Which schools focus on your GPA and which focus on experience?

[Backwoods Boy]

I know that all schools look at both GPA and vet experience. However, I recall that some schools focus more on one or the other. I was hoping all of you could help me figure this out.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Pandacinny]

From what I've heard, both VMRCVM and Penn put a lot of focus on GPA.

 

[sumstorm]

NCSU has 6 key points it focuses on, which does include academics, but they take into consideration things like FT work while attending school in that section. They do have a GPA cut off though.

 

[Lckynmbrslefman]

Western definitely emphasizes experience and diversity more than GPA/GRE.

 

[sunnex3]

i'm not 100% positive, but i think UC Davis and Cornell have a point system where GPA/GRE are 50% of admissions criteria? not 100% certain though, that's just what i -think- i've heard.

 

[Klhughes]

TN bases their interview invites on a point system that is based upon your academic record. The final tally of points comes from your interview and other parts of your application.

 

[Ben and Me]

From what my (vet) boss has told me about NCSU, they only care if you have those required 400 hours...above that, it counts the same. Of course, they want those 400 hours to be spread across several fields of vet med.

So, I wouldn't say that they emphasize experience over grades, especially since they said in the informational meeting last year that an A at Harvard counts the same as an A at a community college.

 

[sumstorm]

From what my (vet) boss has told me about NCSU, they only care if you have those required 400 hours...above that, it counts the same. Of course, they want those 400 hours to be spread across several fields of vet med.

So, I wouldn't say that they emphasize experience over grades, especially since they said in the informational meeting last year that an A at Harvard counts the same as an A at a community college.

Interesting, not quite what was said to me at the informational meeting I attended.

I am curious: how would you like them to determine what an A (4.0) is worth at one school vs another? should they add 0.2 when the school is a big name or in the top 100 of any of the many different school rankings? 0.2 for each of the top 100 ranking reports? That would be awesome for me, my GPA would skyrocket!

Here is what thier written information is about grades (from website):

3. Educational Experience Consideration will be given to academic excellence, the course load per term, employment concurrent with school attendance, and participation in intercollegiate athletics. This will also include evaluation of accomplishments such as honors, awards and advanced degrees.

So it sounds like to me, even in academia, they are considering far more than GPA. The other 5 consideration points are: 1: vet experience (400+ hours, 3 areas, duration, level of duties, diversity of experience) 2: animal experience (100+ hours, multiple activities of long duration, not pet ownership) 4: Evaluation forms/recommendations (support experience listed, validate maturity, commitment and work ethic) 5: Personal statement (who, why, what) 6: Diversity (varies)

As always, I could be totally wrong, but I did get in with grades that are 7+ years old and fell short of a 3.4 and I can only assume that is because of experience.

 

[TSUJC]

In my experience:

Texas A&M University (point system)-------> mainly GPA

Colorado State, Mississippi State ---------> whole package

 

[Ben and Me]

Sumstorm, I'm not going to argue with you about this since I only know what was told to me in the informational meeting and it sounds like we are talking about 2 different things...I was referring to strictly veterinary experience (which I assumed the original poster was also referring to) while it sounds like you're referring more towards life experiences.

And yes, I do think that they should take into account where you went to undergrad. I can tell you from having taken pre-vet classes at 2 different Tier 1 schools that colleges vary wildly in the amount of time/studying/effort that they expect from their students. I think that if you went to a tougher undergrad institute that you should be rewarded. I understand that not everyone has the opportunity to go to Harvard (I certainly wasn't smart enough), but I do think that the kids who are smart enough to get into (and do well at) Harvard should be rewarded.

For example: Microbiology at large, tier 1 college with veterinary school. Multiple choice, scantron tests. I studied for 3 hours and made over a 100 on several tests.

Microbiology at small, liberal arts school: Impossible. My (smarter!) friends who were in it were literaly studying around the clock. But, they also learned a lot more than I did in my microbiology class, and I think they should have been rewarded for that! If I had studied for only 3 hours for one of those tests (or even quizzes!), I would have failed miserably.

UPenn and Cornell are two schools that do emphasize the rigor of undergrad institutions, and it seems to work out okay for them.

 

[sunnex3]

Sumstorm, I'm not going to argue with you about this since I only know what was told to me in the informational meeting and it sounds like we are talking about 2 different things...I was referring to strictly veterinary experience (which I assumed the original poster was also referring to) while it sounds like you're referring more towards life experiences.

And yes, I do think that they should take into account where you went to undergrad. I can tell you from having taken pre-vet classes at 2 different Tier 1 schools that colleges vary wildly in the amount of time/studying/effort that they expect from their students. I think that if you went to a tougher undergrad institute that you should be rewarded. I understand that not everyone has the opportunity to go to Harvard (I certainly wasn't smart enough), but I do think that the kids who are smart enough to get into (and do well at) Harvard should be rewarded.

For example: Microbiology at large, tier 1 college with veterinary school. Multiple choice, scantron tests. I studied for 3 hours and made over a 100 on several tests.

