Medical Schools by Step 1 score

uva class of '13: 233 avg (sd = 20)

any other schools know?

Here you go. More recent data* is found on the later pages.

*All data is purely anecdotal so heed at your own risk.

Originally Posted by AlexTrebek

uva class of '13: 233 avg (sd = 20)

any other schools know?

first, where did you get this info? was it released by the school.

Second I very highly doubt there are schools that have 238 step 1 averages as is shown in that other thread linked above. There is just no way. My school is top 20 and we were told that usually we are at the average or just a couple points above. I would say that is likely the same for most schools and I'd be surprised if it wasn't.

I did speak to the different caliber of students in another thread but the caliber of students in my view does not correlate to board scores as anyone can study hard for a test and do well. Plus some schools teach to the test, give more time to study, etc so comparing schools via step 1 scores is not very useful. The caliber of a med school is based on the caliber of students coming from that school and board scores play a role but they are not the only thing nor the most important thing that counts.

I've interacted with some students with very good board scores from my school who pretty much suck imo with patients, working with a team, critical thinking, etc. It always baffles me how this can be. Granted, maybe I just think I am the best student ever and if someone doesn't do something exactly as I would then they are dumb but I don't think I'm like that lol.

Everyone I've talked to, including several who go to a top 10 school, have said their board scores were the result of their own studying far more so than their school preparing them. I imagine that certain schools will better prepare their students, but I think that the foundations are set across the board, and that the variability of individual students will far overshadow these differences in curriculum/teaching quality. I also imagine that the simple fact that top schools select for students who excel at standardized tests by putting great emphasis on importance will account for far more of the difference in average board scores than the aforementioned curriculum differences between top schools and the rest.

My school is top 20 and we were told that usually we are at the average or just a couple points above.

Everyone I've talked to, including several who go to a top 10 school, have said their board scores were the result of their own studying far more so than their school preparing them.

However, it certainly helps if your school doesn't test over inane crap that obviously isn't Step material.

The caliber of a med school is based on the caliber of students coming from that school and board scores play a role but they are not the only thing nor the most important thing that counts.

I think that the 8 schools that gave me an interview before having anything other than my piss-poor CV, my PS, and my Step 1 scores would tend to disagree on that last point.

UW 'reporting in'. The administration here doesn't disclose our average, but from what I've heard it's significantly below the national average. We're generally not very well prepared for boards, and given less time than average to study, so that might have something to do with it. Really hard to tell what sort of an effect this has on our match outcomes, though, since many people here begin with primary care as their goal.

Originally Posted by MilkmanAl

However, it certainly helps if your school doesn't test over inane crap that obviously isn't Step material.

This. Over and over and over again. We just had ~8 'authentic' board questions (from some archive somewhere) on a recent final. First legitimate board-style questions we'd seen this year. People freaked out because the questions didn't test the arcane, esoteric, useless information presented in lecture.

Every school scores better than the national average...somehow.

Originally Posted by officedepot

first, where did you get this info? was it released by the school.

Second I very highly doubt there are schools that have 238 step 1 averages as is shown in that other thread linked above. There is just no way. My school is top 20 and we were told that usually we are at the average or just a couple points above. I would say that is likely the same for most schools and I'd be surprised if it wasn't.

I did speak to the different caliber of students in another thread but the caliber of students in my view does not correlate to board scores as anyone can study hard for a test and do well. Plus some schools teach to the test, give more time to study, etc so comparing schools via step 1 scores is not very useful. The caliber of a med school is based on the caliber of students coming from that school and board scores play a role but they are not the only thing nor the most important thing that counts.

I've interacted with some students with very good board scores from my school who pretty much suck imo with patients, working with a team, critical thinking, etc. It always baffles me how this can be. Granted, maybe I just think I am the best student ever and if someone doesn't do something exactly as I would then they are dumb but I don't think I'm like that lol.

Translation: It's impossible for a school that is not a "top 20" to have higher board scores than my school. If it is possible, however, high board scores actually don't mean anything ...That is unless you go to a top 20 school. This is the only time that a high board score equates to a good student.

Originally Posted by tco

Translation: It's impossible for a school that is not a "top 20" to have higher board scores than my school. If it is possible, however, high board scores actually don't mean anything ...That is unless you go to a top 20 school. This is the only time that a high board score equates to a good student.

Thanks for this translation. I was really beginning to think that it is impossible for these school to have 238 avererages.

This thread is pretty useless.

Students earn their board scores.

I agree with your succinct translation. But to read between the lines, however, I believe it goes more like: "I didn't do that well on the boards. And thus the exam doesn't reflect one's ability as a physician."

Originally Posted by tco

Translation: It's impossible for a school that is not a "top 20" to have higher board scores than my school. If it is possible, however, high board scores actually don't mean anything ...That is unless you go to a top 20 school. This is the only time that a high board score equates to a good student.

I've come to the conclusion that officedepot is a status/prestige whore.

Originally Posted by dr zaius

I've come to the conclusion that officedepot is a status/prestige whore.

