Poll: MCAT vs GPA

[Shredder]

I'll cast the first ballot for MCAT

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[sunnyjohn]

Yeah, about that avatar... I dunno, but I have a hard time remembering that Shredder probably does not resemble the Donald in real life. My mind's eye totally pictures a slightly younger dude with the exact same hair.

 

[tank you]

i dont know man...it was pretty tough, my confidence is faltering!

for future references, GujuDoc is a girl.

and i also picture a younger version of donald t when i see Shredder's posts..

 

[Shredder]

for future references, GujuDoc is a girl.

and i also picture a younger version of donald t when i see Shredder's posts..

 

[liverotcod]

picture

Excellent

 

[Shredder]

Excellent

Dr. Shredder

yeah im gonna go two tone...the new style

 

[liverotcod]

Dr. Shredder
yeah im gonna go two tone...the new style

I give photoshop lessons at $50/hour if you're interested. You need it

 

[Shredder]

no thanks, im loyal to good old ms paint ha. you know you did a double take...

 

[gujuDoc]

for future references, GujuDoc is a girl.

and i also picture a younger version of donald t when i see Shredder's posts..

Thanks for clarifying with them that I'm female.

 

[gujuDoc]

i dont know man...it was pretty tough, my confidence is faltering!

Stop worrying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It happens every year. People say they think they did horrible and that the tst was much harder then any diag blha blah blah, and so the list goes on with the nubmer of people that say this. But in the end, when the two month waiting period is over they say that their real scores are within the range of their diag scores. All of the 35 and above people on here were getting in that range on their diags. So I'm sure I'll be hearing good news from you come a months' time. In the meanwhile focus on your application and don't worry about it.

By the way, as much as I hate the MCAT, I agree that it is better to use that then GPA because GPA is subjective to the teacher's criterion of a proper grading scale and style of teaching, the course taken, where it is taken, and finally the degree of difficulty to which the course is taken. Plus there is the factor of depending which courses or schools use +/- and which don't and how that may skew one's gpa.

 

[Steiner]

well, if i have any chance of getting in, i hope to god its mcat

I'm wishing for the same thing, but my multiple rejections last year led me to believe otherwise.

 

[Shredder]

Stop worrying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It happens every year. People say they think they did horrible and that the tst was much harder then any diag blha blah blah, and so the list goes on with the nubmer of people that say this. But in the end, when the two month waiting period is over they say that their real scores are within the range of their diag scores. All of the 35 and above people on here were getting in that range on their diags. So I'm sure I'll be hearing good news from you come a months' time. In the meanwhile focus on your application and don't worry about it.

By the way, as much as I hate the MCAT, I agree that it is better to use that then GPA because GPA is subjective to the teacher's criterion of a proper grading scale and style of teaching, the course taken, where it is taken, and finally the degree of difficulty to which the course is taken. Plus there is the factor of depending which courses or schools use +/- and which don't and how that may skew one's gpa.

yeah...the grading in some of my classes is so screwy, im such a big fan of standardized tests which are so professional in their administration, material, and scoring unlike professors

 

[Psycho Doctor]

I give photoshop lessons at $50/hour if you're interested. You need it

I'd love some lessons myself..whenever I can find some time!

 

[tank you]

yeah...the grading in some of my classes is so screwy, im such a big fan of standardized tests which are so professional in their administration, material, and scoring unlike professors

just curious, how is the mcat professional in its material??

 

[willthatsall]

I think how much the GPA counts for probably depends on the school and whether or not the ADCOM is familiar with it. For instance, if you go to an Ivy or another well known school that med schools receive a lot of applicants from and they are familiar with how the grading works, then the GPA from that school is probably more important. But if you go to a small school that the ADCOM is not familiar with or some less prestigious school, then I would imagine the ADCOM is not going to trust a high GPA as much and is going to look at the MCAT for validation. Now, if you have a low GPA from a less prestigious school, that probably hurts bad. So I say:

1) big, well known undergrad: GPA counts for a lot (That doesn't mean that a high GPA is necessarily impressive, since a GPA from a well known school might be notoriously inflated. But the ADCOM at least can accurately discern the value of that GPA.)

2) smaller, more unknown undergrad: GPA counts for less if it is high because MCAT is needed for validation of curriculum, but a low GPA hurts badly because small, unknown undergrads are probably not very difficult.

 

[liverotcod]

just curious, how is the mcat professional in its material??

The MCAT questions are created by a team of educators and then carefully vetted as experimental questions in an actual MCAT administration before being administered as "real" questions.

