Question about Post-Bacc Programs

[zerom]

I've decided to pursue a post-bacc program in order to apply to med school (I only took 2 sciences courses toward my BA). My question is this: what's the difference between the more formal, full-time post-bacc programs (for example, Columbia and Tufts) and just doing the courses part-time (while I work) at a nearby state university?

Obviously, the more formal programs tend to be more expensive, but I'm wondering whether such programs would give me a significantly higher chance of getting into highly ranked/respected med schools. The state school I would take the classes at part-time is respected and recognized nationally, but would the formal full-time programs still give my apps an edge?

My gpa from college is 3.69 (almost no science, lots of math, humanities, and social science) and I obviously haven't taken the MCAT. I have mad soft credentials, such as Peace Corps, paid health care experience, etc.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Phil Anthropist]

Moving to the Postbaccalaureate Programs forum. Good luck!

 

[RogueRules]

The difference is primarily cost, and in some cases length of program (i.e. Goucher gets you through in one year, which can be tough -though not impossible- to do at non-formal programs where they might not have courses offered when you want them). Your undergrad GPA is quite strong, and your peace corps experience will do a lot for you. Med schools seem to have a bit of a hard-on for such things (excuse the crass language, but I am serious about that).

The quality of guidance might vary as well but that varies from school to school and is not dependent on the type of program. You'll find programs of both type that have both good and bad advising. Become familiar with the advising offices at schools in which you are interested to see which you feel is more supportive, etc.

As long as you do not attend a community college, it does not really matter where you go. Your MCAT scores will make clear whether you learned the material adequately or not. The one factor you would want to consider is whether a school will write you a committee letter. This is a good thing (though not an absolute necessity) to have when applying.

Overall, I would recommend going to a less expensive program that boasts good teaching (talk to other post-bacc students to get their opinion) than spending a fortune before you even get to medical school. There is simply no need. I attended a city college (Hunter) and am now at Cornell Med (which, btw LOVES peace corps people) - and there are plenty other of my peers attending top and very good schools.

Doing well in your classes -regardless of where - is the most important thing. Doing well in your MCATS is also very important. Where you take your classes, does not matter as long as it is not a community college.

Good luck to you!

I've decided to pursue a post-bacc program in order to apply to med school (I only took 2 sciences courses toward my BA). My question is this: what's the difference between the more formal, full-time post-bacc programs (for example, Columbia and Tufts) and just doing the courses part-time (while I work) at a nearby state university?

Obviously, the more formal programs tend to be more expensive, but I'm wondering whether such programs would give me a significantly higher chance of getting into highly ranked/respected med schools. The state school I would take the classes at part-time is respected and recognized nationally, but would the formal full-time programs still give my apps an edge?

My gpa from college is 3.69 (almost no science, lots of math, humanities, and social science) and I obviously haven't taken the MCAT. I have mad soft credentials, such as Peace Corps, paid health care experience, etc.

 

[Law2Doc]

The quality of guidance might vary as well but that varies school to school as is not dependent on teh type of program. You'll find programs of both type that have both good and bad advising. Become familiar with the advising offices at schools you are interested in to see which you feel is more supportive, etc.

I would say that the level of "hands on" guidance, advising and marketing of postbac candidates is really the biggest difference. Almost all the formal programs will require more than a year followed by a glide year to complete everything. The top programs herd you through the program making sure you do everything you need, get help (tutoring and advising) if you seem to need it, make sure you sign up for MCAT and line of adequate ECs etc., and the program directors at the fancier places even meet with med school deans to try and "sell" it's postbacs. (Tufts, Goucher, Bryn Mawr all do this, not sure about the others). This is not the kind of service you'd get from HES or some of the more "laissez faire" programs, where you have to self manage a lot more, and advising is available but not really pushed on you unless you seek it out. Linkage is also a big difference (I think Tufts guarantees it's better applicants an interview with the med school).
But frankly a solid GPA candidate with peace corps experience should be in pretty good standing coming out of any postbac program. Get A's in the sciences, rock the MCAT, and get some hospital related clinical experience and you should be in good shape coming out of anywhere.

