Should Medical Schools require a degree?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Should Medical Schools REQUIRE a specific undergrad degree?

  • YES

    Votes: 67 40.6%
  • NO

    Votes: 98 59.4%

  • Total voters
    165
Looking over the cutoffs for several ontario schools is pretty depressing. But what makes me very angry is how some schools do not require a specific degree or only 'recommend' rigorous courses like orgo or physics.

Most people I know do not have straight A's. And something inside me fails to believe that every single medical student out there had straight As in undergrad. I know a few medical students and a couple of residents who will be starting their own practices soon, and they're definitely not the world's smartest people.

I feel that medical schools should clearly say that they require a specific degree in science or health studies. First of all, knowledge gained while pursuing such a degree will be beneficial in medical school. I want to puke when I think of arts students who never took any rigorous science courses because these were only recommended, and are now doctors because their English preparation helped them write their essays.

Lets face the facts, most of us knew that we wanted to be doctors or health practicioners of some kind way back in high school. That's why we worked so hard in bio, chem, calculus and other advanced level courses to help us get into the best undergrad. Why should we reward an English major with no serious science background who realizes that their only options are teaching or writing books?
Is there anyone out there who really wants their doctor to have an undergrad in arts who has only been rigourously studying science during his 3 years as a med student??

Don't get me wrong, doctors do need good written and oral communication skills, and they do need a basic knowledge in social science and ethics. But science has been the foundation of medicine. Sure we need a good bedside manner but what's more important is our understanding of the human body, of its interactions with drugs, of the way viruses and bacteria evolve and overtake us in disease. And I just can't agree that you can jump into science as a medical student and learn everything you need to know in a three year period.

Unfortunately, at a lot of medical schools that's the way admissions are these days.
So to all the high school students aspiring to be pre-meds:
Don't be too keen, remember to take the easiest courses you can, because if your curiosity actually causes you to engage yourself in too many advanced science courses noone will recognize it in the end anyway. All that matters is your GPA and not how you got it.

This whole post is just wrong in every way. First of all, almost every medical school (at least most American ones) require a lot of typical premed courses. So if you're a humanities major or not, you'll still be taking those rigorous sciences. Also consider that the MCAT is going to determine if you have what it takes or not. If you make a 35 on the mcat as an English major, and have a 3.8 gpa and never took a science course. Well all I can say is, amazing, and you deserve to be a doctor.

Also, it isn't like art, history, philosophy and English majors have it easy. They have very rigorous course loads as well, not in science, but it isn't any less challenging. Science doesn't equal harder, it is just one of the many difficult things you can pursue in college. While there are certainly going to be easier classes than others, and possibly easier degrees than others, the vast generalizations you make wreak of ignorance. Consider that medical school is there to teach you about disease, anatomy, physiology etc. While a thorough undergrad experience with science classes will help, intelligent, hard working individuals will be able to excel without them.

Also, it isn't the case that most of us, knew we were going to be doctors since high school. There is a whole forum devoted to people who didn't know they wanted to be doctors until much older, or after earning a degree in a completely different field, they're called non-trads. Furthermore, I would guess the majority of "traditional" premeds did not know they wanted to be doctors until college, or even a year into college.

I was going to contemplate voting on this thread, but I decided against it after reading your post. Don't generalize so much, if you got to be a medical student you deserve it, and don't try to take that away from anyone, just because you might not have what it takes to make it.

You're sending the wrong message here, students should attempt whatever major they like, not what will get them into medical school the easiest. You think English or History is so easy, well I want to see you graduate with a 4.0 in it. The point is, people in college should take this time as a unique period in life where they can learn about themselves and hopefully pursue an academic, and career path that is enjoyable, rewarding and profitable.
 
I don't understand why people would want their doctor to never have taken rigorous science courses?
If you went into English then stick to your own kind.

So you're assuming the courses in medical school that everyone takes are not rigorous science courses?

