Numerically, what is considered a good grade?

Veterinary Science Graduate Certificate from UofI
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
1

168135

On this forum, everyone talks about letter grades and GPA... at my university, we use number grades and averages when refering to how well we did in a class or how well we're doing in school.

I thought I was doing horrible in my pre-reqs but when I compared my grades to the letter system that my vet school uses, I'm getting As and Bs in most of my courses, with the occasional C thanks to Chemistry :p So I'm feeling a lot more confident.

I was wondering what you think, numerically, is a good grade. I've talked to people who've done part of their undergrad at a large, well-known university and then came to my university. They said that the subjects at my university are a lot more difficult... so I kind of believe that anything above a 75 is considered great. A friend of mine, who is here on scholarship and who was valedictorian in high school, panics when any of her marks are below an 85.
Members don't see this ad.
 
well in the United States a 75 is a C, an 85 is a B, and a 95 is an A

of course there are minus grades and plus grades as well (ie. 90 = A-, 88 = B+)

Some classes at some universities have curves, so if the entire class does poorly then the letter grades are adjusted. At my university there were no curves but I recently re-took organic chemistry this past summer and there was a curve. Typically the curve is not HUGE, I believe I obtained an 89 in organic I and that was curved to an A. In orgo II I got an 84 which was curved to a B+.

I'm not sure if that really answers what you're asking.
Here a 75 (C) translates to a 2.0 in terms of GPA while a 95 (A) is a 4.0
 
I was used to percentages in high school too but my university now uses letter grades which I then convert to GPA according to OMSAS guidelines (such as this http://careers.mcmaster.ca/students/education-planning/virtual-resources/gpa-conversion-chart).

The mean/median average at OVC, where I want to go, is 83-85%, so I pretty much base everything off of that. I aim to get 80%+ in every subject, preferably at least 85%. Depends on the difficulty of the course though, I have higher expectations when it comes to biology-based courses compared to chem-based ones, because I'm a much better biology student.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Looking at past acceptances, it seems that most applicants that were accepted after their first try had GPA's of at least 3.6, which would translate to receiving slightly more A's than B's, or at least 86 on average. Just 1 C could pull down a GPA, and several would really hurt it. Going out from this, anything less than a B+ is not a "good grade."
I had a dismal undergrad GPA and am hoping stellar grades in grad school can get me in where B's and C's in undergrad could not.:oops:
Do yourself a favor and get great grades now instead of later.
 
I'm in your area (NS, have attended NSAC and Dal; one uses numbers, one uses letters/GPA) and anything above an 80 seems to be considered a good average. An 85 is a very good average, and I'm aiming between an 85 and a 90. AVC says their usual average is around an 85.

Most of the classes at Dal use a scale similar to:
A+ 90 or greater
A 85-89
A- 80-84
B+ 75-79
B 70-74
B- 65-69
C+ 62-64
C 59-61
C- 56-58
D 50-55
F 49 or lower
 
CSU said:
Looking at past acceptances, it seems that most applicants that were accepted after their first try had GPA's of at least 3.6, which would translate to receiving slightly more A's than B's, or at least 86 on average. Just 1 C could pull down a GPA, and several would really hurt it. Going out from this, anything less than a B+ is not a "good grade."
I had a dismal undergrad GPA and am hoping stellar grades in grad school can get me in where B's and C's in undergrad could not.:oops:
Do yourself a favor and get great grades now instead of later.
Click to expand...

I really hate how there is this obsession with GPA. I know seven people that have been admitted to vet school and all of their GPAs were between 2.9-3.4 and they all got in on their first try. Alot of it has to do with what your grades were in the required courses and your experience. None of them had out of this world experience, i would say it was above average but not out of this world. They also had avg. GRE scores 1100-1200. Remember that the average GPA of accepted students is exactly that an AVERAGE. Some are above and some are below.

by the way, this wasnt meant as an attack on the quoted poster, just a general rant. :)
 
peachy3214 said:
I really hate how there is this obsession with GPA. I know seven people that have been admitted to vet school and all of their GPAs were between 2.9-3.4 and they all got in on their first try. Alot of it has to do with what your grades were in the required courses and your experience. None of them had out of this world experience, i would say it was above average but not out of this world. They also had avg. GRE scores 1100-1200. Remember that the average GPA of accepted students is exactly that an AVERAGE. Some are above and some are below.
Click to expand...

