Which schools place more value on MCAT than GPA?

[neopentanol]

As an third round applicant with a 38 MCAT and 3.32 GPA, I want to make my school selections very carefully. I know that profile matching is an important part of increasing chances, so does anyone know what schools put more emphasis on the MCAT score, and have a midrange or lower mean GPA?
Thanks...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[gotmeds?]

Where's armybound when you need him?

 

[boo-yeh]

Just one off the top of my head is Tufts. I think they have one of the lowest BCPM GPA's in the country (and average overall GPA) while having like a 33 or 34 average MCAT.

 

[foreverLaur]

Sorry this isn't in response isn't useful to anyone - but I just want to subscribe because I need to hear the answers to this threat I have the same situation.

 

[UnderdogMD]

As an third round applicant with a 38 MCAT and 3.32 GPA, I want to make my school selections very carefully. I know that profile matching is an important part of increasing chances, so does anyone know what schools put more emphasis on the MCAT score, and have a midrange or lower mean GPA?
Thanks...

You say this is your 3rd time applying. Would you mind posting which schools showed you some love (interviews) with those stats. My stats are almost exactly the same. I am applying this cycle and I basically applied to schools with the lowest GPAs and disregarded their mcat scores.

 

[deleted103644]

I can't remember who it is, but someone has as one of their quotes "With your MCAT, you could list 'serial killer' as a hobby and still get into Wash U"

Rumor is, Wustl loves high MCAT scores. Your GPA may be too low for them though. And if you're a third round app, you've probably taken the MCATs three times and schools will put less weight on your most recent scores.

 

[Funky]

Where's armybound when you need him?

We need armybound's avatar

 

[Decicco]

How about schools that favor GPA to MCAT. Know any of those?

 

[TheRealMD]

How about schools that favor GPA to MCAT. Know any of those?

I would guess fewer, because GPA isn't standardized. A 3.4 at Harvard is MUCH better than a 3.4 at StateU, and I don't think anyone is really going to argue that. But, to try to equate that to a point system where it can be consistently applied is akin to the UMich undergrad scandal and their point system.

 

[foreverLaur]

We need armybound's avatar

ahha i just caught that

 

[crazy_cavalier]

A 3.4 at Harvard is MUCH better than a 3.4 at StateU, and I don't think anyone is really going to argue that.

That's a crock of ****. If I saw a 3.4 from a person at an institution notoriously known for grade inflation, I wouldnt jump to the conclusion that it were better than one from StateU. And before you make a smartass comment, I'd also like to mention that I dont really care to hear what someone with a screen-name like "TheRealMD" has to say.

 

[searun]

I can't remember who it is, but someone has as one of their quotes "With your MCAT, you could list 'serial killer' as a hobby and still get into Wash U"

Rumor is, Wustl loves high MCAT scores. Your GPA may be too low for them though. And if you're a third round app, you've probably taken the MCATs three times and schools will put less weight on your most recent scores.

I think that Wash U is a gpa ***** as well as an MCAT *****! Both gpa and MCAT at Wash U are the highest in the nation. The nerd factor is off the charts. Pocket protectors are high fashion.

 

[TheRealMD]

That's a crock of ****. If I saw a 3.4 from a person at an institution notoriously known for grade inflation, I wouldnt jump to the conclusion that it were better than one from StateU. And before you make a smartass comment, I'd also like to mention that I dont really care to hear what someone with a screen-name like "TheRealMD" has to say.

It doesn't really matter what I think. It's what adcoms think. Believe what you will.

 

[neopentanol]

I can't remember who it is, but someone has as one of their quotes "With your MCAT, you could list 'serial killer' as a hobby and still get into Wash U"

Rumor is, Wustl loves high MCAT scores. Your GPA may be too low for them though. And if you're a third round app, you've probably taken the MCATs three times and schools will put less weight on your most recent scores.

Nope, took it once. Combination of low gpa, plus applying late has kept me out for two rounds...

Thanks for the responses guys, I will def look into Tufts and WashU. Any others?

 

[searun]

Nope, took it once. Combination of low gpa, plus applying late has kept me out for two rounds...

Thanks for the responses guys, I will def look into Tufts and WashU. Any others?

No, don't waste your money on Wash U - the average gpa is just under 3.9...the highest in the country. You need about a 3.86 and a 38 MCAT just to get their attention, the MCAT alone will not cut it. Your gpa is too low for Wash U...focus on better prospects for you.