Microbiology at small, liberal arts school: Impossible. My (smarter!) friends who were in it were literaly studying around the clock. But, they also learned a lot more than I did in my microbiology class, and I think they should have been rewarded for that!

UPenn and Cornell are two schools that do emphasize the rigor of undergrad institutions, and it seems to work out okay for them.

now this is only my opinion, especially as a UPenn student, but Penn and Cornell probably take into account rigor of the undergrad institutions because a lot their own students apply to the vet school and they know for a fact that the programs at Penn and Cornell (at least in science) are extremely brutal - I can attest to that as a Bio major at Penn! and i've taken courses at both Penn and Cornell and they are definitely not easy classes. You could study for hours and hours for an exam and still not make the average.

i think it's important to take into account academic rigor - i think that schools should take into account the fact that some schools have harder programs than others, and that your grade may not have been as high. but i guess there is no numerical or point system method to determining what an A at a more difficult institution is worth vs. an A at an easier institution.

but then again this is only my opinion - i'm not arguing with anyone.

 

[Konfetkette]

This talk about tier schools is scary!
Ben and Me, just curious...how is it that your friends did poorly? What tier was this school? Microbio nearly killed me last semester and I studied for every exam for days and days. I don't understand why vet schools assume that every tier 3 school is easy. It depends on your professor. My microbio and animal bio professors were insanely hard. My genetics professor is hard but teaches so well, he makes it all understandable. My biochem professor is amazing too but his first exam sent 60% of class running. Orgo I exams averaged 44% and Orgo II are about 54% right now.

 

[IvyLynx]

Re- the ungrad argument:

I don't think that's fair. Making a good financial decision should not end up counting against you. Also, while there are obviously insanely smart people at Ivy League schools, there are also generally average students, and not so smart people with tons of money. There are insanely smart people at average colleges. I know a few MIT acceptees that chose NCSU instead. I have a friend that was accepted to a couple Ivys and was flat out rejected from NCSU. And uh, I find it hard to believe that celebrity offspring are so much smarter than the rest of us and get into Ivys no problem.

If they did things that way I think it would MORE dependent on the opinion of the adcom. Engineering schools are better! No, I mean liberal arts schools! No, well, umm... Plus, academic rigor of the program is often separate from the school.

Back on topic:
(re- the UC Davis thread) --> 50% interview, 50% everything else - GPA

NCSU --> whole package (I was also told that the diversity of the experience matters more than the hours)

 

[sunnex3]

Re- the ungrad argument:

I don't think that's fair. Making a good financial decision should not end up counting against you. Also, while there are obviously insanely smart people at Ivy League schools, there are also generally average students, and not so smart people with tons of money. There are insanely smart people at average colleges. I know a few MIT acceptees that chose NCSU instead. I have a friend that was accepted to a couple Ivys and was flat out rejected from NCSU. And uh, I find it hard to believe that celebrity offspring are so much smarter than the rest of us and get into Ivys no problem.

If they did things that way I think it would MORE dependent on the opinion of the adcom. Engineering schools are better! No, I mean liberal arts schools! No, well, umm... Plus, academic rigor of the program is often separate from the school.

Back on topic:
(re- the UC Davis thread) --> 50% interview, 50% everything else - GPA

NCSU --> whole package (I was also told that the diversity of the experience matters more than the hours)

well i know that there are insanely stupid people at ivy schools and insanely smart people at non-ivy schools - but i think that the QUALITY of the program should be considered - i.e. the Bio department at Penn or Cornell classes are extremely difficult and well regarded. and i also understand that tier-3 schools have good quality programs. i wasn't necessarily talking about the reputation of the SCHOOL ...i was moreso talking about the quality of the specific PROGRAM at the institution that the applicant attended.

now i may be biased - but i'm not one of those insanely rich people who got into the school just because of money. i work hard to get the grades that i earn in a program that is extremely competitive at a school where most science majors are pre-health in one way or another, and i think that the difficulty and competitiveness of the program that i took classes in should be considered.

i did not mean to sound like a snobby ivy league brat - i know that there are schools out there with extremely well regarded programs that may not have the reputation of ivy league schools.

 

[DocDVMD]

I'm actually curious how schools "factor in" academic rigor into their admissions concoctions (haha). I've heard others mention that during their interviews they were told that their GPA is worth .2-.4 more, but I've never been told anything of the sort (I'm from Cornell). How else can they consider it when reviewing apps?

I also wanted to agree with the statement that course difficulty varies widely between schools, and add that it definitely varies within schools as well. I've taken classes that were nearly impossible and classes that were beyond easy, some in the same program. I believe Cornell is considering starting to list median grades for each course on students' transcripts so that grad school admissions committees can compare the students' grades to those of the rest of the class!

PS Cornell vet definitely prides itself on having the highest average GPA of any other vet school, so they like to keep it that way.

 

[IvyLynx]

I believe Cornell is considering starting to list median grades for each course on students' transcripts so that grad school admissions committees can compare the students' grades to those of the rest of the class!

Ooh! I like that idea!

@sunnex3: sorry if i offended you, that was not the intent. It's not that I really have a problem with the idea, I just think it would be difficult to implement. There's no near fool-proof way.

