OK GPA from an ivy?

[gnin]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I recently graduated from a "top 3" ivy league college. My current overall gpa (I was government major) is 3.6. My science GPA is technically a 3.9, but only because I aced a few introductory statistics classes and easy, non-departmental (core) science classes.

As you can imagine, the academic competition at my school was extremely stiff, and the only way an intellectually "normal" person like me was able to graduate with a respectable gpa was by strategically picking relatively less challenging classes in the social sciences. I'm not sure how well I could've handled orgo or other "real" science classes at my school.

However, I did well in science classes in high school, and I'm confident that if I did a postbacc at a school somewhat less competitive than my undergraduate alma mater, I could earn a strong gpa.

Also, my overall college gpa is on the low side for applicants accepted to medical school nationwide. Do med schools cut more slack to applicants with a so-so GPA is they went to a "prestigious" college? I really want to be a doctor, but my family and I have very little money, so I can't afford to take on the expense of a postbacc program if there's a high risk that my college GPA will keep me out of medical school.

Does anyone have advice for me? If there's anyone out there in a situation similar to mine, I'd especially appreciate your input.

 

[ockhamsRzr]

Ok, I'll take the first shot here.

First off, get real, 3.6 from anywhere is good and you will likely not get too much sympathy from fellow SDN'ers for your "ok" gpa (I have the same GPA and was told to stop griping in another thread). Also, while it's been disputed ad nauseum here, that you are from an ivy doesn't hurt. You won't be cut "slack" as you ask, but it certainly doesn't hurt...and again, you have a very competitive GPA.

So, as a fellow social science/humanites graduate (polSci and English), I too explored the various definitions of post-bacc. To be sure, you DO NOT need to spend a fortune (read, Bryn Mawr, JH, Columbia) to complete your pre-reqs and be competitive as a med school applicant (just read the sundry threads here about low-gpa'ers and success). Some more pricey programs will offer "linkages" or consortial agreements with med schools, but on the whole bio is bio, orgo is orgo and at the end of the day you'll need an A anywhere you go.

One excellent program is Harvard's Health Careers Program which is through Harvard extension school and whose courses are a "cheaper-than state-school" $800 each. This is a nationally recognized, 25 year old program, with excellent success rates for applicants who maintain a 3.0 and score 30+ on the MCAT.

You can also go any number of routes, state or private schools, where a formal post-bacc is not offered but where a la carte is more the style. You'll get less counseling per se, but if you do your research (here and other places) the road travelled by others can shed an immense amount of light on what you'll face. Of course, one advantage of a formal post-bacc is that you'll get the all-valuable committee sponsorship letter and potentially your LORs will be centrally handled by the pre-med office (as if you were a premed at the school you're post-bacc'ing at).

There are as many success stories in these fora as there are different ways to post-bacc (literally it simply means "after your baccalaureate degree" right?..so formal or a la carte, expensive or bargain, we're all post-bacc'ers). Hey, you gotta do your pre-reqs, so welcome to the post-bacc club! I encourage you do many searches here, it's all been asked before.

Good luck!

Ock

 

[SmoothER]

First of all, a 3.6 is not on the "weaker" end of GPAs. Secondly, admissions committees care more about your BCPM (science) GPA than they do about your overall or AO (all other) GPAs. I think your Ivy League degree will definitely play a factor in the admissions process. Some medical school admissions commitees have even stated outright that they factor in the quality of the undergraduate institution attended when they make their admissions decisions.

Lastly, your strategy of selecting easier courses to boost your GPA is an excellent way of "gaming the system." Medical school admissions committees do not know which individual classes are easier or harder at particular colleges and universities. They have no way of knowing that English 107 at my school has a professor that gives out a much higher percentage of As than the professor that teaches English 135. The admissions committees receive thousands of applications from hundreds, if not thousands, of colleges and universities all over the nation and around the world. The bottom line is, they have no way of knowing which students successfully "gamed the system" and which students did not.