Also, why in god's name did you apply late TWICE? Don't make this fatal mistake a third time if you want to be a doctor. Good luck and get the damn application in now.

 

[whoisthedrizzle]

I can't remember who it is, but someone has as one of their quotes "With your MCAT, you could list 'serial killer' as a hobby and still get into Wash U"

Rumor is, Wustl loves high MCAT scores. Your GPA may be too low for them though. And if you're a third round app, you've probably taken the MCATs three times and schools will put less weight on your most recent scores.

You sir are the first person on SDN to make me lol

Congrats

 

[pazan]

It doesn't really matter what I think. It's what adcoms think. Believe what you will.

are you an adcom? because, if not, please don't tell us what they think... they don't need 18 and 19 year olds putting words in their mouth.

from personal experience, and from attending a large public school (one in the top 25 on US News), i can tell you that getting a 3.4 at a state university can be much harder than some private schools. grade-cutoffs are a powerful thing and i dont think harvard or a lot of top tier private schools have them. Many public schools will only give 10 - 20% As and 30 - 40% Bs in the pre-req courses. granted, i think the competition is stiffer at top tier privates, so grade inflation probably keeps the suicide rate down.

 

[TheRealMD]

are you an adcom? because, if not, please don't tell us what they think... they don't need 18 and 19 year olds putting words in their mouth.

from personal experience, and from attending a large public school (one in the top 25 on US News), i can tell you that getting a 3.4 at a state university can be much harder than some private schools. grade-cutoffs are a powerful thing and i dont think harvard or a lot of top tier private schools have them. Many public schools will only give 10 - 20% As and 30 - 40% Bs in the pre-req courses. granted, i think the competition is stiffer at top tier privates, so grade inflation probably keeps the suicide rate down.

-_-

What does age have to do with this?

 

[sillydoc2230]

are you an adcom? because, if not, please don't tell us what they think... they don't need 18 and 19 year olds putting words in their mouth.

from personal experience, and from attending a large public school (one in the top 25 on US News), i can tell you that getting a 3.4 at a state university can be much harder than some private schools. grade-cutoffs are a powerful thing and i dont think harvard or a lot of top tier private schools have them. Many public schools will only give 10 - 20% As and 30 - 40% Bs in the pre-req courses. granted, i think the competition is stiffer at top tier privates, so grade inflation probably keeps the suicide rate down.

Having gone to a school that everyone assumes is highly grade inflated, I can tell you that this so called grade inflation and unlimited A's per class only happens in humanities classes. All my science, engineering, and even econ classes had the same, if not lower percentages, of people getting high grades. These days, transcripts from these schools put %A's given in the specific class next to the grade to show you if it was an inflated class. So please, it's hard to get good grades everywhere. This topic has been done to death on SDN, so let's just leave it at that and answer the flipping OP's question.

To answer the OP, WashU is an overall grade *****, apply there at your own risk. I think just applying broadly and right NOW (i.e. early) should give you improved chances at a lot of schools.

 

[neopentanol]

Having gone to a school that everyone assumes is highly grade inflated, I can tell you that this so called grade inflation and unlimited A's per class only happens in humanities classes. All my science, engineering, and even econ classes had the same, if not lower percentages, of people getting high grades. These days, transcripts from these schools put %A's given in the specific class next to the grade to show you if it was an inflated class. So please, it's hard to get good grades everywhere. This topic has been done to death on SDN, so let's just leave it at that and answer the flipping OP's question.

To answer the OP, WashU is an overall grade *****, apply there at your own risk. I think just applying broadly and right NOW (i.e. early) should give you improved chances at a lot of schools.

What if I apply mid-July, since I am waiting for my fee assistance program to be approved?

 

[Non-TradTulsa]

As an third round applicant with a 38 MCAT and 3.32 GPA, I want to make my school selections very carefully. I know that profile matching is an important part of increasing chances, so does anyone know what schools put more emphasis on the MCAT score, and have a midrange or lower mean GPA?
Thanks...

I think your success at applying is going to depend on how you tackle the elephant-in-the-living-room - probably need to deal with it head-on, in your essay and in interviews.

I honestly salute your 38 - that's fantastic. But, unless you had an illness or some other life event, the truth is your GPA and MCAT are out of sync, and that's a red flag - I think your MCAT score might even make your GPA look worse, because it raises the question, "why didn't this guy/gal do better?"

