MCAT accommodations no longer get flagged

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

pithy84

Full Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2014
Messages
247
Reaction score
158
It looks like people who receive accommodations on the MCAT will no longer have their score flagged:

AAMC website announcement

I make no value judgment about whether score flagging is good or bad (not at present). However, I invite other people to post their opinions.

Interestingly, I don't see any news stories about this. Prior to this policy change, which takes effect in "late March of 2015", people who received MCAT accommodations for a disability got an asterisk or something similar stating that the test was "administered under non-standard conditions". Although this asterisk sometimes meant the student got extended time, it could also appear if the proctor fell asleep during the test (true story) or if there was a power outage during the test (also a true story). Same asterisk in all cases.

Of note, the MCAT is the last major exam in the US to abandon the policy of flagging scores. The LSAT (law school admission test) had to stop flagging scores in 2014 because they lost a lawsuit, it was a somewhat major news item. The LSAT was also fined several million dollars. News stories at that time pointed out that the MCAT was the only holdout, and their policy probably would not withstand a lawsuit.

The SAT had to stop flagging scores in 2002, also because they lost a lawsuit.

The GRE (for grad school) is not flagged. The TOEFL (test of English as a foreign language) is not flagged. The GMAT (for business school) is not flagged. I have grown bored of looking up standardized tests, it is apparent that none of them are flagged anymore.

Receiving accommodations on the MCAT is still extremely difficult. The MCAT has a reputation for setting the bar extremely high, relative to other standardized tests. According to the latest data I can find, less than 1% of MCAT examinees are approved for extended time, stop-the-clock breaks, extended breaks, or other accommodations that change the timing. Accommodations for personal medical items (such as food, water, or medication) are more common and apparently easier to get. Other accommodations include increased font size for poor vision. All these accommodations used to get an asterisk (a flag), now none will.

Whether it is fair to grant extended time is a difficult question, but it is possible to address this question with science. Unfortunately, this research has not been done in the case of the MCAT. Research does exist for the SAT, and it seems that extended time on the SAT is indeed fair. The disabled students who receive extended time go on to do well in college, their SAT scores remain a valid predictor of college grades.

From a legal standpoint, it seems rather clear that score flagging was a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Every time this question was tested by a court, the court ruled that score flagging is illegal (see the LSAT decision in 2014 and the SAT decision in 2002). The ADA makes it very clear that employers and schools cannot ask applicants if they are disabled (with limited exceptions). If you cannot ask, then why should you be notified?

The ADA is actually an interesting law. A man applying for a job was asked if he was disabled, and he lied and said no. Upon learning of his disability, the employer fired him for lying in his interview. This went to court, and the court ruled that the man had been wrongfully terminated. The man had a right to lie, because the question itself was illegal. The opposing lawyers argued that the man should have told his interviewer, "that question is illegal, I will not answer it," but the court found that answering in that manner would potentially bias the interviewer. Lying was legally permissible under those circumstances.

As I mentioned in another post, the ADA does not protect people with temporary disabilities such as broken bones. The MCAT doesn't allow you to have a cast on, and they are not obligated to bend this policy, even with advance notice and a doctor's note. This seems rather silly to me, but in theory you could hide a cheat sheet inside your cast. Also in theory, you can wait until your bone heals and then take the MCAT.

Laws are weird.

Members don't see this ad.
 
@efle I think we should all be well aware that fairness has nothing to do with this test. Who wins out, given the circumstances, seems to be what matters most. As long as you're not breaking the rules, you're within your rights as a competitor to do whatever is necessary to beat the percentage of people you need to beat to get to where you want to be. Mental illness is only an issue because it was made to be through lawsuits or the significant threat thereof. There's no greater force at work here. Attempting to truly equalize everybody would not have results preferable for the AAMC. Everyone's test would have an identical score for a context in which the optimal point of true equalization was reached; consequently the test would be a useless measure of student superiority and lose its defining edge as a "differentiator."

"Fairness" is a subjective abstraction. There's so many variables here to consider - mental disposition certainly being one of them - that you couldn't truly make a judgment on the fairness of this exam. The data, showing the differences between each and every person taking the test and then the subjective judgment about whether such differences have been "fairly achieved," is lacking, to say the least. That is not to mention that many important variables may not even be able to be accurately measured.

Good luck making some real sense out of this thing. Should we talk about partisan politics next?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I can only speak for myself... knowing my limitations - ER and surgery - are not in my wheel house. Critical to anyone with any disability is knowing the limitations of that disability.

There are always going to be people who can jump the hoops and get pandered to in order to get accommodations from the schools. I have to believe that the AAMC is less likely to pander to anyone and also just as likely to punish anyone who tries to help someone pander for MCAT accommodations.

