Master's Programs - do they help get you in?

[camstah]

having said everything i have in this thread, i will say, if you haven't done well in most of your science classes, then a post bacc would be a good idea...and if you've done mediocre in your classes, and are interested in pursuing a higher degree, then an MS or MPH may be for you....really, everyone's situation will be unique.....

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[azcomdiddy]

having said everything i have in this thread, i will say, if you haven't done well in most of your science classes, then a post bacc would be a good idea...and if you've done mediocre in your classes, and are interested in pursuing a higher degree, then an MS or MPH may be for you....really, everyone's situation will be unique.....

Thank GOD, that's all anyone has really been saying on here. After countless defensive whining by the MPH guys, the truth finally comes out. If you havea 2.5, then the MPH is not your best course; I don't care how hard those "epidemiology classes are." Like others have said, the difficulty of your degree is weighed in. If they only cared on one completing any degree then some genius would just get a 4.0 in a Masters in P.E. and claim he is a new man. It doesn't work that way. The type of graduate degree does matter so quit trying to sugges it doesn't. It just cracks me how the MPH grads come on here and claim that an MPH will be just as effective as an MS or Postbac when trying apologize for poor grades. Maybe if you have mediocre grades like you were saying (3.0-3.3), the MPH is probably okay provided your MCAT is high.

 

[jwongdr]

hello- thought i could shine some light on this. if your'e a Ca resident like me, a master does not really help much. i got a master with a 4.0 but low undergrad . ca admission advisors told me that a master do not overshadow undergra mishaps. they all said i shoul dhave spent a full year doing upper division course work.

so , yes a master will help after u do the 1st step, raise that undergrad gpa if it's below 3.0. but if u have above 3.0, do a master.

 

[camstah]

Thank GOD, that's all anyone has really been saying on here. After countless defensive whining by the MPH guys, the truth finally comes out. If you havea 2.5, then the MPH is not your best course; I don't care how hard those "epidemiology classes are." Like others have said, the difficulty of your degree is weighed in. If they only cared on one completing any degree then some genius would just get a 4.0 in a Masters in P.E. and claim he is a new man. It doesn't work that way. The type of graduate degree does matter so quit trying to sugges it doesn't. It just cracks me how the MPH grads come on here and claim that an MPH will be just as effective as an MS or Postbac when trying apologize for poor grades. Maybe if you have mediocre grades like you were saying (3.0-3.3), the MPH is probably okay provided your MCAT is high.

sigh...you missed my point...I AM one of those MPH people....an MPH is in no way to be compared to a degree in P.E .....yes, the type of graduate study matters, but an MPH WILL be just as effective as an MS, depending on your situation.....obviously you don't know much about the MPH degree...the point WAS, whether you pursue a post bacc vs. and MS/MPH will depend on your grades and situtation......and that this shouldn't turn into an MS vs. MPH discussion...because that's kinda like asking which will kill someone more dead, a gun or a knife...they'll both kill a person...

an MPH and an MS are different degrees, true....but an MPH isn't a generic degree....it's broken down into specific fields....so while an epi MPH is just as powerful in the sciences as an MS is (especially considering how long some MS programs are versus some MPH programs) some other MPHs, like Community Health, aren't (which, btw, is what I got MY MPH in)...
again, what you wrote is sort of poo-pooing the MPH...which isn't what I was saying...what I said was that which degree you pursue is very much going to depend on your situation...e.g., what schools are available to you nearby? what are the quality of their respective MS, MPH, or post bacc programs? can you get INTO any of these programs? what were your grades, and are you actually interested in what these MS/MPH programs have to offer?
again, no one said that the MS or MPH were used to apologize for poor grades...in my opinion, they are there to enhance what may be a mediocre application.....not to make up for very poor grades....what most people are saying in this thread with respect to which degree, MS or MPH, to get, was meant more for those with 3.0+ GPAs..or at least that's what my comments were intended to address..because obviously if you haven't proven that you can handle the basics well enough, then you need to go back and prove that you can...with a post bacc, or just taking undergrad classes again if you can't take or don't have available to you a post bacc program.......

and to those who wonder whether to get an MS or MPH, just look at the classes, what they have to offer, and what sounds interesting to you.....

 

[CHxyz]

Hi,
Since this thread is about whether graduate school will help with your chances with medical school or not, I was wondering if you guys can help give me some feed back on my stats. I got a 2.55 GPA for my undergrad due to a hard major and I know with this grade I can not get into any med school. Therefore I went into a Master's program and recently finished my Master's with a GPA of 3.88. Now the thing is, I am apply for DO schools and when I look up my total GPA, it was only 2.74. So I guess the MS GPA didn't really help much on the total GPA. Now combined with my MCAT score, 25 and my undergrad GPA (2.5) and grad GPA (3.88) what are my chances with DO schools? On the EC font I have publication, research experiences, volunteer at hospital, fine art (play the violin) and with a Master of Science degree. Thanks before hand for the feed back!!!