I don't like the obsession either... I admit, it used to stress me out a little listening to people freak out over whether or not they'll get in when they have higher GPAs than me. Since then, I've come to accept that all I can do is the best I can do and if that's not enough, then maybe it's not ment to be...we'll see. I'm pretty sure I have the grades to go to a Caribbean school, but I have another year and a half to see if I can get it up to that magical 85 that everybody is talking about. We'll see.

It really annoys me how Canadian universities have more leniency when it comes to grades than American schools. I was shocked when I got one of my first english papers back and it said "85=A-!" and I was like "Shouldn't an 85 be a B" :confused:
 
Also realize schools use different scales and different grading systems. It upsets people when I say my undergrad used true curves, meaning up or down, because people think that is unfair, but it was just the system we used.

Also, not all schools use the same scale. Here a 90.99999% is a B+, 81.99999% is a C+, and 72.99999% is a D+ (the extreme decimals are the schools doing.)
 
Some of us still have schools where you just get an A, B, C, D or F
where 90 and above is A
80 -89.4 is a B
etc. etc. etc.

so its a little complicated because even my A-s are A's which sounds good, but my B+s are Bs, soo yeah

but actually i think they changed it this year so all the freshman now have a +/- system, but not me!
 
My school has a plus/minus system but not all of the teachers use it... so this semester I got a B+ in my o-chem II lab and technically also in my physiology lab but they only used the normal grades so I got stuck with a B. It's just a little annoying because it makes it seem like I did worse than I really did just because they don't use the plus/minus like most of the university and it effects my GPA. I think you have to have a 98% for an A+ (4.33), 94-97% for an A (4.0) and 90-93% for an A- (3.67) and it continues to follow that trend for other letter grades. So if I get an A- I would be at a disadvantage to someone who had a 90% at a school where they don't use the plus/minus system, but I would have the advantage if I got an A+ versus someone who got a 98% at another school. I think it's all a little silly to be honest!

Anyhow, to answer the original question, it just depends. Every school has a different way of grading so it's pretty hard to compare, which is a little unfortunate. It's really hard to say... I personally wouldn't feel great if I was applying with less than a 3.2 (I only have a 3.3 now), but we all know people get in with GPAs below that. So I guess that would be roughly a B/B+ average, or about an 87.
 
So, on your transcripts, do you get letter grades or number grades? We get number grades... I took a course at a different university and all they gave me was a letter grade :p
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Just commenting based on my own past errors
peachy3214 said:
I really hate how there is this obsession with GPA. I know seven people that have been admitted to vet school and all of their GPAs were between 2.9-3.4 and they all got in on their first try. Alot of it has to do with what your grades were in the required courses and your experience. None of them had out of this world experience, i would say it was above average but not out of this world. They also had avg. GRE scores 1100-1200. Remember that the average GPA of accepted students is exactly that an AVERAGE. Some are above and some are below.

by the way, this wasnt meant as an attack on the quoted poster, just a general rant. :)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I think a lot of schools have a minumum cut off for consideration after the first cut of like a 3.0. Others it is a 3.2. That is not always a stated thing either, just something they use when making their decisions as to who goes into the "interview" file. Like you have to have, say, a 3.0 a 1200 GRE and X hours of clinical in each area to make it past the first cut.
 
peachy3214 said:
I really hate how there is this obsession with GPA. I know seven people that have been admitted to vet school and all of their GPAs were between 2.9-3.4 and they all got in on their first try. Alot of it has to do with what your grades were in the required courses and your experience. None of them had out of this world experience, i would say it was above average but not out of this world. They also had avg. GRE scores 1100-1200. Remember that the average GPA of accepted students is exactly that an AVERAGE. Some are above and some are below.

by the way, this wasnt meant as an attack on the quoted poster, just a general rant. :)
Click to expand...

Wait, which schools were they accepted to? Because I had a 3.22 cumulative GPA, good experience, and GRE scores above the range you listed and it took me three years to be accepted to vet school. I can't imagine someone with less than a 3.0 being accepted into a US school without awesome experience and GRE scores plus maybe retaking a few courses. I'll admit that HUGE anxiety over GPA isn't helpful, but it definitely DOES make sense to worry about it some and to try to keep it as high as possible.
 
