Pre-Allo FAQ Series: Does it matter what university you graduate from?

[Dr.Watson]

---

Members don't see this ad.

2. Organic Chemistry is the same material regardless of where you take it. Being at a state institution vs. a private one does not change the mechanisms or the chemical structure.

No, it's not. My Ivy school completely skips over nomenclature (that was a weird throwback to learn for the first time for the MCAT) and crams all mechanisms into one semester. The second semester isn't even taught from a book. It's compiled from the professor's notes and for some med schools, fufills the biochem requirement. "Organic chem" at my school goes way beyond the typical organic chemistry course. Same with physics, same with bio, etc. It has nothing to do with the specific professor, but with the course itself. At some private schools, the classes are different with more information taught and are beyond the scope of a typical state school course. I've taken classes at both types of schools and when comparing syllabi, the Ivy's classes covered a lot more information in greater depth.

 

[-Goose-]

I've always thought this argument was ridiculous. Yes, it matters where you go to undergrad. I had a so-so gpa (~3.6) from a very, very reputable school and I was told point blank by my interviewers that my gpa was great coming from my institution. I was offered several interviews and acceptances at more prestigous schools than I should have been based on my gpa.

So, it matters.

The real question is how much it matters and how much it is worth.

 

[nubbey24]

No, it's not. My Ivy school completely skips over nomenclature (that was a weird throwback to learn for the first time for the MCAT) and crams all mechanisms into one semester. The second semester isn't even taught from a book. It's compiled from the professor's notes and for some med schools, fufills the biochem requirement. "Organic chem" at my school goes way beyond the typical organic chemistry course. Same with physics, same with bio, etc. It has nothing to do with the specific professor, but with the course itself. At some private schools, the classes are different with more information taught and are beyond the scope of a typical state school course. I've taken classes at both types of schools and when comparing syllabi, the Ivy's classes covered a lot more information in greater depth.

Yet you prove my point again...N=1.

Gross over generalizations.

I am not saying that school does not matter. People draw upon their own limited experiences to say things about other schools that they have very limited experience with.

I do agree that school matters, and that if all things equal, a person from an IVY will probably be admitted. The difference between many of these institutions and some (obviously not all) state institutions is not as far reaching as you would like to think though. I have to admit myself that if I was looking at a candidate from a state school and IVY with equal stats, the IVY would probably have the edge too.

I have to admit that I am biased however as I went to a state school and am very happy with the education that I recieved. I am not going to bad mouth IVY's because I have no basis for it. All I know is that it prepared me fine for med school and has allowed me the opportunity to choose from a variety of different schools to attend.

Perspective is everything.

 

[UMP]

These threads always make me feel self-conscious. I went to UMich in state and I hate having people tell me I should feel bad about settling on an inferior state-school education. It seemed like I had some good opportunities and that it turned out pretty okay.

Similar to others, I am afraid of the culture shock of attending a private med school.

if you read through the thread, everyone knows of the umich prestige. I think the people that start the private vs. public U debates are from New England where the public U's are not nearly as good as the local privates. I don't think anyone would say that UMich, UCLA, Cal, or UVA are inferior to Harvard/Princeton/Yale especially if you are paying in-state tuition.

I would never trade my experience at UMich for anything... although I wish we won a couple championships in FB/Basketball/Hockey while I was there 😉

If you are shooting for a Top 10 school the prestige will matter... if you are shooting to get into any US MD school, you can get in from anywhere

 

[somemaybedoc]

I've always thought this argument was ridiculous. Yes, it matters where you go to undergrad. I had a so-so gpa (~3.6) from a very, very reputable school and I was told point blank by my interviewers that my gpa was great coming from my institution. I was offered several interviews and acceptances at more prestigous schools than I should have been based on my gpa.

So, it matters.

The real question is how much it matters and how much it is worth.

I don't think your reasoning is entirely logical.

