology (considered "the hard class" woopty doo!) and intro micro and virology courses (boring).

no major at UCLA requires the insane list of classes you mentioned. The classes you mentioned are like the preclinical curriculum at most med schools, at that point why even bother with undergrad? (for that very same reason, UCLA kids who major in PhySci are equally lame)

and no UC on the planet (of California) requires that students do "actual research at the med school" in order to obtain a degree, that's just plain ridiculous.

the classes you named cross-cover about four different majors at UCLA, and there's no such thing as an upper division "infectious diseases" class. We have intro to micro, intro to virology, bacterial path, viral path, parasitology, advanced molecular parasitology, but those are (count them) six different classes and only two of them are "required" for the MIMG major. MIMG don't have to take developmental, neuro, anatomy, what have you. MCDB don't have to take immuno, virology, neuro, "infectious diseases", or anatomy, or "advanced" biochem (whatever that is). Neuro don't have to do anything on that list except, well, neuro.

And those premed psychobio, psych, anthro, linguistics, english, history, whatever the hell majors don't have to take ANY OF THOSE CLASSES. And yet they still apply to medical school with their 3.95 overall and 3.4bcpm (and probably get in because they're so "unique")


the moral of my story is that you're full of poo, you go to merced or davis or irvine or santa cruz (they're all the same) and you have a crappy mcat score. 👍

 

[pennybridge]

I hate that I know this or care about it, but the highest ranked public university according to US News is Berkeley, and I believe that they are #21 or #22 in the country. Perhaps your list is from a different source, however.

yeah, I second that. There are no UCs in the top 10, let alone merced.

 

[pennybridge]

Ok first of all, what happened to you at your undergrad school? seriously, did they actually and physically abused you up to the point that you can't even stand the sight of the word UC? That's kinda sad. BTW which UC school did you go to?

and for the record, I thoroughly enjoyed my undergrad career. the only way it could have been better was if I wasn't surrounded by hundreds of annoying, question-asking, numbers-obsessed premed drones.

I never cared about the grades I got in classes, with the exception of the classes that were rumored to be "the hard ones" and only then it was more just to mess with the curve. You see at my school, if I get an A, that means somebody else doesn't. 👍 because we have curves. big fun, right?

I only applied to about 14 med schools (all in the top 40 usnews), and got in to my 3rd choice, which is in southern california. I know what you're thinking, you're thinking "hmm, I don't remember asking..."

well tough cookies. Your thread is a joke now. Take the mcat again then start a new thread about it.

 

[michiganblue08]

Secondly, not all UC school curricula are the same. At my UC school, premed students have to take hard upper division courses like imminology, developmental bio, advance biochem, bio of cancer, virology, infectious diseases, neurology, anatomy, physiology, phamarcology and many more while doing actual research at medical school. Tons of people have their projects presented and and awarded every year with publication too. So classes like psychobio, marine bio, anthro for easy A don't satisfy the requirement for graduation. That's from Biological Science ciriculum. There are many subspecialty majors that I don't want to list here.

This information is kinda ridiculous and no one really cares and i reiterate, if you don't go to UCLA or Cal, your school is an "average" state school.

That's what I said in my earlier post. Not all UC school are prestigious. Fortunately, my UC school is on the top 10 of America college list.

That's awesome that you have a lot of pride in your school. But where did you get that sort of information about your unspecified UC? No matter what UC you go to, I can come up with ten schools that are more "prestigious" than it (all 8 IVY's, Stanford and MIT)

 

[michiganblue08]

That's what I said in my earlier post. Not all UC school are prestigious. Fortunately, my UC school is on the top 10 of America college list😉.

maybe its one of the top ten in the 3rd or 4th tier or top ten schools in California

 

[Chargers]

well I know for a fact then that you didn't go to UCLA (where I went) because there is no "premed" classification (you either apply to med school or you don't) and you don't "have to take" any upper division classes you don't want to if it's not required for your major.

for my major, which I chose based on the upper division classes offered, I "had" to take Immunology (considered "the hard class" woopty doo!) and intro micro and virology courses (boring).

no major at UCLA requires the insane list of classes you mentioned. The classes you mentioned are like the preclinical curriculum at most med schools, at that point why even bother with undergrad? (for that very same reason, UCLA kids who major in PhySci are equally lame)

and no UC on the planet (of California) requires that students do "actual research at the med school" in order to obtain a degree, that's just plain ridiculous.

the classes you named cross-cover about four different majors at UCLA, and there's no such thing as an upper division "infectious diseases" class. We have intro to micro, intro to virology, bacterial path, viral path, parasitology, advanced molecular parasitology, but those are (count them) six different classes and only two of them are "required" for the MIMG major. MIMG don't have to take developmental, neuro, anatomy, what have you. MCDB don't have to take immuno, virology, neuro, "infectious diseases", or anatomy, or "advanced" biochem (whatever that is). Neuro don't have to do anything on that list except, well, neuro.

And those premed psychobio, psych, anthro, linguistics, english, history, whatever the hell majors don't have to take ANY OF THOSE CLASSES. And yet they still apply to medical school with their 3.95 overall and 3.4bcpm (and probably get in because they're so "unique")


the moral of my story is that you're full of poo, you go to merced or davis or irvine or santa cruz (they're all the same as sd or la ) and you have a crappy mcat score. 👍

Hell no, I didn't go to ucla. And yeah in the year I was a freshmen my school was ranked in the top 10 public colleges. Now, maybe to 15? I haven't checked.
I didn't say that my school requires everyone to do research in order to graduate. I said almost all the premed people do research. Oh yeah, the premed term is a common one, and there is no legitimate "premed" major. I was just using it to group people who have the same interest instead of listing out their specific majors.
I think I understand your hatred now. Those people who do not take serious upper division science classes and end up with high GPA in those "psychobio, psych, anthro, linguistics, english, history," major deserve to be flamed. The actual REAL premeds who earn their GPA are for real.
And yeah I am well aware of my previous MCAT score, but that will change

 

[Chargers]

This information is kinda ridiculous and no one really cares and i reiterate, if you don't go to UCLA or Cal, your school is an "average" state school.