 

[clumpymold]

Hi,
Since this thread is about whether graduate school will help with your chances with medical school or not, I was wondering if you guys can help give me some feed back on my stats. I got a 2.55 GPA for my undergrad due to a hard major and I know with this grade I can not get into any med school. Therefore I went into a Master's program and recently finished my Master's with a GPA of 3.88. Now the thing is, I am apply for DO schools and when I look up my total GPA, it was only 2.74. So I guess the MS GPA didn't really help much on the total GPA. Now combined with my MCAT score, 25 and my undergrad GPA (2.5) and grad GPA (3.88) what are my chances with DO schools? On the EC font I have publication, research experiences, volunteer at hospital, fine art (play the violin) and with a Master of Science degree. Thanks before hand for the feed back!!!

You should run a search for DO schools and admission processes. I've seen a TON of them on here. Good luck!

 

[blackfire]

Speaking of "special masters programs," can somebody give some feedback on Boston University masters in medical sciences program?
Is medical school a card game because I know some people who were accepted into Georgetown with a 27-29MCAT but the SMP @ Georgetown wants you to have a 27MCAT and up!

 

[DrHuang]

Speaking of "special masters programs," can somebody give some feedback on Boston University masters in medical sciences program?
Is medical school a card game because I know some people who were accepted into Georgetown with a 27-29MCAT but the SMP @ Georgetown wants you to have a 27MCAT and up!

i could be wrong but the 27-29 MCATers could very possibly be...
GEM students or exSMPers. or maybe im just wrong.

 

[BSChemE]

Hi,
Since this thread is about whether graduate school will help with your chances with medical school or not, I was wondering if you guys can help give me some feed back on my stats. I got a 2.55 GPA for my undergrad due to a hard major and I know with this grade I can not get into any med school. Therefore I went into a Master's program and recently finished my Master's with a GPA of 3.88. Now the thing is, I am apply for DO schools and when I look up my total GPA, it was only 2.74. So I guess the MS GPA didn't really help much on the total GPA. Now combined with my MCAT score, 25 and my undergrad GPA (2.5) and grad GPA (3.88) what are my chances with DO schools? On the EC font I have publication, research experiences, volunteer at hospital, fine art (play the violin) and with a Master of Science degree. Thanks before hand for the feed back!!!

How did you calculate your total GPA? I heard that on the AMCAS application that undergrad and grad GPA are calculated separately. Is there a section where you combine the GPA? Is this something that is specific to the DO application?

 

[CHxyz]

I am applying through the AACOM. If you go to the eprofile, they will list your undergrad and graduate GPA. In addition at the bottom, there's a section for combined GPA for both undergrad and graduate. I do not know how they calculate the combined one, but it is also submitted to the schools.

 

[DrHuang]

How did you calculate your total GPA? I heard that on the AMCAS application that undergrad and grad GPA are calculated separately. Is there a section where you combine the GPA? Is this something that is specific to the DO application?

they combine post-bacc classes with undergrad classes but lists graduate and undergraduate classes as separate. (undergrad+postbacc=1 GPA, graduate=another GPA)

 

[PoorPerson]

It was recommended to me to get a MS. This was from LSU New Orleans. After some blood and sweet I received it and reapplied. Didn't help me at all. Denied.
Just my experience.

 

[Ypo.]

It was recommended to me to get a MS. This was from LSU New Orleans. After some blood and sweet I received it and reapplied. Didn't help me at all. Denied.
Just my experience.

Oh, that sucks so bad. How frustrating. I hate that when they lead you on.

You've got to have a decent GPA and after that, it seems like its really about the MCAT. I might have to take that d@mn thing again, just to prove to medical schools that I am a professional MCAT-taker. What a waste of time. I hate this process.

 

[BSChemE]

they combine post-bacc classes with undergrad classes but lists graduate and undergraduate classes as separate. (undergrad+postbacc=1 GPA, graduate=another GPA)

So are you saying that there is no combined GPA for graduate and undergradute GPA on the AMCAS application like it is on the AACOM?

 

[Ypo.]

So are you saying that there is no combined GPA for graduate and undergradute GPA on the AMCAS application like it is on the AACOM?

Bingo, that's correct. Pass go and collect two hundred dollars.

 

[gasapple]

.

 

[JumpingGenes]

Could never have foreseen the action that went down when I entered this thread - got pretty heated there. It seems like Masters Programs do help generally, as they show maturity and sort of convey "taking it to the next level." If my GPA was any lower than 3.0 though, I would probably have chosen a Post-Bac. With a decent GPA and MCAT, I chose to do a MPH since I felt like an MS would be a repeat of things I would learn in medical school. Even if the MS would help my performance there, I wanted to learn about the broader situation in health care.

