THESE Are Your "Chances"!

[Commando303]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Not to be unsympathetic to this understandable concern, but, nauseated by the relentless, continual, almost-generic body of posts by prospective students of optometry who state their O.A.T. scores, G.P.A.s, and majors; list a few schools; and ask what their odds of admission are, I've thought to start this thread.

O.A.T. scores: The closer you are to 400, the better. Below 300 really isn't very good. The science categories are of greater concern to admissions boards than are the rest (i.e., math, reading — though neither of these is "insignificant").

G.P.A.s: The closer you are to 4.0, the better; below ~3.2 starts becoming weak, and below 3.0 is quite weak. If your bad grades are clustered toward the beginning of your academic career, and you've shown notable improvement over time, you're in better shape than you are if you've been consistently lousy. "Explanations" of why you performed poorly at a certain time — if they're realistic and authentic — can amount to something.

Age: Younger isn't necessarily better, but, if you're past 40, 50, etc., you might find admission to be more difficult — not because schools openly practice agism, but because you might have to re-take lots of classes and put aside a profession in which you're already embedded.

Majors: You don't have to have majored in biology or any other science course to enter optometry. As long as you've met the pre-requisites for admission, you should be fine. Yes, colleges may like to see you've gone the "extra mile" in learning facts pertinent to the medical field, but they're unlikely to frown on your candidacy simply because, in addition to optometry, you have a variety of interests.

This is as far as I can get, right now. I might post a link to the average G.P.A.s and O.A.T. scores of admitted applicants, but shall not do so, at the moment (if someone else would like to take that baton, I thank her or him).

Good luck.

 

[Vacuum]

What about waterloo? Also, for those going to "percentage" schools it would be helpful if you could post a rough percentage equivalent.

 

[Phys]

Most of the questions about Waterloo can be found on their website. The lowest percentage average they will take is 75%, but averages accepted range from 84%-92%, I believe. Nobody seems to give a distinct response on the conversion between percentage and GPA, but I would say that the formula for a 4.0 scale GPA can be approximately given by:

GPA = (percentage in decimal form) x 4.0

ie. if you have an 87%,

(0.87) x 4.0 = 3.48

Remember, this is VERY approximate, and I encourage anyone who has a better idea of GPA to post on here.

 

[Slapshot13]

Most of the questions about Waterloo can be found on their website. The lowest percentage average they will take is 75%, but averages accepted range from 84%-92%, I believe. Nobody seems to give a distinct response on the conversion between percentage and GPA, but I would say that the formula for a 4.0 scale GPA can be approximately given by:

GPA = (percentage in decimal form) x 4.0

ie. if you have an 87%,

(0.87) x 4.0 = 3.48

Remember, this is VERY approximate, and I encourage anyone who has a better idea of GPA to post on here.

You couldn't be more off with your GPA calculation. Would someone with a failing average have a 2.0..I don't think so. Considering a 4.0 is a 90 and above (at some schools above 85), your calculation is not even remotely accurately. Convert each of your GPA grades into the midpoint of that range. ie: if you got a 3.3 (B+) it is between 77-79 (approximate a 78). Add up all of your averages and divide by the n value.

 

[Arctic]

You couldn't be more off with your GPA calculation. Would someone with a failing average have a 2.0..I don't think so. Considering a 4.0 is a 90 and above (at some schools above 85), your calculation is not even remotely accurately. Convert each of your GPA grades into the midpoint of that range. ie: if you got a 3.3 (B+) it is between 77-79 (approximate a 78). Add up all of your averages and divide by the n value.

You are quite correct that the method Phys suggests doesn't work. The reason that it doesn't work is that it assumes the GPA spectrum is evenly spread across the percent score spectrum; i.e. that an F is 0% D is 25% C is 50% B is 75% and A is 100% Clearly that isn't the case.

The problem is, there are a number of ways that a school could convert between the two scales (0-4.0 numbering vs. percent) and these different methods can give different answers, so no 'general' rule is going to hold for all schools. The method you suggest is mathematically sound, but unless it happened to be the method a particular school used, you can only loosely approximate the conversion via that method.

 

[Commando303]

I'm not sure how G.P.A.–percentage conversions would work, but I imagine the following scale:

Percentage: G.P.A.
94–100 4.0
90-93 3.7
87–89 3.3
83–86 3.0
80–82 2.7
77-79 2.3
73–76 2.0
70–72 1.7
67–69 1.3
63–66 1.0
60–62 0.7
57–59 0.3
53–56 0.0

If you are a non-U.S. student, it probably would be best to contact individual schools about conversions.

 

[Arctic]

I'm not sure how G.P.A.–percentage conversions would work, but I imagine the following scale:

Percentage: G.P.A.
94–100 4.0
90-93 3.7
87–89 3.3
83–86 3.0
80–82 2.7
77-79 2.3
73–76 2.0
70–72 1.7
67–69 1.3
63–66 1.0
60–62 0.7
57–59 0.3
53–56 0.0

If you are a non-U.S. student, it probably would be best to contact individual schools about conversions.

