Premed By Major

[DivisionByZero]

The AAMC has a lot of data stratified by undergraduate major. Looking at table a17, there are a few interesting trends. I took the time to create graphical representations of the data.

There are a few things worth noting. Firstly, if it wasn’t iterated enough, majoring in biology or biological sciences is not required to get into medical school, although it is the most common route.

Secondly, humanities majors have the highest acceptances into medical school, followed by physical science majors. Conversely, biology and health science majors have some of the lowest.

Thirdly, humanities majors tend to do better on the MCAT, with biology majors and health science majors among the worst.

It is hard to say exactly why these trends occur, but it is possible that a lot of it is due to self-selection, i.e. the type of student who chooses to be a premed humanity major is different from the average cookie cutter biology premed student.

Accounting for the discrepancy within MCAT scores is interesting as well. The 2015 MCAT is heavily passage based, so it makes sense that reading-heavy majors do well.

Another interesting discussion is why specifically health science majors do so poorly in medical school admissions. My humble guess would be that those applying to medical school with specialized health care degrees have significantly lower MCAT/GPA combinations than matriculant stats per table a17, leading to significantly lower matriculation rates.

Ultimately, even humanities majors who are premed matriculate at a rate fairly close to the national average. It is safe to say that major does not matter, as can be confirmed by any adcom here. A dedicated and intelligent student is going to stand out no matter what he or she majors in, and can get into medical school. A good recommendation would be to major in what one enjoys and more importantly can succeed in.

A sidenote worth mentioning are engineering/cs majors which provide great fallback options if medical school does not work out. A thing to watch out with these majors is the rigor and workload of these majors, especially considering the difficulty needed to achieve a good gpa in the major. A student who wants to do this should be aware of the risks involved.

Sources:
https://www.aamc.org/download/321496/data/factstablea17.pdf

Thanks for reading. This was my first attempt at something like this, so let me know if you are interested in more or if you have any suggestions or improvements. Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Spectar]

The AAMC has a lot of data stratified by undergraduate major. Looking at table a17, there are a few interesting trends. I took the time to create graphical representations of the data.

There are a few things worth noting. Firstly, if it wasn’t iterated enough, majoring in biology or biological sciences is not required to get into medical school, although it is the most common route.

Secondly, humanities majors have the highest acceptances into medical school, followed by physical science majors. Conversely, biology and health science majors have some of the lowest.

Thirdly, humanities majors tend to do better on the MCAT, with biology majors and health science majors among the worst.

It is hard to say exactly why these trends occur, but it is possible that a lot of it is due to self-selection, i.e. the type of student who chooses to be a premed humanity major is different from the average cookie cutter biology premed student.

Accounting for the discrepancy within MCAT scores is interesting as well. The 2015 MCAT is heavily passage based, so it makes sense that reading-heavy majors do well.

Another interesting discussion is why specifically health science majors do so poorly in medical school admissions. My humble guess would be that those applying to medical school with specialized health care degrees have significantly lower MCAT/GPA combinations than matriculant stats per table a17, leading to significantly lower matriculation rates.

Ultimately, even humanities majors who are premed matriculate at a rate fairly close to the national average. It is safe to say that major does not matter, as can be confirmed by any adcom here. A dedicated and intelligent student is going to stand out no matter what he or she majors in, and can get into medical school. A good recommendation would be to major in what one enjoys and more importantly can succeed in.

A sidenote worth mentioning are engineering/cs majors which provide great fallback options if medical school does not work out. A thing to watch out with these majors is the rigor and workload of these majors, especially considering the difficulty needed to achieve a good gpa in the major. A student who wants to do this should be aware of the risks involved.

Sources:
https://www.aamc.org/download/321496/data/factstablea17.pdf

Thanks for reading. This was my first attempt at something like this, so let me know if you are interested in more or if you have any suggestions or improvements. Thanks!

Is biological science not a hard science? It's weird that it's separate.

Since adcoms take a 'holistic' view, it may be better to just major in humanities to look different than all the bio premeds. You end up with a higher GPA anyway.

It's also interesting how humanities majors have higher mcat scores. Is this because they are really good at certain topics on the mcat or because they have more time to study

 

[DivisionByZero]

You end up with a higher GPA anyway.

That is a valid point. But not all people can succeed in the humanities, due to not liking reading/writing. I think playing to one's strengths is more important.

 

[Spectar]

That is a valid point. But not all people can succeed in the humanities, due to not liking reading/writing. I think playing to one's strengths is more important.

