99 on NBDE I

[300]

For those who honestly shot for the 99 on part I and either got it or came close (97+):

If you came close, what did you feel held you back? Was it particular topics/sub-topics, lack of prep with the resources you had, etc…?

If you got a 99, assuming you used at least dental decks, several old tests, class notes and good texts, and several step I preps, what was your plan of attack and which specific resources did you use or would you highly recommend?

Of course if you got a 92.372 or above, your comments are also appreciated.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ItsGavinC]

For those who honestly shot for the 99 on part I and either got it or came close (97+):

If you came close, what did you feel held you back? Was it particular topics/sub-topics, lack of prep with the resources you had, etc…?

If you are aiming for a 99 and score a 97, then I think it'd would be tough to classify anything as really holding one back. The difference in scores at that point is really one question=one point.

Somebody scoring a 97 instead of a 99 isn't due to lack of prep, in my opinion. It's probably more likely due to misreading a couple questions, etc.

 

[suffolktri]

If you are aiming for a 99 and score a 97, then I think it'd would be tough to classify anything as really holding one back. The difference in scores at that point is really one question=one point.

Somebody scoring a 97 instead of a 99 isn't due to lack of prep, in my opinion. It's probably more likely due to misreading a couple questions, etc.

It "could be the difference between a couple points" or it could be drastically different. One question doesn't really equal one point as Gavin says. The standardized scores of 49-99 that you will receive do represent a curved actual score on your exam. For instance, the standardized scores on the 1998 exam and the raw score equivalent respectively were:
Anatomy
83-84 (=97 standardized score)
85-86 (=98 standardized score)
87-99 (=99 standardized score)
biochem/phys
83-84 =97
85 =98
86-99=99
micro/path
81 =97
82-83=98
84-99=99
The one exception than is Dent Anatomy which roughly equals one question one point with 94-100 =99 standardized
The difference then between someone who got a 97 and one who got a 99 could be up to 16 questions!! I think that there are instances where the difference between a 97 and a 99 were a matter of luck but on the whole the students with a 99 are most definitely better prepared. I don't know that there is a sure fire method to get a 99, my opinion would be the time you spend studying whatever it is you study makes the difference. Decks, old exams, review books, whatever it is just put in more time. The students who get extremely high 90's are simply more comfortable with the material they studied, not some secret method that everyone else doesn't know about.

All that said a 97 is a wicked score!!!! You'll be a star either way

 

[DcS]

I think that there are instances where the difference between a 97 and a 99 were a matter of luck but on the whole the students with a 99 are most definitely better prepared.

I can't think of a more inaccurate statement. Are you serious? I definitely disagree with you. Someone who scored a 99 on part 1 if they were to take the exam 5 times i'd say they would score around 96-99 the whole time. As gavin said the difference b/w those two scores are a matter of one or two questions, you are misinterpreting the sliding scale. Just like w/ SATs the closer you get to a perfect score the more one or two questions are weighted.

 

[suffolktri]

I can't think of a more inaccurate statement. Are you serious? I definitely disagree with you. Someone who scored a 99 on part 1 if they were to take the exam 5 times i'd say they would score around 96-99 the whole time. As gavin said the difference b/w those two scores are a matter of one or two questions, you are misinterpreting the sliding scale. Just like w/ SATs the closer you get to a perfect score the more one or two questions are weighted.

DcS,
I don't know if you are just disagreeing for fun or you actually think you understand what you are talking about. How many of your colleagues have scored a 99 versus a 96? Do you personally know multiple people with those scores? I have dozens of fellow students who have scored high 90's and there is a difference in those students in a 96 versus a 99. What experience are you basing your statement on? Are you having a hard time reading the scale? There is a large difference betweent the potential differences between a 96 and a 99, ie refer to the posted scale in my previous post. not 1-2 but rather 3-4 and BEYOND!! In my experience a student who scores a 99 standardized is a student who easily scores above an 88-90 on the raw score. It is no different than the ACT or SAT or any test with a sliding scale. and I will explain:

Be aware I explained already that chance plays a role in the difference between a 97 and a 99 sometimes...., but if I were to take your comment at face value then that would mean that stastically in the country the population of students getting a 96, 97, 98, and a 99 would be virtually the same, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE, a score of 99 is achieved at such a smaller rate than a 96 or 97 that your argument doesn't hold water. Thus there is something else playing a role here besides chance, and that is ...preparation and intelligence..... The SAT is the same story my friend, in the old style of SAT getting a 1350 was 20x more common than getting a 1400, getting a 1370 was 9x more common than getting a 1400 and so on. Again your argument doesn't hold water.
How about elaborating on the sliding scale for me then, because obviously you see it a different way.....