 

[Pandacinny]

It would be nice if quality of program could always be taken into consideration, but on a practical level, how is anyone supposed to do that? There are so many schools in this country that getting into the nitty gritty of program and testing details is impossibly time consuming. Also, there's no way to really tell how bad a program is without being in it. And frankly, Ivys don't necessarily have the best programs in everything. There are certain Ivy/other well known schools, for example, that friends of mine have completely dismissed because they don't have great specific programs (in psychology and physics, respectively) whereas less well known state schools have excellent programs within those fields.

What you guys would have adcoms do is take the hundreds of schools people apply from each year, parse out the specific program they studied in (which can range from bio/animal science to history or english), then try to use the magic adcom hivemind to figure out which schools really were more rigorous and which ones just have a famous name and which ones were easier and less well known. I just don't think there's any fair or realistic way to do that.

Bottom line, everyone has to deal with hard classes and easy ones. There's no way someone who went to an ivy league school can honestly tell me their classes were harder than mine at state college and they should get extra points because of it. You can't know that - you didn't take them with me. Just as there's no way for me to tell you your classes are easier and not worth as much.

 

[sumstorm]

I was not argueing, I was putting out there what NCSU actually PUBLISHES. I trust what they are saying vs what someone else says, so I just put it out there and let the OP evaluate based on what the school wrote. As noted, I could always be wrong.

As for education, I went to one of those very challenging 'tier 1' liberal arts schools, which is ranked just about everywhere and is known for avoiding grade inflation. Let me put this quite simply. In 4 years, not a single individual earned an A in organic chem. NOT A SINGLE PERSON. Less than a dozen B's in that same time period.

Having said that, I have now taken classes at a couple of private liberal art schools, a few science/engineering schools, and a couple of state schools, and 3 community colleges (I can't stay out of school, I love learning, even as a vet I bet I take classes just for fun). For the sake of openess, some of those courses I audited (seriously why on earth would anyone wanting to maintain a decent GPA as a biology major do anything more than audit fluid mechanics?) but when I audited I completed all the work and took the exams. I have also designed lab programs and research internships for many of those schools. I have met community college professors that are tougher than I would ever desire to deal with (and one of whom WAS my professor at that tier 1 lib arts school). I have sat through state school classes WITH vet schools that saddened me because they weren't of the caliber of my HS classes. I turned down some big name Ivies because I wanted small classes, lots of research and a campus where I KNEW everyone.

I am not disagreeing that there are differences between programs, and that it would be amazing if those could be fairly acknowledged, but could it be realisticly done? If so, how? I can see how you might be able to do it for a few schools, but does that mean we shouldn't encourage students to attend programs that best fit them, such as liberal arts schools? Also, how do we ensure that professor X's replacement while he is on sabbatical is as good of a prof, and should you be docked if you took his classes instead?

My point is there are variations between professors in the same school on the same campus, let alone between schools. I just don't know how an evaluator can really adjust that. Would they call the professors for every class? Do they chalk it up to program reputation? Remember that some of the rankings for schools are based on the incoming class (as our president liked to say 'anyone can take straight A students and maintain straight A academic stars; we prefer to take students from diverse and unique backgrounds and ensure that they are the leaders of the future, which requires more than academic prowess.') My 'best guess' would be to suggest more testing to see if the basics are covered knowledge wise before offering admission. I think that would be more fair than grades or riding on the tails of academic program success. I know one of my friends in an architecture program at a private engineering school complains bitterly about the rampant cheating at his school...and how the curves then damage his grades. He is winning awards, which is good for his program, but it means that the cheaters in his program are enjoying his success while damaging his GPA.

I don't disagree with the concept.... I just can't figure out a way to actually implement it. I dislike the heavy focus on grades; I do think it unfairly penalizes a multitude of individuals. As noted before, I worked extremly long hours during undergrad.....I honestly believe I could have had at least a 3.9 if I hadn't worked so much. I just can't figure out how to do that.

Which would your rank higher for a pre-med, Swarthmore (anti grade inflation), Harvard, MIT, Princeton (accused of grade inflation)? I am just not sure how to do so...if there was a way that was efficient and cost effective, it would make sense to me....and I do think it is important to consider more than just grades.

Not argueing, just not sure how to realisticly do it. Kind of like dog shelters; I hate the idea of euthanizing well mannered dogs and cats who are adoptable, but when you have room for 20 and you are receiving more than 40 a day, I don't know how you can create enough options.

