OOP cutoff is 3.9!

[champ]

so whats the deal with this international pool of applicants having a cut off of 3.5???? (As posted on the mcgill twitter feed). Why cant we all just apply as internationals then....

[champ]

The international pool isn't very big.

 

There are two reasons why you wouldn't want to apply as an international.

1. You're Canadian and they'll find out you're applying through the wrong pool.

2. There are only so many seats for international students.

 

Yeah I figured that much. So why are there international spots? cash grab?

[deeman101]

Most OOPs from years before already had 3.9+, FYI.

 

It is brutal, I agree. What I find "hilarious" is how McGill seems to deliver the news in such a direct, dream-crushing manner.

 

Haha! Welcome to McGill! Wait 'till you see what the MMI does to your dreams.

 

does anyone know if this GPA cut-off is according to a McGill conversion (such that >85 percent = 4.0) or a standard OMSAS conversion for Ontario educated individuals ?

 

It doesn't use the OMSAS scale. It uses the more lenient 85+ = 4.0 scale.

 

ALSO, would a 3.99 GPA (plus three decent CV highlights/abstract) guarantee interview seeing as a 3.90 pseudo-cut-off has been established?

 

There is never a guarantee of an interview.

 

Yeah I figured that much. So why are there international spots? cash grab?

 

Because it would be extremely politically incorrect if QC gov't doesn't fund international med students. I mean they're already pretty politically incorrect but this is another level. At ~$42k/yr its still a lot cheaper than most US med schools.

[future_doc]

So why are there international spots? cash grab?

 

Yes. And international graduates are good for PR in helping maintain the "international" reputation/recognition.

[bjsdefz]

3.9+, matches McGill's "reputation", I guess. But it's really not McGill's fault.

 

This situation will only get worse, unless they decide to allow more doctors to be trained. Canada becomes more and more dreadfully in need of doctors, whereas more and more eager potential doctors and fine trained foreign doctors are refused to be entitled doctors here.

 

After seeing McGill's admission this year, maybe the Quebec government will start sponsoring the French version of MCAT exam.

[champ]

Most OOPs from years before already had 3.9+, FYI.

 

 

 

Haha! Welcome to McGill! Wait 'till you see what the MMI does to your dreams.

 

 

 

It doesn't use the OMSAS scale. It uses the more lenient 85+ = 4.0 scale.

 

 

 

There is never a guarantee of an interview.

 

 

 

Because it would be extremely politically incorrect if QC gov't doesn't fund international med students. I mean they're already pretty politically incorrect but this is another level. At ~$42k/yr its still a lot cheaper than most US med schools.

 

SO just to clarify that 3.9 cut off is not based on the OMSAS scale?

[deeman101]

SO just to clarify that 3.9 cut off is not based on the OMSAS scale?

 

Yes, it is NOT based on the OMSAS scale. Because the OMSAS scale is invented and used by Ontario med schools only. AFAIK

[GGGSaint]

Yes, it is NOT based on the OMSAS scale. Because the OMSAS scale is invented and used by Ontario med schools only. AFAIK

 

Used at Dalhousie as well.

[bobsaget]

dude, you'll prolly get the interview. don't stress.

 

not a dude.. ha

 

deeman, thanks for the clarifications. okay, so my grades (percentages from my home institution) will be converted to McGill GPA then? neat.

 

oh! p.s.. did not intend to say "guarantee" i was speaking more from a probability stand point. oopsee.

[MedPen]

Most OOPs from years before already had 3.9+, FYI.

Haha! Welcome to McGill! Wait 'till you see what the MMI does to your dreams.

 

Am I missing some key piece of info on the McGill MMI? Everyone talks about it like it's the MMI that pwned all the other MMIs... I did the french MMI and it wasn't bad at all. I certainly didn't walk out of there feeling like it was the end of my medical dreams. Is McGill's version that radically different?

[ontariomed0002]

What scale does McGill use to convert GPAs then from OOP applicants?

[samy]

Am I missing some key piece of info on the McGill MMI? Everyone talks about it like it's the MMI that pwned all the other MMIs... I did the french MMI and it wasn't bad at all. I certainly didn't walk out of there feeling like it was the end of my medical dreams. Is McGill's version that radically different?

 

McGill's MMIs were really cool to do. Way better than the French ones.

Smaller groups, actual medical students where there to talk to you, answer all your questions.....

I'd say it was more human.

[rmorelan]

3.9+, matches McGill's "reputation", I guess. But it's really not McGill's fault.

 

This situation will only get worse, unless they decide to allow more doctors to be trained. Canada becomes more and more dreadfully in need of doctors, whereas more and more eager potential doctors and fine trained foreign doctors are refused to be entitled doctors here.

 

After seeing McGill's admission this year, maybe the Quebec government will start sponsoring the French version of MCAT exam.