Use your head and think it through before you make accusations. Maybe you are the one who confused gavin in the first place... And before you respond be sure you read my answer and understand it, you don't want to look ignorant twice.

 

[suffolktri]

DcS,
I don't know if you are just disagreeing for fun or you actually think you understand what you are talking about. How many of your colleagues have scored a 99 versus a 96? Do you personally know multiple people with those scores? I have dozens of fellow students who have scored high 90's and there is a difference in those students in a 96 versus a 99. What experience are you basing your statement on? Are you having a hard time reading the scale? There is a large difference betweent the potential differences between a 96 and a 99, ie refer to the posted scale in my previous post. not 1-2 but rather 3-4 and BEYOND!! In my experience a student who scores a 99 standardized is a student who easily scores above an 88-90 on the raw score. It is no different than the ACT or SAT or any test with a sliding scale. and I will explain:

Be aware I explained already that chance plays a role in the difference between a 97 and a 99 sometimes...., but if I were to take your comment at face value then that would mean that stastically in the country the population of students getting a 96, 97, 98, and a 99 would be virtually the same, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE, a score of 99 is achieved at such a smaller rate than a 96 or 97 that your argument doesn't hold water. Thus there is something else playing a role here besides chance, and that is ...preparation and intelligence..... The SAT is the same story my friend, in the old style of SAT getting a 1350 was 20x more common than getting a 1400, getting a 1370 was 9x more common than getting a 1400 and so on. Again your argument doesn't hold water.
How about elaborating on the sliding scale for me then, because obviously you see it a different way.....

Use your head and think it through before you make accusations. Maybe you are the one who confused gavin in the first place... And before you respond be sure you read my answer and understand it, you don't want to look ignorant twice.

You don't get lucky and get a 99, or get lucky getting a 1400 on the SAT or 36 ACT. You might get lucky getting a 96 instead of a 95 or 94, but not a 99.

 

[DcS]

DcS,
I don't know if you are just disagreeing for fun or you actually think you understand what you are talking about. How many of your colleagues have scored a 99 versus a 96? Do you personally know multiple people with those scores? I have dozens of fellow students who have scored high 90's and there is a difference in those students in a 96 versus a 99. What experience are you basing your statement on? Are you having a hard time reading the scale? There is a large difference betweent the potential differences between a 96 and a 99, ie refer to the posted scale in my previous post. not 1-2 but rather 3-4 and BEYOND!! In my experience a student who scores a 99 standardized is a student who easily scores above an 88-90 on the raw score. It is no different than the ACT or SAT or any test with a sliding scale. and I will explain:

Be aware I explained already that chance plays a role in the difference between a 97 and a 99 sometimes...., but if I were to take your comment at face value then that would mean that stastically in the country the population of students getting a 96, 97, 98, and a 99 would be virtually the same, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE, a score of 99 is achieved at such a smaller rate than a 96 or 97 that your argument doesn't hold water. Thus there is something else playing a role here besides chance, and that is ...preparation and intelligence..... The SAT is the same story my friend, in the old style of SAT getting a 1350 was 20x more common than getting a 1400, getting a 1370 was 9x more common than getting a 1400 and so on. Again your argument doesn't hold water.
How about elaborating on the sliding scale for me then, because obviously you see it a different way.....

Use your head and think it through before you make accusations. Maybe you are the one who confused gavin in the first place... And before you respond be sure you read my answer and understand it, you don't want to look ignorant twice.

First of all, you need to calm down. If you spend your time worrying about stuff like this you really need to get out, take a deep breath, and enjoy life a little more.

I understand your point, you don't need to go into explanation ad nauseum.

How many board part I exams have you taken? Judging from your post and questions, I would have to assume zero. I at least speak from the experience of someone who has taken every board exam for the last ~20 years including the most recent test. It doesn't matter if you study until you are blue in the face and have an IQ of 180, there are questions on the boards that you will not see in any material during your preparation. This is true, of course, except for dental anatomy. In that subject, there really is a tangible set amount of information that they can ask. Hence, the higher scores and the smaller variation in the curve.