 

[sunnex3]

i apologize, i didn't mean to sound like i thought that a whole lot of emphasis should be put on grades or academic rigor.

i also think that grades should not be so heavily emphasized - i think that experience/LOR/personal statements are what really shapes your application and gives an accurate picture of what kind of applicant you are.

i was just trying to say that i definitely think that academic rigor/quality of the academic program you were in should be considered as ONE of the many factors that go into making a decision about an applicant. i also acknowledge that many universities (including harvard and princeton) have grade inflation and that many state schools may have better programs than ivy league schools (i.e. va tech has an excellent engineering program, much better than Penn's)

but for those schools with an academically rigorous program/department, i think that when looking at a B at the more dififcult school vs. an A at a school with an easier program, the difficulty should be taken into account, at least a little bit.

again, this is only my personal opinion, don't mean to judge/offend anyone. nor am i saying that i know the academic quality of all programs at all universities and that anyone who hasn't gone to an ivy league school doesn't deserve to go to vet school or anything. if penn wasn't so generous with my financial aid, i would've just gone to my state school too (UVA, which is also an equally excellent school). i really don't mean to sound like an ivy league brat and i'm sorry if i sound like one!

of course, many other factors such as full time jobs, personal conflicts, etc. etc. should be taken into account as well. i'm not saying to just look at grades. i'm just talking about when looking at the whole picture.

and i acknowledge that there isn't really a good way to maybe "quantitatively" factor in or completely evaluate academic rigor and it would be amazing if there was a cost effective, efficient way but obviously there isn't. but maybe it should at least merely just be taken into consideration.

 

[sunnex3]

And frankly, Ivys don't necessarily have the best programs in everything. There are certain Ivy/other well known schools, for example, that friends of mine have completely dismissed because they don't have great specific programs (in psychology and physics, respectively) whereas less well known state schools have excellent programs within those fields.

Bottom line, everyone has to deal with hard classes and easy ones. There's no way someone who went to an ivy league school can honestly tell me their classes were harder than mine at state college and they should get extra points because of it. You can't know that - you didn't take them with me. Just as there's no way for me to tell you your classes are easier and not worth as much.

i wasn't trying to say that ALL ivy league schools have BETTER programs and that my classes are necessarily harder than yours. i completely agree that some ivies have worse programs that a school that might not have as high of a reputation. but that doesn't mean that some of these ivies/well known schools don't have extremely difficult programs of study - indeed some are worse, but some are better. and again, i might be biased as an ivy league student, but i also know that the pre-health program at my school is extremely well regarded and is extremely difficult to do well in AND also the science departments here tend to avoid grade inflation as well - we actually have a somewhat grade deflation - the avg. GPA of students in the science programs are significantly lower than those who aren't.

and again, i apologize for sounding like i thought that ivy league schools are superior in every way - i definitely don't think like that!

 

[sumstorm]

LOL. I didn't assume anything negative about anyone!

I just know that small liberal arts schools can be almost unheard of at huge schools like Penn. I know the adcoms at penn have probably heard of swarthmore, but most couldn't name half a dozen lib arts from the midwest. That is where the problem sets in....because whether or not they intend to, they will be penalizing students from rigorous programs just because they aren't aware of the program. Does that make sense?

btw- I actually took 2 classes at Penn while I attended my first year of undergrad at a 'nearby' lib arts school (it did have a great exchange program)....and I like penn much better.

my biggest frustration with the entire process is the arbitrary nature of it....but I am in where I want to be, getting a house, and planning the next four years. Just have to finish that pesky animal nutrition class.

 

[sunnex3]

LOL. I didn't assume anything negative about anyone!

I just know that small liberal arts schools can be almost unheard of at huge schools like Penn. I know the adcoms at penn have probably heard of swarthmore, but most couldn't name half a dozen lib arts from the midwest. That is where the problem sets in....because whether or not they intend to, they will be penalizing students from rigorous programs just because they aren't aware of the program. Does that make sense?

btw- I actually took 2 classes at Penn while I attended my first year of undergrad at a 'nearby' lib arts school (it did have a great exchange program)....and I like penn much better.

my biggest frustration with the entire process is the arbitrary nature of it....but I am in where I want to be, getting a house, and planning the next four years. Just have to finish that pesky animal nutrition class.

oh cool what courses did you take? some of the profs at penn are absolutely amazing.

i have heard that some schools (i guess depending on the admissions officers) will look up a school's program, if they don't know much about it. i think actually someone on here mentioned that. but i agree - it is unfair that some students will be penalized because their school is a small liberal arts college that is not as huge or largely known like Penn. which i guess kind of contradicts my argument...

 

[Ninnerfish]

I've been to both a school known for its academics and one not known for its high academic rigor, and I can tell you the strength of any program is based solely on the individual professors that teach each class. I've had classes at the "hard" school that I spent 30 minutes tops studying for each week and aced and ones at the "easy" school that I'm lucky to survive with a C. Unless someone was to sit down and individually rank each professor for each subject at each school, I see no fair way to assign weight to a GPA.

The thing that bugs me about the emphasis some schools put on grades is that even within the same school, a grade can mean different things depending on the individual class. Say, for example, you take Microbiology with professor A, who gives only two tests (midterm and final) upon which your whole grade is based. What happens if you're not feeling so great for one of them or you just are having an "off" day and get a bad grade? Sucks for you. Now there's professor B, who teaches the same class, but gives five tests over the semester. Your chances of rebounding from one unfortunate exam are much better. If anything, I can see weighting the importance of the GRE much more than GPA. At least in that case, everyone is taking the same test (although there is room to argue about financially better-off students being able to afford more test prep classes).

 

[sunnex3]

i didn't mean to turn this into such a big discussion
this topic seems to be getting a lot of attention!
i'm sorry if i've offended anyone!

