Strength of Undergraduate Institution When Applying to Med School

[pazzer2]

Hello,

I'm a US trained MD (graduated in the 1990s) and am shocked how difficult it is to get into medical school now. Back in my day, it was common to apply to 6-8 schools. Now I hear that applying to 20-30 schools is quite common. When I applied a 3.7/60 MCAT was an almost guarantee. Things appear to be a lot more difficult now.

As a physician, I routinely get barraged by friends and family whose kids want to go to medical school. I generally give the advice that going to a prestigious undergrad school is generally not worth it. Mainly because from my own medical school class, there were kids from lots of schools - from Ivy league to small colleges. In general I also tell them to avoid colleges known for deflation (UChicago, Princeton, MIT, etc). My understanding is that med school admissions committees don't give any extra weight to college prestige. So does this advice still hold? Would love to hear your thoughts on the matter. Are there any official stats (from AMCAS or other) places to support these views?

1. Are GPAs from prestigious colleges treated differently vs GPA from obscure college?
2. All things being equal (GPA/MCAT) is it better to attend a college where there are relatively few applying to med school vs a larger university?
3. Within the same university, assume two candidates with same MCAT score. But one is an engineering major (GPA 3.3) which is fairly high for that major vs a Biochem major (GPA 3.8). Would admissions committees give any extra boost to the GPA of the engineering major (because it is known to be deflating)?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ChymeofPassion]

Hello,

I'm a US trained MD (graduated in the 1990s) and am shocked how difficult it is to get into medical school now. Back in my day, it was common to apply to 6-8 schools. Now I hear that applying to 20-30 schools is quite common. When I applied a 3.7/60 MCAT was an almost guarantee. Things appear to be a lot more difficult now.

As a physician, I routinely get barraged by friends and family whose kids want to go to medical school. I generally give the advice that going to a prestigious undergrad school is generally not worth it. Mainly because from my own medical school class, there were kids from lots of schools - from Ivy league to small colleges. In general I also tell them to avoid colleges known for deflation (UChicago, Princeton, MIT, etc). My understanding is that med school admissions committees don't give any extra weight to college prestige. So does this advice still hold? Would love to hear your thoughts on the matter. Are there any official stats (from AMCAS or other) places to support these views?

1. Are GPAs from prestigious colleges treated differently vs GPA from obscure college?
2. All things being equal (GPA/MCAT) is it better to attend a college where there are relatively few applying to med school vs a larger university?
3. Within the same university, assume two candidates with same MCAT score. But one is an engineering major (GPA 3.3) which is fairly high for that major vs a Biochem major (GPA 3.8). Would admissions committees give any extra boost to the GPA of the engineering major (because it is known to be deflating)?

1. Not significantly
2. Depends on the strength of advising
3. No

 

[AnMDtoB]

definitely depends on the med school.

have heard directly that some schools would say yes to #s 1&3, though the boost to GPA is not huge - maybe 0.1-0.25 added points for prestige & major, respectively (for engineering/physics/similar). Others don't care and just compare everyone's gpa directly. Generally speaking, attending a university known for grade deflation is a bad idea - but not as bad as attending a lesser known grade deflating university.

Either way, you definitely don't need to go to an ivy/MIT/caltech/etc. level school to get into a perfectly good med school.

I don't believe that the number of students applying to medical schools from that place would matter, but haven't heard anything either way about that from an adcom

 

[sadpremed121]

I like to believe that it does make some difference, but only because I go to one of those schools you listed haha. If you look at top med schools, a lot of students are coming from top undergrads. If you’re up to the challenge I say do it but not necessary if you just want to get into a med school.

 

[mass-premed66]

I went to a top 3 school and advisors told us that the general rule was we could add .2 to GPA when looking at MSAR and making a school list. So, maybe? Don’t think it totally overcomes other issues with an app

 

[DNAJB6]

The top research schools do consider the prestige and difficulty of the undergraduate school and major; however, the classes sizes are small and those schools can fill their classes with high MCAT and high GPA students from top schools. Many lesser schools don't care, which is really naive. In other words going to a tougher/grade deflating school is more likely to hurt than to help.

