Your problem with admissions

[ssmith]

I’ve spoken to many different PA students and have heard similar stories; about half of their classmates can’t handle the load because they have never had a REAL college course. They took their biochem and o chem classes from community/state colleges and their genetics course was an easy A.  Here is a scenario that happens way too often and I’m wondering what admissions does to justify decisions.

Bill is a genius and was offered a full ride to the University of his choice. He choose a difficult Ivy league school and graduated with a 2.9. While Scott struggled to graduate high school and was only able to attend a community college. He graduated with a 4.0 but never had to stay up past midnight studying for and exam nor had to write a lengthy paper of any kind. They apply to the same PA schools, and even though Bill has a stronger application in every other area, he isn’t offered an interview because the screening tool denies his application.  Scott is offered interviews at a few schools and is accepted after “googleing” ‘how to interview’. What needs to change?

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

I've never seen this scenario. More likely, Bill was not a genius and Scott didn't apply himself until college. Not to mention you can't get a bachelor degree from a CC, so Scott had to do pretty well at university too.

 

Let's be honest, real geniuses who really try don't have 2.9 GPAs from Ivy League or not. Plus, people who could ONLY get into CC don't do great there either.

[UGoLong]

To succeed in school, you need good study habits and know what works best for you. Staying up all night for an exam never worked for me and I absolutely never did it in PA school. I might have gotten up at 4:30 sometimes but I never went to sleep after 11. 

 

This whole thing that someone was developed through a hotter forge going to an Ivy League school just doesn't work for me. If someone gets a 2.9, they didn't master the material, wherever they went. 

 

And cursing the system will not help you get in. It's not going to change in your lifetime. Better to just start from wherever you are now and do what you have to do.

 

Good luck!

[dndandrea]

I think schools look at where the students come from (school wise). However...

 

The experience I had at the community college I attended after high school was much better than the university I'm currently attending. Professors devoted the majority of their time teaching and spent time assisting students to learn the material at the community college. Professors at my current big university spend more time doing research than they do teaching. Teaching is just part of their job. WAY less one-on-one interaction sucked as well. I've been at this university taking my final pre-reqs (harder ones like biochem) and upper electives for over 5 semesters and i've had straight As. My GPA is a 3.95. 

 

The university doesn't challenge me as much as my community college did. I learned a ton more at the community college as well.

[Maynard]

Admissions is a very imperfect process, but it is based on hard data.

 

If half of all PA students couldn't handle their course load we would see a lot of 50% graduation rates, but in reality most graduation rates are closer to 95%.

 

It is harder to get into an Ivy League school but that doesn't make it harder to get an A at one. The Princeton Review publishes data on how many hours certain student bodies study per day. If all these Ivy League students are studying past midnight it isn't reflected in the data, which shows they don't study that much more than students at state schools. I got an admissions brochure from Harvard in high school and I recall it saying something about how close to 90% of their students graduate with honors. They follow the same accreditation standards as other schools and they don't just curve the grade because they have a smart class -- if everyone masters the material then everyone gets an A.

[arosswoods]

I took A&P at a CC. Mr professor was a MD who taught part time. I graduated from a state school with a 4.0, wrote many lengthy papers in a challenging science program that included research, designing and conducting case studies with human subjects and counseling class with "live" sessions. When you assume that CC/State equals lower quality. I assume you're using your school's ivy status as an excuse for your low performance.

[SHU-CH]

My personal experience mirrors that of dndandrea. I got a BS but had to go back to community college to take a couple of prereqs. The professors at the CC were great. They loved to teach and were teaching because they thought it was fun. If you showed an interest in the material they would bend over backward to help you out.

 

I think the biggest challenge facing a lot of applicants is that CASPA can overwhelm the admissions process at a lot of schools. When a program suddenly begins to receive 1500-2000 applications they need to find a way to screen 80-90% of them out very quickly. The easiest way to do this (although certainly not the best) is by using GPA.

[WorkHardPlayHard]

I went to CC for my first two years so I could work and take advantage of the science faculty the school was known for. This let me knock out most of my base prereqs and get a great LOR from my bio professor. This meant when I went to uni I was able to focus on my cGPA and graduate with the GPA I wanted. I spent two years working outside of medicine in my field of study to save money for PA school, and the last two years getting paid HCE. I start PA school this coming fall.

 

The only thing that needs to change is your willingness to do what must be done to raise your GPA to the minimum so you can get on the radar. acta non verba.

[fakingpatience]

I'm sorry, I'm tired so I'm going to be more blunt than I should. This post comes across extremely entitled; you sound bitter at the application process. The primary difference between a state school and others is simply finances. The implication that a state school is "less than" is frankly offensive. As said by others, grade inflation exists everywhere. And why is it "your problem with admissions"?

 

I too have spoken to many PA students, at many different schools, and have not once heard any inkling of "half the classmates can't handle the load". Instead they emphasize how everyone has areas they're better and worse at, and part of the great thing about the program (said at all different programs) is that students work together to get everyone through it. The atmosphere of collaboration is one of the best things about PA schools.