For instance, my original eval done in 2012 was 1 month too old for the MCAT this year and the requested accommodations. I have moved out of state from the original provider of that eval... Google became my friend and I tried to find an MD - forensic psych or psych - who did ADHD testing that could possibly perform the eval and then write the assessment.

The first psych I went to was all gung-ho... "Yep, I can do that! No problem, pay me $300..." however, when he read the requirements of the AAMC, the written report, the signature of the evaluator that shows the ### of the physician, and the rubber hit the road, he backed out. I gotta believe because if he pushed something he was not qualified to do, it would raise questions with the organization that licenses him. He took my money without question then backed out... he likes pushing weight loss meds ;)

The person who did my eval specializes in ADHD testing along with autism, dyslexia, etc. She is a PsyD from a top 10 university.

One day of testing is only one piece of 10 that are required for accommodations. Elementary school records depicting ADHD issues, junior high, senior high, college testing and accommodations are required. Then there's the work portion. ADHD accommodations REQUIRE the disability to affect MORE than one category of life so either work, home, social, etc. Once that box is checked, then it is required to have substantial letters to evidence how the disability has affected those situations and how accommodating them has helped. For me, I had work. My former bosses (4 of them) all wrote letters stating varying degrees of knowing about the ADHD, and how putting me in a conference room or private office helped me focus more efficiently.

After all of that, one must provide evidence of having been accommodated at the college where premed courses were taken.

Even with all of the former without the accommodations in college, the application will be denied. It's sort of like AAMC uses a progression type of standard to assess whether or not to grant accommodations. I know of a student who was not accommodated in college and despite having the eval, was denied.

Hope that helps shed some light on an interesting topic. Whether or not the ** appear on the MCAT or not, it's great to have a discussion with people about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I can only speak for myself... knowing my limitations - ER and surgery - are not in my wheel house. Critical to anyone with any disability is knowing the limitations of that disability.

There are always going to be people who can jump the hoops and get pandered to in order to get accommodations from the schools. I have to believe that the AAMC is less likely to pander to anyone and also just as likely to punish anyone who tries to help someone pander for MCAT accommodations.

For instance, my original eval done in 2012 was 1 month too old for the MCAT this year and the requested accommodations. I have moved out of state from the original provider of that eval... Google became my friend and I tried to find an MD - forensic psych or psych - who did ADHD testing that could possibly perform the eval and then write the assessment.

The first psych I went to was all gung-ho... "Yep, I can do that! No problem, pay me $300..." however, when he read the requirements of the AAMC, the written report, the signature of the evaluator that shows the ### of the physician, and the rubber hit the road, he backed out. I gotta believe because if he pushed something he was not qualified to do, it would raise questions with the organization that licenses him. He took my money without question then backed out... he likes pushing weight loss meds ;)

The person who did my eval specializes in ADHD testing along with autism, dyslexia, etc. She is a PsyD from a top 10 university.

One day of testing is only one piece of 10 that are required for accommodations. Elementary school records depicting ADHD issues, junior high, senior high, college testing and accommodations are required. Then there's the work portion. ADHD accommodations REQUIRE the disability to affect MORE than one category of life so either work, home, social, etc. Once that box is checked, then it is required to have substantial letters to evidence how the disability has affected those situations and how accommodating them has helped. For me, I had work. My former bosses (4 of them) all wrote letters stating varying degrees of knowing about the ADHD, and how putting me in a conference room or private office helped me focus more efficiently.

After all of that, one must provide evidence of having been accommodated at the college where premed courses were taken.

Even with all of the former without the accommodations in college, the application will be denied. It's sort of like AAMC uses a progression type of standard to assess whether or not to grant accommodations. I know of a student who was not accommodated in college and despite having the eval, was denied.

Hope that helps shed some light on an interesting topic. Whether or not the ** appear on the MCAT or not, it's great to have a discussion with people about it.
I agree with above. It is not easy to get accommodations. I had test scores back to middle school and 2 PhD evaluations submitted to be granted a bit of extra time for a learning disability. MCAT is very picky about who gets it, and what you get. So few students with disabilities are able to maintain a competitive G P A and ace the MCAT that the number of applicants with accommodations is very low.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
@efle I think we should all be well aware that fairness has nothing to do with this test. Who wins out, given the circumstances, seems to be what matters most. As long as you're not breaking the rules, you're within your rights as a competitor to do whatever is necessary to beat the percentage of people you need to beat to get to where you want to be. Mental illness is only an issue because it was made to be through lawsuits or the significant threat thereof. There's no greater force at work here. Attempting to truly equalize everybody would not have results preferable for the AAMC. Everyone's test would have an identical score for a context in which the optimal point of true equalization was reached; consequently the test would be a useless measure of student superiority and lose its defining edge as a "differentiator."

