First time Board Pass Scores

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
F

Free2B

overworked, underpaid
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Does anyone have the numbers for the first time Board pass rates of each school? I see on the Barry website they list 100% pass but no 1st time info.
Thanks
Members don't see this ad.
 
First time pass rate for all schools was 81% (2006-2007 academic year). The important pass rate is the first one of course and not the "overall" pass rate (which includes those who failed and passed it the second time).

AZPOD was 100%
I believe 96% for DMU
Scholl - I saw 89% on the Rosalind Franklin Website but I thought it's normally higher


I'm not positive of the true first-time part 1 board scores of the other schools. Barry University told me 96 % during my interview but I find it pretty hard to believe. I specifically asked FIRST TIME pass rates and this is what they said. I am also not sure of which school(s) have a first time pass rate below the average. Besides Scholl, AZPOD, and DMU the other 5 do not seem to make this information readily available on the website or available to pre-pods. Of course, if the scores are not very good/above the average, they are not going to boast about them.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Barry's pass rate was 79% last July when I took it... I don't know if that included our students who were re-taking or just the first time takers from my '09 class, though? I had posted on that in this thread below, and Temple's rate was listed as 85%:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=463191

Some ppl in my class didn't take it at that July sitting, so their first attempt was in Oct or is still to come.

Board pass rate is a fine thing to consider, but don't pick a school simply on that. All board pass rate really says is that the school attracts good students (and/or flunks out anyone who wouldn't pass the boards). If you're a strong student at any pod school, you'll do fine. Hey, I went to Barry, and my pass rate was 100% :laugh:
 
JEWmongous said:
First time pass rate for all schools was 81% (2006-2007 academic year). The important pass rate is the first one of course and not the "overall" pass rate (which includes those who failed and passed it the second time).

AZPOD was 100%
I believe 96% for DMU
Scholl - I saw 89% on the Rosalind Franklin Website but I thought it's normally higher


I'm not positive of the true first-time part 1 board scores of the other schools. Barry University told me 96 % during my interview but I find it pretty hard to believe. I specifically asked FIRST TIME pass rates and this is what they said. I am also not sure of which school(s) have a first time pass rate below the average. Besides Scholl, AZPOD, and DMU the other 5 do not seem to make this information readily available on the website or available to pre-pods. Of course, if the scores are not very good/above the average, they are not going to boast about them.
Click to expand...

DMU had a 100% first time pass rate this year.
 
Barry - 79 %
Temple - 85 %
Scholl- 89 %
DMU- 100 %
AZPOD- 100% = almost 91% between these 5

Ohio ?
Cali ?
NYCPM?

Just thinking, are one or two of these schools under the average to bring the pass rate to 81 %????

I've never heard any info on OCPM's first time pass rate but considering they had very lax admissions in recent years and accepted a few different placement tests, I cannot imagine it to be that great.
 
JEWmongous said:
Barry - 79 %
Temple - 85 %
Scholl- 89 %
DMU- 100 %
AZPOD- 100% = almost 91% between these 5

Ohio ?
Cali ?
NYCPM?

Just thinking, are one or two of these schools under the average to bring the pass rate to 81 %????

I've never heard any info on OCPM's first time pass rate but considering they had very lax admissions in recent years and accepted a few different placement tests, I cannot imagine it to be that great.
Click to expand...
You have the right ides, but you can't just add up the schools' rates and divide by number of schools. Barry and DMU only have about 40-50 first time board exam takers per year. I think that Temple has a bit more than that number, I know Scholl has a lot more, and AZ early classes have a lot less (for now, but their classes will grow fast now that they're accredited).

NY has a lot more students than any school except perhaps Chicago, and OCPM has also began accepting far more students than they did in the past. I think Cali keeps their sizes reasonable at about the average 40-50. As you see, if a school that accepts many students such as NY, OCPM, or Scholl had a poor pass rate, that'd affect the national rate much more than say, AZ's relatively small population of test takers having a bad year on the boards.

These are my just rough guesses, but here's the approx number of potential '09 grads at each:

Cali 40-50
DMU 40-50
Temple 50-60
OCPM 60-70
NYCPM 60-80
Scholl 70-80
AZ 30-40
Barry 40-50 (I think it's 42 or 43 for my class, but don't quote me on that... we just lost 1 or 2 yesterday)
 
Feli said:
You have the right ides, but you can't just add up the schools' rates and divide by number of schools. Barry and DMU only have about 40-50 first time board exam takers per year. I think that Temple has a bit more than that number, I know Scholl has a lot more, and AZ early classes have a lot less (for now, but their classes will grow fast now that they're accredited).

NY has a lot more students than any school except perhaps Chicago, and OCPM has also began accepting far more students than they did in the past. I think Cali keeps their sizes reasonable at about the average 40-50. As you see, if a school that accepts many students such as NY, OCPM, or Scholl had a poor pass rate, that'd affect the national rate much more than say, AZ's relatively small population of test takers having a bad year on the boards.