As I was saying, you are correct in assuming that there is a large range in the other 3 sections for a score of 99. I think you are incorrect in assuming that most people who get a 99 miss very few questions and do so by some alternative (and superior) method of preparation. I really think that most who get that score do so by only a few questions, except for a very rare few. As I said before, if you learned kaplans 1000pg book, the decks inside and out, USMLE review, Netter flashcards, and your dental school notes/books you will still find 10 questions or so that come from absolutely none of those materials. Of course, since they are actual facts they can be found somewhere but nowhere in the scope of what people study to prepare. So unless someone has an infinite knowledge of every aspect of those subjects, they are going to miss around 10 questions. IMO those who get 99 in most cases are "lucky" in that they are close to a 98 and 97 etc.

How many board part I exams have you taken???

 

[aphistis]

You don't get lucky and get a 99, or get lucky getting a 1400 on the SAT or 36 ACT. You might get lucky getting a 96 instead of a 95 or 94, but not a 99.

So you think 1400 was a perfect SAT...and you're sitting here trying to paint yourself as some sort of expert at the statistics of standardized test scoring? Very rich.

 

[suffolktri]

So you think 1400 was a perfect SAT...and you're sitting here trying to paint yourself as some sort of expert at the statistics of standardized test scoring? Very rich.

Try reading a little bit higher "300", the 1400 deals with the stastic I gave 3 posts ago. Besides, a 1600 isn't a perfect score now anyways, the format has changed to 3 sections adding to a perfect score of 2400 which is why I was talking about the old format in the first place. I guess I should have made that more obvious for you. My mistake.

 

[aphistis]

Try reading a little bit higher "300", the 1400 deals with the stastic I gave 3 posts ago. Besides, a 1600 isn't a perfect score now anyways, the format has changed to 3 sections adding to a perfect score of 2400 which is why I was talking about the old format in the first place. I guess I should have made that more obvious for you. My mistake.

1) So you're talking about a perfect NBDE I, but in support of your argument you're trying to cite an SAT that's down 200 points from the maximum?

2) Let's consider that. Going back to your depthless knowledge of statistics, you must know a >1400 SAT was +2 SD, and so represented about the top 2.5% of test-takers. If a 1350 was 20 times as common, by my humble math, that accounts for over half the test population, which leaves you with something of a problem regarding the remainder of your bell curve distribution.

...now, if you were intending to use a perfect score for this little anecdote of yours, then suddenly that works out nicely, since >3 SD up from the mean only accounts for about 0.25%. But you've made it very clear that you're saying exactly what you mean, so who am I to disagree?

3) I'm perfectly aware that the SAT has been revamped, and I never said a 1600 is a perfect score. I said it was a perfect score. Is verb conjugation one of those classes you skipped to take more statistics?

If you're going to sit around here insulting other people's intelligence, don't be too surprised when you don't get much sympathy in return. The original edit of this post was unnecessarily abrasive, and I apologize for that, but I stand behind my argument.

 

[zdaddy08]

1) So you're talking about a perfect NBDE I, but in support of your argument you're trying to cite an SAT that's down 200 points from the maximum?

2) Let's look at this a second. Going back to your depthless knowledge of statistics, you must know a >1400 SAT was +2 SD, and so represents the top 5% of test-takers. If a 1350 was 20 times as common, by my humble math, that accounts for everybody who took the test.

...now, if you were intending to use a perfect score for this little anecdote of yours, then suddenly that works out nicely, since >3 SD up from the mean only accounts for about 0.5%. But you've made it very clear that you think you know exactly what you're talking about, so who am I to disagree?

3) I'm perfectly aware that the SAT has been revamped, and I never said a 1600 is a perfect score. I said it was a perfect score. Is verb conjugation one of those classes you skipped to take more statistics?

Look, up till now I've tried to be at least minimally polite. But if you're going to sit around here insulting other people's intelligence, when it's perfectly clear to me, and most anyone else with two brain cells to rub together, that you lack even the most superficial understanding of the subject you're trying to lecture us on, don't expect much sympathy in return. Is that obvious enough for you?

BOO HOO!!!

 

[aphistis]

BOO HOO!!!

Poor guy. I'd be grumpy too if I was still stuck in SABS & OFB. No hard feelings.

