So if grades don't matter...

[Whaddup]

---

Members don't see this ad.

If grades during pharm school are largely irrelevant...why do schools try SO hard to keep grades stratified? It flies in the face of reality. Why not move to a pass/fail system and keep the passing grade relatively high to ensure slackers don't straggle in through the cracks?

I say this because I am a compulsive achiever. I hate closing off opportunities for myself. I work part time, get involved in student organizations, maintain high grades, etc because I don't wanna lock myself out of opportunities. If grades don't matter, is it stupid to strive for A's? Why do professors try so hard to ensure only x% of the class gets an A? Why not move to a completely pass/fail system?

 

[confettiflyer]

residency

 

[crazybob]

If grades during pharm school are largely irrelevant...why do schools try SO hard to keep grades stratified? It flies in the face of reality. Why not move to a pass/fail system and keep the passing grade relatively high to ensure slackers don't straggle in through the cracks?

I say this because I am a compulsive achiever. I hate closing off opportunities for myself. I work part time, get involved in student organizations, maintain high grades, etc because I don't wanna lock myself out of opportunities. If grades don't matter, is it stupid to strive for A's? Why do professors try so hard to ensure only x% of the class gets an A? Why not move to a completely pass/fail system?

residency

That and also if you want to graduate with High Honors or some other distinction, you have to use a grading scale.

Also, scholarships might have GPA requirements.

 

[pharmwannebe2]

If grades during pharm school are largely irrelevant...why do schools try SO hard to keep grades stratified? It flies in the face of reality. Why not move to a pass/fail system and keep the passing grade relatively high to ensure slackers don't straggle in through the cracks?

I say this because I am a compulsive achiever. I hate closing off opportunities for myself. I work part time, get involved in student organizations, maintain high grades, etc because I don't wanna lock myself out of opportunities. If grades don't matter, is it stupid to strive for A's? Why do professors try so hard to ensure only x% of the class gets an A? Why not move to a completely pass/fail system?

a lot of pharm schools have pass/fail system.

 

[KARM12]

a lot of pharm schools have pass/fail system.

Yes, and we see those transcripts for their residency apps and we're like "WTF, am I supposed to do with this?" These are schools not in our area so we have no idea how to evaluate these students on our GPA scale....

 

[crazybob]

Yes, and we see those transcripts for their residency apps and we're like "WTF, am I supposed to do with this?" These are schools not in our area so we have no idea how to evaluate these students on our GPA scale....

So LORs, work experience, volunteer involvement, national organization memberships would be the most important? Do those things get mentioned and discussed in the interviews for residencies?

 

[confettiflyer]

So LORs, work experience, volunteer involvement, national organization memberships would be the most important? Do those things get mentioned and discussed in the interviews for residencies?

I think KARM12 is trying to say that they aren't able to tell if you're an academic ******* with a P/F transcript.

 

[grizzlesgrizzlies]

If grades during pharm school are largely irrelevant...why do schools try SO hard to keep grades stratified? It flies in the face of reality. Why not move to a pass/fail system and keep the passing grade relatively high to ensure slackers don't straggle in through the cracks?

I say this because I am a compulsive achiever. I hate closing off opportunities for myself. I work part time, get involved in student organizations, maintain high grades, etc because I don't wanna lock myself out of opportunities. If grades don't matter, is it stupid to strive for A's? Why do professors try so hard to ensure only x% of the class gets an A? Why not move to a completely pass/fail system?

its just the whole academic system at work... you can't really question it, just play by the rules when you're in school because you honestly have no other choice

 

[SHC1984]

residency

And scholarships. 😀

 

[GoldfishPharmD]

If grades during pharm school are largely irrelevant...why do schools try SO hard to keep grades stratified? It flies in the face of reality. Why not move to a pass/fail system and keep the passing grade relatively high to ensure slackers don't straggle in through the cracks?

I say this because I am a compulsive achiever. I hate closing off opportunities for myself. I work part time, get involved in student organizations, maintain high grades, etc because I don't wanna lock myself out of opportunities. If grades don't matter, is it stupid to strive for A's? Why do professors try so hard to ensure only x% of the class gets an A? Why not move to a completely pass/fail system?