 

[Pemulis]

I'd ditto everything said here: your credentials are solid and if you can keep up the good work for post-bac and the MCAT, you should be in pretty good shape wherever you end up. But to play devil's advocate for a second, I am currently a post-bac at Goucher, and feel that the extra money spent is well worth it to me. My reasoning is this: I will finish my program in one year. If I'm lucky, I'll end up linking directly to med school and start next fall, but even if that falls through, I should be in med school by the year following. By contrast, at the do-it-yourself options I was looking at, the earliest I would have been in med school is three years down the road (two years to finish courses, and then one lag year to apply). So from a purely financial perspective, the Goucher program is actually SAVING me money in the long run (1 or 2 extra years of a doctor's salary is far more money than the 25g I'm spending to be here). But this all depends on your personal priorities. I'm a bit of an older student, and getting to med school ASAP is important to me; other people really want to take the extra year or two to get there.

Beyond just the financial considerations, also think about what kind of environment you're going to do your best in. For me, the Goucher program is well worth the extra cost, even if I ignore my belief that in the long run it's actually a financial winner. This is a year, or more, of your life, so make sure you're going to spend it in a place where you won't be miserable.

Good luck whatever you decide.

 

[zerom]

Thank you for all the responses so far, they have all been very helpful. I was wondering if Pemulis could provide me an impression of Goucher: obviously you're happy there, but what has been you impression of the professors, fellow students, advising, and generally the options open to students who complete the program with a good GPA? Just from the webpage, it looks like a program I should consider.

 

[Pemulis]

Thank you for all the responses so far, they have all been very helpful. I was wondering if Pemulis could provide me an impression of Goucher: obviously you're happy there, but what has been you impression of the professors, fellow students, advising, and generally the options open to students who complete the program with a good GPA? Just from the webpage, it looks like a program I should consider.

Professors: so far, so good. I'm just finishing up the summer chem sequence, so I've only had one prof yet, but he's a very entertaining lecturer. The tests, for the most part, are fair, and most people in the class are doing well in it. The professor and TA are also both VERY available for help outside of class. Because the post-bac classes are completely separate from the undergrad courses, the class is small and has a "non-competitive" feel (no curve, for example). Also, the profs here know that we're all going to med school, so they are really looking to help you get that A, and write a good letter of rec for you.

Fellow students: great. My classmates are a smart, interesting, group of people. Lots of former peace corps volunteers, refugees from the corporate world, a few former musicians and artists; in other words, Goucher really looks to recruit an interesting and diverse group. By and large, the students who come here are mature people who are heading to medicine for the right reasons. People are also really supportive of each other, which is a definite difference as compared to the atmosphere in typical, large, "weed out" type courses at big universities.

Advising: haven't had much experience with it yet, but so far it seems excellent. In fact, Goucher is probably known above all else for this. Liza Thompson, the director of the program, is regarded around here as a real expert in getting people into med school, and the alumni I've spoken with have had very positive things to say about the help she gave them in navigating the admissions process.

Options open to graduates of the program: as good as anywhere. For six years running now, Goucher has gotten 100% of its students from each class into med school. Every year, out of a class of about 30 students, one or two people end up at Hopkins, another one or two at Chicago, others at Pitt, Penn, Harvard, Columbia, Baylor, Yale, Rochester, Duke, UCSF, Stanford, etc. So a very high percentage of people aren't just getting into med school, but into the highest tier schools in the country. Adcoms know the Goucher program and look very favorably on applicants coming out of it.

The decision of whether or not to go for a formal post-bac is obviously a personal one, but if you do decide on a formal program, I would definitely recommend taking a close look at Goucher.

 

[RogueRules]

In line with the timing consideration is that other programs also have linkage programs, so that you can skip your lag year - and this is something I would consider when looking at post-bacc programs. No doubt that doing Goucher with linkage is the fastest way you'll get get to med school. But, other schools have linkage programs to medical schools as well. Hunter has linkages with Cornell and Stony Brook, Columbia has linkages with Brown, Stony brook and 3 other schools I believe, etc. Through those programs you will generally be in med school in 2 (versus 3) years - but, of course, you need to be accepted into them and they are competitive.

Also, corroborating what law2doc said, formal programs/private institutions may well guide you more tightly, but I'd argue that I liked the freedom planning my own schedule and not having someone dictate to me what schools and linkage programs I may or may not apply to, or even run the risk of not being supported by the committee (as you do at Columbia and presumably other schools with tight GPA requirements for a letter).

I did my undergrad at an Ivy league school and have to say that I absolutely loved my postbacc experience at Hunter. I developed a whole new appreciation for public education as the teaching was arguably probably the best I had had to date.

In the end, consider time, money, and your ability to succeed in what ever program you enter. Doing well is critical, so make sure you can keep pace with whatever program you choose!

Good luck!