 

[jk5177]

I am refreshingly amused to see such discourse in the dental forum.

 

[UFOMS]

Bro,

A few people at my school in the class below me got 99's ....and a lot of 97's, 96's, and 95's. The kicker was that they had a previous unreleased (and stolen) exam. So they obviously wouldn't had done so well without that "mystery" exam. Lot of people in my class were a little p o'd at that.

 

[Rezdawg]

Bro,

A few people at my school in the class below me got 99's ....and a lot of 97's, 96's, and 95's. The kicker was that they had a previous unreleased (and stolen) exam. So they obviously wouldn't had done so well without that "mystery" exam. Lot of people in my class were a little p o'd at that.

Which school?

 

[suffolktri]

1) So you're talking about a perfect NBDE I, but in support of your argument you're trying to cite an SAT that's down 200 points from the maximum?

2) Let's consider that. Going back to your depthless knowledge of statistics, you must know a >1400 SAT was +2 SD, and so represented about the top 2.5% of test-takers. If a 1350 was 20 times as common, by my humble math, that accounts for over half the test population, which leaves you with something of a problem regarding the remainder of your bell curve distribution.

...now, if you were intending to use a perfect score for this little anecdote of yours, then suddenly that works out nicely, since >3 SD up from the mean only accounts for about 0.25%. But you've made it very clear that you're saying exactly what you mean, so who am I to disagree?

3) I'm perfectly aware that the SAT has been revamped, and I never said a 1600 is a perfect score. I said it was a perfect score. Is verb conjugation one of those classes you skipped to take more statistics?

If you're going to sit around here insulting other people's intelligence, don't be too surprised when you don't get much sympathy in return. The original edit of this post was unnecessarily abrasive, and I apologize for that, but I stand behind my argument.

It seems as if I really hit a nerve with you, just so we all know my comments directed towards you and Dcs were a result of inflammatory remarks aimed my way with no provocation, thus I felt the need to at least reply. My stastics quoted about the SAT were from a Kaplan SAT instructor I am friends with and I guess my mistake, if you are right, was in believing him. I am not insulting anyone's intelligence, I was merely encouraging (could have been done more gracefully I admit) people to try to be informed before they respond. I thought that I was making substantiated remarks but obviously others felt not, although no one has yet argued with my observation of the relative frequencies of 96,97,98,99, I'm waiting for that attack still. The one thing I would hope is that you don't expect someone to rollover and play dead when you reply in that manner to them. So, until we argue again, and in the words of DcS, go take a walk and get some fresh air, ...I'm going to, and we'll stop this bickering or, in your own words, we both look like idiots.

 

[Rezdawg]

It seems as if I really hit a nerve with you

That seems to happen with him quite often. Dont worry.

 

[aphistis]

That seems to happen with him quite often. Dont worry.

Only as often as people portray wrong information as God's own truth.

Suffolk, thanks for the PM. If SDN doesn't notify you, I replied.

 

[Rezdawg]

Only as often as people portray wrong information as God's own truth.

Okay, understood...however, your initial response is always a little more harsh than it should be. Like suffolktri stated, you shouldnt "expect someone to rollover and play dead when you reply in that manner to them".

 

[lnn2]

For those who honestly shot for the 99 on part I and either got it or came close (97+):

If you came close, what did you feel held you back? Was it particular topics/sub-topics, lack of prep with the resources you had, etc…?

If you got a 99, assuming you used at least dental decks, several old tests, class notes and good texts, and several step I preps, what was your plan of attack and which specific resources did you use or would you highly recommend?

Of course if you got a 92.372 or above, your comments are also appreciated.

If anyone of you guys receives an 99 score on NDBI please let me know! Dinner is on me! I also will send you enough money so that you can buy yourself a gun and ammo and do yourself a favor: PUT YOURSELF OUT OF MISERY!!!! Get a life!

 

[slysnoodles]

If anyone of you guys receives an 99 score on NDBI please let me know! Dinner is on me! I also will send you enough money so that you can buy yourself a gun and ammo and do yourself a favor: PUT YOURSELF OUT OF MISERY!!!! Get a life!

Yeah, this thread is pretty ridiculous - almost like something I would start...

I seriously doubt that any program director really cares about the difference between a 97 or a 99. The ortho PD at my school told me that they group applicants into three categories:

Below 90
Between 90 - 95
Above 95

 

[lnn2]

Yeah, this thread is pretty ridiculous - almost like something I would start...

