Which is better?

[scarletgirl777]

---

Members do not see this ad.

well now that we have pretty much settled the debate over which is better... does anyone know of any specific med schools that do in fact give weight to "hard" undergrads?

I think the issue is that it's hard for some schools to say that up front, or to explain exactly how much it matters.

I noticed that on Baylor's forms it has for interviewers to fill out, it asks for interviewers to take into account the rigor of coursework when rating the person's academic performance. My undergrad (one of those top 20 schools) has noticed that the people who get into Mount Sinai from our school have lower GPAs on average then the general group of people who get into Mount Sinai. If you come from a "hard" undergrad and are trying to assemble a list of schools that will be friendly to you, then I don't think it's worth the effort--it's too hard to figure out how much it matters. It's enough to know that it may matter somewhat at some places.

 

[redlight]

I think the issue is that it's hard for some schools to say that up front, or to explain exactly how much it matters.

I noticed that on Baylor's forms it has for interviewers to fill out, it asks for interviewers to take into account the rigor of coursework when rating the person's academic performance. My undergrad (one of those top 20 schools) has noticed that the people who get into Mount Sinai from our school have lower GPAs on average then the general group of people who get into Mount Sinai. If you come from a "hard" undergrad and are trying to assemble a list of schools that will be friendly to you, then I don't think it's worth the effort--it's too hard to figure out how much it matters. It's enough to know that it may matter somewhat at some places.

but the question is: is there a strong correlation between "top RESEARCH school" and rigor? every school has 'easy' courses/departments. anthro comes to mind in my school..
and that brings the whole grade inflation bit to mind.. should top 20s (like brown) with massive grade inflation (avg gpa of 3.6 for entire school) be given as much credit as, say, cornell (avg gpa 3.3)?

 

[scarletgirl777]

but the question is: is there a strong correlation between "top RESEARCH school" and rigor? every school has 'easy' courses/departments. anthro comes to mind in my school..
and that brings the whole grade inflation bit to mind.. should top 20s (like brown) with massive grade inflation (avg gpa of 3.6 for entire school!!) be given as much credit as, say, cornell (avg gpa 3.3)?

It doesn't matter whether or not they should be given credit. It matters whether or not they are given credit. We can debate whether or not they should be given credit until we are blue in the face. The fact of the matter is that at some places they are given some credit, and most schools are opaque enough about their admissions process that you cannot find out what that credit is. My undergrad has made some efforts to collect their own data and has found certain trends that they can share with us, but the sample size is too small to determine the mindsets of individual med schools and adcoms. I think the take home message here is that at the end of the day better grades are always better and when figuring out how competitive you are, the most important thing is figuring out how well you can sell your package. And in this package, where you went to school is probably not going to be the most important thing, as there will likely be dozens or even hundreds of other applicants who share your alma mater.

 

[redlight]

haha, good point (should vs whether they are). but honestly if i can find this stuff so easily online (avg gpas), i'm guessing adcom can to. especially because many top ugrad have committees who do things like rank LORs n applicants n stuff-- and i know for a fact that mine compares and ranks gpa in an array of ways so the med school has a good understnading of what that gpa actually means coming from my school (in addition to stuff like incoming class hs avg gpa and SAT scores to give adcom an idea of the rigor of student body)

and yes, yes generally better grades are better. im just saying that i do think ugrad rigor matters but dont exclusively think or assume "top research" school = rigorous.

 

[Laocoon]

You could entirely circumvent this issue by earning a high GPA at a top undergrad.

 

[redlight]

You could entirely circumvent this issue by earning a high GPA at a top undergrad.

easier said than done 😛

and i forgot to add adcom can see trends in gpa (ie these two schools have students with similar academic crdentials coming into college, but this school has waayy more high gpa's than the other. grade inflation, perhaps?)

 

[scarletgirl777]

easier said than done 😛

and i forgot to add adcom can see trends in gpa (ie these two schools have students with similar academic crdentials coming into college, but this school has waayy more high gpa's than the other. grade inflation, perhaps?)