 

[DNAJB6]

Hello,

I'm a US trained MD (graduated in the 1990s) and am shocked how difficult it is to get into medical school now. Back in my day, it was common to apply to 6-8 schools. Now I hear that applying to 20-30 schools is quite common. When I applied a 3.7/60 MCAT was an almost guarantee. Things appear to be a lot more difficult now.

The number of residency spots hasn't kept up with demand and the expansion of medical school seats also reflects this. Couple this with a large surge in the number of applicants and you can see why the statistics of incoming student have changed even over the last decade.

 

[Goro]

1. Are GPAs from prestigious colleges treated differently vs GPA from obscure college?

It seems to be true for the Really Top Schools, which like inbreeding.

1. All things being equal (GPA/MCAT) is it better to attend a college where there are relatively few applying to med school vs a larger university?

This seems to be true if getting a pre-med committee LOR is an issue. They like to hedge their bets and only give good LORs to their best candidates, so they can brag about having a high success rate. But this is not a reason to pick a UG school, and it would be hard to find out how many students apply to med school anyway, I fear.

1. Within the same university, assume two candidates with same MCAT score. But one is an engineering major (GPA 3.3) which is fairly high for that major vs a Biochem major (GPA 3.8). Would admissions committees give any extra boost to the GPA of the engineering major (because it is known to be deflating)?

Nope. If someone has a 3.25 as an engineering major, we don't know if said person would be a 3.95 as a Bio major, or a 3.25 one.
Also, both candidate would be considered as individuals. They do not compete against each other, only themselves.

 

[Obnoxious Dad]

Hello,

I'm a US trained MD (graduated in the 1990s) and am shocked how difficult it is to get into medical school now. Back in my day, it was common to apply to 6-8 schools. Now I hear that applying to 20-30 schools is quite common. When I applied a 3.7/60 MCAT was an almost guarantee. Things appear to be a lot more difficult now.

As a physician, I routinely get barraged by friends and family whose kids want to go to medical school. I generally give the advice that going to a prestigious undergrad school is generally not worth it. Mainly because from my own medical school class, there were kids from lots of schools - from Ivy league to small colleges. In general I also tell them to avoid colleges known for deflation (UChicago, Princeton, MIT, etc). My understanding is that med school admissions committees don't give any extra weight to college prestige. So does this advice still hold? Would love to hear your thoughts on the matter. Are there any official stats (from AMCAS or other) places to support these views?

1. Are GPAs from prestigious colleges treated differently vs GPA from obscure college?
2. All things being equal (GPA/MCAT) is it better to attend a college where there are relatively few applying to med school vs a larger university?
3. Within the same university, assume two candidates with same MCAT score. But one is an engineering major (GPA 3.3) which is fairly high for that major vs a Biochem major (GPA 3.8). Would admissions committees give any extra boost to the GPA of the engineering major (because it is known to be deflating)?

Rather than collectively organizing and correlating data concerning MCAT/undergraduate admissions rigor/undergraduate grade inflation/undergraduate major rigor with the actual medical school performance of the hundreds of thousands of people who go through medical school, med school adcoms prefer to spend their time reading ghost edited personal statements and getting buffaloed by people in interviews.

Part of the deal is the way in which medical schools are ranked by US Blues and World Distort. For research institutions 6% of the rating is median undergraduate GPA and for primary care it's 4.5% without any adjustment for undergraduate rigor. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/articles/medical-schools-methodology

Let's say the University of Minnesota med school has one seat left and has two Minnesota resident applicants with the same MCAT score. One applicant is from Carleton with a 3.4 in physics and the second has a 3.9 in anthropology from Mankato. If the adcom admits the kid from Carleton and the kid from Mankato goes somewhere else, the University of Minnesota Medical School has just hurt itself in the rankings.

This is behind a paywall.