 

 

Yes there are problems with the mass application / weed out system. But guess what, it goes both ways. What about the older students, with countless clinical experience who did poorly their freshman year of college, 20 years ago. Yes, it sucks that they have a harder time being admitted to a PA school due to their lower GPA, but that is the fact of the application system. Is an Ivy League education more valuable than clinical, and in reality, life experience?

[car.jenna]

What needs to change is your perspective.

We each have strengths that are brought to the table. As fakingpatience said, PA school is a collaborative environment. Does an Ivy League-educated person make a better PA? Not necessarily. Some schools weigh the GPA as less important than HCE or volunteer work. Some look at what University was attended. Mr. Ivy League has an opportunity to boost his app in other areas. We aren't all rich and brilliant straight from high school and some of us take different paths to get where we're headed. But, the ones who succeed are the ones who figure out a way to make things work and don't waste time whining that a 2.9 from an Ivy League school isn't getting them into PA school when they haven't figured out other ways to improve their application and boost themselves as a candidate. 

[mrwhite]

That's a pretty unfair comparison honestly.  I loved my CC classes, my A&P II course was taught by a Stanford MD... He had high standards to say the least.

[EMEDPA]

I took several pre-med courses from a CC a few years ago when I was thinking about going back to medschool. they were all taught by professors from the local state college teaching extra on their days off. they all said they taught the same class as at state college, but at CC there were 30 students/class and at state college there were 200.

[Patho]

I have two perspectives on this. I struggled in my first two years of undergraduate at a 4 yr private college taking bio and chem classes, but I also felt they were less instructive and more test based. After graduating I took some pre reqs at community colleges and did a lot better but this could be due to other factors such as increased maturity. However,  I felt that my CC classes were more instructive and helpful; ultimately, I left my CC classes remember and appreciating bio and chem a lot more than I ever did in those first two years of undergrad.

 

I've also heard from others at my university that the some science courses they took over the summer at the local state university was a lot easier than the classes at our university, and they were able to aced them easily. This may be true to a certain degree, but the important point is, what did you learn walking away from these classes? I certainly learned at lot more taking basic science classes such as A&P at my CC than at my university.  

 

If your GPA is 2.9, you should be able to increase that to the minimum 3.0 for most PA programs taking several classes, and then improve on other areas of your application. This will take time, but also allow you to refresh on some classes, which I think PA programs look in at in a positive light.

[Allegro]

I agree with Oneal; I've never seen this scenario and it does sound like an entitled excuse.

 

Also, as someone who went to an Ivy League school for graduate school and a more run-of-the-mill college for undergrad, I can personally state that the many articles written about how getting into the pretiguous school is much harder than actually attending are 100% true and that you're better off avoiding them at the undergraduate level. I received a much more valuable and challenging education at my undergrad than the undergraduate students I TA'd were getting in the Ivy League, and administrators, faculty, and admissions people across the board KNOW it. Your parents may enjoy bragging about your Ivy League sweatshirt but most people on the inside of academia are much less likely to be impressed. It actually reflects worse on "Bill" that he couldn't maintain a 3.0 average at his big-name school where grade inflation is the norm.

 

[undergradx]

I hate to play the devil's advocate, but in my personal experience, it is much easier to attain a high GPA in a CC. I went to a "public ivy" and it was popular to take summer classes at CCs and transfer the credits. There would be no incentive to do this if CC classes were just as tough. I recently graduated and am finishing up prereqs online and at CC. That being said, I agree that you can learn as much if not more at a CC.  

 

However, I do feel like we are punishing students who decided to go to an ivy league institution to challenge themselves and could have gone to a CC/state school and gotten a higher GPA. Like I said, you might not learn more at an ivy league, but getting a high GPA is tougher (again, in my experience). Some of my prerequisite classes were, for instance, designed so the mean grade would be a C+/B-. The average freshman comes in with a high school GPA of 3.8. Thus the average high school 3.8-er (very hard workers, mind you) is getting a 2.7 in these classes and being passed up by PA admissions.

 

Anyhow, I graduated with a 3.72 and am not trying to complain or whine. And again, I'm not saying CC students are less prepared. I have met many intelligent, wonderful people at CC. Rather, I feel that we are passing up ivy league students who may have been successful in PA school. 

[RTtoPA]

You're probably finding most people aren't agreeing with you on the CC/Ivy school debate because difficulty in grading has to do with the professor more than the school. One prof might be an MD working as adjunct whereas the other might be a high school bio teacher working adjunct. Generally speaking, these two individuals will have starkly different expectations of you, the student. Also... Bill is not a genius if he was only able to earn a 2.9 no matter the school. 

 

I wholeheartedly agree with fakingpatience. Clinical experience versus GPA would be a much better argument.

[Maynard]

I hate to play the devil's advocate, but in my personal experience, it is much easier to attain a high GPA in a CC. I went to a "public ivy" and it was popular to take summer classes at CCs and transfer the credits. There would be no incentive to do this if CC classes were just as tough.

 

There are plenty of other incentives: cost, location, convenience, or compatibility with other demands. Your experience may very well be that CC classes are easier, but others here have had the opposite experience. On an aggregate scale CC classes probably are easier than university classes, but there is a lot of variance.

