what's a good grade in master program?

[NewKidin2block]

I desperately need advice from people with similar experience. I am currently in a Chemistry Ph.D program. completed 4 courses and 2 seminar class. My current graduate gpa is 3.6 (yeah I know). I can possible push it to 3.75 if I I get solid A on 2 other classes in spring and summer quarter.

I know everyone believe graduate school have an inflated GPA. but what do you think is the right level of comparision between graduate school and undergrad? is A- in grad school consider only a B+ in undergrad?

I am planning to reapply for class of 2008. but I have very little volunteering experience.

Can any reapplicant with master in physical science give me some insight?

thanks a lot

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Critical Mass]

This question is pretty easy. Since grad school success represents mastery of a different type of learning, it's rarely considered by med school adcoms unless your grades were notably bad. So there is no way to relate grad grades to undergrad grades. A graduate GPA holds no value whatsoever to some medical schools. They are going to look primarily at your undergraduate work and MCAT score when they pre-screen your application and decide whether or not to interview you.

With a Ph.D. in chemistry, I can't see how you wouldn't excel on the MCAT PS. Hit 10's on BS and VR and you should be golden.

 

[armybound]

This question is pretty easy. Since grad school success represents mastery of a different type of learning, it's rarely considered by med school adcoms unless your grades were notably bad. So there is no way to relate grad grades to undergrad grades. A graduate GPA holds no value whatsoever to some medical schools. They are going to look primarily at your undergraduate work and MCAT score when they pre-screen your application and decide whether or not to interview you.

With a Ph.D. in chemistry, I can't see how you wouldn't excel on the MCAT PS. Hit 10's on BS and VR and you should be golden.

just curious, what different kind of learning am I mastering in graduate school? It seems to be the same as undergrad to me.

 

[NewKidin2block]

I got 34L (13P, 12B, 9 V), lot of research experience (no publication), little clinical experience, and late application. I really can't pit-pointed my weakness down to a single point

This question is pretty easy. Since grad school success represents mastery of a different type of learning, it's rarely considered by med school adcoms unless your grades were notably bad. So there is no way to relate grad grades to undergrad grades. A graduate GPA holds no value whatsoever to some medical schools. They are going to look primarily at your undergraduate work and MCAT score when they pre-screen your application and decide whether or not to interview you.

With a Ph.D. in chemistry, I can't see how you wouldn't excel on the MCAT PS. Hit 10's on BS and VR and you should be golden.

 

[NewKidin2block]

it's varied from program to program, as well as from instructor to instructor. I spent 12-18 hours per problem sets per week. trying to deriving theorems and mathematical relationship. and I have 3 problems set due each weeks. Graduate school was more like non-stop problem set solving for me. imagine you need to get up at 5am twice a week to finsihed up the problem set.

just curious, what different kind of learning am I mastering in graduate school? It seems to be the same as undergrad to me.

 

[Critical Mass]

just curious, what different kind of learning am I mastering in graduate school? It seems to be the same as undergrad to me.

Really? I never studied a day in graduate school and did great on the exams. Grad programs I was in were research-focused, namely that your skill in reading and interpreting a journal article was far more important than fact memorization. Likewise there was little didactic coursework, instead most time was spent in the lab looking for that one experiment out of five that worked.

Med school is the complete opposite. Pathway A is regulated by Enzyme B. Ganglion C houses cell bodies of sensory neurons but not parasympathetics. Drug D inihibits here but not there. No short answer/essay questions, MC only; and an MC question tends to test 20 facts at the same time. You can memorize the words without understanding what they mean in M1/2 and ace the exams.

 

[armybound]

Really? I never studied a day in graduate school and did great on the exams. Grad programs I was in were research-focused, namely that your skill in reading and interpreting a journal article was far more important than fact memorization. Likewise there was little didactic coursework, instead most time was spent in the lab looking for that one experiment out of five that worked.

Med school is the complete opposite. Pathway A is regulated by Enzyme B. Ganglion C houses cell bodies of sensory neurons but not parasympathetics. Drug D inihibits here but not there. No short answer/essay questions, MC only; and an MC question tends to test 20 facts at the same time. You can memorize the words without understanding what they mean in M1/2 and ace the exams.

Ah, my experiences so far are completely the latter. I guess it has to do with my program. I still take 'normal' courses, like immunology and neuroanatomy. If I don't study like crazy, I'm sure to fail.

Of course I'm not writing a thesis, so my research experience is next to nonexistent.

 

[njbmd]

I desperately need advice from people with similar experience. I am currently in a Chemistry Ph.D program. completed 4 courses and 2 seminar class. My current graduate gpa is 3.6 (yeah I know). I can possible push it to 3.75 if I I get solid A on 2 other classes in spring and summer quarter.

I know everyone believe graduate school have an inflated GPA. but what do you think is the right level of comparision between graduate school and undergrad? is A- in grad school consider only a B+ in undergrad?

I am planning to reapply for class of 2008. but I have very little volunteering experience.