"Fairness" is a subjective abstraction. There's so many variables here to consider - mental disposition certainly being one of them - that you couldn't truly make a judgment on the fairness of this exam. The data, showing the differences between each and every person taking the test and then the subjective judgment about whether such differences have been "fairly achieved," is lacking, to say the least. That is not to mention that many important variables may not even be able to be accurately measured.

Good luck making some real sense out of this thing. Should we talk about partisan politics next?

It makes perfect sense to me, since I never considered it a fair test. It inherently rewards, among other things, naturally fast and accurate minds. The reason the accommodation markings were a good thing imo is precisely for the bolded reason - you need to be aware of circumstances with changed rules for the same reasons you want to be aware of broken rules. Someone with a 99th percentile accommodated score cannot logically be seen as demonstrating all the things a 99th percentile score normally demonstrates, and if they are viewed equally it's ultimately detrimental for the ability-based part of admissions. But, I'm certainly a minority. Maybe it's PC to view test accommodations like wheelchair access ramps for some logic I just can't wrap my mind around.

Though I suppose a more fitting comparison would be to wheelchair access ramps which are now to be used in secret and only allow passage to people in wheelchairs for the right, well-documented reasons.

I agree with above. It is not easy to get accommodations. I had test scores back to middle school and 2 PhD evaluations submitted to be granted a bit of extra time for a learning disability. MCAT is very picky about who gets it, and what you get. So few students with disabilities are able to maintain a competitive gap and ace the MCAT that the number of applicants with accommodations is very low.

It doesn't really matter if the number is low. A small number of successful cheaters would still be a bad thing. If the amount of extra time granted was enough that you could eventually feel fully finished with your passages/answers, then you were not tested for the same abilities as a typical test taker, especially in Verbal.
 
My brother and I have had numerous PM discussions with accommodated applicants over the past 2 cycles, and not one reported the flagged MCAt getting any attention. I think med schools are on board with ADA requirements, even if the MCAT took too long to get with other standardized test providers in not flagging accommodated tests.
 
My brother and I have had numerous PM discussions with accommodated applicants over the past 2 cycles, and not one reported the flagged MCAt getting any attention. I think med schools are on board with ads requirements, even if the MCAT took too long to get with other standardized test providers in not flagging accommodated tests.
You realize that this could be due to a selection bias where the schools inviting them for interview were the ones that don't care about flagged tests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You realize that this could be due to a selection bias where the schools inviting them for interview were the ones that don't care about flagged tests.
Yes I believe top 20 med schools have selection bias for class diversity, including folks who think differently.
 
Oh definitely some do. But I'd wager others still prefer scores that did not carry asterisks.
It would actually be great to not receive any interviews from schools that discriminate students based on their disability, it just shows their true moralities and how they would treat students that do get accepted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It inherently rewards, among other things, naturally fast and accurate minds.

Well, or minds that are supplemented to become fast/accurate, legally and within the rules of the exam. Amphetamines may play a significant role in helping one who is naturally less inclined to focus, but this is a sensible thing to allow as the individual, on an average day, will be taking these meds anyway, and is therefore at their baseline performance level. You don't have to worry about how they will be "accommodated" throughout med school and residency, as they can easily accommodate themselves quickly and inconspicuously with medication. It's when one requires something that isn't easily and readily administered in a realistic environment, such as perfect silence for an extended period of time as @Ad2b mentioned, that one seems to be relying on a supplement that can only work to their advantage in a controlled, theoretical (academic) environment. One would worry about these individuals actually joining the work force and having to deal with a range of completely uncontrolled, random, and high-stress situations where the individual has to, in spite of it all, be able to focus to the utmost level for the sake of the patient's well being.

We may also assume it is possible to argue that inherent intelligence/quickness/ability to focus is unfair and therefore provides a sort of "birthright" advantage over others.
 
It would actually be great to not receive any interviews from schools that discriminate students based on their disability, it just shows their true moralities and how they would treat students that do get accepted.

Simple supply and demand. They are far from being the only ones who offer admission to medical education. People with disabilities desire medical education and have other schools that are available to them and willing to supply them with medical education. Therefore those with disabilities demanding the service of medical education don't have to be concerned with the requirements of a supplier that has no leverage. Of course, all of this is a moot point anyway. No one can tell now. But maybe it'll become a common interview question as a way for certain schools to fight back and find out anyway (considering every pre-med knows providing false information about their accommodations would sink them anyway). They'd provide the info during the interview, and then the school knows. It's spur of the moment, so the student wouldn't have time to think of a game plan on how to address it, since they expected it not to be an issue. Consequently, students that would have had asterisks (but now don't) are still at a disadvantage. Maybe. I doubt schools could be so shrewd, but who knows!
 
