Do Average Joe's do well on the MCAT?

[EricMont]

I wouldn't consider myself an average student, I work hard and get straight A's every semester. I have done well on the ACT (32) and GRE and so I think I am pretty decent at standardized tests as well. However, I have had friends who were 3.0 students get 30's on the MCAT and were not (I hate having to say this) someone I would go to for help in school. They were students that tended to say things wrong/do poorly on tests and almost always memorized things for classes like human physiology (which I think is a subject you need to synthesize not memorize). I have three friends now that have been your standard "slacker" and have gotten 30's on the MCAT.

So I guess what I am trying to open to discussion is this, "is your MCAT score truly just effort? Or do you have to possess a rarer intelligence outside of just hours of studying to obtain the 37's 38's 39's etc?"

My observation is that there are thousands of people that have been on this forum and only a couple hundred that have posted their success on the 30+ study habits section. I look at posters like ColeOnTheRoll, who got a 41! Is this poster a genius? or was this person a student who just "went through the motions" every year getting B's and C's in classes and then just studied really hard for the MCAT?

I truly think, in order to give a further representation of what kind of students are on this forum (effort-wise), people should also include their GPA with their 30+ MCAT posts.

I have only read one story on here of a guy saying he was an "average student" and did well but was that just one rare example?

I guess I just want to reassure myself that my 6-7 hours per day of studying is going to pay off..

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[bball]

A good amount of it is intelligence, but you can put yourself in the best position to earn the highest score possible with repeated practice and content review.

 

[Silverfalcon]

I truly think, in order to give a further representation of what kind of students are on this forum (effort-wise), people should also include their GPA with their 30+ MCAT posts.

I don't see the purpose of this at all. What are you trying to establish? Correlation between high GPA and high MCAT score? While it is true that some students who receive high letter grades do well on MCAT, it's not necessarily because they are smarter. They probably are, but they also work very hard in classes and in MCAT prep. I've personally seen many students who did well on classes and "wing" MCAT. They then say, "MCAT is dumb - it doesn't really measure what I learned." Well, then study hard!

Also, by asking for GPA with MCAT, you are basically implying that your trust for someone's advice for MCAT will not be upheld unless you see that person's grade. If someone with 3.0 got 30 on MCAT, you will say that the score is a fluke regardless of how hard someone worked to study MCAT.

I think that generalization is not only wrong, but can be offensive to some students who worked hard in their courses. Not everybody gets A, and if you go to hard institutions like MIT or CalTech, you may get B+ while someone else in much easier schools will get A. My point is that while prerequisites and corresponding GPA are important on one's achievement in MCAT, they shouldn't be used to judge someone's score. You should look at MCAT based on what the person put into study for THAT exam.

Also, keep in mind that some brilliant students will be very modest and call themselves "average students." Personally, I think that by surviving pre-health prerequisites, you are not an average Joe.

 

[mxt200]

I don't see the purpose of this at all. What are you trying to establish? Correlation between high GPA and high MCAT score? While it is true that some students who receive high letter grades do well on MCAT, it's not necessarily because they are smarter. They probably are, but they also work very hard in classes and in MCAT prep. I've personally seen many students who did well on classes and "wing" MCAT. They then say, "MCAT is dumb - it doesn't really measure what I learned." Well, then study hard!

Also, by asking for GPA with MCAT, you are basically implying that your trust for someone's advice for MCAT will not be upheld unless you see that person's grade. If someone with 3.0 got 30 on MCAT, you will say that the score is a fluke regardless of how hard someone worked to study MCAT.

I think that generalization is not only wrong, but can be offensive to some students who worked hard in their courses. Not everybody gets A, and if you go to hard institutions like MIT or CalTech, you may get B+ while someone else in much easier schools will get A. My point is that while prerequisites and corresponding GPA are important on one's achievement in MCAT, they shouldn't be used to judge someone's score. You should look at MCAT based on what the person put into study for THAT exam.

Also, keep in mind that some brilliant students will be very modest and call themselves "average students." Personally, I think that by surviving pre-health prerequisites, you are not an average Joe.

^^^^👍👍

GPA has nothing to do with MCAT. All the MCAT is is how much work you put into it and how dedicated you are to studying.

 

[JP2740]

There are no "rare examples." There's a reason it happened, he didn't guess his way to a great grade. Find what works for you, and don't take the test until you're ready and you will be. It might take you more time, but if you put it in you'll get a good grade guaranteed.

 

[EricMont]

I don't see the purpose of this at all. What are you trying to establish? Correlation between high GPA and high MCAT score? While it is true that some students who receive high letter grades do well on MCAT, it's not necessarily because they are smarter. They probably are, but they also work very hard in classes and in MCAT prep. I've personally seen many students who did well on classes and "wing" MCAT. They then say, "MCAT is dumb - it doesn't really measure what I learned." Well, then study hard!

