Transcripts

[astudentis]

Alright, I get that most schools have a pass/fail system (whats indicated on official transcripts). Some schools have Honors/pass/fail system.

 

When applying for carms, would one system work in advantage for the applicant? (i.e. if you get a lot of honors passes)?

 

Also, is it common among applicants to include graded (unofficial transcripts with %grades) with the applications (as I heard a student, apparently in 4th year, say that they were going to).

 

just wondering:confused:

[Madz25]

I dont think one is an advantage over the other...in fact, I feel if you go to an H/P/F school, you're obliged to get as many H's as possible especially if you're trying for a competitive specialty. No such problem in a P/F school.

 

Nobody I know sent in the unofficial transcript with % grades. I heard of someone from another school sending in NBME grades but I never did....nor can I think of anyone at Dal that did.

 

Edited to add: I sent undergrad transcripts (with grades) only to the programs that requested them (even if it was suggested and not required).

[crush]

The transcripts send in were ONLY pass/fail. Though I remember that some of my classmates had to send in their undergrad transcripts with actual marks.

 

I personally don't think that H/P/F has an advantage, unless you are all H's. In fact, I think it's a disadvantage if you have a bunch of P's in H/P/F. I know program directors have been said to like H/P/F, but it's not a great comparator given that not all schools have it. At least in P/F everyone is all equalized (which is good if you are not ultra-H-man). I think most schools are switching to P/F now if they haven't already.

[entkeener]

We should go back to GPA. Right now there is no objective measure of medical knowledge. As it stands, your luck in the match is based on who you know.

 

Welcome to the real world... that's how things work after CaRMS, and it's how most fields outside of medicine function. Most program directors I've spoken to would rather have someone they think would fit well in their program than have the most brilliant jerk in the lot. An ounce of street smarts is worth more than a pound of book smarts, and lets face it, just about everyone in medical school has book smarts anyway- who cares about whether you got 92% vs 94% on an exam in first year?!?

[apache]

Is clinical aptitude based on preclinical marks? A lot of people aren't good test takers but are great on the wards. I've asked questions I've had on exams to docs I've shadowed and they've told me their not sure... you forget most of the details anyways, what matters are the concepts and the ability to think through problems and do proper research when you're not sure what's going on.

 

Maybe all our marks should be shown, small groups, clinical skills... in addition to exam marks.

 

On an aside, I've been told by 3 of the deans at my school that the most important thing, in terms of evaluation, are your clerkship evaluations.

Your first two years just say you passed and didn't have any ethical problems.

 

We should go back to GPA. Right now there is no objective measure of medical knowledge. As it stands, your luck in the match is based on who you know.

[Destiny Gundam]

A lot of people aren't good test takers but are great on the wards

 

Yup that's me alright.