pre vet requirement

[SMW83]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I was looking at various pre vet requirements for various vet schools, and I noticed that there is no math requirement. My question is though is with the science courses they list, does the science courses require a math as a prereq? just a question though. if it is, then im gonna have to find a way to pass the math class cause i failed trig in high school😱 😱

 

[HopefulUGACVM]

If I am not mistaken some schools require at least stat or college algebra be taken? If its not well it is a requirement to receive an undergraduate degree.

I would not suggest skipping math AT ALL considering you will have to tackle that on the GRE. Also, other courses required such as Physics, Ecology, Genetics, Experimental Biology, Physiology, etc. will require a firm grasp on stats/mathematics considering chi-square analysis, ANOVA, ANCOVA, t-tests, fecundity schedules, energy calculations, physics are all common concepts in upper level bio classes. Not to mention physics. Did I say physics yet?

Yes, math is important regardless of whether or not a particular school requires it.

Since you have so many questions/doubts may I suggest you go to your advisor and talk to him/her?? Or are you still in HS? (just a question, not meaning to be rude)

 

[birdvet2006]

I know I'm a bit out of the loop (having already been through vet school), but when I was a pre-vet, I only had to take trigonometry in order to get into my physics class. I took the physics for non-engineers classes. I had taken up to calculus in high school, so it wasn't that big of a deal (besides the terrible professor).

I also had to take a basic statistics course, but can't remember any of it. 🙂 I haven't used it and like most other vets (except for those who have actually published research studies) I have no clue what most of the statistical tests mean anymore. *yawn*

GRE math is very basic. Mostly geometry and basic algebra, stuff you get in high school. If you take a GRE prep course, they'll teach you how to get through that stuff quickly.

 

[HopefulUGACVM]

Math is not my strong point! So as far as taking pre-cal (which was just trig basically!) was a pain for me, but it helped keep me fresh for the GRE (yet... I still had to take GRE prep..hmm). But in any case I still had to take it as a degree requirement.

I guess I was not so eloquent in my previous post... I guess what I meant to eventually say was, they may not require it for vet school seeing as in your upper-level bios you will be getting math whether you like it or not. At least at my undergrad school we did, can't speak for anywhere else 🙂

 

[irish_pompano]

Several schools require calculus or statistics or both. In fact, think all of the schools I'm applying to this time around required at least calculus if not more. TAMU comes to mind...I think UF will take a statistics course in place of Calc.

 

[Orthonut]

usually it's trig that's required-which has college algebra as a prereq. I think Ochem usually has trig as a concurrent or prereq.

Sorry to pee on your parade 🙁

Oh and stats too, you need stats (oh what fun...) for Oregon State...

 

[kate_g]

I haven't used it and like most other vets (except for those who have actually published research studies) I have no clue what most of the statistical tests mean anymore.

Sorry to hijack, but I wanted to comment on this... Right now you're basing treatment decisions on how you learned things in vet school (and probably for a while right after graduation, on the senior vets at your practice). But twenty years from now your knowledge from vet school will no longer be current, and you'll be basing treatment decisions on new research, published in papers. The harsh truth is, researchers are interested in getting papers published. And also, sometimes secondarily, in advancing science. There are people with agendas out there, who publish papers with very strongly worded conclusions, and you should want to know whether they have the data to back them up. For that you need to understand the experimental design and the statistical analyses they used. I guess the chances are you won't kill anyone by just believing what's in the conclusion section, but I think it's unfortunate that so many people just don't care to look any deeper. If nothing else, it perpetuates the (also unfortunate) tendency for researchers to overstate conclusions just to get published in a bigger journal.

So SMW, to get back to your question, I think you should *want* to take stats. That generally doesn't involve trig, so if you're just not good at spatial math it might not be such a big deal. And I agree with others that almost all the schools I looked at required some math, even if it was only stated as "math courses sufficient to satisfy prerequisites for physics and organic chemistry".

 

[SMW83]

If I am not mistaken some schools require at least stat or college algebra be taken? If its not well it is a requirement to receive an undergraduate degree.

I would not suggest skipping math AT ALL considering you will have to tackle that on the GRE. Also, other courses required such as Physics, Ecology, Genetics, Experimental Biology, Physiology, etc. will require a firm grasp on stats/mathematics considering chi-square analysis, ANOVA, ANCOVA, t-tests, fecundity schedules, energy calculations, physics are all common concepts in upper level bio classes. Not to mention physics. Did I say physics yet?

Yes, math is important regardless of whether or not a particular school requires it.

Since you have so many questions/doubts may I suggest you go to your advisor and talk to him/her?? Or are you still in HS? (just a question, not meaning to be rude)

ive been out of HS since 2003. I am 22.😎

 

[HorseyVet]

For that you need to understand the experimental design and the statistical analyses they used. I guess the chances are you won't kill anyone by just believing what's in the conclusion section, but I think it's unfortunate that so many people just don't care to look any deeper. If nothing else, it perpetuates the (also unfortunate) tendency for researchers to overstate conclusions just to get published in a bigger journal.

So SMW, to get back to your question, I think you should *want* to take stats.

If you don't use stat regularly you'll typically forget it. Personally I think experimental design is a lot more important....Also I think it's just plain old important to look at the number (and their relavent demographic info like age/sex etc.) rather then just the stats. I've read several papers that say they're results are significant one way or the other, but ultimatly had very small sample sizes (this is especially true for LA).

In those cases I think it's better to see/say "well this worked for 5/10 ponies" then "this experimental result was or was not significant." That's also typically how most of the vets I've been around have discussed options with clients (including myself who is looking into having an experimental procedure performed on my dog)....Clients, for one, understand this better....if you approach statistical significance by saying "well they found that this worked well enough"...it's not really as truthful or as helpful IMO for providing info that will help one to make a descision.......If they hear "yes, stat significant" they may just think "hey this works".... but if you let them know that really it's a hit or miss thing, they can be better prepared/abled to make a choice for their animal and be more realistic about outcomes. "well this works for x many dogs, but Fluffy might not have the same result."

Again experimental design is really important, especially if you're dealing with methods to reproduce a given injury/disease. The method of reproducing said disease may (and often enough doesn't) correlate directly to how the treatment would work on an animal that naturally came to have the injury/disease. Demographics are also, again, very important to me. Sometimes people use very young animals to test treatments that will be performed in geriatric ones. With dogs...it's very important to know what breed the study used and if that breed is comparable to your patient.

All of those things can be easily picked up either through your science program, research, or even just through always making a point to view literature critically.

 

[kate_g]

If you don't use stat regularly you'll typically forget it. Personally I think experimental design is a lot more important....Also I think it's just plain old important to look at the number (and their relavent demographic info like age/sex etc.) rather then just the stats. I've read several papers that say they're results are significant one way or the other, but ultimatly had very small sample sizes (this is especially true for LA).

OK, so let me clarify that a good stats class will teach you to *not* blindly trust a statement of "significance" - for exactly all the reasons you gave. My whole point was that the untrained person will read "statistically significant" and believe it's true. A person with a good understanding of probability and error, and how those things affect the statistical analyses presented in a paper, is much better able to interpret the results and decide how much has been fudged to get that "significant" number that sells the paper. You were saying that a vet should have a good understanding of experimental design and data interpretation... I'm saying that a good stats class will give you an understanding of experimental design and data interpretation (sure, there are other ways to gain that knowledge, but not as quickly). Actually remembering the statistical tests, and under what situations they're valid and appropriate, and all that kind of stuff, would be a bonus but as you already said is not completely necessary.