Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
I applied to 12!
-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
PharmCAS Questions
Started by foraminal
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
I applied to 12!
I am sorry but I just can't see the need to. How many did you get accepted to out of the 12?
Does anyone know if math courses are included in the PharmCas science GPA? Calculus and stats are required prerequisites so I'm guessing they are included in the calculation? Thanks.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
When you don't have the greatest stats, you should apply to as many schools as possible, increase the chances that you get in somewhere.
1/12 is still better than 0/5
If your stats are so bad that you need to apply to 14 schools, if you get in, you will be at BEST a second rate pharmacist.
Well I guess that makes sense to increase your chances. Still, that is a lot of money to be shelling out.
How did you come to this conclusion?
Exactly the same question I was going to ask.
The saying "spray and pray" comes to mind when applying to 14 schools. Not a good shot? Spray and pray. Marksmanship not up to par? Spray and pray. Same concept here. Not the best candidate? Spray and pray. If you need to resort to applying to any and every school you can, chances are you aren't a strong candidate to begin with. If your stats are solid, you won't need to apply to a bakers dozen+1, will you?
That still doesn't follow that you will be at best only a second rate pharmacist. I can think of a few reasons why that isn't necessarily true.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Doesn't mean they'll be a second rate pharmacist. I don't think the quality of how good of a pharmacist you are correlates with your grades, really. There are plenty of people out there who have had bad pasts or whatever. Bad GPA, no experience, whatever. At the time they applied, they would not have been accepted into good schools. A few years down the line, they have retaken classes, and they are accepted into good schools. But they are the same person. Are they going to be a second rate pharmacist (AT BEST) still? They are still the same person.
Sure, people have different circumstances that may cause them to have some bad grades. Life happens, I understand and agree with that. After retaking their classes, they won't have a lower GPA, though. By applying to 14 different schools, you are basically saying that your stats are so low that MAYBE someone out there will have low enough standards to accept you. (Pre-Candidate status schools, etc). So YES, I think they will be a second rate pharmacist. I'm sorry but your grades do reflect your ability.
Life is not about what is fair or what is right. I'm personally tired of everyone on here coddling other people who, yes, are not fit to be a pharmacist. People cry that the profession is losing respect amongst other medical professions and this is why. I never did any research into medical school but I'm fairly sure you'd have to go to somewhere like the Caribbean to go to med school if your grades sucked. Why should pharmacy be any different?
Not on their transcript. However, remember that PharmCAS does not drop retaken classes; it averages grades.
While you or I may assume that, it is not necessarily true. This person's stats may be borderline, not low, or she could be a reapplicant and she's not taking the chance that she would be rejected this cycle and have to reapply. And besides, have you seen the range of GPA's and PCATs that pharmacy schools accept? I applied to the University of Minnesota last year and they accepted students with sub 3.0 GPA's. There were also accepted students with sub 30 PCAT, and U of MN is the number three pharmacy school in the US (if you believe US News).
Yes, they reflect your ACADEMIC ability. Grades, however, do not indicate the kind of pharmacist you will become. There is much more than academics involved in the day-to-day work of a pharmacist. The institutions that train pharmacists recognize this, or else being admitted would not require an interview -- they would simply select those with the highest grades. Excellent communication skills, the ability to put a nervous patient at ease, a refined sense of right and wrong, professional judgment...I believe those are all things a good pharmacist will need. You do not suddenly get them because you did well in class.
No, it isn't. People with good grades turn out to be crappy pharmacists, and those with poor grades become excellent pharmacists. It is what it is. You may not like the "coddling," and it certainly gets on my nerves sometimes, but its point is that if you have a dream you should pursue it, no matter the bumps on your way. It's America...dreaming comes with the territory.
Last edited:
Thanks
I believe the address to which you should send your transcript is clearly printed on your transcript request form.
How do your grades in UNDERGRAD, reflect your ability as a pharmacist? They have no relation. Hell, even if you have a ****ty GPA in pharmacy school, you could still be best pharmacist. I know I'm not making that Rho Chi bull****.
All that matters in pharmacy is your diploma and your NAPLEX, state board scores.
I wouldn't really care if my doctor went to John Hopkins or if he went to St. George's. No difference in my opinion.
Excellent points and I agree with you on most counts - especially about the interview process. I know a lot of "robot" people who have a 4.0 but have zero social skills or no common sense. HOWEVER, if you didn't do well learning your basic knowledge (organic, biology) how do you plan to master the courses pertaining directly to pharmacy, which are much more difficult?
Yes this is the "land of opportunity" but come on... 200mg of REALITY, PO TID. Why get someones hopes up when they really DO NOT have that good of a shot of being accepted? Should a person not apply because someone said so on here? No, of course not. Should they put all their aspirations into pharmacy? No.
I disagree. Chances are, if you pulled straight C's in pharmacy school and you knew less than someone who got an A, I may consider you not as good of a pharmacist. Why? Lets say you are counseling a patient, or doing rounds in your hospital and a doctor asks you your opinion. You don't know your **** - so you look around and say, "Um, let me get back to you on that," or maybe "I'll have to look that up." This is really all based on your definition of what a "good pharmacist" is.
I ended up accepted to 3 (UNC, UofM and UWisconsin) with a few waitlists, but I didn't bother with 6 of the applications after I got into UofM, though I must say, out of state tuition at UofM is about 50k more expensive than either of the two aforementioned possibilities because you can gain residency after living a year in NC or Wisconsin. All because I wanted a huge M stamped on my degree. ugh.
I guess I'll be a second rate pharmacist now at a top tier school 🙁
Last edited:
Once again, grades don't equal how much you know. You can have a 2.4 and master the NAPLEX. Personally, it takes me about 4-6 weeks for the information that I get to sink in, thus I'll probably do ****ty on the 1st exam, but I'll ace the cumulative final.