 

I actually wonder how much longer there will be calls for expansion - the latest reports are suggesting the gap is closing overall and are beginning to urge a slow down/stop of the expansion of medical school spots. This year was the first time in a while where the average age of doctors in Canada did not increase (thanks to the largest increase in doctors in 3 decades last year). In the last decade we have upped the number of doctors by 12,000. To put it in perspective there were 201 active physicians per 100,000 population across Canada in 2009, up from 190 per 100,000 in 2005, and 150 per 100,000 in 1980.

 

What I am saying is that if we do nothing more than mantain our current and relatively recently increased number of spots the shortage is projected to clear, and there is a time in the future where when we may need to actually drop the numbers again. Since is very hard to increase capacity beyond a point ( you have to start building expensive things ) I can see the government not holding off past the relatively cheaper satallite efforts. By the time the build a new school (usually 10 years) and actually train a doctor to completion (say a min of 6 years) it will be 2027.

[mm88]

What scale does McGill use to convert GPAs then from OOP applicants?

 

McGill's own scale. Anything 85% + is a 4.0, whereas most other schools have 93-100 as a 4.0.

 

This might be the reason for the ZOMG! 3.9 cutoff. It's not on the OMSAS scale, so if you look at it in terms of percentages and reconvert to McGill's GPA scale it is pretty in line with the kind of OOP standards other universities have set.

[LupeFiasco]

To be perfectly honest, it doesn't take a genius to have some foresight and realize that by removing the MCAT as part of the application the school will have more applicants. You can further go on to deduce that the school will likely have to raise the GPA cutoffs.

 

On their admissions website, I think the minimum GPA for OOP was like 3.6 or lower (probably lower). Quite a few people spent a LOT of time and money to apply and their application will just get tossed (or already has been).

 

I feel really bad for these people and I implore them to seriously ask McGill for their money back.

 

- Lupe

[MedPen]

.

 

On their admissions website, I think the minimum GPA for OOP was like 3.6 or lower (probably lower). Quite a few people spent a LOT of time and money to apply and their application will just get tossed (or already has been).

- Lupe

 

That's why I was surprised by the high OOP cutoff vs the one stated on their website. Of course, I was expecting the cutoff to increase with the removal of the MCAT required but not this drastically and certainly not this categorically. I would assume that around 70-80% of the 1300 applicants were ineligible based on the 3.9 cutoff...

[masaraksh]

That's why I was surprised by the high OOP cutoff vs the one stated on their website. Of course, I was expecting the cutoff to increase with the removal of the MCAT required but not this drastically and certainly not this categorically. I would assume that around 70-80% of the 1300 applicants were ineligible based on the 3.9 cutoff...

 

Really, that many? Well in a way that makes me happy.

[osmosis]

3.9? 'effin ridiculous.

 

i love how medschools continue to say they want "well-rounded" doctors and applicants. how the f**k do you expect to have well rounded students with a cutoff like that? you're only going to get people who spend every waking moment in the library studying, instead of those who work, volunteer, play sports, and gain life expereince so that they actually know how to TALK to their patients and families instead of being an introverted prescprition doctor.

 

god.

[let.it.be]

Let's watch the assumptions on what a 3.9 student is like. not all of us live in the library every waking hour. Personally speaking, I have good research experience and several varied/unique extra-curricular activities, many that were leadership roles. I also kept an active social life during my undergrad. I also am confident this is the norm and not the exception, because I do not consider myself to be exceptionally smart - I just know how to time manage, work hard, and enjoy the ride.

 

Does having a specific cut off suck? Yes. Think of how many great candidates get axed by Queens and UWO just because of one section of their MCAT. But what I have learned in this process is that it is such a great thing schools emphasize different things/treat applications differently, and so while you might not be one school's cup of tea, you have other options.

[gouldj7]

3.9? 'effin ridiculous.

 

i love how medschools continue to say they want "well-rounded" doctors and applicants. how the f**k do you expect to have well rounded students with a cutoff like that? you're only going to get people who spend every waking moment in the library studying, instead of those who work, volunteer, play sports, and gain life expereince so that they actually know how to TALK to their patients and families instead of being an introverted prescprition doctor.

 

god.

 

With the number of applicant they recieve, I think it is safe to say they will have no trouble finding well rounded people who incorporate library studies and 3.9's into that roundedness. Aka they need to have some sort of quantifiable cut-off. Frustrating yes, but the reality is those 175 odd students will be well rounded individuals with gpa's closer to 3.95

[Robin Hood]

3.9? 'effin ridiculous.

 

i love how medschools continue to say they want "well-rounded" doctors and applicants. how the f**k do you expect to have well rounded students with a cutoff like that? you're only going to get people who spend every waking moment in the library studying, instead of those who work, volunteer, play sports, and gain life expereince so that they actually know how to TALK to their patients and families instead of being an introverted prescprition doctor.