Consider hypothetically, if you went to a less reputable school and worked the same amount. Assuming the school was easier your GPA would be higher.

He accepted your lower GPA because you came from a big name school. In other words: if you came from a less reputable school, he would have demanded a higher GPA of you (due to the perceived ease with which one could obtain a 3.6 at such a school)

Thus your reasoning does not establish that the more prestigious school gains you anything, as it does not prove that an equal amount of effort and talent at a prestigious school garners a better result than if applied at a less presitigious institution.

So this discussion is not as ridiculous or unfounded as it seems.

I for one do not know the answer.

 

[-Goose-]

Consider hypothetically, if you went to a less reputable school and worked the same amount. Assuming the school was easier your GPA would be higher.

This may be true, but the benefits of going to a brand-name school outweigh the additional difficulty that you may or may not encounter there.

Also, at the interviews for the top medical schools, everyone will have a 4.0 and, therefore, those from the big-name undergrads will be the ones left standing. Look no further than Vanderbilt School of Medicine's entering class list. Many, many kids from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. Very, very few kids from Podunk U, unless they are superstars.

If you think that school name doesn't matter, you are either kidding yourself or you go to a school without much of a reputation and are trying to convince yourself that you're on an equal playing field with applicants from the Ivy league.

 

[Dookter]

This may be true, but the benefits of going to a brand-name school outweigh the additional difficulty that you may or may not encounter there.

Also, at the interviews for the top medical schools, everyone will have a 4.0 and, therefore, those from the big-name undergrads will be the ones left standing. Look no further than Vanderbilt School of Medicine's entering class list. Many, many kids from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. Very, very few kids from Podunk U, unless they are superstars.

If you think that school name doesn't matter, you are either kidding yourself or you go to a school without much of a reputation and are trying to convince yourself that you're on an equal playing field with applicants from the Ivy league.

I don't disagree with your post, but I would like to point out that Vandy is the most Ivy-***** med school around. You're right that at all these good schools there are a lot of kids from great ugrad schools, but Vandy is known for stacking the deck a lot more than most other good medical schools...

 

[Dr.Watson]

Yet you prove my point again...N=1.

Gross over generalizations.

I am not saying that school does not matter. People draw upon their own limited experiences to say things about other schools that they have very limited experience with.

I know it's N=1! That's my point. You're the one that generalized that all organic chemistry classes cover the same material. I'm saying that in my own personal experience, I've found that organic chemistry classes are not the same and do not cover the same material. That's all. And if you want to be an organic chemist, my school's prep would be better. For the MCAT, it's worse.

I agree with somemaybedoc that the ultimate value of choosing a state versus private (and no, of course ''state" is not broadly including the UMichs-types) is not predictably important when it comes to where you'll get into medical school. If the same person went to an Ivy and got a 3.6 and a 35 or went to an easier state school and got a 4.0 and a 35, they'd have a nice choice of medical schools. Now those choices wouldn't be the same, but I think a nice range of top 20s and a few top 10s would be included for both. The numberwhore places like WashU may look down on that Ivy kid's low GPA, but the LOR/EC's or premed committee letters may shine brighter for the Ivy kid and garner admission to schools with different focus than straight #s. Though, a state school kid with a 3.6 and a 35 probably can't expect the same success as an Ivy kid with those same #s.

 

[somemaybedoc]

This may be true, but the benefits of going to a brand-name school outweigh the additional difficulty that you may or may not encounter there.

Also, at the interviews for the top medical schools, everyone will have a 4.0 and, therefore, those from the big-name undergrads will be the ones left standing. Look no further than Vanderbilt School of Medicine's entering class list. Many, many kids from Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. Very, very few kids from Podunk U, unless they are superstars.

If you think that school name doesn't matter, you are either kidding yourself or you go to a school without much of a reputation and are trying to convince yourself that you're on an equal playing field with applicants from the Ivy league.

That is just an assumption, you haven't controlled for the fact that the average person from a top school is likely to be more talented than the average person from a less well known school.