All doctors who graduated from real medical schools took rigorous science courses. It is part of the medical school curriculum. Trying to base a doctor's abilities off of his undergraduate courses is ridiculous. Why not have a doctor who spent his undergraduate years learning humanities? This doctor would be much more well rounded than most of us traditional premeds who take one set of classes for 6 years then start doing rotations with minimal exposure to the arts, history, etc.
 
It's pretty simple in my view, and Dr. Pardi states it pretty well. If it were so important to have a "rigorous" basic science background, then schools would absolutely require it. As it stands, no school that I know of requires anything beyond organic chem...don't you think the entire medical school industry knows this better than you do? if it were true that humanities majors didn't have as good a record at being doctors as the biochem majors, don't you think the schools would pick up on that after 150 years of doing it and stop accepting the humanities kids?

In any case, I'm a current MS1 at the hardest-core of all hard-core research medical schools, and I guarantee you that everyone in my entire first year class could be a science PhD if that's what the adcom wanted. But that's not what they want, and as a result there are only ~10 people in my class who already have a PhD of any kind.

Maybe I'm biased because I'm a silly, slacker English major who should stick to his own kind and only took 7 science classes TOTAL in undergrad. Or maybe it's because I already know that I can kick ass in the basic sciences and wanted to improve in a skill set that I wasn't already good at when I entered undergrad four years ago. God forbid.
 
dr_dre said:
I feel that medical schools should clearly say that they require a specific degree in science or health studies. First of all, knowledge gained while pursuing such a degree will be beneficial in medical school.

Why take a bunch of classes you're going to take again in med school....seems like a waste of time to me.

dr_dre said:
Don't get me wrong, doctors do need good written and oral communication skills, and they do need a basic knowledge in social science and ethics. But science has been the foundation of medicine. Sure we need a good bedside manner but what's more important is our understanding of the human body, of its interactions with drugs, of the way viruses and bacteria evolve and overtake us in disease.

You should use that line diminishing the importance of bedside manner in your personal statement and/or interviews...the docs will LOVE it.


dr_dre said:
And I just can't agree that you can jump into science as a medical student and learn everything you need to know in a three year period.
You don't have to agree...but, of course, you'd be wrong. But, of course, what would i know...i'm only a former English major currently doing just fine in med school...i'm sure most undergrads would have a better finger on the pulse of what it takes to be a doctor. 😉

Thanks for playing, you've been a great contestant...we have some beautiful parting gifts for you. Better luck next time.
 
I like that. Go engineers!! (EE turned pre-med here)

hmm... Baltimore... BME... you wouldn't happen to go to Hopkins, would you? 😉

If you thought signals and systems was bad, you should try control systems design... I really hated that class. 😡

Are you talking about Control Systems with Rugh (not sure of spelling)? Yeah I hated that class too. I took it in Hodson 110. I also bombed MIS in that classroom too. When it came time to take the MCAT in that room, I was so jinxed I just voided the damn thing. Design team was ******ed, physfound was ******ed.

The only engineering class I had fun in was Instrumentation, cuz the whole class was hands on stuff.
 
Looking over the cutoffs for several ontario schools is pretty depressing. But what makes me very angry is how some schools do not require a specific degree or only 'recommend' rigorous courses like orgo or physics.

Most people I know do not have straight A's. And something inside me fails to believe that every single medical student out there had straight As in undergrad. I know a few medical students and a couple of residents who will be starting their own practices soon, and they're definitely not the world's smartest people.

I feel that medical schools should clearly say that they require a specific degree in science or health studies. First of all, knowledge gained while pursuing such a degree will be beneficial in medical school. I want to puke when I think of arts students who never took any rigorous science courses because these were only recommended, and are now doctors because their English preparation helped them write their essays.

Lets face the facts, most of us knew that we wanted to be doctors or health practicioners of some kind way back in high school. That's why we worked so hard in bio, chem, calculus and other advanced level courses to help us get into the best undergrad. Why should we reward an English major with no serious science background who realizes that their only options are teaching or writing books?
Is there anyone out there who really wants their doctor to have an undergrad in arts who has only been rigourously studying science during his 3 years as a med student??