 

[twelvetigers]

Heated topics are everyone's favorite! What fun would it be if we just sat around and patted each other on the back all day? As long as it remains a debate and no one resorts to hypothetical fists, it usually stays pretty interesting.

 

[Konfetkette]

I took gen chem 1 at community college, gen chem 2 at a uni (will retake gen 1 if I have to), and got Bs in both, which is not great but good for how much I hated the class. Anyway, I worked much harder for a B in community college than at uni. Any my uni professor did have only two exams. Different professors, different difficulty levels. I believe it has little to do with the reputation of a school. It'd be pretty ignorant to assume that bio program sucks at a school they've never heard of.

 

[Pandacinny]

I think Sumstorm and Ninnerfish have pretty much summed it up. Personally, I was accepted to "better" schools for undergrad, but went with a lesser known state school because they offered me a scholarship. Since my family has six kids in it, and my sister was also starting college, it was follow the money or don't go to college. I'm happy with my decision, but would hate to think people in similar situations were being punished. I wasn't offended by your post, and I even agree with you theoretically. I wish they could easily weight programs - that would make it more fair for people in hard ones. I just can't see a way to do that.

So this is a little back on topic, at a VMRCVM info session three or four years ago, this came up. The school representative said they don't weight schools. The feeling was that people "at the top of the pack" in their school would probably still try to be in that position in vet school, whether they went to a private school, a state university, or community college.

 

[hopefulvet21]

There's other factors that determine the "academic rigor" of a school besides its reputation. "Big name" schools have big names because they attract a huge amount of applicants every year, and it is tougher to get in. Thus, IN GENERAL the caliber of the students you're competing with for an A is higher than you would get at a community college. I don't think adcoms really compare every single school with every single other school. But I think they note general, perceived differences in quality. For example, I think a Harvard student with Bs is still far better than a community college student with As. I don't think they see students who attended fairly similar colleges as different in quality however. Like Boston College and Boston University or something.
And if you were accepted to MIT but went somewhere cheaper, I believe there was a place to put that on VMCAS where it asked you what previous colleges you were accepted to, even if you declined. So if that's your gripe, you could have just showed it on VMCAS.

By the way, there's really no difference in Ivy league schools and many big universities. For example, I know Rutgers in NJ was invited to be Ivy league but turned it down because they'd have to accept less students. The tagname "Ivy League" came from the Roman numeral for 4, "IV" which if you say it out loud says "Ivy." There were originally 4 colleges in this league during colonial times because those were the only universities there were. I don't buy that an Ivy league school is better than MIT or CalTech, or Middlebury, or NYU, or wherever. Did you know at Brown if you fail a class and retake it they'll take the F off your transcript? spoiled!

 

[sumstorm]

I wasn't offended by your post, and I even agree with you theoretically. I wish they could easily weight programs - that would make it more fair for people in hard ones. I just can't see a way to do that.

The feeling was that people "at the top of the pack" in their school would probably still try to be in that position in vet school, whether they went to a private school, a state university, or community college.

Very good points, and such a concise way to sum up the debate!

I certainly agree with the 'top of the pack.' I attended a consortium school for my last two years of HS. Top students from all over the state (more competitive than vet school, not kidding.) We were actually heavily discouraged from sharing grades, tests were handed back unmarked, with a summary sheet of how you performed, and there was no ranking. If you had more than 1 C in a semester, you returned to your regular HS. The school felt that everyone had already pushed so hard to get in, that enabling competition among students would only lead to problems, including potentially suicide. It did not relieve the stress of pushing hard (which I think all of us would have anyways) but it did shift the focus from 'who is best' to 'how can we help each other' which carried over to our college years; nearly everyone became certified tutors at thier colleges/universities and had reputations for assisting other students. Every person I graduated with at the HS graduated college with honors. So what your relaying makes perfect sense to me.

 

[IvyLynx]

Hmm, well..I thought agreed with the 'top of the pack' statement. I also went to one of those high schools for Jr and Sr year. Top students in the state. Poor grades got you kicked out. Sumstorm, did you not also see a lot of the opposite pattern? A lot of my classmates got burned out. More than one of us has been kicked out for college for GPAs under 1.0. While a lot of the top students are definitely still succeeding, a lot are struggling.

 

[InfiniVet]

Its not true that A&M is "mostly GPA"
They look at the whole package, they really do. I got in with a 3.5 on the first cycle (!), and one of the smartest gals in our class got in with a 3.1 (granted, 3 cycles).

A&M admissions committee is made up of various instructors and veterinarians who have their own experience to judge from. Some went to Ivy league and think of every other education as inferior. Most want to make sure all of your upper level courses are from a University, not a community college. Some think there is nothing wrong with community college at all. Same with experience. Some want 400 hours, some want 4,000. Thats why its a committee. It all gets averaged out.

Thats also why its hard to figure out exactly what they want!

So if you have lower GPA (<3.5), get 1,000's of hours of experience. >3.7 GPA? You probably only need hundreds.