Of course not all people are suited for humanities but I think it also depends on the school. For example, in my school, a degree in history, political science, a mainstream language, religious studies or philosophy are all known to be a walk in the park whereas biology/biochem, physics, and chemistry are known to be the toughest there is.
I would say it's half and half - half of it is what kind of person you are and the other half is what kind of professors you get.

 

[Lawpy]

Is biological science not a hard science? It's weird that it's separate.

Since adcoms take a 'holistic' view, it may be better to just major in humanities to look different than all the bio premeds. You end up with a higher GPA anyway.

It's also interesting how humanities majors have higher mcat scores. Is this because they are really good at certain topics on the mcat or because they have more time to study

Hard science refers to chemistry, physics and engineering. Biology is kept separate because most people pursuing medicine are biology majors.

Humanities majors have better critical thinking skills because their coursework requires reading, analyzing and critiquing various works of literature.

 

[Gilakend]

I regret not majoring in business after seeing a friend sit down for 30 minutes and study for his final (essentially a vocab test) then go get drunk and ace the exam the next day. He's living the dream man.

 

[aldol16]

Humanities majors have better critical thinking skills because their coursework requires reading, analyzing and critiquing various works of literature.

I'm not sure that sort of critical thinking transfers directly to analyzing science as one does in a hard science course or on the MCAT science sections. This sort of the analytical reasoning that applies to humanities research is perhaps best suited for CARS and not as much for the data-driven sciences. Of course this might not be a popular view and it certainly does not preclude humanities majors from having both types of critical reasoning skills, but I think they are separable - at least on a practical level.

 

[Geo16]

Humanities majors have better critical thinking skills because their coursework requires reading, analyzing and critiquing various works of literature.

Hm.. wondering if they have a trend of strong CARS section.

 

[Lawpy]

I'm not sure that sort of critical thinking transfers directly to analyzing science as one does in a hard science course or on the MCAT science sections. This sort of the analytical reasoning that applies to humanities research is perhaps best suited for CARS and not as much for the data-driven sciences. Of course this might not be a popular view and it certainly does not preclude humanities majors from having both types of critical reasoning skills, but I think they are separable - at least on a practical level.

Hm.. wondering if they have a trend of strong CARS section.

It definitely helps for CARS but I think these skills also translate into doing well in other sections like bio and psych/soc, largely because they involve translating complex passages into simple concepts and the idea is to avoid overthinking the questions. Chem/physics is a lot more computational so some more work needs to be done. This matches well with I've seen on SDN (which is self-reported data), where humanities majors tend to excel in CARS, bio and psych/soc and do average in chem/physics.

 

[Geo16]

I regret not majoring in business after seeing a friend sit down for 30 minutes and study for his final (essentially a vocab test) then go get drunk and ace the exam the next day. He's living the dream man.

Damn, my friend who does Econ says otherwise. He's traumatized by his GPA.

 

[aldol16]

It definitely helps for CARS but I think these skills also translate into doing well in other sections like bio and psych/soc, largely because they involve translating complex passages into simple concepts and the idea is to avoid overthinking the questions. Chem/physics is a lot more computational so some more work needs to be done. This matches well with I've seen on SDN (which is self-reported data), where humanities majors tend to excel in CARS, bio and psych/soc and do average in chem/physics.

I guess that's true. I think where I've seen the most humanities major suffer in terms of coursework is the equation-based courses like physics and some chemistry. Organic chemistry is usually a wash but physical organic chemistry is harder for them. I think the kind of analytical reasoning you get from analyzing literature doesn't translate well to reasoning based on equations, where a strong quantitative understanding is required.

 

[Gilakend]

111

Damn, my friend who does Econ says otherwise. He's traumatized by his GPA.

I've heard some war stories about some of the business majors at my school, like accounting, but as far as our just general business major goes, it's notoriously easy. Or at least significantly easier than engineering or a science which a large percentage of the majors are.

 

[Lawpy]

Damn, my friend who does Econ says otherwise. He's traumatized by his GPA.

111


I've heard some war stories about some of the business majors at my school, like accounting, but as far as our just general business major goes, it's notoriously easy. Or at least significantly easier than engineering or a science which a large percentage of the majors are.

Economics and finance are definitely the hardest business degrees because they are heavy in math and can be abstract. Some of the economics courses uses stuff from multivariate calculus, linear algebra and calculus-based probability/statistics, and so the concepts can get quickly difficult. Quantitative finance often uses stuff from differential equations and quantum mechanics to improve financial forecasting (which is also why financial algorithms are becoming increasingly popular/lucrative and math/computer science majors are recruited heavily into Wall Street).

 

[cactusman]

I don't even think of Econ as a business degree. Many schools have no UG business school but offer it through Arts & Sciences. Business degrees often are a different kind of degree, like BBA or BAC.

