MD Are students at top-10 schools essentially guaranteed 250+ on step 1 if they work super hard?

[1almond]

Since a 250 is around the 85th percentile, and students at top-10 schools are probably above the 85th percentile of accepted applicants, are they essentially guaranteed to be capable of scoring 250+ if they work super hard for it?

I'm interested in pursuing neurosurgery (or at least exploring the idea), and I just noticed from the 2016 charting outcomes that about 90% of people with a step 1 over 250 matched (~85% for 250, ~95% for 270). I'm wondering how likely it is that I'll be able to pull off a score like that. I'll be going to a US News top-10 med school, had around a 3.9 in undergrad, and an MCAT over the 95th percentile (though I know the MCAT-Step correlation is weak to moderate).

Here's my question: for someone in my position (i.e. top med school and solid stats), is it possible that I'm incapable of getting a 250-260 on Step 1? Or is everyone in my position capable of pulling off a score like that, and it just comes down to how much work you're willing to put in? If I work my butt off in med school, will I almost certainly be able to pull that kind of score?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DNC127]

Plenty of people score in that range who have high MCATs, and plenty of people score in that range with low MCATs. If you want that score, work for it. Everyone (who is intelligent) is capable, just depends on who is willing to put in the time/ how efficiently they put in the time.

 

[FindMeOnTheLinks]

Your Mcat is a good indicator but is by no means a guarantee. You would think going to a top school gives you a better chance but it's really not as much about where you go to school as it is how hard you prepare and how smart you are. There's no reason you can't get a 250 if you're smart and you work hard.

 

[1almond]

No

Why

 

[AcademicNeurosurgery]

To answer your question - yes, people who get into top schools are generally capable of doing well on boards as they likely have a history of doing well on standardized tests.

It is important to remember though that there is board prep, and then there is caring-for-patients prep. Going to a top school might give you an edge with the latter. Your ability to pound useless minutiae + UFAPS into your head and apply that information to clinical scenarios you will never see in real patients will determine your board score.

People at "top schools" can score below average, people at "low-tier schools" can score in the 99th percentile. So yes, it is possible that you may not get a 250-260 (and you're certainly not guaranteed that score) but you certainly can.

As far as pre-clinical years at my school, I basically shelled out 60k in tuition to sit at home and learn from UFAPS. MedEd is a joke right now and will hopefully change dramatically within the next decade. But, I digress.

 

[1almond]

Plenty of people score in that range who have high MCATs, and plenty of people score in that range with low MCATs. If you want that score, work for it. Everyone (who is intelligent) is capable, just depends on who is willing to put in the time/ how efficiently they put in the time.

Your Mcat is a good indicator but is by no means a guarantee. You would think going to a top school gives you a better chance but it's really not as much about where you go to school as it is how hard you prepare and how smart you are. There's no reason you can't get a 250 if you're smart and you work hard.

Hm, what's the deal with people not getting scores that they want then? Are they just lazy or what?

 

[AcademicNeurosurgery]

Hm, what's the deal with people not getting scores that they want then? Are they just lazy or what?

Life happens. Some people have a bad test day, go through external stressors during M2, etc. Some people just aren't good at standardized tests. Others coast through pre-clinical years and have weak foundations. In my experience, I am hard-pressed to find peers who I would consider "lazy". The fews folks I know who struggled to focus on school were struggling due to external life factors, not due to laziness. If they made it this far, they have an above-average work ethic. There are still gradations, however, and some just outperform others.

 

[WheezyBaby]

Your Mcat is a good indicator but is by no means a guarantee. You would think going to a top school gives you a better chance but it's really not as much about where you go to school as it is how hard you prepare and how smart you are. There's no reason you can't get a 250 if you're smart and you work hard.

Have you even taken step 1? At any rate, smart is relative. Everyone in med school is smart

 

[Merely]

This is a stupid question lol, if you study very hard you will do...well. If you don't study hard you won't do well...it's common sense. Studying hard means spending 12 hours a day is not unreasonable. It's all about sacrifice. Everyone (most people) in med school are capable of getting a 250...however, most people are not willing to sacrifice what it takes to get that 250. Also, it's pretty insulting to tell people who get 230 or 240 that they are lazy...just because they don't put in the time to get the 250 doesn't mean they're lazy...it means they chose not to put the time in because they have other hobbies, commitments, etc...

