So there are a plethora of accounts for why diagnostics are not meaningful. Particularly Sn2d's argument comes to mind. I took a diagnostic today as it is required by our pre health committee at my school. I scored a perfectly balanced 30. The argument against diagnostics is that they artificially provide low scores. Does anyone believe they can do the inverse (i.e. can they artificially provide a good score)? I'm not taking this to mean I don't need to prepare. Obviously I want to score as high as possible, but does a decent score on a diagnostic indicate a strong starting point or is the consensus that regardless of score it is meaningless? If it helps, it was the Kaplan diagnostic.
Diagnostics...again
- Thread starter SMIGuy
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2011
- Messages
- 2,171
- Reaction score
- 863
@SMIGuy
I think the Kaplan diagnostic provides inflated scores. IIRC, the curve for the science sections is unrealistically lenient.
I think I scored ~34 when I had yet to take Organic Chemistry or Physics*. When I had finished my all prereqs, I took a TPR diagnostic and got ~28 (which was much more representative of my content deficiencies).
*I did have a semi-decent GenChem and GenBio background though.
I think the Kaplan diagnostic provides inflated scores. IIRC, the curve for the science sections is unrealistically lenient.
I think I scored ~34 when I had yet to take Organic Chemistry or Physics*. When I had finished my all prereqs, I took a TPR diagnostic and got ~28 (which was much more representative of my content deficiencies).
*I did have a semi-decent GenChem and GenBio background though.
Similar threads