Simple supply and demand. They are far from being the only ones who offer admission to medical education. People with disabilities desire medical education and have other schools that are available to them and willing to supply them with medical education. Therefore those with disabilities demanding the service of medical education don't have to be concerned with the requirements of a supplier that has no leverage. Of course, all of this is a moot point anyway. No one can tell now. But maybe it'll become a common interview question as a way for certain schools to fight back and find out anyway (considering every pre-med knows providing false information about their accommodations would sink them anyway). They'd provide the info during the interview, and then the school knows. It's spur of the moment, so the student wouldn't have time to think of a game plan on how to address it, since they expected it not to be an issue. Consequently, students that would have had asterisks (but now don't) are still at a disadvantage. Maybe. I doubt schools could be so shrewd, but who knows!

By asking the question it will be a violation of ADA and entrapment. The whole point of removing the asterisk to prevent this scenario.There will be that one pre-med who has the guts to sue the school and if he/she wins the school's rep will take a hit. Adcoms are scared of this worst case scenario.

Sadly those people who went through accommodations and don't understand the ADA will shoot themselves in the foot at the interview. They have the right to decline to answer that kind of question and should realize that. I had a good talk with the accommodations director at my school as how to answer the question. People should talk with a psychologist or someone knowledgable on disabilities about how to answer "the question."
 
Last edited:
By asking the question it will be a violation of ADA and entrapment. The whole point of removing the asterisk to prevent this scenario.There will be that one pre-med who has the guts to sue the school and if he/she wins the school's rep will take a hit. Adcoms are scared of this worst case scenario.

Sadly those people who went through accommodations and don't understand the ADA will shoot themselves in the foot at the interview. They have the right to decline to answer that kind of question and should realize that. I had a good talk with the accommodations director at my school as how to answer the question. People should talk with a psychologist or someone knowledgable on disabilities about how to answer "the question."
If I understand correctly, the ADA protects you from having to divulge specifics of your medical history, not from questions about what accommodations were. An interviewer can safety ask "Did you take the test in non-standard conditions, and if so what was atypical?" they just can't ask "Why?". I may be wrong
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Well, or minds that are supplemented to become fast/accurate, legally and within the rules of the exam. Amphetamines may play a significant role in helping one who is naturally less inclined to focus, but this is a sensible thing to allow as the individual, on an average day, will be taking these meds anyway, and is therefore at their baseline performance level. You don't have to worry about how they will be "accommodated" throughout med school and residency, as they can easily accommodate themselves quickly and inconspicuously with medication. It's when one requires something that isn't easily and readily administered in a realistic environment, such as perfect silence for an extended period of time as @Ad2b mentioned, that one seems to be relying on a supplement that can only work to their advantage in a controlled, theoretical (academic) environment. One would worry about these individuals actually joining the work force and having to deal with a range of completely uncontrolled, random, and high-stress situations where the individual has to, in spite of it all, be able to focus to the utmost level for the sake of the patient's well being.

We may also assume it is possible to argue that inherent intelligence/quickness/ability to focus is unfair and therefore provides a sort of "birthright" advantage over others.
I've previously talked about this exact thing actually, and similar reasoning why I'm fine with ADD meds in the disabled but not used to boost normal people. The only accommodations I take major issue with flying under the radar are massive time extensions.
 
If I understand correctly, the ADA protects you from having to divulge specifics of your medical history, not from questions about what accommodations were. An interviewer can safety ask "Did you take the test in non-standard conditions, and if so what was atypical?" they just can't ask "Why?". I may be wrong

The problem with ADA guidelines is that it doesn't specifically address the issue of test related questions. However, the question cannot be closely related to a disability. For example, let's say there is a student with a 26 MCAT score with the mark and the interview is asking questions to the applicant. It would make sense to ask about a lower score and the mark, because maybe there was an earthquake and this caused the low score. However, the student would have a poor sense of judgement if he/she could have voided their score. Now let's say this was a student with a 41 MCAT with the mark and the interviewer were to ask about it. What reason does the interviewer have with a high score? This question automatically leads into the disability (otherwise what other reasons do you have for the accommodation). The student can leave the details confidential, but the damage has been done. This is why in both cases it shouldn't be asked.

There is the example of asking "how many sick days have you taken off?" This question is a no, no by the ADA. Even though the sick days could be used for personal reasons or used in a life threading medical situation, but it is close enough to infer a medical disability. There are times where the questions are in a lot of gray areas and thus court cases are needed to resolve those gray areas.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
taking the MCAT is not a right...I get where you are coming from but the point of that exam is to be standardized, so it should be. Any accoomodation for medical reasons either needs to be addressed one of two ways. It's either an accommodation that doesn't effect cheating and everyone should get the same treatment or it's an unreasonable and you just don't get it no matter what your reason is........standardized


But the person with a medical need in himself/herself is NOT standard. If I have an increased risk for seizure by not taking meds at set time, especially given the added stress of the test-taking environment, then I am not a standard or typical person in that respect. I am working from a handicap, and I cannot be expected to "work" like you will "work" under the same circumstances, if I am held back from my medications, or if, say, I need to respond to my insulin pump, etc.