 

[FindMeOnTheLinks]

Have you even taken step 1? At any rate, smart is relative. Everyone in med school is smart

im taking it in 2 weeks

Obviously everyone in medical school is smart, and of course it's all relative. Some people are "smarter" than others in that they are better at taking standardized tests. If you are of those people, you probably have a decent chance at getting a high score if you put in the work. If you aren't one of those people, you probably would need to put in a few more hours to obtain a high score. There's nothing wrong with that at all, and Im pretty sure most people would agree.

 

[Mad Jack]

Since a 250 is around the 85th percentile, and students at top-10 schools are probably above the 85th percentile of accepted applicants, are they essentially guaranteed to be capable of scoring 250+ if they work super hard for it?

I'm interested in pursuing neurosurgery (or at least exploring the idea), and I just noticed from the 2016 charting outcomes that about 90% of people with a step 1 over 250 matched (~85% for 250, ~95% for 270). I'm wondering how likely it is that I'll be able to pull off a score like that. I'll be going to a US News top-10 med school (top 5 if it matters, which I suspect it doesn't), had around a 3.9 in undergrad, and an MCAT over the 95th percentile (though I know the MCAT-Step correlation is weak to moderate).

Here's my question: for someone in my position (i.e. top med school and solid stats), is it possible that I'm incapable of getting a 250-260 on Step 1? Or is everyone in my position capable of pulling off a score like that, and it just comes down to how much work you're willing to put in? If I work my butt off in med school, will I almost certainly be able to pull that kind of score?

No, not at all, this is approaching black hole dense levels of underestimating the USMLE.

Premed stats have little to do with Step scores. They're all about hard work. Had one kid in my class that was a below average premed that pulled a 262, and another that was really, really awful as a premed (26 MCAT, 3.3 GPA) that pulled a 252. Then there's me, who was a pretty solid applicant on paper (3.81, 35) but got burned out by the time my Step 1 popped up and ended up with a 226. Premed grades don't require the sort of stamina, resilience, and hard work that the USMLE requires, not by a long shot. To give you an idea of what scores people pop out with from certain colleges, here's a graph from 2012:

Most kids bust their ass through medical school, so if your average score is a 236 at Yale, chances are 90% of the kids there were giving it their all and the average ended up being far shy of your desired 250-260.

 

[Dr. Death]

Plenty of people score in that range who have high MCATs, and plenty of people score in that range with low MCATs. If you want that score, work for it. Everyone (who is intelligent) is capable, just depends on who is willing to put in the time/ how efficiently they put in the time.

Savage caveat, I love it

 

[Mad Jack]

Hm, what's the deal with people not getting scores that they want then? Are they just lazy or what?

Some people don't possess the sort of intelligence the test is going after to a large enough degree (bulk memorization isn't everyone's thing). Some people would normally have the motivation but crack under the stress. Some people are simply too busy and don't have enough hours in the day due to other things they've got going on. Some people have psychosocial issues that interfere with their performance. Some people have test anxiety. Some people have a bad day, or the test hits their knowledge gaps just right, or they couldn't sleep the night before. There's a thousand reasons people don't get the score they want that have nothing to do with hard work or motivation.

 

[1almond]

Plenty of people score in that range who have high MCATs, and plenty of people score in that range with low MCATs. If you want that score, work for it. Everyone (who is intelligent) is capable, just depends on who is willing to put in the time/ how efficiently they put in the time.

Your Mcat is a good indicator but is by no means a guarantee. You would think going to a top school gives you a better chance but it's really not as much about where you go to school as it is how hard you prepare and how smart you are. There's no reason you can't get a 250 if you're smart and you work hard.

No

To answer your question - yes, people who get into top schools are generally capable of doing well on boards as they likely have a history of doing well on standardized tests.

It is important to remember though that there is board prep, and then there is caring-for-patients prep. Going to a top school might give you an edge with the latter. Your ability to pound useless minutiae + UFAPS into your head and apply that information to clinical scenarios you will never see in real patients will determine your board score.

