USC or UCLA for Pre-Med?

drax12
Thu, 27 Dec 2012 01:25:00 +0000

I think you also mentioned interviews… The last thing, I’m sure, m-schools want to add to their rosters is a bunch of high-scoring, high-grade robot kids who have nothing in regard to bedside manner.

I see you’re playing games with the edit function:



A student graduating from high school might be lost in a three-part SATI format and post a low score because he/she doesn’t have funds to match his/her potential wrt the test, but if he/she does well in college in, say, a biochem department, he is likely to score well on the MCAT…

bluebayou:

Pure speculation on your part. And quite frankly, not necessarily logical. VR is a chunk of the mcat, and a biochem major ain’t likely to ace it. But that is just speculation on my part.



Four years of college will help said student become more mature in taking these types of tests, along with gaining a foothold in a more specialized test like the MCAT. VR would be a smaller portion of the test, with a lot of the premed stuff taking the greater portion.

Add, that we’re probably talking about someone who was an outstanding student in the classroom, but just didn’t have the funds to match his/her potential wrt the SAT. This idea resides under the… “we all have pretty much the same potential, but there are those who have the funds to buy better scores if not grades.”



Regardless, those that hail from sub-standard high schools with sub-standard preparation with sub-standard tests scores, tend to do worse on average. And without a hook, those C’s during Frosh year will tend eliminate allo med school



Again, I’m speaking of someone who manifested high grades… and say, pedestrian scores. Scores are just a ephemeral achievement; grades are much more lasting. Grades show the student’s effort in the classroom, which with this effort can overcome whatever SAT shortcomings.