New MCAT

I'm just glad I got in when I did. Each year has more and more hoops to jump through to get to the finish line.

That said, lengthening the exam isn't a huge deal, since it used to be 8 hours anyway. Step I is 8 hours too, so it would give students a realistic idea of what they should expect. I don't think the writing portion did much good anyway, since students have to prove that they can write in their multitude of essays and grades in English classes as well.

As far as the introduction of the new behavioral sciences section... it'll certainly be interesting to see how medical schools deal with that number. Especially since a good part of the application pool that year won't have taken the new MCAT.

mvenus929 said:

I'm just glad I got in when I did. Each year has more and more hoops to jump through to get to the finish line.

That said, lengthening the exam isn't a huge deal, since it used to be 8 hours anyway. Step I is 8 hours too, so it would give students a realistic idea of what they should expect. I don't think the writing portion did much good anyway, since students have to prove that they can write in their multitude of essays and grades in English classes as well.

As far as the introduction of the new behavioral sciences section... it'll certainly be interesting to see how medical schools deal with that number. Especially since a good part of the application pool that year won't have taken the new MCAT.

Click to expand...

That's a good point, and I'm just glad I'll be taking it before 2015.

I'm glad I took it when there were only 52 questions a section. I tried some of the old 75 question ones and boy I sure faded by the end of those.

link to new changes?

nm: https://www.aamc.org/newsroom/newsreleases/2011/182652/110331.html interesting stuff

I don't think the changes are a good idea. I no longer understand what the MCAT, in this new form, is supposed to represent or evaluate.

At present it directly evaluates a student's mastery, more or less, of the required science curriculum, and it gives one type of perspective on their reasoning abilities (with influences from their education background, linguistic abilities, and probably some other factors that affect VR performance). I don't think these things are particularly great predictors of a student's potential clinical skills, but at least they test the student in how good they are as...a student.

When I heard that they are adding all of those extra sections, my main thought was: How is anybody supposed to take ALL of those classes? I imagine it will be possible if they want to major in the basic or biological sciences, but even then it won't leave room for students to pursue much else at all in terms of college curriculum. It gives me the feeling that we may be moving more towards having a monoculture among our doctors in this country. One day, we may find that the practical majority of our physicians have the same exact college curriculum, with pre-medical preparation having dominated their studies and replaced the opportunity to learn about other things.

If you accept that argument, then I have a conclusion to follow (which I won't go and derail the thread by ranting about here). I think any type of intellectual monoculture is dangerous, and so I'm almost categorically against practices that encourage it.

So, in short, although I respect and appreciate the efforts being made to improve and modernize the MCAT, I think that these changes seems to be a step in the wrong direction.

I'm all for it. It doesn't really matter. The MCAT will always test one thing: how well a student can take a standardized test.

The only thing I hope they do is expand the answer choices from 4 to 5.

It gives me the feeling that we may be moving more towards having a monoculture among our doctors in this country.

Click to expand...

I don't think so. Adding more breadth is a good thing IMO. Adding more non-science topics would indeed encourage more diversity instead of less.

Im for it

Lol to a HSDN member saying they're for MCAT changes. Just wait until you have to take the dang thing, I think your opinion will change.

I'm not for the additional sections because I feel like if they diversify the material much more it will just be too difficult to study for. I got a 36 on the MCAT, but I studied intensely for 3 months to get that score. If I would have had to also study philosophy, psych and sociology? Them getting rid of the writing section is inconsequential, because first of all the writing section counts for nothing in the admissions process, and second, there's a pretty easy formula to follow to score highly on it (I'm a god awful, slow writer, didn't practice at all for writing besides reading a few of someone else's samples, and I got an S on writing).

It's easy for the people that run AAMC to create a new test and whatnot, but they are forgetting the context in which this exam is taken. Do they think the MCAT isn't hard enough as it is? For god sakes, the score you need to be competitive is already going up year after year, causing students to study harder and for longer, and they want to seemingly make the test even more difficult? I just don't get it.

Diggidy said:

Lol to a HSDN member saying they're for MCAT changes. Just wait until you have to take the dang thing, I think your opinion will change.

I'm not for the additional sections because I feel like if they diversify the material much more it will just be too difficult to study for. I got a 36 on the MCAT, but I studied intensely for 3 months to get that score. If I would have had to also study philosophy, psych and sociology? Them getting rid of the writing section is inconsequential, because first of all the writing section counts for nothing in the admissions process, and second, there's a pretty easy formula to follow to score highly on it (I'm a god awful, slow writer, didn't practice at all for writing besides reading a few of someone else's samples, and I got an S on writing).

It's easy for the people that run AAMC to create a new test and whatnot, but they are forgetting the context in which this exam is taken. Do they think the MCAT isn't hard enough as it is? For god sakes, the score you need to be competitive is already going up year after year, causing students to study harder and for longer, and they want to seemingly make the test even more difficult? I just don't get it.

Click to expand...