Also, by asking for GPA with MCAT, you are basically implying that your trust for someone's advice for MCAT will not be upheld unless you see that person's grade. If someone with 3.0 got 30 on MCAT, you will say that the score is a fluke regardless of how hard someone worked to study MCAT.

I think that generalization is not only wrong, but can be offensive to some students who worked hard in their courses. Not everybody gets A, and if you go to hard institutions like MIT or CalTech, you may get B+ while someone else in much easier schools will get A. My point is that while prerequisites and corresponding GPA are important on one's achievement in MCAT, they shouldn't be used to judge someone's score. You should look at MCAT based on what the person put into study for THAT exam.

Also, keep in mind that some brilliant students will be very modest and call themselves "average students." Personally, I think that by surviving pre-health prerequisites, you are not an average Joe.

I do see your point and understand what you are trying to explain; however, I feel that GPA does show a good representation of your efforts as a student, in general. Sure, there will be people who have very simple majors and in very non-challenging schools and good grades. However, for the most part, people on this forum are in hard science majors (chemistry, biology, biochemistry, physiology, etc) and those majors aren't "very simple" anywhere in my opinion. They do require effort and do require a dedicated student in order to do well. Furthermore, those with simple majors or took very simple pre-req's at like community colleges or just under-prepared 4-yr institutions would certainly be at a huge disadvantage when it came time to take the MCAT and would most likely not be abundant in the 30+ MCAT thread.

My point is that I need a reference. I busted my a** every semester at a top 50 college and got straight A's every semester and I want to take advice about the MCAT from students who work as hard as I did. I do feel there is a difference between the biochem major who just scraped by and the biochem major who dedicated 4 years to learning. I want to take my advice from the person who had dedication and not lackluster. And when I see a person say I got a 4.0 as a biochemistry major or a physics major, I may take that person just a little more seriously when they say they had to study really hard for the MCAT...I am not trying to abrasive or prejudice towards anyone, I just really want to know a reference for effort on this test that is such a huge predictor for success in becoming a physician.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

you're annoying.

 

[EricMont]

you're annoying.

Way to go. I am sure you feel all your posts on this forum are just 100% necessary for the sake of this forum to remain functional. You have no purpose on this thread is you are going to throw out cheap remarks like this.

 

[T1R3KO]

So what about people who get all A's simply by being smart? Someone with a 4.0 and a 38 could very well have succeeded at both with an incredible grasp of material with little effort.

Why should you believe that people who put no effort into their classes will suddenly know how to dedicate all of their time to MCAT studying? It seems to me that people approach the MCAT in a very similar way to how they approach their coursework, so both are equal measures of a balance of intelligence and effort.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

Way to go. I am sure you feel all your posts on this forum are just 100% necessary for the sake of this forum to remain functional. You have no purpose on this thread is you are going to throw out cheap remarks like this.

and your purpose is what? proclaim that only 4.0s are suited to give your highness advice? shut your mouth. your flawed view leads nowhere. you expect your vaunted 4.0 premed to advise you to work less hard for the mcat because you worked so hard already? or that they still couldn't break 30 so don't bother? and you'd take said advice? then you're an idiot. on the other hand, if this same person told you to work hard, you would? how's that different from anyone else telling you to do so? we're not here to assuage your neurosis. get to work and see what you can make of it.

 

[Don Draper]

So I guess what I am trying to open to discussion is this, "is your MCAT score truly just effort? Or do you have to possess a rarer intelligence outside of just hours of studying to obtain the 37's 38's 39's etc?"

My observation is that there are thousands of people that have been on this forum and only a couple hundred that have posted their success on the 30+ study habits section. I look at posters like ColeOnTheRoll, who got a 41! Is this poster a genius? or was this person a student who just "went through the motions" every year getting B's and C's in classes and then just studied really hard for the MCAT?

First point, yes you need to have a pretty good level of intelligence to get 37-40+. The thing people forget though is that intelligence has many faces.

Part of the intelligence of this exam is testing skill. If you can rule out answers and know the concept they are testing, you can get it down to 50/50. Lets say there are 7 passages on the exam, 2-3 will be easy, 2-3 will be medium, and 2 will be hard. If you get the 5 passages that are easy/medium, you only have ~15 questions left. If you can 50/50 these you automatically have 7 or 8 correct.

"Smart" people are good at stuff like this, picking right answers.

Cole probably studied hard and had good testing skill.