Don't get me wrong, doctors do need good written and oral communication skills, and they do need a basic knowledge in social science and ethics. But science has been the foundation of medicine. Sure we need a good bedside manner but what's more important is our understanding of the human body, of its interactions with drugs, of the way viruses and bacteria evolve and overtake us in disease. And I just can't agree that you can jump into science as a medical student and learn everything you need to know in a three year period.

Unfortunately, at a lot of medical schools that's the way admissions are these days.
So to all the high school students aspiring to be pre-meds:
Don't be too keen, remember to take the easiest courses you can, because if your curiosity actually causes you to engage yourself in too many advanced science courses noone will recognize it in the end anyway. All that matters is your GPA and not how you got it.

you are beyond bitter...I'll continue to let everyone else pick apart your odd argument
 
I think this thread was directed mostly at canadians as it states in the first paragraph. And I agree that things are a little messed up there.
Some schools don't require the MCAT or any classes. Yes you heard it - you can apply without ever taking any bio, chem, orgo (I know of like 4 schools that actually require it there), biochem, or physics or writing the MCAT. Or if you do take the MCAT, some schools will only look at one section on it such as verbal or written. Some schools don't even require you to take any senior classes. It is slightly unfair because the first round of cuts is made solely on GPA (and the cutoff at UofT last year was over 3.8).
I know 2 guys who are at an Ontario med school (Ottawa I think) who used to play soccer with me down in the States. They had it all figured out and took the easy root and it got them in no problems. They always told me I could go into undergrad and take all first year and second year classes the entire time, and fish for all the bird courses and spend all my time volunteering in clinics and doing some research and building my GPA and EC's.

I guess I can understand the frustrations of the OP. I'm sure there are some people who take the above mentioned path but it's not everyone. In my honest opinion it's kind of sad if you never really apply yourself in a single field but just take random bird courses from every single faculty. But I guess this strategy must work in some Canadian schools since as I said the first cuts are GPA and after that all they look at are EC's, noone cares about the specific courses you took, and remember no MCAT in a few schools.

Either way I can't agree with that messed up view and even though I will have a science major I voted Yes.
But I would really like to hear from some of the NO voters; hear what your opinion is. There are 48 of you (at this time) and noone has posted yet.
 
Either way I can't agree with that messed up view and even though I will have a science major I voted Yes.
But I would really like to hear from some of the NO voters; hear what your opinion is. There are 48 of you (at this time) and noone has posted yet.

Don't you mean you voted NO and that you want to hear from the YES people?
 
opinion is. There are 48 of you (at this time) and noone has posted yet.

🙂 I did previously (in this thread)! but it was an opinion...im willing to go with the flow and get a degree though, but i could care less about the degree
 
Don't you mean you voted NO and that you want to hear from the YES people?

I think that's what he means.

And my guess is that the people that the majority of the people who voted "yes" voted looking at the (biased) thread title and not at the specific poll question. (I almost did)

If the division was that evenly split, we'd have more people in here arguing that medical schools should require all students to be generic cardboard cutouts.
 
I think this thread was directed mostly at canadians as it states in the first paragraph. And I agree that things are a little messed up there.
Some schools don't require the MCAT or any classes. Yes you heard it - you can apply without ever taking any bio, chem, orgo (I know of like 4 schools that actually require it there), biochem, or physics or writing the MCAT. Or if you do take the MCAT, some schools will only look at one section on it such as verbal or written. Some schools don't even require you to take any senior classes. It is slightly unfair because the first round of cuts is made solely on GPA (and the cutoff at UofT last year was over 3.8).
No schools in Canada look at one section only, Mac wanted to do that but ran into some problems so maybe in the coming years they will. And all schools require you to take senior course. You have to have 60% of your courses going to your year. Therefore if your in third year 60% of your courses must be in third year unless your degree requires it which is almost never the case.
I know 2 guys who are at an Ontario med school (Ottawa I think) who used to play soccer with me down in the States. They had it all figured out and took the easy root and it got them in no problems. They always told me I could go into undergrad and take all first year and second year classes the entire time, and fish for all the bird courses and spend all my time volunteering in clinics and doing some research and building my GPA and EC's.
I think you misunderstood them. You can apply to medical school at Ottawa after second year so their application consists of grades from first and second year only.
 
