average PCAT?

[attia]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

hello
It looks like eveyone here is getting very good scores above 90s
If anyone knows what would you consider or is considered a average score on the pcat?

 

[UTCPharm]

hello
It looks like eveyone here is getting very good scores above 90s
If anyone knows what would you consider or is considered a average score on the pcat?

Technically, I would assume the average PCAT score would be 50, because we are talking about percentiles, so that would mean 50 percent did better and 50 percent did worse than you. But as far as acceptance to school goes, from what I've heard something around 75-80 is average. That is, if you score around there it won't help you a whole lot, but it won't hurt you either. I was surprised to hear that at UT Memphis, their average accepted PCAT last year was a 75, I believe.

 

[patmcd]

The average is is 50th percentile. Id say 75+ is a good score for most schools. However you should look at each schools accpetance stats to determine what score you'll need to shoot for at each school.

 

[DownonthePharm]

The scores here are a little squewed. First off you are usually a pretty smart and gung-ho person to even belong to a academically related message board. Secondly, people with lower scores tend not to post them, for whatever reason(s) they may have.

I think in general anything over a 70% is considered competative. Each school varies. I would try to make all of your subscores over 70% also no matter what your overall average, because some schools are strict about the breakdowns too.

 

[Jbuprepharm]

The scores here are a little squewed. First off you are usually a pretty smart and gung-ho person to even belong to a academically related message board. Secondly, people with lower scores tend not to post them, for whatever reason(s) they may have.

I think in general anything over a 70% is considered competative. Each school varies. I would try to make all of your subscores over 70% also no matter what your overall average, because some schools are strict about the breakdowns too.

UAMS in Little Rock had an average of like 67 or something for their last class. The schools I'm applying to are in the upper 70's, so I'm ahead there, but my GPA is average at best

 

[RyanMaverick]

You guys are lucky, my school had an 89% PCAT average...

 

[Rxbound]

Ugh! Double post!

UAMS in Little Rock had an average of like 67 or something for their last class. The schools I'm applying to are in the upper 70's, so I'm ahead there, but my GPA is average at best

 

[Rxbound]

The class that entered last year had an average of 80.....
The GPA was 3.68, on top of that.
www.uams.edu/cop

UAMS in Little Rock had an average of like 67 or something for their last class. The schools I'm applying to are in the upper 70's, so I'm ahead there, but my GPA is average at best

 

[attia]

does everyone have a bacholor thats y they did good
any one got 80 90 only 1 or 2 yeras of college???

 

[RyanMaverick]

I got a 99 after 2.5 years of university.

 

[WVUPharm2007]

The scores here are a little squewed. First off you are usually a pretty smart and gung-ho person to even belong to a academically related message board.

Except for me. I'm just here for the free Bud Light. And I got an 83. Didn't even know what was going to be on the thing the night before.

 

[attia]

I got a 99 after 2.5 years of university.

kool

 

[ghabpharm]

does everyone have a bacholor thats y they did good
any one got 80 90 only 1 or 2 yeras of college???

I got a 91 after only 1 yr of college.

 

[RxRob]

There's something strange about the PCAT scores, either that or people in general.

I mean, who got a 1? Or a 5 or even 15? There should only be one in 10 people scoring in the 90's, and 1 in a 100 scoring 99... it seems SOMEWHERE someplace along the way someone would own up to it. No one has a problem stating low GPA's over and over in different forums. It just smells...

Same thing on all the review book reviews at amazon.com... everyone gets 90's or a 99. I think we're being tested against 20 or so chimpanzees.

 

[iheartpandp]

Someone posted that they got a 7 percent composite a few months ago.

 

[DuocSi2010]

There's something strange about the PCAT scores, either that or people in general.

I mean, who got a 1? Or a 5 or even 15? There should only be one in 10 people scoring in the 90's, and 1 in a 100 scoring 99... it seems SOMEWHERE someplace along the way someone would own up to it. No one has a problem stating low GPA's over and over in different forums. It just smells...

Same thing on all the review book reviews at amazon.com... everyone gets 90's or a 99. I think we're being tested against 20 or so chimpanzees.

Hahhaha. I agree. There are waaaaay too many people that have 99%.

 

[MAXHARDC]

Hahhaha. I agree. There are waaaaay too many people that have 99%.

Hey bro, this is the internet, people will say just about anything on here to make them look good. I never meet anyone that did well on the PCAT with only a little bit of studying here and there, and these were bright individuals.