Telling the doctor on your rotation that you'll get back to them on that, or you gotta look something up is a perfectly acceptable answer. When you go and look that information up, you'll be sure to remember it for next time.
some people end up becoming great clinicians once they go into their PGY2 specialties. Not everyone shines in pharmacy school. They're really really late bloomers. One of the faculty we have here is rumored to have lived this story.
OK, now this is a totally different issue: that a person with low undergrad grades will struggle in pharmacy school. One does not equal the other.
Really? You don't know that. No one on SDN knows that; only adcoms do. But if we are to believe the anecdotes of SDN members and the statistics published by pharmacy schools, people with what we would consider poor stats DO get admitted, even at well-established, fully accredited, and reputable pharmacy schools. So while the chance that a "low-stat" individual will get into pharmacy school is slim, it does exist.
Your "you have poor grades in undergrad and will make a poor pharmacist" stance is untenable. I'm sure you know it, which is why you've modified your position here:
And this is right. People should have backup plans, especially in something as uncertain as pharmacy school admissions. But it is impossible to tell the kind of pharmacist a person will be simply by looking at his/her undergraduate grades.
...Jeez. I'm becoming like Mike.
As long as you don't start pointing at your hat, you should be OK.
Who doesn't wanna be like Mike? Wait, I think we're talking about different Mike's here.
L
Lo|a
You mind sharing some of your stats to give us below avrg people a light of hope?? My stats are pretty shi*ty (excuse my choice of word for lack of a better word).
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
hm, i don't know how much help it will be to you to have my stats. i had around a 3.0 science gpa, 3.4 overall from a top tier school, a 95 pcat and what I thought were compelling essays. But then again, my lower science grades were something I was concerned about so that's why I applied to so many institutions. All in all, I considered myself a strong candidate but there are many, many strong applicants out there. Thankfully the overlap seems to be much more self contained in that top applicants apply to many institutions so the number of people accepted and taken in by institution will be inflated as a result of this phenomenon. I don't know if there's any actual PharmCAS data that can reduce this down to individual matriculant data. Schools will always publish more 'impressive' numbers in order to make themselves look better, but don't be fooled that it's easy to get in. Now that the economy ain't doing so hot, everyone wants a stable job.
We are. I mean Mike as in WVUPharm2007.
Grades do not determine how good of a pharmacist a person will be. Grades however does tell how hardworking the person is and how well they follow instructions. A person with low stats shows extreme laziness and lack of effort. Do you want a lazy pharmacist that shows no effort?
Last edited:
No, we just want a pharmacist who cares more about purses ans shoes than her patients.
She can always apply to 14 PCAT schools + ~ 6-7 non-PCAT schools if she wants to.
Actually, I do not. If I'm correct, it must be some reference to Michael Jordan.
laziness and lack of effort? That is pretty ignorant to say dont you think. A pharmacist who goes partying every weekend is no difference than one who becomes a homebody every weekend so he/she can study. Guess what, at the end, both of those people still earn a PharmD degree. If both of them pass the Naplex and law too, what difference does it make? I would rather have a pharmacist who is relaxing and chill to work with than one who is uptight about everything. I pretty sure I can categorize you in the latter description.
hahahahahahahahahahhahhhhhahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahhahaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
ha
No, its from personal experience.
1) a pharmacist will not need to study every weekend b/c they are out of school.
2) a college student can party every weekend and go to classes/study mondays-fridays and still pull a 3.5+ gpa. I only studied on Mondays-Fridays in undergrad and partied or relaxed on my weekends and I graduated with a 3.89...In high school I never opened a book or did much HW and graduated with a 3.2...same deal.
3) a GPA below a 3.0 means the person partied EVERYDAY and never went to classes is more like it.
3) a GPA below a 3.0 means the person partied EVERYDAY and never went to classes is more like it.
And what about the people who have above a 3.0? Not all the people who are applying to a lot of schools have a gpa below a 3.0. A person with a 3.2 or 3.3 is not as competitive as a 3.8 so that person might want to apply to a lot of schools to make sure they get accepted. If they only apply to 3 schools, they might get 3 rejects. A 3.2/3.3 does not imply that a person partied everyday or never went to class.
No, its from personal experience.
1) a pharmacist will not need to study every weekend b/c they are out of school.
2) a college student can party every weekend and go to classes/study mondays-fridays and still pull a 3.5+ gpa. I only studied on Mondays-Fridays in undergrad and partied or relaxed on my weekends and I graduated with a 3.89...In high school I never opened a book or did much HW and graduated with a 3.2...same deal.
3) a GPA below a 3.0 means the person partied EVERYDAY and never went to classes is more like it.
Wrote you a long reply but decided it's not worth trying to explain something to you. In short:
Learn to be more kind, compassionate and understanding and less of a douche.
Last edited:
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
No, its from personal experience.
1) a pharmacist will not need to study every weekend b/c they are out of school.
2) a college student can party every weekend and go to classes/study mondays-fridays and still pull a 3.5+ gpa. I only studied on Mondays-Fridays in undergrad and partied or relaxed on my weekends and I graduated with a 3.89...In high school I never opened a book or did much HW and graduated with a 3.2...same deal.
3) a GPA below a 3.0 means the person partied EVERYDAY and never went to classes is more like it.
Actually, I didn't party, I was usually at the lounge playing Madden on the XBox360 most of the time.
Do you ever have a point?
Sometimes.
I have submitted my PharmCAS application and I realized that for one of my classes that was a "lecture only" i instead put "lecture and lab combined". Is this a big deal? Also, will I be able to change it during the fall update? Thank you.