My contribution to this otherwise not really useful discussion about "my major is better/harder than your major" is that I think that MCAT scores are not emphasized as much as they should be in Medical School Admissions (This is my current perception.) Here in TX, there seem to be plenty of 4.0/27s gaining admissions but many fewer 3.5/36s gaining admissions.

All majors are NOT equal in terms of their difficulty. As an Engineering major that has taken lots of humanities, as well as my science pre-requisites and then some, I agree with those that say that you just can't compare a difficult major like Engineering to humanities/natural science. Comparing the GPAs between those two disciplines is like comparing apples and oranges. That's why we need/have the MCAT, but my perception is that less weight is placed on the MCAT than on GPA (at least here in TX) so those who challenged themselves are disadvantaged in the applications process, and the quick-and-easy way to get into medical school is to major in basket weaving, do well in the prereqs, and cram for the MCAT to pull a 30ish (or even a little less) score. Not cool, IMHO, but that's the way it is.....
 
The other thing I'll add is that the Med. School prerequisite courses are a joke and are not "rigerous science" courses. Most AMCAS schools only require 1 year of Bio. Lecture, which means that I could've just taken Intro. Bio. 1 and 2 to satisfy that. In Intro. Bio. 2 at the school where i took it, I learned about such "challenging" things as the biosphere, habitats, biodiversity, and ecology. Although I was not in a gambling mood (as a nontrad, I wanted a 4.0 in all of my prerequisite courses) I bet that I could've slept through the courses AS WELL AS THE EXAMS and still managed an A. To TX medical schools' credit, 2 years of Bio. is required, which requires students to take some of the more rigerous Bio. courses like Genetics and other upper-division stuff, but saying that the prerequisite courses are rigerous is like saying that W is a genius.
 
The other thing I'll add is that the Med. School prerequisite courses are a joke and are not "rigerous science" courses. Most AMCAS schools only require 1 year of Bio. Lecture, which means that I could've just taken Intro. Bio. 1 and 2 to satisfy that. In Intro. Bio. 2 at the school where i took it, I learned about such "challenging" things as the biosphere, habitats, biodiversity, and ecology. Although I was not in a gambling mood (as a nontrad, I wanted a 4.0 in all of my prerequisite courses) I bet that I could've slept through the courses AS WELL AS THE EXAMS and still managed an A. To TX medical schools' credit, 2 years of Bio. is required, which requires students to take some of the more rigerous Bio. courses like Genetics and other upper-division stuff, but saying that the prerequisite courses are rigerous is like saying that W is a genius.

Hah, so now not only do we have an assertion that Engineering is the hardest major, apparently Texas is the only state worth a damn for undergrad...
 
I'm a humanities major.

Now ask me about my 100+ hours of Basic Sciences.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

I think the purpose of undergrad is to explore things outside of medicine. The purpose of giving choice is so that people can broaden their horizons by taking classes that interest them and from which they can enjoy what they are learning.

Schools want diversity and I think that's a good thing.

I wouldn't want every med student to be exactly the same. It would get tiresome and boring.

You are going to learn plenty of the science in med school???
 
Hah, so now not only do we have an assertion that Engineering is the hardest major, apparently Texas is the only state worth a damn for undergrad...
Objection, your honor! Assumes facts not in evidence.

Not only did I not do my UG in TX (what I said was that TX medical schools require 2 years of Bio., which, almost by definition means that you will be taking more rigerous Bio. courses) but I never said that engineering was THE hardest major, but ONE of the hardest. Ask yourself this, those of you that are non-engineering majors, did you take any engineering classes as electives? Why not?

I rest my case.
 
I think i'd have to agree with the OP to an extent. I DO think a science degree should be required (at least a minor) for the same reasons as others posted that they should have taken 'rigorous' advanced courses.
 