While in school, I think grades matter a lot. That's what we've been taught our whole lives going through school. You needed to do well in high school to get into college. You needed to do well in college to get into professional/grad school, and now you need to do well in grad school to ensure opportunities during school and after graduation. Like stated above, we're going to be competing with one another during school and after school, so the grades will help to set us apart (among other things).

I do think there needs to be a balance though. If you get a 4.0 but didn't do anything but go to class and then go home, I don't think that will look too great.

 

[SELDANE]

Believe it or not, in about 5 years or so you may decide that pharmacy just isn't for you. Your ability to get accepted into another professional school (ie., medical, dental, law) will largely be based on the grades you earned in pharmacy school. As several posters have already commented "pass/fail" tells an evaluator little if anything.

 

[KARM12]

I think KARM12 is trying to say that they aren't able to tell if you're an academic ******* with a P/F transcript.

Exactly... we look at all those things in addition to grades. When you have a large number of applicants it is a quick way to whittle down the list. P/F doesn't tell me anything about your academic ability other than your at least met the minimum requirements.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

"WTF, am I supposed to do with this?"

Stop using something as stupid as GPA to judge who would be the best candidate for a residency. GPA is just a measure of how well you jump through hoops and how well you can practice academic bulimia. Just because you knew something 2 years ago doesn't mean you still know it today. There is something that should be said about actual learning versus being able to memorize factoids for a test. There should be a test that measures practical pharmacy knowledge TODAY, reasoning ability, and spacial intelligence that residenceurs* could use when considering candidates. They should also have some sort of rigorous test during the interview to get a better idea of the person's ability in person.

I mean, if you actually want the BEST people to be selected for residencies, that's what you'd have to do. Oh, and you should pay them a typical wage, too. Essentially paying $70k a year to be trained is complete bull**** and I personally think its bush league. I'm not taking $35k to be someone's bitch for another year or two. But what do I know...I'm just a ****** that had a 3.0 GPA...

(*If that's not a word, it should be)

 

[KARM12]

Stop using something as stupid as GPA to judge who would be the best candidate for a residency. GPA is just a measure of how well you jump through hoops and how well you can practice academic bulimia. Just because you knew something 2 years ago doesn't mean you still know it today. There is something that should be said about actual learning versus being able to memorize factoids for a test. There should be a test that measures practical pharmacy knowledge TODAY, reasoning ability, and spacial intelligence that residenceurs* could use when considering candidates. They should also have some sort of rigorous test during the interview to get a better idea of the person's ability in person.

I mean, if you actually want the BEST people to be selected for residencies, that's what you'd have to do. Oh, and you should pay them a typical wage, too. Essentially paying $70k a year to be trained is complete bull**** and I personally think its bush league. I'm not taking $35k to be someone's bitch for another year or two. But what do I know...I'm just a ****** that had a 3.0 GPA...

(*If that's not a word, it should be)

Right, but when you have 100 applicants, GPA is a factor becuase you can't interview all of them for 6 spots. You may miss some good people, but I think overall it has worked well. I think our cut off is around 3.0. All aspects are a factor when selecting candidates. Once you make it through the "paper" round, it is your interview that will get you the job.

Being a resident is unfortunantly also jumping through hoops...

 

[WVUPharm2007]

You may miss some good people, but I think overall it has worked well.

How do you know its worked out well? Unless you residency people have access to a machine that allows you to travel to parallel universes where the lower GPA'd types got the residencies...and you can compare the results...

But wouldn't you think a series of standardized tests would work much better? I think it would.

 

[GoldfishPharmD]

Stop using something as stupid as GPA to judge who would be the best candidate for a residency. GPA is just a measure of how well you jump through hoops and how well you can practice academic bulimia. Just because you knew something 2 years ago doesn't mean you still know it today. There is something that should be said about actual learning versus being able to memorize factoids for a test. There should be a test that measures practical pharmacy knowledge TODAY, reasoning ability, and spacial intelligence that residenceurs* could use when considering candidates. They should also have some sort of rigorous test during the interview to get a better idea of the person's ability in person.