Investigating the Utility of a GPA Institutional Adjustment Index - Advances in Health Sciences Education

Background: Grading standards vary widely across undergraduate institutions. If, during the medical school admissions process, GPA is considered without reference to the institution attended, it will disadvantage applicants from undergraduate institutions employing rigorous grading...

link.springer.com

 

[ChymeofPassion]

The top research schools do consider the prestige and difficulty of the undergraduate school and major; however, the classes sizes are small and those schools can fill their classes with high MCAT and high GPA students from top schools. Many lesser schools don't care, which is really naive. In other words going to a tougher/grade deflating school is more likely to hurt than to help.

?? Naive?

 

[Moko]

Anecdotally from what I've observed at my school (and how I personally see applications):
- Undergrad prestige will not make up for low GPAs / MCATs and/or poor ECs
- All else being equal, an application coming from a prestigious undergrad will have greater 'wow' factor than a similar application coming from a relatively unknown school. Part of this has to do with familiarity and knowing the quality of education at the more well-known undergrads
- Despite the potential bump from undergrad prestige, many of our matriculants still come from non-prestigious undergrads. So I do believe that going to a place where one can get good grades and a good education at a reasonable price remains important

 

[MyOdyssey]

Anecdotally from what I've observed at my school (and how I personally see applications):
- Undergrad prestige will not make up for low GPAs / MCATs and/or poor ECs
- All else being equal, an application coming from a prestigious undergrad will have greater 'wow' factor than a similar application coming from a relatively unknown school. Part of this has to do with familiarity and knowing the quality of education at the more well-known undergrads
- Despite the potential bump from undergrad prestige, many of our matriculants still come from non-prestigious undergrads. So I do believe that going to a place where one can get good grades and a good education at a reasonable price remains important

What's regarded as an unusually prestigious undergrad at your school?

HYPSM? Ivy? Ivy + Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore? Top 20 USNWR?

 

[proudofmykids]

I like to believe that it does make some difference, but only because I go to one of those schools you listed haha. If you look at top med schools, a lot of students are coming from top undergrads. If you’re up to the challenge I say do it but not necessary if you just want to get into a med school.

Correlation but not causation.
Smart people go to med school. Smart people go to T10 undergrad schools.

 

[proudofmykids]

What's regarded as an unusually prestigious undergrad at your school?

HYPSM? Ivy? Ivy + Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore? Top 20 USNWR?

And then you have individual College Rankings which can be significantly different / better than the University ranking.

 

[allantois]

Better to get 4.0 at Podunk State than 3.0 at Harvard

 

[Heliobacter]

Correlation but not causation.
Smart people go to med school. Smart people go to T10 undergrad schools.

I also think that conventionally "prestigious" undergrads have more access to resources that can improve one's application. Institutional ones include grade inflation, much more prevalent academic safety nets, and increased access to high-impact research (and mentors that are more supportive of undergraduate publications). In addition, there are often more extracurricular opportunities and positive influence from other high-achieving peers can only help. At my institution, also coincidentally one with some of the highest medical school admissions rates (90%+), according to my PI, it is almost an institutional policy to give out a certain (high) proportion of As.

In this way, I think there is a degree of causation. Smart students go to T10 undergrad schools, sure, but T10 undergrad schools provide students with more opportunities that can make one more appealing to medical schools.

 

[DNAJB6]

?? Naive?

Yes. College science classes are largely graded on a curve so someone almost always will get an A. A 3.9 at an easy school with a median SAT score of 800/1600 is in no way comparable to a 3.7 or 3.8 from MIT with a median SAT score of 1500/1600 where everyone was at the top of their high school class. The latter is also known for grade deflation. Some top 25 schools also curve downward. It happens. To say that the GPA is equivalent based only on the magnitude of the number without considering the context is incredibly naive. It is not standardized, is the product of several variables, and is prone to manipulation.

Edited: I shouldn't have used the word "lesser" though. That doesn't reflect my views, and its usage was not apt. What I mean is that the GPA should be considered in the context of any potential variables that shaped it. This can include the rigor of the undergraduate school, how well known the school is for grade inflation or deflation regardless of its prestige (some of the Ivies are known for grade inflation), and even tracks within a school. Some universities have honors tracks that may be viewed differently than the general curriculum.