Some schools are more merciless in telling students what they think their chances are, so that's not really fair. Also, it could be that the coursework is the same difficulty, but for some reason the students that are applying from that school just did better, presumably because of better mastery of the material.

All I can say is that outside of SDN I have never heard anyone argue that where you go does not matter at all or that the perceived difficulty of your major/coursework does not matter. Why does this ridiculous debate continue?

EDIT: In terms of committee LORs--it is my understanding that my premed committee ranks us in comparison to other applicants. So not in comparison to other premed/science majors or whatever, other applicants. And not just in comparison to any student from our school studying anything--JUST OTHER APPLICANTS. Since different majors do different things differently, that ranking does not relate at all to any perceptions about what average GPA for all students at my undergrad is.

 

[redlight]

Some schools are more merciless in telling students what they think their chances are, so that's not really fair.

im not sure what you mean.. and not sure if its unfair? if you mean some ugrad are more brutally honest about ones chances, i think its fair. it saves everyone some work and money. i dont think facts and trends should be sugar coated. for example if applying with low stats, why should a committee be forced to be less than brutally honest about what they WILL put in your review letter and the advice they think you should follow to improve your chances? med schools can tell stronger from weaker recs just by the wording so id rather my committee have my back and write me a better letter next round than roll the dice and burn cash.
if im totally misunderstanding, please disregard.

Also, it could be that the coursework is the same difficulty, but for some reason the students that are applying from that school just did better, presumably because of better mastery of the material.

yes, but anything is possible, not everything is likely, etc. it is very very unlikey that 2 schools w/ similar ranking similar class profile (hs gpa/SAT) constantly produces a class with 40% A's vs 20% A's because one student body all of a sudden decides to work harder than the other.
besides, you can guage rigor objectively by looking at mcat scores if you want to be picky. a difference in average gpa of .3 is startling and i dunno why it wouldnt be a red flag for obvious grade inflation if mcat averages are about the same.

All I can say is that outside of SDN I have never heard anyone argue that where you go does not matter or that the perceived difficulty of your major/coursework does not matter. Why does this ridiculous debate continue?

again, i totally agree that rigor plays a role (at least one adcom on sdn [LizzyM] has said it gets taken into consideration). the issue is how much of a role from school to school. the dabate continues until this admissions process becomes more open and less confusing... or until i/we premeds find something more interesting to do haha. im bored/not tired so thats my escuse 😳

 

[redlight]

missed the edit: sorry, slow typer..

ok, that's what your uni does. mine compares to the entire student body so adcoms know where the applicant stands at the university (or, thats my understanding). idk if its important or not, but it apparently has some use?? other departments do things differently, but you (in general, not just u scarlet) were not just taking classes w/ premeds so i guess it may be relavent in that regard.

 

[scarletgirl777]

im not sure what you mean.. and not sure if its unfair? if you mean some ugrad are more brutally honest about ones chances, i think its fair. it saves everyone some work and money. i dont think facts and trends should be sugar coated. for example if applying with low stats, why should a committee be forced to be less than brutally honest about what they WILL put in your review letter and the advice they think you should follow to improve your chances? med schools can tell stronger from weaker recs just by the wording so id rather my committee have my back and write me a better letter next round than roll the dice and burn cash.
if im totally misunderstanding, please disregard.

What I mean is, some undergrad's counselors may flat out tell you not to bother applying, or to alter your list of schools, or to take a year off to boost your application. An undergrad that is more aggressive in this way will have applicants with higher GPAs, and that could partially account for a GPA difference between 2 seemingly similar schools.

 

[scarletgirl777]

missed the edit: sorry, slow typer..

ok, that's what your uni does. mine compares to the entire student body so adcoms know where the applicant stands at the university (or, thats my understanding). idk if its important or not, but it apparently has some use?? other departments do things differently, but you (in general, not just u scarlet) were not just taking classes w/ premeds so i guess it may be relavent in that regard.