I mean, if you actually want the BEST people to be selected for residencies, that's what you'd have to do. Oh, and you should pay them a typical wage, too. Essentially paying $70k a year to be trained is complete bull**** and I personally think its bush league. I'm not taking $35k to be someone's bitch for another year or two. But what do I know...I'm just a ****** that had a 3.0 GPA...

(*If that's not a word, it should be)

I think it would be great if classes were pass/fail, and we just took a national exam to use to compare ourselves, something similar to STEP 1 for medical students. I think that would be better because I'm sure a 3.5 would be looked at a lot highly from someone who went to a top school vs a 4.0 at a newer school.

To be honest, I think earning good grades are easy. If you put in the effort, I'm pretty sure it's not that hard to earn an A or B. I think for the most part (I know there's some exceptions) when people do bad, it's mostly due to the fact that they don't study. The difficult part is applying your knowledge and knowing how to interact with people. I'm one of those folks. I'm not totally awkward with people, but I just find it harder than just learning material and regurgitating it. I'm more worried about being a good pharmacists than what my grades are, so I'm working on that (while still trying to do well).

 

[IshDiandra]

I think it would be great if classes were pass/fail, and we just took a national exam to use to compare ourselves, something similar to STEP 1 for medical students. I think that would be better because I'm sure a 3.5 would be looked at a lot highly from someone who went to a top school vs a 4.0 at a newer school.

To be honest, I think earning good grades are easy. If you put in the effort, I'm pretty sure it's not that hard to earn an A or B. I think for the most part (I know there's some exceptions) when people do bad, it's mostly due to the fact that they don't study. The difficult part is applying your knowledge and knowing how to interact with people. I'm one of those folks. I'm not totally awkward with people, but I just find it harder than just learning material and regurgitating it. I'm more worried about being a good pharmacists than what my grades are, so I'm working on that (while still trying to do well).

I don't think that going to a pass/fail system would be better, especially if the only thing it comes down to see who is "more qualified" is by a national exam. There are some people who do really well in school, but suck at standardized tests, and others who are vice versa. Sometimes, we may do poorly on a test because we may have been stressed out, had a bad day, or it could have been just a total fluke. I think GPA does help factor into your abilities. Yes, it's "easy" to get good grades if you study hard, memorize, etc. BUT it shows more than just your ability to perform "academic bulimia", it also shows effort, hard work, and the strive to excel.
There are people who are incredibly smart and talented, and they do well on tests because they just have that natural ability. However, they do not apply their talents in school, and yes, you could say "but still! They're so gifted. Blah blah blah" To be honest, I wouldn't care. The fact that they didn't put the effort in school (and considering how "brilliant" they are, it's not like it would take that much brain power for them to perform well) would just show me that they probably wouldn't be likely to put the effort in a job, which is where it counts most.

 

[KARM12]

How do you know its worked out well? Unless you residency people have access to a machine that allows you to travel to parallel universes where the lower GPA'd types got the residencies...and you can compare the results...

But wouldn't you think a series of standardized tests would work much better? I think it would.

I am saying the people we get using the current system tend to be successful residents. I think our current PGY1's ranged from 3.1 to 3.8. You don't have to have a 4.0, you just probably won't get an interview with a 2.2. The whole point is that there is no perfect system and much of it is subjective in the end.

Standardize test would be interesting as it could level the playing field. It would be interesting to see how the new schools stack up to the established schoold. But then again people bitch and moan about those too....that they are "bad test takers."

 

[Sparda29]

They should get rid of the GPA scale for pharmacy school and just use Pass/Fail. The entire evaluation for the residency should be based on recommendations and the interview. **** GPA.

 

[smileyangel11]

GPA is a gauge to measure how well someone does in school. Whether or not it is over rated is another discussion. But, when a program/position is forced to select 1 person from a pool of good candidates based on an application + an interview, anything that helps with an objective evaluation is useful.