Remember, conceptual strength is not necessary for a 4.0. I know a lot of 4.0 students who can regurgitate the professor's words or they can plug and chug problems, then you ask them to explain the idea, teach it, or compare it to other things in life (conceptual strength) and they can't. This is completely independent of "how hard you work".

 

[Don Draper]

I don't see the purpose of this at all. What are you trying to establish? Correlation between high GPA and high MCAT score? While it is true that some students who receive high letter grades do well on MCAT, it's not necessarily because they are smarter. They probably are, but they also work very hard in classes and in MCAT prep. I've personally seen many students who did well on classes and "wing" MCAT. They then say, "MCAT is dumb - it doesn't really measure what I learned." Well, then study hard!

Also, by asking for GPA with MCAT, you are basically implying that your trust for someone's advice for MCAT will not be upheld unless you see that person's grade. If someone with 3.0 got 30 on MCAT, you will say that the score is a fluke regardless of how hard someone worked to study MCAT.

I think that generalization is not only wrong, but can be offensive to some students who worked hard in their courses. Not everybody gets A, and if you go to hard institutions like MIT or CalTech, you may get B+ while someone else in much easier schools will get A. My point is that while prerequisites and corresponding GPA are important on one's achievement in MCAT, they shouldn't be used to judge someone's score. You should look at MCAT based on what the person put into study for THAT exam.

Also, keep in mind that some brilliant students will be very modest and call themselves "average students." Personally, I think that by surviving pre-health prerequisites, you are not an average Joe.

There is truly no direct correlation.

GPA depends on:

• Intelligence
• Difficulty of course
• Study skills
• Difficulty of professor
• Testing skills
• Assignment skills
• Public relations/politics w/ professor
• Conceptual strength
• Regurgitation/memory skills
• Possible cheating with help of other students

MCAT depends on:

• Intelligence
• Testing skill
• Conceptual strength
• Science skills

There are plenty of people who rely on many factors to reach a 4.0, if you don't have intelligence you can use other things to get there. If you have intelligence then you need less other factors. The MCAT gives you less tools to chose from.

 

[Don Draper]

My point is that I need a reference. I busted my a** every semester at a top 50 college and got straight A's every semester and I want to take advice about the MCAT from students who work as hard as I did. I do feel there is a difference between the biochem major who just scraped by and the biochem major who dedicated 4 years to learning.

It's funny you use biochem as a example. Likely by far the most memory based and least conceptually based major you could have in undergrad. Super memory in biochem = A. My prof last semester used to say she regretted her biochem major because she didn't learn any thinking skills, it was all memory.

 

[EricMont]

and your purpose is what? proclaim that only 4.0s are suited to give your highness advice? shut your mouth. your flawed view leads nowhere. you expect your vaunted 4.0 premed to advise you to work less hard for the mcat because you worked so hard already? or that they still couldn't break 30 so don't bother? and you'd take said advice? then you're an idiot. on the other hand, if this same person told you to work hard, you would? how's that different from anyone else telling you to do so? we're not here to assuage your neurosis. get to work and see what you can make of it.

I don't see what your problem is. You are going psycho about this and honestly are discrediting yourself on this thread simply by showing such aggression. If it bothers you so much then be mature and just walk away. I have news for you, when you are in the real world, be it a doctor or whatever, and you lose your cool like that and unleash your aggression on a coworker, you get canned real fast and do not receive praise.

 

[EricMont]

It's funny you use biochem as a example. Likely by far the most memory based and least conceptually based major you could have in undergrad. Super memory in biochem = A. My prof last semester used to say she regretted her biochem major because she didn't learn any thinking skills, it was all memory.

I used it to exemplify the hard-science major vs. soft-science major.

 

[UMICHPremed]

Super memory in biochem = A. My prof last semester used to say she regretted her biochem major because she didn't learn any thinking skills, it was all memory.

Depends on where you received your biochem degree. That kind of generalization is invalid.

 

[EricMont]

There is truly no direct correlation.

GPA depends on:

• Intelligence
• Difficulty of course
• Study skills
• Difficulty of professor
• Testing skills
• Assignment skills
• Public relations/politics w/ professor
• Conceptual strength
• Regurgitation/memory skills
• Possible cheating with help of other students

MCAT depends on:

• Intelligence
• Testing skill
• Conceptual strength
• Science skills

There are plenty of people who rely on many factors to reach a 4.0, if you don't have intelligence you can use other things to get there. If you have intelligence then you need less other factors. The MCAT gives you less tools to chose from.

I see your point here.

 

[Ahsan]

wow, Everybody just chill. There is no need for any animosity between us future doctors. We are suppose to be role models.

