Competency Based Admissions

[EasternMer]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I've seen on the MSAR that many schools now have a red highlighted text on their "ABOUT" that says "Now switching to Competency Based Admissions?"

What does that mean specifically and how is it different from before?

Hopefully some adcoms can advise @Goro @gyngyn @LizzyM

 

[gyngyn]

https://www.aamc.org/initiatives/admissionsinitiative/competencies/

 

[NickNaylor]

Looks like it's putting in a more "official" guideline format what was previously gathered via an applicant's general gestalt. I see nothing in the link that @gyngyn posted that is at all surprising.

 

[Instatewaiter]

Interesting

 

[gyngyn]

Looks like it's putting in a more "official" guideline format what was previously gathered via an applicant's general gestalt. I see nothing in the link that @gyngyn posted that is at all surprising.

Medical school admissions policy changes move at a glacial pace.

 

[breakintheroof]

Looks like it's putting in a more "official" guideline format what was previously gathered via an applicant's general gestalt. I see nothing in the link that @gyngyn posted that is at all surprising.

One thing that is changing is that some schools are citing this as they move away from specific course requirements. Like this:

Beginning in the 2016 admissions cycle, Pritzker will be moving to competency-based entrance requirements. These requirements will emphasize not the number of courses taken, but the level of mastery that should be achieved.

 

[gyngyn]

One thing that is changing is that some schools are citing this as they move away from specific course requirements. Like this:

Here's my list of schools that have done the same:
East Tennessee State, The Medical University of South Carolina ( In Charleston not Columbia), USC, University of Virginia, Stanford, Tulane, UCSD, U of Cincinnati, SIU, Rush, Einstein, U of Chicago, NYU, U Conn, Hofstra...

 

[breakintheroof]

Here's my list of schools that have done the same:
East Tennessee State, The Medical University of South Carolina ( In Charleston not Columbia), USC, University of Virginia, Stanford, Tulane, UCSD, U of Cincinnati, SIU, Rush, Einstein, U of Chicago, NYU, U Conn..

Most of that list looks familiar...🙂 I see Rush and Cincinnati have been added as well, the more the better.

 

[gyngyn]

Most of that list looks familiar...🙂 I see Rush and Cincinnati have been added as well, the more the better.

I'm pretty sure the rest of CA is coming. If anyone knows of others, feel free to add.

 

[jb94mg]

I'm pretty sure the rest of CA is coming. If anyone knows of others, feel free to add.

Isn't the idea that we should encourage diversity? So they're no longer formalizing requirements so that students who want to do other majors aren't forced to take so many pre-reqs outside of their major? That's my understanding of why they're doing this. I wish more schools would follow suit. I think it's great. They should do away with requiring so many time-consuming labs too, in my opinion. Just takes away time from things they could do that might well be more beneficial/seminal.

 

[touchpause13]

https://www.aamc.org/initiatives/admissionsinitiative/competencies/

Wow this is awesome

 

[EasternMer]

Wow this is awesome

???

I feel like 80% of it is arbitrary and just a way for Medical Schools to lure in non-science majors by getting rid of the traditional pre-req courses.

Which, imo, is a great move. Liberal arts majors make such thoughtful physicians.

 

[allantois]

I don't know what med schools are doing, but AAMC is clearly not on the path of decreasing the number of pre-requisites with their new MCAT 🙄

 

[touchpause13]

???

I feel like 80% of it is arbitrary and just a way for Medical Schools to lure in non-science majors by getting rid of the traditional pre-req courses.

Which, imo, is a great move. Liberal arts majors make such thoughtful physicians.

I was an English major so of course I love it 🙂

 

[Goro]

DO schools haven't glommed onto this yet, but I know it's coming.

And that sound you hear off in the distance is the wailing of hyperacheivers who spend all their time in the library and research lab, thinking this is all they need for entry to med school.

Note that the competencies are all about personal growth and mastery of human-human interactions? Acing coursework is but a small component.

https://www.aamc.org/initiatives/admissionsinitiative/competencies/

 

[gyngyn]

I don't know what med schools are doing, but AAMC is clearly not on the path of decreasing the number of pre-requisites with their new MCAT 🙄

The amount of content is increasing. The specific way in which you show mastery of the content is changing.