Every department thinks that they alone have the true knowledge about what it means to teach and grade and therefore does whatever the heck they feel like. Therefore, at least at my university, it's not very helpful to talk about university-wide average GPAs. The Romance Languages Department grades very differently from the Chemistry Department and has very different expectations of its students. Therefore, the performance in bio and premed courses is much more informative.

 

[redlight]

What I mean is, some undergrad's counselors may flat out tell you not to bother applying, or to alter your list of schools, or to take a year off to boost your application. An undergrad that is more aggressive in this way will have applicants with higher GPAs, and that could partially account for a GPA difference between 2 seemingly similar schools.

ok so i interpreted correctly so i stand by my comments.. committees shouldn't be pushy, but they should be completely honest because adcom can tell BS in the way they advertise the student.. and if a ugrad committee is not giving an accurate/complete description in the letter, that letter's value/weight drops..

and the gpas were university-wide averagas, not just premed applicant averages so that committee tough love situation is irrelevant in this specific case. i guess thats another benefit of giving uni-wide gpa averages.

Every department thinks that they alone have the true knowledge about what it means to teach and grade and therefore does whatever the heck they feel like. Therefore, at least at my university, it's not very helpful to talk about university-wide average GPAs. The Romance Languages Department grades very differently from the Chemistry Department and has very different expectations of its students. Therefore, the performance in bio and premed courses is much more informative.

again, the departments' philosophies shouldnt matter because premeds AND everyone else have the opportunity to take the same courses. for example, if the school has a core curric or something, even if the courses are from different departments, knowing how everyone does helps put the applicants grades in perspective (in addition to comparing w/ premeds and etc.).

 

[redlight]

again, just want to be clear: im not bashing anyone/any school, any ranking, etc.. im just trying to say that top X doesnt necessarily mean rigorous. and that rigor matters, but to varying degrees of which i can only make an educated guess cuz.. im not adcom. 😛

edit: major headache, work tomorrow, im peacing out.
thanks for the input!

 

[sourgrapes]

Which would be better for medical school admissions, a sgpa of 3.91 and gpa of 3.93 from a third tier university or a sgpa of 3.25 and gpa of 3.45 from a top 20 college? Assume a MCAT score of 34.

I don't know much about the circumstances of these 2 GPAs but this is yet another example of how much easier it is at lower tier universities! I went to a top 10 undergrad and you know what I'm sour about? I'm sour I didn't go to my local state school and get a 4.0 instead of being stuck with this 3.5! poor me j/k but seriously good luck in med school state schoolers because you are not prepared like us top 10ers 😛. I worked my butt off for this 3.5 while my state school friends cruised to 4.0s. How is it fair that I worked so much harder than them and they are looked at better by adcoms? I know I sound like I'm on a high horse and winey but whatever 😎

 

[cbrons]

Lol "low tier." What a joke. No one cares about you ivy league snobs. You mean nothing. Congrats on spending your high school lives buried under a textbook. I go to some no-name school in the middle of nowhere that is underfunded like no other. If I would've got into Princeton, Harvard, Yale, etc. I wouldn't have went. The last place I want to be is somewhere where people use the word "tier" in their everyday vocabulary.

Get a life, get laid. Good night.

 

[cbrons]

How is it fair that I worked so much harder than them and they are looked at better by adcoms? 😎

Because you're dumb and decided to go to a "harder" school thinking anyone would give two ****s. That in and of itself shows you lack the ability to prognosticate about your future med school competition. Sour grapes indeed 😱

 

[airplanes]

...the undergrad prestige thing again? really?

 

[cbrons]

...the undergrad prestige thing again? really?

Yep... the kids who still wear huggies under their brooks brothers pajamas are back to bitch some more about how they didn't have the brains or the balls to perform well at daddys ivy league alma matter. Not to say that all ivy league kids are like this but lets face it, a lot of these types surface on SDN in threads such as this.