Yes, and what you'll note there are all the low GPA but stellar experience/low GPA but improved majorly over the past few years/low GPA but applied multiple times people. Not low GPA and slightly above average experience but rocked everything and got in the first try. I'm not saying GPA is all that matters, I'm just saying that it still *does* matter and that having the highest one you can is helpful. Nobody should stay up late at night stressing about it, but nobody should get complacent either.
 
Last edited:
No one is saying being complacent, of course you always do the best you can. But I think there are a lot of factors that come into play. To answer your question three went to Tennessee, one went to Auburn, one went to Tufts, and two went to UPenn. Im just saying that there is WAY more then GPA to most schools some schools wont even look at your whole app without a good GPA but alot of them will look at everything. I think if you live in an urban/surb. environment and all of your experience is with SA and or horses that may hurt your chances of getting in on your first try. The one thing they all had in common is that they are from rural areas and most of their experience was with cattle. SO maybe thats something that schools really want i dunno. Ill I know is that they had no problems getting in and had multiple interviews. So nobody should beat themselves up over a C/C+.
 
I guess its the self degradation that annoys me. People with great GPAs complaining about how they don't think they will get in. I mean be concerned, but dont parade your GPA around for everyone to see, especially if its a 3.5 or better and thats "horrible" by your standards. A good chunk of the people on these boards don't have above a 3.5 and it just looks like your fishing for compliments or a confirmation on your "awesomeness"


ps. ok so that sounds kinda mean, but i needed to get it out. This also is not a rant because my own GPA is less then steller, my own GPA is fine, and i wont comment on it further. But I dont think that we should make other people on the boards feel bad for not maintaining a 3.7 GPA, when im sure one day they will get into vet school and one day they will make GREAT vets. :)
 
peachy3214 said:
No one is saying being complacent, of course you always do the best you can. But I think there are a lot of factors that come into play. To answer your question three went to Tennessee, one went to Auburn, one went to Tufts, and two went to UPenn. Im just saying that there is WAY more then GPA to most schools some schools wont even look at your whole app without a good GPA but alot of them will look at everything. I think if you live in an urban/surb. environment and all of your experience is with SA and or horses that may hurt your chances of getting in on your first try. The one thing they all had in common is that they are from rural areas and most of their experience was with cattle. SO maybe thats something that schools really want i dunno. Ill I know is that they had no problems getting in and had multiple interviews. So nobody should beat themselves up over a C/C+.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I applied to U Penn with a 3.4, extensive and diverse experience, Ag background, zoo med experience, international vet med experience, research experience, business experience, and experience dealing with hoof and mouth. Didn't get in. Would love to know what they wanted that threw me out of competition if it wasn't the GPA.
 
Hey, I totally get that sentiment. It's really annoying to be getting a C+ in a class while your classmates complain about how they're just going to FAIL when in actuality they mean they'll get a B+. :p
 
Pandacinny said:
Hey, I totally get that sentiment. It's really annoying to be getting a C+ in a class while your classmates complain about how they're just going to FAIL when in actuality they mean they'll get a B+. :p
Click to expand...

Hey, that still happens in vet school! I hear people bemoan that they didn't get a high enough A+! Let's not mention my C anywhere near that.
 
sumstorm said:
Interesting. I applied to U Penn with a 3.4, extensive and diverse experience, Ag background, zoo med experience, international vet med experience, research experience, business experience, and experience dealing with hoof and mouth. Didn't get in. Would love to know what they wanted that threw me out of competition if it wasn't the GPA.
Click to expand...

haha I would want to know too!
 
sumstorm said:
Hey, that still happens in vet school! I hear people bemoan that they didn't get a high enough A+! Let's not mention my C anywhere near that.
Click to expand...


I was thinking specifically of vet school, to be honest. :p Never had that happen much in undergrad but I think it's because I hung out with such low key people!

I always think "If your A- is 'failing', does that make my C+ a super fail...?"
 
Pandacinny said:
Hey, I totally get that sentiment. It's really annoying to be getting a C+ in a class while your classmates complain about how they're just going to FAIL when in actuality they mean they'll get a B+. :p
Click to expand...