BTW, Do you believe handicaps in golf are wrong? :) LOL Just throwing that out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
The problem with ADA guidelines is that it doesn't specifically address the issue of test related questions. However, the question cannot be closely related to a disability. For example, let's say there is a student with a 26 MCAT score with the mark and the interview is asking questions to the applicant. It would make sense to ask about a lower score and the mark, because maybe there was an earthquake and this caused the low score. However, the student would have a poor sense of judgement if he/she could have voided their score. Now let's say this was a student with a 41 MCAT with the mark and the interviewer were to ask about it. What reason does the interviewer have with a high score? This question automatically leads into the disability (otherwise what other reasons do you have for the accommodation). The student can leave the details confidential, but the damage has been done. This is why in both cases it shouldn't be asked.

There is the example of asking "how many sick days have you taken off?" This question is a no, no by the ADA. Even though the sick days could be used for personal reasons or used in a life threading medical situation, but it is close enough to infer a medical disability. There are times where the questions are in a lot of gray areas and thus court cases are needed to resolve those gray areas.
I don't think those are similar enough gray areas to both invoke ADA protection - asking about sick days very directly investigates the person's health and nothing else, while asking about atypical exam conditions encompasses a huge range of potential answers, only some of which are disability related. And you'd also have to invent some arbitrary threshold where it no longer "makes sense" to ask about the atypical conditions. Does it make sense to ask someone with a 34? Probably not, since that's top 7%...but what if they also have a 4.00 at an Ivy League and are applying to WUSTL Med where that is considered a weak/far below median score? At some places, you could argue it reasonable to question for nearly all applicant scores on the grounds that your opinion of it might improve further to the benefit of the applicant. There's really not a good chance of a court case being won against something so hazily maybe sort of possibly discriminatory, so long as nobody asks why after what the * indicates.

But the person with a medical need in himself/herself is NOT standard. If I have an increased risk for seizure by not taking meds at set time, especially given the added stress of the test-taking environment, then I am not a standard or typical person in that respect. I am working from a handicap, and I cannot be expected to "work" like you will "work" under the same circumstances, if I am held back from my medications, or if, say, I need to respond to my insulin pump, etc.


BTW, Do you believe handicaps in golf are wrong? :) LOL Just throwing that out there.
I think your examples fall into his first category of stuff that doesn't help a typical person so no reason to care; if being able to pop a pill at a certain time doesn't boost scores for the average person, it's not a challenge to the standardization of what abilities are displayed by the exam score. The only accommodations anyone really takes issue with are ones that would normally be a huge score booster, such as getting several hours to do your Verbal section.
 
BTW, Do you believe handicaps in golf are wrong? :) LOL Just throwing that out there.

If you ran around talking about beating tiger but neglected to mention the 10pt handicap it took, you are dishonest

Any deviation from standard procedures should be flagged
 
I don't think those are similar enough gray areas to both invoke ADA protection - asking about sick days very directly investigates the person's health and nothing else, while asking about atypical exam conditions encompasses a huge range of potential answers, only some of which are disability related.

If workplaces only allow people to use sick days in the strictest sense of the term, you are absolutely right. However, I believe there are workplaces where one can use them for a family member being sick (accident or if they need surgery). There are a few possibilities outside of the medical disability. However, for the vast majority of cases it would lead into the disability. It makes sense this question should not be asked.

And you'd also have to invent some arbitrary threshold where it no longer "makes sense" to ask about the atypical conditions. Does it make sense to ask someone with a 34? Probably not, since that's top 7%...but what if they also have a 4.00 at an Ivy League and are applying to WUSTL Med where that is considered a weak/far below median score? At some places, you could argue it reasonable to question for nearly all applicant scores on the grounds that your opinion of it might improve further to the benefit of the applicant. There's really not a good chance of a court case being won against something so hazily maybe sort of possibly discriminatory, so long as nobody asks why after what the * indicates.

The point of the pervious example is to show that if there is one situation where asking it would make zero sense, then the same treatment should apply to all other situations. If the person had a 45 MCAT (perfect score) and the interviewer were to ask, there is no other basis to ask the question besides to infer about accommodated testing. There is no benefit to asking about the mark for the applicant's sake because the student has reached the peak performance on the exam.

All those possibilities for that mark can be pretty much summed up into 2 categories 1) unnatural occurrence happened but took test anyway, 2) accommodated testing. You can void and take the exam in the majority of cases with the unnatural occurrence. This makes it that much easier to single out those with an accommodation and thusly a disability.
 
I'd say there's three holes in this argument. 1) even at 45 the original logic holds; it may be more impressive that the applicant achieved it with the added stressor of interruption for a fire alarm etc. But, 2) this gets into the realm of ridiculous extremes that do not provide a good enough reductio ad absurdum to want to stop the far more likely cases of middling scores that may be more favorably viewed after knowing the full story. Plus 3) it would simply be impossible to show intent to discriminate well enough. The alternative reasons to ask are too reasonable.