 

[calipremed5768]

It is worth it for T20s imo. I graduated from one of Stanford/MIT/Chicago and have got IIs from top schools with pretty mediocre ECs (no pub, limited clinical experience, etc.). A lot of volunteering at a hospital but nothing “special” about it

 

[907914]

College science classes are largely graded on a curve so someone almost always will get an A

800/1600 is in no way comparable to a 3.7 or 3.8 from MIT with a median SAT score of 1500/1600

As someone who has been the upper end 3rd SD at one of those ‘easy schools’ you talk about, I feel pretty confident in that my ~4.0 is equivalent to a ~4.0 at a ‘prestigious’ school.

The classes at podunk U are no more difficult and no easier than they are at Harvard. There will still be over performers and underperformers.

My question for someone from a top school: how does the curve in a class work? If everyone is already likely the ‘smartest kid from their high school’ wouldn’t there be an over abundance of people scoring >90% in classes? Does that mean the 4.0 threshold is at 100%, 3.7 is at 96%...? Like...how does that work? Or do we not see this trend and SAT doesn’t correlate with college success?

 

[calipremed5768]

I think the effect is comparable to the impact of attractiveness in that it is likely subconscious. Though it might be unfair an adcom will probably think that a Harvard grad is smarter than a state school grad with identical stats. I don’t think officers overtly say “we need to prioritize graduates from prestigious schools” but it probably affects their decision making when reviewing apps

 

[mass-premed66]

There are no curves in classes at Harvard. For orgo, the grades are scaled so a 90 is an A and for everything else 94%+ is an A.

 

[sadpremed121]

As someone who has been the upper end 3rd SD at one of those ‘easy schools’ you talk about, I feel pretty confident in that my ~4.0 is equivalent to a ~4.0 at a ‘prestigious’ school.

The classes at podunk U are no more difficult and no easier than they are at Harvard. There will still be over performers and underperformers.

My question for someone from a top school: how does the curve in a class work? If everyone is already likely the ‘smartest kid from their high school’ wouldn’t there be an over abundance of people scoring >90% in classes? Does that mean the 4.0 threshold is at 100%, 3.7 is at 96%...? Like...how does that work? Or do we not see this trend and SAT doesn’t correlate with college success?

They make the tests extremely difficult so that averages are still in the 60s and 70s.

 

[Heliobacter]

My question for someone from a top school: how does the curve in a class work? If everyone is already likely the ‘smartest kid from their high school’ wouldn’t there be an over abundance of people scoring >90% in classes? Does that mean the 4.0 threshold is at 100%, 3.7 is at 96%...? Like...how does that work? Or do we not see this trend and SAT doesn’t correlate with college success?

My school is an extreme example, but for non-weeder classes, the cutoff is set so that about 50% of students get A’s. For classes like organic or biochem, that is closer to about 20%.

My school never curves down — a 90% is always a 4.0, no matter how many people get 90s. We don’t have letter thirds (A- or B+), so our grade boundaries are a lot wider. It just so happens to be the case that exams still discriminate between students fairly well such that less than 50% of students get averages of 90% of above, so sometimes the cutoff for an A decreases.

tl;dr: hard exams — 70% is the typical average grade

 

[calipremed5768]

I think it gives you a halo effect imo

 

[ChymeofPassion]

Matters much more what your ECs are once you are top percentile. I have similar stats to a friend of mine from an ivy, I go to a top 50 private, but my ECs are leaps and bounds better than him. I have gotten interviews to T10 schools, he didn't.

 

[calipremed5768]

True but friends usually add 8 points to their MCAT and .2 to their gpa when telling you their stats

 

[DNAJB6]

As someone who has been the upper end 3rd SD at one of those ‘easy schools’ you talk about, I feel pretty confident in that my ~4.0 is equivalent to a ~4.0 at a ‘prestigious’ school.

The classes at podunk U are no more difficult and no easier than they are at Harvard. There will still be over performers and underperformers.

My question for someone from a top school: how does the curve in a class work? If everyone is already likely the ‘smartest kid from their high school’ wouldn’t there be an over abundance of people scoring >90% in classes? Does that mean the 4.0 threshold is at 100%, 3.7 is at 96%...? Like...how does that work? Or do we not see this trend and SAT doesn’t correlate with college success?