I think an applicant who earned a 3.9 in a political science major has a MUCH higher chance of admission than an applicant who earned a 2.7 in a chemical engineering major. The fact of the matter is, the admissions commitees do not even take into consideration the difficulty of the courseload. Is the courseload in chemical engineering more difficult than the courseload in political science? Yes. Does that matter in the admissions process? No. The reason for this is because the applicant can choose any major he wants. As a result, they expect the applicant to perform well regardless of the major that the applicant decided to pursue. They would hold the chemical engineering major to the same high standards as the political science major. I have a few friends who simply will not be able to get into any American medical school because they wanted to pursue majors like mechanical engineering, chemical engineering, etc. As a result, their GPAs are dismal. However, their lower GPAs are not a result of them not lacking the intellect for the field or them not working hard enough in the classes. The GPAs are low simply because the classes have vicious curves with an extremely small percentage of students receiving A- or above.

 

[dca_55]

I'm not sure where you're getting that a 3.6 overall is on the "low side". Last time I checked the info at the AAMC, the average for accepted students was around a 3.6, so you're right in the middle!

I also graduated from an ivy, but was an ecology major, so I lacked orgo and a few labs. Im taking them at a "somewhat less competitive" college as a post-bac, and I've found the rigor/competition to be much less than my undergrad experience. I don't think you have to worry about not doing well, as long as youre motivated.

It sounds like you haven't taken the pre-med science classes (except for stats which may count for the math req) so the commitees will know that the premed science classes were taken at wherever you did your post-bacc. If you choose a "less competitive" college to do your post-bacc, it might take some of the advantage of going to an ivy away. On the other hand, if you're able to ace the classes, having a 4.0 as a postbacc would look good even if it's not an ivy.

One last note...if you seriously think you couldn't handle the "real" sciences at your ivy, how do you plan on handling the sciences in med school? I know the "real" sciences I took were tough, but from what my friends from undergrad that are now in med school tell me, it doesn't get any easier!

 

[gnin]

I don't really think my 3.6 gpa is at all horrible, but I should add that i'm not a minority and am a legal resident of massachusetts, which has a large number of competitive premed applicants. If I came from a disadvantaged background or a state with less competitive state med schools, like Mississippi or North Dakota, I would not be so worried.

 

[SmoothER]

I don't really think my 3.6 gpa is at all horrible, but I should add that i'm not a minority and am a legal resident of massachusetts, which has a large number of competitive premed applicants. If I came from a disadvantaged background or a state with less competitive state med schools, like Mississippi or North Dakota, I would not be so worried.

The state has the HARDEST state med schools to get into is clearly California. Californians have absolutely no state school to fall back on so they have to apply to dozens of out-of-state private schools instead. Trust me, California is harder (in terms of staying in-state for med school) than Massachusetts. Well, best of luck to ya.

 

[no-see-um]

The state has the HARDEST state med schools to get into is clearly California. Californians have absolutely no state school to fall back on so they have to apply to dozens of out-of-state private schools instead. Trust me, California is harder (in terms of staying in-state for med school) than Massachusetts. Well, best of luck to ya.

I agree. (I'm from NY if that means anything)

 

[care bear]

I don't really think my 3.6 gpa is at all horrible, but I should add that i'm not a minority and am a legal resident of massachusetts, which has a large number of competitive premed applicants. If I came from a disadvantaged background or a state with less competitive state med schools, like Mississippi or North Dakota, I would not be so worried.

wow, i don't even have words. a 3.6/3.9 should not even have to be in the same sentence as 'horrible'. (i know that you're saying it's *not* horrible, but still. the fact that you have to say that, as if to say 'i know it's not horrible, it's just bad. . . .) wow. i'm not cutting you down or being condescending, i'm just honestly dumbfounded.

i don't think anyone assumed that you were a minority or were from a particularly 'easy' state when responding to you! 3.6 is average for *white* matriculants nationwide, and 3.9 is well above average. you really, really, really don't have anything to worry about.
besides, if you went to a top Ivy you should do well on your mcats without a problem. PLEASE don't spend another second of your life worrying about your GPA, it will be an UTTER waste.

(unless you are aiming for top5 med schools only, in which case please disregard the above advice in its entirety 😉 )