After attending one of the top universities in the US, I was secretly thinking that an MPH would be a "walk in the park." How wrong I was... I have two words for you - research papers. Yep, lots and lots of researching health and policy and then writing and writing and writing. As a result, my writing skills have been massively enhanced, making all the secondaries much easier to complete (I have been transformed into a "writing machine"). Also, the program requires a lot of group projects, which helps to develop interpersonal skills and is realistic in terms of how health care operates in the real world. The MPH program gives one an opportunity to get out into the community, take part in educational activities, and research diseases. While it is not "hard science," the people in the program genuinely strive for excellence and are highly motivated, making grading quite competitive. In fact, I was expecting it to be much less competitive than it turned out to be and have had to work hard to keep the GPA at an acceptable level (above 3.5). Maybe it isn't as academically rigorous, but try cranking out a 120 page research paper/health plan - ouch - I am currently chained to my computer desk.

Overall, if you are not struggling to lift the GPA above the "line of rejection," then an MPH is a very useful and interesting program. If you look at publications, many MDs also have MPHs - another factor I considered when choosing my direction. All of the Docs that I talked with said they thought an MPH was an excellent idea and valuable degree. So far, I have really enjoyed the program and foresee it being very useful in the future, as it applies to every area of health care. I have no idea if it will help with admissions, but it does give a solid backup plan in case the $hit hits the fan. Overall, I am fully satisfied with the MPH program and would recommend it to those looking for an interesting experience.

 

[pathdr2b]

After rereading this thread, I'd say that a person with a low undergrad GPA , the "numbers" are VERY important, basically essential!

It appears that a GPA > 3.8 from Master's work AND an MCAT > 27 is needed to be reasonably competitive at allopathic schools. Obvioulsy there are no certainities, but what do you guys think of these numbers?

I'd also like to add that many of you are too young to know that not long ago maybe 15 years ago, applicants with low GPA's ( < 3.3) had virtually NO chance of getting accepted to med school. I was told that I'd needed to get a PhD to get accepted in the early 90's. Now, there are many options for which we should all be very thankful!

 

[pathdr2b]

To say that you need an above 3.8 is not true.
You need at least a 3.5 to meet the averages at most schools. 3.6-3.7 at most for the averages.

I'm referring to GPA performance in GRAD SCHOOL as I stated before. Anyone that applies to med school with a 3.5 GPA from grad school when the average GPA in grad school is 3.7, is going to have some problems. A 3.5 GPA for graduate work is below average, so now you're talking about applying to med school with below averages for both undergrad and grad. Notice, I'm not saying it's impossible nor am I including DO admissions. Besides, once you've screwed up as an undergrad, shouldn't we all be shooting for as far above "average" as possible?

So don't think numbers equal everything.

In general everyone knows this is true but the reality is that if you screwed up as an undergrad and you want to have a chance at a school like Harvard or Duke, you'd BETTER step up with solid numbers. Like an admissions member at Hopkins told me a few years ago, they look for demonstrated proof you can compete with students with unblemished academic records. Fortunately or unfortunately depending on how you look at it, that boils down to numbers.

There are people who get rejected with great numbers because they had no social skills and ability to show they really were interested in medicine.
Unlike other grad programs, you base med school admissions on a wide array of factors.

No kidding!

 

[medtechv79]

I wish I was more mature when I started college. What I should have done is finished up college with a decent GPA majoring in psychology or whatever and taken all the prereq sciences after I graduated. Sigh.....that would have been best for me. I would have had a good GPA....at least I think anyways. I'm just venting.....I did premed my first two years of college and screwed up my GPA...(first tiime away from home, adjusting) sot it was hard for me....

 

[EvoDevo]

I have to say that I agree with pathdr2b. The Master's degree is your chance to show that the undergrad GPA doesn't mean as much now. You *must* do well in your Master's work to give the adcom folks a feeling that you can handle medical school. Think about it this way: when your file is being reviewed by the committee, you want your advocate to be able to say: "Yeah, so his u/grad GPA isn't so hot. But look at his grad GPA and MCAT scores."

If you've screwed up your u/grad gpa then you have to oWn the grad gpa.

 

[NontradICUdoc]

Pathdr2be,

Sorry I thought you were referring to undergrad GPA. If you are talking master's programs or postbac, yes a 3.8-4.0 is necessary.

However, what I was referring to was in general, that people (undergrads) do get in with 3.5 gpa.

However, yes you are right, if your gpa is already messed up then of course you want to up it with real straight a's.

I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment. The adcoms will be looking at everything you have done, especially an upward trend. Stating that a 3.8-4.0 graduate GPA is a necessity, I believe, is a little obtuse and does not give the other factors that an adcom will look at much credit.

 

[pathdr2b]

I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment. The adcoms will be looking at everything you have done, especially an upward trend. Stating that a 3.8-4.0 graduate GPA is a necessity, I believe, is a little obtuse and does not give the other factors that an adcom will look at much credit.