I lived with that type of girl. She spent most of the semester freaking out over Animal Behavior. We had the exact same marks in lab and I made 2 points higher than her on the midterm (found that out from someone else... she didn't want to tell me... all she told me was that she did a lot worse than I did), and she got over a 90 in the class and I got an 85. She was also convinced she did horrible in Geology. None of her marks were below a 90 :p I wanted to slap her when I found out.
 
I guess its the self degradation that annoys me. People with great GPAs complaining about how they don't think they will get in. I mean be concerned, but dont parade your GPA around for everyone to see, especially if its a 3.5 or better and thats "horrible" by your standards. A good chunk of the people on these boards don't have above a 3.5 and it just looks like your fishing for compliments or a confirmation on your "awesomeness"

Quite the statement, especially when paired with the one about "fixation with GPA". I was under the impression that the original poster was seeking out opinions on what we considered good grades. I think I started the whole uproar here, based on my past undergrad grades and research I have done on what GPA was most likely to get you accepted into a program. I did not get in with mediocre grades( way less than 3.5), that is why I am in grad school now. I only suggested that great grades now would save you the time and expense of grad school. I am a much older nontraditional student that had the brains but not the ability to earn great undergrad grades. I had a successful first career, but always regretted not getting into a vet program, and vet med always remained my first choice as a profession. I fixed the reasons I was not earning good grades and am doing fine in grad school, but will not post my grad school GPA as it may appear to some that I am seeking out "awesome" status or fishing for compliments.
I joined this forum because I really benefit from the support, and thought that as a mature student that made mistakes with GPA in the past, I had something to offer those who are currently struggling with GPA. I would rather see people fix whatever is keeping them from earning competitive grades and get into a program than wish for years that they would have taken action on their GPA issues early on. I don't have an offer yet, I am in the same boat as most of you here, just trying to get into a program.
This forum was designed as an educational tool; learn what you can from it, give back what you can. Attacks do not uphold the spirit of SDN. I read this forum for quite a while before I joined up and posted. I believe that the majority that post their GPA's and other personal info do it to help out others on the forum. In fact, I have noticed quite alot of posts requesting that people provide this info. I would rather not have told the entire SDN community about my bad undergrad grades, but I did it with a purpose. Seems I shouldn't have :confused:
Fixation with GPA? Bottom line is the higher the GPA, the better the odds are at getting accepted into a program. There are limited spaces available, and AC need to choose a fraction of those applying. Example: CSU has 135 spaces in 2014 class with 1752 applicants. Do the folks with the low GPA's think they are entitled to a slot over those who did what it took to earn a higher GPA? If so, why? :scared:
 
Obviously you want to help people where you can but the point is that some people have fantastic GPAs and still complain to everyone about it which is silly. But people know what they need to do to improve their GPAs....thats a pretty basic concept. I think that people would benefit more from advice on other parts of their application, like experience or their essays. I just really feel that its counterproductive to the purpose of the board, which is to encourage people not make them feel bad about themselves or like they are not just as capable as everyone else.
 
Fixation with GPA? Bottom line is the higher the GPA, the better the odds are at getting accepted into a program. There are limited spaces available, and AC need to choose a fraction of those applying. Example: CSU has 135 spaces in 2014 class with 1752 applicants. Do the folks with the low GPA's think they are entitled to a slot over those who did what it took to earn a higher GPA? If so, why? :scared:[/QUOTE]

I don't think thats a true statement. Plenty of people with high GPAs don't get in. On top of that not all undergrads are created equal. A 3.9 GPA at a below average institution is not better than a 3.4 at an above average institution, and vet schools know this and take it into consideration. Your entire application matters and if your even at this point in the application process you most likely have a good GPA(above a 3.0) and therefore shouldnt feel the need to compare that aspect of your application with anyone elses.

I know that there are a handful of vet schools that do look only at GPA first, but the fact of the matter is that there are a lot that don't and look at your entire application and at that point every aspect of the application matters.

and just to cover it cause I know someone will say something, I am speaking from conversations that i have had with my aunt who works at CSU Vet school.
 
CSU said:
Fixation with GPA? Bottom line is the higher the GPA, the better the odds are at getting accepted into a program. There are limited spaces available, and AC need to choose a fraction of those applying. Example: CSU has 135 spaces in 2014 class with 1752 applicants. Do the folks with the low GPA's think they are entitled to a slot over those who did what it took to earn a higher GPA? If so, why? :scared:
Click to expand...

