average usmle scores

[OpalOnyx]

do you guys know of a website or other source where i can look up average usmle (step 1 (especially)) scores for a set of schools?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[NTF]

I've never heard of one. I believe it's each schools prerogative whether to release that data and the vast majority of schools seem to avoid it.

 

[twilightdoc]

do you guys know of a website or other source where i can look up average usmle (step 1 (especially)) scores for a set of schools?

As far as I am aware, that information isn't published by the NBME and probably not by individual schools, although it may be available by "word of mouth".

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

AAMC does not publish this information and tells schools to not publish their data.

 

[OpalOnyx]

thanks nontrad twilightdoc and serenade.

has anyone had luck with calling the student affairs or admissions office to get that information? i suppose it couldn't hurt to try?

 

[plauto]

not out there and I would not even waste my time asking for it...but it's not going to hurt.

 

[Catalystik]

If you get any solid information, kindly add it to SDN's unofficial comppilations at: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=102875&highlight=Step

 

[ThaliaNox]

I think this information is pretty useless. You're the same person whether you're at Harvard or the University of QRST. The differences between the schools in average USMLE scores are mostly due to the initial admission selection criteria for each school. You don't lose 10 IQ points because you turned down a higher ranked school for the full tuition scholarship at your state school. And vice versa, the legacy admission who never should have gotten in doesn't magically do better on the test either. Chances are that performance on the Step 1 would have been the same no matter which medical school someone went to.

 

[Depakote]

I think this information is pretty useless. You're the same person whether you're at Harvard or the University of QRST. The differences between the schools in average USMLE scores are mostly due to the initial admission selection criteria for each school. You don't lose 10 IQ points because you turned down a higher ranked school for the full tuition scholarship at your state school. And vice versa, the legacy admission who never should have gotten in doesn't magically do better on the test either. Chances are that performance on the Step 1 would have been the same no matter which medical school someone went to.

I agree with these sentiments. While it is the schools job to show you the material and different schools may go about this in different ways, it is ultimately the student's job to learn the material. The test doesn't reflect the school's job presenting the material, it reflects the students retention and application of the material.

 

[Steeler7588]

AAMC does not publish this information and tells schools to not publish their data.

Interesting. UVa posts their information exactly as it's given to them, the only school I've seen do that.

http://www.med-ed.virginia.edu/handbook/academics/licensure.cfm

They shouldn't be doing that?

Chances are that performance on the Step 1 would have been the same no matter which medical school someone went to.

I'd agree with your overall sentiment (in that it's not very important), but it is interesting to see how schools' Step 1 scores (reported scores, at least) differ from their students' GPA and MCAT averages. Schools with similar students on paper getting pretty different scores, schools with lower stats doing better than schools with higher stats, etc. Of course, 95% of reported scores can't be confirmed or are tweaked in some way, so there's a chance none of it is even true. I wouldn't be surprised if scores correlated with time given off to study, either.

But yeah, until there's some sort of official release of every school's scores, it's not worth considering. I can name several schools that claim to have the highest Step 1 scores in the country, which right away tells you to be wary. A school like Emory doesn't even tell its own students what their class average was, so how can any other school claim they've done the best if they don't know everyone's scores? Anything short of the sort of transparency UVa shows isn't very helpful at all.

How is the USMLE scored, anyway? Is it standardized? It seems like scores are rising, which would make judging what's a "good" score kinda hard.

 

[Omni]

AAMC does not publish this information and tells schools to not publish their data.

Interesting. Why is that?

 

[MilkmanAl]

Interesting. Why is that?

The main argument I've heard is that it would encourage schools to teach exclusively to the boards, and that would cut a lot of useful info out of the pre-clinical curriculum. Granted, it'd also cut a lot of needless crap at the same time, but you really do need to know a bit more than what's presented in First Aid if you want to be on the ball during clinicals.

 

[ButImLETired]

Interesting. UVa posts their information exactly as it's given to them, the only school I've seen do that.

http://www.med-ed.virginia.edu/handbook/academics/licensure.cfm

They shouldn't be doing that?

I'd agree with your overall sentiment (in that it's not very important), but it is interesting to see how schools' Step 1 scores (reported scores, at least) differ from their students' GPA and MCAT averages. Schools with similar students on paper getting pretty different scores, schools with lower stats doing better than schools with higher stats, etc. Of course, 95% of reported scores can't be confirmed or are tweaked in some way, so there's a chance none of it is even true. I wouldn't be surprised if scores correlated with time given off to study, either.

But yeah, until there's some sort of official release of every school's scores, it's not worth considering. I can name several schools that claim to have the highest Step 1 scores in the country, which right away tells you to be wary. A school like Emory doesn't even tell its own students what their class average was, so how can any other school claim they've done the best if they don't know everyone's scores? Anything short of the sort of transparency UVa shows isn't very helpful at all.

How is the USMLE scored, anyway? Is it standardized? It seems like scores are rising, which would make judging what's a "good" score kinda hard.

That's a good point.