Is it REALLY necessary to state the obivious time and time again? We all know of people with 4.0 GPA's and 40SMCAT's that don't get into med school because their EC's weren't good or they didn't have enough volunteer clinical experience or they passed gas during the interview. Come on guys, we ALL know you SHOULD present a well rounded application package.

 

[Lindyhopper]

JerseyJim,
Congrats!! I'm wondering about your MS in physio; Was that in special masters designed to get people into med school or a traditional masters taught by the bio department?

 

[stoleyerscrubz]

is that a typo? most people say you need a 3.5+ in your masters

my GPA undergrad was a 3.37, graduate 3.02. .

 

[seabreeze811]

I agree, I just got accepted to medical school. I applied before my graduate studies and only had 3 interview with 3 waitlists not to mention only about half the schools I applied to didnt send me secondaries. This year all of the school have sent me secondaries and I have 10 interviews... I just graduated with a mastor's in physiology, my GPA undergrad was a 3.37, graduate 3.02. I definately think going to graduate school help in getting into medical school and to top that give you something to fall back on if you don't get in. I also became an EMT while in graduate school which also improved my EC.... Getting into medical school is not necessarily about grades, it is about you drive and determination to get in.

Hi JerseyJim,

Which masters program did you go to? Im thinking of getting a masters but i don't know which one. Is masters in science better or an MPH?

 

[daelroy]

Let's put it this way, any program helps if your MCAT is high. It doesn't really matter if you do an MPH, MS or posbac. Notice that all the MPH students that were accepted all had high MCAT scores. However, if your MCAT is in the 26-29 range, I would do a postbac or special masters program. MPH programs are not perceived as being challenging by most adcoms and if you do a Masters, make sure it is not thesis or research oriented. If you are trying to make up for a low GPA, you need to take a large volume of MS1 type of classes that adcoms can recognize. The last thing you want to do is enroll in a masters program that contains many ambiguous research classes that an adcom can figure out is an easy A. Adcoms are savy these days and are fully aware of how masters programs can really inflate their GPA due to their easy research classes.

 

[pathdr2b]

and if you do a Masters, make sure it is not thesis or research oriented

I disagree with this advice. I think you should do a thesis (to show you can think) AND take those extra classes. Anyone who needs a Master's program to show they can "hang" shouldn't be worried with the time it will take to properly get the job done.

 

[daelroy]

I disagree with this advice. I think you should do a thesis (to show you can think) AND take those extra classes. Anyone who needs a Master's program to show they can "hang" shouldn't be worried with the time it will take to properly get the job done.

The problem is in medical school, you aren't going to be given ample time to think about your classes. You won't be given an A and a pat on the back for simply showing your advisor what you have accomplished. My anatomy professor isn't going to give me an A when I show her all the anatomy flash cards I have made.

In medical school, you take classes....a lot of them...all at once and you have exams every third week in which you have to regurtitate large volumes of material. If you want to think, get your PhD. In medical school, it's about survival. Taking a bunch of blowoff research classes isn't going to tell an adcom that you can handle the brutal schedule of medical school. This is why you hear from so many MPH and Masters grads who had to reapply. Why do you think postbac and "Special" masters programs were created in the first place. It's because the old school path of the MPH and "Masters" wasn't working for most of its grads unless they had spectacular MCAT's.

Unless, you want an MD/PHD like you, it's a waste of time to pursue research you aren't passionate about. For your standard low GPA candidate, research is a waste of time. Just do a postbac or special masters and not waste any more time than you have to.

 

[pathdr2b]

For your standard low GPA candidate, research is a waste of time. Just do a postbac or special masters and not waste any more time than you have to.

Education is NEVER, EVER a waste of time and after a few more birthdays, perhaps you'll get that. Comparing anatomy flash cards to defending a thesis is absolutely insane.

In the 3rd year of med school, you'll have to "defend" yourself all the time on the wards when asked about treatment strategies for patient X. Or maybe, you'll just flash your clinical notes to the attending!

 

[daelroy]

Education is NEVER, EVER a waste of time and after a few more birthdays, perhaps you'll get that. Comparing anatomy flash cards to defending a thesis is absolutely insane.

In the 3rd year of med school, you'll have to "defend" yourself all the time on the wards when asked about treatment strategies for patient X. Or maybe, you'll just flash your clinical notes to the attending!

I have too many birthdays and it is insane to suggest that one needs to complete a thesis to be able to think. In fact, you and I both know of many individuals who are completing a thesis and do everything but think particularly if they are completing someone else's research or just rewriting their advisor's work. And you are sadly misguided if you think that one isn't getting an education by not pursuing research. One doesn't need to complete a thesis to be able to think and determine treatment strategies especially considering that the research you will do in your graduate education will mostly likely be clinically unrelated. But by all means, please explain to your program director that you can think better than the student who scored higher than you on Step 1 because you have a "Masters." I'm sure, he or she will thoroughly convinced.

