Sundarban1 said:
I think you only need to get your science GPA into the 3.4 range if you want to be competative for state schools, etc...I disagree with the statement that anyone with over 3.0 should not attempt a post bacc, for those students represent a majority of those who enter post bacc programs (3.0-3.5) in the first place. This person already has a master's degree, why would they do a SMP when he/she could just take orgo over, with a few other advanced classes in the same amount of time?
😕
I'm not implying the OP should do an SMP. I'm implying the OP should do MCAT study through either an MCAT-focused postbac, an MCAT prep course, or self-study. Self-study and the prep course would be best. The OP has done well with (I'm assuming) a full-time courseload in a hard masters at Hopkins. Taking some undergrad intro classes in immuno, histo, physio, etc.
would be a step down.
Also, the OP is an Indiana native. Indiana University has their own special pre-professional masters biology program for students (usually from Indiana) who are trying to get into IU med. The implication is that if the undergrad record was not representative of the student's abilities, they can prove it in a postbac. I'm not implying the OP should do this program (it would be pointless) but I am implying that the OP's state-school DOES take into account graduate work and even recommends it for students with less than satisfactory undergrad performances. Indiana even used to have a special masters in Cellular and Integrative Physiology for that purpose (it's now extinct).
In you're referring to henryjekyl, it would make sense to just increase the MCAT--either by an MCAT-prep focused postbac or self-study and intensive MCAT prep course. He doesn't have to take o-chem over, but for a US allo acceptance he really needs to increase his MCAT or do a "backdoor" program like RFU that I mentioned above.
Okay, I'll take back what I said somewhat. Postbacs will always be helpful. But if you have a 3.0 cume and 3.0 science you are immediately confronted with several problems.
In the case of the cumulative GPA your GPA will go up in very small increments even with a full time course load. As you accumulate a lot of credit hours, it becomes increasingly difficult to raise your GPA. You would initially see bigger progress when you have fewer credit hours and you get As. But as you take more, you would only go up about 0.1 to 0.15 with a full-time course load from year to year. At a 3.0/3.1, gpa enrichment is practically futile if you're trying to raise it to the 3.5-3.6 area (try crunching the numbers on Excel to see how high you can get it up). I would *guess* (without having crunched the numbers) that going from a 3.1 to 3.6 after already completing a Bachelor's will probably take a good 3 years of full-time study (probably more). However, if your state school has ~3.5-3.6 as a competitive range and you're at a 3.3-3.4, gpa enhancement to just get that extra boost may be a worthy pursuit.
Also, the problem for science majors is that there aren't that many enrichment *undergrad* postbac programs once you've hit a certain level. If you've taken anatomy, physiology, microbiology, immunology, endocrinology, genetics, etc., it's hard to find an undergrad postbac program that will give you enough *new* science courses. The alternative would be to take physics, chemistry, math, astronomy, etc. but if you're taking these classes for the sole purpose of raising the bcpm and taking science coursework I think that will be pretty evident to the admissions committees. And if you have a Master's in Biomedical Sciences it's going to be odd if you're taking the same courses at a less demanding level. In your case, it makes sense to take the prereqs as a postbac student. However, I do not see the point in taking upper-division science courses when you've already had classes (and I'm assuming you did well) in immuno, virology, pathophys, oncology, molecular cell bio, biostats, and pharmacology. If you did well in your Master's in Biomedical Sciences and your undergrad cume/bcpm are greater than 3.0, there's not much of a point in taking an undergrad postbac with the exception of (1) taking the prereqs and (2) meeting the minimum GPA qualifications to pass specific schools that screen, which usually do not even disclose their numerical evaluations. And contrary to popular belief, an excellent graduate-level performance can make up for (but not increase) a less than wonderful undergrad performance.
Just my opinion.