Who says it's going to be more difficult? I didn't read about anything that says it's going to be more difficult? And even it is, the damn thing is curved. You're being compared to your peers not to their standard.

but the proposed changes that i'm reading are vague and it's too early to tell if the exam will be more difficult than the current exam. i can make a very long exam with more subjects and it be on par or even easier than the actual mcat.

and it doesn't matter at the end. the test-designers really have one main goal: to make a normalized curve of scores. given that traditional students have a finite amount of time to study for the mcat, i don't think the difficulty to prepare and do well on the exam will change appreciably. even if the test is harder, everybody would be equally disadvantaged (more or less).

and i find it funny that people are suggesting the addition of other subjects will decrease diversity and create a 'monoculture' of premeds/med students. if anything, the inclusion of social sciences will force premeds to rethink taking advanced biogenetics 3000 and take a behavioral psyc course or 2.

CityLights said:

But what I think is even more concerning: How do you test "ethics" on a standardized test? Or "cross-cultural competence"? Awareness of both of these things is obviously very important in medicine but the element of subjectivity that both present is concerning in the context of what in the past has been an objective test.

Click to expand...

my predictions:
in response to what i've quoted above, all they are talking about here is changing the current mix of passage types on the VR section and maybe tweaking the questions a little. it won't be a wholesale change. medicine is a conservative place, and AAMC wouldn't be doing anything truly revolutionary, trust me

other than that, stats and biochem will become de facto pre reqs. good, they already are at most med schools, and ought to be, too. the rest of it will be coachable (ie, you won't have to take a bunch of psych and socio classes to be competitive, the curricula would be impossible to standardize between colleges), but taking social science courses would be recommended, much the same way that stats and biochem are now. again, good. nearly every med school keeps telling us that they want applicants to take a broad mix of courses in college, and these changes will just push that along.

this will diversify the educational background of the applicant pool, which is in my mind a good thing. but yes, i'm glad i don't have to take the new 7 hour version, yuck.

edit: found this paper on the AAMC site, useful if for no other reason than that it demonstrates quite nicely just how worthless orgo content is in medical school. look for more schools to start accepting biochem in lieu of orgo 2, as a handful already do.

Isoprop said:

but the proposed changes that i'm reading are vague and it's too early to tell if the exam will be more difficult than the current exam. i can make a very long exam with more subjects and it be on par or even easier than the actual mcat.

and it doesn't matter at the end. the test-designers really have one main goal: to make a normalized curve of scores. given that traditional students have a finite amount of time to study for the mcat, i don't think the difficulty to prepare and do well on the exam will change appreciably. even if the test is harder, everybody would be equally disadvantaged (more or less).

and i find it funny that people are suggesting the addition of other subjects will decrease diversity and create a 'monoculture' of premeds/med students. if anything, the inclusion of social sciences will force premeds to rethink taking advanced biogenetics 3000 and take a behavioral psyc course or 2.

Click to expand...

Thoughtful points.

Isoprop said:

and i find it funny that people are suggesting the addition of other subjects will decrease diversity and create a 'monoculture' of premeds/med students. if anything, the inclusion of social sciences will force premeds to rethink taking advanced biogenetics 3000 and take a behavioral psyc course or 2.

Click to expand...

In proposing that a broader MCAT, with broader (more) course requirements, will encourage an educational monoculture among premeds, I am submitting that premeds won't have many choices left to make about their college curricula.

The way I see this playing out, it wouldn't be about premeds deciding between a "biogenetics 3000" type of course and a behavioral psych course. Rather, every premed would either be or feel compelled to take an intro-level behavioral psych course, and an intro-level philosophy, and intro-level psychology and sociology courses, and virtually none of them will take "biogenetics 3000."

I suppose in the current situation, there's a certain portion of students who take those super high-level science courses, and a certain portion of students who take a broader curriculum that's more or less in-tune with what will be expected in the future. I suppose that leads to incoming classes of medical students who have a variety of diverse educational backgrounds. And, finally, I suppose that a broader MCAT will discourage that in the future, which makes me uneasy.

Of course, I can't say for sure if things will really play out that way when the new MCAT comes into effect (which is where I think our disagreement stems from). It certainly seemed logical and likely to me, though. I know that I would have made absolutely sure to take those intro courses if I had been told that I'd be tested on them as a prerequisite to admission.

Moving to MCAT discussions

Espadaleader said:

Its funny. You science majors complain "how can you take all of those courses". Easy. Find a humanities/premed. We take everything! A philosophy major is small so I've taken all of my traditional prereqs, biochm, calc, stats, psych, socio, language, religion, opera. The list goes on. Hard science majors can't get that kind of education. Period.

Click to expand...

.

Espadaleader said:

I am talking about certain majors where that is impossible. Biomedical engineering for example. A BME major can't be expected to take all of those courses - it would not be fair to them.

Click to expand...

.