I don't think pharmacy school will ever go pass/fail. I know plenty of pharmacy students will be suicidal if there is no GPA system, for which their GPA is sometimes their WHOLE self worth.

 

[crazybob]

GPA is a gauge to measure how well someone does in school. Whether or not it is over rated is another discussion. But, when a program/position is forced to select 1 person from a pool of good candidates based on an application + an interview, anything that helps with an objective evaluation is useful.

I don't think pharmacy school will ever go pass/fail. I know plenty of pharmacy students will be suicidal if there is no GPA system, for which their GPA is sometimes their WHOLE self worth.

I have heard from friends who applied to med schools that at their interview, their interviewers ask something like "The straight A students make the best researchers, but the straight C students make the best doctors. Do you agree with this, and why?"

From what you said, it sounds like the programs focus on which students are better suited for research more than actual practice.

 

[tungsten87]

I have heard from friends who applied to med schools that at their interview, their interviewers ask something like "The straight A students make the best researchers, but the straight C students make the best doctors. Do you agree with this, and why?"

From what you said, it sounds like the programs focus on which students are better suited for research more than actual practice.

That is a terrible interview question imo as it is simply a worthless generalization.

 

[smileyangel11]

I have heard from friends who applied to med schools that at their interview, their interviewers ask something like "The straight A students make the best researchers, but the straight C students make the best doctors. Do you agree with this, and why?"

From what you said, it sounds like the programs focus on which students are better suited for research more than actual practice.

I think both an extremely HIGH GPA AND extremely LOW GPA can hurt an applicant. Some recruiters are judgemental when they pick up a transcript w/ GPA in 3.9-4.0 range. They think a PharmD with that kind of GPA may have some kind of underlying psychological issues, and are often socially inadequate.

Having said that, however, I have NEVER seen a 4.0 GPA being weeded out from the application pool for a high GPA, but I have seen plenty of 2.0s thrown in the bottom of the pile.

I don't completely agree with straight As are researchers and straight Cs are best doctors, but I can see where it is coming from. I look at the transcripts in importance of courses required for their position. If someone got all "A"s in pharmacotherapy courses, but "C"s in Pharm Econ. I certainly still consider him/her a good student academically.

Bottom line is: (1) When you're in school, study hard for the main stream courses, and if you know your stuff, good grades should be a RESULT, not the CAUSE of your hard work.
(2) When you start working, focus on creating value for your hospital/store/etc, and you'll see promotions following as an result.

 

[smileyangel11]

I have heard from friends who applied to med schools that at their interview, their interviewers ask something like "The straight A students make the best researchers, but the straight C students make the best doctors. Do you agree with this, and why?"

From what you said, it sounds like the programs focus on which students are better suited for research more than actual practice.

I think both an extremely HIGH GPA AND extremely LOW GPA can hurt an applicant. Some recruiters are judgemental when they pick up a transcript w/ GPA in 3.9-4.0 range. They think a PharmD with that kind of GPA may have some kind of underlying psychological issues, and are often socially inadequate.

Having said that, however, I have NEVER seen a 4.0 GPA being weeded out from the application pool for a high GPA, but I have seen plenty of 2.0s thrown in the bottom of the pile.

I don't completely agree with straight As are researchers and straight Cs are best doctors, but I can see where it is coming from. I look at the transcripts in importance of courses required for their position. If someone got all "A"s in pharmacotherapy courses, but "C"s in Pharm Econ. I certain consider him/her a good student academically.

Bottom line is: (1) When you're in school, study hard for the main stream courses, and if you know your stuff, good grades should be a RESULT, not the CAUSE of your hard work.
(2) When you start working, focus on creating value for your hospital/store/etc, and you'll see promotions following as an result.

 

[ffpickle]

Stop using something as stupid as GPA to judge who would be the best candidate for a residency. GPA is just a measure of how well you jump through hoops and how well you can practice academic bulimia. Just because you knew something 2 years ago doesn't mean you still know it today. There is something that should be said about actual learning versus being able to memorize factoids for a test. There should be a test that measures practical pharmacy knowledge TODAY, reasoning ability, and spacial intelligence that residenceurs* could use when considering candidates. They should also have some sort of rigorous test during the interview to get a better idea of the person's ability in person.

