take post bacc classes or get masters

[lilmacstew]

If you graduate with a 2.9 gpa, should you take some post bacc classes in science and such, or should you actually get a masters first?
Thank you

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Nora]

Both options have their advantages and disadvantages. The Master's degree, especially in the sciences and if you do well, would show that you have the ability to grasp and succeed in higher level sciences. Unfortunately, graduate GPA does not factor into the 2.9 and may lead to your automatic elimination via computer formulas in some schools.

A postbacc with a heavy emphasis on sciences would do two things: it may significantly raise your BCPM (science) GPA and push your overall to the much 'nicer' looking 3.0 that many of us with many ugrad vices look for.

I had a 2.8 when I finished ugrad (both science and OA). I decided to take both options. I am now completing an MA in neuropsychology with a 3.88 and have since taken 18 credits of sciences in a self-designed postbacc which had moved my overall to 2.92 but my BCPM to 3.26. With over 130 credits of undergrad, this was the best that I could do. I intend to write the MCAT in April 2004. I hope that this path will help me in June. It was the most appropriate for me.

Best of luck to you.

 

[met19]

Master's it adds to your CV...secondly some master's have you take med school courses...ie the SMP at Gtown...PM me if you have more questions....

 

[HollyJ]

I graduated college with a decent GPA, but I hadn't taken all of the prereqs. I chose to take postbac classes (I was NOT in a formal program) for a number of reasons.

- GPA. Although my GPA was fine, it wasn't great. Postbac classes figure into your undergrad GPA, so I was able to raise it with a minimum of muss and fuss.

- Grade inflation is considered (rightly or wrongly) to be a given in grad programs, so even great grades in a masters degree often can't make up for a lackluster undergrad transcript.

- Time. I busted my tail, but I got everything I needed to done in a year, while working full time.

- Money, money, money. Since I didn't have to quit working, I didn't have to go into debt or anything while I was taking my classes. Also, I only had to take (and pay for) classes that I needed, not an entire program.

- From my conversations with adcom members, I believe that having a masters degree just doesn't help you that much in admissions. Some people may disagree, but that is what I was told when I was considering my options.

Good luck!

 

[jbing]

Originally posted by lilmacstew
If you graduate with a 2.9 gpa, should you take some post bacc classes in science and such, or should you actually get a masters first?
Thank you

i seriously think the best thing to do would be to take enough postbacc classes to get your gpa to the "magic" 3.0 cutoff, then go for the masters. we all know that in terms of pure grades and numbers there's not much of a difference between a 2.9 and a 3.0, but i think when an adcom is rushing quickly through your app they will cringe more at a 2.9 than they would a 3.0. it's probably psychological but it's real. and you'd probably only need, what, 2-3 classes worth of A's to get it up to a 3.0?

 

[met19]

I actaully had the opposite opinion given to me by adcom members. Most seem to state if you are doing a post bac in the same classes, the material might "stick around" better the second time. That doesn't look good. However, if you do a masters (spefically a 1 year program) with medical classes that looks very good. Overall a master's might or might not help. But remember, when you are in a mater's where you can say the med average (at gtown, drexel, finch, BU-the big four programs) was 83 and my score was a 89 or whatever, that allows the adcom a DIRECT COMPARISON. And from waht I heard, ADCOM's love that since they undergrad courses really don't predict how one will do in med school (b/c the work is so different). If you plan on doind just any master's it doesn't help alot. Also alot of post bacs are designed for students who have not taken the pre-req's yet. Someone also mentioned money as a reason not to do a masters. If you really want to go to med school, money should not stop you. Afterall, if you plan on a minimun of 20-25 grand in loans time 4=100 grand. another 20-25 doesn't really hurt at that point.

 

[MEDicated]

ive had experience with taking classes post-bac and like others have said on this post, you should at least take them to get over that 3.0 hump. also, any prerequisite science classes in which you received a C or worse, i would advise you to retake. this is the advice i received from some medical schools. the masters degree is a good option, but remember that med schools won't admit you unless you have completed the degree. so if you would like to apply this upcoming year, don't start a 2 year masters program. good luck with everything (it does pay off, even if it seems impossible......i've had a good experience after screwing around in undergrad...so keep the faith).

 

[kwanny]

Originally posted by lilmacstew
If you graduate with a 2.9 gpa, should you take some post bacc classes in science and such, or should you actually get a masters first?
Thank you

I say, do whatever you can afford, but make sure your heart's in the right place tho.