Being smart in medical school is a tremendous asset, no doubt about that. However, medical school is an incredible amount of work in a very short time. You need incredible persistence and determination and a willingness to put most of your life on hold while you study. Organizational skills are also needed because you'll be trying to manage such a huge volume of material. Being smart just isn't enough to get you through - you also have to be able to work like a pack mule.

My advice would be to worry less about school-shopping and try to tackle the question that any adcom is going to have - what are you going to do differently to succeed? Not that a 3.32 is anything to be ashamed of, but that's the wonderful world of med school admissions.

 

[Nasrudin]

I think your success at applying is going to depend on how you tackle the elephant-in-the-living-room - probably need to deal with it head-on, in your essay and in interviews.

I honestly salute your 38 - that's fantastic. But, unless you had an illness or some other life event, the truth is your GPA and MCAT are out of sync, and that's a red flag - I think your MCAT score might even make your GPA look worse, because it raises the question, "why didn't this guy/gal do better?"

Being smart in medical school is a tremendous asset, no doubt about that. However, medical school is an incredible amount of work in a very short time. You need incredible persistence and determination and a willingness to put most of your life on hold while you study. Organizational skills are also needed because you'll be trying to manage such a huge volume of material. Being smart just isn't enough to get you through - you also have to be able to work like a pack mule.

My advice would be to worry less about school-shopping and try to tackle the question that any adcom is going to have - what are you going to do differently to succeed? Not that a 3.32 is anything to be ashamed of, but that's the wonderful world of med school admissions.

I agree with you but in a sense I would add that I think the overall gpa is contextual whereas the MCAT is an absolute potential indicator and therefore could, in the right context be a more insightful measure.

For example, I have a 3.4-3.4 cum. But My first attempt 10 years ago was a 2.7 and now for the last 3-years I've got a 3.98.

To me gpa is a measure of the guy who shows up to work on time with his hair combed with the appropriate attire who goes about doing his job. This is to me not difficult and requires only a modicum of motivation.

Now, I've started perusing some MCAT materials and doing some passages and, I'll tell you straight up, a 38 to me, meanss unbelievable talent and mastery.

I'm really not that impressed with a young college ace that has a 4.0 unless they have other interesting qualities. I'm no adcom but I would speculate that they look at these things in context and that an MCAT could indeed be a more powerful indicator.

 

[odddodo]

A high GPA may not be the most standardized measure, but it is often just as telling as an MCAT score; by your same analogy, someone with a low GPA and a high MCAT would be the office worker who does a great job occasionally but never shows up to work when the company needs him.

I don't mean any personal attack here, but your writing off the GPA like that irritates me. I would benefit if what you said were true (I myself have a low GPA, high MCAT), but the GPA is a solid indicator of consistent performance through time.

I agree with you but in a sense I would add that I think the overall gpa is contextual whereas the MCAT is an absolute potential indicator and therefore could, in the right context be a more insightful measure.

For example, I have a 3.4-3.4 cum. But My first attempt 10 years ago was a 2.7 and now for the last 3-years I've got a 3.98.

To me gpa is a measure of the guy who shows up to work on time with his hair combed with the appropriate attire who goes about doing his job. This is to me not difficult and requires only a modicum of motivation.

Now, I've started perusing some MCAT materials and doing some passages and, I'll tell you straight up, a 38 to me, meanss unbelievable talent and mastery.

I'm really not that impressed with a young college ace that has a 4.0 unless they have other interesting qualities. I'm no adcom but I would speculate that they look at these things in context and that an MCAT could indeed be a more powerful indicator.

 

[Non-TradTulsa]

I'd agree with you on some of your points, Nasrudin. A 38 is darned impressive. However, as a newly-minted MS-II (and a non-trad like you), I stand with my original thesis that potential isn't worth squat if you don't apply yourself. Medical school is just like anything else - showing up on time with hair combed in appropriate attire is 90% of it, and adcoms do indeed place a lot of weight on a proven ability to do that - because it's a key indicator of the necessary maturity.

Actually, for some reason, I gave this thread some additional thought while I was off doing something else. A 3.32 isn't that bad - the more I think about it, I wonder what else is going on.