Max

 

[Rx_of_Music]

I think you have to keep a couple things in mind. First off the data that Harcourt uses as the "normative" was taken from first time test takers between October 1998 and March 2003. Since then the number of students applying to pharmacy schools has almost doubled (while the number of available seats has stayed relatively the same). As a result, the number of people taking the PCAT has doubled. So it would stand to reason that more people could score in the 90’s. Secondly the percentile of Pharm.D. students with bachelors degrees has risen significantly. This would account for higher scores because of more educated PCAT examinees. Hope this helps.

By the way the University of Georgia School of Pharmacy averages were the highest in its 100 year history last year (PCAT 93 and pre-pharmacy GPA 3.7). This year’s averages were even higher!

 

[MAXHARDC]

I think you have to keep a couple things in mind. First off the data that Harcourt uses as the "normative" was taken from first time test takers between October 1998 and March 2003. Since then the number of students applying to pharmacy schools has almost doubled (while the number of available seats has stayed relatively the same). As a result, the number of people taking the PCAT has doubled. So it would stand to reason that more people could score in the 90’s. Secondly the percentile of Pharm.D. students with bachelors degrees has risen significantly. This would account for higher scores because of more educated PCAT examinees. Hope this helps.

By the way the University of Georgia School of Pharmacy averages were the highest in its 100 year history last year (PCAT 93 and pre-pharmacy GPA 3.7). This year’s averages were even higher!

Your reference to the number of students taking the test, as "doubled" has no relevance to this discussion. In a normal distribution for example, about 34% of the scores fall between the mean and one standard deviation above the mean. For these individuals on the Internet to claim to have scored 99.9 percentile, would be 3 standard deviations above the mean.

You have to realize how deceptive the Internet "pools" are. Everybody and their mother has above the norm exam scores, all have great bodies, and they are all honest. The Internet is a place of cons, scams, deceit, lies, and yes betrayal. Ok that was a little harsh 🙂

Max

 

[Rx_of_Music]

Your reference to the number of students taking the test, as "doubled" has no relevance to this discussion. In a normal distribution for example, about 34% of the scores fall between the mean and one standard deviation above the mean. For these individuals on the Internet to claim to have scored 99.9 percentile, would be 3 standard deviations above the mean.

You have to realize how deceptive the Internet "pools" are. Everybody and their mother has above the norm exam scores, all have great bodies, and they are all honest. The Internet is a place of cons, scams, deceit, lies, and yes betrayal. Ok that was a little harsh 🙂

Max

I have taken statistics took Max and more people taking the test equals a higher quantity (not percentage) of people residing in the the tails of the standard curve. It has everything to do with this discussion. Go back and read the original question.

 

[MAXHARDC]

I have taken statistics took Max and more people taking the test equals a higher quantity (not percentage) of people residing in the the tails of the standard curve. It has everything to do with this discussion. Go back and read the original question.

Wrong, having a larger pool of individuals, the more the scores cluster around the mean, and the smaller the standard deviation will be, come on man, this is elementary. In a normal distribution of scores, 68.3% of the scores are within the range of one S.D. below the mean to one S.D. above the mean. Your the one that needs to re-read your original post. It is full of conjecture and misinformation. You have been badly misinformed.

Max

 

[Falokis]

Wrong, having a larger pool of individuals, the more the scores cluster around the mean, and the smaller the standard deviation will be, come on man, this is elementary. In a normal distribution of scores, 68.3% of the scores are within the range of one S.D. below the mean to one S.D. above the mean. Your the one that needs to re-read your original post. It is full of conjecture and misinformation. You have been badly misinformed.

Max

I thought the pool was a set number because it is based on the 98-03 scores. That's not going to change. I think we are smarter than the people that took the test a few years ago. It is more competative and thus people put in more effort towards the PCAT. The average score will go up every year unless they change the grading system to include more recent scores. If they used up till March 06 in that pool used to rank us, you can bet the June scores would be lower than they will be otherwise.

 

[acetyl]

Max, what you're saying is wrong. If you have 1000 random people taking a test over time they are ALWAYS going to fall into set percentile ranges. If the sample size is doubled, and the sample is indicative of the population, then the number of people in those percentile ranges will increase proportional to the number in the original sample. I'm not saying they will exactly double but the numbers will definetly increase relative to the increase in test takers.

Saying that increasing the number of test takers (from a random sample) will not affect the number of individuals in the top percentiles is just plain wrong.

 

[MAXHARDC]

Max, what you're saying is wrong. If you have 1000 random people taking a test over time they are ALWAYS going to fall into set percentile ranges. If the sample size is doubled, and the sample is indicative of the population, then the number of people in those percentile ranges will increase proportional to the number in the original sample. I'm not saying they will exactly double but the numbers will definetly increase relative to the increase in test takers.