I mean, if you actually want the BEST people to be selected for residencies, that's what you'd have to do. Oh, and you should pay them a typical wage, too. Essentially paying $70k a year to be trained is complete bull**** and I personally think its bush league. I'm not taking $35k to be someone's bitch for another year or two. But what do I know...I'm just a ****** that had a 3.0 GPA...

(*If that's not a word, it should be)

So I guess you think that GPA is bull**** for selecting pharmacy students too, right? And also college students? 90% of the stuff I learned in HS was "academic bulimia".....just a bunch of senseless jumping through hoops...so they shouldn't really use GPA for anything right? The real world is all about numbers. It's like saying a business shouldn't look at how much profit they're making because it's just a bunch of jumping through hoops to keep customers happy and reduce inventory costs, etc. What?

 

[owlegrad]

So I guess you think that GPA is bull**** for selecting pharmacy students too, right? And also college students? 90% of the stuff I learned in HS was "academic bulimia".....just a bunch of senseless jumping through hoops...so they shouldn't really use GPA for anything right? The real world is all about numbers. It's like saying a business shouldn't look at how much profit they're making because it's just a bunch of jumping through hoops to keep customers happy and reduce inventory costs, etc. What?

Are you serious? I can't imagine that you really believe GPA and profits are comparable. Businesses operate in order to generate profit. There is a direct relationship between making a profit and running a successful business. That's not comparable to students studying to get good grades. Good grades don't guarantee success; sustained profits do.

 

[lorain]

heres another generalization

the 4.0 students ive worked with retail struggle to do 400 than the 2.0 guys Ive worked

gpa i suppose matters for residency, but it isnt the only thing....a 3.0-3.5 gpa with other credentials (the well rounded) is still a strong applicant

heck, I pulled a 3.5(avg of undergrad, some grad classes i took,. and pharm ) in school while working up to 20 hours a week, that tells a employer more than me just studying all the time and pulling a 4.0

 

[crazybob]

heres another generalization

the 4.0 students ive worked with retail struggle to do 400 than the 2.0 guys Ive worked

gpa i suppose matters for residency, but it isnt the only thing....a 3.0-3.5 gpa with other credentials (the well rounded) is still a strong applicant

heck, I pulled a 3.5(avg of undergrad, some grad classes i took,. and pharm ) in school while working up to 20 hours a week, that tells a employer more than me just studying all the time and pulling a 4.0

So am I right in saying that all pharmacists (or most of them) will think that a student who graduates from pharmacy school with a 4.0 would be "socially incompetent"?

I've heard that from a girl in my class whose pharmacy manager said that he would never hire a 4.0 student or a recent grad with a 4.0 gpa.

 

[SHC1984]

heck, I pulled a 3.5(avg of undergrad, some grad classes i took,. and pharm ) in school while working up to 20 hours a week, that tells a employer more than me just studying all the time and pulling a 4.0

Just b/c someone has a 4.0 doesn't mean they study ALL the time. Some of us just prefer to sit down, drink coffee and relax or read for fun. It's funny how people will just assume that just because I don't like to go out every night and partied that somehow I just study all the time. I rather spend my time relaxing or reading Twilight again for the fifth time. Is that a crime?

 

[naseuy]

I rather spend my time relaxing or reading Twilight again for the fifth time. Is that a crime?

Yes.

 

[crazybob]

I rather spend my time relaxing or reading Twilight again for the fifth time. Is that a crime?

😱

 

[SHC1984]

😱

😳 Twilight was just an example...one of my favorites! 😀 My point is people are different. NOT partying/getting drunk does NOT equal studying ALL the time!!! LOL...I study some, relax some, go shopping more, and read romance novels a lot. Personally, I rather stay home and relax. I guess I am just not cool like the hardcore party people. 🙁🙄

 

[Carboxide]

😳 Twilight was just an example...one of my favorites! 😀 My point is people are different. NOT partying/getting drunk does NOT equal studying ALL the time!!! LOL...I study some, relax some, go shopping more, and read romance novels a lot. Personally, I rather stay home and relax. I guess I am just not cool like the hardcore party people. 🙁🙄

I do the same thing. I do party OCCASIONALLY. But I think the partiers tend to need more time in a day because you wake up the next morning late, don't start studying right away, etc...it just kills your whole weekend.