 

[touchpause13]

DO schools haven't glommed onto this yet, but I know it's coming.

And that sound you hear off in the distance is the wailing of hyperacheivers who spend all their time in the library and research lab, thinking this is all they need for entry to med school.

Note that the competencies are all about personal growth and mastery of human-human interactions? Acing coursework is but a small component.

I'm surprised that DO schools aren't leading the charge on this. I feel like it fits perfectly with the philosophy

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~dcal/documents/TSS_NEJM_reading

 

[caffeinemia]

This is hilarious, because I thought the first thing you learn in medical school and residency is that you are incompetent?

 

[hoihaie]

This is hilarious, because I thought the first thing you learn in medical school and residency is that you are incompetent?

competently incompetent

 

[caffeinemia]

competently incompetent

completely competently incompetent, ya comprehend? Now say that five times fast.

 

[Goro]

In terms of creativity in medical education, DO schools seem to lag behind MD schools.

It holds true for MD schools as well. Trends in education seem to start at Harvard and work their way west!

I'm surprised that DO schools aren't leading the charge on this. I feel like it fits perfectly with the philosophy

 

[gyngyn]

Trends in education seem to start at Harvard and work their way west!

Many west coast schools have already dropped specific course requirements. HMS, not so much...

 

[breakintheroof]

Many west coast schools have already dropped specific course requirements. HMS, not so much...

It seems like Harvard wants to have their own special spin on it. For example, their science requirements sound pretty serious at first, but then they go on to say something like this for each of them:

Although a formal year-long course that covers these concepts will meet this requirement, other innovative approaches (including interdisciplinary courses taught together with biologically relevant physical sciences) that allow students to master these “competencies,” independent of discrete courses and semester time commitments, are encouraged and will be considered.

That's only for next cycle, I think, so even if they mean it they are still slightly behind the curve.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

It seems like Harvard wants to have their own special spin spin on it. For example, their science requirements sound pretty serious at first, but then they go on to say something like this for each of them:

That's only for next cycle, I think, so even if they mean it they are still slightly behind the curve.

I got the studies I posted from the site you linked.

I still think the schools out west are cooler 😉

 

[hoihaie]

completely competently incompetent, ya comprehend? Now say that five times fast.

I am completely compentently incompentently competent at saying that 5 times fast 🙂

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

@gyngyn, @Goro, @LizzyM
Do you except the new MCAT to function as a competency exam for at least a decade? Or do you think the high achievers (like the current ~36+ crowd) will master it even sooner?

 

[Goro]

It seems that AAMC likes to have its MCATs around for a decade before changing them. I think good standardized test takers will do well no matter what he format. Test taking is a skill, like riding a bike or throwing an inside curveball.

@gyngyn, @Goro, @LizzyM
Do you except the new MCAT to function as a competency exam for at least a decade? Or do you think the high achievers (like the current ~36+ crowd) will master it even sooner?

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

It seems that AAMC likes to have its MCATs around for a decade before changing them. I think good standardized test takers will do well no matter what he format. Test taking is a skill, like riding a bike or throwing an inside curveball.

Sorry, I should have worded my question better. It wasn't about changing the MCAT.

In a prior thread, @gyngyn and @LizzyM were discussing the prospect of the new mcat functioning more as a competency exam. I wonder how long it will be before the high achievers separate themselves from the middle?

LizzyM:
I have grown frustrated with the old MCAT and the way a 35 is considered far less than a 39 although by percentile they are very close. (a 25 and a 29 are not very close on the other hand). My understanding is that the AAMC is going to try to move us toward thinking about central tendency and the middle of the pack without worrying too much about the extreme ends (or end as we tend to focus only on the highest scores).

Gyngyn:
If the MCAT were used the way that is intended (as a metric of competence) instead of a bragging tool, I do believe that we would all benefit.

Although, you are correct about the good test takers doing well regardless of the format.

 

[unnumzaan]

I'm pretty sure the rest of CA is coming. If anyone knows of others, feel free to add.

+ Hofstra

http://medicine.hofstra.edu/Admission/md/mdadmissions_application_req.html

 

[gyngyn]

+ Hofstra

http://medicine.hofstra.edu/Admission/md/mdadmissions_application_req.html

Done!