 

[sourgrapes]

Because you're dumb and decided to go to a "harder" school thinking anyone would give two ****s. That in and of itself shows you lack the ability to prognosticate about your future med school competition. Sour grapes indeed 😱

I was definitely not pre-med going into college so that argument of yours is invalid. And even though you choose not to believe prestige matters for reasons yet to be explained, many people actually do care about how prestigious your undergrad was. A lot of the docs I've met were impressed by this. 😛

 

[cbrons]

Lets outline the people that care that you went to an Ivy League school as a pre-med:

* Your parents
* You

Lets outline the people that don't care

* Adcoms
* Your next door neighbor
* The Orkin man
* The rest of the world in general

Lets outline the methods by which the difficulty of an undergraduate institution's pre-med classes can be objectively measured:

* Oops, it can't

 

[cbrons]

A lot of the docs I've met were impressed by this. 😛

 

[sourgrapes]

Lol "low tier." What a joke. No one cares about you ivy league snobs. You mean nothing. Congrats on spending your high school lives buried under a textbook. I go to some no-name school in the middle of nowhere that is underfunded like no other. If I would've got into Princeton, Harvard, Yale, etc. I wouldn't have went. The last place I want to be is somewhere where people use the word "tier" in their everyday vocabulary.

Get a life, get laid. Good night.

Because you're dumb and decided to go to a "harder" school thinking anyone would give two ****s. That in and of itself shows you lack the ability to prognosticate about your future med school competition. Sour grapes indeed 😱

Yep... the kids who still wear huggies under their brooks brothers pajamas are back to bitch some more about how they didn't have the brains or the balls to perform well at daddys ivy league alma matter. Not to say that all ivy league kids are like this but lets face it, a lot of these types surface on SDN in threads such as this.

You seem to have some anger issues or I maybe I've hit a soft spot. You certainly are judging me, but guess what? You don't know me! Also, why do you have to resort to childish name-calling? Grow up and then lets talk.

P.S. there is no way that you could convince me that when someone says they graduated from Harvard it doesn't put that person on a pedestal so to speak.

 

[Livingapparatus]

can these kind of **** threads stop coming up

 

[Kaustikos]

That picture made my day

 

[236116]

P.S. there is no way that you could convince me that when someone says they graduated from Harvard it doesn't put that person on a pedestal so to speak.

It doesn't, or else everyone from Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahvaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahd with a 3.5 26 would get in, and they don't.

Brons, Kaus, keep it up.

 

[slowbutsteady]

It doesn't, or else everyone from Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahvaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahd with a 3.5 26 would get in, and they don't.

Brons, Kaus, keep it up.

You are correct. But EVERY applicant from Harvard and Yale with a 3.5 and a 33 will get in and you cannot say that about most schools.

 

[Kaustikos]

It doesn't, or else everyone from Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahvaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahd with a 3.5 26 would get in, and they don't.

Brons, Kaus, keep it up.

You are correct. But EVERY applicant from Harvard and Yale with a 3.5 and a 33 will get in and you cannot say that about most schools.

I'll put my entire savings and investment that you're wrong on that one. Care to gamble?

 

[236116]

You are correct. But EVERY applicant from Harvard and Yale with a 3.5 and a 33 will get in and you cannot say that about most schools.

Wrong.

If your 3.5/33 isn't backed up with ECs LORs PERSONALITY (ie: are you a douche?)

YOU WILL NOT GET IN UNLESS DADDY'S ON THE ADCOM.

There are better people with better scores and people skills.

 

[19nbj58]

I guess it must be "cool" to hate on pre-meds from Ivys.

 

[jult24er]

I'll put my entire savings and investment that you're wrong on that one. Care to gamble?

gonna third that.

 

[officedepot]

Am I the only one who gets annoyed when someone in high school says that undergrad matters a ton? They say things like all people who go to harvard are much smarter than people who go to state schools. They don't even listen to me when I say it does not matter that much (at least for medical school)...