Neopentanol, you're going through your third admissions cycle and obviously have had to go to a lot of expense and heartache. I think you need to open your checkbook one more time and hire a good, reputable admissions consultant - somebody like Judy Colwell who moderates the forums at examkrackers. For most good candidates, admissions consultants are a huge waste of money - but I think there must be something in your app that you aren't seeing. Have you followed-up with schools that didn't take you to see what the problem was? Did they mention anything besides GPA? I'm wondering if your essay is problematic or if you're blowing your interviews or what. I'd hire somebody who knows the ropes to help you. Good luck!

 

[HristosKaran]

How is the trend in your GPA?? If it has a strong upward trend, I think you should be competative at most schools. A 38 on the MCAT shows amazing talent and understanding of material under extreme pressure. That is in the top 5% of those who take the MCAT correct? Did you have a 38 the last two years you applied, or is this your most recent score? Anyways, I def. think you should be able to get in somewhere with those scores. Make sure the rest of your app. is solid!

 

[Nasrudin]

A high GPA may not be the most standardized measure, but it is often just as telling as an MCAT score; by your same analogy, someone with a low GPA and a high MCAT would be the office worker who does a great job occasionally but never shows up to work when the company needs him.

I don't mean any personal attack here, but your writing off the GPA like that irritates me. I would benefit if what you said were true (I myself have a low GPA, high MCAT), but the GPA is a solid indicator of consistent performance through time.

I don't mean any offense. I'm the guy in the front,in class 10 minutes before start time with my tape recorder an the whole deal. I pride myself on consistency and diligence. I am only saying that the MCAT is a powerful tool. And I feel it revels more about the intellect than the gpa.

But your arguments hold the higher field because what you guys say is true--most of it is about showing up on time etc.

In terms of the OP's question. I heard anecdotal evidence that Tulane looks at high MCAT low gpa candidates seriously.

 

[neopentanol]

I don't mean any offense. I'm the guy in the front,in class 10 minutes before start time with my tape recorder an the whole deal. I pride myself on consistency and diligence. I am only saying that the MCAT is a powerful tool. And I feel it revels more about the intellect than the gpa.

But your arguments hold the higher field because what you guys say is true--most of it is about showing up on time etc.

In terms of the OP's question. I heard anecdotal evidence that Tulane looks at high MCAT low gpa candidates seriously.

That sort of diligence and consistency will take you far, and its something that I've always lacked. I wonder if it is a skill I can learn, or if its genetic, because no matter how hard I try I can't seem to get over my lazy habits, and I admire the people who can apply themselves fully on an everyday basis to the tasks they have to do, without procrastination, without distraction, and with complete focus.

Tulane is on my list, thanks.

PS: Nasrudin, are you Persian?

 

[Non-TradTulsa]

That sort of diligence and consistency will take you far, and its something that I've always lacked. I wonder if it is a skill I can learn, or if its genetic, because no matter how hard I try I can't seem to get over my lazy habits, and I admire the people who can apply themselves fully on an everyday basis to the tasks they have to do, without procrastination, without distraction, and with complete focus.

Wow. Cool. Somebody who's not in denial. Neopentanol, just take that level of honesty into your interviews - be willing to tell them what they already know - but tell them you recognize the problem and are determined to change - and you'll do really well. I actually have a lot of sympathy for you - I wasn't like Nasrudin, I was like you - I was very smart and could get by almost anything in a slow walk when everyone else was running. My first semester of medical school almost killed me - now I'm OK and usually enjoy school - but, boy, did I have to change my ways fast!! The MCAT is a very tough test that stretches your mind to the limit - but, truth is, medical school is honestly not that tough - there are very few concepts that you won't understand completely the first time you see them - the trick to medical school is that the volume of material is absolutely overwhelming (at my school: the equivalent of 27 graduate hours in the first semester) and dedication, organization, and staying current are the keys to survival!

 

[foreverLaur]

That sort of diligence and consistency will take you far, and its something that I've always lacked. I wonder if it is a skill I can learn, or if its genetic, because no matter how hard I try I can't seem to get over my lazy habits, and I admire the people who can apply themselves fully on an everyday basis to the tasks they have to do, without procrastination, without distraction, and with complete focus.

Tulane is on my list, thanks.

PS: Nasrudin, are you Persian?

if you find you can learn it, let me know.

 

[Nasrudin]

That sort of diligence and consistency will take you far, and its something that I've always lacked. I wonder if it is a skill I can learn, or if its genetic, because no matter how hard I try I can't seem to get over my lazy habits, and I admire the people who can apply themselves fully on an everyday basis to the tasks they have to do, without procrastination, without distraction, and with complete focus.

Tulane is on my list, thanks.