And Bleargh is right. He was blunt about it but the op needs to understand that he is the only one was has control over how he does on his mcat! His past-- GPA and ACT scores doesn't and will not reflect his score on MCAT. That was then, this is now. Forget about how you did in your prereqs or ACT, and focus on your present.

As long as you work hard man, you will get what you deserve. Simply as that.
But i guess we insecure people do need assurance sometimes, so You can DO IT! Its just a matter of how bad do you want it?!!!

 

[EricMont]

wow, Everybody just chill. There is no need for any animosity between us future doctors. We are suppose to be role models.

And Bleargh is right. He was blunt about it but the op needs to understand that he is the only one was has control over how he does on his mcat! His past-- GPA and ACT scores doesn't and will not reflect his score on MCAT. That was then, this is now. Forget about how you did in your prereqs or ACT, and focus on your present.

As long as you work hard man, you will get what you deserve. Simply as that.
But i guess we insecure people do need assurance sometimes, so You can DO IT! Its just a matter of how bad do you want it?!!!

Finally, thank you. See no names, no insults. Just a concrete answer. Best of luck.

 

[Ahsan]

You feel the love now?! lol

 

[NickNaylor]

I wouldn't consider myself an average student, I work hard and get straight A's every semester. I have done well on the ACT (32) and GRE and so I think I am pretty decent at standardized tests as well. However, I have had friends who were 3.0 students get 30's on the MCAT and were not (I hate having to say this) someone I would go to for help in school. They were students that tended to say things wrong/do poorly on tests and almost always memorized things for classes like human physiology (which I think is a subject you need to synthesize not memorize). I have three friends now that have been your standard "slacker" and have gotten 30's on the MCAT.

So I guess what I am trying to open to discussion is this, "is your MCAT score truly just effort? Or do you have to possess a rarer intelligence outside of just hours of studying to obtain the 37's 38's 39's etc?"

My observation is that there are thousands of people that have been on this forum and only a couple hundred that have posted their success on the 30+ study habits section. I look at posters like ColeOnTheRoll, who got a 41! Is this poster a genius? or was this person a student who just "went through the motions" every year getting B's and C's in classes and then just studied really hard for the MCAT?

I truly think, in order to give a further representation of what kind of students are on this forum (effort-wise), people should also include their GPA with their 30+ MCAT posts.

I have only read one story on here of a guy saying he was an "average student" and did well but was that just one rare example?

I guess I just want to reassure myself that my 6-7 hours per day of studying is going to pay off..

Since you mentioned me specifically, I'll try and explain my background. I work very hard in classes. I'm not the kind of person that doesn't have friends and only spends time studying, but most of my time is spent studying/doing work/etc.. As a general rule, I've worked hard in my classes to understand and learn material, NOT to simply get an A. Many people that I know only want to know how to get an A or will only do the amount of work necessary to get an A. I take great pride in my work and won't do anything less than I'm capable of. I also take the stance that since I'm paying to sit in these classes, I might as well learn what my professors are telling me. I think this is absolutely critical to doing well in school, and you'll see the fruits of that labor in your GPA and in your MCAT scores. I put a good amount of time studying for the MCAT, but I'm sure there are others who put in much more time than I did. I think the MCAT relies much more on innate intelligence and luck than your GPA. With enough studying you can get a 4.0. I don't think that's the case for a 37+ MCAT. I'm not trying to toot my own horn here, because I'll be the first to admit that I don't know how I ended up with a 41. If you're trying to identify the difference between GPA and MCAT, though, I think that about summarizes it.

Your studying will pay off, but you'll be humbled when you see other people's scores. Some people are so intelligent that they study very little and do extremely well. Do the best you can and be happy with that.

 

[Don Draper]

Depends on where you received your biochem degree. That kind of generalization is invalid.

Well sure. But then again, everything depends on where you went. Some schools its easy to be a science major.

So... since we were talking about science in generally being more difficult, I mentioned that biochem is generally memory based.

Generality --> Generality

 

[UMICHPremed]

Well sure. But then again, everything depends on where you went. Some schools its easy to be a science major.

So... since we were talking about science in generally being more difficult, I mentioned that biochem is generally memory based.

Generality --> Generality

Speaking in generalities, what scientific discipline doesn't require degrees of memorization. Just because biochem requires more, it doesn't mean you can memorize your way through the degree. The fact is for you to have any chance of succeeding in biochem, you must know the background information; however, like any other science, you must know how to apply.

It can be argued that other degrees such as cellular/molecular biology, general chemistry, or evolutionary biology are more memory based.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Speaking in generalities, what scientific discipline doesn't require degrees of memorization. Just because biochem requires more, it doesn't mean you can memorize your way through the degree. The fact is for you to have any chance of succeeding in biochem, you must know the background information; however, like any other science, you must know how to apply.