 

[sumstorm]

And if you were accepted to MIT but went somewhere cheaper, I believe there was a place to put that on VMCAS where it asked you what previous colleges you were accepted to, even if you declined. So if that's your gripe, you could have just showed it on VMCAS.

I don't buy that an Ivy league school is better than MIT or CalTech, or Middlebury, or NYU, or wherever. Did you know at Brown if you fail a class and retake it they'll take the F off your transcript? spoiled!

The whole F think amazes me....each school is different. I think my college did grade replacement (I don't remember since I never scored that low in a class) and is another thing that makes schools hard to compare.

I didn't want to list 13 random schools plus those I actually attended (does it really matter to ad-coms what schools offered me a place back in 1997? I wonder how long schools keep records of who was offered admissions? I know none of the colleges I attended have immunization records anymore). Also programs can change ALOT in just a few years. My husband jokes all the time about how he benefits from RPI's improvement in status since he attended. Sometimes school choice isn't about cheaper as much as a better fit. I can't emphasize enough how important it is to attend a school that matches your lifestyle, learning style, and personality for undergrad. For a person coming from a family of HS drop outs, I really needed an undergrad institution that could understand financial and societal pressures (like my parents rather disparaging motto at the time: 'going to college is a lazy person's way of avoiding hard, honest work' though thier attitude is a bit improved now.)

 

[sumstorm]

Hmm, well..I thought agreed with the 'top of the pack' statement. I also went to one of those high schools for Jr and Sr year. Top students in the state. Poor grades got you kicked out. Sumstorm, did you not also see a lot of the opposite pattern? A lot of my classmates got burned out. More than one of us has been kicked out for college for GPAs under 1.0. While a lot of the top students are definitely still succeeding, a lot are struggling.

Really? LOL.... I remember an interesting game of truth or dare with NC's 1996/97 class during a consortium program on environmental impact and climate change.

Actually from my school, every single graduate completed undergrad in 3-5 years with honors (5 years for programs like architecture.) I think the absolute removal of competition helped. Now, we did have the 'butcher's list' of expulsions each semester, which was very hard on everyone. Perform or leave. I don't know what the admissions was like at your school, but ours included a psych evaluation. Oddly enough, my younger cousin (my mother's sister married my father's cousin) is attending now, and has some of the same professors. She looks like a taller thinner version of me, and apparently a lot of the professors have accidently called her my name (we have the same last name.) I feel kind of bad for her. At the same time, I send her monthly packages of goodies to make life a bit easier. We also had a lot of stress management, study skills, leadership training, etc, which may have helped.

All that said, a common comment is 'It seemed like a good idea at the time' and the general feeling on the school is along the line of Frost's 'The Road Not Taken.' I did find that friendships from that school are bizarre with a weird form of co-dependency.

 

[IvyLynx]

I did find that friendships from that school are bizarre with a weird form of co-dependency.

LOL, did we go to the same school?! Going to a place like that never leaves you. I run into alums all the time; there's the obligatory reminiscing.

We didn't have psych evaluations, but I think that would be a good addition! It was really competitive in some aspects, which is why I really hate 'intelligence competitions/debates'. Take your 'omg so and so is soooo smart' or 'how did they get in?' somewhere else. It's old, it's juvenile, and it's really annoying. That's what I saw. It wasn't necessarily academically oriented.

I didn't know that they were adding to the Ivys. It doesn't mean much anyway.

 

[sumstorm]

LOL, did we go to the same school?! Going to a place like that never leaves you. I run into alums all the time; there's the obligatory reminiscing.

We didn't have psych evaluations, but I think that would be a good addition! It was really competitive in some aspects, which is why I really hate 'intelligence competitions/debates'. Take your 'omg so and so is soooo smart' or 'how did they get in?' somewhere else. It's old, it's juvenile, and it's really annoying. That's what I saw. It wasn't necessarily academically oriented.

I have a feeling there is a similar feeling across the consortium schools...I find some kinship with most people I meet who attended those schools. Similar life experiences, I guess. You are certainly right...it never leaves you...and I can say that with (I think) 10 extra years on you.

Our school put in the psych evals after a series of suicides following expulsion. I dislike the 'whose better?' junk as well, because I can almost always guarantee that I can find something that person A does better than person B and something person B does better than person A. I know my own weaknesses and strengths, and figure that is all that matters. I try to figure out what someone's strengths are, then cater to those when trying to help them (ie if they are excellent at dance, I will have a much better time explaining physics concepts using dance than I will using cars.)

Are the students from your school still relatively local? The ones from my school are literally scattered around the world.

 

[absvet]

Cornell's DVM Admissions Formula
25% Overall GPA (all grades from all colleges)
25% GRE (verbal & quantitative only)
5% Quality of Academic Program
20% Animal/Veterinary/Research Experience
(supported with Letters of Evaluation)
10% Non-Cognitive Skills
10% All Other Achievements & Letters of Evaluation
5% Personal Statement

Like it or not, 5% of the "formula" is the quality of the academic program for Cornell. I couldn't find such concrete numbers for Penn, but, no one says exactly how they determine that "quality."