I actually semi-looked at average Step 1 scores when I was applying to schools that had recently changed their curriculum (and that had the new numbers). Assuming the caliber of the class is roughly equal, a major change in average Step 1 score would therefore be based on the new curriculum. Of course, this is assuming that the numbers were accurate.

 

[longhorn09]

I wonder if it really matters? Afterall, what you get in the step 1 correlates with how much you study, not with which school you go to.

 

[Steeler7588]

Assuming the caliber of the class is roughly equal, a major change in average Step 1 score would therefore be based on the new curriculum.

Indeed. But looking at the official numbers for how first time test takers do, the average score of all students has jumped 6 points from 216 to 222 from 2003 to 2009. Seems like it'd be hard to compare scores from different years then.

 

[ThaliaNox]

Indeed. But looking at the official numbers for how first time test takers do, the average score of all students has jumped 6 points from 216 to 222 from 2003 to 2009. Seems like it'd be hard to compare scores from different years then.

Keep in mind that the passing mark creeps up by a point or two every year, so if a consistent number of students passes the USMLE each year, the average would have to go up.

 

[DrBowtie]

Interesting. Why is that?

Because it is only reliable as a P/F test.

 

[OpalOnyx]

thanks guys. My reasoning behind it was to compare curricula - However, I agree with those of you who are saying that Step 1 scores are more reflective of individual efforts/studying than the school's preparation.

One trend that I see (at least in the schools I'm considering) is that students tend to prep in uniform ways - There are certain tools or resources that are used by everyone at a particular school. Maybe getting an average Step 1 score will gauge the effectiveness of those resources. Does that make sense?

 

[quiltlady]

" students tend to prep in uniform ways - There are certain tools or resources that are used by everyone "
That's the key statement. Everyone uses the same review books. Some schools give more time for study, some students study more efficiently. Some worked harder the first two years to learn the material the first time.
When you realize that probably half the students at any given school did not attend class at all, you realize the school was not the factor in their success or lack of it.

 

[OpalOnyx]

" students tend to prep in uniform ways - There are certain tools or resources that are used by everyone "
That's the key statement. Everyone uses the same review books. Some schools give more time for study, some students study more efficiently. Some worked harder the first two years to learn the material the first time.
When you realize that probably half the students at any given school did not attend class at all, you realize the school was not the factor in their success or lack of it.

Yea I agree. The score investigation is probably not worth bothering with, unless I find myself with loads of free time and am bored/curious.

 

[Steeler7588]

Keep in mind that the passing mark creeps up by a point or two every year, so if a consistent number of students passes the USMLE each year, the average would have to go up.

Why would they increase the score needed for passing? I feel like they'd want test scores to be equivalent across years, like the MCAT.

 

[Narmerguy]

I've heard that they're going to tweak (or even rework/scrap) the USMLE. That sounds promising.

 

[Disinence2]

I agree with those above. Average Step 1 scores really aren't going to be all that helpful. What if you evaluated your undergrad by the schools average MCAT score?

 

[ThaliaNox]

Why would they increase the score needed for passing? I feel like they'd want test scores to be equivalent across years, like the MCAT.

I don't know why for sure, but they do. Probably some political crap about quality increase. One thing to keep in mind is that the USMLE is not scored in percentiles, like the MCAT. Theoretically, everyone could score a 260. It would not be even theoretically possible for everyone to score a 39 on the MCAT, since that test is scored in percentiles.

 

[stephy]

Does a few points difference really matter when matching for residency?

 

[ThaliaNox]

Does a few points difference really matter when matching for residency?

The main point of the USMLE is not matching for residency. It is a liscensing test. The main point is passing it to prove you know your basic clinical sciences. Your score on it will have some impact on residencies, but that is not why the test is taken.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

The main point of the USMLE is not matching for residency. It is a liscensing test. The main point is passing it to prove you know your basic clinical sciences. Your score on it will have some impact on residencies, but that is not why the test is taken.

Well, obviously it is a licensing test (That's the "L"). But I would argue that its main use at this point is for residency apps. That may not be its intended purpose, but it's the metric every program uses.

 

[houstoncfh]

Does a few points difference really matter when matching for residency?

It depends on which few points you're talking about. Some schools/programs/specialties will screen based on your Step 1 score. So, if your score doesn't reach a certain threshold, you run the risk of not getting your application read. So, in that sense, making a 198 instead of a 200 could make a big difference.

On the other hand, making a 235 instead of a 230 isn't really giving you a huge leg up.

 

[ThaliaNox]

Well, obviously it is a licensing test (That's the "L"). But I would argue that its main use at this point is for residency apps. That may not be its intended purpose, but it's the metric every program uses.

I had been referring to the slow increase in passing and the corresponding slow increase in average score. These increases have little impact on matching. Yes, a difference in 198-200 can screen you out. I'm not arguing there. Sorry if I was confusing.

 

[Steeler7588]

Theoretically, everyone could score a 260.

I didn't know that, thanks. That'd explain the rising scores.