 

god.

 

There are people who manage to get a 3.9 and have a life, they happen to be much smarter or organized than the average, and that's what med schools want.

[Andie]

My McGill GPA was 3.89 Guess my app was thrown in the garbage bin...

[masaraksh]

3.9? 'effin ridiculous.

 

i love how medschools continue to say they want "well-rounded" doctors and applicants. how the f**k do you expect to have well rounded students with a cutoff like that? you're only going to get people who spend every waking moment in the library studying, instead of those who work, volunteer, play sports, and gain life expereince so that they actually know how to TALK to their patients and families instead of being an introverted prescprition doctor.

 

god.

 

bitter? you are making so many incorrect assumptions its incredible. glad to hear you think you have more "life experience" than others.

[David Med]

There are three groups of people who get a GPA of 3.9+:

 

1. People who study day and night and don't do anything else.

2. People who pick basket weaving majors.

3. People who are naturally gifted and smart and can still do a bunch of extracurriculars without having to spend the majority of their waking lives in the library.

 

I know it's a shock, but given the number of applicants there are some renaissance men and women out there who are, well, better than you at many things.

 

You still need to maintain a balance in your personal life in order to succeed even if you say people who gets 3,9 study all night long, they still have a personality and social needs. It's easy to give eager to people who succed more than you just by saying that they are nerd and that they study all day, but the real question to ask yourself is are you ready to work like that in order to achieve the objective you've fixed?

 

These people who gets 3,9 GPA whether they are smart or not, I respect them because I know for sure that they work and that they are ready to make sacrifices to achieve what they want and that's one prerequisite in my opinion to be a great doctor. I know that grades doesn't explain everything, but the one that get 4,0 and have no social life is a MINORITY. Same thing for the great gifted people you seems to all worry about , MINORITY there. Most people works for the grades they get and they deserve some respect.

 

Just face the fact that you have poor time management and one more thing is you need a lot of motivation to give constant effort till the end of the semester..

[mnbv]

First off, I think we should all admit that that many of the active members on this website (myself included) make up what most people would call keeners. Most probably have great GPAs, and many surely have GPAs above 3.9. But for those who don't -- don’t be discouraged. This sample of people is unlikely to be representative of the entire cohort of applicants to all the medical schools you’re looking to apply to.

 

Before belittling the concerns of those frustrated by the 3.9 OOP cutoff and calling them bitter, maybe we can take a moment to consider the motivation of the admissions committee in setting the cutoff as high as they did -- I think that therein lies the frustration.

 

For full disclosure, I just want to say that I'm IP, but this news came as a pretty big shock to me too.

 

A quick look at median GPAs of students accepted to American medical schools, as published by the AAMC, is pretty interesting (see http://www.washington.edu/uaa/gateway/advising/downloads/gpamcat.pdf). Here's a sample:

 

Yale: 3.81

Boston University: 3.74

Harvard: 3.87

Johns Hopkins: 3.87

Tufts: 3.69

Stanford: 3.8

Mount Sinai: 3.75

Columbia: 3.77

University of Pennsylvania: 3.82

Brown: 3.76

Georgetown University: 3.69

 

Only one school on that list had a median accepted student GPA of more than 3.9 (Washington University at 3.91).

 

What strikes me here is that these are median values for some of the best universities in the world. That means that half of students admitted had GPAs lower than the above numbers. Now I understand that these values are from the United States, where the med school landscape is different, and that those admitted probably had stellar letters and experience, especially for the Ivy Leagues. But so too do many of the OOP students who applied to McGill and were just told that they wouldn’t be invited for an interview because they didn’t have a 3.9. Apparently Columbia thought that people with grades well below that had something to offer.

 

I can think of no reason for McGill to decide to only invite applicants with a >3.9 GPA for interviews other than trying to save the time it would take to give all the OOP applications proper consideration. I acknowledge the considerable challenge involved in trying to sift through so many autobiographical sketches (or abstracts, since apparently it would take too long to read a proper letter) and all the rest, but in choosing to use the single criteria of GPA as the deciding factor that could prevent good candidates from getting an interview, the admissions committee has demonstrated that they are simply unwilling to take the necessary steps to really choose the best candidates. Surely an isolated GPA, in the absence of consideration to program, school, or the person’s story, cannot be the best predictor of future performance as a doctor. Their decision to use only that is not in the best interest of the applicants or the school.

 

Although there might be more than enough good candidates from the >3.9 group, there are certainly at least a few people with grades slightly below that who deserve an interview. McGill’s claim that they look at the candidate as a whole has not proven to be true here. Of course it’s to be expected that the competition would be fierce for so few OOP spots, and that many, if not most, of the best overall candidates would fall in that >3.9 group. But if McGill really wants to train the best doctors, a more holistic approach in the selection process is absolutely required. The corner-cutting that seems to be going on is just not acceptable.