 

[WildlifeSaver]

There's other factors that determine the "academic rigor" of a school besides its reputation. "Big name" schools have big names because they attract a huge amount of applicants every year, and it is tougher to get in. Thus, IN GENERAL the caliber of the students you're competing with for an A is higher than you would get at a community college. I don't think adcoms really compare every single school with every single other school. But I think they note general, perceived differences in quality. For example, I think a Harvard student with Bs is still far better than a community college student with As. I don't think they see students who attended fairly similar colleges as different in quality however. Like Boston College and Boston University or something.
And if you were accepted to MIT but went somewhere cheaper, I believe there was a place to put that on VMCAS where it asked you what previous colleges you were accepted to, even if you declined. So if that's your gripe, you could have just showed it on VMCAS.

By the way, there's really no difference in Ivy league schools and many big universities. For example, I know Rutgers in NJ was invited to be Ivy league but turned it down because they'd have to accept less students. The tagname "Ivy League" came from the Roman numeral for 4, "IV" which if you say it out loud says "Ivy." There were originally 4 colleges in this league during colonial times because those were the only universities there were. I don't buy that an Ivy league school is better than MIT or CalTech, or Middlebury, or NYU, or wherever. Did you know at Brown if you fail a class and retake it they'll take the F off your transcript? spoiled!

I didn't know that about my state school Rutgers. That is kool. I know the competitiveness for that school isn't the same as it use to though. That is one of the reasons I am moving to WI to go to UW Madison which is also a public school, but is a top tier one school. Basically if you go there, you have a shot at any school later if you do well.. There is a difference in rigor of undergrad schools. I been at a CC for some time yet and I have been around a lot of students during summer classes complain about how difficult it is compared to their 4 year school sometimes (esp chem).

One of the ways we figure out if someone got a good education like someone else from a different schools is by standarized test.

Look at the MCAT that is used for deteremination for pre-meds and we have the GRE. At some vet schools a percentage might go towards academic instition? I think it is mostly your gpa and your ECs, LOR..

just as a sidenote i know that many factors go into account accepenteces at schools, but I know penn for instance for determination for acceptances, they give you points in different areas and one of them is if you have a certain "name".

 

[IvyLynx]

I have a feeling there is a similar feeling across the consortium schools...I find some kinship with most people I meet who attended those schools. Similar life experiences, I guess. You are certainly right...it never leaves you...and I can say that with (I think) 10 extra years on you.

Our school put in the psych evals after a series of suicides following expulsion. I dislike the 'whose better?' junk as well, because I can almost always guarantee that I can find something that person A does better than person B and something person B does better than person A. I know my own weaknesses and strengths, and figure that is all that matters. I try to figure out what someone's strengths are, then cater to those when trying to help them (ie if they are excellent at dance, I will have a much better time explaining physics concepts using dance than I will using cars.)

Are the students from your school still relatively local? The ones from my school are literally scattered around the world.

Okay, so the kinship thing isn't just our alums then! and I definitely agree with you on the bolded. I think I would make a good tutor, but I've never tried formally.

Wow, suicides after expulsion? That's so sad. We've had a couple occur during college, but I can't say they were related to high school.

Nope. We're all over too

 

[Beanjamime]

I know certain schools have a reputation for looking more at certain criteria, but honestly I really think it's all just a big guessing game. Looking on SDN these past few months there are some people that seem like they would have been a shoo in for whatever school but don't get accepted while someone else who doesn't seem like they have a great chance gets in. Haha maybe they pull names out of a hat after you meet the bare minimum gpa, gre, and experience. I've been showing my significant other people's posts ever since I joined and he can totally see why I think it's one big crazy game. Doesn't anybody else feel that way? Maybe I'm just crazy but I don't see any logic at all sometimes.

 

[Beanjamime]

Cornell's DVM Admissions Formula
25% Overall GPA (all grades from all colleges)
25% GRE (verbal & quantitative only)
5% Quality of Academic Program
20% Animal/Veterinary/Research Experience
(supported with Letters of Evaluation)
10% Non-Cognitive Skills
10% All Other Achievements & Letters of Evaluation
5% Personal Statement

Like it or not, 5% of the "formula" is the quality of the academic program for Cornell. I couldn't find such concrete numbers for Penn, but, no one says exactly how they determine that "quality."

During their information session Jennifer Mailey said quality of academic program refers to your school's standings in I think Petersons

 

[TSUJC]

I agree with Beanjamime, it is a crap shoot! I was talking with a guy today that just got rejected for the 3rd time. He has vet experience, a good GPA and is almost done with his masters. It sometimes seems like a sick joke!

 

[DocDVMD]

Agreed. The whole process is so arbitrary, and many faculty members/vets in academia agree.

 

[IvyLynx]

^^ ia!