 

[azcomdiddy]

In the 3rd year of med school, you'll have to "defend" yourself all the time on the wards when asked about treatment strategies for patient X. Or maybe, you'll just flash your clinical notes to the attending!

The next time your attending pimps you about a treatment strategy, tell him that you will get back to him in a month because you will be in the lab thinking about the issue.

 

[pathdr2b]

The next time your attending pimps you about a treatment strategy, tell him that you will get back to him in a month because you will be in the lab thinking about the issue.

Since, I would have already completed my PhD by the time I get to clinicals, I'll just refer him/her to my dissertation!

 

[azcomdiddy]

Since, I would have already completed my PhD by the time I get to clinicals, I'll just refer him/her to my dissertation!

So much for Masters programs teaching one how to "think" through a problem.

 

[daelroy]

Since, I would have already completed my PhD by the time I get to clinicals, I'll just refer him/her to my dissertation!

I'll flash him your dissertation too and graduate from medical school 3 years earlier.

 

[PSuDoc9978]

The problem is in medical school, you aren't going to be given ample time to think about your classes. You won't be given an A and a pat on the back for simply showing your advisor what you have accomplished. My anatomy professor isn't going to give me an A when I show her all the anatomy flash cards I have made.

In medical school, you take classes....a lot of them...all at once and you have exams every third week in which you have to regurtitate large volumes of material. If you want to think, get your PhD. In medical school, it's about survival. Taking a bunch of blowoff research classes isn't going to tell an adcom that you can handle the brutal schedule of medical school. This is why you hear from so many MPH and Masters grads who had to reapply. Why do you think postbac and "Special" masters programs were created in the first place. It's because the old school path of the MPH and "Masters" wasn't working for most of its grads unless they had spectacular MCAT's.

Unless, you want an MD/PHD like you, it's a waste of time to pursue research you aren't passionate about. For your standard low GPA candidate, research is a waste of time. Just do a postbac or special masters and not waste any more time than you have to.

Are you kidding? Obviously you haven't been to grad school at all and don't really understand what graduate school is about. After getting my masters in physiology where I did complete a thesis, med school has been a breeze. And this is coming from a 3rd year already completing a surgery rotation. Graduate school advisors don't give you pats on the back. It's more like a kick in the butt for not thinking of ten other senarios for your project or yelling at you for not staying up in lab that fifth night to complete a set of experiments. So yeah some of the classes for graduate school can be a little easier but that doesn't mean the experience is easy because of that. You still work your butt off in lab when you come back from class. And besides, if you don't feel that you have enough courses you can still take higher level undergrad courses as a graduate student which is what I actually did do for some biochemistry courses.

So my advice to anyone would be if you wonder whether you can hack a residency program, go to grad school and see if you survive cause once I got to medical school, the first two years of school I snowboarded more than I ever did as an undergrad or graduate student. Graduate work does help in the end even if research isn't your passion because if anything, you learn to balance alot of different responsibilities and organize your time much better than you do as an undergrad. There is a reason why applicants are taken more seriously when they have a master's with a thesis. It's because most med schools how brutal grad school can be when compared to the undergrad....and yeah they don't separate undergrads from grad students....they will compare right next to each other.

 

[azcomdiddy]

Are you kidding? Obviously you haven't been to grad school at all and don't really understand what graduate school is about. After getting my masters in physiology where I did complete a thesis, med school has been a breeze. And this is coming from a 3rd year already completing a surgery rotation. Graduate school advisors don't give you pats on the back. It's more like a kick in the butt for not thinking of ten other senarios for your project or yelling at you for not staying up in lab that fifth night to complete a set of experiments. So yeah some of the classes for graduate school can be a little easier but that doesn't mean the experience is easy because of that. You still work your butt off in lab when you come back from class. And besides, if you don't feel that you have enough courses you can still take higher level undergrad courses as a graduate student which is what I actually did do for some biochemistry courses.

Just because you attended a Nazi grad school don't think that your experience is similar to every grad student. I'm sure some former podiatrist thinks medical school is easier than what he faced in podiatry school but like him realize you are the exception and not the rule. The other 99% of grad students would consider medical school much harder. It varies with each program but for everyone who had to work his tail off during grad school, there are 5 others who go out drinking 5 times per week and finish their "research" at their leisure. My roommate two years was never supervised because his professor was always traveling. Another roommate was an MD/PHD candidate and he was challenged by his work but his lifestyle was twice as relaxed compared to his MS1/2 years. Most people would not consider medical school a breeze in comparison to grad school. This is why medical schools largely ignore the inflated GPA's of grad students. It shouldn't be a suprise why many grad students finally have to settle on the Caribbean. Have you ever seen a grad student with less than a 3.6 GPA, I haven't? There is a reason for that... GRADE INFLATION. You can bet that adcoms aren't that impressed when they see a graduate student with a 3.8 GPA since nearly every graduate students boasts a high GPA.