Do you honestly think a degree in physical chemistry makes you a better physician than someone who graduated with a degree in english?

If you are doing rad/onc, absolutely. In fact, you probably wouldn't get into residency without it. However, the overall standpoint is true as well. The reason schools have minimum requirements for classes is so they know you can hack it in medical school.
I still don't know what those engineering kids are smoking though, chemistry is way harder. 😀
 
yourself this, those of you that are non-engineering majors, did you take any engineering classes as electives? Why not?

I rest my case.

Because I'm not interested in engineering?😕
 
How would you know if you never even took any courses? I used to think the same about Psychology until I took Intro. to Psych. I used to think the same about Economics until I took Intro. to Econ., and wound up being an Econ. Double Major.
 
I still don't know what those engineering kids are smoking though, chemistry is way harder. 😀

Sauter. Pure sauter. Melt it on the iron, close all the doors and windows, and its a party. Since like 70% of all engineering students are like Indians from Calcutta, man when we smoke it up theres lots of dancing in circles on one foot and raising the roof.
 
Ask yourself this, those of you that are non-engineering majors, did you take any engineering classes as electives? Why not?

I rest my case.

Cuz it would be like dropping academic soap in an academic state penitentiary right after you get an academic sex change.

RAPE.
 
Yeah exotic masseuse work can get hectic at times.
 
This medical school process is all about finishing. You MUST finish all 4 years of medical school to get your M.D. You MUST finish all of your residency and finish taking the boards to be completely certified. If all medical schools don't require a degree, then to me, people will get used to not finishing, and I predict raise the drop out rate in medical school. Also, the 4 years in college really helps to mature you a give your a broad exposure to alot of things. If people can leave after their sophomore year, I think it will bread less interesting, eccentric, physicians. Gunners will starting forming in junior year of high school and take over.
 
How would you know if you never even took any courses? I used to think the same about Psychology until I took Intro. to Psych. I used to think the same about Economics until I took Intro. to Econ., and wound up being an Econ. Double Major.

I'm sorry I was assuming you made the earlier comments to hint that engineering classes are harder, and if given the choice one wouldn't opt to enroll in said class becuase they thought it was "too hard". I was simply saying that I wouldn't enroll in it not because its may be harder, but becuase i'm not interested in it.
 
I'm sorry I was assuming you made the earlier comments to hint that engineering classes are harder, and if given the choice one wouldn't opt to enroll in said class becuase they thought it was "too hard". I was simply saying that I wouldn't enroll in it not because its may be harder, but becuase i'm not interested in it.
That was what I was hinting at. I was just bringing up the chicken-egg problem with saying that you are not interested in the material. How do you know that you are not interested in the material when you have never been exposed to it? While you may be different, I'm quite sure that the vast majority of people choose not to expose themselves to engineering (or other similarly difficult) classes because of their reputation for being difficult. Obviously, I can't prove any of this, but I will sleep soundly knowing that I have the perfect plan for getting into Medical School in my next life (Basket Weaving Major, cram for MCAT, etc -- see my post a few posts up.)
 
That was what I was hinting at. I was just bringing up the chicken-egg problem with saying that you are not interested in the material. How do you know that you are not interested in the material when you have never been exposed to it? While you may be different, I'm quite sure that the vast majority of people choose not to expose themselves to engineering (or other similarly difficult) classes because of their reputation for being difficult. Obviously, I can't prove any of this, but I will sleep soundly knowing that I have the perfect plan for getting into Medical School in my next life (Basket Weaving Major, cram for MCAT, etc -- see my post a few posts up.)

Yea, I absolutely understand what you were getting at, but at the same time, most "pre-meds", or at least the legit ones, are rather smart/motivated. I have taken classes that I didn't like/want to take, but still did rather well in it because I wanted to. I wouldn't avoid taking a class because it's "too hard" and i'm sure you, or most SDNers, wouldn't either. But for the average college kid, you're logic would probably apply.
 