It can be argued that other degrees such as cellular/molecular biology, general chemistry, or evolutionary biology are more memory based.

Gen chem is definitely not memorization-intensive. There are so many concepts there. People, in general, seem to spend much less time studying for thinking-heavy courses (like chem, calc, physics, etc) than for a bio class, for example.

OP, why are you worried so much about how others are doing or what they've done? Worry about yourself and focus on improving your own test strategies and you'll come out okay.

 

[Don Draper]

Speaking in generalities, what scientific discipline doesn't require degrees of memorization. Just because biochem requires more, it doesn't mean you can memorize your way through the degree. The fact is for you to have any chance of succeeding in biochem, you must know the background information; however, like any other science, you must know how to apply.

It can be argued that other degrees such as cellular/molecular biology, general chemistry, or evolutionary biology are more memory based.

Yes, classes require memorizing things. This is fairly obvious.

Yet, Biochem is super memory intensive. I actually do think you could "memorize your way through the degree". You could get C's or is it D's to get a degree in biochem by only memorizing slides.

One of the rules of how much thinking a degree involves is asking what the test average would be if you could take it next to a textbook. In biochem you could flip to the answer and copy it, the average would be 95-100% on the exam.

However, for example in a upper division physics course, I've heard of professors actually allowing open book and still the averages are in the 50's. This is because the course (in general) is not regurgitation.

Your undergrad biochem isn't even medical school biochem level and I've talked to many med students would repeatedly say, "biochem is just memorization." Also that it is "among the least conceptually based topics" you study in medical school.

Gen chem is definitely not memorization-intensive. There are so many concepts there. People, in general, seem to spend much less time studying for thinking-heavy courses (like chem, calc, physics, etc) than for a bio class, for example.

Exactly. I think this is pretty evident. Problem solving courses can deliver very hard exams without tons of stuff to memorize.

I go back to the example, if you took an open book biochem exam it would be the easiest exam ever.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

I think people need to clarify whether they're talking about biochem as a course or biochem as a major.

Biochem, as a course, is incredibly memorization-intensive. There is barely any concept there and the vast majority of studying, at the undergrad level, involves memorizing pathways, structures, electron movement, etc.

Biochem, as a major, is a pretty thinking-heavy major. A significant portion of it includes many upper level chem courses that require much more thinking than memorizing.

Problem solving courses can deliver very hard exams without tons of stuff to memorize.

Exactly.

 

[Don Draper]

I think people need to clarify whether they're talking about biochem as a course or biochem as a major.

Biochem, as a course, is incredibly memorization-intensive. There is barely any concept there and the vast majority of studying, at the undergrad level, involves memorizing pathways, structures, electron movement, etc.

Biochem, as a major, is a pretty thinking-heavy major. A significant portion of it includes many upper level chem courses that require much more thinking than memorizing.



Exactly.

Thanks for making this distinction. I am thinking more of biochemistry the course and subject. If we start adding the chemistry courses and physics associated with the degree, then I would agree these are tougher THINKING classes.

 

[Silverfalcon]

First of all, OP, many users have brought up very excellent points. I hope you take them to the heart because they really help you. Having said that...

My point is that I need a reference.

Why? You should do what's right for you, not trying to copy what someone else did - MCAT is an individual studying. Even with prep course, you need to be thinking what you are doing to do well - no one knows yourself better than you.

I do feel there is a difference between the biochem major who just scraped by and the biochem major who dedicated 4 years to learning...

However, for the most part, people on this forum are in hard science majors (chemistry, biology, biochemistry, physiology, etc) and those majors aren't "very simple" anywhere in my opinion. They do require effort and do require a dedicated student in order to do well.

You are contradicting yourself here. You say that many people on SDN are hard science majors. So technically, none of us should be "biochem major who just scraped by," and all of our advices should be helpful to certain degree regardless of GPA.

Now, I think that the main purpose of bringing all these up was for you to have someone with high GPA tell you that high grades mean easy MCAT studying. But, here's a piece of reality for standardized test - and I know this because I taught standardized test (SAT) for a while - and that is, no college course prepares you directly for MCAT. Professors (and teachers, instructors, etc..) are there to teach subjects they love, not to have you get 45 on MCAT. You need to study hard on MCAT to do well, and if you don't, you will likely do worse than how you would if you studied.

 

[TriagePreMed]

Wow, maybe not your intention, but you come off as such a major douche OP.