And voiding isn't always that simple, if coming up with several hundred dollars for a retake is tough for you and/or your schedule doesn't allow you to easily keep up studying until the next open test day.

@IslandStyle808
 
If you ran around talking about beating tiger but neglected to mention the 10pt handicap it took, you are dishonest

Any deviation from standard procedures should be flagged
Wow this how you feel? Even in the examples I gave?
 
If the point of the MCAT were to establish who was the best at taking the MCAT, then it would make sense for accommodations to be flagged.

That, however is not the point of the MCAT.
 
Can you elucidate exactly why? What's the reason?

for the same reason that there even is a norm.....it provides a standardized environment to ensure everyone's performance is measured equally. When someone gets to step out of that standardized set of rules, it should be known
 
for the same reason that there even is a norm.....it provides a standardized environment to ensure everyone's performance is measured equally. When someone gets to step out of that standardized set of rules, it should be known

Why should it be known? What purpose does it serve in the medical school admissions process?
 
If the point of the MCAT were to establish who was the best at taking the MCAT, then it would make sense for accommodations to be flagged.

That, however is not the point of the MCAT.
Uhhhh of course the point of a metric like the MCAT is to see who performs better/worse than everyone else on the MCAT. What is the point of the MCAT if not to measure your ability on the things tested by the MCAT?
 
Why should it be known? What purpose does it serve in the medical school admissions process?

I'm lost here. You seem to be implying that you really don't understand that the MCAT is a large part of medical admissions and that it is the single most uniform measure of student capability that they have....
 
Wow this how you feel? Even in the examples I gave?
Besides, getting an acceptable score on the MCAT is nothing like beating Tiger. That's pretty impossible for someone like me, even w a handicap.

There are reasonable allowances for someone with legitimate health issues. It would be pretty hypocritical for a "caring" profession to not make it a level playing field for these people.
 
Wow this how you feel? Even in the examples I gave?
Besides, getting an acceptable score on the MCAT is nothing like beating Tiger. That's pretty impossible for someone like me, even w a handicap.

There are reasonable allowances for someone with legitimate health issues. It would be pretty hypocritical for a "caring" profession to not make it a level playing field for these people.

This is competitive and no, I don't think exceptions should be made at all. But if they are, they should be flagged. I shouldn't be able to test under differing conditions and have my score appear as though I tested under the same conditions
 
I'm lost here. You seem to be implying that you really don't understand that the MCAT is a large part of medical admissions and that it is the single most uniform measure of student capability that they have....

Uhhhh of course the point of a metric like the MCAT is to see who performs better/worse than everyone else on the MCAT. What is the point of the MCAT if not to measure your ability on the things tested by the MCAT?

The point of the MCAT is "to assess your problem solving, critical thinking, and knowledge of natural, behavioral, and social science concepts and principles prerequisite to the study of medicine."

If the AAMC determines that you are allowed some extra accommodation in a way that maintains fairness and the integrity of the test, then what is the point of flagging this on the score report?

How is a "flag" supposed to be used by an adcom?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Why should it be known? What purpose does it serve in the medical school admissions process?
So the scores aren't directly compared apples to apples? You can't easily compare normal standard conditions with non standard conditions whatever they may be so it should be known any deviation from the standard protocol.
 
This is competitive and no, I don't think exceptions should be made at all. But if they are, they should be flagged. I shouldn't be able to test under differing conditions and have my score appear as though I tested under the same conditions

This is actually the same sort of mentality of people who oppose gay marriage. Since you can't have what you want (no accommodations), you want to simply punish the people who get them (flagging their score reports).
 
make it a level playing field
The test isn't designed to be fair or a level playing field; for example the large amount of time pressure puts the naturally less intelligent at a huge, unfair disadvantage.


So the scores aren't directly compared apples to apples? You can't easily compare normal standard conditions with non standard conditions whatever they may be so it should be known any deviation from the standard protocol.
Exactly this


This is actually the same sort of mentality of people who oppose gay marriage. Since you can't have what you want (no accommodations), you want to simply punish the people who get them (flagging their score reports).
That's a garbage analogy in many, many ways. See look: It's the mentality of those who oppose murder. Since you can't prevent all murder, you want to punish the people who murder. Bull**** logic man
 
The point of the MCAT is "to assess your problem solving, critical thinking, and knowledge of natural, behavioral, and social science concepts and principles prerequisite to the study of medicine."

If the AAMC determines that you are allowed some extra accommodation in a way that maintains fairness and the integrity of the test, then what is the point of flagging this on the score report?

