Order of importance for med school

[jult24er]

My GPA, BCPM, MCAT, and research were all pretty good and I haven't gotten in anywhere. There's much more to it than that, guys. I think EC's, whatever they are, that set you apart from other pre-meds, are more important in AdComs eyes than everything else.

ha ha ha, so interesting, just proves beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Of course in your expereince EC is the most important thing!!

In my expereince, it is too. In some guy who had great ECs and a 29 MCAT and got rejected, MCAT is the most important. Some girl who got in with a 3.9 29 thinks GPA is ...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dienekes88]

wow, im sorry, i dont understand (i think im getting the coffee squirell pic now). id like to though ...

I think Kaustikos is trying to say that with greater transparency, you can actually have greater confusion. Everyone will stumble over themselves to replicate the "winning formula."

It won't be the game of escalation that Kaustikos is talking about, though. Everyone knows that GPA and MCAT are important. Why else do you think there are so many threads titled "ZOMG I GOTS A B+!!!1! MAJOR FAILz/QUIT???!!"

It's a complicated process, but people applying to med school want to force some reason into it. They want to think, "dude, if I just get a 35 and 3.8, I'm totally going to get into University of XYZ."

 

[cyclin M]

I understand now. But how does one become more "qualified" than another individual if the original claim - 30 mcat and 3.6 gpa are what you need - aren't really true and someone with those qualifications isn't more qualified than someone with a 27 mcat and 3.2 gpa but with, say, a self-sacrificing lifestyle constantly devoted towards helping kids and animals. But then everyone does that with 30mcat and 3.6 gpa but then someone with a 27 mcat and 3.2 gpa bests those guys by just writing a book about life. Then someone does the 30 mcat/3.6 and writes a book and self sacrifices and is outed again by someone with a 27/3.2 that kills someone. Then you have the 303/3.6 crowd committing suicide because they don't get it

 

[dienekes88]

You forgot something about suicide...

The hyperbole about suicide was just a description of the frustration it would cause... not a means to get into medical school.

 

[Abulcasis]

I think we need a mediator between those who stress the importance of EC's over those that don't.

Obviously MCAT and GPA is most important because that's what medical schools look at FIRST before evaluating your application. EC's come to ENHANCE your application and to make you more competitive.

Now that lately, everyone has EC's, the importance of EC's has definitely increased, so no pre-med student can go without them, but that's not to say that EC's outweigh your grades/MCAT's.

The one with the 3.6/39 MCAT etc etc probably got rejected from a school because the other applicants there had better EC's. Not necessarily that EC's are important than your numbers, but that it depends on the competition in the applicant pool which is generally higher for more elite schools than those that aren't.

does this make sense at all?

 

[dienekes88]

That is one of the best pics I've seen on SDN!

Edit: but it won't quote into my post...

 

[jult24er]

I think Kaustikos is trying to say that with greater transparency, you can actually have greater confusion. Everyone will stumble over themselves to replicate the "winning formula."

It won't be the game of escalation that Kaustikos is talking about, though. Everyone knows that GPA and MCAT are important. Why else do you think there are so many threads titled "ZOMG I GOTS A B+!!!1! MAJOR FAILz/QUIT???!!"

It's a complicated process, but people applying to med school want to force some reason into it. They want to think, "dude, if I just get a 35 and 3.8, I'm totally going to get into University of XYZ."

I dont think it should necissarily be an all numbers-game. But i think all criteria should be transparent. I dont see how that would make greater confusion.

 

[Abulcasis]

The hyperbole about suicide was just a description of the frustration it would cause... not a means to get into medical school.

Actually I read in an autobiography once about someone that threatened suicide if a school didn't let her in and they did (this happened in China though- not like that would make a difference).

 

[jult24er]

I think we need a mediator between those who stress the importance of EC's over those that don't.

Obviously MCAT and GPA is most important because that's what medical schools look at FIRST before evaluating your application. EC's come to ENHANCE your application and to make you more competitive.

Now that lately, everyone has EC's, the importance of EC's has definitely increased, so no pre-med student can go without them, but that's not to say that EC's outweigh your grades/MCAT's.

