- Joined
- Oct 21, 2005
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 0
I hope I don't get flamed for this but what is the highest step 1 score possible? three digit score obviously. thanks. also whats the highest you have heard of someone getting?
surething1 said:I hope I don't get flamed for this but what is the highest step 1 score possible? three digit score obviously. thanks. also whats the highest you have heard of someone getting?
Yea, if you get over a 270, you can say whatever you want!Idiopathic said:Lets say 285. I heard of a 272. Im sure someone else here has seen a higher one.
vtucci said:Someone at my school got a 281.
(nicedream) said:LOL, can you imagine getting a 299? Wtf. I wonder what kind of % that would be.
Two ninety nine sounds more impressive. It takes longer to say...BlondeCookie said:Maybe 100%. Then again, 299 sounds like such a peculiar number. Why wouldn't it just be an even 300?
So much bull**** goes on about STEP 1 scores. According to NRMP Data from 2005 the amount of applicants to Derm, Plastics, Ortho, Rad Onc, and Rads with greater than 270?
ZERO. Unless all of the 270+ kids are applying early match to neurosurgery or optho, and considering there were only 14 kids in country with scores from 260-270 that applied to Derm, and only 4 to plastics--it seems to me that 270+ is extremely unlikely, and surely not at the frequency that I see thrown around all over this board.
281? i'm not saying its impossible, but that kid would have to be the smartest/best test taker kid out of all the medical schools in the country. That includes HMS, Johns Hopkins, UCSF, Baylor, WashU, etc etc. Thats ALOT of smart kids he's crushing.
Just my take. I could be wrong, but I was wondering what you guys think about that.
It looks like 1 person with 270+ applied to Ortho, but your point still stands.
Duly noted. It looks like 1 person applying to ortho and 1 person applying to rads had >270. Like you said though, my argument still makes sense. >270 is a really, really rare event, and I doubt it occurs with the frequency that is claimed on this board. Its nice to finally see some hard data on this subject instead of being uncertain and relying on anecdotal evidence.
But I could be wrong.
It looks like 1 person with 270+ applied to Ortho, but your point still stands.
Just checked the NRMP Data from 2005. The version I HAVE - unless there is more than 1 version circulating - says the highest score for diagnostic radiology applicants was "<=270" (for 1 applicant), which I take to be LESS OR EQUAL to 270. While several other (but not all, and not ortho) specialties had this score distribution, NONE of the specialties had ">=270" - which I understand to be 'greater than or equal to' 270. There is space allocated for >=270, so it may very well exist, but with anything above 265 being in the top 2% nationwide, I doubt that there are too many of 270+s or 280+s around. Step 2 forum seems to have more of 270+s, though....
I downloaded the PDF file that I have from a link posted some time ago on this forum.
\If thats based on standard deviations that cant be correct bc it is doubtful that the scores fall on a normal bellcurve...but i dunno its all good i think we have beaten this topic into the ground lolWhen I did my calc for 258, it worked out to be around the 97th percentile (i.e. 3% of scores were equal to or higher), which means that likely at least 2.5% of scores were 260 or greater, which accounts for about 500 people (assuming 20K test takers). Thats quite a bit actually, and leaves room for people to outlie in that 270+ area, but I think 280 is pusing it for sure
\If thats based on standard deviations that cant be correct bc it is doubtful that the scores fall on a normal bellcurve...but i dunno its all good i think we have beaten this topic into the ground lol
Its not doubtful. in fact, its calculated based on the standard curve. admittedly they dont always fall that way, but its close enough to estimate, and Ill argue that the 3 digit/2 digit scores are based completely on the standard distribution.
This test is graded on the number correct
Time, where did you get that 2% number for greater than 265? just curious. it seems to me that 2% would give much greater numbers than is shown on the NRMP data for 260-270 range in all specialties...
I think I have the same PDF that you do from the NRMP website, I first thought there was no one with
>270 in rads or ortho, but if u look closely, it shows a 1, not a 0. But maybe I am misreading it?
Keeping in mind its likely a theoretical score, that 299.
In order for the UMSLE to be normalized to score from year to year, it must be a normal distribution that can be adjusted. As such, it is highly unlikely that your score is exactly what you got in terms of # correct. More likely than not it follows a similar pattern w/ the MCAT where around the mean you have to get many more correct to raise your score (thus making a 230 much better than a 220) whereas the diff between a 270 and 260 is pretty meaningless.It seems to me that a gifted statistician should be able to figure this out. If you remember back to the MCAT, to move a section score from 10 to 11 required getting an extra 10 or so questions right, but moving your score from 13 to 14 only required getting another two or three questions right-the thing was weighted towards the middle, so that a LOT of people scored 28-32. If Step 1 is NOT weighted like that, then it seems to me that could be teased out somehow.
I'd like to offer a 2nd conspiracy theory-the reason that they won't admit that your score corresponds to the number you got right is that they would then have to admit how many "experimental" questions are on each test, plus then everyone will realize how silly it is to prefer a residency applicant with 225 over one with a 220. Five Q's on a daylong test??? C'mon! I feel in my heart that there are probably 50 experimental questions and 300 real ones. A score of 215 would be 72% correct, which seems like a reasonable average to me, and 300 would be the theoretical upper limit.