Though I think that you phrased this poorly and it's a bit narrow in scope, I do think it's a good question to ask yourself if you are one of us with a low GPA.

It is true that GPA is a pretty high consideration for many of the schools* but it's not all that goes into the application, as illustrated in the many successful applicants threads that we have had here. There are plenty of people with lower GPAs who beat out others with higher GPAs for the same schools, so it's dishonest to say that there's a direct correlation like you state. Otherwise, why would adcoms even ask for all of the other information? They'd just make a rank order of GPAs, admit the top 135 and call it a day. It sure would be much easier that way! :smuggrin:

Getting back to my original sentiment, since the GPA is, for better or for worse, weighted with varying high degrees of importance, those of us with subpar undergraduate marks for one reason or the other really should be asking ourselves why. If you go to an interview, it's a very common question that an adcom will ask, so it's good to be prepared. Why should a school take me and my 3.16 undergraduate GPA over an applicant with a 3.86 instead? I can answer that, and that's basically what I used my personal statement, explanation statement and supplementary essays to convey. Each of us needs to be able to answer that question for ourselves, even those with a higher GPA.

*it's funny that you use CSU as an example, since they do not have a weighting assigned to GPA as a value as many other schools do..
 
We did kinda get off topic here... but that's okay...

I go to a Canadian university, where a 75 is a B and is considered pretty decent. In American universities, a 75 is a C and people seem to freak out about it. Just wanted to look at the numbers, not the letters, and see what standards people have set for themselves and why. A person's GPA tells me nothing. *Random US University*'s applicants have an average GPA of 3.5. What is that in numbers?

One of the reasons why I started this thread is because I've been working my tail off and one day, according to this forum, yay, I have a chance of getting in (~3.0 gpa and rising!), then the next day, I have no chance of getting in anytime soon (but my average isn't an 85, which is what is required for AVC... uh oh). Also, the other day, my friend patted me on the back for getting 70s and 80s this semester... he's always done better than me in school and I wasn't expecting the compliment... but is that really as good as he's making it out to be?

I'd be estatic if I could get my stats to the point where I'd get accepted into a Carib school. I'm a strong biology student (think I'm averaging 85 in my bio)... poor chem student, which is pulling my average down. Re-taking organic in the spring (my university will replace my old grade with my new, yay!) Got a research job, am debating whether to quit my fast food job that I've been at for a year and a half now (need the money, but didn't appreciate them scheduling me over exams). Vet school is my #1 choice, but I don't know what else is out there for me, and I'm just starting to research my options. Do I want to do a masters? PhD? Marine biology sounds cool! I just want to be happy with what I do and it sounds sad, but I also want to make enough to do the things I enjoy. Being a vet tech would have made me so happy, but making slightly above minimum wage for the rest of my life didn't sound too appealing. Everyone told me to just go for vet, so here I am.

A year+ from now, when I'm about to apply, I don't want to waste my time if it's obvious that my grades won't cut it... and I'm having a difficult time seeing where it is I stand when all people tell me are GPAs and letters :p
 
scarcelyheard said:
A year+ from now, when I'm about to apply, I don't want to waste my time if it's obvious that my grades won't cut it... and I'm having a difficult time seeing where it is I stand when all people tell me are GPAs and letters :p
Click to expand...

You can't know where you stand until you apply. It's up to you whether you actually feel like it's a waste of time to apply or not. How's that?
 
scarcelyheard said:
but my average isn't an 85, which is what is required for AVC... uh oh).
Click to expand...

Maybe I should have been more specific... 85 is the "average" average that AVC gets. But it's not a hard and fast cut off. It's not like if you have an 80 average they biff your application in the garbage. Jack MacDougall, one of the recruitment officers, actually said that they have taken averages as low as 76, because in that case, everything else was stellar. The girl had a good GRE score, tons of experience and extra curriculars. They invited her for an interview based on those, and she had a great interview, so they took her.

You do need good marks, but they aren't the be-all and end-all of everything.
 
Coquette22 said:
Maybe I should have been more specific... 85 is the "average" average that AVC gets. But it's not a hard and fast cut off. It's not like if you have an 80 average they biff your application in the garbage. Jack MacDougall, one of the recruitment officers, actually said that they have taken averages as low as 76, because in that case, everything else was stellar. The girl had a good GRE score, tons of experience and extra curriculars. They invited her for an interview based on those, and she had a great interview, so they took her.