PS: Nasrudin, are you Persian?

Yeah. I have one small advantage over my younger less focused colleagues in that I know what its like to to work 60 hours a week at a mindless job and seeing your life going no where. You'd be surprised how that actually makes the game of getting school work done kind of fun. You could say I'm a addicted to learning and striving now because I've lived my whole 20's without it. So for me school work diligence is more like playing a fun game--i relaize i'm risking sounding pretty nerdy but its true.

No I'm not Persian. But I am an amateur student of the great works of Persian and Islamic literature. The comic hero Nasrudin and his many exploits reminds me not to take my worldly journey to serious which is my tendency--so the name was used for that purpose.

If I hear of any schools' criteria that fit your profile I'll post it.

 

[foreverLaur]

Yeah. I have one small advantage over my younger less focused colleagues in that I know what its like to to work 60 hours a week at a mindless job and seeing your life going no where. You'd be surprised how that actually makes the game of getting school work done kind of fun. You could say I'm a addicted to learning and striving now because I've lived my whole 20's without it. So for me school work diligence is more like playing a fun game--i relaize i'm risking sounding pretty nerdy but its true.

No I'm not Persian. But I am an amateur student of the great works of Persian and Islamic literature. The comic hero Nasrudin and his many exploits reminds me not to take my worldly journey to serious which is my tendency--so the name was used for that purpose.

If I hear of any schools' criteria that fit your profile I'll post it.

It is amazing how quickly you'll learn that. I'm spending my summer doing audit for one of the Big 4 (prior accounting major) and it has done nothing but make me dread going to work and cement my choice to switch majors.

I am on health care clients who have a June 30 year end and I work 8am - 10pm seven days a week. Thank goodness they don't hover so I can take the occasional break on here. I'd kill to be studying right now

 

[SAspursfan]

I'm in a similar situation as the OP, except both my GPA (3.16) and MCAT (35) are a tad bit lower. However, I do have the benefit of earning a 4.0 GPA for the past two and a half years, in which I took essentially all my pre-reqs except the gen chems and bio 1. So what do Adcoms think when they see someone like me? I've proven both my intellect and diligence, so should the crappy grades I got as a transitioning business major 3-5 years ago really negate this? Or is it just a matter of the schools noticing this?

 

[TheRealMD]

What kind of GPA did you have in the earlier years of your undergrad if you only have a 3.16 now? That must be a really strong upward trend!

 

[MChitty]

Yeah. I have one small advantage over my younger less focused colleagues in that I know what its like to to work 60 hours a week at a mindless job and seeing your life going no where. You'd be surprised how that actually makes the game of getting school work done kind of fun. You could say I'm a addicted to learning and striving now because I've lived my whole 20's without it. So for me school work diligence is more like playing a fun game--i relaize i'm risking sounding pretty nerdy but its true.

No I'm not Persian. But I am an amateur student of the great works of Persian and Islamic literature. The comic hero Nasrudin and his many exploits reminds me not to take my worldly journey to serious which is my tendency--so the name was used for that purpose.

If I hear of any schools' criteria that fit your profile I'll post it.

It is amazing how quickly you'll learn that. I'm spending my summer doing audit for one of the Big 4 (prior accounting major) and it has done nothing but make me dread going to work and cement my choice to switch majors.

I am on health care clients who have a June 30 year end and I work 8am - 10pm seven days a week. Thank goodness they don't hover so I can take the occasional break on here. I'd kill to be studying right now

This is SO true. I'm aching to go back to school, though when I graduated from college, I was dying to get out. In fact, I'm sitting at my mindless, numbing job right now! Luckily, I only usually work a 40 hour work week--but it feels like 80!

 

[neopentanol]

I'm in a similar situation as the OP, except both my GPA (3.16) and MCAT (35) are a tad bit lower. However, I do have the benefit of earning a 4.0 GPA for the past two and a half years, in which I took essentially all my pre-reqs except the gen chems and bio 1. So what do Adcoms think when they see someone like me? I've proven both my intellect and diligence, so should the crappy grades I got as a transitioning business major 3-5 years ago really negate this? Or is it just a matter of the schools noticing this?

I think you're in a pretty good boat as far as ADCOMS are concerned. 4.0 for 2 and a half years is as strong an upward trend as you can get! Also, for the majority of schools (not Ivy's), I think they see 35 and up as all the same.