 

[SHC1984]

I do the same thing. I do party OCCASIONALLY. But I think the partiers tend to need more time in a day because you wake up the next morning late, don't start studying right away, etc...it just kills your whole weekend.

I think they need more time in the day too! Hence why they don't usually do as well as someone that does not party all the time.

I use to party some myself...but that was when I was 21 or 22...I am just tired of it now...I guess that's what happens with old age. Most P1 are 20-22 years old..so I don't blame them for feeling differently.

 

[crazybob]

I think they need more time in the day too! Hence why they don't usually do as well as someone that does not party all the time.

I use to party some myself...but that was when I was 21 or 22...I am just tired of it now...I guess that's what happens with old age. Most P1 are 20-22 years old..so I don't blame them for feeling differently.

You might not be trying to party with the right people.

 

[SHC1984]

You might not be trying to party with the right people.

There is nothing wrong with the people. Partying in general is like WORK. It takes up too much energy and it's very tiring.

I like to sleep on my own bed and it usually takes me 1-2 hours to get ready for bed. I shower at night and I put on many different kinds of face cream, moisturizers, chanel eye cream (I will DIE without this!), serums, toner, face mask, etc. It takes me literally a while to get ready for bed..and I don't like to sleep without doing my usual routine...partying at someone's house will ruin it for me! I can't sleep on my own bed, I am usually so drunk that I sleep with my make up on (YUCK!!!), and sometimes I forget to shower, floss and brush my teeth etc. b/c I passed out. It's just a huge mess! My skin always looks awful the next morning if I don't get my sleep...so I prefer to stay at my own house, sleep at a certain time, go do my usual routine to get ready for bed. It just feels much better that way.

 

[CUninja]

Agree with WVU.

I'm nowhere near crazy enough to make the generalization that 4.0 students have no life. That is no different than stereotyping someone based on race. It shouldn't be done.

However, if employers and residency directors truly want the best people, why rely so heavily on a number they know is inherently flawed? When you can have an honest debate on whether GPA is a good indicator of success (and I believe we are here), it should not be the main emphasis in an application.

I have a GPA a little higher than 2.6 halfway through pharmacy school. At this point, I know I'm uncompetitive for a residency, so I won't apply for any.

Do I feel I'm being judged unfairly on a number that means relatively nothing in the long run? Yes.

BUT... I knew I was being judged on an unfair system from day one and chose not to play their game. Therefore, I should shoulder most of the blame in this situation.

Would it be great it things changed? Absolutely. But let's be real...this is not going to change anytime soon.

 

[GoldfishPharmD]

Agree with WVU.

I'm nowhere near crazy enough to make the generalization that 4.0 students have no life. That is no different than stereotyping someone based on race. It shouldn't be done.

However, if employers and residency directors truly want the best people, why rely so heavily on a number they know is inherently flawed? When you can have an honest debate on whether GPA is a good indicator of success (and I believe we are here), it should not be the main emphasis in an application.

I have a GPA a little higher than 2.6 halfway through pharmacy school. At this point, I know I'm uncompetitive for a residency, so I won't apply for any.

Do I feel I'm being judged unfairly on a number that means relatively nothing in the long run? Yes.

BUT... I knew I was being judged on an unfair system from day one and chose not to play their game. Therefore, I should shoulder most of the blame in this situation.

Would it be great it things changed? Absolutely. But let's be real...this is not going to change anytime soon.

Do you want to do a residency? If so, I think you should try. I know it's competitive, but I think it's worth a shot if you really want to do one.

If you don't, that's cool too. I just hating seeing people give up on something because they don't think they will accomplish what they want (if that's your case).