It varies by school, but some of the schools have caps on the number of A grades that they are allowed to assign. Grades can also be rounded down as well so a student with >90% can end up with a B. I'm not going to pretend it happens all the time, but it does happen. On the other hand, I'm not saying that your grades are worthless or not deserved either. Some less "prestigious" (I hate that term) are known for deflation as are some "top" schools. On the other hand, not all of the top schools are immune from grade inflation either. What I am saying is that context matters. As a general matter the competition at a top school is going to be generally tougher. There are obvious exceptions.

The MCAT is the grade equalizer. Medical schools see many applicants and are familiar with many undergraduate schools. If majors/applicants from your school usually have lower average GPAs but higher average MCAT scores, then that information is meaningful. At the same time, if the applicants have higher GPAs but lower MCAT scores, then that is also an indicator of grade inflation. If your school's average MCAT/GPA are in line with each other, then that is useful as well. It is not so much of an issue of nepotism or bonus per se, but an issue of ensuring that students are not punished because of school. With that said, I am not saying that less prestigious students should be punished either - the MCAT score is very important. Attending a tougher school and doing poorly won't help you, but for borderline students it can make a difference. Based on your comments and LizzyM score, I would be inclined to believe that you would do well regardless of where you went to undergrad and you mastered the material. That's not true of everyone.

 

[proudofmykids]

It is worth it for T20s imo. I graduated from one of Stanford/MIT/Chicago and have got IIs from top schools with pretty mediocre ECs (no pub, limited clinical experience, etc.). A lot of volunteering at a hospital but nothing “special” about it

But your gpa is also likely commensurate with this T10schools as well, right?
The OP was asking about gpa weighting or not. Most feel not, with some holistic exceptions,

 

[calipremed5768]

True but my MCAT is below average for t10

 

[OfMiceAndWomen]

I know that prestigious undergrad wouldn't make up for a low GPA (e.g. 4.0 Podunk State vs. 3.0 Harvard), but that type of big differential isn't very common, right? I was wondering if undergrad name would make up for smaller GPA differentials (e.g. 4.0 vs. 3.7/3.6)?

Also, regarding how grade inflation/deflation is factored in, I was under the impression that med school adcoms (I know this happens in undergrad admissions) will compare applicants from the same school with each other, so selecting the top applicants from the same school will equalize inherent institutional grade inflation/deflation.

In terms of major rigor, I know that my pre-med committee letter explains to med schools how difficult an applicant's major is compared to other majors at the undergrad. For instance, there are different kinds of bio majors, including engineering, at my school, so the pre-med committee will communicate to med schools which are tougher than others.

I feel like for the most part, if a med school consistently gets a lot of applicants from a certain undergrad, they'll be pretty familiar with how that undergrad school shapes up to other schools, as well as how the applicant shapes up to other ppl from that school.

 

[Lynx zwo drei vier]

It depends on the medical school. Private medical schools are known for giving applicants from their affiliated undergraduate institutions (if applicable) a significant leg up. That explains part of why Ivy med schools disproportionately admit Ivy Leaguers.

Part of it is also that Ivy+ schools produce people who are better at succeeding in the application process. Even at the smallest, most rural Ivy—Dartmouth—undergrads have endless opportunities to take part in research, conferences, entrepreneurship, and big-time athletics, to name a few things. Medical schools love that stuff, and accept accordingly.

 

[MyOdyssey]

It depends on the medical school. Private medical schools are known for giving applicants from their affiliated undergraduate institutions (if applicable) a significant leg up. That explains part of why Ivy med schools disproportionately admit Ivy Leaguers.

Part of it is also that Ivy+ schools produce people who are better at succeeding in the application process. Even at the smallest, most rural Ivy—Dartmouth—undergrads have endless opportunities to take part in research, conferences, entrepreneurship, and big-time athletics, to name a few things. Medical schools love that stuff, and accept accordingly.

Big time athletics?

 

[Lynx zwo drei vier]

Big time athletics?

Yup, every Ivy is a D-1 school.

 

[ChymeofPassion]

Yup, every Ivy is a D-1 school.