People at "top schools" can score below average, people at "low-tier schools" can score in the 99th percentile. So yes, it is possible that you may not get a 250-260 (and you're certainly not guaranteed that score) but you certainly can.

As far as pre-clinical years at my school, I basically shelled out 60k in tuition to sit at home and learn from UFAPS. MedEd is a joke right now and will hopefully change dramatically within the next decade. But, I digress.

This is a stupid question lol, if you study very hard you will do...well. If you don't study hard you won't do well...it's common sense. Studying hard means spending 12 hours a day is not unreasonable. It's all about sacrifice. Everyone (most people) in med school are capable of getting a 250...however, most people are not willing to sacrifice what it takes to get that 250. Also, it's pretty insulting to tell people who get 230 or 240 that they are lazy...just because they don't put in the time to get the 250 doesn't mean they're lazy...it means they chose not to put the time in because they have other hobbies, commitments, etc...

No, not at all, this is approaching black hole dense levels of underestimating the USMLE.

Premed stats have little to do with Step scores. They're all about hard work. Had one kid in my class that was a below average premed that pulled a 262, and another that was really, really awful as a premed (26 MCAT, 3.3 GPA) that pulled a 252. Then there's me, who was a pretty solid applicant on paper (3.81, 35) but got burned out by the time my Step 1 popped up and ended up with a 226. Premed grades don't require the sort of stamina, resilience, and hard work that the USMLE requires, not by a long shot. To give you an idea of what scores people pop out with from certain colleges, here's a graph from 2012:

Most kids bust their ass through medical school, so if your average score is a 236 at Yale, chances are 90% of the kids there were giving it their all and the average ended up being far shy of your desired 250-260.

Some people don't possess the sort of intelligence the test is going after to a large enough degree (bulk memorization isn't everyone's thing). Some people would normally have the motivation but crack under the stress. Some people are simply too busy and don't have enough hours in the day due to other things they've got going on. Some people have psychosocial issues that interfere with their performance. Some people have test anxiety. Some people have a bad day, or the test hits their knowledge gaps just right, or they couldn't sleep the night before. There's a thousand reasons people don't get the score they want that have nothing to do with hard work or motivation.

Wow, these responses are all over the place, I guess there's just no consensus. A bunch of you confidently say that everyone's capable of 250+ if they put in the work, and a bunch of you say that that's not the case at all. Bummer.

 

[togaedere]

Try your hardest and do your best. If what you are looking for is a guarantee for you, you will not get it. Your mileage may vary from other people's experience. I got a 30 on the MCAT (after a 28 first attempt) and >250 step 1. I felt like I worked equally hard for both but step one studying just clicked better for me. I'm also one person, and wasn't trying to do anything ultra competitive, so it was just about knowledge - not make or break.

Now that I'm a few years out of it I reflect back and say that step one has to be the most overthought exam in the universe. Probably for good reason cus it can determine a lot - but it is just a test. A test that has LOTS of study material for - find what works for you, stick to a study plan, do lots and lots of questions. It doesn't guarantee a score but on a knowledge-based test that should be enough to get you where you want to go.

Wow, these responses are all over the place, I guess there's just no consensus. A bunch of you confidently say that everyone's capable of 250+ if they put in the work, and a bunch of you say that that's not the case at all. Bummer.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

In short, no.

You're not guaranteed anything even if you work hard enough. The closest to a guarantee you can make about the boards is that if you study hard you'll pass , since >95% of USMDs who take them do pass.

This is a stupid question lol, if you study very hard you will do...well. If you don't study hard you won't do well...it's common sense. Studying hard means spending 12 hours a day is not unreasonable. It's all about sacrifice. Everyone (most people) in med school are capable of getting a 250...however, most people are not willing to sacrifice what it takes to get that 250. Also, it's pretty insulting to tell people who get 230 or 240 that they are lazy...just because they don't put in the time to get the 250 doesn't mean they're lazy...it means they chose not to put the time in because they have other hobbies, commitments, etc...

I very strongly disagree with this. You have absolutely no basis for making this statement.