Next I suppose we will receive a scathing review from a dental hygenist who will claim that medical school was so much easier than dental hygeine school.

 

[pathdr2b]

So much for Masters programs teaching one how to "think" through a problem.

You know I REALLY hate to go for the "jugular vein" but when folks take a friendly debate and become nasty, I have to flip hats.

My references to grad school pertain manily to folks going for the MD or MD/PhD so by that definition, you need to back you a$$ out of the conversation. If DO was my goal, I nor many other students probably wouldn't have needed to get that MS degree since these schools look at "upward trends" more than MD schools.

Tell you what, why don't you get a MS then you'll be partially able to have a decent conversation about what grad school is like.

 

[bubbajones]

Ok Does anyone know any Master's programs I should apply to? Someone give me a list or something...here are my stats 3.0 gpa 2.7sci gpa 24mcat. People tell me to do post bacc others say go for a masters? Someone please help me out. My advisors suck. write back please.

 

[njbmd]

The problem is in medical school, you aren't going to be given ample time to think about your classes. You won't be given an A and a pat on the back for simply showing your advisor what you have accomplished. My anatomy professor isn't going to give me an A when I show her all the anatomy flash cards I have made.

In medical school, you take classes....a lot of them...all at once and you have exams every third week in which you have to regurtitate large volumes of material. If you want to think, get your PhD. In medical school, it's about survival. Taking a bunch of blowoff research classes isn't going to tell an adcom that you can handle the brutal schedule of medical school. This is why you hear from so many MPH and Masters grads who had to reapply. Why do you think postbac and "Special" masters programs were created in the first place. It's because the old school path of the MPH and "Masters" wasn't working for most of its grads unless they had spectacular MCAT's.

Unless, you want an MD/PHD like you, it's a waste of time to pursue research you aren't passionate about. For your standard low GPA candidate, research is a waste of time. Just do a postbac or special masters and not waste any more time than you have to.

Hi there,
I am going to disagree about "thinking" in medical school. Medical school is all about problem solving and those who do well, are the people who learn those volumes of materal and learn to apply it quickly to clinical situations. Medical school is all about clinical problem solving. If you are only a "regurgitator", you are going to have huge problems down the road. It's just not that easy.

I went into medical school with a Ph.D which served me well and continues to serve me well. I did research while in medical school and I continue to pursue research as a resident physician. I do not believe for one second, that you have to be passionate about reseach to obtain some benefit from the process. I totally believe that my research was one of the things that honed my approach to medicine and medical problem solving.

There are many roads to medical school and medicine. Doing a masters or Ph.D is one route and there are others. The best thing for me was that I didn't have to pay for any of my graduate coursework as I was on a department research stipend. This might have loads of appeal for someone who wants to do research, take additional classes and not have to pay for them.

Most of the competitive residency programs tend to favor people who have done research and have papers. This was already in place for me even though I continued to do research as a medical student. Am I advocating getting a Ph.D if you really don't like being in the research lab? No, but I do believe that there is value in doing research at any level undergraduate, graduate and while in medical school. Most of the program directors that I encountered on residency interviews tended to agree with me.

If I had not been accepted into medical school, I had already prepared my lectures for the next spring and fall. It kept me away from the mailbox as I waited for my acceptances. Another benefit is that you have something to do during your glide year, finish your thesis/dissertation.

Take the path into medicine that you believe is best for you but don't discount the value of scientific and scholarly investigation. It works on many levels.

njbmd

 

[azcomdiddy]

Hi there,
I am going to disagree about "thinking" in medical school. Medical school is all about problem solving and those who do well, are the people who learn those volumes of materal and learn to apply it quickly to clinical situations. Medical school is all about clinical problem solving. If you are only a "regurgitator", you are going to have huge problems down the road. It's just not that easy.

I went into medical school with a Ph.D which served me well and continues to serve me well. I did research while in medical school and I continue to pursue research as a resident physician. I do not believe for one second, that you have to be passionate about reseach to obtain some benefit from the process. I totally believe that my research was one of the things that honed my approach to medicine and medical problem solving.

There are many roads to medical school and medicine. Doing a masters or Ph.D is one route and there are others. The best thing for me was that I didn't have to pay for any of my graduate coursework as I was on a department research stipend. This might have loads of appeal for someone who wants to do research, take additional classes and not have to pay for them.

Most of the competitive residency programs tend to favor people who have done research and have papers. This was already in place for me even though I continued to do research as a medical student. Am I advocating getting a Ph.D if you really don't like being in the research lab? No, but I do believe that there is value in doing research at any level undergraduate, graduate and while in medical school. Most of the program directors that I encountered on residency interviews tended to agree with me.

If I had not been accepted into medical school, I had already prepared my lectures for the next spring and fall. It kept me away from the mailbox as I waited for my acceptances. Another benefit is that you have something to do during your glide year, finish your thesis/dissertation.

