Does success in pre-reqs predict MCAT success?

[JMCdoc311]

Hey guys,
I'm going to be a junior this year, which means the MCAT is coming up in April. My question to those who have taken it is whether or not success in the science pre-reqs is a a good predictor of how you'll do on the MCAT. I've only taken three pre-reqs thus far and so far have gotten a 100 in each of them. I'll be taking the remaining ones over the next two semesters and taking the April MCAT. If i continue to get A's in all my science classes, should I have any trouble getting a 30 or higher on the MCAT? Input would be really appreciated!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[TooMuchResearch]

Hey guys,
Does success in pre-reqs predict MCAT success?

I don't think so.

 

[loveoforganic]

I would say loosely. There's probably a much higher correlation between doing poorly in prereqs and poorly on mcat than there is well in prereqs and well on mcat.

 

[mmmcdowe]

Hey guys,
I'm going to be a junior this year, which means the MCAT is coming up in April. My question to those who have taken it is whether or not success in the science pre-reqs is a a good predictor of how you'll do on the MCAT. I've only taken three pre-reqs thus far and so far have gotten a 100 in each of them. I'll be taking the remaining ones over the next two semesters and taking the April MCAT. If i continue to get A's in all my science classes, should I have any trouble getting a 30 or higher on the MCAT? Input would be really appreciated!

I would personally say that failure in the pre-reqs tends to indicate poor chances on doing well on the MCAT, but nothing is set in stone. As far as success generating success, it certainly is a good sign, but it would be an overstatement to say that everyone that got A´s on the pre-reqs got a 30 or higher on the MCAT. There are a lot of factors such as when and where you took the pre-reqs which come into play, plus the MCAT is an application exam. Understanding the material is the first step, but being able to apply it beyond what you normally see in a undergrad exam is what makes it hard. The MCAT is mainly passage based, and you are expected to apply your understanding of the material to such passages.

 

[TexasFight]

I could see it helping in the PS section. That's the only section that comes the closest to testing "what you know" rather than how you can interpret their data and twist it into the correct answer. I think it makes sense as the AAMC always publishes data about how engineering and physics majors do significantly better on the PS section, whereas bio majors don't necessarily have the same advantage on the BS section.

 

[snitchseeker88]

Personally, while I think doing well in undergraduate classes and prerequisites does help prepare you for taking the MCAT, it doesn't necessarily guarantee success. It's true that a lot of the basic knowledge required to take the MCAT comes from those prerequisites courses, but they also go beyond just testing how much you know. These tests are just as much about strategy and test taking skills as they are about the material. So, there are some people who will ace all of their undergradate classes, and know the material really well, but just won't be able to get past the "tricks" and details of the questions, or the time limit given. So, I really don't think that pre-reqs can predict MCAT success. Sure they help, but a lot of the test is strategy and test taking skills, and that only comes from taking a lot of practice tests and knowing how the test works.

Still, good work on your classes so far, hope you do well this year!

 

[Alvarez13]

The answer is No.

 

[movax]

Hell no. I got a C in Orgo I, and I tutor Orgo I, with the recommendation of the very professor who gave me that C. Didn't do to hot on his tests, but I'll be damned if I don't know my Orgo. Use that to ace that part on the MCAT, and show adcoms that you DO know your stuff

Of course, if you skate through pre-reqs and don't learn ****, you are boned, naturally, unless you plan on relearning it all for the MCAT and then dumping it.

 

[ChenMary]

For me, it was totally accurate.

 

[FuSoYa]

I don't think there is much correlation. Doing well on the MCAT is so much more than just having the science knowledge. As just a single example, I took it my junior year and scored under 30. Then took it again 5 years after I graduated and score well above 30.

 

[ChenMary]

Did you actually try the first time? You must have had a headache or something...

I think you are prob one of those people who just crammed.... if you really understood it that wouldnt have happened.

 

[arrivee]

I don't think so either -- for example, I got C's in both semesters of Biology...and then got a 12 in that section on the MCAT...not very indicative at all.

 

[vishnupatel]

I have been told by lots of my friends that there science success doesn't correlate at all with their success of a doctor. So don't even worry about it.

 

[RogueUnicorn]

too many variables go into grades to make the correlation strong i'd imagine.... institution, instructor... sexual favors...

 

[vishnupatel]

bleargh, i want to hear about your college experience!!!

 

[LAman10]

of course there's a correlation. people with higher gpas tend to have a higher MCAT score. naturally there will be exceptions (and those are what everyone on this thread seems to be citing), but on the whole I do think there is a correlation.

edit: loveoforganic and mmmcdowe are right; I'd say that poor performance in pre-reqs is indicative of poor mcat performance, while success in pre-reqs can go either way, depending on if you're naturally smart or just one of those people who works really hard.

 

[Piston95]

of course there's a correlation. people with higher gpas tend to have a higher MCAT score. naturally there will be exceptions (and those are what everyone on this thread seems to be citing), but on the whole I do think there is a correlation.

edit: loveoforganic and mmmcdowe are right; I'd say that poor performance in pre-reqs is indicative of poor mcat performance, while success in pre-reqs can go either way, depending on if you're naturally smart or just one of those people who works really hard.