 

[SpacemanSpifff]

This is a stupid question lol, if you study very hard you will do...well. If you don't study hard you won't do well...it's common sense. Studying hard means spending 12 hours a day is not unreasonable. It's all about sacrifice. Everyone (most people) in med school are capable of getting a 250...however, most people are not willing to sacrifice what it takes to get that 250. Also, it's pretty insulting to tell people who get 230 or 240 that they are lazy...just because they don't put in the time to get the 250 doesn't mean they're lazy...it means they chose not to put the time in because they have other hobbies, commitments, etc...

In short, no.

You're not guaranteed anything even if you work hard enough. The closest to a guarantee you can make about the boards is that if you study hard you'll pass , since >95% of USMDs who take them do pass.



I very strongly disagree with this. You have absolutely no basis for making this statement.

Basis for that statement = Dunning-Kruger effect.
A good chunk of people who get a 250 may assume that it's within everyone's grasp, but as @Mad Jack noted, it's may not be in the cards for those who can't excel in standardized testing.
Your best shot is intensive preparation with a bit of luck, I think that's something everyone who's scored well would agree on.

 

[Mad Jack]

Basis for that statement = Dunning-Kruger effect.
A good chunk of people who get a 250 may assume that it's within everyone's grasp, but as @Mad Jack noted, it's may not be in the cards for those who can't excel in standardized testing.
Your best shot is intensive preparation with a bit of luck, I think that's something everyone who's scored well would agree on.

Not all standardized testing is created equal- I've been pretty much 99th percentile on every test I've ever taken in my life, 96th percentile on the MCAT, 84th on the COMLEX, and 44th on the USMLE. The USMLE is a particularly challenging test, as most standardized tests are measures of either gross knowledge or executive thinking, but the USMLE requires mastery of both to a degree that is far beyond any other exam I have encountered. The MCAT, as a reference, was largely an exercise in executive thinking, with the knowledge required on a much lower level.

If I were to grade it, the MCAT is like a 8 executive/4 knowledge on a scale of 10, while the USMLE Step 1 is a 10 executive/10 knowledge. My deficit has always been bulk memorization, as I'm a very conceptual guy, so I found it to be quite the challenging exam. Someone with a more balanced intellectual profile would likely fare far better than I (though clinical medicine has proven quite intuitive for me due to the way I process information). Step 2 is a less difficult exam, seems to be more of an executive functioning test with much less specific knowledge required to do well.

 

[WheezyBaby]

im taking it in 2 weeks

Obviously everyone in medical school is smart, and of course it's all relative. Some people are "smarter" than others in that they are better at taking standardized tests. If you are of those people, you probably have a decent chance at getting a high score if you put in the work. If you aren't one of those people, you probably would need to put in a few more hours to obtain a high score. There's nothing wrong with that at all, and Im pretty sure most people would agree.

So a 260 is obtainable for most too with a few more hours on top of that? How many more hours for a 270? I just disagree 250 is a generally obtainable score

 

[ZX10R]

This is a weird question. If you go to a top 10 school you don't need a 250+ STEP1/2 to match competitively. Your name will carry you; certain PDs only want top 10 students. For example a PD will take a 225 from Harvard over a 252 from #100 ranked school at a "top" residency. No offense, but you haven't even spent a day in a med school classroom yet. Worry about doing will as a MS1 instead of getting a 250+ on STEP1.

 

[FindMeOnTheLinks]

So a 260 is obtainable for most too with a few more hours on top of that? How many more hours for a 270? I just disagree 250 is a generally obtainable score

Where did I ever mention 260? I think I made it pretty obvious I was speaking in generalities. If you want a good score, you better be smart (relative to medical students on average) AND work hard. If you're not smarter relative to the average med student, then you have to work harder to get a good score. I don't see why you're so butt hurt about what I said.

And of course 250 isn't a "generally obtainable" score. It's a 90th or whatever percentile score. That's why I said you better be smart, or you better work really hard. What other way is there to do it?

 

[mimelim]

This is a weird question. If you go to a top 10 school you don't need a 250+ STEP1/2 to match competitively. Your name will carry you; certain PDs only want top 10 students. For example a PD will take a 225 from Harvard over a 252 from #100 ranked school at a "top" residency. No offense, but you haven't even spent a day in a med school classroom yet. Worry about doing will as a MS1 instead of getting a 250+ on STEP1.