It may be the same pool of students that gets into the top med schools, but many of them chose to go to the Ivy's for undergrad and very few chose to go to podunk U. The correlation is not necessarily indicative of causality.

I have nothing to kid myself about either as I am done with this process.

 

[CaramelDlite]

I don't disagree with your post, but I would like to point out that Vandy is the most Ivy-***** med school around. You're right that at all these good schools there are a lot of kids from great ugrad schools, but Vandy is known for stacking the deck a lot more than most other good medical schools...

It's not just Vandy. Umich sent out a list of all acceptees in December and 35 were from Harvard ALONE and 30+ were from Stanford. The representation from these schools together was far greater than the representation from the state of Michigan. Bear in mind also that in December, UMich hadn't even filled it's entire class.

 

[crimsonkid85]

It's not just Vandy. Umich sent out a list of all acceptees in December and 35 were from Harvard ALONE and 30+ were from Stanford. The representation from these schools together was far greater than the representation from the state of Michigan. Bear in mind also that in December, UMich hadn't even filled it's entire class.

along that line of thought....so far at JHU MSTP, 3 out of the 10 MSTP funded positions are offered to harvard class of '07 people (there may be more, i just happened to know these three).

 

[Lests55]

Bottom line, if you go to a state school and want to pursue a top medical school, you better be a badass.

 

[halal meat]

Would I have a better chance of being admitted into MSUCHM/MSUCOM if I attended MSU rather than Wayne State?

 

[Eric Lindros]

No, it's not. My Ivy school completely skips over nomenclature (that was a weird throwback to learn for the first time for the MCAT) and crams all mechanisms into one semester. The second semester isn't even taught from a book. It's compiled from the professor's notes and for some med schools, fufills the biochem requirement. "Organic chem" at my school goes way beyond the typical organic chemistry course. Same with physics, same with bio, etc. It has nothing to do with the specific professor, but with the course itself. At some private schools, the classes are different with more information taught and are beyond the scope of a typical state school course. I've taken classes at both types of schools and when comparing syllabi, the Ivy's classes covered a lot more information in greater depth.

dude, this is very atypical of most schools. i mean, if you want a cookie, great. congrats on being the only one who had this experience

 

[Eric Lindros]

Bottom line, if you go to a state school and want to pursue a top medical school, you better be a badass.

wrong. totally wrong

 

[crimsonkid85]

dude, this is very atypical of most schools. i mean, if you want a cookie, great. congrats on being the only one who had this experience

what he was referring to, is the chem 17/chem 27 sequence at harvard college. the organic professors there don't like teaching premeds, and want to segregate them out from the people who are ACTUALLY interested in organic synthesis. thus, the chem17/27 track is designed with an emphasis on medical applications. chem 17 literally teaches everything in theoretical organic chemistry in condensed form: from carbocations, to carbonyl chemistry, all the way through sigmatropic rearrangements--in ONE semester. chem 27 teaches the applications thereof in biological systems. it's a pretty neat course which teaches you how nature does sigmatropic rearrangements via chorismate mutase, for example. you also learn about how nature utilizes aldol chemistry in polyketide synthesis, and thioester chemistry via non-ribosomal peptide synthesis, etc etc etc.

the chem20/chem30 sequence was designed for chemistry majors who are interested in theoretical organic chemistry. of note, we didn't learn nomenclature, either. literally andy meyers said to us, 'nomenclature is boring, and we'll never require you to memorize for memorization's sake.' and that was that. to this day, i sometimes refer to compounds as, 'that...thingy.'

oh, and for all the people who say that you learn the same organic chemistry everywhere...it's just simply not true (see chem17/27 above). and even with respect to chem20/chem30, i doubt many in 2nd semester organic chemistry students in the nation learn concepts such as the zimmerman-traxler model and then be required to use it to predict absolute stereochemistry of chiral-auxiliary mediated aldol reactions.

which, going back to the topic at hand, i think that if you want to half-ass your way through an ivy institution like harvard, or yale, or princeton, etc etc, sure, it's totally easy to do. but i would make the argument that if you wanted to challenge yourself, a college like harvard could open up opportunities that you can't find elsewhere. just ask freshman who was in Physics 16, or math 55.

finally, if you want to go to a top medical school, i think you have to be pretty badass, regardless of where you're from! 😛

 

[Lests55]

wrong. totally wrong

How so?