This medical school process is all about finishing. You MUST finish all 4 years of medical school to get your M.D. You MUST finish all of your residency and finish taking the boards to be completely certified. If all medical schools don't require a degree, then to me, people will get used to not finishing, and I predict raise the drop out rate in medical school. Also, the 4 years in college really helps to mature you a give your a broad exposure to alot of things. If people can leave after their sophomore year, I think it will bread less interesting, eccentric, physicians. Gunners will starting forming in junior year of high school and take over.


Yet in Canada we do not need a degree to apply to most schools and there is very LOW drop out rate.
 
neom3x11- Yeah I am also confused!!! I saw the other thread and was wondering wheter it was the same person or not.
 
That was what I was hinting at. I was just bringing up the chicken-egg problem with saying that you are not interested in the material. How do you know that you are not interested in the material when you have never been exposed to it? While you may be different, I'm quite sure that the vast majority of people choose not to expose themselves to engineering (or other similarly difficult) classes because of their reputation for being difficult. Obviously, I can't prove any of this, but I will sleep soundly knowing that I have the perfect plan for getting into Medical School in my next life (Basket Weaving Major, cram for MCAT, etc -- see my post a few posts up.)

the truth is that even if engineering classes are more interesting they just sound dull compared to many non-engineering classes (to me at least and I'm sure others will sympathize).

If I had to choose a course blindly from the following classes:

Intro to quantum mechanics and special relativity
Contemporary issues in philosophy of mind
The burden of disease in developing countries
Modern Architecture
Topics in Solid and Structural Mechanics
Thermodynamics of materials

the final two engineering classes would be dead last on my list. Of course this is nothing more than my opinion but structural mechanics and thermodynamics just sounds kind of boring.

Maybe you are right and I don't know what I'm missing, but the way that I look at it if I'm going to try something new why take a risk with something that sounds dull to begin with?
 
I'm a little confused, but as a person with such disdain for non-science courses, the OP seems to have done SO WELL on the VR section of the MCAT...not to mention the hypocrisy of promoting acting and "having another talent"...not to mention his WONDERFUL argumentative skills...

I disagree that medical schools should require a science degree, because it takes a lot more than scientific knowledge to be a good doctor. Medical school is like drinking out of a fire hydrant - you'll get more than you need in those 4 years. Therefore, you shouldn't be worried about whether or not 4 years is enough, but rather whether you yourself can handle all of the material coming your way. By the superb academic performances of non-science majors, most of them have proven that they can.


What are you trying to get at?
Obviously nothing will make sense if you take random comments and post them on here. You can't understand my point if you just pull something like that completely out of context and post it here.

Are you complaining that I often disagree with people who come on and bash an opinion I post without giving anything any thought?
Who cares how I did on the VR. I may feel like I got a 6 but might end up with a 10 or something. I know many people who are humanities students who still struggle on the VR.

And what does my acting hobby have to do with this? I never took any university courses for it. Just because I'm into sciences doesn't mean I don't like to act. And just because I personally think that english is easier than biochemistry has nothing to do with my hobbies.


Stop pulling random crap out of context to back up some nonsense point. I hate when people just pull random quotes out of nowhere to back up their own points. You must be quite the essay writer.

BTW, did anyone hear President Bush today, when he said "I hate" "all black people".
 
Don't get me wrong, doctors do need good written and oral communication skills, and they do need a basic knowledge in social science and ethics. But science has been the foundation of medicine. Sure we need a good bedside manner but what's more important is our understanding of the human body, of its interactions with drugs, of the way viruses and bacteria evolve and overtake us in disease. And I just can't agree that you can jump into science as a medical student and learn everything you need to know in a three year period.

I bet you are going to be really surprised when you discover how infrequently that virology class you took in college will help you in actual medicine. Probably the most important thing is being able to connect with your patients. You're (most likely) not going to be on the front-line developing therapies or researching disease mechanisms, you are going to be applying the things that other people have already discovered.
 