Show me the data on that one, or even a quote from a PD saying something remotely close to that. Not going to argue that name helps. But, most programs that are very competitive have Step score floors that will make it so the 225 will be looked over easily.

 

[AcademicNeurosurgery]

This is a weird question. If you go to a top 10 school you don't need a 250+ STEP1/2 to match competitively. Your name will carry you; certain PDs only want top 10 students. For example a PD will take a 225 from Harvard over a 252 from #100 ranked school at a "top" residency. No offense, but you haven't even spent a day in a med school classroom yet. Worry about doing will as a MS1 instead of getting a 250+ on STEP1.

My hunch is that this is probably false in the vast majority of cases. The only time the name may carry you in this situation is if your 225 Step 1 is a fluke and the rest of your app is stellar. In that case, you might find a big-name faculty at your top 10 school to make a phone call for you. If the rest of your app is consistent with the 225 Step 1, you would be sadly mistaken to think that a big-name faculty member will go to bat for you and put their reputation on the line.

 

[Foot Fetish]

This is what I believe (others may disagree, but nothing will change my mind): MCAT is more of an IQ test, whereas Step 1 is primarily memorization. Now before you get your panties in a knot, obviously Step 1 requires a healthy amount of critical thinking and integration, however that is not the bottleneck. In MCAT, you could memorize every single fact in the book and still not get an elite score simply because you lacked the required reading comprehension / logic ability. In contrast, if you had only slightly above average IQ but somehow literally memorized every testable fact for boards, I believe it would be pretty straightforward to get a 265. It stands to reason that a test with a vastly greater amount of testable material would come down to memory. Case in point the prototypical foreign medical grad who gets a 260+ simply because they had the luxury of studying full time for a whole year. People love to say "Memorizing First Aid is not enough," but thats a heaping pile of bull-crap because, in reality, very, very, very few people have managed to *literally* memorize every single point in that book. And 99% of the time, those who say that they had Step 1 questions that weren't in FA are simply wrong and just missed that point in the sea of high-yield minutia. Again, you obviously need to understand the things that you're memorizing, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still much more information than the average person has the time or willpower to memorize. Like others have said, it's a test in which sacrifices pay dividends. Your fancy shmancy US news ranking won't save you if you don't sit your butt down and do the work. You can no longer rely on innate ability at this juncture...because, at the end of the day, people want the doctor who knows the most, not the one with the highest IQ. Encyclopedic knowledge beats IQ pretty much every time in medicine.

 

[751866]

Hm, what's the deal with people not getting scores that they want then? Are they just lazy or what?

It's possible that like you, they can't read. Clearly the guy said "...if you're smart..."

So a 260 is obtainable for most too with a few more hours on top of that? How many more hours for a 270? I just disagree 250 is a generally obtainable score

see the above comment... if you're smarter than most of your peers in medical school and study, I think it's definitely in reach. It's not very attainable for the person who learns and understands the average amount that med students learn and understand...Not sure why you guys have taken exception to a statement with obvious qualifiers...

 

[751866]

This is what I believe (others may disagree, but nothing will change my mind): MCAT is more of an IQ test, whereas Step 1 is primarily memorization. Now before you get your panties in a knot, obviously Step 1 requires a healthy amount of critical thinking and integration, however that is not the bottleneck. In MCAT, you could memorize every single fact in the book and still not get an elite score simply because you lacked the required reading comprehension / logic ability. In contrast, if you had only slightly above average IQ but somehow literally memorized every testable fact for boards, I believe it would be pretty straightforward to get a 265. It stands to reason that a test with a vastly greater amount of testable material would come down to memory. Case in point the prototypical foreign medical grad who gets a 260+ simply because they had the luxury of studying full time for a whole year. People love to say "Memorizing First Aid is not enough," but thats a heaping pile of bull-crap because, in reality, very, very, very few people have managed to *literally* memorize every single point in that book. And 99% of the time, those who say that they had Step 1 questions that weren't in FA are simply wrong and just missed that point in the sea of high-yield minutia. Again, you obviously need to understand the things that you're memorizing, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still much more information than the average person has the time or willpower to memorize. Like others have said, it's a test in which sacrifices may dividends. Your fancy shmancy US news ranking won't save you if you don't sit your butt down and do the work. You can no longer rely on innate ability at this juncture...because, at the end of the day, people want the doctor who knows the most, not the one with the highest IQ. Encyclopedic knowledge beats IQ pretty much every time in medicine.