Was I even talking to you? Why don't you try to read the whole story before making a post.


That's awesome that you have a lot of pride in your school. But where did you get that sort of information about your unspecified UC? No matter what UC you go to, I can come up with ten schools that are more "prestigious" than it (all 8 IVY's, Stanford and MIT)

You must be a UC reject. About the ranking, see my other post.

 

[Old ortho]

If you get a MCAT of 30, you have a good chance of getting into a low tier med school. If you get a 32, then you may get into a mid tier med school. If you get a 34, then you will have a good shot at a Cali or high tier med school.

 

[HumbleMD]

You must be a UC reject. About the ranking, see my other post.

🙄 No, he's a U of M man, ranked just above UCLA. So my first guess was Merced, but now I'm wondering if you go to SB? Seriously we are all dying to know....

 

[michiganblue08]

That's what I said in my earlier post. Not all UC school are prestigious. Fortunately, my UC school is on the top 10 of America college list😉.

Hell no, I didn't go to ucla. And yeah in the year I was a freshmen my school was ranked in the top 10 public colleges. Now, maybe to 15? I haven't checked.
I didn't say that my school requires everyone to do research in order to graduate. I said almost all the premed people do research. Oh yeah, the premed term is a common one, and there is no legitimate "premed" major. I was just using it to group people who have the same interest instead of listing out their specific majors.
I think I understand your hatred now. Those people who do not take serious upper division science classes and end up with high GPA in those "psychobio, psych, anthro, linguistics, english, history," major deserve to be flamed. The actual REAL premeds who earn their GPA are for real.
And yeah I am well aware of my previous MCAT score, but that will change

Why must you never tell us the whole truth? And I'm guessing you go to UCSD because of the whole San Diego Chargers football team.

 

[colliea21]

I want to know which UC school you went to!! Actually, I demand an answer!!

peace

 

[Richard Kimble]

I want to know which UC school you went to!! Actually, I demand an answer!!

peace

Who cares. If he didn't study, it would be like getting a 24 on his diagnostic. I know plenty of people who improved like 12 points. The test is as much strategy (practice/studying for the MCAT) as content (GPA). He could be very intelligent and deserve his GPA at a competitive UC, but just didn't study. Regardless, ADCOMS know which schools are easier than others. I'm sure he'll do 30+ on the next one.

 

[pennybridge]

The test is four times as much strategy (practice/studying for the MCAT) as content

fixed that for you.


also MCAT content /= GPA. You can have a ****ty GPA and still ace science sections. Likewise you can have an awesome GPA and bomb science sections. Everyone automatically assumes the content that makes up the basis for grading the MCAT is identical to the grading basis for undergrad science courses. It just isn't.

 

[Richard Kimble]

fixed that for you.


also MCAT content /= GPA. You can have a ****ty GPA and still ace science sections. Likewise you can have an awesome GPA and bomb science sections. Everyone automatically assumes the content that makes up the basis for grading the MCAT is identical to the grading basis for undergrad science courses. It just isn't.

Right. So everyone should give the guy a little latitude

 

[HumbleMD]

fixed that for you.


also MCAT content /= GPA. You can have a ****ty GPA and still ace science sections. Likewise you can have an awesome GPA and bomb science sections. Everyone automatically assumes the content that makes up the basis for grading the MCAT is identical to the grading basis for undergrad science courses. It just isn't.

It can indeed happen, but I still have yet to see some good correlation data on MCAT and GPA. I'd be willing to bet that the 2.0, 40 and 4.0, 20 students aren't all that common, though (which is why I cringe everytime I see a 2.5 GPA student told that everything will be okay as long as they "rock the MCAT" and get above a 35).

 

[Anjlprincezz]

🙄 No, he's a U of M man, ranked just above UCLA. So my first guess was Merced, but now I'm wondering if you go to SB? Seriously we are all dying to know....

I'm thinking it's actually merced but the OP is hinting at SD (which, as Chulito mentioned, is NOT top 10)... And you're right, you called it....


OP if you're so damn proud of your school, why don't u just say the name?!

 

[thirsty4chicken]

even with my GPA? wow I know it's not 4.0, but it's not easy to get a 3.8 at UC. I thought that it might help me a little bit on the MCAT side.

You probably won't get any UC secondaries with a 24 on your MCAT. The computers will automatically screen you out. 🙁

 

[blargh]

i didn't read half of the posts above me, so i apologize in advance if i'm repeating what someone already said...

i think a lot of you fail to realize that there's also a LOT of variability within a UC. since there are so many kids and so many classes, there's even tons of variability within specific classes like intro bio. some kids end up with insanely hard professors while others have enough free time to intentionally plan out their schedules so they can always get the easy professor. some people also do better because they are lucky enough to have access to old tests, friends in earlier lectures who fill them in on what's going on, etc. in that sense, the MCAT still acts as an equalizer, even though you have two bio majors from the same UC with a 3.9 GPA. one might have worked harder for it than the other (though it may not be apparent because of factors i mentioned earlier).

 

[blargh]

🙄 No, he's a U of M man, ranked just above UCLA. So my first guess was Merced, but now I'm wondering if you go to SB? Seriously we are all dying to know....

i'm guessing ucsd... the reference to "almost everyone does research" leads me towards ucsd. 99.9% of pre-meds at ucsd work in a lab somewhere. plus, i imagine the uc merced population is really really small.