This is in contrast to how college instructors normally create their test questions.

 

[stinkycheese]

According to every ADCOM member I've spoken to (2 at UCSD, 1 at UCLA, 1 at UCD), GPA is more important than MCAT. The axiom is that the MCAT doesnt get you in anywhere, it just keeps you out.

I disagree. I think a high MCAT will open more doors regarding interviews than a high GPA with a lower MCAT. The reason is that a high MCAT score gets noticed as "proof" of intelligence and may help an adcom grant you the interview to explain any medium-low gpa's. But if you have a 3.9 and a 24, that might instead say, "this school is too easy" or "hard worker, not smart enough." Are those snap judgments true? No. But are snap judgments a lot of what gets you the interview? Probably. Once your foot is in the door, it's up to you. That's where a great MCAT comes in.

 

[prettyslick]

I think how much the GPA counts for probably depends on the school and whether or not the ADCOM is familiar with it. For instance, if you go to an Ivy or another well known school that med schools receive a lot of applicants from and they are familiar with how the grading works, then the GPA from that school is probably more important. But if you go to a small school that the ADCOM is not familiar with or some less prestigious school, then I would imagine the ADCOM is not going to trust a high GPA as much and is going to look at the MCAT for validation. Now, if you have a low GPA from a less prestigious school, that probably hurts bad. So I say:

1) big, well known undergrad: GPA counts for a lot (That doesn't mean that a high GPA is necessarily impressive, since a GPA from a well known school might be notoriously inflated. But the ADCOM at least can accurately discern the value of that GPA.)

2) smaller, more unknown undergrad: GPA counts for less if it is high because MCAT is needed for validation of curriculum, but a low GPA hurts badly because small, unknown undergrads are probably not very difficult.

I totally agree with you. However, what is a low GPA according to you?

 

[BigMike7]

Well it seems the majority of people here believe MCAT is the best determinant of how well you will do in med school, but have any of you talked to actual doctors about what their MCAT scores were? I personally know a number of doctors who scored in the mid twenty range, 24, 25, 26 and go figure, they all passed medical school and are successful doctors. So just because one person has a 38 doesn't mean they are any more likely to pass medical school than someone with a 25. It's all relative to the person, which is why the interview should be taken very seriously by adcom's b/c you can learn more about a person by listening to them respond to questions than you can by looking at some numbers from a test.

 

[laura_mideon]

Well it seems the majority of people here believe MCAT is the best determinant of how well you will do in med school, but have any of you talked to actual doctors about what their MCAT scores were? I personally know a number of doctors who scored in the mid twenty range, 24, 25, 26 and go figure, they all passed medical school and are successful doctors. So just because one person has a 38 doesn't mean they are any more likely to pass medical school than someone with a 25. It's all relative to the person, which is why the interview should be taken very seriously by adcom's b/c you can learn more about a person by listening to them respond to questions than you can by looking at some numbers from a test.

That's pretty interesting. I personally haven't taken the MCAT yet so it's hard for me to judge accurately, but i did take the pcat and scored just about exactly what my gpa is (in regards to percent). I think that the gpa should be a little bit more important but weighed close to equally with the mcat, just because one shows how well you think under pressure and the other shows how consistently you can make good grades and work hard. But it's easier to crack under pressure while taking a standardized test and based on what I've read in this forum (certain mcat testing dates having easier tests then other times, and certain aamc exams being easier than other ones), the mcat seems to have a certain amount of luck involved, and while so does gpa (having the right teacher...etc), it just seems the mcat does more so since it's only one test and you can't have good luck in every class. jmo.

 

[pseudoknot]

So just because one person has a 38 doesn't mean they are any more likely to pass medical school than someone with a 25.

Actually it does mean that; this has been well-documented by empirical research.

 

[Shredder]

haha, yeah i agree it means precisely that

 

[BigMike7]

Actually it does mean that; this has been well-documented by empirical research.

I would love to see where this "well documented research" is. If you look at most schools, the average acceptance MCAT is usually right around a 30, meaning there are plenty above and below that, and most schools have a pass rate in the high 90 % so how can you say one persons MCAT score makes them more likely to pass over another person. My guess is you both performed very well on the MCAT and you are only thinking about this from the standpoint of someone who did well. Here is some perspective on MCAT scores...Most D.O. programs have an average acceptance in the mid 20 range and there are plenty of D.O schools that rank higher nationally than M.D. schools with averages in the 30's. Just something to think about.