 

[rickthetwinkie]

There's too much self-selection bias when it comes to "omg top 10 undergrad". The people at more highly selective insitutions tend to be a bit more badass than your typical student(probably, anyway), so to say that just because Johns Hopkins gave away 3 of 10 MSTP spots to Harvard grads just on virtue of their name is assuming causality: Harvard grad -> top med school spot whereas you could contend that the real causality is that the person was probably already badass. I think its safe to assume that these Harvard grads were probably pretty awesome in their own right. We can't say for sure unless we had their applications in our hands, though.

 

[etsuprinthead]

i am a student at a small (~12,000 students) state school. when i started interviewing (e.g. at washu, berkeley), i was really intimidated that all but 1 other interviewee was from a big-name school. i didn't feel that it put me at a disadvantage in my interviews, though i can't speak to the entire admissions process, since i haven't heard from most places i interviewed at yet. i felt like, in my interviews, being from a state school no one outside TN has heard of made it more interesting and gave me a chance to talk more about what kind of education and experiences i have gotten here. and, after a couple of interviews, i decided to be proud of my school -- i probably had to work a little harder to get those interviews than i would have if i had an ivy-league degree backing me up. maybe i would have gotten more interviews if i had been from an ivy league, but, as it is, i have/ have had 7 interviews out of 10 secondaries i finished -- the only schools who haven't offered me an interview are schools with fairly-strict in-state requirements.

as far as my education at a state school -- i think it's been pretty good. some of my classes could have been harder and prepared me better, but on the whole, i think i'm graduating with a good education. i am in our honors program, which accepts 21 students/year -- so i have had lots of small classes, great teachers, personal attention. i'm also required to write an undergraduate thesis, and i don't think that my friends at ivy leagues have to do that. it is really easy to get into undergrad research, either at the undergrad colleges or at the medical school. our biology honors department is really trying to get undergrads published so that we'll be competitive at good grad schools, so i was 2nd author on a paper in genetics my junior year. sure, i might have had even more exciting research opportunities at an ivy, but i was the only student in the lab, so i got a LOT of experience, which got me a job with the USDA for a couple of summers.

would i go here again? absolutely. after all, are you really going to think back on college in 15 years and think, "darn, i wished i had had to work harder in that molecular biology class"? nope -- for me, it's all about the people you meet, and i can't imagine NOT having met the folks here.

 

[DreamyKid]

Just for a few inputs. Schools vary in difficulty depending more on the teacher and less on the school. At least IMO. For example, when I took Calc I at a Community college, the class was WAY HARDER than Calc II and III I took at a top UC. But that doesn't mean state schools are easier than CCs, nor does that correlate to expensive privates being better than state schools. It matters on what you learn from that experience. And surely, talking to my friends from Ccs to Uc's to privates, they relatively have the same GPA. These are all goal oriented students who work hard. If you do that. You'll keep your grades up while learning a lot, which is far better than just having the name of a good school on your diploma

just my 2 cents =D

 

[Lests55]

i am a student at a small (~12,000 students) state school. when i started interviewing (e.g. at washu, berkeley), i was really intimidated that all but 1 other interviewee was from a big-name school. i didn't feel that it put me at a disadvantage in my interviews, though i can't speak to the entire admissions process, since i haven't heard from most places i interviewed at yet. i felt like, in my interviews, being from a state school no one outside TN has heard of made it more interesting and gave me a chance to talk more about what kind of education and experiences i have gotten here. and, after a couple of interviews, i decided to be proud of my school -- i probably had to work a little harder to get those interviews than i would have if i had an ivy-league degree backing me up. maybe i would have gotten more interviews if i had been from an ivy league, but, as it is, i have/ have had 7 interviews out of 10 secondaries i finished -- the only schools who haven't offered me an interview are schools with fairly-strict in-state requirements.