Nomdeplume said:

In proposing that a broader MCAT, with broader (more) course requirements, will encourage an educational monoculture among premeds, I am submitting that premeds won't have many choices left to make about their college curricula.

The way I see this playing out, it wouldn't be about premeds deciding between a "biogenetics 3000" type of course and a behavioral psych course. Rather, every premed would either be or feel compelled to take an intro-level behavioral psych course, and an intro-level philosophy, and intro-level psychology and sociology courses, and virtually none of them will take "biogenetics 3000."

I suppose in the current situation, there's a certain portion of students who take those super high-level science courses, and a certain portion of students who take a broader curriculum that's more or less in-tune with what will be expected in the future. I suppose that leads to incoming classes of medical students who have a variety of diverse educational backgrounds. And, finally, I suppose that a broader MCAT will discourage that in the future, which makes me uneasy.

Of course, I can't say for sure if things will really play out that way when the new MCAT comes into effect (which is where I think our disagreement stems from). It certainly seemed logical and likely to me, though. I know that I would have made absolutely sure to take those intro courses if I had been told that I'd be tested on them as a prerequisite to admission.

Click to expand...

But since every premed and his mom is a bio major, encouraging them to take other nonbiology/non-science classes will only increase the breadth in their education. There is already a monoculture of premeds. This will more likely alleviate it than exacerbate it.

And we're probably talking about classes that are required as general education credits at every university. So the most likely outcome is that nothing will change.

gravitywave said:

my predictions:
in response to what i've quoted above, all they are talking about here is changing the current mix of passage types on the VR section and maybe tweaking the questions a little. it won't be a wholesale change. medicine is a conservative place, and AAMC wouldn't be doing anything truly revolutionary, trust me

other than that, stats and biochem will become de facto pre reqs. good, they already are at most med schools, and ought to be, too. the rest of it will be coachable (ie, you won't have to take a bunch of psych and socio classes to be competitive, the curricula would be impossible to standardize between colleges), but taking social science courses would be recommended, much the same way that stats and biochem are now. again, good. nearly every med school keeps telling us that they want applicants to take a broad mix of courses in college, and these changes will just push that along.

this will diversify the educational background of the applicant pool, which is in my mind a good thing. but yes, i'm glad i don't have to take the new 7 hour version, yuck.

edit: found this paper on the AAMC site, useful if for no other reason than that it demonstrates quite nicely just how worthless orgo content is in medical school. look for more schools to start accepting biochem in lieu of orgo 2, as a handful already do.

Click to expand...

pretty much what i think too. no need to take social science classes (likely). also, behavioral science/research methods/ethics is tested on step 1. so it makes it more aligned with what's expected on step 1.

finally, i hope biochem won't be required. taking biochem only to retake it again in med school would suck.

I'm worried that the new MCAT will discourage nontraditional students from applying to medical school. As it is now, a nontrad like myself who didn't take any science classes before graduating college can do all the science requirements in one long, intense school year, and except for the reading comprehension section, basically study for the MCAT by taking those classes. Taking a year of science classes while simultaneously studying ethics, philosophy, biochemistry and everything else would be pretty much impossible. I'm glad I'll be taking it next year.

KurtLucas10 said:

That is not true... I have taken a lot of humanities/non-science courses. They are my easy ones.

Click to expand...

Which tells us all that you haven't actually taken any decent ones. The real humanities and behavioral science classes (the meaty ones) take much more time and effort than virtually any course in the chem, physics, and (as if it were difficult to outdo...) bio depts. Seriously. Biogenetics 3000 (or the equivalent here) <<< Behavioral Research Methods 3000. The former requires a few hrs/wk of going to class (and a couple hrs the day of the exam). The latter requires hours of projects, proposal writing, lit reviews, etc. as well as a few hrs the day of the exams to prep.

.

apumic said:

Which tells us all that you haven't actually taken any decent ones. The real humanities and behavioral science classes (the meaty ones) take much more time and effort than virtually any course in the chem, physics, and (as if it were difficult to outdo...) bio depts. Seriously. Biogenetics 3000 (or the equivalent here) <<< Behavioral Research Methods 3000. The former requires a few hrs/wk of going to class (and a couple hrs the day of the exam). The latter requires hours of projects, proposal writing, lit reviews, etc. as well as a few hrs the day of the exams to prep.

Click to expand...

But that sounds horrible. Why would those of us who have no interest in studying the history of eastern architecture and things of the sort ever want to take classes like that?

gettheleadout said:

But that sounds horrible. Why would those of us who have no interest in studying the history of eastern architecture and things of the sort ever want to take classes like that?

Click to expand...

I didn't see you/we would; however, doing that kind of stuff does develop certain skills valuable to medicine. (Good research skills come to mind, for instance. I doubt I count much less tell you how many science students come in for tutoring and have NO clue how to find answers to their questions w/o pleading for someone to reteach them everything they should have learned the first time. It's absolutely pathetic. If you have a question, learn to find answers on your own!)