 

[QofQuimica]

Here's something I'm curious about: what is the weighted distribution of the MCAT scores of a school? I mean, if the average is 30, then yes, some people did score higher and some scored lower. You probably have a few people with scores off the charts (40+), which would have to be counterbalanced by some 20-somethings. But, would a 40 get counterbalanced with one 20 to get a 30 average, or would a 40 be counterbalanced with two 25s to average a 30? I'm guessing the latter: you have a mean of 30, and a long tail on the high side, but not on the low side. Anyone know about this? And if you don't have any "well-documented empirical research," you can just give your anecdotal opinion, like I did.

 

[DrBowtie]

I would suspect if the average is 30, the vast majority would fall into the 28-32 range. I would also suspect that a 40+ is offset by multiple 26's-27's. I highly doubt any 40's are directly offset by a 20. The sample size is so small an outlier would affect it more.

 

[Shredder]

the well documented research is out there, otherwise why would the mcat have any meaning at all. of course it is supposed to be a predictor of medical success

 

[pseudoknot]

I would love to see where this "well documented research" is.

A good starting point is http://www.aamc.org/students/mcat/research/bibliography/start.htm and there have been threads in this forum with other references.

If you look at most schools, the average acceptance MCAT is usually right around a 30, meaning there are plenty above and below that, and most schools have a pass rate in the high 90 % so how can you say one persons MCAT score makes them more likely to pass over another person.

So, you're arguing that a) there exist med students with MCAT scores below 30, and b) most med students graduate, therefore there can be no correlation between MCAT score and likelihood of graduating? Well, what is the average MCAT score of the 5% (or whatever) of med students who fail? Do you know for a fact that it's the same as the rest of the students?

My guess is you both performed very well on the MCAT and you are only thinking about this from the standpoint of someone who did well.

I won't know my score for another month. I'm not sure what you mean by "the standpoint of someone who did well;" either there is a correlation between MCAT score and pass rate or there isn't.

 

[BigMike7]

the well documented research is out there, otherwise why would the mcat have any meaning at all. of course it is supposed to be a predictor of medical success

I didn't mean to imply that the MCAT shouldn't have any meaning at all. The point I was making is that some people were putting too much emphasis on the MCAT b/c plenty of people who don't have high 30 scores do just fine in med school.

 

[tank you]

I didn't mean to imply that the MCAT shouldn't have any meaning at all. The point I was making is that some people were putting too much emphasis on the MCAT b/c plenty of people who don't have high 30 scores do just fine in med school.

i dont think there are "plenty of people" that even get accepted in med school with scores below 30, i think u meant there are "some people."

 

[BigMike7]

i dont think there are "plenty of people" that even get accepted in med school with scores below 30, i think u meant there are "some people."

I would still say plenty of people get in with below a 30. Look at the average acceptance of schools around the nation, many of them are 28 and 29 which implies the average person that got in had less than a 30 so I would think that is more than just some.

 

[criminallyinane]

Most D.O. programs have an average acceptance in the mid 20 range and there are plenty of D.O schools that rank higher nationally than M.D. schools with averages in the 30's. Just something to think about.

??? No DO school is ranked in research and barely a handful are ranked in primary care. Where are the "plenty" of DO schools that are ranked higher than MD schools?

 

[Florence Scrubs]

GPA is a product of hard work not intellectual ability.

 

[Braveheart]

i want to post by vote for the MCAT. I think that the MCAT is the great equalizer and GPA is just too subjective.

 

[Braveheart]

GPA is a product of hard work not intellectual ability.

That exactly how I feel. For example, many people view organic as being hard however when I put in 100% as far as studying I get back at least 95% of my effort. And thats how it is for most classes in undergrad. However , I wish I had given 100% in most of my classes. However MCAT rules!

 

[BigMike7]

GPA is a product of hard work not intellectual ability.

Not a product of intellectual ability? Are you serious? I don't care how hard you work, if you don't have the intellectual ability to handle a tough class then your GPA will reflect that.

 

[tank you]

with gpa, you are being compared only with the other students at your school. however, with mcat, you are being compared with everyone from every school.

 

[BigMike7]

with gpa, you are being compared only with the other students at your school. however, with mcat, you are being compared with everyone from every school.

I certainly agree with you on this, but to say that GPA only shows hard work and not intellectual ability is just crazy.

 

[Shredder]

I certainly agree with you on this, but to say that GPA only shows hard work and not intellectual ability is just crazy.

if you put in enough time and kissing up to profs and TAs in classes, you are pretty much assured of good grades. ive seen a lot of less than brilliant people do this. a 4.0 just doesnt carry the same intellectual weight as a 40 mcat.