This medical school process is all about finishing. You MUST finish all 4 years of medical school to get your M.D. You MUST finish all of your residency and finish taking the boards to be completely certified. If all medical schools don't require a degree, then to me, people will get used to not finishing, and I predict raise the drop out rate in medical school. Also, the 4 years in college really helps to mature you a give your a broad exposure to alot of things. If people can leave after their sophomore year, I think it will bread less interesting, eccentric, physicians. Gunners will starting forming in junior year of high school and take over.

hmmmm somethin to think about! great point
 
If you are doing rad/onc, absolutely. In fact, you probably wouldn't get into residency without it. However, the overall standpoint is true as well. The reason schools have minimum requirements for classes is so they know you can hack it in medical school.
I still don't know what those engineering kids are smoking though, chemistry is way harder. 😀

Well this is about undergraduate work. I am not aware if they ask what classes you took as an undergrad when you apply to residencies.

And this was all about applying to medical school anyway. Not residencies.

I'd also bet that Physical Chemistry isn't a requirement, but rather a course common to all the people who are interested in rad/onc.
 
Do medical schools require a high school degree?
 
This medical school process is all about finishing. You MUST finish all 4 years of medical school to get your M.D. You MUST finish all of your residency and finish taking the boards to be completely certified. If all medical schools don't require a degree, then to me, people will get used to not finishing, and I predict raise the drop out rate in medical school. Also, the 4 years in college really helps to mature you a give your a broad exposure to alot of things. If people can leave after their sophomore year, I think it will bread less interesting, eccentric, physicians. Gunners will starting forming in junior year of high school and take over.

👎

you can't make such a generalizing statement, especially in a country where obtaining a college degree is still te standard of educational "success."
 
the truth is that even if engineering classes are more interesting they just sound dull compared to many non-engineering classes (to me at least and I'm sure others will sympathize).

If I had to choose a course blindly from the following classes:

Intro to quantum mechanics and special relativity
Contemporary issues in philosophy of mind
The burden of disease in developing countries
Modern Architecture
Topics in Solid and Structural Mechanics
Thermodynamics of materials

the final two engineering classes would be dead last on my list. Of course this is nothing more than my opinion but structural mechanics and thermodynamics just sounds kind of boring.

Maybe you are right and I don't know what I'm missing, but the way that I look at it if I'm going to try something new why take a risk with something that sounds dull to begin with?
This proves absolutely nothing as you "cherry picked" those classes so that you picked the most boring sounding engineering classes, and some interesting-sounding non-engineering classes. I could do the same, but I really don't have the time, since my cherry-picking would similarly prove nothing.
 
All majors are NOT equal in terms of their difficulty. As an Engineering major that has taken lots of humanities, as well as my science pre-requisites and then some, I agree with those that say that you just can't compare a difficult major like Engineering to humanities/natural science. Comparing the GPAs between those two disciplines is like comparing apples and oranges. That's why we need/have the MCAT, but my perception is that less weight is placed on the MCAT than on GPA (at least here in TX) so those who challenged themselves are disadvantaged in the applications process, and the quick-and-easy way to get into medical school is to major in basket weaving, do well in the prereqs, and cram for the MCAT to pull a 30ish (or even a little less) score. Not cool, IMHO, but that's the way it is.....

I remember a post by a med school adcom member who said that GPAs of students with difficult majors (she mentioned engineering specifically) are boosted relative to others during the admission process... I wish I could find the exact post...

The poster was LizzyM
 
Med schools are into liberal art majors because:

1. We learn how to think for ourselves. We do not regurgitate.
2. We know how to communicate
3. We are more sensitive and more humanitarian
4. Medicine is not just a science...it is an art. We are the artists.
5. We are nicer.
6. We look better.
7. We are more fun.
8. We are INTERESTING!!!!!

9. Liberal arts classes are actually more difficult because they are so subjective. What worked for one teacher will not work for the next. We are, therefore, more flexible, less rigid in our thought, more able to adapt to change, and more successful in a wide range of subjects than are those poor, simple, narrow-minded science majors who did nothing but study science for their entire lives.