 

[SAspursfan]

Thanks for the encouragement... I just hope all the Adcoms out there will look this far into my application! Did you have an upward trend as well?

 

[SAspursfan]

What kind of GPA did you have in the earlier years of your undergrad if you only have a 3.16 now? That must be a really strong upward trend!

I had a 2.2 for my first two years... mostly business classes, but there were also a few science classes thrown in as well, which is why my BCPM GPA is also about 3.16. The first two science courses I took were gen chem 1 and calc 1, and I failed both of them. Then I got a few more C's before starting my straight-A streak. It's still amazes me how a few crappy grades can totally destroy your GPA!

But the reality is, I have been a 4.0 GPA and 35 MCAT applicant for the past 2 and a half years... so should all that other crap even matter?

 

[LifetimeDoc]

I had a 2.2 for my first two years... mostly business classes, but there were also a few science classes thrown in as well, which is why my BCPM GPA is also about 3.16. The first two science courses I took were gen chem 1 and calc 1, and I failed both of them. Then I got a few more C's before starting my straight-A streak. It's still amazes me how a few crappy grades can totally destroy your GPA!

But the reality is, I have been a 4.0 GPA and 35 MCAT applicant for the past 2 and a half years... so should all that other crap even matter?

I'd say it won't matter to most schools since you have proven you can get a 4.0 and can score in the top 5-7% of MCAT takers.

 

[Celestron2000]

In response to the OP...
I was in a similar situation when I applied to med school.
I had been out of school for 3 years doing research,
brought my GPA up to about the same level doing my med school pre-recs post-bac, and got a 38 MCAT.
I did very well on the verbal.

Obviously, I was admitted to Jeff (not even wait listed) and also my state school. I was offered an interview at NYCOM which I turned down after admission to Jeff and UK.

So try Jeff, I think they might show MCAT love, but I've heard that what they really like is a great verbal score.

APPLY EARLY!!!

and good luck.

 

[Celestron2000]

...
Also, my brother applied w/ similar stats in the same round.
He applied about a month later at Jefferson, and wasn't even offered an interview.
However he is now at the top of his class at University of Kentucky Medical School.

Don't worry it's doable, just apply extensively and early.

 

[SAspursfan]

Anyone else know of any schools that are all about the MCAT?

 

[batman1983]

Having gone to a school that everyone assumes is highly grade inflated, I can tell you that this so called grade inflation and unlimited A's per class only happens in humanities classes. All my science, engineering, and even econ classes had the same, if not lower percentages, of people getting high grades. These days, transcripts from these schools put %A's given in the specific class next to the grade to show you if it was an inflated class. So please, it's hard to get good grades everywhere. This topic has been done to death on SDN, so let's just leave it at that and answer the flipping OP's question.

To answer the OP, WashU is an overall grade *****, apply there at your own risk. I think just applying broadly and right NOW (i.e. early) should give you improved chances at a lot of schools.

I think I probably might have the best experience about the debate on school difficulty. I have to concur that unless you go to UC Berkeley or Uni of Virginia (Im not sure, but I think that is a state school), a 3.4 at Harvard or any Ivy is probably more difficult than at a state school. I graduated from Cal with 3.6 in Biology, and took an extra semester of classes at San Francisco State for interest and to help boost the GPA. Compared to Berkeley, SFSU, which is probably representative of most state schools, was a joke. I was able to take 5 bio courses (18 units) and work fulltime (40-50 hrs/week), and still get a 4.0, while at Cal, I would be lucky to get B+/A- average taking 2 bio courses a semester. Even with grade inflation, I am willing to bet all the gold in fort knox that Harvard or any other top prestigious school is more difficult than most state schools.

 

[Steiner]

As an third round applicant with a 38 MCAT and 3.32 GPA, I want to make my school selections very carefully. I know that profile matching is an important part of increasing chances, so does anyone know what schools put more emphasis on the MCAT score, and have a midrange or lower mean GPA?
Thanks...

I had a similar situation as you. Low GPA, high MCAT, and applied 3 times. The school I was accepted at seemed to place a more significant amount of weight on MCAT than GPA. Someone got accepted this round with ~2.8 GPA & high MCAT. Besides my school I would check out the private schools other than the Harvards & Yales. Creighton, Louisville, Tulane, Loyola, Cornell, Dartmouth, Tufts, Boston, etc....