The point is, that whatever scale a school chooses to use would significantly affect the results, so all of these are only going to be loose approximations unless it happens to be the exact scale/method the school uses. So yes, students should always try and find out directly from a school what their scoring conversion system is.

 

[Phys]

Thanks so much, guys. One of my high school teachers had given us the formula I had originally posted, and I was getting kind of worried about my GPA. Looks like it's higher than I had thought!

 

[Arctic]

Well, that's a formula hastily written by someone who A: doesn't really understand math, and/or B: didn't bother to think about it very much. It's intuitively obvious to me why it's invalid (and I already explained why); again just find out directly from the school.

 

[lnh]

Profile of Entering Class
I'm weary of those posts as well, so I'll take up the baton. Here is a link to ASCO's profile for the entering class of 2009. This can be found on the opted.org site, and it is updated every year.

http://www.opted.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3449

For those who are not familiar with this list, it not only shows the average GPA and OAT scores of entering students across all schools, but it also gives you a break down of how many applied vs how many accepted, resident/nonresident tuition, application fees, percent with bachelors, male/female ratio, and general state/country demographics. 🙂


Edit: Determining Your Academic Index
In order to balance your GPA and OAT score, some schools use what is called your AI, or your Academic Index. Basically you take your GPA on a 4.0 scale and multiply it by 100. Then add your OAT score. This is your AI.

Ex) GPA: 3.23x100=323 + OAT: 360 = 683 (AI)

According to UHCO, a competitive AI is from 660-700. Anything above 700 and you're in real good shape. Therefore this person is still "competitive" even though the GPA is on the low side. This is what I heard a few years ago, prior to the re-calibration of the OAT (effective May 1, 2009).

In order to compare OAT scores from tests taken before and after re-calibration, schools have been adding roughly 20 pts. At least, this is what I heard from UIWSO admissions committee. You can always contact your school directly and ask.

 

[opt87]

Does anyone know which schools use an AI?

 

[lnh]

To be honest, the only school I know that uses it for sure is UHCO. I got the 660-700 figure straight from Dr. Shulman.

SCO says: The lower the GPA, the higher the OAT score needs to be in order to be competitive. There is no magic formula, but we use a “sliding scale approach” when analyzing the competitiveness of an applicant’s OAT and GPA. A good example would be an applicant with a 3.0 GPA and a 320 on the OAT. Both academic indicators are at the low end of the competitive range. Increasing the OAT score to 330 could put that applicant in a more competitive position.

--which pretty much sounds like the same thing to me. Either way, it is a good system to give you a feel for how well you need to do to offset a low gpa and vice-versa. Schools may differ on what range is considered "competitive."

Can anyone speak up for other schools?

 

[tresrisque]

lnh,

Since the re-calibration occurred, is UHCO using the same AI range? For example, I have a 3.54 GPA and I got a 320 on my OAT. So..

3.54 x 100 = 354
354 + 320 = 674

According to the scale you mentioned, 674 is within the competitive range (albeit, still on the low side). But do you think they add the ~20 points to your OAT score (that would make me have a ~694), or do you think they may have lowered the sliding scale (640+)?

I hope that doesn't sound too confusing! lol

 

[lnh]

Nope! I understand what you are asking. 🙂 They will most likely keep the scale and add 10-20 points to your OAT, since this is the only year where they have to compare applicants who took the OAT before and after re-calibrations. After the 2-year period for the old scores are up, they can go back to business as usual.

If you look at their entering class profile: (http://www.opt.uh.edu/academics/od/class-profile.cfm)

Undergraduate Grades:
Average Overall GPA - 3.40
Optometry Admissions Test Scores (OAT) Averages:
Academic Average - 325
Total Science: 330
Quantitative Reasoning: 332
Reading Comprehension: 314
Physics: 318
Biology: 327
Chemistry: 323
Organic Chemistry: 329

Your scores would fit right in, and your GPA is good. An early application would be best, but I think as long as the rest of your application is strong, you're fine. Don't forget this is just a general guideline. Falling in the range doesn't guarantee you an interview, but it lets you know you have a fighting chance and their consideration.

Also, UIWSO is adding ~20, but I think SCO is leaning towards adding ~10. Unless you check with the schools directly, I would add just 10 to be on the safe side. I hope that helps!

 

[kayy]

SCCO also uses an AI, although I don't know that its the same one

 

[tresrisque]

I just wanted to add that NSUOK does NOT use an AI, since the class size is pretty small.

 

[tresrisque]

bump. Frankly, there are quite a few people who SHOULD read this.

 

[DawgOD]

it disturbs me when people on this message board think they are admissions