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Cornell seems pretty flexible.

 

[gyngyn]

Cornell seems pretty flexible.

I see "requires" too many times to make the list, though.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I see "requires" too many times to make the list, though.

Lol, I didn't think it would make your list. It just confirms that the east coast is still lagging a bit behind.

 

[nOchemallday]

I feel like 80% of it is arbitrary and just a way for Medical Schools to lure in non-science majors by getting rid of the traditional pre-req courses.

Agree with the bolded. I think the least verifiable competencies are (in order): Capacity for Improvement, Living Systems, and Teamwork. IMO there's no way adcoms are getting a handle on these from just a primary + secondary + single interview day. There may be very specific cases that strongly exhibit or strongly refute an applicant's competency in that category, but as a CORE (read: necessary for qualification) standard - please. I'm not saying that these competencies are not paramount for an ideal candidate, just unlikely to be throroughly validated in the little time schools spend with applicants.

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~dcal/documents/TSS_NEJM_reading

I think it's funny that both of the articles in the pdf say they want a more streamlined "biologically relevant" set of science pre-req's, but college shouldn't just be a stepping stone to professional school. And also that students should "explore and stretch academically and intellectually...to prepare for citizenship in society," yet courses like ethics should be reserved for medical schools to teach else rigorous scientific competence is foregone. They just keep walking back and forth across a very thin line of how to prepare students for a career in medicine and also have them achieve a truly "liberal" education.

 

[LizzyM]

Agree with the bolded. I think the least verifiable competencies are (in order): Capacity for Improvement, Living Systems, and Teamwork. IMO there's no way adcoms are getting a handle on these from just a primary + secondary + single interview day. There may be very specific cases that strongly exhibit or strongly refute an applicant's competency in that category, but as a CORE (read: necessary for qualification) standard - please. I'm not saying that these competencies are not paramount for an ideal candidate, just unlikely to be throroughly validated in the little time schools spend with applicants.

The LORs can speak to capacity for improvement and teamwork if the writer knows the applicant well and covers that material based on personal observations and experiences with the applicant. I hope that schools will drop the "two science / one non-science " LOR requirement so that applicants can choose people who can best elucidate the candidate's skills as a team member and regarding capacity for improvement.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Agree with the bolded. I think the least verifiable competencies are (in order): Capacity for Improvement, Living Systems, and Teamwork. IMO there's no way adcoms are getting a handle on these from just a primary + secondary + single interview day. There may be very specific cases that strongly exhibit or strongly refute an applicant's competency in that category, but as a CORE (read: necessary for qualification) standard - please. I'm not saying that these competencies are not paramount for an ideal candidate, just unlikely to be throroughly validated in the little time schools spend with applicants.


I think it's funny that both of the articles in the pdf say they want a more streamlined "biologically relevant" set of science pre-req's, but college shouldn't just be a stepping stone to professional school. And also that students should "explore and stretch academically and intellectually...to prepare for citizenship in society," yet courses like ethics should be reserved for medical schools to teach else rigorous scientific competence is foregone. They just keep walking back and forth across a very thin line of how to prepare students for a career in medicine and also have them achieve a truly "liberal" education.

It looks like their recommendations are for students who want to attend medical school without majoring in a hard science.

 

[Womb Raider]

How is this any different from what most medical schools require of their applicants now? That is, a bunch of qualities that have no objective method of measurement/comparison and are ultimately subjective.

 

[The Helpful Aye Aye]

How is this any different from what most medical schools require of their applicants now? That is, a bunch of qualities that have no objective method of measurement/comparison and are ultimately subjective.

It gives more flexibility to the applicant with their course selection and gives admissions committees are different way to reject/accept people. I went through a few "competencies" in my secondaries and they basically asked "Y U THINK U NO BIOLOGY GOOD?" My freshman year skipping introductory biology was "discouraged, but could be done on a case-by-case basis" (as in advanced students going straight to upper level, more specialized courses). People would freak out/not do it because of medical school websites that said "requires 1 year of general biology" or "prerequisite biology" and rightfully so! Strict, course designation-based requirements are dumb. Logically, if you place out of an intro course and do well in an advanced course or MCAT section in that subject you've mastered the basics. If you're a chemical engineer and your major has engineering-specific chemistry courses that satisfy your degree in chemistry, you shouldn't have to go back to take general chemistry. Etc, etc.

