Originally posted by tennik Wondering how well first and second year grades correlate to your weak subjects on Step 1. In practice tests I find my scores correlate better with my schools strong and weak subjects than my grades.
That's an interesting thought, and likely true, to an extent. Some years back, the NBME gave schools a breakdown of student performance on the various subsections. It was broken down both by subjects and organ systems. (I'm not sure if they still do this because the most recent version my school has is from at least 3 or 4 years ago, I think.) In most areas our performance in specific areas was close to total averaged performance (as measured by SD above the mean), but on some areas we rocked it or sucked it. And this wasn't just a one year deal but probably a trend across years (based on what I've heard from a few upperclassmen).
Anyways, there are particular trends at different schools for performance in different areas. This shouldn't be surprising, though. Some courses, at a given school, are well taught and others are pretty bad, or not even covered in the curriculum.