Analyze this before you retake the MCAT

[thinkchangeflow]

I wanted to post this data chart to share along insights for everyone who is contemplating whether or not to retake. Would be interested as to what adcoms consider a "significant" score improvement that would justify that the applicant made the correct move by retaking the MCAT.

Sent from my SM-A300H using SDN mobile

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Zenabi90]

I find it very interesting that the most improvement came from the ~500 range, adn that the lower scores (<480) showed the smallest median improvement.

I am not surprised that 518+ tended to show score decreases.

Another consideration is that the biggest score increase it seems is 9pts overall.

 

[thinkchangeflow]

I agree, its very odd that the initial <490 scores have a lower median than the initial 490-509 scores....remember that the mark to the far right is the 90%tile so that means there is a small window of 10% of people who are actually able to increase their score greater than the number associated with the far right mark. It makes it even more impressive, based on percentiles, when someone is able to substantially increase their score >8 pts on a retake from any initial score range. The decrease in scores at >518 sort of validates the variability due to chance when each question has such a big impact to differentiate any score >90%tile.

Sent from my SM-A300H using SDN mobile

 

[Altius Premier Tutor]

Don't believe this data at face value. Improving your MCAT score is far more attainable than what these data suggest. This report from AAMC has been around for a long time and they like it because it makes them feel that their testing instrument is "so good, you're score will effectually never change." This is the classic example of data only being meaningful if you consider all of the variables/context. I've helped many, many students attempt a second or third time and I have NEVER had someone improve by less than 4 points, the average is probably 10-15 if you do everything I ask you to do.

These data are misleading because A) they simply sum up all of the examinees who retake, and because B) most students who retake the exam do very little different the second time compared to the first. When I say "most students," I mean that I've hardly encountered a student who truly "metamorphosized" their approach after getting a poor score. Often, they retake a short 2-3 months later, with very little additional preparation. Usually, they do the same low-yield things they did last time. At best, they took a lecture course from X Company the first time, so they try a lecture course from Y COMPANY the second time. Big deal. To increase your score significantly on a retake, you must CHANGE the things that matter, and change them in a BIG way. You must study WAY MORE. You must dramatically increase the CONCEPTUAL nature of how you study, dramatically increase the accuracy of your practice or the depth of your practice exam review. Input = Output. If you put in the same things you get the same results, which is basically what these data say because MOST students put in essentially the same input on a second attempt. BUT, if you drastically change the input you WILL GET a different output! I promise...

 

[Zenabi90]

Don't believe this data at face value. Improving your MCAT score is far more attainable than what these data suggest. This report from AAMC has been around for a long time and they like it because it makes them feel that their testing instrument is "so good, you're score will effectually never change." This is the classic example of data only being meaningful if you consider all of the variables/context. I've helped many, many students attempt a second or third time and I have NEVER had someone improve by less than 4 points, the average is probably 10-15 if you do everything I ask you to do.

These data are misleading because A) they simply sum up all of the examinees who retake, and because B) most students who retake the exam do very little different the second time compared to the first. When I say "most students," I mean that I've hardly encountered a student who truly "metamorphosized" their approach after getting a poor score. Often, they retake a short 2-3 months later, with very little additional preparation. Usually, they do the same low-yield things they did last time. At best, they took a lecture course from X Company the first time, so they try a lecture course from Y COMPANY the second time. Big deal. To increase your score significantly on a retake, you must CHANGE the things that matter, and change them in a BIG way. You must study WAY MORE. You must dramatically increase the CONCEPTUAL nature of how you study, dramatically increase the accuracy of your practice or the depth of your practice exam review. Input = Output. If you put in the same things you get the same results, which is basically what these data say because MOST students put in essentially the same input on a second attempt. BUT, if you drastically change the input you WILL GET a different output! I promise...

I wouldn't call the data misleading, but I would call it raw. I do agree with your second point. Many students who choose to retake think that they merely need to put in more hours to achieve a higher score, without a significant change in strategy. In fact, I find that this table actually helps to strengthen your advice. As @thinkchangeflow stated higher up, the right whisker only covers up to 90% as the upper limit, meaning there are definitely students who have achieved significant increases in overall score. These are the students who I believe did as you say, and changed their methods and approach drastically enough to get a significant change in their score. I myself am one of those, who got a 27Q 5 years ago, recently decided to try again, rebuilt my study strategy from the ground up and achieved a 517 in 4 weeks. I completely agree, anyone who wants to properly improve their score needs to put in the time not just in studying, but analyzing the weaknesses and issues present in their current approach.

 

[thinkchangeflow]

Don't believe this data at face value. Improving your MCAT score is far more attainable than what these data suggest. This report from AAMC has been around for a long time and they like it because it makes them feel that their testing instrument is "so good, you're score will effectually never change." This is the classic example of data only being meaningful if you consider all of the variables/context. I've helped many, many students attempt a second or third time and I have NEVER had someone improve by less than 4 points, the average is probably 10-15 if you do everything I ask you to do.

These data are misleading because A) they simply sum up all of the examinees who retake, and because B) most students who retake the exam do very little different the second time compared to the first. When I say "most students," I mean that I've hardly encountered a student who truly "metamorphosized" their approach after getting a poor score. Often, they retake a short 2-3 months later, with very little additional preparation. Usually, they do the same low-yield things they did last time. At best, they took a lecture course from X Company the first time, so they try a lecture course from Y COMPANY the second time. Big deal. To increase your score significantly on a retake, you must CHANGE the things that matter, and change them in a BIG way. You must study WAY MORE. You must dramatically increase the CONCEPTUAL nature of how you study, dramatically increase the accuracy of your practice or the depth of your practice exam review. Input = Output. If you put in the same things you get the same results, which is basically what these data say because MOST students put in essentially the same input on a second attempt. BUT, if you drastically change the input you WILL GET a different output! I promise...

Great points you made in here. I think we as a team of people who understand this need to ensure the sub 500 scoring students do not get discouraged while also creating an effective new approach to their studying. I wanted to particularly get this discussion going because I am someone who went from scoring 10th percentile on my ever practice exam to breaking through the 70th percentile on my actual exam. There were so many great lessons learned along the way, but having watched this forum over the years it became clear that the selection bias of who actually posts is real and we need to open the discussion to be beneficial for those who really need it and are discouraged to post. We need to eliminate the limiting beliefs that some "retakers" have about their abilities and we can do that by being open and honest on sdn. Remember, nearly half of all students score below ~500. They all need our support!

Sent from my SM-A300H using SDN mobile