Memorizing facts is different than integrating them with concepts you learned in a disconnected manner. Smarter people can see linearity more quickly in seemingly convoluted topics. I don't think you have to be a super genius at all, but I don't think you can get a 265 being a joe schmoe who just memorized. People who self report that ("I got 250+ by pure memorization and I'm a dunce, trust me") are likely being modest or unknowingly underestimating their own ability and overestimating the ability of peers as was mentioned earlier.

 

[DocWinter]

Whoever thinks that all med students have to do to get 90% in the usmle is to study harder is dead wrong. And the "top schools" don't always have the top students - nepotism and affirmative action are very alive and well at this level. I worked hard in ms1, ms2 and had an average class rank and comlex. If I had less family obligations maybe i could have broken another layer. But no amount of extra work or desire would have gotten me 250.

 

[Lexdiamondz]

Show me the data on that one, or even a quote from a PD saying something remotely close to that. Not going to argue that name helps. But, most programs that are very competitive have Step score floors that will make it so the 225 will be looked over easily.

I mean, the average Step 1 score at top schools isn't that much higher than the national average, and yet compare the match lists from Harvard, Penn, UCSF and Columbia to those of your run of the mill state school.

I go to one of these T-10 schools, the advantage is real. No, you aren't going to match Dermatology or Plastics with a 225 but someone with below average grades for their field and a good pedigree will still pretty much match whatever specialty they want.

My hunch is that this is probably false in the vast majority of cases. The only time the name may carry you in this situation is if your 225 Step 1 is a fluke and the rest of your app is stellar. In that case, you might find a big-name faculty at your top 10 school to make a phone call for you. If the rest of your app is consistent with the 225 Step 1, you would be sadly mistaken to think that a big-name faculty member will go to bat for you and put their reputation on the line.

This is also true to some extent. A Research year and a couple pubs from Yale will make up for lackluster scores, but even without it matching is still often within reach for most specialties so long as your pedigree is right. The ivy-league incestuousness is real.

 

[cellsaver]

Here's my question

You asked multiple questions actually

The data seems to indicate that the school one attends has less to do with Step 1/2 outcomes than the secondary traits that the students possess. In other words, it isnt Harvard that gets students the high scores, but rather it is the students that get Harvard the high scores. Harvard should be paying the $tudent$ for giving them a good reputation

From Uworld website:
USMLE Step 1 Exam - Overview | Examination Content | Test Format | Eligibility

How much is my performance on the USMLE exams affected by the medical school I attend?
Only about 15% of the variation in USMLE scores across different medical schools could be traced to factors related to the school itself. Little of this difference could be traced to differences in curriculum or school level-educational policies. Private school students tended to perform better on Step 1 but worse on Step 3. The geographic location of the school also impacted scores. This study did not directly address the quality of teaching that students receive, in part because this is difficult to assess and quantify. Overall, these findings suggest that the majority of variation in USMLE performance among different schools is likely secondary to traits that the students bring into the medical school environment, rather than differences between medical schools themselves.

REFERENCE
Hecker K, Violato C. How Much Do Differences in Medical Schools Affect Student Performance? A Longitudinal Study Employing Hierarchical Linear Modeling. Teaching and Learning in Medicine 20(2), 2008, 104-113.​

 

[mcloaf]