How is a "flag" supposed to be used by an adcom?
they should know you didn't "assess" in the same time frame everyone else did
This is actually the same sort of mentality of people who oppose gay marriage. Since you can't have what you want (no accommodations), you want to simply punish the people who get them (flagging their score reports).

I enjoy a good distractor as much as the next guy but I don't think the government should do marriage at all so find another target for that
 
Impossible.

Thankfully, your attitudes are being left largely in the past as more enlightened individuals actually move forward.

I'll also say that some of the brightest, sharpest, most impressive individuals in my class get accommodations on tests, and I have absolutely no problem with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Impossible.

Thankfully, your attitudes are being left largely in the past as more enlightened individuals actually move forward.

I'll also say that some of the brightest, sharpest, most impressive individuals in my class get accommodations on tests, and I have absolutely no problem with it.
Ah, the classic "it's trending so it's enlightened". Please. There are plenty of things which have enjoyed great pop support that contradict logic and reason.

I'll also say that your opinion is worth nothing; the quality of your arguments is what matters, and yours so far range from not given to comically poor.
 
I don't understand why this discussion is even a thing... whether providing students with disability with accommodation is fair or not is a long gone argument.

the decision has been made by agreement among hundreds to thousands of doctors, psychologists, phds, congress, ADA... you name it. so whether we agree on this matter or not it's been implemented by those who have and had WAY more qualifications than you or me or any of us on this thread for that matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
I'd say there's three holes in this argument. 1) even at 45 the original logic holds; it may be more impressive that the applicant achieved it with the added stressor of interruption for a fire alarm etc. But, 2) this gets into the realm of ridiculous extremes that do not provide a good enough reductio ad absurdum to want to stop the far more likely cases of middling scores that may be more favorably viewed after knowing the full story. Plus 3) it would simply be impossible to show intent to discriminate well enough. The alternative reasons to ask are too reasonable.

And voiding isn't always that simple, if coming up with several hundred dollars for a retake is tough for you and/or your schedule doesn't allow you to easily keep up studying until the next open test day.

@IslandStyle808

1) This scenario is possible, I agree. However, that information doesn't really give the non-accomodations 45 MCAT student that much brownie points. As long as the student can perform under standard conditions, the adcom won't care much. Although, this question could hurt the accommodations 45 MCAT student a lot more. Hence it being used more as a weeder tool, than a tool to help the applicant.

2) If anything it would show a lack of good judgement. The person who had a lesser score could void the exam given the chance. This should have been done and the exam taken later.

3) What would you gain from the question? The fact the student is better than you thought since he did not void the exam due to a unnatural circumstance? It goes back to number two lack of good judgement because they did not void. Let's say that the mark is gone and the student gets a bad score. The interviewer asks about the bad score and that student states it was due to an earthquake. The result would be the same. There is poor judgement by the student since he/she did not void. This result can be discerned even without the mark.

Sadly s*** happens in life. You would need to bite the bullet, save up money, and apply next year. There was one person on this forum who mentioned about a friend with a broken arm. He tried to apply for accommodations, but was denied. The rational behind the AAMC's accommodations decision was that the arm will heal later and he can try then. This would be in August and his application would be rather late. I felt awful for the guy, but I agree with the assessment by the AAMC. It wasn't permanent, but temporary. Life throws you these things and medical schools expect you to handle them.
 
I don't understand why this discussion is even a thing... whether providing students with disability with accommodation is fair or not is a long gone argument.

the decision has been made by agreement among hundreds to thousands of doctors, psychologists, phds, congress, ADA... you name it. so whether we agree on this matter or not it's been implemented by those who have and had WAY more qualifications than you or me or any of us on this thread for that matter.

Sadly these things take time. I have seen this argument for years and it has been a large back and forth between members. I kind of don't care about convincing the naysayers about accommodations, I have tried to sway them but never could. I do care if they fear monger stating things like "these guys are getting unlimited time" when there is no such thing. If they stick to the facts, I have to respect their opposing view.

I am reminded of what my professor said about GMOs in his research ethics class. Everyone was up in arms a decade ago about the growing field and harmful effects of these genetically modified food products in our bodies. However, now everyone is like "meh so what else is new" (the class from ten years ago was different in opinion than the one currently). He stated that it was because people have lived with it so long that it has become acceptable. As time goes by and more people fight for these rights, it will become more socially acceptable to give accommodations to people with disabilities whether physical or psychological.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I don't understand why this discussion is even a thing... whether providing students with disability with accommodation is fair or not is a long gone argument.

the decision has been made by agreement among hundreds to thousands of doctors, psychologists, phds, congress, ADA... you name it. so whether we agree on this matter or not it's been implemented by those who have and had WAY more qualifications than you or me or any of us on this thread for that matter.
Oh you misunderstand. I believe it absolutely is a step towards being more fair to those with disabilities. If I thought the point of the MCAT was fairness towards test takers I'd be on board. But as I've said many times, the MCAT is not intended to be fair, as shown by the way it punishes low intelligence and rewards high intelligence. It's a test to measure certain qualities, some fair (rewarding time spent studying) some not (punishing people with english as a second language, who can be perfectly fluent for communicating but find the hazy Verbal questions nearly impossible).
 