Some adcoms on here have talked about additional factors for the low acceptance rate for HEAL majors. There's a perception that the curriculum is less rigorous. There's also concern that someone applying directly out of a vocational health program may lack commitment and find that they are happy in a new health career. If a student takes a spot in a nursing program without the intent to go into nursing, that may also be considered ethically questionable, given the constant need for nurses.

 

[Endoxifen]

[QUOTE="SpectreDoc, post: 18978896, member: 781083"
It's also interesting how humanities majors have higher mcat scores. Is this because they are really good at certain topics on the mcat or because they have more time to study[/QUOTE]
I doubt that's the reason. It's probably that it is largely self-selecting. The only humanities students who will be applying to med school made it through all of the premed course work while also doing completely unrelated humanities work. Essentially, they had to either be very smart or work very hard because the majority of their coursework was not building on their science foundation constantly.

 

[aldol16]

I doubt that's the reason. It's probably that it is largely self-selecting. The only humanities students who will be applying to med school made it through all of the premed course work while also doing completely unrelated humanities work. Essentially, they had to either be very smart or work very hard because the majority of their coursework was not building on their science foundation constantly.

Sometimes I think sciences are easier for humanities majors because it's a lot more straightforward for them for the simple fact that they don't deal with science on an everyday basis. They can learn the simple rules and logic and leave it at that, whereas more advanced science students will be aware of deeper paradoxes and exceptions that we don't teach in introductory courses that sometimes conflict with the material that we do teach. An example is enzyme mechanisms. We teach how to draw mechanisms and how to apply that to enzymes in the form of arrow-pushing. You can learn that and ace every exam we give you. But if an advanced student looks at it at a deeper level, he or she may realize that some of the mechanisms don't make much sense classically because they involve the breaking of highly inert bonds. And the student may discount mechanisms for that reason, because they don't make sense given the classical understanding of chemistry that they were taught. But further perusal would lead the student into the phenomenon of quantum tunneling in enzymes (which is employed quite widely by nature), which we do not teach in an introductory course.

 

[Endoxifen]

Sometimes I think sciences are easier for humanities majors because it's a lot more straightforward for them for the simple fact that they don't deal with science on an everyday basis. They can learn the simple rules and logic and leave it at that, whereas more advanced science students will be aware of deeper paradoxes and exceptions that we don't teach in introductory courses that sometimes conflict with the material that we do teach. An example is enzyme mechanisms. We teach how to draw mechanisms and how to apply that to enzymes in the form of arrow-pushing. You can learn that and ace every exam we give you. But if an advanced student looks at it at a deeper level, he or she may realize that some of the mechanisms don't make much sense classically because they involve the breaking of highly inert bonds. And the student may discount mechanisms for that reason, because they don't make sense given the classical understanding of chemistry that they were taught. But further perusal would lead the student into the phenomenon of quantum tunneling in enzymes (which is employed quite widely by nature), which we do not teach in an introductory course.

Honestly, I doubt the majority of science premeds will get that far either. Most students just don't care enough about things that deep into the course material. Because of that, I still think the humanities students may have it slightly worse off.

 

[aldol16]

Honestly, I doubt the majority of science premeds will get that far either. Most students just don't care enough about things that deep into the course material. Because of that, I still think the humanities students may have it slightly worse off.

The science-major pre-meds do. I notice that chemistry major students who are pre-meds (or not) are very engaged and do notice small things that we try to gloss over (mainly because not glossing over them would open up additional lectures-worth of material more suitable for higher-level courses). Don't get me wrong - my humanities students are all very smart. But it's the added background knowledge that gets the science students.

 

[Endoxifen]

The science-major pre-meds do. I notice that chemistry major students who are pre-meds (or not) are very engaged and do notice small things that we try to gloss over (mainly because not glossing over them would open up additional lectures-worth of material more suitable for higher-level courses). Don't get me wrong - my humanities students are all very smart. But it's the added background knowledge that gets the science students.

I guess we've had different experiences with the general student population. When I tutor or even study with someone in one of my classes, I hardly ever find someone willing to think beyond the lecture material. There are obviously those high achievers who will really dig deep, but even in a medical school application cycle, they make a small minority.

 

[aldol16]

I guess we've had different experiences with the general student population. When I'm tutor or even study with someone in one of my classes, I hardly ever find someone willing to think beyond the lecture material. There are obviously those high achievers who will really dig deep, but even in a medical school application cycle, they make a small minority.

It could be the strength of the undergraduate institution where I did graduate school and if it is, that doesn't surprise me as the student population will obviously have different strengths depending on the school.