This is what I believe (others may disagree, but nothing will change my mind): MCAT is more of an IQ test, whereas Step 1 is primarily memorization. Now before you get your panties in a knot, obviously Step 1 requires a healthy amount of critical thinking and integration, however that is not the bottleneck. In MCAT, you could memorize every single fact in the book and still not get an elite score simply because you lacked the required reading comprehension / logic ability. In contrast, if you had only slightly above average IQ but somehow literally memorized every testable fact for boards, I believe it would be pretty straightforward to get a 265. It stands to reason that a test with a vastly greater amount of testable material would come down to memory. Case in point the prototypical foreign medical grad who gets a 260+ simply because they had the luxury of studying full time for a whole year. People love to say "Memorizing First Aid is not enough," but thats a heaping pile of bull-crap because, in reality, very, very, very few people have managed to *literally* memorize every single point in that book. And 99% of the time, those who say that they had Step 1 questions that weren't in FA are simply wrong and just missed that point in the sea of high-yield minutia. Again, you obviously need to understand the things that you're memorizing, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still much more information than the average person has the time or willpower to memorize. Like others have said, it's a test in which sacrifices pay dividends. Your fancy shmancy US news ranking won't save you if you don't sit your butt down and do the work. You can no longer rely on innate ability at this juncture...because, at the end of the day, people want the doctor who knows the most, not the one with the highest IQ. Encyclopedic knowledge beats IQ pretty much every time in medicine.

I'm curious about what personal experience you have with step 1 that's helped form such strong opinions as an M1. I did well on the exam and absolutely had things that were not in first aid, as did every one else I know. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but first aid is not comprehensive.

 

[sliceofbread136]

This kind of garbage really belongs in pre-allo.

The answer is obviously no. Different people are good at different things and you very well may not be suited for medical school like you were for pre-med

 

[Gurby]

In contrast, if you had only slightly above average IQ but somehow literally memorized every testable fact for boards, I believe it would be pretty straightforward to get a 265.

 

[cellsaver]

This is what I believe
{...snip....}...

"In God we trust. All others must bring data" - W Edwards Deming

 

[FutureDoc1088]

Always very average on standardized tests but always good grades. 28 MCAT, >250 step 1 because the test is a test of knowledge and integration of topics. I don't think step 1 was as much memorization as it was overall comprehension of each topic in a way that allows you to connect the dots between multiple systems. Step 1 is knowing the topic well enough to connect the anatomy, physiology, pharm, path, micro, etc. and then apply it to a particular question. This kind of framework happens over 2 years, not during dedicated study. Then dedicated study is when you add in the random facts and mneumonics that you forget immediately after the exam. If you don't work hard, I don't think your natural test-taking abilities are enough. Perhaps some people become cocky or complacent because they got a 40 on the MCAT and assume they'll just do well on step 1. I knew I had to work harder to get a good score, and hard work paid off. MCAT is all reading comprehension and I don't read too good. Step is a test of what you know and understand.

 

[MelMcT2009]

You're not "essentially guaranteed" anything anymore than anyone else is. Put the work in and hopefully you'll see the results you want. That's it. Has very little to do with what school you're at or what your MCAT score was.

 

[mistafab]

Hard work is the biggest determining factor.

If a med student puts in 8 hours a day, 5 days a week for studying, they are at a huge advantage over the course of almost two years (8x5x4x12x2=3840 hours). Harder workers will clearly outdue another student who puts in 6 hours a day (2880). The cumulative effect of working harder far outpaces intelligence. How could you not do better than someone else if you practiced for an extra thousand hours for a single test?

They say to truly master something, you need ten thousand hours. I bet you that the best of the best are approaching this amount of investment - intelligence would be hard pressed to make up for such an astronomical difference in the amount of time invested.

 

[Lexicon0]

Nope. Practically all my classmates 'worked super hard' and our average was lower than a 250.

 

[TooMuchResearch]

No.

 

[NWwildcat2013]

I think there is a difference between working super hard during dedicated and working super hard for MS1 and MS2 and dedicated. With the latter option of sustained and long term effort basically anyone who got into medical school can score 250+. I don't think someone would be guaranteed that score but they would certainly be capable of achieving it.

 

[Gurby]

How could you not do better than someone else if you practiced for an extra thousand hours for a single test?