I'd ditto everything said here: your credentials are solid and if you can keep up the good work for post-bac and the MCAT, you should be in pretty good shape wherever you end up. But to play devil's advocate for a second, I am currently a post-bac at Goucher, and feel that the extra money spent is well worth it to me. My reasoning is this: I will finish my program in one year. If I'm lucky, I'll end up linking directly to med school and start next fall, but even if that falls through, I should be in med school by the year following. By contrast, at the do-it-yourself options I was looking at, the earliest I would have been in med school is three years down the road (two years to finish courses, and then one lag year to apply). So from a purely financial perspective, the Goucher program is actually SAVING me money in the long run (1 or 2 extra years of a doctor's salary is far more money than the 25g I'm spending to be here). But this all depends on your personal priorities. I'm a bit of an older student, and getting to med school ASAP is important to me; other people really want to take the extra year or two to get there.

Beyond just the financial considerations, also think about what kind of environment you're going to do your best in. For me, the Goucher program is well worth the extra cost, even if I ignore my belief that in the long run it's actually a financial winner. This is a year, or more, of your life, so make sure you're going to spend it in a place where you won't be miserable.

Good luck whatever you decide.

 

[LAcmw]

hey...i have 2 schools to choose from...one is Cal State LA (second bacc) and the other is Rutgers (postbac). i live in LA, but i'm originally from NJ so i have the best of both worlds. i'm torn on where to go and where to live and i have laid out ALL the pros and cons....so i think. i was just reading your comment about community college and was just wondering why it's a bad idea. this may seem like a silly questions, but is it mainly for lack of advisement and having the profs to write recommendations etc???

thanks..crystal --PM if you can..i get lost on these threads-i'm new to all this.

The difference is primarily cost, and in some cases length of program (i.e. Goucher gets you through in one year, which can be tough -though not impossible- to do at non-formal programs where they might not have courses offered when you want them). Your undergrad GPA is quite strong, and your peace corps experience will do a lot for you. Med schools seem to have a bit of a hard-on for such things (excuse the crass language, but I am serious about that).

The quality of guidance might vary as well but that varies school to school as is not dependent on teh type of program. You'll find programs of both type that have both good and bad advising. Become familiar with the advising offices at schools you are interested in to see which you feel is more supportive, etc.

As long as you do not attend a community college, it does not really matter where you go. Your MCAT scores will make clear whether you learned the material adequately or not. The one factor you would want to consider is whether a school will write you a committee letter. This is a good thing (though not an absolute necessity) to have when applying.

Overall, I would recommend going to a less expensive program that boasts good teaching (talk to other post-bacc students to get their opinion) than spending a fortune before you even get to medical school. There is simply no need. I attended a city college (Hunter) and am now at Cornell Med (which, btw LOVES peace corps people) - and there are plenty other of my peers attending top and very good schools.

Doing well in your classes -regardless of where - is the most important thing. Doing well in your MCATS is also very important. Where you take your classes, does not matter as long as it is not a community college.

Good luck to you!

 

[zerom]

Although you weren't addressing my comment, I feel as though I can provide a response. From most of the people I've talked to, the consensus seems to be that a med school admissions committee would look down upon taking most of your science classes at a community college. This results from the assumption that such classes would not be as rigorous as those offered at a non-CC school. While this view of CC's may or may not be correct, I don't doubt that admissions committees do look at classes from Rutgers (for example) in a better light than those from a CC.

hey...i have 2 schools to choose from...one is Cal State LA (second bacc) and the other is Rutgers (postbac). i live in LA, but i'm originally from NJ so i have the best of both worlds. i'm torn on where to go and where to live and i have laid out ALL the pros and cons....so i think. i was just reading your comment about community college and was just wondering why it's a bad idea. this may seem like a silly questions, but is it mainly for lack of advisement and having the profs to write recommendations etc???

thanks..crystal --PM if you can..i get lost on these threads-i'm new to all this.

 

[NapeSpikes]

Cal State LA is not a CC, so I'm not sure how the CC vs. 4-year question relates to Rutgers vs. Cal State LA, since both are 4-years.

 

[LAcmw]

sorry for the confusion... yeah, they are both 4 year state universities, but i just had ideas of taking classes at night and CCs offer night classes, especially science ones (well, the CCs near me). it was actually just a separate thought..trying to think of all my options here, that's all.

Cal State LA is not a CC, so I'm not sure how the CC vs. 4-year question relates to Rutgers vs. Cal State LA, since both are 4-years.