Does the range of accepted MCAT scores line up well with the range of matriculant scores?

[efle]

---

Members do not see this ad.

For example, say a school accepts a 10th-90th range from 32-40 next cycle. Will the group of people who end up matriculating also have a 32-40 range, or is there a skew that occurs between the two populations?
I imagine there might be a leftward shift if the people at the higher end got in to many peer institutions and only a fraction enroll at this school, while for people at the lower end this may have been a unique awesome underdog success story and their other options were not as attractive. Anybody have data or personal experience to say whether the % of acceptees matriculating is pretty uniform across the range of stats?

This is all just out of some curiosity at the MSAR using accepted ranges while for undergrad all the test score information is about enrolled students, which made me wonder how it impacts the ranges to switch between looking at accepted vs enrolled.

 

[godawg300]

US news has matriculant data.

 

[PhillyMed777]

It is a good question. The answer is there is no definitive trend. You can find a sample (for free) by looking at individual school's matriculating class information or data page. Not every school has it, but you can then compare it to the accepted data. Just an limited observation, but I've noticed that the "average or whatever" MCAT number on MSAR and the range tend to be slightly higher than matriculated numbers for many mid-ranked and lower schools.

 

[NoDakDok]

There is a left shift in numerical factors from accepted to matriculant at all institutions I have seen, including "Top 20" schools. Granted, I believe the last data I checked was from 2012. But this was true for every single school from top to bottom.

For interpretation purposes the reason for this is pretty simple. Because top applicants are accepted to many institutions, but can only attend one. there are naturally artificially high numbers of applicants accepted to all institutions with high numbers, and the true value of matriculated applicants has an overall lower numerical score. If at any year you took the "average accepted" of all schools and compared it to the "average matriculant" for all schools, you would see that the average number accepted is higher than the average matriculant. This is why.

It is preferential to be around any particular school's accepted applicant numbers, rather than their matriculated, as the accepted student number is closer to their desired applicant. In other words, you want to, if possible, have higher numbers than their matriculated applicants. Of course, this is ideal, but not necessary, obviously.

ETA: Examples

 

[Goro]

Schools also post their avg scores for matriculants.

For example, say a school accepts a 10th-90th range from 32-40 next cycle. Will the group of people who end up matriculating also have a 32-40 range, or is there a skew that occurs between the two populations?
I imagine there might be a leftward shift if the people at the higher end got in to many peer institutions and only a fraction enroll at this school, while for people at the lower end this may have been a unique awesome underdog success story and their other options were not as attractive. Anybody have data or personal experience to say whether the % of acceptees matriculating is pretty uniform across the range of stats?

This is all just out of some curiosity at the MSAR using accepted ranges while for undergrad all the test score information is about enrolled students, which made me wonder how it impacts the ranges to switch between looking at accepted vs enrolled.

 

[Lamel]

Maybe a 1-2 point shift down for matriculants from what I've seen.

 

[efle]

Alright guys thanks for the confirmation/input, I'll try to look at the USNAWR and school pages to get an idea of whether the shift is minuscule or varies a lot between schools etc