 

[justinpaws]

To touch back on sunnex's point -- while the quality of academic programs may not vary significantly between schools, I do think grade inflation should be taken into consideration. I've honestly taken some classes that are not very difficult (well, compared to o-chem or something), and I did learn a lot and know my subject well. Yet the professor insists that this just isn't good enough, and makes the exams and grading completely ridiculous...like if you don't use his exact wording, you get the whole question wrong (which just seems so dumb to me). Or they throw out some hideous multiple-choice test (I HATE MULTIPLE CHOICE) with ambiguous wording and I do terribly, even if I could tell you every bone, fossa, foramen, and process in a cat's body like nobody's business. So people who are taking these classes might be really well-informed about the subject, but somehow ended up with some crud grade, and that just isn't fair either. I know my school and other high-ranked schools will do this just to make their programs look more challenging than they may truthfully be, and a student's grade really doesn't reflect how well he knows the subject.

That may have come out the wrong way...

 

[sumstorm]

To touch back on sunnex's point -- while the quality of academic programs may not vary significantly between schools, I do think grade inflation should be taken into consideration. I've honestly taken some classes that are not very difficult (well, compared to o-chem or something), and I did learn a lot and know my subject well. Yet the professor insists that this just isn't good enough, and makes the exams and grading completely ridiculous...like if you don't use his exact wording, you get the whole question wrong (which just seems so dumb to me). Or they throw out some hideous multiple-choice test (I HATE MULTIPLE CHOICE) with ambiguous wording and I do terribly, even if I could tell you every bone, fossa, foramen, and process in a cat's body like nobody's business. So people who are taking these classes might be really well-informed about the subject, but somehow ended up with some crud grade, and that just isn't fair either. I know my school and other high-ranked schools will do this just to make their programs look more challenging than they may truthfully be, and a student's grade really doesn't reflect how well he knows the subject.

That may have come out the wrong way...

How should the vet schools determine which schools inflate grades and which don't? Or which programs? Or which professors?

 

[hopefulvet21]

By showing the median or mode grade for each class on the transcript. That could allow comparison of the individual student's grade to how well the class did. It would help for comparison of students within the same college at least, but not necessarily between colleges. Not saying we should, it's just a possibility.

 

[hopefulvet21]

If anything, I can see weighting the importance of the GRE much more than GPA. At least in that case, everyone is taking the same test (although there is room to argue about financially better-off students being able to afford more test prep classes).

If that happens, I will jump off the nearest bridge. The GRE has time and time again been shown to be a very poor indicator of success in any graduate school. ETS is a corporation just trying to take people's money. If they really wanted a measure of how "smart" everyone was, why not have us take an IQ test instead?! Or the MCAT?

 

[sumstorm]

By showing the median or mode grade for each class on the transcript. That could allow comparison of the individual student's grade to how well the class did. It would help for comparison of students within the same college at least, but not necessarily between colleges. Not saying we should, it's just a possibility.

You just pointed out the problem; it lets you compare BETWEEN students in the SAME school.

I doubt anyone else from my undergrad applied to any of the vet schools I did...and even if they did, our class grades (and thus the medians/modes would be 10 years apart.)

There just isn't a simple and efficient way to do it.

As for GRE's, the studies go both ways on whether it is more or less effective than GPA.

A better use of time would be to study the causes and reasons for vet students dropping/failing out....and compare successful candidates to determine what is consistent, and then do a series of post graduate studies (5y, 10y, 20y, etc) to determine effectiveness/commitment to the field down the road. Still tedious and expensive, but probably easier than trying to deal with the changing compositions of schools/classes/grades/professors/programs.

GRE subject tests might be a possability. Not sure anyone would want to do all the ones that would be required to cover the major pre-reqs. I would be fine with MCATs as well....but then again, I despise the GRE CAT.

 

[justinpaws]

I think what hopefulvet means is that all class stats are made available for adcoms, not that you are only compared to other people from your school who are applying. The latter would clearly not work.

As to answer your earlier question, this is where school rankings come in. What do you think the point of having a ranking system is, in general? Can you honestly say someone would earn the same GPA at Harvard than he would at a tier 4 school? My friend had a 4.0 for three years from a Cal State before he transferred to my university, now he gets all Cs and a few Bs. On the other hand another friend had a very low GPA from Amherst and he got into Davis and Cornell. There's a discrepancy, even if you can't see it, but apparently some vet schools take that into consideration.

 

[hopefulvet21]

You just pointed out the problem; it lets you compare BETWEEN students in the SAME school.

I doubt anyone else from my undergrad applied to any of the vet schools I did...and even if they did, our class grades (and thus the medians/modes would be 10 years apart.)

There just isn't a simple and efficient way to do it.

As for GRE's, the studies go both ways on whether it is more or less effective than GPA.

Yes, that's what I said, it lets you compare students in the same school. I don't think that's a problem. Maybe at YOUR undergrad no one applied to the same schools you did, but that's not true for other undergrads. And if your grades were 10 years apart, there would be different median grades each of those years. So say you got an A in some class and the median was a C. Another person from your undergrad got an A in that class and the median was an A. You would look like a better student for that class.

And I didn't say I was comparing the GRE to GPA as an indicator of success in graduate school. I was comparing the GRE to MCAT or IQ tests instead. I think those would be better tests to take than the GRE, and more relevant.

Also, I bet a lot of those studies which "go the other way" were done by ETS or companies they paid. Always beware of studies that may have a political or marketing agenda behind them. (As another example, studies that try to show global warming is not real.)