 

[Sparda29]

Personally, I SUCK when it comes to answering K-type questions, I have no idea how to attack them. On an exam, I usually get all the questions that are regular multiple choice or true/false or fill-in-the-blank correct, but the K-type, impossible for me. And since most of the exams have K-type as their main type of question, I get a lot of questions wrong due to it, thus my GPA suffers.

When I went on rotations and was drilled by my preceptors, I was able to answer most of their questions on the spot, occasionally I'd have to look something up. That is where my strength is.

 

[CUninja]

Do you want to do a residency? If so, I think you should try. I know it's competitive, but I think it's worth a shot if you really want to do one.

If you don't, that's cool too. I just hating seeing people give up on something because they don't think they will accomplish what they want (if that's your case).

Not really. What I would like to do is military pharmacy via scholarship. But again, my GPA is a heavy factor, if not the sole factor, that I did not receive it this year. Again, it is my own damn fault...if I played the game, I would be in a better position to do what I'd like.

If I had to do it again, I wouldn't change a thing. I'll take my life experiences over GPA any day. 👍

Although a lot of people bring up that I am putting my future patients at risk by not getting straight A's. If anyone would like to make that argument, please attach a link to a credible study showing the link between grades in pharmacy school and patient welfare. People who make this argument need to realize that it is opinion and not fact. I'm not saying you are making this argument though 🙂

 

[GoldfishPharmD]

Not really. What I would like to do is military pharmacy via scholarship. But again, my GPA is one of the sole factors, if not the sole factor that I did not receive it this year. Again, it is my own damn fault...if I played the game, I would be in a better position to do what I'd like.

If I had to do it again, I wouldn't change a thing. I'll take my life experiences over GPA any day. 👍

Yeah. I didn't do too hot the second half of undergrad, but I learned a lot about myself in the process. Your experiences mean more than your grades.

Good luck with getting the military scholarship! 🙂

 

[CUninja]

Yeah. I didn't do too hot the second half of undergrad, but I learned a lot about myself in the process. Your experiences mean more than your grades.

Good luck with getting the military scholarship! 🙂

Thanks...much appreciated! 🙂

 

[crazybob]

Although a lot of people bring up that I am putting my future patients at risk by not getting straight A's. If anyone would like to make that argument, please attach a link to a credible study showing the link between grades in pharmacy school and patient welfare. People who make this argument need to realize that it is opinion and not fact. I'm not saying you are making this argument though 🙂

They're assuming that a straight A student will be able to explain better to a patient about adverse reactions and how to take the medication. But the straight A student might not realize that the patient will not understand terms from MedChem and pharmacology so the patient will still be at risk by not understanding what to do with the medication.

Back in high school when I was doing very well academically, I've had classmates tell me that I was terrible at explaining things the way they could understand. My professors knew what I was talking about, but my classmates were confused.

Then in college, I was a Chem TA and I had to learn how to explain lab procedures and calculations in terms that Gen Chem students could understand. It took me a while before I could do so without confusing any of the students.

 

[GoldfishPharmD]

Not really. What I would like to do is military pharmacy via scholarship. But again, my GPA is a heavy factor, if not the sole factor, that I did not receive it this year. Again, it is my own damn fault...if I played the game, I would be in a better position to do what I'd like.

If I had to do it again, I wouldn't change a thing. I'll take my life experiences over GPA any day. 👍

Although a lot of people bring up that I am putting my future patients at risk by not getting straight A's. If anyone would like to make that argument, please attach a link to a credible study showing the link between grades in pharmacy school and patient welfare. People who make this argument need to realize that it is opinion and not fact. I'm not saying you are making this argument though 🙂

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Some people are book smart and some people are better at actually working with people and explaining things. Actually, a lot of the people I've met that are good at talking in public and explaining things really well have average grades. Just because you didn't ace every single test and have a perfect 4.0 doesn't mean you won't be a good pharmacist.