No way!

Originally Posted by dr zaius

I've come to the conclusion that officedepot is a status/prestige whore.

Really now...

Originally Posted by dr zaius

I've come to the conclusion that officedepot is a status/prestige whore.

hold the phones!

Originally Posted by tco

Translation: It's impossible for a school that is not a "top 20" to have higher board scores than my school. If it is possible, however, high board scores actually don't mean anything ...That is unless you go to a top 20 school. This is the only time that a high board score equates to a good student.

Well said.


Now that I am in the midst of residency interviews, I don't quite understand the fixation with Step I scores. Plenty of to residency programs want to see how you do on Step II now as well before they commit to you. I have several residency directors even tell me that they find a stronger correlation between Step II and residency performance, which is why Step II is becoming increasingly important.

Of course I am not trying to take away from a rocking Step I score, but medical school applicants should move beyond using this as some strong benchmark for the quality of the school. I probably would have gotten the exact same score had I gone to any number of medical schools.


Unless of course you are at a "top 20" school, in which case you should probably just quite medical school if you score less than 1 SD above the average on any of these tests.

Originally Posted by officedepot

board scores play a role but they are not the only thing nor the most important thing that counts.

The original charting outcomes of the match gave odds ratios about which factors predicted success in the match. Step 1 score had the highest odds ratio. It was even more predictive of matching than being MD/PhD.

Originally Posted by thesauce

The original charting outcomes of the match gave odds ratios about which factors predicted success in the match. Step 1 score had the highest odds ratio. It was even more predictive of matching than being MD/PhD.

^this

theres nothing more important than step 1, followed closely by a good audition rotation

Originally Posted by thesauce

The original charting outcomes of the match gave odds ratios about which factors predicted success in the match. Step 1 score had the highest odds ratio. It was even more predictive of matching than being MD/PhD.

charting outcomes does not include things which are not so easily measured such as med school rep, where applicants were applying, grades in clinical years, etc. Step 1 is something every applicant has completed and is the easiest to assess as reseach experience and other various factors are harder to measure because it is so variable.

I'm not saying step 1 isn't important because it is for sure. But there's a ton of other stuff programs will look at when deciding upon who they want to interview and who will subsequently match.

Originally Posted by officedepot

charting outcomes does not include things which are not so easily measured such as med school rep, where applicants were applying, grades in clinical years, etc. Step 1 is something every applicant has completed and is the easiest to assess as reseach experience and other various factors are harder to measure because it is so variable.

I'm not saying step 1 isn't important because it is for sure. But there's a ton of other stuff programs will look at when deciding upon who they want to interview and who will subsequently match.

Graduation from a top 40 NIH medical school, number of research experiences, and AOA were all factors they looked at. It's true that not every factor was included (how could they be?), but it was a pretty solid analysis. If you have good evidence to the contrary (aside from just a general feeling), it would be nice to see it.

As a general rule:

Step 1 >>>>>>>> audition/elective rotations/clinical grades >> everything else

Obviously, certain specialties may differ (Rad Onc) and many applicants will differ (superstars in other parts of app)

Reputation of medical school matters much less than individual achievement in medical school.....unless of course you are a certain poster in these forums who evidently attends one hell of a medical school

IMHO

Originally Posted by officedepot

charting outcomes does not include things which are not so easily measured such as med school rep, where applicants were applying, grades in clinical years, etc. Step 1 is something every applicant has completed and is the easiest to assess as reseach experience and other various factors are harder to measure because it is so variable.

I'm not saying step 1 isn't important because it is for sure. But there's a ton of other stuff programs will look at when deciding upon who they want to interview and who will subsequently match.

Have a look at the tables in this article:
http://journals.lww.com/academicmedi...s_of_a.24.aspx

There's even a breakdown by specialty.

i'm actually coming around to the position that Step 1 is more of a gateway thing than anything else. as in, programs want applicants to meet or exceed their "target score" when selecting people to interview, but other things become more important when it comes to the rank list (letters, clinical grades, interview).

if i'm right, then a 270 is almost never any more useful than a 250, and even 250 isn't that much more helpful than a 240 in most fields, unless you have very specific goals.

Originally Posted by officedepot

... My school is top 20 ...

only top 20? not top 10? get outta here.

Not really same skills. The data for my school shows little to no correlation between mcat and step 1. Mine were completely opposite.

Originally Posted by MossPoh

Not really same skills. The data for my school shows little to no correlation between mcat and step 1. Mine were completely opposite.

obviously step 1 requires a lot of rote memorization relative to the mcat but i think it overall would correlate well if you ranked schools be average matriculating mcat score.

Originally Posted by MossPoh

Not really same skills. The data for my school shows little to no correlation between mcat and step 1. Mine were completely opposite.

There's a lot of data out there indicating that MCAT score tends to be the strongest predictor of USMLE score, especially for Step 1. Try here to start.