Saying that increasing the number of test takers (from a random sample) will not affect the number of individuals in the top percentiles is just plain wrong.

Man people, this is all very basic. You guys really need to review the measure of variability, or dispersion, of a distribution of scores all across the board, and what happens when the sample increases. Acetyl your comment that, " If the sample size is doubled, and the sample is indicative of the population, then the number of people in those percentile ranges will increase proportional to the number in the original sample" is severely misconstrued. The obtained score ( your 1000 random people) will not differ by more than plus or minus one standard error from the true score about 68% of the time. About 95% of the time, the obtained score will differ by less than plus or minus two standard errors from the true score.

Max

 

[beccala33]

Man people, this is all very basic. You guys really need to review the measure of variability, or dispersion, of a distribution of scores all across the board, and what happens when the sample increases. Acetyl your comment that, " If the sample size is doubled, and the sample is indicative of the population, then the number of people in those percentile ranges will increase proportional to the number in the original sample" is severely misconstrued. The obtained score ( your 1000 random people) will not differ by more than plus or minus one standard error from the true score about 68% of the time. About 95% of the time, the obtained score will differ by less than plus or minus two standard errors from the true score.

Max

The thing is, if you read harcourt's website, you'll see that the percentiles aren't measured against the people who are taking the exam with you. We are actually being graded against a population who took the pcat years ago. Because pharmacy school is getting more competitive and the applicant pool is of a higher caliber of student, I would agree that there are probably more people who get above a 50th percentile then people who score below 50. This really goes against the whole idea of percentile rankings, but this is the way they do it.

 

[acetyl]

Exactly, and I think it's BS that they can rank people with the new test in the same way as the old test.

 

[DrDTOX]

Is it really worth it to study for the PCAT? I already have a Ph.D. in toxicology and am wanting to go back to pharmacy school. The bottom line is that I just do not have enough time to study for it. I have heard some people just walking in there, taking the exam with no preparation, and then getting in the 90th percentile!

 

[acetyl]

Did you study for your qualifying exams?

 

[cdpiano27]

Well, I am PhD in statistics and I think all of these high scores does have to do with the population we are being measured up against from 1998-2003, I think.

When I took the GRE two years ago to apply to my PhD program, I got 750 Quantitative, 670 Verbal, and 6/6 Writing which corresponded to percentiles 81 Quantitative, 94 Verbal, and 95 Writing. There is no composite given on GRE but if you took the average of those three you would get exactly 90 percentile on GRE.

So why quantitative so low percentile?

In fact 800 which is a perfect score is only the 92 percentile.

There are many, many Asian students taking the GRE and almost every single one of them gets a perfect score on the quantitative section throwing off the average. Even when I was taking the computer based test, I barely studied at all for quantitative and I got a sample of the most difficult questions from the written tests one after the next to try to separate a 750 from an 800. And that is why it is due to the international population of all those students from China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong who never make below an 800 on that section.

However, I was given easier questions by the computer on the CAT-adaptive test got a 670 which was the 94th percentile. Why because it is English again, and 700 is considered 99th percentile.

So it all depends WHO YOU ARE BEING MEASURED AGAINST. I think the people at Harcourt will see this sooner or later and change all the rankings which will not be good but will separate who should get into pharm school and who should not.

 

[saradempsey]

The thing is, if you read harcourt's website, you'll see that the percentiles aren't measured against the people who are taking the exam with you. We are actually being graded against a population who took the pcat years ago. Because pharmacy school is getting more competitive and the applicant pool is of a higher caliber of student, I would agree that there are probably more people who get above a 50th percentile then people who score below 50. This really goes against the whole idea of percentile rankings, but this is the way they do it.

I took the PCAT first in 2003 and got a 50 with no studying and going out the night before. I took in again in Oct 2005 and got a 51 with studying. All my scaled scores doubled but the composite only went up 1 point. I called to question this and they told me that I was being compared with everyone who had taken it in the past 5 years. They said that the mean went up and that the score in got in Oct would have been a higher score in 2003 when I first took it. Does that make sense?

 

[think]

I took the PCAT first in 2003 and got a 50 with no studying and going out the night before. I took in again in Oct 2005 and got a 51 with studying. All my scaled scores doubled but the composite only went up 1 point. I called to question this and they told me that I was being compared with everyone who had taken it in the past 5 years. They said that the mean went up and that the score in got in Oct would have been a higher score in 2003 when I first took it. Does that make sense?

im not sure what u mean
are u saying its better to take it one time ??

 

[OSURxgirl]

Actually, the average would not be 50. The median is 50 if 50% score above it, and 50% score below it. The average could be higher or lower than 50, depending on the distribution.