I seriously doubt that any program director really cares about the difference between a 97 or a 99. The ortho PD at my school told me that they group applicants into three categories:

Below 90
Between 90 - 95
Above 95

it's absolutely ridiculous, clueless! case in point, when I started my 1st yr, there's a guest speaker, a guy with 99 score NDBI; he talked about studying habit, note cards....the whole 9 yards! Guess what, he didn't get into our school ortho program, his 1st choice! his classmates thought that it's funny. Someone actually wrote in the men's restroom: hey, XXX, how about that ortho?!

 

[ItsGavinC]

It "could be the difference between a couple points" or it could be drastically different. One question doesn't really equal one point as Gavin says.

Sure it does. One question does equal one point from a 97 to a 98 to a 99 on any given section (with the noted exception of DA).

You posted the exact same thing yourself.

Now, as you've also posted, the difference from a 98 to a 99 doesn't have to be one question, but it COULD be one question.

My point was that it could be, but doesn't have to be, a huge difference in questions from a 97 to a 99.

 

[300]

If anyone of you guys receives an 99 score on NDBI please let me know! Dinner is on me! I also will send you enough money so that you can buy yourself a gun and ammo and do yourself a favor: PUT YOURSELF OUT OF MISERY!!!! Get a life!

Yeah, just be happy you passed okay?

My opinion: All else being pretty much equal, a 99 will beat out a 97 anyday. If you can handle a little extra learning then there's no reason not to aim for it. Stop whining.

 

[zdaddy08]

Poor guy. I'd be grumpy too if I was still stuck in SABS & OFB. No hard feelings.

i'm not grumpy...you just piss people off, big baby! No hard feelings

 

[txdent2be2007]

...and to think I'd be happy with a lowly 90...

Arguing about the difference between a 97 and 99 is like griping that your Ferrari isn't as fast as your buddy's Lamborghini. Kinda silly to me.

Maybe these folks with 99s who don't get into ortho have other problems...

 

[aphistis]

i'm not grumpy...you just piss people off, big baby! No hard feelings

And you think you're in a position to level criticism about pissing other people off?

"Big baby"...you ought to be more careful with such scorching rhetoric.

Suffolk & I have resolved our disagreement, and that's the only reason I was in this thread in the first place, so I'll be on my way now. Adios.

 

[jk5177]

it's absolutely ridiculous, clueless! case in point, when I started my 1st yr, there's a guest speaker, a guy with 99 score NDBI; he talked about studying habit, note cards....the whole 9 yards! Guess what, he didn't get into our school ortho program, his 1st choice! his classmates thought that it's funny. Someone actually wrote in the men's restroom: hey, XXX, how about that ortho?!

That is amusing.

 

[Woodsy]

hold on, you people are arguing about a 97 vs. a 99? That's pretty ridiculous. I have to agree with DCS on this one. a 97 vs. a 99 could just mean that u guessed C instead of B because C is the first letter of your name and C happened to be the right answer. On these standardized tests, luck has a lot to do with it sometimes. Even with all the prep in the world that might give u around 90s. That extra "10" questions usually are answered by "fluke" or just that no one got them right so the person/people who somehow managed to one or two right are bumped up to 99...I don't know how it works but that seems to be the case in most standardized tests.

This is pretty funny. If you can score above a 92, let alone a 99...what more do you want?

300, you can ask such a question, what held you back from getting a 99? To answer such a stupid question, a stupid response is required. Rather than studying that last paragraph in the decks, which happened to be the only question that stumped me, I was in the process of making you a new brother or sister....

 

[jk5177]

hold on, you people are arguing about a 97 vs. a 99? That's pretty ridiculous. I have to agree with DCS on this one. a 97 vs. a 99 could just mean that u guessed C instead of B because C is the first letter of your name and C happened to be the right answer. On these standardized tests, luck has a lot to do with it sometimes. Even with all the prep in the world that might give u around 90s. That extra "10" questions usually are answered by "fluke" or just that no one got them right so the person/people who somehow managed to one or two right are bumped up to 99...I don't know how it works but that seems to be the case in most standardized tests.

Woodsy, I think these dental students are quite exact and perfectionistic. Afterall they need to be sure that the crown is exact and not off by a fraction of a mm.