The one with the 3.6/39 MCAT etc etc probably got rejected from a school because the other applicants there had better EC's. Not necessarily that EC's are important than your numbers, but that it depends on the competition in the applicant pool which is generally higher for more elite schools than those that aren't.

does this make sense at all?

Not to me ...

 

[Abulcasis]

Not to me ...

Damn...I don't want the Darth Vader picture posted in response to that then..

 

[dienekes88]

I dont think it should necissarily be an all numbers-game. But i think all criteria should be transparent. I dont see how that would make greater confusion.

Because people will think that writing a memoir or racing an Ironman is the ticket. Then everyone will do it. Then you're screwed, 'cause now it has become an unofficial prerequisite... but you have to figure out something else that is unusual.

I imagine 20 years ago... people who volunteered were viewed as pretty rad in the admissions world. Maybe 10 years ago... people who shadowed were at the top of the pile.

Now both of those things, which used to be defining characteristics, are now essentially required.

 

[jult24er]

Damn...I don't want the Darth Vader picture posted in response to that then..

well, more sense then a guy talking through a tube. unless that guy is stephen hawking.

 

[dienekes88]

Actually I read in an autobiography once about someone that threatened suicide if a school didn't let her in and they did (this happened in China though- not like that would make a difference).

I don't think Kaustikos read that book.

In the post... they commit suicide, 'cause "they don't get it." Frustration.

 

[halekulani]

1. overall gpa
2. mcat
3. ec's

i won't even put bcpm into the equation because it should be more or less around your overall gpa. it is only a factor IMO if you are significantly worse in science courses.

 

[Abulcasis]

I don't think Kaustikos read that book.

In the post... they commit suicide, 'cause "they don't get it." Frustration.

oh, alright. thanks for the clarification

 

[dienekes88]

I think we need a mediator between those who stress the importance of EC's over those that don't.

Obviously MCAT and GPA is most important because that's what medical schools look at FIRST before evaluating your application. EC's come to ENHANCE your application and to make you more competitive.

Now that lately, everyone has EC's, the importance of EC's has definitely increased, so no pre-med student can go without them, but that's not to say that EC's outweigh your grades/MCAT's.

The one with the 3.6/39 MCAT etc etc probably got rejected from a school because the other applicants there had better EC's. Not necessarily that EC's are important than your numbers, but that it depends on the competition in the applicant pool which is generally higher for more elite schools than those that aren't.

does this make sense at all?

Yes. It does.

Regarding the EC's...

I didn't have much volunteering: 9 months - but a very good rec letter from my volunteer coordinator.

I did 3 months of research my freshman year of college.

A bunch of sports... Ironman x2.

However, this is a complicated process. In no ways does that explain why I got into two of my top choice schools.

 

[jult24er]

Because people will think that writing a memoir or racing an Ironman is the ticket. Then everyone will do it. Then you're screwed, 'cause now it has become an unofficial prerequisite... but you have to figure out something else that is unusual.

I imagine 20 years ago... people who volunteered were viewed as pretty rad in the admissions world. Maybe 10 years ago... people who shadowed were at the top of the pile.

Now both of those things, which used to be defining characteristics, are now essentially required.

I see ... thanks ... hmmm ...

i suppose what you're saying then, is that its not the memoir or ironman, per se, its more like "a unique experience that shows you are motivated, interesting, good person, etc. ..." which brings up the question, what does unique, motivated, interesting, etc. mean?

 

[Abulcasis]

Because people will think that writing a memoir or racing an Ironman is the ticket. Then everyone will do it. Then you're screwed, 'cause now it has become an unofficial prerequisite... but you have to figure out something else that is unusual.

I imagine 20 years ago... people who volunteered were viewed as pretty rad in the admissions world. Maybe 10 years ago... people who shadowed were at the top of the pile.

Now both of those things, which used to be defining characteristics, are now essentially required.

QFT x 6.636^34

(I know what Planck's constant is btw)

 

[dienekes88]

I see ... thanks ... hmmm, not sure what to do with that.

i suppose what you're saying then, is that its not the iditerod memoir per se, its more like "a unique experience that shows you are motivated, interesting, good person, etc. ..." which brings up the question, what does unique, motivated, interesting, etc. mean?

That's the million dollar question...

...and that's why SDN will live on forever...