You do need good marks, but they aren't the be-all and end-all of everything.
Click to expand...

That makes me feel a lot better. Thanks for the clarification. Somebody else on here said that if you have below an 85, you don't get the interview. I went on the AVC site to see what the average was, and there was no mention of it. St. George's says they want an 80 average, so now I'm curious about the range of marks people had to get accepted.
 
scarcelyheard said:
That makes me feel a lot better. Thanks for the clarification. Somebody else on here said that if you have below an 85, you don't get the interview. I went on the AVC site to see what the average was, and there was no mention of it. St. George's says they want an 80 average, so now I'm curious about the range of marks people had to get accepted.
Click to expand...

AVC is a bit of an odd case due to the breakdown of seats according to provinces. As each Atlantic province has a set number of seats per year, the average GPA of interviewed / accepted students can vary widely by province. As for Jack telling you about that case where they extended an interview despite a weak GPA, I don't know what to say - I've asked and heard from Jack, Dr. Singh and one of the admissions officers that interviews are expressly awarded solely on GPA (and possibly, but I don't think so, GRE). Once they have extended an interview, then they also assess your animal experience & extracurriculars.

If you're from PEI, the average GPA to get an interview / acceptance may be 75%.
If you're from NS or NB, the average GPA to get an interview / acceptance may be 85%.

As the provincial governments subsidize seats, occasionally buying / selling of seats occurs. PEI, to my knowledge, has never sold a seat to another province (or becomes an international seat) - to do so would sort of undermine the provincial government's support for a local university. NS and NB have, however, sold seats - that's why PEI, despite having a population roughly a 1/4 to 1/3 that of NB or NS, has roughly the same amount of seats available. Also accordingly to the population is the number of applicants - I can't remember the exact numbers, but a year or two ago there were only 21 PEI applicants for something like 12 seats, whereas there were something like 30-40 applicants each for NS and NB's seats.

In essence, this makes it easier to get in if you're from PEI than it is NS or NB. I personally know at least half a dozen students who interviewed from either NS or NB who didn't get in and, when they asked what they should do for the next application cycle, were told to move to PEI and work for a year (preferably something to do with animals) to establish residency.

NL is a bit of an odd case - they have 2 seats available but I have no idea how many applications AVC gets per year for them. God help you if you're a Newfie applying to AVC if one or both of the previous year's acceptee's decide to defer for a year; that means the seats available for the current year drop to 1 or 0.
 
Last edited:
chagheill said:
As for Jack telling you about that case where they extended an interview despite a weak GPA, I don't know what to say - I've asked and heard from Jack, Dr. Singh and one of the admissions officers that interviews are expressly awarded solely on GPA (and possibly, but I don't think so, GRE). Once they have extended an interview, then they also assess your animal experience & extracurriculars.
Click to expand...

The website just says "interview invites are extended based on academic ranking." I'm not sure if that includes the average alone, or the GRE as well. I just know that they did extend an interview to someone with a weaker average. It could be a matter that it was a few arts credits bringing her average down that were deemed less important and her biology scores were outstanding, since AVC weights the biology credits more heavily than anything else. Or maybe there were extenuating circumstances such as a death in the family while taking those lower scored credits. I have no idea what the exact circumstances were, just that it did happen.

ETA: Stupid me. Further down the page it says:
The first step, encompassing 55% of the evaluation, involves ascertaining completeness of the application, i.e. fulfillment of minimal requirements for admission, then ranking of applicants according to the grades received in the prerequisite courses and GRE scores. Based upon the rank list, approximately twice as many applicants will be invited for an interview than are offered a seat.
Click to expand...

So yes, GRE score does account for a small part of your initial ranking that gets you an interview.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

riderrapidash
Schools that take Fall semester grades into consideration for acceptance?
Replies
9
Views
700
riderrapidash
riderrapidash
D
Advice for Improving Application (Current Sophomore/Low GPA/Good Experience)
Replies
2
Views
390
derka
D
L
Vet schools that do grade replacement
Replies
1
Views
889
SkiOtter
SkiOtter
R
WAMC First time applicant- good GPA, low experience
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ardently.cowenby
A
T
considering second app cycle vs vet prep
Replies
0
Views
546
topanga_231
T
Top