At a certain point in any endeavor, you will hit a wall where you just don't have as much innate ability as someone else. The question is, where is the wall? Maybe a test like Step 1 favors brute force so much so that anyone able to score well on the MCAT won't have issues with that wall. Maybe not ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[AcademicNeurosurgery]

I'm curious about what personal experience you have with step 1 that's helped form such strong opinions as an M1. I did well on the exam and absolutely had things that were not in first aid, as did every one else I know. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but first aid is not comprehensive.

If everything on the exam was in First Aid, people would get perfect scores. While I understand that there are questions on the exam outside the scope of the common Step 1 resources, I think there is enough in UFAPS to get a 240 and possibly into the 250-260s with strong integration/problem-solving skills and a little luck. Of course, this is hard to prove since we can't sit down with the exam and see how much came straight from these study resources.

 

[Anti-PD1]

Where do you guys come up with these questions, and what purpose would an answer serve?

 

[mcloaf]

If everything on the exam was in First Aid, people would get perfect scores. While I understand that there are questions on the exam outside the scope of the common Step 1 resources, I think there is enough in UFAPS to get a 240 and possibly into the 250-260s with strong integration/problem-solving skills and a little luck. Of course, this is hard to prove since we can't sit down with the exam and see how much came straight from these study resources.

I agree someone who mastered UFAP could absolutely achieve those scores, but there's a lot of information in the U and P portions of that acronym that is not contained in FA.

 

[ChordaEpiphany]

.

 

[Goro]

Preclinical GPA is a far better indicator of Step I score.

So, wanna good Step or Level I score? Do well in your first two years.

/thread

Your Mcat is a good indicator but is by no means a guarantee. You would think going to a top school gives you a better chance but it's really not as much about where you go to school as it is how hard you prepare and how smart you are. There's no reason you can't get a 250 if you're smart and you work hard.

 

[Goro]

You get out of med school what you put into it. Work ethic counts.

Hm, what's the deal with people not getting scores that they want then? Are they just lazy or what?

 

[Affiche]

You get out of med school what you put into it. Work ethic counts.

I think this is oversimplifying it and almost dismissive of the effort put in by kids who don't get the score they wanted. There are plenty of kids in my class who bust their asses just to pass.

 

[Goro]

Have you taken Step I yet?

This is what I believe (others may disagree, but nothing will change my mind): MCAT is more of an IQ test, whereas Step 1 is primarily memorization. Now before you get your panties in a knot, obviously Step 1 requires a healthy amount of critical thinking and integration, however that is not the bottleneck. In MCAT, you could memorize every single fact in the book and still not get an elite score simply because you lacked the required reading comprehension / logic ability. In contrast, if you had only slightly above average IQ but somehow literally memorized every testable fact for boards, I believe it would be pretty straightforward to get a 265. It stands to reason that a test with a vastly greater amount of testable material would come down to memory. Case in point the prototypical foreign medical grad who gets a 260+ simply because they had the luxury of studying full time for a whole year. People love to say "Memorizing First Aid is not enough," but thats a heaping pile of bull-crap because, in reality, very, very, very few people have managed to *literally* memorize every single point in that book. And 99% of the time, those who say that they had Step 1 questions that weren't in FA are simply wrong and just missed that point in the sea of high-yield minutia. Again, you obviously need to understand the things that you're memorizing, but that doesn't change the fact that it's still much more information than the average person has the time or willpower to memorize. Like others have said, it's a test in which sacrifices pay dividends. Your fancy shmancy US news ranking won't save you if you don't sit your butt down and do the work. You can no longer rely on innate ability at this juncture...because, at the end of the day, people want the doctor who knows the most, not the one with the highest IQ. Encyclopedic knowledge beats IQ pretty much every time in medicine.

 

[Goro]

Data doesn't lie, Affiche. See my post on Pre-Clinical GPA.

I think this is oversimplifying it and almost dismissive of the effort put in by kids who don't get the score they wanted. There are plenty of kids in my class who bust their asses just to pass.

 

[Affiche]

Data doesn't lie, Affiche. See my post on Pre-Clinical GPA.

Right, I'm saying there are kids who bust their asses but still don't have the gpa they're aiming for, and subsequently bust their asses and end up with a step score lower than what they wanted as well. Hours put in ≠ higher gpa/Step. Test-taking skills, intelligence, etc all play into it.