 

[bodonid]

qft x 6.636^34

(i know what planck's constant is btw)

 

[jult24er]

That's the million dollar question...

...and that's why SDN will live on forever...

true.

i suppose the way this process is set-up now, it privileges one person's answer to those questions way beyond mine ... i see though how making the process more transparent would mean less room to choose based on subjective criteria ...

 

[Abulcasis]

10 years from now....an EC that will become a fad to help people in the admissions process is to perform surgery during premed years.

Wooo!

 

[dienekes88]

10 years from now....an EC that will become a fad to help people in the admissions process is to perform surgery during premed years.

Wooo!

zOMG. Don't tell everyone my secret to getting into med schoolz! I did my first Lap Appy at 14. Did a Whipple at 19.

Get this. Major hepatectomy + Whipple at 20. Fifteen hours in the OR. Didn't even have to take a bathroom break. I foley'd myself.

 

[fizzle]

Few people bring this up, but I think that for an application, the overall story and person that you convey through your application is the MOST important thing. The EC's are simply supporting evidence to back up the points in your story, and the numbers just show that you're academically qualified to handle medical school. Your story distinguishes you from everyone else (otherwise, what's the difference between every person who volunteers at a hospital or does research?). It seems to me that many people are too focused on each of the individual parts (Are my EC's good enough? Are my numbers high enough?) and not concerned enough with the image that the application, as a whole, presents to the admissions committee.

It's a holistic thing. Your essays probably make up the bulk of your story, but you can't really point to any single element as putting you on the right or wrong track. I think it's what causes much of the supposed "unpredictability" in medical school admissions, when, in fact, it's just that most of us don't know what really matters. That "most of us" includes me, too, unfortunately

 

[jult24er]

I think it's what causes much of the supposed "unpredictability" in medical school admissions, when, in fact, it's just that most of us don't know what really matters. That "most of us" includes me, too, unfortunately

props for honesty (PFH)

you have an acceptance though, congrats, thats great news, good luck.

 

[flip26]

My GPA, BCPM, MCAT, and research were all pretty good and I haven't gotten in anywhere. There's much more to it than that, guys. I think EC's, whatever they are, that set you apart from other pre-meds, are more important in AdComs eyes than everything else.

Dude, didn't you apply REALLY late? Did you really not understand that the weakness in your app is one of late timing, not of stats (not sure about your ECs since you did not list any on MDApps, and that too could be a weakness for you)...

 

[WashMe]

ha ha ha, so interesting, just proves beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Of course in your expereince EC is the most important thing!!

In my expereince, it is too. In some guy who had great ECs and a 29 MCAT and got rejected, MCAT is the most important. Some girl who got in with a 3.9 29 thinks GPA is ...

I agree that it is personal/subjective as to why each person thinks they have not had success. All I'm saying is that I thought I played by the rules; near top of my class GPA and BCPM, 99+%ile MCAT, 3+ years research w/ a pub, emergency dept. volunteering, MCAT teaching, etc.... at some point I was misled by someone, be it my advisor, the MSAR, or whatever. That stuff must not be as important as everyone thinks. If people are making lists of "what is most important" then something is missing. How about we divide EC's into shadowing, research, and volunteering (they all seem almost necessary to AdComs). Then add other factors (doctors in the family, family on medical school staff, ethnicity/gender, undergraduate college, undergraduate major, many other things...).

It is not simple, and no list of 3-5 things will suffice.

 

[WashMe]

Dude, didn't you apply REALLY late? Did you really not understand that the weakness in your app is one of late timing, not of stats (not sure about your ECs since you did not list any on MDApps, and that too could be a weakness for you)...

Nah man all my apps with the exception of Case Western/Cleveland Clinic and Michigan were done in July! I added the aforementioned schools after I didn't get into OSU, Cincy, and Pitt. I also thought that of Harvard/Penn/Yale I would hopefully get one interview...

 

[Jolie South]

I agree that it is personal/subjective as to why each person thinks they have not had success. All I'm saying is that I thought I played by the rules; near top of my class GPA and BCPM, 99+%ile MCAT, 3+ years research w/ a pub, emergency dept. volunteering, MCAT teaching, etc.... at some point I was misled by someone, be it my advisor, the MSAR, or whatever. That stuff must not be as important as everyone thinks. If people are making lists of "what is most important" then something is missing. How about we divide EC's into shadowing, research, and volunteering (they all seem almost necessary to AdComs). Then add other factors (doctors in the family, family on medical school staff, ethnicity/gender, undergraduate college, undergraduate major, many other things...).