 

[Gospe1]

To all you people who were discussing grade inflation at ivy league universities. A friend of mine did his thesis on grade inflation at one of the ives. Basically, he found that although there was serious grade inflation in some majors such as fine arts, theater & dance with an average GPA of around 3.8, most science majors were un-inflated. That is, the average GPA of bio, chem, and physics was 3.35, 3.3, 3.1 respectively. I'm willing to bet a considerable amount of money that med schools are aware of this, since many committee members are, in fact, graduates of such schools. Basically, people get what they earn at these schools. Also, take into the fact that you have serious competition, even if its more mental than grade-wise.

 

[mdm2fly]

To all you people who were discussing grade inflation at ivy league universities. A friend of mine did his thesis on grade inflation at one of the ives. Basically, he found that although there was serious grade inflation in some majors such as fine arts, theater & dance with an average GPA of around 3.8, most science majors were un-inflated. That is, the average GPA of bio, chem, and physics was 3.35, 3.3, 3.1 respectively. I'm willing to bet a considerable amount of money that med schools are aware of this, since many committee members are, in fact, graduates of such schools. Basically, people get what they earn at these schools. Also, take into the fact that you have serious competition, even if its more mental than grade-wise.

a 3.35 and 3.3 are b+ averages, and a 3.1 is just above a b average. that sounds like grade inflation to me. i would consider an un-inflated average to be a 2.0/c.

i go to a good state school. my class lectures contain 120-200 students per class. in one of my freshman classes, i found out that half of the students (including me) decided to reject at least one ivy school to be closer to home, pay less, family health issues, etc. does that mean that, in this case, 75 students that could have gone to an ivy should be averaged on an ivy scale? 75 students is a lot more than the number of students i saw in some ivy school classes i visited.

it is understandable that with less students, and with so many of them being competitive, that the school would give higher grades overall because they sort of feel bad for the students, but i feel, call me idealistic, that you should go to a competitive school because you like the competition and because you feel like you would thrive in that sort of environment, and that grades should be given based on a true c average. adcomms will then be able to make their own judgments, since, as you wrote yourself, most of them come from ivies and will judge accordingly.

 

[coralfangs]

see, here we have that same classic argument again.

and trust me, there IS no inflation
u have to understand that the student bodies ENTERING those ivy leagues are generally "SMARTER" (at least smarter at taking exams), there is nothing wrong for them to have higher averages

the best example is my undergrad school, university of toronto
we have 3 campuses: st george, mississauga, and scarborough (basically 3 different schools with the same name)
sometimes, the averages at mississauga and scarborough are LOWER, and the kids would complain that we have it easy at st george campus
however, a prof happens to teach a pharmacology course to TWO SCHOOLS (st george and mississauga), he decides to teach the SAME material, give the SAME lecture slide/handout, and administrate the SAME exams
however, the average in the mississauga class is CONSTANTLY 10-15% lower than the average in the st george class (one probable explanation: the entrance requirement for the st george campus is around 85% while the requirement for the mississauga campus is around 75%)

so those kids who complain at the mississauga would still get the same average if they were to be at the so-called "grade-inflating" campus

a 3.35 and 3.3 are b+ averages, and a 3.1 is just above a b average. that sounds like grade inflation to me. i would consider an un-inflated average to be a 2.0/c.

i go to a good state school. my class lectures contain 120-200 students per class. in one of my freshman classes, i found out that half of the students (including me) decided to reject at least one ivy school to be closer to home, pay less, family health issues, etc. does that mean that, in this case, 75 students that could have gone to an ivy should be averaged on an ivy scale? 75 students is a lot more than the number of students i saw in some ivy school classes i visited.

it is understandable that with less students, and with so many of them being competitive, that the school would give higher grades overall because they sort of feel bad for the students, but i feel, call me idealistic, that you should go to a competitive school because you like the competition and because you feel like you would thrive in that sort of environment, and that grades should be given based on a true c average. adcomms will then be able to make their own judgments, since, as you wrote yourself, most of them come from ivies and will judge accordingly.

 

[Captain Nemo]

As pointless as this debate is, I couldn't resist jumping into the discussion. First, I generally agree with the above poster. The caliber of students entering the "ivies" (and I use "ivies" here to denote any highly competitive, research-intensive national university) is on a whole more academically talented and accomplished than that of an average state school. To deny this is a little stubborn and close-minded I think. To the poster who commented that a random sampling of a class revealed that he/she and 74 other classmates turned down "at least one ivy" to attend a state school, I would guess then that you attend one of the very good above-average state schools, i.e. UMich, UVA, UCLA, Berkeley, UNC, etc. I would say on the whole, these comments don't really apply to students at those schools, as they attract a strong caliber of students and provide a rigorous education.