Take the path into medicine that you believe is best for you but don't discount the value of scientific and scholarly investigation. It works on many levels.

njbmd

Nearly every medical student who applies to a competitive program does research and most of those students don't have a Masters or a PhD. Even those who successfully matched in the most competitives fields like dermatology didn't have a graduate degree. The moral of the story is that you don't NEED a graduate degree to do research. I agree that graduate school is an excellent opportunity for those who enjoy research but for most people, it's merely a prolonging of a goal they are passionate about: the M.D. or D.O. Why encourage someone to pursue something that will delay their education if there are other alternatives such as postbacs and special Masters program that can save them time? Lastly, the research you do prior to medical school will often have very little if any correlation to the field you are pursuing as a third year medical student. And even if your research is relevant, you will likely do additional research in a program to network or acquire letters of recommendation so you don't save any time by doing research in advance in a graduate program. Having your M.S. will not really make you stand out as much as you think considering that most medical students will spent months doing research duing summers and clerkships and will be presenting research as well. I think the only graduate degree that can really make an applicant stand out is a PhD during the match. However, considering the time invested into a Ph.D., I would hope that you pursued that for reasons other that simply wanting to get into medical school. For some people, becoming a physician is their priority and thus spending additional years doing research is a waste of time if he or she is not passionate about it. For many people, that's time they could have spent with their families. Therefore, it isn't benefitting anyone to suggest they have to do research to get into medical school. That is simply the furtherest thing from the truth. For someone who just wants to get into medical school, avoid graduate school; it's a waste of time.

 

[azcomdiddy]

You know I REALLY hate to go for the "jugular vein" but when folks take a friendly debate and become nasty, I have to flip hats.

My references to grad school pertain manily to folks going for the MD or MD/PhD so by that definition, you need to back you a$$ out of the conversation. If DO was my goal, I nor many other students probably wouldn't have needed to get that MS degree since these schools look at "upward trends" more than MD schools.

Tell you what, why don't you get a MS then you'll be partially able to have a decent conversation about what grad school is like.

Sigh

That was your reference but unfortunately the thread referenced something entirely different namely graduate education which isn't limited to a PhD. And if you had bothered reading the thread in it's entirety, you would realize that people were debating whether they should pursue a Masters degree to improve their chances of admission. I didn't recall one inquiring whether he or she should get their PhD to get into medical school. And I know no one asked whether getting a PhD will enable one to think. And since you require a PhD to think, I suggest you get another one in philosophy with an emphasis in logic. For one thing, not all MS students are pursuing research. Many are just taking classes and doing non-thesis based course. Second, if M.D. schools don't look favorably on upward trends then explain why they are directly affiliated with special masters and postbac programs that accept students with subpar GPA's. The purpose of these programs is to help students demonstrate an "upward trend" in their grades. The last I checked Columbia, Dartmouth and Georgetown were not affiliated with D.O. schools. I tell you what, when you finally graduate with your M.D./PhD, you can explain all the virtues of graduate education to one of the pre-meds in here. You can explain it to them as their resident because they will probably be your attending by the time you are done with everything.

 

[pathdr2b]

I didn't recall one inquiring whether he or she should get their PhD to get into medical school. And I know no one asked whether getting a PhD will enable one to think. And since you require a PhD to think, I suggest you get another one in philosophy with an emphasis in logic..

Man, you are THICK in the brain!! I have NO idea where you got this from. Are you running low on Prozac because you just pulled this one right out of your a$$!

I tell you what, when you finally graduate with your M.D./PhD, you can explain all the virtues of graduate education to one of the pre-meds in here. You can explain it to them as their resident because they will probably be your attending by the time you graduate.

On a scale of one to ten, how much do you REALLY think future MD/PhD's are concerned about who's going to be on the wards and when?

Actually, I have a better idea, why don't we just ban residencies so we can all get to practice sooner. While were at it rushing to become MD's, lets' just make med school one big coorespondence course that can be completed in 2 years so we can hurry up and become a practicing physician!!

 

[azcomdiddy]

On a scale of one to ten, how much do you REALLY think future MD/PhD's are concerned about who's going to be on the wards and when?

Have you forgotten the point of this conversation? No one is talking about MD/PhD candidates. Hey, that's great if you want to get your M.D./Ph.D. The people in this room don't want their M.D./.Ph.D. The thread is entitled "Masters-do they help get you in?" which has an obvious connotation of "I want to get into medical school so will getting a Masters help me achieve this goal." The people on this thread are trying to get into medical school not get their M.D./Ph.D. For those people, getting the Ph.D. it is a huge waste of time since they want to become physicians as quickly as possible. Would you like me to provide a Power Point presentation next time or did this finally sink in? Really, this is not a difficult concept to grasp.