It is not simple, and no list of 3-5 things will suffice.

It may not be those things. It may be your essays, LORs, or interviewing skills. LORs are hard to know about until post-cycle. Essays and interviewing skills are often things that we assume that we're good at but could quite possibly need work.

I would take a look at those areas if this cycle does not work out.

 

[fahimaz7]

QFT x 6.636^34

(I know what Planck's constant is btw)

Grats on...

a. Being a sophomore in college
b. Studying the wrong material for the MCAT
c. Showing how bad you care to impress the people on this site
c. All of the above

The above question has at least one correct answer...

 

[flip26]

Nah man all my apps with the exception of Case Western/Cleveland Clinic and Michigan were done in July! I added the aforementioned schools after I didn't get into OSU, Cincy, and Pitt. I also thought that of Harvard/Penn/Yale I would hopefully get one interview...

Ouch, I thought you applied late.

What were your ECs? Clinical stuff, etc?

How many interviews total? It seems like your numbers should have garnered you a very high ratio of interviews to secondaries...unless there is some real "hole" in your app, like a poorly written PS...

 

[fahimaz7]

I agree that it is personal/subjective as to why each person thinks they have not had success. All I'm saying is that I thought I played by the rules; near top of my class GPA and BCPM, 99+%ile MCAT, 3+ years research w/ a pub, emergency dept. volunteering, MCAT teaching, etc.... at some point I was misled by someone, be it my advisor, the MSAR, or whatever. That stuff must not be as important as everyone thinks. If people are making lists of "what is most important" then something is missing. How about we divide EC's into shadowing, research, and volunteering (they all seem almost necessary to AdComs). Then add other factors (doctors in the family, family on medical school staff, ethnicity/gender, undergraduate college, undergraduate major, many other things...).

It is not simple, and no list of 3-5 things will suffice.

GPA 3.95
MCAT 39

If you made it through undergraduate and you failed to do any EC's... You shouldn't be getting in. But, with that said, all it would have taken to satisfy the EC requirement was a few good days with a physician and another few with a volunteer group. If you had these, the only thing I can think of is the personal statement.

I hope you had something to list when you filled out the 15 EC's on AMCAS other than Dean's list, President's list, and all around academic badass.

 

[WashMe]

GPA 3.95
MCAT 39

If you made it through undergraduate and you failed to do any EC's... You shouldn't be getting in. But, with that said, all it would have taken to satisfy the EC requirement was a few good days with a physician and another few with a volunteer group. If you had these, the only thing I can think of is the personal statement.

I hope you had something to list when you filled out the 15 EC's on AMCAS other than Dean's list, President's list, and all around academic badass.

Funny that's exactly what I said on my AMCAS lol. I taught an extensive MCAT class (~80hr commitment), did some ER volunteering, and did ~20 hrs of shadowing. I would have shadowed more but I didn't think it showed much commitment and it didn't take long for me to see what I am getting myself into My pre-med advisor really like my PS and my interviewer at WashU told me he hopes I don't get to see my LOR's because it would give me an overblown ego.

All I can say is

 

[fahimaz7]

Funny that's exactly what I said on my AMCAS lol. I taught an extensive MCAT class (~80hr commitment), did some ER volunteering, and did ~20 hrs of shadowing. I would have shadowed more but I didn't think it showed much commitment and it didn't take long for me to see what I am getting myself into My pre-med advisor really like my PS and my interviewer at WashU told me he hopes I don't get to see my LOR's because it would give me an overblown ego.

All I can say is

Pre-med advisers = the devil

What's that saying.. If you can't do... Teach? lol.. jk.

 

[Abulcasis]

Funny that's exactly what I said on my AMCAS lol. I taught an extensive MCAT class (~80hr commitment), did some ER volunteering, and did ~20 hrs of shadowing. I would have shadowed more but I didn't think it showed much commitment and it didn't take long for me to see what I am getting myself into My pre-med advisor really like my PS and my interviewer at WashU told me he hopes I don't get to see my LOR's because it would give me an overblown ego.

