Did Step 2 get harder this year?

[raiderette]

I have spoken to several friends at multiple med schools and 5-7 of them did not get the average 10+ point bump. In actuality, one of the best clinicians I know, who honored everything based on NBME tests lost 10 points. Has anyone else seen lower than than average gains (or losses) on Sep 2 CK?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ciestar]

I had a 34 point gain from step 1. (Low bar to start with lol)

 

[crunchywhit]

I keep reading old posts where the test was “just like uworld.” My test was not that way. Got what I needed but know others that studied hard, are solid test takers, and didn’t. That thing was a beast.

 

[takeurmeds02]

I keep reading old posts where the test was “just like uworld.” My test was not that way. Got what I needed but know others that studied hard, are solid test takers, and didn’t. That thing was a beast.

Yea it felt nothing like UWorld lol

-------------

To OP, I went up 15 points from 23x

 

[mistafab]

Step 2 was like a video game...

Except it wasn’t fun.
And it was really hard.
And your career was at stake.

 

[bballdragon5]

Step 2 CK was rough...I’m a bad test taker and I came out thinking I bombed it, but I had a 25 point bump. I don’t know if it was harder, but I thought in general these tests were generally standardized. I just think medicine gets harder each year as we uncover more.

 

[deleted645092]

My score itself increased by <5 points from the high 240s to low 250s. According to the score conversion table available online my actual percentile went down ~5%.

 

[Lawpy]

So I was looking into past data from here:

Here's a Step 1-Step 2 CK improvement curve from 2015-2016.

I mentioned in the thread the following:

Note that the table and charts examine Step 1 and Step 2 CK score bins, and score improvement is based on Step 2 CK score bin being greater than Step 1 score bin. For example, someone with a Step 1 score of 225 and Step 2 CK score of 229 is considered to have the same performance since both scores are in the 220-229 score bin. However, someone with a Step 1 score of 224 and Step 2 CK score of 232 is considered to have improved (moving from 220-229 score bin to 230-239 score bin).

While this is for one year, it may give a rough estimate on what to expect.

 

[libertyyne]

So I was looking into past data from here:

Here's a Step 1-Step 2 CK improvement curve from 2015-2016.

I mentioned in the thread the following:

Note that the table and charts examine Step 1 and Step 2 CK score bins, and score improvement is based on Step 2 CK score bin being greater than Step 1 score bin. For example, someone with a Step 1 score of 225 and Step 2 CK score of 229 is considered to have the same performance since both scores are in the 220-229 score bin. However, someone with a Step 1 score of 224 and Step 2 CK score of 232 is considered to have improved (moving from 220-229 score bin to 230-239 score bin).

While this is for one year, it may give a rough estimate on what to expect.

Unfortunately this data gets skewed by specialties where step 2 is not important for application so the applicants sandbag taking it to avoid reporting the score and dont have to bust their behind.

 

[CidHighwind]

Unfortunately this data gets skewed by specialties where step 2 is not important for application so the applicants sandbag taking it to avoid reporting the score and dont have to bust their behind.

What specialties are those? The only ones I know that to be true for are optho and urology. Pretty much every other field wants their applicants to at least do as good on Step 2 as they did on Step 1.

 

[username456789]

Step 2 what is like a video game...

Except it wasn’t fun.
And it was really hard.
And your career was at stake.

You’re thinking of Step 3.

 

[libertyyne]

What specialties are those? The only ones I know that to be true for are optho and urology. Pretty much every other field wants their applicants to at least do as good on Step 2 as they did on Step 1.

Neurosurgery
Thoracic.
I don't think surgical subs care that much.

 

[watermelon master]

Unfortunately this data gets skewed by specialties where step 2 is not important for application so the applicants sandbag taking it to avoid reporting the score and dont have to bust their behind.

but don't you have to have your step 2 score in before you're ranked? I've never understood why people do this - do they think that if they wait to take step 2 until after they interview, that PDs will forget they didn't take step 2 and rank them otherwise? To me that sounds silly and pretty hard to coordinate, do people really wait until like November to take step 2?

 

[efle]

but don't you have to have your step 2 score in before you're ranked? I've never understood why people do this - do they think that if they wait to take step 2 until after they interview, that PDs will forget they didn't take step 2 and rank them otherwise? To me that sounds silly and pretty hard to coordinate, do people really wait until like November to take step 2?

Our advising here tells us that if we kill Step1 we should avoid taking step 2 until as late as possible so we cant undo our own success with a score drop. Some specialties and programs require a step 2 to rank but many do not.

 

[7331poas]

Neurosurgery
Thoracic.
I don't think surgical subs care that much.

Pretty sure both of those expect you to have step 2 in before eras

 

[libertyyne]

Pretty sure both of those expect you to have step 2 in before eras

nope. Step 2 is not important for neurosurgery interviews at all. I know 7 people who matched over the last two years who delayed step 2 as far back as they can so they wouldnt have to worry about it for eras. You do need results in by rank date tho.

 

[CidHighwind]

Neurosurgery
Thoracic.
I don't think surgical subs care that much.

I mean I’m sure they care if you bomb it or do poorly. It’s just that most of their candidates also do really well on Step 2 as well, so it becomes a moot point. Also I’ve heard from people about how difficult Step 3 was. Even though they pass, it’s not by a very wide margin.

nope. Step 2 is not important for neurosurgery interviews at all. I know 7 people who matched over the last two years who delayed step 2 as far back as they can so they wouldnt have to worry about it for eras. You do need results in by rank date tho.

But that’s the thing right. If you do poorly on it they’ll still see it and take it into consideration when ranking you. Yeah some might judge going from 250s to 240s, but I feel like for a lot of candidates they have both scores in by the time ERAS opens.

