@Simpson2019 : The overall rates don’t matter. If you can get a 3.5 and 30 equivalent (I don’t know how the new scale works), 80%+ gain admission. To me, there is evidence that many apply below this threshold AND are not consulting the PHA for a composite letter. The overall number is actually 51%, but 58% of PHA consultants gain admissions: https://apply.emory.edu/academics/advising/career.html
A 7% differences and the overall rates implies that a significant amount of students are applying on a whim knowing they aren’t particularly competitive (Emory sometimes has 400 applicants a year! Way too many) AND a lot are not seeking a composite letter (the PHA requires a series of events to be able to go through composite letter process). Get a 3.5/30 equivalent, do what PHA says, get the composite letter, apply broadly and you’re golden.
There is no need for me to speculate about where most people gain admissions (some qualified people won’t even apply to elite schools because it is cheaper to go to their state schools for example. Plus medical school curricula have lots of standardization as they prep for the licensing exams. Going to top schools is kind of for research opportunities if you want that. A great testing and high performing student will likely get good residency placement from any U.S. medical school). We can’t know and it strongly depends on a students ECs, GPA/MCAT, and other things. The applicants well over 30 equivalent (say 34+ equivalent or 33+) and 3.77-3.8+ do get really good access to some elite and highly ranked medical schools. People in that range with a good profile (solid ECs and the recommended volunteer and shadowing hours and research for many of those), from what I observed (have many friends and former mentees who did VERY well with admissions who were in these ranges and sometimes a little lower on the GPA side depending on how rigorous their courses were and how good their research or ECs were).
If you fall below these, but above the “magical threshold”, apply broadly for sure, and you’ll still have a really good shot. I would say only apply when you think your application is most competitive though. If you completely screw up in a pre-health or related STEM course (as in below C+) or more and it puts your GPA at a borderline area or below that, consider retaking at Emory or elsewhere even if you need to wait another year, especially if your MCAT is not in that 33+ range. If you end up with a solid GPA (let us say 3.65+), but the MCAT is mismatched (below 31 equiv. or so), then retake the MCAT before applying (if your GPA is 3.8+ and your MCAT is middling, that will for sure look weird, and you won’t want to apply with just that MCAT score).
You can actually screw up a course or two within reason and still place well. One of my favorite mentees got a B in one class each semester and even got one C+ in an intermediate (non-prehealth requirement) chem course and still got into Pittsburgh and several other elite MDPhD programs because he still maintained over a 3.8 (he usually took intensive courseloads mixing STEM and non-STEM courses. Usually taking 5 courses a semester. He would get an A in most and then maybe have a serious humanities course with a top instructor in which he would allow himself to get some B grade), had ultra strong research, civic, and EC records, really challenged himselve academically, and scored very well on the MCAT (his training via his coursework was so solid and fresh at the time, that he didnt have to study as long as others to prep for the MCAT. Most of his courses emphasize the same or higher level analytical thinking and problem solving than the MCAT including that Achem course he screwed up in which was a non-traditional rendition of analytical where the teacher integrated his biomolecular/biophysical chemistry focused research into lectures, p-sets, and exams. Obviously that made it rough, but my friend still learned).
This guy was quite special, but I have seen it or close before and candidates like him are often very successful despite their more adventurous and risky academic approach (he also started with freshman organic under Soria for example. He wasn’t at Emory to skate through pre-health requirements and his STEM majors. He was very motivated and driven by intellectual curiosity even if it meant imperfect grades from time to time). The formula is to make no lower than B+, and try to get mostly A/A- in med. school specific requirements and then just do your best in other STEM and non-STEM courses. Ideally, you should have schedules or solid performance that allow for some B/B+ grades (the “risk” courses) without completely damaging your GPA over time. It would be most strategic to take a “risk” course small or intimate enough such that the professor mentors, and knows that they have higher than average difficulty for their department (or course if multi-section). This way, it is even possible that they would enthusiastically write rec. letters for a strong B/B+ student (and they will of course explain that their course is different/standards are high and allude to your character and intellectual development throughout the course and other positive attributes). More difficult instructors usually understand that great or even excellent work must be done to get B/B+ in their courses so accommodate and mentor as needed.