All I can say is

Your situation worries a great many future med school applicants....

Best of luck to you.

 

[jult24er]

I agree that it is personal/subjective as to why each person thinks they have not had success. All I'm saying is that I thought I played by the rules; near top of my class GPA and BCPM, 99+%ile MCAT, 3+ years research w/ a pub, emergency dept. volunteering, MCAT teaching, etc.... at some point I was misled by someone, be it my advisor, the MSAR, or whatever. That stuff must not be as important as everyone thinks. If people are making lists of "what is most important" then something is missing. How about we divide EC's into shadowing, research, and volunteering (they all seem almost necessary to AdComs). Then add other factors (doctors in the family, family on medical school staff, ethnicity/gender, undergraduate college, undergraduate major, many other things...).

It is not simple, and no list of 3-5 things will suffice.

I agree. You're like me x100, im shocked.

 

[redlight]

imo
1. gpa and mcat. who says one has to outweigh the other a majority of the time?
can you handle med school? you need solid #s in both to prove it. end of story.
2. essays and lors
what parts of your life have led you to decide medicine, how other people see you
as a person/potential doctor, what defining moments have made you who u are.
3. ecs, awards and honors
where you walk the talk. need to know what drives you, what you are interested
in, how you standout amoung peers

all this gets you your interview,
which gets you accepted
4. interview skills- how you sell yourself, carry yourself, interact with others. how you rank compared to other interviewees on w/e scale the school uses.. assuming they are not just interveiwing you to make sure you are human/sane and already plan on accepting you.

i think this might be generic order, with 4 being the most important, 1 being the least overall (the stats are important to get, but once you have them, you are in a pool with a bunch of ppl who have them so they become the least important factor)

 

[scarletgirl777]

You'd be surprised at how many blocks of wood I've seen at my interviews so far



The way I see it, someone who had a 4.0 and had some test day anxiety and got a 29 will be a better med student because he/she has proven that they can handle themselves academically over the long-term, rather than someone with a 3.0 and a 39 who is clearly smart enough to kick butt on the MCAT but not dedicated enough to his studies to pull a decent GPA.

If this person just had test anxiety on that one particular day, why didn't they just take the MCAT again? And if test anxiety is in fact an ongoing problem they have, why has it not poorly affected their grades in college? Why didn't they bomb their course finals? This incongruity suggests that their science coursework was not serious. And if their science coursework was in fact legit, and their issue is that they went to some free thinking liberal arts school and it's just that they can't deal with multiple choice exams...then how are they going to pass the boards??? Or the finals in med school that often try to model the boards? This is an issue they should have worked out before, and why should med school take a chance on them being able to work it out later?

In case you can't tell, I think MCAT is more important (or should be). By which I mean--if you take a kid with the average matriculant GPA (about a 3.6, right?) and give him a high MCAT and you compare him to a kid with an average MCAT (30) and give him a high GPA, I should hope the first kid is more competitive. Because comparing GPAs across different schools and different classes is pretty tough, especially in the situation where the adcom is unfamiliar with a school.

 

[cbrons]

I wouldn't say getting a 29 means you cracked under pressure, but you didn't perform as well as you probably could have. It's a bit of a stretch to say that that person will habitually crack under pressure in life-or-death situations. Handling yourself under pressure is a learnable skill, not a fixed personality trait.

exactly, which is why I said you need to prepare for the test by coming up with a good strategy to deal with it.. just the same as you need to prepare for the test by studying the content. Its true that some people, like a colleague of mine who did terrible on the PCAT 3 times in a row, would do a lot better if they didn't get such bad anxiety. Getting a bad score three times in a row didn't say something about her understanding of the material so much as it did her preparation.

 

[musicalmedicine]

Based on what you see on SDN, it's probably this:

1) The amount of time you spend worrying about having a B on your transcript.
2) How convincingly you can argue that you consistently scored > 40 on MCAT practiced tests, but were inconvenienced somehow on the actual test day. Thus, a mere 38.
3) The degree to which you exaggerate your EC's.
4) The amount of time you spend on SDN, especially in search of information that can easily be found on a particular med school's own website.
5) The percentage of your concept of "medicine as a career" that is shaped by TV shows such as Scrubs, Nip/Tuck, and House.