People get a low GPA for a variety of reasons: 1) Are young and care less, 2) Are majoring in something they don't (parents force them), 3) Have to work on the side, 3) take classes with professors that are way too hard, etc. People get a high GPA for a variety of reasons: 1) Take easy classes only, 2) Work hard for their grades, 3) Go to a school or have a major that's not competitive, 4) are good at regurgitation.

It makes sense that those with a high GPA that work hard will probably get a high MCAT. And it also makes sense that certain low GPA folks that get their act together or finally are studying something they like (etc.) can get a high MCAT.

As a high and mighty 4.0 that you are, you should be able to reason this, unless you're just someone that regurgitates. In that case, fear the MCAT.

 

[EricMont]

First of all, OP, many users have brought up very excellent points. I hope you take them to the heart because they really help you. Having said that...



Why? You should do what's right for you, not trying to copy what someone else did - MCAT is an individual studying. Even with prep course, you need to be thinking what you are doing to do well - no one knows yourself better than you.





You are contradicting yourself here. You say that many people on SDN are hard science majors. So technically, none of us should be "biochem major who just scraped by," and all of our advices should be helpful to certain degree regardless of GPA.

Now, I think that the main purpose of bringing all these up was for you to have someone with high GPA tell you that high grades mean easy MCAT studying. But, here's a piece of reality for standardized test - and I know this because I taught standardized test (SAT) for a while - and that is, no college course prepares you directly for MCAT. Professors (and teachers, instructors, etc..) are there to teach subjects they love, not to have you get 45 on MCAT. You need to study hard on MCAT to do well, and if you don't, you will likely do worse than how you would if you studied.

I see your point and do appreciate it. I think you have disagreed with me in a very mature manner. I feel you are wrong with what you argue but I still will take to the time to read it and understand your stance.

As far are your stress for individuality in studying, I agree. Yes, you do need to gauge studying and preparation on an individual basis; however, I feel that one of the most valuable things in the world is reliable information. And I think it is important to have the most reliable information when it comes to MCAT advice.

As for your contradiction claim, I believe you took that completely out of context. As I recall, I was stating the whole biochem major example because of someone (maybe you) who claimed that someone may have an easy major and therefore a GPA would not matter. I brought that up also further demonstrate how the majority of people who are in the "easier" majors are more likely not to be posters on the 30+ thread.

Furthermore, you say that I bring this up because I want someone to say good GPA = studying is a cake. 100% not true, and far from the truth. I bring this up because I wanted to know 1) is it truly effort or do you truly need something beyond studying countless hours for this test and taking countless practice tests to get great scores 2) if it truly is heavily sided towards effort, then what is "effort?" Does effort mean, "hey I am a very hard working student in a really tough major, and I had to go above and beyond on this just to get to the point where I was getting above a 30" or does effort mean that "hey I am a pretty lazy student who really doesn't try that much for big tests and I studied hard on my standards" It is all too simple to say, "you need to study hard for this test" it is also all too simple to say that this test is hard. Those phrases are too vague and in my opinion lead people to not fully understanding the complexities of studying for this test.

I am not on here saying that people with good GPA's will all get great scores on the MCAT, which I feel those who haven't read closely have turned this into. I feel the moment that a discussion remotely close to GPA correlating to MCAT performance comes up, all the posters with below average GPA's who haven't taken the MCAT yet come in legions to discredit everything said out of fear of the unknown.

 

[EricMont]

Wow, maybe not your intention, but you come off as such a major douche OP.

People get a low GPA for a variety of reasons: 1) Are young and care less, 2) Are majoring in something they don't (parents force them), 3) Have to work on the side, 3) take classes with professors that are way too hard, etc. People get a high GPA for a variety of reasons: 1) Take easy classes only, 2) Work hard for their grades, 3) Go to a school or have a major that's not competitive, 4) are good at regurgitation.

It makes sense that those with a high GPA that work hard will probably get a high MCAT. And it also makes sense that certain low GPA folks that get their act together or finally are studying something they like (etc.) can get a high MCAT.

As a high and mighty 4.0 that you are, you should be able to reason this, unless you're just someone that regurgitates. In that case, fear the MCAT.

You continue to insult me. You started after you brought up that unwanted comment about science and religion in that other motivational thread. Was there any reason for calling me a "major douche" this time? There was no reason and it just shows you lack of maturity. Also if you had paid attention while reading, you would understand that this is not a conversation about high GPA meaning high MCAT score. Nor is it a conversation about why or why not people get good grades. It is a conversation discussing what is effort and how to gauge someone's effort. Honestly, if you want to reply to my comments in a mature way, be my guest. But, when you don't actually read my comments and jump to insults, then you comments are not welcome.

 

[Silverfalcon]

I am not going to respond to every single paragraph that you made mainly because it seems that you have expressed more reasonable intentions beyond the initial post.