For most people nothing will change in terms of class selection. For non-traditional students or people with science-related but not BCPM degrees, this will allow them to make their case in a more fair way.

 

[The Helpful Aye Aye]

In terms of the stuff outside of class (like cultural competency), these are things that assessed in secondaries and interviews anyway... Vermont had a rated team exercise this cycle. I don't see what all the hubub is about AAMC endorsing a group of vague qualities medical students should possess. They certainly make applicants think about those sorts of things ad nauseum. As long as medical students still have the final say in how they quantify the competencies, not a whole lot should change in the practical sense.

 

[Womb Raider]

Hmm I guess I understand... The only real difference I can see is medical schools allowing higher level science courses trump/replace the basic requirements. I don't think it's unreasonable to remove course requirements if you can show competency in other ways (e.g. MCAT).

Basically this changes absolutely nothing.

 

[Lucca]

Hmm I guess I understand... The only real difference I can see is medical schools allowing higher level science courses trump/replace the basic requirements. I don't think it's unreasonable to remove course requirements if you can show competency in other ways (e.g. MCAT).

Basically this changes absolutely nothing.

Maybe to us on SDN but for neurotic freshman signing up for classes or an exhausted undergraduate explaining course selections to helicopter parents at recruiting weekends or to your helicopter parents or for non-traditionals I think it can be very comforting.

I can think of nothing better for the pre-Med curriculum than to void all lab requirements and make lab skills competency based in a way that the requirement can be satisfied through your own choice in labs and through research in a faculty lab. Nothing has enraged me more, wasted more of my time, and added less to my education in college than introductory science labs. (Essentially I can't think anything better for the pre-med curriculum than for the idea of a premed curriculum itself to burn in a fire)

 

[Womb Raider]

(Essentially I can't think anything better for the pre-med curriculum than for the idea of a premed curriculum itself to burn in a fire)

Haha I agree with most of your post but I just have to say I REALLY enjoyed a lot of the material I learned in the pre-med curriculum (particularly physics) that I can't say for certain I would've taken if it wasn't a requirement for being pre-med.

Basic physics and gun safety should be a required course for ALL students, but that's probably outside the scope of this thread.

 

[Lucca]

Haha I agree with most of your post but I just have to say I REALLY enjoyed a lot of the material I learned in the pre-med curriculum (particularly physics) that I can't say for certain I would've taken if it wasn't a requirement for being pre-med.

Basic physics and gun safety should be a required course for ALL students, but that's probably outside the scope of this thread.

I'm not saying I didn't enjoy my pre-med classes. In fact, I enjoyed most of them and would have taken them anyway, most likely, since I'm interested in science (except I wouldn't have taken Organic Chemistry II which actually turned out to be a really fun class so you got me there). The existence of a pre-med curriculum, however, falsely proposes that the content of said curriculum is sufficient for becoming a physician, sufficient for an entire education and - worst of all if one were to fall into this trap - that it is the most important component of both of those things. I agree that everyone should learn basic physics and I wish high school included a one semester course on family finances, budgeting and managing debt for everyday life. I can respect that most people would avoid physics and mathematics if they could, which is a shame, but there's no reason that the topics in those subjects couldn't be included in the competencies.

 

[Teah7]

I've seen on the MSAR that many schools now have a red highlighted text on their "ABOUT" that says "Now switching to Competency Based Admissions?"

What does that mean specifically and how is it different from before?

Hopefully some adcoms can advise @Goro @gyngyn @LizzyM

I know some students who worked hard taking all their science pre-reqs might be against this new policies and I totally understand their frustration. My question is, if a person self-teach herself all the science classes during 1.5 year studying for MCAT, what would be the best way to do it? What kind of MAT review would be the best options for someone with non-science undergraduate degree and with very little science knowledge? I am 42 and I often live in the middle of nowhere due to the fact that my husband's jobs are in such places and we often relocate. I have to self-prepare myself for MCAT and I have at least 1 year for it. Please, advise me that kind of MCAT prep books to get?