There may be a correlation but that's because the people who do well in pre-reqs probably work really hard. So when it comes to the MCAT, they also study hard, work hard, practice a lot etc..so they do well. But if you do well in your pre-reqs does it mean you'll definitely do well? No way, its completely different. If you ace all your pre-reqs and go into the MCAT w/o practicing MCAT specific material...your behind will hurt when you leave the center. Pre-reqs and mcat are 2 completely different animals, there's a correlation yes maybe but that's most likely due to the work ethic and study habits of the students, not because the 2 things themselves are correlated.

 

[LAman10]

There may be a correlation but that's because the people who do well in pre-reqs probably work really hard. So when it comes to the MCAT, they also study hard, work hard, practice a lot etc..so they do well. But if you do well in your pre-reqs does it mean you'll definitely do well? No way, its completely different. If you ace all your pre-reqs and go into the MCAT w/o practicing MCAT specific material...your behind will hurt when you leave the center. Pre-reqs and mcat are 2 completely different animals, there's a correlation yes maybe but that's most likely due to the work ethic and study habits of the students, not because the 2 things themselves are correlated.

Well yeah, obviously. The OP was just asking if he could be expected to do well (specifically >30), given his grades in science courses. And assuming he doesn't just walk into the MCAT cold-turkey (which he won't because it's clear he has good study habits), then he should definitely do fine.

btw, a correlation between two variable is only defined when all other variables are held constant (e.g. work ethic, study habits, etc.), so yes there is a correlation.

 

[redlight]

umm ... chenmary=vishnupatel? they both joined this month, posted on basically all the same threads and were both banned yesterday..

and the answer is no. there are hundreds of 3.8-4.0s with sub 30 scores.

 

[LAman10]

umm ... chenmary=vishnupatel? they both joined this month, posted on basically all the same threads and were both banned yesterday..

and the answer is no. there are hundreds of 3.8-4.0s with sub 30 scores.

lol you have too much time on your hands. but that would be amusing to see someone pass themselves off as east asian AND south asian.

Another thing to note: both screennames are simply a first and last name, although in a different order.

 

[Vulcan]

Also keep in mind that the MCAT requires stamina...it's a 4 hour test...that is something you do not have to deal with in classes.

 

[LiveUninhibited]

Why don't you just take a practice test and see where you are?

And even if it did predict 30+, that shouldn't really affect how much you study for it. You should do several hours a day for 6 months out either way, and whether it makes the difference between a 28 and a 33, or a 33 and a 38, you will have done your best. Incidentally a 38 and high gpa can get you an automatic interview in one of the schools I applied to.

 

[redlight]

lol you have too much time on your hands. but that would be amusing to see someone pass themselves off as east asian AND south asian.

Another thing to note: both screennames are simply a first and last name, although in a different order.

it"s just something i noticed while browsing threads. every time i saw a vishnu post a mary post was nearby. their join date is basically right below their sn, and they are banned now but definitely posted yesterday.

 

[LAman10]

it"s just something i noticed while browsing threads. every time i saw a vishnu post a mary post was nearby. their join date is basically right below their sn, and they are banned now but definitely posted yesterday.

haha no harm there! being detail-oriented and observant is a hallmark of a good physician. you could probably write about this discovery in a few of your secondary essays.

 

[plaz]

Also keep in mind that the MCAT requires stamina...it's a 4 hour test...that is something you do not have to deal with in classes.

Most of my classes' tests are that long.

 

[SportingMD54]

OP,

I can think of at least two people who graduated from my university with 3.9 + in biology that scored 25 or lower on the MCAT. I know of another that got a 28. So the answer is no.

 

[LAman10]

OP,

I can think of at least two people who graduated from my university with 3.9 + in biology that scored 25 or lower on the MCAT. I know of another that got a 28. So the answer is no.

yeah but I can think of at least 15 of my friends with 3.7+ and 31+ on the MCAT, and then 4-6 friends with <3.5 and <30 on the MCAT... so, though not absolute, there is definitely a trend (honestly guys, the MCAT does measure something; it's not like the SAT. they wouldn't still be using it for something as important as medical school admissions if it really was faulty)

And I might note, once you hit about 34-35 on your MCAT, everything above that is honestly a matter of luck and perfection. If you can get yourself to the 35+ range, I'd say it's just as likely for you to get a 42 as it is for you to get a 36 (a matter of a few questions in each section)

 

[NickNaylor]

This is based strictly on my experience, so take it for what it's worth.

There seems to be very little correlation. On the one hand, I've gotten As in all of my pre-reqs and scored a 34 on my first practice MCAT. A good friend of mine who I know is intelligent also got As in all of his classes but scored a 20 on his first practice MCAT. We go to different universities, but it's nothing like a H/Y/P vs. a CC or something like that. I don't think the quality in teaching is substantial.

Doing well in your pre-reqs and actually learning the material will give you the required content foundation, but the MCAT is much more than a knowledge test.