as far as my education at a state school -- i think it's been pretty good. some of my classes could have been harder and prepared me better, but on the whole, i think i'm graduating with a good education. i am in our honors program, which accepts 21 students/year -- so i have had lots of small classes, great teachers, personal attention. i'm also required to write an undergraduate thesis, and i don't think that my friends at ivy leagues have to do that. it is really easy to get into undergrad research, either at the undergrad colleges or at the medical school. our biology honors department is really trying to get undergrads published so that we'll be competitive at good grad schools, so i was 2nd author on a paper in genetics my junior year. sure, i might have had even more exciting research opportunities at an ivy, but i was the only student in the lab, so i got a LOT of experience, which got me a job with the USDA for a couple of summers.

would i go here again? absolutely. after all, are you really going to think back on college in 15 years and think, "darn, i wished i had had to work harder in that molecular biology class"? nope -- for me, it's all about the people you meet, and i can't imagine NOT having met the folks here.

I heard that it is really hard to get an interview there. Care to explain?

 

[CaramelDlite]

I heard that it is really hard to get an interview there. Care to explain?

 

[etsuprinthead]

I heard that it is really hard to get an interview there. Care to explain?

What do you want to know?

 

[crimsonkid85]

What do you want to know?

i think the point is that berkeley doesn't HAVE a med school, so you're either crazy, or lying. ;p

 

[45408]

It's all about opportunities in my opinion. Larger state schools typically have larger everything, including opportunities. Go to a school where you have 500 different majors and minors to chose from. Go to a school that has countless clubs and organizations, sports teams, school spirit. You would be suprised how not "lost in the crowd" you feel at a big school with tons of pride and spirit and opportunities. I realize, however, that some people just enjoy smaller settings and to each his own.

Also, a common myth about large schools is that you don't get to know your professors. Farthest thing from the truth. Case in point: I went to a very, very large university and my strongest part of my application, according to my interviewers, were my letter of recs. 4/5 were from my profs.

I feel much the same way. My school had 28,000 undergrads, and I had opportunities galore to volunteer, do research on campus, get involved in student organizations, and there were always new/different/weird things going on. I do have a feeling that my school name may have held me back a bit, but that's just a hunch. I was accepted to two good schools (one in US News top 25), and waitlisted at a better one. Either way, my wife and I are in the location she liked best, and it was my second choice overall. Can't complain, but I do have to go study now. 😛

 

[45408]

Bottom line, if you pursue a top medical school, you better be a badass.

Fixed.

 

[etsuprinthead]

i think the point is that berkeley doesn't HAVE a med school, so you're either crazy, or lying. ;p

actually, they do. it's called the UCB-UCSF Joint Medical Program. You spend 3 years at Berkeley doing pre-clinical and master's courses and earn an MS from UCB, then spend 2 clinical years at UCSF and get your MD there. Google it. It exists. I'm an alternate there.

 

[mynamewastaken]

Originally Posted by nubbey24:

2. Organic Chemistry is the same material regardless of where you take it. Being at a state institution vs. a private one does not change the mechanisms or the chemical structure.

"No, it's not. My Ivy school completely skips over nomenclature (that was a weird throwback to learn for the first time for the MCAT) and crams all mechanisms into one semester. The second semester isn't even taught from a book. It's compiled from the professor's notes and for some med schools, fufills the biochem requirement. "Organic chem" at my school goes way beyond the typical organic chemistry course. Same with physics, same with bio, etc. It has nothing to do with the specific professor, but with the course itself. At some private schools, the classes are different with more information taught and are beyond the scope of a typical state school course. I've taken classes at both types of schools and when comparing syllabi, the Ivy's classes covered a lot more information in greater depth."