I think that this list is probably the most accurate.

 

[Kaustikos]

I don't think Kaustikos read that book.

In the post... they commit suicide, 'cause "they don't get it." Frustration.

After your thorough and excellent explanation of what I was trying to get at, I officially appoint you as my mediator and analyst.
The income is payment in the form of 's, which can be converted into currency wherein 10000000000000000 = 1$

I give you 100000 so far

Thanks for clarifying while I was away, though.

 

[nevercold]

Before going to medical school, I would have said:
1) MCAT
2) GPA
3) ECs
4) Interview

After going to medical school and participating in admissions I realize there are really three important lists:

What will get you the interview -
1. GPA in tough courses
2. Story
3. MCAT
4. ECs

What will get you in after the interview -
1. Interview
2. GPA in tough courses
3. Story
4. MCAT
5. ECs

What will sink you at any point -
1. Interview
2. Story
3. GPA/MCAT
4. ECs

Where people go astray in their lists:
* Lots of people have good interviews and good stories and it is not always easy to stratify people with these, so the numbers end up being the more concrete thing to think about.
* While the MCAT is the "great equalizer," every score also has like a +/- 4-6 pt range so a 34 could be a 30 or a 38 -- in contrast a GPA is earned over many, many courses and has a much smaller 95% confidence interval and is more directly reflective of your ability to succeed in *gasp* courses (like those you take in the first half of medical school).
* ECs and "story" should be separated because everyone has a central core of their development that has brought them to this point that does not necessarily include the entire laundry list of things they did to add on to the application.

 

[Kaustikos]

Before going to medical school, I would have said:
1) MCAT
2) GPA
3) ECs
4) Interview

After going to medical school and participating in admissions I realize there are really three important lists:

What will get you the interview -
1. GPA in tough courses
2. Story
3. MCAT
4. ECs

What will get you in after the interview -
1. Interview
2. GPA in tough courses
3. Story
4. MCAT
5. ECs

What will sink you at any point -
1. Interview
2. Story
3. GPA/MCAT
4. ECs

Where people go astray in their lists:
* Lots of people have good interviews and good stories and it is not always easy to stratify people with these, so the numbers end up being the more concrete thing to think about.
* While the MCAT is the "great equalizer," every score also has like a +/- 4-6 pt range so a 34 could be a 30 or a 38 -- in contrast a GPA is earned over many, many courses and has a much smaller 95% confidence interval and is more directly reflective of your ability to succeed in *gasp* courses (like those you take in the first half of medical school).
* ECs and "story" should be separated because everyone has a central core of their development that has brought them to this point that does not necessarily include the entire laundry list of things they did to add on to the application.

It's so variable and changing. It's worse than the stock market!

 

[fizzle]

Before going to medical school, I would have said:
1) MCAT
2) GPA
3) ECs
4) Interview

After going to medical school and participating in admissions I realize there are really three important lists:

What will get you the interview -
1. GPA in tough courses
2. Story
3. MCAT
4. ECs

What will get you in after the interview -
1. Interview
2. GPA in tough courses
3. Story
4. MCAT
5. ECs

What will sink you at any point -
1. Interview
2. Story
3. GPA/MCAT
4. ECs

Where people go astray in their lists:
* Lots of people have good interviews and good stories and it is not always easy to stratify people with these, so the numbers end up being the more concrete thing to think about.
* While the MCAT is the "great equalizer," every score also has like a +/- 4-6 pt range so a 34 could be a 30 or a 38 -- in contrast a GPA is earned over many, many courses and has a much smaller 95% confidence interval and is more directly reflective of your ability to succeed in *gasp* courses (like those you take in the first half of medical school).
* ECs and "story" should be separated because everyone has a central core of their development that has brought them to this point that does not necessarily include the entire laundry list of things they did to add on to the application.

How do you know what a tough course is? I imagine that there are plenty of easy courses with tough-sounding names (and vice versa).

 

[bodonid]

Grats on...

a. Being a sophomore in college
b. Studying the wrong material for the MCAT
c. Showing how bad you care to impress the people on this site
c. All of the above

The above question has at least one correct answer...