 

[Friendly]

GPA is a product of hard work not intellectual ability.

....and since when was medicine about intellectual ability? After you're experienced, it's repetitive and sometimes mundane. If you want intellectual stimulation do a Ph.D. If you want hard work, do and M.D. Hence, I vote for GPA as being paramount in importance for medical school selection. The MCAT- while quite useful as a selection tool - is a single tests on a single day and should not excuse years of procrastination.

 

[QofQuimica]

The whole either-or premise of this thread is just silly. Obviously both GPA and MCAT are important, and they do show proficiency with two sets of different but partially overlapping intellectual skills. Here's how I would analyze applicants' records; consideration of GPA + MCAT together separates students into four academic groups:

The first two groups are easiest to assess because their records are consistent.

Group 1 contains the people with high GPAs and MCATs. They are clearly capable of handling medical school work and highly motivated, so they'd be my first choice of students to interview and accept, assuming that the rest of the application holds up.

Group 2: people with below average GPAs and MCATs. They might actually be very motivated or bright, but their record does not reflect this. I would worry that they'd struggle in the classroom and maybe not make it through the program. Thus, I'd hesitate to interview or accept them unless there were extenuating circumstances or extreme hardships in their past that are no longer affecting their ability to do well in the classroom.

Then there are two groups of people who are a "mixed bag."

Group 3, those students with high MCATs and low GPAs, are students who are obviously bright, but come across as being unmotivated. They could do well academically, but only if someone can light a fire under their a**. I'd interview them if their academic record showed improvement over time (i.e., their GPA is low b/c of a bad freshman year but afterward they started pulling better grades in college or a post-bacc). But these people are a major attrition risk, so I wouldn't accept too many of them.

Group 4: Those students with average MCATs and high GPAs are the ones who are hard workers. They would be my second choice of students to be invited for interviews as long as their MCATs weren't too low, because I'd know that if I let them in, they'd work their tails off to get through the program. And being highly motivated with a normal level of intelligence breeds greater academic success than being a lazy genius. I would guess that most medical students fall into this group, not the first one.

Bottom line: I did vote for MCAT as being more important than GPA, because I agree with those posters who suggested that it more objectively compares the capabilities of pre-meds from different undergrad programs to one another. And of course I'd want the "brightest" students at my school. That being said, though, I'd expect these high-MCAT students to also have a high GPA in keeping with their superior ability. If I must choose between having either a high GPA or a high MCAT in an applicant, but not both, then I'd prefer to take the hard-working applicant with the high GPA and an average MCAT score.

 

[Drlander76]

i dont think neither MCAT nor GPA are indication of how good doctor you will be. for instance some kids spent most of their time in libararies studying their butt off, they dont know any thing out side of the text books. the odd is they will score high both MCAT and their GPA. while other people, live normal life; meaning they work go to school, pay bills, try to have some social time not neccesary long, party, workout and study to the best of their ability. ok tell me which catogary you think will make better Docs? and please be reasonable!

 

[jackets5]

I would have to go with the MCAT because it is standardized . GPA can be so varied from school to school. Ive took Orgo 1 at Arizona and Orgo 2 at Georgia Tech. The Orgo 2 class was so much in depth and challegening. i saw copies of Tech's Orgo 1 tests and they were about 10 times as hard as mine at Arizona. Also curves can suck. I took a Genetics class were my final average came out to a 82 and i got a C in the class because the teacher was a prick and the class did real well. GPA is so varied from school to school thats they are hard to compare. I left Arizona with a 3.5 GPA if i did the same amount of work at Tech that i did at Arizona my GPA would be lucky to break 2.5

 

[Dr.Pdizzle]

The bottom line is this: neither an mcat score nor gpa can definitively say this person will make a good doctor. You can be the brightest person on this planet and not make a good doctor. In the end I think the interview holds the most weight, all that other stuff just gets you the interview.

 

[crazy_cavalier]

So, uh, how can you check who voted for what? I thought these polls now allow you to see what each individual person voted for.

 

[KingTutATL]

The bottom line is this: neither an mcat score nor gpa can definitively say this person will make a good doctor. You can be the brightest person on this planet and not make a good doctor. In the end I think the interview holds the most weight, all that other stuff just gets you the interview.

I agree. what does it matter than someone had a 4.0 gpa in physics classes. How would that be applied to the medical world.