 

[azcomdiddy]

Actually, I have a better idea, why don't we just ban residencies so we can all get to practice sooner. While were at it rushing to become MD's, lets' just make med school one big coorespondence course that can be completed in 2 years so we can hurry up and become a practicing physician!!

I have an idea, why don't we expand medical school to 8 years so we can all be 40 by the time we get out and never bother having a family let alone a life.

It's nice to see future PhD's making our world a better place

 

[pathdr2b]

It's nice to see future PhD's making our world a better place

 

[azcomdiddy]

An M.D./Ph.D program is immensely more difficult to be accepted to than an M.D. program by itself. Considering this is the Reapplicant forum and nearly everyone here currently lacks the statistics to get into an M.D. program let alone an M.D./Ph.D. program, do you really think people on this forum are so concerned with getting the M.D./Ph.D specifically.

I can see the short bus was a regular part of your morning.

 

[FoughtFyr]

An M.D./Ph.D program is immensely more difficult to be accepted to than an M.D. program by itself. Considering this is the Reapplicant forum and nearly everyone here currently lacks the statistics to get into an M.D. program let alone an M.D./Ph.D. program, do you really think people on this forum are so concerned with getting the M.D./Ph.D specifically.

I can see the short bus was a regular part of your morning.

Actually Slick, I was a reapplicant and got in to an Ph.D. program with a promised (in writing) MD/Ph.D. slot the next year (the department had two spaces and both had been used by the time I applied). This was at a very prestigious east coast school. An argument can be made that if you can perform significant enough research as to make yourself valuable to an academic department, re-applicant or not, room can be made in the medical school for you. This, while difficult and rare, is another way for the determined reapplicant to go.

BTW - I didn't take the slot. I was also accepted into an MD program and went that route instead.

Guess you never know who is riding that little bus. Hey Path, pass the coffee.

- H

 

[BSChemE]

An M.D./Ph.D program is immensely more difficult to be accepted to than an M.D. program by itself. Considering this is the Reapplicant forum and nearly everyone here currently lacks the statistics to get into an M.D. program let alone an M.D./Ph.D. program, do you really think people on this forum are so concerned with getting the M.D./Ph.D specifically.

I can see the short bus was a regular part of your morning.

First of all, I really should be studying for my so called grade inflated Masters classes , but I wanted to defend Path. I really do not think Path was trying to tell everyone to do a MD/PHD. Path just commented that getting a thesis based Masters was a good road to take. Somehow, a couple of people concluded that Path was telling everyone to go out and do a MD/PHD. I also think that Path is going that route because of personal interest, not just getting the PHD before the MD to make the MD application look better.

Also, just beacuse this is an reapplicant forum does not mean everyone here is a reapplicant. Most people check all of the forums. I believe the title of this thread was "Masters programs- Do they help you get in?" not " I am a reapplicant - Should I get a Masters?" This thread is probably of interest to several applicants.

 

[azcomdiddy]

This, while difficult and rare, is another way for the determined reapplicant to go. - H

Before you gloss over terms that you knew you couldn't leave out, please remember that this process is extremely rare and difficult. And it really isn't a way for a determined reapplicant to go because most programs will not accept someone into their M.D./PhD slot because it is an extremely competitive spot. Asking someone to apply to a M.D./Ph.D with a 2.9 undergrad GPA is like asking someone with an 18 MCAT to apply to Harvard and see if they get lucky. I'm sure by some miracle you were accepted to an MD/PhD program with weak stats but then again people win the lottery as well.

Regarding Path and his PhD mantra, I'm aware that he wasn't encouraging people to pursue a PhD. I was just using his argument against him because he tried to back peddle when I confronted him about his snide remark about how doing a thesis "will teach one to think' which has an elitist connotation and suggests that if you don't do a thesis then you are stupid. And then he replied with a weak retort about how he was only addressing the M.D./PhD crowd which was bogus.

I admire those who pursue the M.D./Ph.D. And I would encourage one to pursue such an endeavor if he or she was genuinely passionate about research. However, it should never be used as a tool to get into medical school. For one thing, a person who wasn't interested in research would foolishly spend years doing something they had no real nterest in. Second, a person would be prolonging their desire to graduate from medical school and practice medicine. I take issue when someone implies that it's worth taking extra years to pursue a PhD even if one wasn't passionate about it because of the virtues it could provide one. That's nice and all but many people could give a rats' arse about virtues. Most reapplicants are simply trying to get into medical school as soon as they can. Suggesting a long and ciruitious map to such an endevor by pursuing a graduate degree that one is not passionate about is absolutely ridiculous. It would be a tragedy for someone to steal a postion from someone who is genuinely interested in pursuing a M.D./PhD.

Pursue research because you want to. Don't use it as a tool to get into medical school. There are other more efficient routes to getting into medical school. You don't have to obtain a graduate degree. Those of you who feel they must do complete a thesis oriented MS to get into medical school are sadly misinformed.