O snap

 

[Abulcasis]

fahimaz7, I'll just pretend I never saw that.

 

[vokey588]

I bet you can find more instances where a school accepts someone with a lower than average GPA but high MCAT vs. a higher than average GPA and lower than average MCAT. Its like that jerkoff cyclin*** said, the MCAT is the "great equalizer".... sounds like a famous play in sports history or the nickname for some sleezebag politician but it is true... schools can have grade inflation, classes can individually have grade inflation/deflation, difficulty level, etc. and on and on.. its not like the admissions people can look at the school you came from, take your GPA from that school and then hold that number up like it has some sort of predictive value.

Yeah sure.. a 4.0 vs. a 3.5 does suggest something about the commitment made by the former student but when it comes down to .10 to even .20 difference its really not fair for them to say person A with the slightly higher GPA is more qualified than person B with the slightly lower one because of all the factors I just listed. On the other hand, you can most certainly differentiate between small deviations in MCAT scores between two people.

Plus the correlation coefficient between MCAT Biology score and step I is something like .53, a little less for physics (I thought it was .49) and verbal but clearly there is definitely a relationship. You can find this somewhere on the stats page of the AAMC website. The point is, there is more objective difference between two applicants with slightly different scores whereas there is not so much an objective differenct between two applicants with the slightly different GPAs, unless of course they took every class together.

"But CBRONZ some ppl get nervous and hAvE a BAd dAy TaKiN da test!!!!!!!!"

I understand that but test anxiety is something you need to really work on ahead of the exam... something you have to prepare for just like you have to preprare for the content of the actual exam. If you get a terrible score on the test because you didn't study, are you going to use something like ADD (which I myself have) as an excuse that you couldn't sit still and study? I'm sure you could but no one would accept it as valid.

For instance if I wanna be a sleezebag politician because its my dream to get elected governor so I can sell senate seats, and I had stage fright talking in front of a lot of people, I'd have to prepare long before the campaign to get that under control. If I didn't get it under control, I couldn't get up on stage and eloquently lie for 10 minutes with a straight face. So... going back to the test, if you know you have this problem, you have to prepare for it in advance by getting it under wraps.

so thats why I think the MCAT is often given much more weight than GPA, or at least should be



*** just kidding bud, you know you're the man

That's a pretty terrible correlation coefficient. You could say there is a relationship but it's clearly weak at best.

 

[229141]

imo
1. gpa and mcat. who says one has to outweigh the other a majority of the time?
can you handle med school? you need solid #s in both to prove it. end of story.
2. essays and lors
what parts of your life have led you to decide medicine, how other people see you
as a person/potential doctor, what defining moments have made you who u are.
3. ecs, awards and honors
where you walk the talk. need to know what drives you, what you are interested
in, how you standout amoung peers

all this gets you your interview,
which gets you accepted
4. interview skills- how you sell yourself, carry yourself, interact with others. how you rank compared to other interviewees on w/e scale the school uses.. assuming they are not just interveiwing you to make sure you are human/sane and already plan on accepting you.

i think this might be generic order, with 4 being the most important, 1 being the least overall (the stats are important to get, but once you have them, you are in a pool with a bunch of ppl who have them so they become the least important factor)

Not really imo...without stats you'll never even make it to the interview. And a lot of schools take a huge chunk of the people they interview (30-40%). Your stats won't matter as much if you can GET to the interview- that I agree with

 

[Abulcasis]

nm

 

[229141]

exactly, which is why I said you need to prepare for the test by coming up with a good strategy to deal with it.. just the same as you need to prepare for the test by studying the content. Its true that some people, like a colleague of mine who did terrible on the PCAT 3 times in a row, would do a lot better if they didn't get such bad anxiety. Getting a bad score three times in a row didn't say something about her understanding of the material so much as it did her preparation.

But but but! cbrons wut if I get teh jitterz when i'm takenz da mcat!?


No seriously you are 100% right. It's all about preparation..the more prepared you are, the less nervous you'll be in my opinion. What are we gonna bend the rules for everyone just because they aren't good at the test format? Life isn't fair..gotta deal with it and realize a lot of times getting into med school is survival of the fittest.