Completely agreed. There was also one comment above about ochem texts all being the same. That's true and has nothing to do with exams....my experience (having transferred from a competitive 4 yr school to an IVY) was the former was competitive and a fine school....but your performance and grades was based on preparation....my experience at the IVY has been preparation is completey taken for granted by the prof. In other words, my orgo tests completely assumed you understood and knew every mechanism and reaction in the notes and text. The exams barely tested ANY basic knowledge whatsoever. As a general rule, our exams were filled with anomolies, unknowns, and reactions TYPES we had never seen before. It completely raises the bar. My personal experience was the Ivy was on a completely different level (seriously not being arrogant, it was really my experience- I would have surely stayed at the former school had I known) I think it's always interesting to hear the grade inflation talk....I have never once in my 6 years at an Ivy (not that dumb just did a post bacc at a different one) found one science class to be inflated....i could even argue deflation occured. I think my theory on this is no matter how hard you make a physics test at princeton, plenty of students will move through it with ease. This argument of schools being harder than others is, in my opinion, moot. Yes, different schools are definitely harder than others...but the students at the schools essentially standardize these differences. It's the students who are just below the bar that struggle at schools like this...also, a friend of my family (4th year at Columbia PS) said her experience has been an exorbitant amount of incoming first years are from Ivy's and top 5 us and lib arts schools. Apparently it is like a little club...the better med schools on some level, find graduates of top schools more attractive than equal or slightly lesser credentials from average undergrads...no one will ever know how much in the long run I dont think it's a make or break by any means..

 

[natygan22]

Ideally I hope that it does not matter what school you went to as I am a firm believer that education is what you make it. Schools provide an opportunity to learn and whether or not one succeeds is more dependent on motivation, passion, and a desire to learn than a schools retention rate or student to faculty ratio, etc. I think that admissions committees would be unwise to ever pick a student soley on the undergraduate institution they attended. I could only imagine that in a situation where two applicants were tied in every respect would a more respected undergrad school make a difference. Therefore, I would recommend that you work hard and have a great time at whatever undergrad school you chose to attend!

 

[45408]

The exams barely tested ANY basic knowledge whatsoever. As a general rule, our exams were filled with anomolies, unknowns, and reactions TYPES we had never seen before. It completely raises the bar.

Just don't assume that a state school organic chemistry class is automatically easier. I had a very, very challenging organic chemistry professor (some of the other professors are easier), who gave us all kinds of screwy scenarios and very lengthy synthesis sequences. We had to draw a complete a Hofmann rearrangement mechanism on our final (I'm sure other people have as well, but it's certainly a complicated mechanism).

Meanwhile, some students from another one of our state schools, but a much more highly regarded school, readily admitted in our Kaplan class that they were woefully unprepared for the organic chem on the MCAT. So many people scored a 100 on their final exam that the final curve actually lowered the guy's grade who told me about it. The highest score on our final organic 2 exam was a 94, and it dropped off very steeply from there.

 

[bob123456]

I go to an Ivy (which is a decision I regret) and I just don't understand all this talk about grade inflation. It is very typical to have a science/math class here where a 90% average in a class is a C. The difference between top schools and other ones isn't so much material (although I wonder how many public schools spend 4 weeks on the Schrodinger equation in the 1st intro chem class) as it is your classmates. Every class is curved here and that curve is based on the performance of some of the smartest undergraduates in the world, which is definitely stiff competition. This is in opposition to classes at universities my friends go to (one of which I have taken) where a certain level of performance equals a certain grade (such as an 85% in organic chemistry being an A). It's all about competing against yourself in a standard context or competing against others on an outrageous curve. If I could choose again I would definitely pick the former.

 

[DoctorPardi]

Again guys thanks for the input and discussion. I'll be posting the next in this series soon 🙂 .