what to do next

[jeanie523]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I'm a recent graduate from a big state school on the east coast. I'm getting conflicting information on what options I should now pursue. I still have 4 pre-med courses to fulfill-which I plan to complete at a local cc. My end cumm gpa is still not high enough to get accepted to med school (and I'm not prepared to receive all rejection letters) and my science gpa is a tad higher. My plans are to complete these courses, take the MCAT this spring, and apply to a post-bac program. My question: Is receiving a M.S. preferred than a "certificate"? I don't know if it makes that big of a difference, and in fact was told that taking research classes doesn't impress the admissions board. I was also told that instead of going back and taking some pre-med courses over again (C/C+) is not worth the time. Instead, I should take straight biology classes (endo, genetics, micro).

Does anyone have any experience with this situation?

 

[gtb]

I believe a full blown masters degree complete with research is more valuable than a post-bachelor prep program for medical school. This is even more true if your research is in an area of science that you enjoy and accomplish enough to publish a first author paper in a journal. Few MS candidates actually author their own research and this will make an impression on any interviewer. There are several reasons that encourage these opinions.

First is the reality that medicine is now critically evidence based. Any research skills you bring into the application process will be considered a huge advantage. This remains true throughout medical school and is probably even more valuable when you begin applying for residencies. I have no biological research in my background and it most certainly diminishes my competitiveness for high-demand residencies (radiation oncology, radiology, etc.). Now I find myself scrambling for a research project just to boost my residency applications.

Also interviewing medical school applicants gets really boring when almost every individual has exactly the same interests, background, and speech prepared. About the only way to bubble sort through most candidates is MCAT scores and GPAs. But if you come into the applications process with interesting research and ideas about how this applies to future medicine you have an advantage. You've piqued their curiosity and so the interview will be more interesting and memorable. There are point systems for most schools and prior success at research will add points to the application (or at the very least to the interview points). Plus as I've said before, a frequent interview question is, "What are you going to do if you don't get in?" The reason this question is asked is to screen out those candidates who apply to medical school because they just don't know what else to do with their life. More specifically, medical school should be your dream option, not your only hope. If you were doing research you really loved and it applies to medicine, you can tell them you'll extend your research and apply again beginning in a few months. It's a very solid answer to this particular question and an important reason to study something you enjoy.

There are many more reasons why a successful masters degree will greatly improve your chances of getting into medical school. Some examples include: it shows academic ability when you really try, demonstrates ability to work in a research environment, develops critical thinking & problem solving skills, and confirms a desire to work in the clinical/medical field. From my perspective, the masters degree is the appropriate choice because of its numerous benefits. The only thing you achieve with a post-bachelor program is the demonstration of academic potential. With the increasing competition for medical school positions I no longer feel this is the best strategy to get in.

Good luck with your choices.

 

[abbeacon]

I just finished a master's program (which involved taking both medical and graduate courses), and know that this program really helped me get accepted this time around.

I echo most of the comments made by gtb, especially about the research component of MS programs. It's also important to realistically assess your cumulative and bcpm gpa's. Many schools make initial cuts based on undergrad gpa, so any work done in a master's program will not count toward this gpa. Conversely, work done in post-bacc programs and at community colleges that don't lead to a degree will be applied to your undergrad gpa in amcas. I had a 3.3 (cumulative & bcpm) going into my master's program, and I felt this was enough to at least get me over an initial screen. I would say if your gpa's are below a 3.0, it might be advisable to retake those premed requirements to bump up your gpa.

I'm generally opposed to doing a "certificate" program, and didn't even consider such programs when I was applying to schools after I graduated from college. I reasoned that a MS degree was a tangible degree that could help me get a job if I wasn't accepted this time around, while a "certificate" saying I did well in premed and med classes really wouldn't help if I was rejected. Finally, regardless of what program you choose, you should be sure to ask the school about its placement into med schools, especially those schools affiliated with the program (e.g., georgetown, drexel, umdnj, etc). Hope this helps!

abbeacon

 

[jeanie523]

Thanks for the advice guys. I'm in the middle of applying to both post-bac programs and graduate schools, so hearing concrete reasons behind pursuing a masters is extremely helpful! 😀