value of columbia post bacc

[DrOtto]

---

Members do not see this ad.

When comparing Columbia to smaller programs like Goucher or Bryn Mawr, the discussions tend to get bogged down by attrition rates, selectivity (going in to the program - e.g. Goucher only takes highly qualified candidates, so it skews placement rates higher), etc. So ignoring these for one second...

Here's my question: MCAT, research experience, etc. all being equal, will a given gpa from Columbia (ex. 3.9) be:

a - less impressive
b - equally impressive
c - more impressive

than the same from Goucher (or Bryn Mawr)?

All I'm trying to get at is reputation, including consideration for classes with undergrads vs. postbaccs only, avg. curve, etc. I'm sure you could come up with many reasons why this question isn't fair, but I think it is applicible to someone who excells academically and is likely to thrive in both settings.

And then my follow up question would be similar: all things being equal, will similar research experience at Columbia and Goucher be viewed differently? Here is where I think there may be a greater divergence.

Any thoughts?

 

[BeachBlondie]

All things being equal? It doesn't make much difference. In fact, the attrition rates, acceptance percentages, ad nauseum are intended to draw STUDENT interest to the program--the more people they can get to apply, the more money they can glean from application fees, among other things.

In the eyes of admissions committees, your grades and performance on the MCAT are important, while the institution from which they were earned is a far lesser matter. For instance, I'm currently enrolled in Harvard's post-bacc program. Our attrition rate is ABOMINABLE--65% +--but the only thing that the committees will care about are the grades. Is the curriculum challenging? Heck yes. Is that an excuse for receiving lower grades than someone who went to an "easier" program? Never.

So, when you're making your decision, I would HIGHLY recommend contacting alumni or current students of the program of interest and asking them to be honest about their experiences. You want to ensure that no matter where you go, you're going to excel, and most importantly, enjoy yourself.

(P.S., I was also accepted to Columbia and backed out because of the steep tuition and some unhappy alumni I spoke with)

 

[badb100d]

I will agree with BeachBlondie and say that a 3.9 at Columbia is not going to be any different from a 3.9 anywhere else. However, having gone through the Columbia program myself, I do believe in their committee letters. Mine was even complimented at an interview. No one really knows how much influence the committee letter has on an adcom, but in my experiences I would say it has been beneficial.

I'm not really sure if I understand your question about research at Columbia vs. Goucher. As a Columbia student there were naturally many Columbia affiliated opportunities available, but my classmates pursued research experiences at institutions all over NYC, not just Columbia. I would guess that the same would be true of Goucher. Where you do post-bacc does not dictate where you do research. Also, I would venture to say that what you get out of the research, how much you enjoy it, the passion you have for it, is much more important to adcoms than where it was actually done and on what topic.

 

[prolixity29]

I think I understand the question about research. I wondered the same thing as I was applying for post-baccs.

My guess is that it would make a difference, but not in the way you described. Doing research at Columbia, that you could otherwise be doing at or closeby to Goucher, will probably not appreciably differentiate your application. But, I do believe that at a large University setting like Columbia you are more likely to find unique and interesting research opportunities that you would not find if you were to attend Goucher. Of course, there are great research opportunities to be had at Goucher but exceedingly unique ones, the stuff that would set your application apart ASSUMING your numbers were gravy, are probably quite hard to find.

However, whether those unique research opportunities exist and how/whether you can seize them is an entirely different question. At Columbia you are competing with talented undergraduates and a larger pool of post-baccs as well. Also, the amount of time you have on your hands is key.

I also believe that, all else being equal, getting a certain GPA at Columbia will look better than getting the same GPA at Goucher. But the chances of you doing that are relatively slim I think. I have heard of several people walking away from Goucher with 4.0's, and I think it's pretty rare for someone to do the same at Columbia. You take classes with undergrads there.

 

[EJS1979]

I know nothing about the Columbia program except from what I've heard in this forum, but I can definitely speak a little bit about Goucher and its research opportunities...

Goucher sets aside Tuesdays for "volunteer" opportunities, but the term "volunteer" is used very loosely; students can volunteer in clinics or hospitals, but they can also shadow, do research, etc. No, Goucher isn't a large institution, so the college itself doesn't offer research opportunities, etc., but the postbac program has a great reputation with the University of Maryland, Johns Hopkins, the NIH, and the FDA, and the fact that the time is built into the schedule is really helpful. During the actual school year, several of my classmates did research at Maryland and Hopkins, and now, during their glide year, half of my class is doing really amazing research work (both bench and clinical) at Hopkins, the NIH and the FDA, and many of these jobs are essentially passed down to Goucher postbacs every year. So, no, great opportunities are not at all hard to find, maybe even easier than at a larger institution with more competition, and there is no reason why these projects would be looked at any differently than those at Columbia.

DrOtto, as to your point about students who excel academically and are likely to thrive in either situation: that describes pretty much every student at Goucher, BM, Scripps, Hopkins, and most other strong programs. The biggest factor that distinguishes most postbac programs from each other is the overall atmosphere of the program and the happiness level of the students, which I don't think should be underestimated.