Will I have harder time to get accepted?

[hsia2]

My GPA is around 3.3, DAT 22/22/21
I got interviews from Columbia, Michigan and Nova
Knowing that Nova and Columbia has average GPA around 3.6
Will it be harder for me to get accepted by Nova/ Columbia because of my low GPA?? (even if i do well on interview??)

Thanks guys

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Cal55]

From what university?

 

[lphiewok]

if you're simply asking if you will have 'harder' time getting accepted, then yes. of course someone with lower than their accepted average will have harder time getting accepted.

if you're asking if you will not get accepted, then no because you have fairly descent GPA (although lower than avg of their acceptance) but very good DAT score and especially if you do well on your interview I think you have a very good chance.

3.3 is honestly hard for state schools like Michigan, Columbia who has very well qualified applicants applying, and Nova which sends out lots of interviews but i think you will still have good chance if you do well on your interview (also, looking at your SN and thinking that you're an Asian, you won't get the URM boost which in case you would have gotten in pretty much all of those schools if you were URM)

 

[DrDDSman]

if you're simply asking if you will have 'harder' time getting accepted, then yes. of course someone with lower than their accepted average will have harder time getting accepted.

if you're asking if you will not get accepted, then no because you have fairly descent GPA (although lower than avg of their acceptance) but very good DAT score and especially if you do well on your interview I think you have a very good chance.

3.3 is honestly hard for state schools like Michigan, Columbia who has very well qualified applicants applying, and Nova which sends out lots of interviews but i think you will still have good chance if you do well on your interview (also, looking at your SN and thinking that you're an Asian, you won't get the URM boost which in case you would have gotten in pretty much all of those schools if you were URM)

This may be true but I think once you get an interview, your stats are less important (but still important), and most likely your interview performance is the deciding factor over a few As in your soph year of college. Why would these schools send out interviews to OP if they didn't feel (s)he might be a qualified candidate. I'm sure there are people out there who got rejected with equal or better stats than OP from these schools, so it goes to show that numbers aren't always the deciding factor. But, what goes on behind closed doors no one really knows.

 

[KitKat09]

It is really hard to say- Nova is the only school I know that calculates their own GPA based on separate bio, chem scores. So lot of it will depend what kind and how many of those science classes you took, did you finish all pre rec now and took some extra science courses or you are only getting ready to finish pre rec etc....

 

[lphiewok]

This may be true but I think once you get an interview, your stats are less important (but still important), and most likely your interview performance is the deciding factor over a few As in your soph year of college. Why would these schools send out interviews to OP if they didn't feel (s)he might be a qualified candidate. I'm sure there are people out there who got rejected with equal or better stats than OP from these schools, so it goes to show that numbers aren't always the deciding factor. But, what goes on behind closed doors no one really knows.

yes of course, if they interview you then adcom believes that you can be a qualified candidate. But you have to realize that there are hundreds of other applicants who will do just fine at the interview and when adcom makes decision b/w someone how has lower avg. GPA and above avg. GPA with similar interview performances, it'll be harder for someone with lower avg. GPA to come out as a winner.

i donno it might be because i wasn't accepted in my first try with good DAT but low GPA and when I asked the dean why I wasn't accepted, he told me that they are just tooo many applicants with 3.2-3.4 GPA. They will invite some of them with good DAT and ECs, but then they have to really stand out and be able to explain it during the interview why they don't have higher GPA.

Also, each schools have different systems of admissions. Schools which use the point systems (e.g. Oklahoma has 11 points given for your stats alone and 10 points for your interview), you already have lower numbers to start with even if you do well on your interview.

 

[DrDDSman]

yes of course, if they interview you then adcom believes that you can be a qualified candidate. But you have to realize that there are hundreds of other applicants who will do just fine at the interview and when adcom makes decision b/w someone how has lower avg. GPA and above avg. GPA with similar interview performances, it'll be harder for someone with lower avg. GPA to come out as a winner.

i donno it might be because i wasn't accepted in my first try with good DAT but low GPA and when I asked the dean why I wasn't accepted, he told me that they are just tooo many applicants with 3.2-3.4 GPA. They will invite some of them with good DAT and ECs, but then they have to really stand out and be able to explain it during the interview why they don't have higher GPA.

Also, each schools have different systems of admissions. Schools which use the point systems (e.g. Oklahoma has 11 points given for your stats alone and 10 points for your interview), you already have lower numbers to start with even if you do well on your interview.

Thats interesting. Good luck to you this year. So I guess it depends mostly on the schools and what their system/policy is. Applying sucks

 

[FutureDent020]

yes of course, if they interview you then adcom believes that you can be a qualified candidate. But you have to realize that there are hundreds of other applicants who will do just fine at the interview and when adcom makes decision b/w someone how has lower avg. GPA and above avg. GPA with similar interview performances, it'll be harder for someone with lower avg. GPA to come out as a winner.

i donno it might be because i wasn't accepted in my first try with good DAT but low GPA and when I asked the dean why I wasn't accepted, he told me that they are just tooo many applicants with 3.2-3.4 GPA. They will invite some of them with good DAT and ECs, but then they have to really stand out and be able to explain it during the interview why they don't have higher GPA.

Also, each schools have different systems of admissions. Schools which use the point systems (e.g. Oklahoma has 11 points given for your stats alone and 10 points for your interview), you already have lower numbers to start with even if you do well on your interview.

First off, both you and DDS are right in the points you have made. Second, what do you all think constitutes doing "just fine" in an interview? Is it answering the questions with competency and coherency? Or is it portraying yourself as amicable, intelligent, and easy to talk to. Where you partake in a lengthy conversation that results in laughs and an overall pleasant discussion. If most applicants are having the latter type of interview, then what would be a great interview? Or is what I have described a great interview?
This is more a question to gauge how interviews are going...any honest thoughts? I would make this it's own thread, but i'm sure it's already been done.