 

[Superman78]

So I guess all that hard work in high school can actually hurt you if you end up going to a top very rigorous undergrad school that deflates your GPA.

The lesson, kids: coast through high school, have a lot of sex and do a lot of drugs, get into a poor undergrad institution where all of the slackers go, and then turn it up a few notches and own all of them and get a 4.0.

 

[sourgrapes]

So I guess all that hard work in high school can actually hurt you if you end up going to a top very rigorous undergrad school that deflates your GPA.

The lesson, kids: coast through high school, have a lot of sex and do a lot of drugs, get into a poor undergrad institution where all of the slackers go, and then turn it up a few notches and own all of them and get a 4.0.

Agreed!! No point in doing the hard work in HS to get into a top 10 if actually going there will hurt you in the long run!

In all seriousness, do the hard work in HS and get a good merit scholarship at your local state school.

 

[Superman78]

Am I the only one who gets annoyed when someone in high school says that undergrad matters a ton? They say things like all people who go to harvard are much smarter than people who go to state schools. They don't even listen to me when I say it does not matter that much (at least for medical school)...

Undergrad school does matter a lot in most cases, though not as much for med school. The smartest kids at my high school went to the best schools so obviously there is some correlation there.

 

[Steeler7588]

well now that we have pretty much settled the debate over which is better... does anyone know of any specific med schools that do in fact give weight to "hard" undergrads?

MUSC. They can add up to 0.55 (!!) to your GPA, depending on what school you go to. However, their bonuses added to schools are heavily influenced by regional ties and aren't based on any national metric or ranking; also, considering that you have no shot as OOS no matter how high your numbers are unless you have close ties to South Carolina, this adjustment is really only of interest to instate students.

 

[Steeler7588]

poor me j/k but seriously good luck in med school state schoolers because you are not prepared like us top 10ers 😛. I worked my butt off for this 3.5 while my state school friends cruised to 4.0s. How is it fair that I worked so much harder than them and they are looked at better by adcoms?

If you're so much better prepared than your lowly state school friends, then I'm sure you rocked them when it comes to MCAT scores? Why worry about being at a disadvantage against them with regard to GPA, when you've got such an advantage with your higher MCAT?

...that is, if you really are that much better prepared.

 

[sourgrapes]

If you're so much better prepared than your lowly state school friends, then I'm sure you rocked them when it comes to MCAT scores? Why worry about being at a disadvantage against them with regard to GPA, when you've got such an advantage with your higher MCAT?

...that is, if you really are that much better prepared.

I was talking in regards to just GPA, so I'm taking MCAT/e.c/everything else out of the equation. In regards to GPA, yes a 4.0 at a state school is probably better than a 3.5 at a top 10. However, I'm skeptical that getting a 4.0 at a state school is more difficult. Even though I may get flamed for saying this, I honestly feel that going to a top 10 school (or even top ~30) makes you more prepared for the rigor of med school. I base this on anecdotal evidence from people in med school who say that state schoolers have a harder time adjusting, and some of them never learn to adjust until its too late.

 

[Pewl]

a 3.3 at UCLA or Berkeley = a 3.8 at Irvine or Riverside = a 4.4 at a Cal State.

End of Story.

😀

 

[Emmet2301]

If the undergrad school doesn't matter then why don't we all just go to our safety schools and get high GPA's and get into Harvard Med school or the like?

 

[itsallthesame]

when your letters are extremely personal and specific and truly exceptional and from highly respected professors, your gpa won't matter quite as much. try finding them at a 3rd teir university.

also, my experience has been that my great ugrad university has come up quite often in interviews in a very positive manner and my lackluster to bad gpa hasn't been brought up once by the interviewer...

also, look at the number of harvard or yale or stanford kids at any medical school and tell me that there isn't a bias for them vs cal state or penn state.