Originally Posted by MossPoh

Not really same skills. The data for my school shows little to no correlation between mcat and step 1. Mine were completely opposite.

your school is an outlier. studies show R = .4-.5, a moderate correlation but the best one there is.

Originally Posted by MossPoh

Not really same skills. The data for my school shows little to no correlation between mcat and step 1. Mine were completely opposite.

I would imagine lower ranked schools would have a weaker correlation because they have a higher proportion of students with lower MCATs and those who may be nontrads or late bloomers.

My school prides itself out getting people to outperform their MCAT. Not uncommon for people with mid 20s to score in the 230s and 240s. I had a pretty decent MCAT (33) but I outperformed it as well.

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

I had a pretty decent MCAT (33) but I outperformed it as well.

For sure. For data, I had MCAT of 33 (verbal was an 8) and 25+ on part 1 of usmle. I think the VR section of the MCAT is bs.

http://www.educus.com/Journals/18444195

for School v. Score = More inter-student variability than inter-school.

http://www.educus.com/Journals/17198300

for MCAT = Moderate correlation between MCAT biological sciences and verbal to Step 1 (r=0.60)

Originally Posted by dyeguy21

http://www.educus.com/Journals/18444195

for School v. Score = More inter-student variability than inter-school.

Not surprising, but interesting to see. Always figured that who you were/how you studied were much more important then schools, as most of them teach you the same things in similar ways. I was actually surprised to see the size of the student effect (15% variance compared to 27% inter-individual variance)

Originally Posted by dyeguy21

http://www.educus.com/Journals/18444195

for School v. Score = More inter-student variability than inter-school.

http://www.educus.com/Journals/17198300

for MCAT = Moderate correlation between MCAT biological sciences and verbal to Step 1 (r=0.60)

There is an r of <0.4 for my school. They are all different and depends on the people more than the school.

Originally Posted by MossPoh

There is an r of <0.4 for my school. They are all different and depends on the people more than the school.

out of curiousity, does your school have an average MCAT <30? because off the top of my head, i would think that the correlation breaks down a bit at schools with lower averages, and tightens up for ones with a higher concentration of better test-takers. i could be wrong, but it would help explain the discrepancy.

Originally Posted by gravitywave

out of curiousity, does your school have an average MCAT <30? because off the top of my head, i would think that the correlation breaks down a bit at schools with lower averages, and tightens up for ones with a higher concentration of better test-takers. i could be wrong, but it would help explain the discrepancy.

Yes - I think it's 29ish.

Originally Posted by AlexTrebek

uva class of '13: 233 avg (sd = 20)

any other schools know?

What was 2010's avg?

Originally Posted by gravitywave

out of curiousity, does your school have an average MCAT <30? because off the top of my head, i would think that the correlation breaks down a bit at schools with lower averages, and tightens up for ones with a higher concentration of better test-takers. i could be wrong, but it would help explain the discrepancy.

Yes, as stated above.

I had a 27 MCAT on second try and got a 240+ on step 1, which was underperforming from practice exams.

Your argument is sound in theory, but that would also imply those with lower MCAT are poor test takers. It also does not take GPA into account (and tons of other things). The best predictors of step 1 scores are pre-clinical grades and nbme performance. When you are dealing with classes around 100-150, it doesn't take much to muck up averages.

...

Originally Posted by MossPoh

Yes, as stated above.

I had a 27 MCAT on second try and got a 240+ on step 1, which was underperforming from practice exams.

Your argument is sound in theory, but that would also imply those with lower MCAT are poor test takers. It also does not take GPA into account (and tons of other things). The best predictors of step 1 scores are pre-clinical grades and nbme performance. When you are dealing with classes around 100-150, it doesn't take much to muck up averages.

Also makes you wonder about schools like Mayo, which has a 50 person class, a reasonable MCAT average yet class STEP scores averages hover around 240.

Originally Posted by Techmed07

Also makes you wonder about schools like Mayo, which has a 50 person class, a reasonable MCAT average yet class STEP scores averages hover around 240.

What's Mayo's MCAT average?

240 isn't surprising at top schools. A low 30's MCAT projects into the low 240s I think.

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

What's Mayo's MCAT average?

240 isn't surprising at top schools. A low 30's MCAT projects into the low 240s I think.

If that were true then the avg step1 would be in the 240s, not 1 std deviation below in the 220s

Originally Posted by turkeyjerky

If that were true then the avg step1 would be in the 240s, not 1 std deviation below in the 220s

I'm not up on recent data but I thought the average for matriculants was around 28-29. I'm talking about scores around 32-33.

And I guess I left out the part where the SD for the correlation was ~15. Oops

Originally Posted by 2012mdc

What's Mayo's MCAT average?

240 isn't surprising at top schools. A low 30's MCAT projects into the low 240s I think.

I believe last year's class averaged about a 235 with an MCAT average of around 33.

I know several people here at Mayo that have had MCATs around 31 with STEP 1 over 250+.

We have some really great teaching (and not so great), but we are prepared very well for the exam. It's just a matter of putting in the the time and working efficiently from what those that have made such strides have said.