 

[libertyyne]

I mean I’m sure they care if you bomb it or do poorly. It’s just that most of their candidates also do really well on Step 2 as well, so it becomes a moot point. Also I’ve heard from people about how difficult Step 3 was. Even though they pass, it’s not by a very wide margin.

Thats the point of not taking before eras. THat way if you do poorly it wont impact your ability to get an interview. Once the interview is done, they care very little about it unless you fail it. If you look at the neurosurgery/ thoracic surgery data on step 2 it shows lower percentiles for step 2.

The only way taking step 2 before eras time in those specialties would be necessary would be if you did poorly on step 1.

look at the difference in how many programs even cited it as a factor 64% vs 90% and the level of importance 3.9 vs 4.3

 

[CidHighwind]

Thats the point of not taking before eras. THat way if you do poorly it wont impact your ability to get an interview. Once the interview is done, they care very little about it unless you fail it. If you look at the neurosurgery/ thoracic surgery data on step 2 it shows lower percentiles for step 2.

The only way taking step 2 before eras time in those specialties would be necessary would be if you did poorly on step 1.

View attachment 279063
View attachment 279064
look at the difference in how many programs even cited it as a factor 64% vs 90% and the level of importance 3.9 vs 4.3

It’s still over half, telling people it’s “not important” is misleading. Of lesser importance, but still important is probably more accurate. But again it depends on the field, in some fields they automatically assume you didn’t do well on Step 2 if it’s not on your app, and if they get a bunch of people with both scores in they’ll take them.

 

[slowthai]

Yeah, for the surgical subs, for years, people have said to withhold step 2 until after ERAS unless your step 1 is lower and you think it'll make a difference or the program requires it with your step 1 score.

 

[7331poas]

Thats the point of not taking before eras. THat way if you do poorly it wont impact your ability to get an interview. Once the interview is done, they care very little about it unless you fail it. If you look at the neurosurgery/ thoracic surgery data on step 2 it shows lower percentiles for step 2.

The only way taking step 2 before eras time in those specialties would be necessary would be if you did poorly on step 1.


look at the difference in how many programs even cited it as a factor 64% vs 90% and the level of importance 3.9 vs 4.3

Personally I hate the way that question is asked and the data is presented. If 60% cite that Step 2 is important, do you really think I am not going to emphasize step 2 when I could potentially be alienating over half the programs in the country?

 

[libertyyne]

It’s still over half, telling people it’s “not important” is misleading. Of lesser importance, but still important is probably more accurate. But again it depends on the field, in some fields they automatically assume you didn’t do well on Step 2 if it’s not on your app, and if they get a bunch of people with both scores in they’ll take them.

Obviously people should do their own research. There is a trend of lower scores in step 2 for neurosurgery, it is not incidental or accidental that people who did very well on step 1 are consistently doing worse. Considering I have an above average step 1 score for the field , i see no necessity in risking taking step 2 and doing worse only to hurt my application. I'll take the advice of people who actually matched recently and matched well from my school.

 

[CidHighwind]

Obviously people should do their own research. There is a trend of lower scores in step 2 for neurosurgery, it is not incidental or accidental that people who did very well on step 1 are consistently doing worse. Considering I have an above average step 1 score for the field , i see no necessity in risking taking step 2 and doing worse only to hurt my application. I'll take the advice of people who actually matched recently and matched well from my school.

That’s fine, and different specialties look for different things. I think a better way to word this is that yes, if you’re in the 260s on Step 1, that’ll get you plenty of interviews. However, it you do really bad on Step 2 (think 210s or having to retake it since one just completely blew it off) then it’ll still end up hurting you once rank lists come in. In surgical specialties where most people already have top %tile scores, doing well on the second test isn’t as important. But if you’re applying and don’t have a 250+, take Step 2 early.

 

[efle]

I think the way to interpret it is probably "we will usually use it, if it's there". The big hurdle by far is getting the interview, that's what drove Step1 to such a crucial role and cuts out 90% of the pool. If you've taken step 2 by ERAS submission season, then they'll use that in interview decisions.

Then the rank list is going to be much more about your interview and letters etc, they're not going to go back and compare whether you went up or down on Step2 and adjust your rank off that.

Hence the advantage of taking it late unless you want to recover from a low step1 by having it present at initial evaluation

 

[Lawpy]

I think the way to interpret it is probably "we will usually use it, if it's there". The big hurdle by far is getting the interview, that's what drove Step1 to such a crucial role and cuts out 90% of the pool. If you've taken step 2 by ERAS submission season, then they'll use that in interview decisions.

Then the rank list is going to be much more about your interview and letters etc, they're not going to go back and compare whether you went up or down on Step2 and adjust your rank off that.

Hence the advantage of taking it late unless you want to recover from a low step1 by having it present at initial evaluation

So wait, if someone has a 260+ Step 1, is it worth delaying Step 2 regardless of the specialty they're applying? Because there's a risk of dropping in Step 2 even if it's something like 250+.

 

[kinjin24]

I keep reading old posts where the test was “just like uworld.” My test was not that way. Got what I needed but know others that studied hard, are solid test takers, and didn’t. That thing was a beast.

They didn’t have the work ethic for it apparently

 

[sovereign0]

I thought the exam was quite difficult and was not well-represented by UWorld (even though I got through less than half) or any of the practice exams. Felt pretty similar to the shelf exams, which I admittedly did pretty well on. I didn't think there was a chance I would even match my Step 1 score (250-255) based on my practice test results. I was pretty surprised when I beat my step 1 score by 20 points, and beat my highest practice test score by 10 points. Feels like I got away with something I shouldn't have, but I'm super grateful since I'm applying surgical sub-specialty and Step 2 CK could only hurt me. Unfortunately my school required us to take it in time to be reported on ERAS.