The Valedictorians and Salutatorians at my HS who had captained state championship teams, composed 4-string quartet pieces, and performed nuclear engineering research went to Princeton, Stanford and Harvard. These are the types of students those schools attract, so imagine the academic competition that results from grouping all these students used to being high achievers into a single class. I would argue that the resulting academic work is of a high grade, but also that what is needed to distinguish oneself, getting an A for example, is more stringent. Therefore an A at Yale should mean more than an A at random State U. Think big fish in little pond moving to an ocean, where the big fish needs to excel even more in some way to survive.

All this is definitely not to say high-achieving, brilliant students can't be found at any State U. I would just posit the idea that at the "ivies" they're more common, which increases the overall quality of the work performed by the students and the difficulty in attaining distinguishing marks. I think people become defensive on here, because no one wants to be told, even in only an insinuating manner that their school is not as good as some other school or that their hard-earned GPA at another school would be worth less.

 

[limpkitty]

I don't buy the grade inflation story, it seems to me that students today just put forth much more effort than they used to. But, it's important to realize that it's everybit as hard to get an A at most (good) state schools as it it in ivies. Virtually every science class I've taken, the average is set at a C and only 10% or so get A's. Hell, in my physics class, you had to get 100% on some exams to get an A on the test.

 

[SAspursfan]

Of course the average Ivy league student is more academically capable than the average state student... I hope that isn't actually being argued. However, the argument that an Ivy league student's A should be worth more than a state student's is absolutely nauseating. What about the fact that the typical Ivy league student comes from a wealthier family than the typical state student, and therefore may not have to work throughout college? Or the fact that the Ivy league schools employ more prestigious professors, who might be able to teach a given amount of material better than a professor at a state school? Should we factor these things into the equation?

The answer, of course, is no. Every student in every class shares a common goal: to earn an A. Either you accomplish this goal, or you don't. There are tough classes at Ivy league schools, and there are tough classes at state schools... if you think there are more tough classes at your Ivy league school, then tough ****. You decided to go there. Don't complain and say that you deserve more credit for your A-minus than some kid who had a 99% average in his state school's organic class but couldn't afford the tuition to be "challenged" more at your private school.

 

[SAspursfan]

The "big fish in a little pond" analogy falls flat when you realize that ALL of us are eventually released into the same big ocean: applying to medical school. Personally, I think a student surrounded by the "Valedictorians and Salutatorians" you mention has a huge advantage compared to the student surrounded by Joe Shmoe for this very reason. He knows how steep the competition is, and therefore works much harder. So would it be fair to conclude that the successful state student is more self-motivated than the successful Ivy league student?

As pointless as this debate is, I couldn't resist jumping into the discussion. First, I generally agree with the above poster. The caliber of students entering the "ivies" (and I use "ivies" here to denote any highly competitive, research-intensive national university) is on a whole more academically talented and accomplished than that of an average state school. To deny this is a little stubborn and close-minded I think. To the poster who commented that a random sampling of a class revealed that he/she and 74 other classmates turned down "at least one ivy" to attend a state school, I would guess then that you attend one of the very good above-average state schools, i.e. UMich, UVA, UCLA, Berkeley, UNC, etc. I would say on the whole, these comments don't really apply to students at those schools, as they attract a strong caliber of students and provide a rigorous education.

The Valedictorians and Salutatorians at my HS who had captained state championship teams, composed 4-string quartet pieces, and performed nuclear engineering research went to Princeton, Stanford and Harvard. These are the types of students those schools attract, so imagine the academic competition that results from grouping all these students used to being high achievers into a single class. I would argue that the resulting academic work is of a high grade, but also that what is needed to distinguish oneself, getting an A for example, is more stringent. Therefore an A at Yale should mean more than an A at random State U. Think big fish in little pond moving to an ocean, where the big fish needs to excel even more in some way to survive.

All this is definitely not to say high-achieving, brilliant students can't be found at any State U. I would just posit the idea that at the "ivies" they're more common, which increases the overall quality of the work performed by the students and the difficulty in attaining distinguishing marks. I think people become defensive on here, because no one wants to be told, even in only an insinuating manner that their school is not as good as some other school or that their hard-earned GPA at another school would be worth less.