Can any reapplicant with master in physical science give me some insight?

thanks a lot

In graduate school, you are expected to maintain at least a 3.0 average. Any grade below 3.0 (B) is a bad grade in graduate school because it can drop your overall GPA if not offset by a higher grade that keeps you above that 3.0 minimum average.

Graduate GPA is evaluated differently from undergraduate GPA (as you probably already know) and thus any comparisions such as B- in graduate school is comparable to a D in undergraduate are not particularly useful. A graduate degree does not offset a poor undergraduate GPA as the two GPAs are weighted very differently.

Medical school admissions committees would likely not consider a graduate GPA of 3.0 as a "good" grad GPA because it is the minimum. Graduate GPAs above 3.5-3.6 are considered adequate and 3.7-4.0 good to excellent. It is expected that your graduate GPA will be higher because you are concentrating on subject matter of interest to you.

It is expected that you have publications within the scope of your graduate program because contributing to the body of knowledge that is your discipline is part of the graduate school process. It is expected that you have good verbal skills and be able to evaluate the professional literature of your graduate area of study.

If you are able to get your graduate GPA to 3.75, you have helped your cause but your graduate GPA will be evaluated within the context of your undergraduate GPA and MCAT. If you had a poor undergraduate GPA and applied to schools that screen by undergraduate GPA, you may have come up short. In short, your graduate GPA might not have been your problem all along.

To improve an undergradate GPA, do post bacc coursework and not graduate school. If you do graduate school, be sure that you do well and rock on the MCAT but you may be screened out of some schools by a low undergraduate GPA in spite of a good graduate GPA. It's not a case of grade inflation but rather a case of the two GPAs being weighted differently.

 

[Bernoull]

Maaan.... ignorance is BLISS!!! I've been thinking all along that graduate gpa & coursework will b more heavily weighted than undergrad. Just to remove some variables I thought a M.Sc. in Biochem with a 3.4 gpa is more important (in the eyes of ADCOMs) than a B.Sc. in Biochem with a 3.4 gpa (especially taken at the same school). My reasoning is that clearly the M.Sc. is more advanced, rigorous etc. just like how undergrad Bio 101 and Bio 440 (would be viewed by ADCOMs).

". . . To improve an undergradate GPA, do post bacc coursework and not graduate school. . ."

Would taking higher lever undergrad courses (stand-alone classes) especially BCPMs after graduation prop up (marginally, of course) your undergrad gpa.

R post bac gpas evaluated differently from undergrad or are they averaged out. bcos it seems to me if they r evaluated differently then a postbac would not be better than a Masters if the school screens out applicants based on undergrad gpa.

I apologize for my loaded questions......

 

[armybound]

Would taking higher lever undergrad courses (stand-alone classes) especially BCPMs after graduation prop up (marginally, of course) your undergrad gpa.

yes, people claim that post-bac classes do factor into your undergrad gpa.

 

[Bernoull]

Thanks armybound, it's will be helpful to get an Adcom's view on this... it'll dampen the heresay n speculations a bit. I heard different things myself..

 

[Law2Doc]

yes, people claim that post-bac classes do factor into your undergrad gpa.

It's not just that people claim it, it's that there is a column on AMCAS for combined undergrad and ug postbac. That is the column that adcoms reportedly rely on (and they pretty much have to because a lot of traditional postbac people won't have any prereqs in their undergrad GPA so it's hard to imagine adcoms would use a column that doesn't include those, or looks at different ug GPA columns for different applicants as "the" student's GPA). This column is also the whole reason why a lot of the postbac programs that cater to grade rehabilitation exist in the first place.

Graduate GPAs do not affect undergrad level ones, and are not weighted as heavy in the process. However an SMP or hard science graduate program can provide the couple of semesters of success in the sciences that can prove to an adcom that you can handle the science years of med school. So SMP programs actually do have good track records of getting people into med school. Whether you do a postbac or SMP depends a lot on the particular person's story -- there is no "one size fits all". They simply are meant to address different things.

 

[Law2Doc]

I got 34L (13P, 12B, 9 V), lot of research experience (no publication), little clinical experience, and late application. I really can't pit-pointed my weakness down to a single point

You may want to talk to people at schools after the application process, if you haven't already? I would think there is a whole littany of non-numerical reasons you might have hit hurdles. Your ug and grad GPAs are likely not keeping you down, nor is your MCAT score. "Little clinical experience" jumps out at me and is a big problem for a lot of schools. Things like late application and applying too narrowly also can be detrimental, although people tend to be too quick to jump to those conclusions because they are the ones that let people believe their application was otherwise flawless (which so often isn't the case). Your PS, secondary essays, LOR can also totally be impediments to getting into med school. Or if you got to the interview stage and weren't able to sell yourself, that could certainly keep you out. I wouldn't assume a grade related obstacle, because there are simply so many other potential sources and the numbers you have described aren't that bad. I hope you didn't go to grad school instead of addressing an actual shortcoming.