What you asked in this thread, overall, is something that many will wonder but yet never receive. This is the question of whose words one must adhere to, and how much work one should dedicate to study for MCAT to do well.

There is really no set answer because every individual case is different. To use a medical analogy, while there are some dichotomous key that doctors are trained to recognize (e.g. certain signs are matched to certain diseases, whatnot), each diagnosis is different because no patient is exactly same. Doctor must stick to his/her intuition and do what he/she feels is necessary for that individual.

Same goes for studying for anything. While we all want to know who we can listen to and get the most helpful advice to achieve our goal, that is a dream that will remain as a dream. What may work for one person will not for another, and there is no way of knowing unless one gives it a try. The issue then is no longer about the experiences behind someone's score, but more about yourself, and as you may know, we cannot "diagnose" yourself - only you can - for MCAT.

 

[EricMont]

I am not going to respond to every single paragraph that you made mainly because it seems that you have expressed more reasonable intentions beyond the initial post.

What you asked in this thread, overall, is something that many will wonder but yet never receive. This is the question of whose words one must adhere to, and how much work one should dedicate to study for MCAT to do well.

There is really no set answer because every individual case is different. To use a medical analogy, while there are some dichotomous key that doctors are trained to recognize (e.g. certain signs are matched to certain diseases, whatnot), each diagnosis is different because no patient is exactly same. Doctor must stick to his/her intuition and do what he/she feels is necessary for that individual.

Same goes for studying for anything. While we all want to know who we can listen to and get the most helpful advice to achieve our goal, that is a dream that will remain as a dream. What may work for one person will not for another, and there is no way of knowing unless one gives it a try. The issue then is no longer about the experiences behind someone's score, but more about yourself, and as you may know, we cannot "diagnose" yourself - only you can - for MCAT.

Well said.

 

[TriagePreMed]

You continue to insult me. You started after you brought up that unwanted comment about science and religion in that other motivational thread. Was there any reason for calling me a "major douche" this time? There was no reason and it just shows you lack of maturity. Also if you had paid attention while reading, you would understand that this is not a conversation about high GPA meaning high MCAT score. Nor is it a conversation about why or why not people get good grades. It is a conversation discussing what is effort and how to gauge someone's effort. Honestly, if you want to reply to my comments in a mature way, be my guest. But, when you don't actually read my comments and jump to insults, then you comments are not welcome.

Honestly, I didn't even remember it was you. And like I said, you come off as a major douche, even though it may not be your intention. Read SilverFalcon's post right after yours to see why it reads that way.

 

[EricMont]

Honestly, I didn't even remember it was you. And like I said, you come off as a major douche, even though it may not be your intention. Read SilverFalcon's post right after yours to see why it reads that way.

See you still don't get it. You feel the need to insult people and throw jabs at people while you sit behind a computer screen. Why not simply say something like I don't agree with you. SilverFalcon surely was able to disagree with me without throwing an insult into it. Your comments, again, are unnecessary. I cannot find anything you say to be of any value to the thread or answering my questions.

 

[kehlsh]

and your purpose is what? proclaim that only 4.0s are suited to give your highness advice? shut your mouth. your flawed view leads nowhere. you expect your vaunted 4.0 premed to advise you to work less hard for the mcat because you worked so hard already? or that they still couldn't break 30 so don't bother? and you'd take said advice? then you're an idiot. on the other hand, if this same person told you to work hard, you would? how's that different from anyone else telling you to do so? we're not here to assuage your neurosis. get to work and see what you can make of it.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[EricMont]

Couldn't agree more.

Coming from the guy who spends ample amount of time sending me numerous PM's saying I am ******ed and calling me a bunch of other nasty names.

 

[kehlsh]

Coming from the guy who spends ample amount of time sending me numerous PM's saying I am ******ed and calling a bunch of other nasty names.

lol. Yes, because you deserve it. Just by reading a first sentence of your post, I don't see why anybody wouldn't agree with me. You seriously have some kind of mental problem if you think you can call somebody a slacker just based off their GPA/class performance. He/she may have been working at other things like research, volunteer, work, etc, may have gotten personal troubles that prevented him/her to concentrate on studies, or may have decided to blow GPA because other things matter more to them, you are not to judge.

In addition, 32 in ACT is not something to be proud of. It should come to you as rather embarassing, to think that you claim yourself as good standardized test taker yourself with that kind of score. Assuming you were as hard-working as you proclaim to be, what happened?

EDIT: I think you have wrong idea of one thing. I'm not a keyboard warrior, I'd seriously slap you in real life if given a chance.