 

However, as I've written here many times before, many schools do have a slight preference for University credits over CC credits. Many schools also give higher weight to difficult programs. The issue here is whether an Ivy Leaguer with a 2.9 should really get passed over for another student with a 4.0 and the answer is a clear and resounding 'yes'.

 

There is a much stronger argument for weighing majors differently than there is for weighing programs differently. Engineering is almost always tougher than psychology and that is reflected in the data on how much time engineers spend studying. Ivy League programs have not shown this quite as much.

[zoopeda]

The only fair criticism of the CC route (as far as I can tell) is that students who ONLY thrive in a small classroom (where they can raise their hand and ask questions whenever needed) might not thrive in an 80-person lecture style PA program.  All that's said about CCs and big schools above is true--you'll find tough classes at both and easy classes at both as well.  (If you go to Ratemyprofessor.com, you'll quickly find the easy and difficult teachers and confirm that, in fact, they're spread throughout academia--CC and Uni alike.)  The benefits of cost, flexible scheduling, etc often make CCs the ONLY possibility for many of us.  (I know I couldn't have worked, raised kids, and attended my local 4-year uni to complete prereqs, so I'm grateful for the CC system.)  That said, there's no question that leaning in a giant lecture vs a small classroom is actually quite different and that if this difference affects performance in some students, that's reason alone for PA programs to value big lecture experience over the typical CC coursework.  Then again, there are plenty of 30-40 person (per class) PA program that might be a better fit for CC grads, leaving the 80+ person programs to select those with more big lecture exposure.  It does seem like the OP's original posted scenario is pretty unrealistic and probably not worth as much thought as we're all giving it, but it is a good broader discussion. 

[ssmith]

It sounds like CC courses have more in common with PA school courses than those form a big University. So, are courses with smaller classes and more available professors a better way to prepare yourself?

[dndandrea]

It sounds like CC courses have more in common with PA school courses than those form a big University. So, are courses with smaller classes and more available professors a better way to prepare yourself?

During my interview with a PA school, I mentioned to them that their PA program reminds me of what I miss most about my community college--small classes and more one-on-one interaction with the professor. They weren't offended when i linked their private school to a community college, and I ended up getting accepted there. Most programs are around 30-40 students so it makes sense.

[ssmith]

The weight placed on the GPA is probably more for the purpose of knowing how high a students grades were than knowing how much a student student knows about the prereq material. Or else PA schools would have an admissions test like the MCAT.

 

It is harder to get into an Ivy League school but that doesn't make it harder to get an A at one.  if everyone masters the material then everyone gets an A.

 

My experience has been that some departments (chemistry) have a GPA cap. A professor explained this to me; basically the more students who fail, then the more A's can be given. This definitely doesn't happen at CCs. I aced my OChem class, but so did my classmate who talked the teacher into letting him retake assignments and even a test! No wonder we all love our CC professors. I learned more the first time I took chemistry and earned a C- then when I retook it from a CC and got an A.

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

The weight placed on the GPA is probably more for the purpose of knowing how high a students grades were than knowing how much a student student knows about the prereq material. Or else PA schools would have an admissions test like the MCAT.

 

 

My experience has been that some departments (chemistry) have a GPA cap. A professor explained this to me; basically the more students who fail, then the more A's can be given. This definitely doesn't happen at CCs. I aced my OChem class, but so did my classmate who talked the teacher into letting him retake assignments and even a test! No wonder we all love our CC professors. I learned more the first time I took chemistry and earned a C- then when I retook it from a CC and got an A.

World's smallest violin playing a sad tune for you.

[ssmith]

World's smallest violin playing a sad tune for you.

 

You're hilarious and thanks for the accompaniment, but the problem here seems to be misunderstood. It's not about me.  I’m no genius and I didn't go to an Ivy League school; I was far from trying to get in and even farther from being able to afford it!

I'm just proposing a scenario and I'm wondering what admissions committees do to offset the power of the GPA? When a program receives 1800 applications they can only hope to find the best group for their cohort.

[brian7]

I have been accepted by 2 programs and have a GPA a couple points below their average accepted GPA. I am sure out of the 2000 applications they received, the majority had higher GPAs than me. I also only had about 700 hours of experience when my application was verified. Again, I think this number is probably on the lower end when compared to other applicants and also compared to the schools average for accepted students. This tells me that schools really do look at applicants as a whole and the "power" of the GPA doesn't seem as important as having a well rounded application. This is just my two cents.

[swooshie1]

You're hilarious and thanks for the accompaniment, but the problem here seems to be misunderstood. It's not about me.  I’m no genius and I didn't go to an Ivy League school; I was far from trying to get in and even farther from being able to afford it!

I'm just proposing a scenario and I'm wondering what admissions committees do to offset the power of the GPA? When a program receives 1800 applications they can only hope to find the best group for their cohort.

 

They look at your application in its entirety: community service,  HCE, shadowing, life experience, and then they conduct an interview. The interview is when they find out who you are rather than what you know, and it either seals the deal or nails your coffin shut. It's not rocket science.