10. And how about this....if you are so dedicated to science....if you have studied it since high school, majored in it in college, committed your life to it essentially...then why not go on into acadamic research or become a scientist. There is something that seems false about a person who portends to be so devoted to science yet wants to become a doctor. Very few doctors are what I would call true scientists. Hmmmmm....I wonder why a self-professed "science" person would not go on to pursue a career in science? Well, since your so smart, as evidenced by your scientific prowess, then I think you can figure out the answer to that question. But just in case you can't, since you probably didn't memorize it out of a book, then let me break it down...You want to be rich! You want prestige! You want power! Trust me....medical school admissions know this about you. However, it's much less likey that a liberal arts student chose their major because they thought it would bring them wealth, prestige, or power. We are simply more real, more sincere.

Silly rabbit, Trixs are for kids.
 
I remember a post by a med school adcom member who said that GPAs of students with difficult majors (she mentioned engineering specifically) are boosted relative to others during the admission process... I wish I could find the exact post...

The poster was LizzyM
Yeah, I read that a few weeks ago, and I hope that you/she are/is right about that.
 
since when does a standardized test predict **** like that, the SAT's werent ****, i got a 1520 on it anyway, off topic, anyway iam a Biology and psychology major, i totally agree with the non science majors that yes there is much more to being a doctor than science, but i also understand dre's frustration. Ive taken philosophy and psychology courses, they are sooooo much more interesting if not easier, and just being interesting MAKES them easier. Concerning the MCAT, maybe non science majors score higher because they have more time to study? I mean come on what idiot cant get a high score on a standardized test if they study for it, ive never come across a test i couldnt ace with proper study time. also a quick question im only a sophmore so i cans till change the psych major, i was thinking would philosophy be better? I like psych because i think it will help me deal with and understand people better. Also what do med schools think about double majors. Do they have an advantage over someone majoring in one thing, you know since I major in science AND social science will that give me an edge, make them think im a more complete candidate? Why dont they ever have data for double majors! Sorry but i just had to add taht in there
 
I've had a punch of stupid posts, so I guess I'll give this one a shot.

I understand Dre's sentiments but I ultimately disagree with the severity of his proposal.

For a while, I completely agreed with Dre's viewpoint and thought it was just illogical to have someone in a non-science major pursue a science-related career. Furthermore, I was frustrated by people stating the same reasons over and over for nullifying my opinions (ie: humanities are more interesting, medicine is more than just science etc)....but ultimately, the problem with that assessment is that it makes the counter-assumption that science majors are automatically boring and they automatically do not possess the other vital qualities of a good physician (just as science majors make the assumption that non-science majors don't have any interest in science, and thus, are not qualified). Even more so, as much as some people hate to admit it, medicine does boil down to science, and if you're not good at science, you probably won't do well in medical school (that's why pre-med reqs. are necessary and why physics, arguably the hardest science to grasp, is a pre-req).

However, I finally reversed course a bit based on one observation: no matter what you do in your undergrad, it is medical school and residency that make you a physician. There's a reason why people want to get into any medical school in the US....no matter where you go, you'll be a credited physician and you will learn how to become a good one as well. It doesn't matter if you were the president of this club, scored a 45 on the MCAT 4.0 blah blah blah, I still wouldn't want you operating on anyone until you went to medical school and completed your residency. Experience trumps education in every respect in medicine, so as long as you go through both med school and residency, the experience is enough to give you the skills necessary.

Nevertheless, I do have my own opinion that certain majors (certain science majors, almost every engineering major) should have a slight preference over statistically-easier majors (mostly in the humanities) in the admissions process. I say this fully knowing that each major has its own difficulties, whether it be intensive writing or strenuous labs. However, once again, statistically speaking, certain majors have lower average GPAs due to tougher curves, and for this reason, they should be accomodated a bit by Adcoms. For the most part, I'd say that they do their job well and they do take major into account, but I just can't agree with people claiming that a 3.5 BioEng major is the same as a 3.5 Spanish major. Once again, I know that both can be strenuous, but it's more likely that the curve was tougher in BioEng classes, and the 3.5 in that major means much more.

Feel free to disagree with me, I just wanted to throw in my two cents.
-Dr. P.
 
Top