So efle, I don't really follow your logic. I mean, in general, one can very easily, and truthfully state that life is quite often unfair.

That has nothing to do with giving a person essentially the same opportunity as all the other test-takers to her/his best on a test. For a person with certain disabilities, we can't know what their best is or might have been, if we don't make things as balanced and level as possible. Sure, there is nothing perfect. That's a general "given" in life.

Disabilities accommodations are mostly quite sensible. Of course someone that is blind is not going to become a surgeon for heaven's sake. But reaching for balance and equity within reason is just.

At any rate, the issue ultimately comes down to the consideration of "otherwise qualified."

Example:

Otherwise qualified
[Actually, only Section 504 employs the term "otherwise qualified" (29 U.S.C. § 794(a)); the ADA specifies only that the person with a disability be "qualified" (42 U.S.C. § 12112). However, for all practical purposes, the terms are equivalent-that is, the person must be able to meet the essential eligibility requirements of a program, with or without reasonable accommodation, in spite of the restrictions imposed by the disability. In a related case, the Supreme Court reviewed an appeal by an applicant who was denied admission to a nursing program solely due to a serious hearing disability (Southeastern Community College v. Davis, 1979). After exploring possible options, college officials determined that there existed no reasonable accommodation that would allow the plaintiff to safely participate in or receive the benefits of the nursing pro gram given her dependence on lip reading. She had requested that she not be required to take clinical courses and that a full-time supervisor be assigned to her. Accordingly, her participation would have required major program modifications and the lowering of standards. In ruling for the college, the Supreme Court held that the plaintiff was not otherwise qualified and that legitimate physical requirements at times may be necessary (see also County of Los Angeles v. Kling, 1985). Furthermore, the Court noted that Section 504 did not require affirmative action, but conceded that the distinction between accommodation and affirmative action might not always be clear.] http://www.ldonline.org/article/6082/


So, in my previous examples, the individual with the insulin pump, or a person with a seizure disorder controlled on medications, etc, well, these people may well meet the requirements of "otherwise qualified."
I wonder, then, if indeed they do meet the requirements of being otherwise qualified, why would this necessitate some discriminating mark or asterisk next to their scores or information?

Making discriminations is not always necessarily wrong--especially when you are comparing certain Merlots or the like. :)
But in the situations noted above, indeed it should be questioned as to how such "marking" undermines anti-discrimination laws. The laws are there for a reason. Again, it will ultimately come down to whether or not a student, candidate, test-taker is otherwise qualified and if the accommodations are reasonable. If so, there is no point in making special markings on the record, other than to, in effect, countermand the anti-discrimination laws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Yes. As I said any non standard administration should be marked. Let the schools decide how or how much they want to delve into the reason for non standardized conditions.

All of this is decided by the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division. Its the law and not up to the schools to decide. Below quote is taken from here: http://www.ada.gov/regs2014/testing_accommodations.html

"How Should Testing Entities Report Test Scores for Test-Takers Receiving Disability-Related Accommodations?
Testing entities should report accommodated scores in the same way they report scores generally. Testing entities must not decline to report scores for test-takers with disabilities receiving accommodations under the ADA.

Flagging policies that impede individuals with disabilities from fairly competing for and pursuing educational and employment opportunities are prohibited by the ADA. “Flagging” is the policy of annotating test scores or otherwise reporting scores in a manner that indicates the exam was taken with a testing accommodation. Flagging announces to anyone receiving the exam scores that the test-taker has a disability and suggests that the scores are not valid or deserved. Flagging also discourages test-takers with disabilities from exercising their right to testing accommodations under the ADA for fear of discrimination. Flagging must not be used to circumvent the requirement that testing entities provide testing accommodations for persons with disabilities and ensure that the test results for persons with disabilities reflect their abilities, not their disabilities. "
 
The real world lacks accommodations. You can get accommodated conditions for undergrad tests, the MCAT, and med school tests but when you hit the hospital floor and have to answer questions in the form of pimping instead of on a test with unlimited time in a quiet room, it must be quite a shock. I get that the issue is already decided legally, it just seems on logical grounds that it is info that would enhance our ability to select for best physician material. It seems to me that someone struggling to think clearly in a distracting environment / with limited time does change their relative ability (just like having a duller vs sharper mind does), and keeping the former hidden helps those applicants at the expense of society.

In other words, think about why people would worry that accommodation flags put them at a disadvantage - admissions isn't spitefully anti-disability, there are logical grounds to view the score and applicant differently.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top