 

[Priapism321]

This thread is very unintentionally hilarious to me. Every post starts exactly the same ("Ummmmmm, so my GPA is not so hot, BUT, let me tell you why that is so unimportant, and by the way, let me tell you what I AM good at, and why people who get good grades just are not as good."). This thread should really be titled:

"****ty Grade Support Thread: The Thread Where Mediocrity Is Adequate"

 

[RX CARE]

This thread is very unintentionally hilarious to me. Every post starts exactly the same ("Ummmmmm, so my GPA is not so hot, BUT, let me tell you why that is so unimportant, and by the way, let me tell you what I AM good at, and why people who get good grades just are not as good."). This thread should really be titled:

"****ty Grade Support Thread: The Thread Where Mediocrity Is Adequate"

👍 I concur

 

[GoldfishPharmD]

This thread is very unintentionally hilarious to me. Every post starts exactly the same ("Ummmmmm, so my GPA is not so hot, BUT, let me tell you why that is so unimportant, and by the way, let me tell you what I AM good at, and why people who get good grades just are not as good."). This thread should really be titled:

"****ty Grade Support Thread: The Thread Where Mediocrity Is Adequate"

I have good grades, and I think other things besides grades matter too. I do think they matter, but they're not the only thing.

 

[psychoandy]

If grades during pharm school are largely irrelevant...

Who told you that?

I think you can get a job with a 2.5 and a naplex pass; however, to play the game right you do need a decent GPA. The kind of people that run residency programs or fellowships are the kind of people who were total gunners and are extremely dedicated to academic pharmacy. As a result, you have to look good on paper in order to get one that you really want. I mean...doesn't this hold true for pretty much any white collar job? It's all part of playing "the game"/perpetual hoop jumping/life. IDK if anyone could chime in re: getting a residency with under a 3.0, but it probably won't be first choice/most prestigious. I am pretty sure that under 3.0 will get you nowhere in industry unless you're straight up really awesome. Not saying you have to play "the game", you could probably be just fine as a lifer, i see many who are perfectly content and don't aspire for more. But at my institutional workplace PGY1s were greatly favored over regular pharmd's and are the only ones with a real chance for promotion/advancement/cushy day shifts.

My GPA is closer to 2.5 than 3.5 but I really don't think that you can really substitute anything else as a decent metric. You could do standardized tests, but then that'll go the SAT route where people will just practice until they ace it. You could do letters of rec, but then you're going to get swamped with recs and none will really stand out; plus it totally favors people who work part/full time or who know important people. I'm not even going to get into volunteering hours/extracurriculars because everyone should remember from high school what BS it is. Ideally work experience would be a great metric to use, IF pharmacies were the same all over the country or the interviewer knows a pharmacist who could vouch.

btw i subscribe somewhat to the higher gpa lower common sense stereotype. i'm already aware that i'm a bad person so whateva whateva 😎

 

[Old Timer]

If grades during pharm school are largely irrelevant...why do schools try SO hard to keep grades stratified? It flies in the face of reality. Why not move to a pass/fail system and keep the passing grade relatively high to ensure slackers don't straggle in through the cracks?

I say this because I am a compulsive achiever. I hate closing off opportunities for myself. I work part time, get involved in student organizations, maintain high grades, etc because I don't wanna lock myself out of opportunities. If grades don't matter, is it stupid to strive for A's? Why do professors try so hard to ensure only x% of the class gets an A? Why not move to a completely pass/fail system?

I think the best answer to your question is:

Bottom line is: When you're in school, study hard for the main stream courses, and if you know your stuff, good grades should be a RESULT, not the CAUSE of your hard work.
(

First of all grades obviously matter. If you have a 1.0 you will get kicked out of your program. If you want to apply for a residence you will not get in with a 2.0. They need some criteria to weed out the applicants and while I am sure they miss a few gems with 2.0's, they generally don't.

That being said, grades have no correlation to your performance as a pharmacist. It does not matter what you got in pharmacy school if you don't know your stuff when you are out there in the real world.

If you want to get a 4.0 because you get a scholarship or because it gives your personal satisfaction, then go for it. Just don't think it will make you a better pharmacist.

 

[Disposal]

I feel that letter grading sets some sort of motivation in students in order for them to strive to achieve some sort of pinnacle success in their classes. This helps the school's ultimate goal to have all their graduates pass the NAPLEX.