 

[TriagePreMed]

See you still don't get it. You feel the need to insult people and throw jabs at people while you sit behind a computer screen. Why not simply say something like I don't agree with you. SilverFalcon surely was able to disagree with me without throwing an insult into it. Your comments, again, are unnecessary. I cannot find anything you say to be of any value to the thread or answering my questions.

This is the last response to this I'll give or the topic will go off-topic. I don't think you want that in your thread. Read through the many people that feel you're acting like an elitist jerk. If you understand that this is the way things have read, you'll understand that this "jab" is nothing more than a response to your actions. Many of us feel "jabbed" by your initial post.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Guys, relax with the name-calling and insults. If you're not going to respond in a mature manner, just don't respond. It's that simple. There's no need to get worked up over something some anonymous person said on the internet.

 

[UMICHPremed]

You take Biochem 351 with Dr. K. Nolta at Michigan at see how well you would do just by memorizing facts.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

You take Biochem 351 with Dr. K. Nolta at Michigan at see how well you would do just by memorizing facts.

Probably pretty well. I'll just memorize Lehninger's again like I did in my own "hard" (read: time-consuming) biochem course. Seriously, go through Lehninger's, the "bible" of biochem...not many concepts there.

 

[UMICHPremed]

Probably pretty well. I'll just memorize Lehninger's again like I did in my own "hard" (read: time-consuming) biochem course. Seriously, go through Lehninger's, the "bible" of biochem...not many concepts there.

Probably not. I know because my friends who only memorized but did not take the time to truly understand the implications and applications scored only a few points above the average, ~40% to 50%.

 

[UMICHPremed]

Biochem, as a course, is incredibly memorization-intensive. There is barely any concept there and the vast majority of studying, at the undergrad level, involves memorizing pathways, structures, electron movement, etc.

.

At most universities, the introductory biochem course that non-biochem majors take is different from the one biochem majors take. The one that non-majors take is really watered down. There is much more to the real biochem.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

At most universities, the introductory biochem course that non-biochem majors take is different from the one biochem majors take. The one that non-majors take is really watered down. There is much more to the real biochem.

I took the same one that biochem majors take, not a non-major one. As an MCB major, I had to take the same one biochem majors take; biochem is a requirement for my major and my department doesn't allow you to take the easier one. It was not an intro to biochem course either. We were expected to have a decent foundation before taking the course.

I don't really want to keep derailing this thread/arguing about this anymore. If you'd like, I'd be more than happy to discuss this via PM with you. 🙂

 

[JP2740]

lmao @ this child thinking he/she has some sort of entitlement because he/she has a 4.0gpa. I have a 4.0 gpa and I've been studying 5 months just started hitting 37's on my practice mcat, I'm sure many people below my gpa have done much better than I have in less time. So who cares? Figure out what's best for you. I still had to work my ass off to get my scores looking like this after 5 months with my sacred 4.0 gpa, and still, who knows what I'll get on the real thing.

 

[UMICHPremed]

I took the same one that biochem majors take, not a non-major one. As an MCB major, I had to take the same one biochem majors take; biochem is a requirement for my major and my department doesn't allow you to take the easier one. It was not an intro to biochem course either. We were expected to have a decent foundation before taking the course.

I don't really want to keep derailing this thread/arguing about this anymore. If you'd like, I'd be more than happy to discuss this via PM with you. 🙂

Hence, the statement, at MOST universities. This just serves to show that generalities are invalid; thus, biochem as a course or major can not be described with just a few words (i.e. solely memory intensive). The end. 🙂

 

[Don Draper]

..

 

[TheMightyBoosh]

This thread is about as pointless as wearing sunglasses at night.

 

[EricMont]

lol. Yes, because you deserve it. Just by reading a first sentence of your post, I don't see why anybody wouldn't agree with me. You seriously have some kind of mental problem if you think you can call somebody a slacker just based off their GPA/class performance. He/she may have been working at other things like research, volunteer, work, etc, may have gotten personal troubles that prevented him/her to concentrate on studies, or may have decided to blow GPA because other things matter more to them, you are not to judge.

In addition, 32 in ACT is not something to be proud of. It should come to you as rather embarassing, to think that you claim yourself as good standardized test taker yourself with that kind of score. Assuming you were as hard-working as you proclaim to be, what happened?

EDIT: I think you have wrong idea of one thing. I'm not a keyboard warrior, I'd seriously slap you in real life if given a chance.

simple logic here:
slap in real life = get charged with assault
get charged with assault = criminal record
criminal record = no more med school chances

You think think this is about gpa's lol. If you paid attention, my questions did not ask about how gpa correlates to mcat but because your ignorance is overwhelming, you don't think before you act.