These are my just rough guesses, but here's the approx number of potential '09 grads at each:

Cali 40-50
DMU 40-50
Temple 50-60
OCPM 60-70
NYCPM 60-80
Scholl 70-80
AZ 30-40
Barry 40-50 (I think it's 42 or 43 for my class, but don't quote me on that... we just lost 1 or 2 yesterday)
Click to expand...

Feli makes a good point. It is easier to have a smaller class size get a higher board pass rate because they can easily fill all their spots with good candidates wheras a bigger class size might accept really great students but also some that aren't so great that might bring the board scores down too. Also, I have heard from multiple sources that some schools will have their weaker students wait to take the boards at the second date so their first time pass rate looks higher than it would be.

On a side note, the boards we take are variable every year. It is not like the USMLE where there is a consistant test every year. For example, the USMLE looks at a 2% deviation from the trend as a problem with the test. The NPMBE has about a 30% deviation and thinks that is fine. The test they give out year to year is not consistant. There has been a lot of frustration with all the schools about incompetance on their part. I'm sure students who have taken the boards the year they screwed up the computer system could add to that. Some would like the UMSLE to write and do our tests because they are so good at it. This doesn't mean we would take the same test MD students take but the same orginazation would make our boards.

I think what also is important to know is that Boards don't determine if you will be a good doc. It is just a test to test the minimun someone must know to be a podiatrist. It takes a lot more than passing boards to be a great podiatrist. So when looking at schools to go to, keep that in mind. A more important question for me would be, "How well will this school prepare me for externships so I can do well and get the residency I want and what am I willing to put in to attain that? Will I be comfortable at this school so I can be the best I am able to be?" Most will pass the boards but not all will get the residency they want.
 
Feli said:
Barry's pass rate was 79% last July when I took it... I don't know if that included our students who were re-taking or just the first time takers from my '09 class, though? I had posted on that in this thread below, and Temple's rate was listed as 85%:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=463191

Some ppl in my class didn't take it at that July sitting, so their first attempt was in Oct or is still to come.

Board pass rate is a fine thing to consider, but don't pick a school simply on that. All board pass rate really says is that the school attracts good students (and/or flunks out anyone who wouldn't pass the boards). If you're a strong student at any pod school, you'll do fine. Hey, I went to Barry, and my pass rate was 100% :laugh:
Click to expand...

You couldn't be more right, When it comes down to it thats what matters don't it? :laugh:
 
bdaddyjolley said:
...Also, I have heard from multiple sources that some schools will have their weaker students wait to take the boards at the second date so their first time pass rate looks higher than it would be...
Click to expand...
I don't think I'd agree with that.^

Some students don't sign up for boards in July after 2nd year like they could, but it's their decision - not the school's. If you have passed basic sciences and want to take boards, you simply go to the dean, have him sign a letter that you've taken the required courses and are in good standing at a pod school, pay your test fee, and you get a seat for the exam. The only way the school could stop someone from taking boards is if they've flunked one or more of the required basic sciences; those students don't meet the NBPME requirements as an elgible testing candidate.

I've actually heard different: the people who don't take it go down as "did not pass" in the school pass rate because school pass rates are just for the July sitting. (ie 50 students in a class... 45 take the exam in July, 5 decide not to register, 40/45 pass, = 80% pass rate since 40 of 50 students at that school passed). I don't really know if that's correct or not, but what was mentioned about schools blocking weaker students from taking the test in July isn't really possible.

Some people put it off for whatever reason... probably since they don't feel prepared, they are nervous about starting clinic while studying for the exam, or they just didn't budget and don't have $900. I'd suggest to any 2nd year student to just take it in July; borrow money from your parents if funding is the issue. If you wait, the basic science lectures and studying that the test is based off just get to be more and more distant memories, and you won't have board exam study groups like you do if you take it in July when everyone else is. Even if you don't pass the July sitting, you'll be familiar with the format and have an advantage on any test if you've taken it before. NBPME also states that they provide a list of weak areas along with the failure letter.

Besides, beginning 3rd year has enough on the agenda with getting into the clinic and hospital flow, studying for classes, and outside reading for upcoming externships. I've found that classes aren't as hard simply because the credit load is much lighter, but clinic/hospital rotations have long hours some days and I'm surely doing more journal and independent reading now than I ever did in basic sciences. I like 3rd year better than basic sciences, but it's still a lot of work. I'd make every effort to get pt1 in the rear view mirror when everyone else does so that you can move on to clinical training and preparing for residency.
 
Feli said:
I don't think I'd agree with that.^

Some students don't sign up for boards in July after 2nd year like they could, but it's their decision - not the school's. If you have passed basic sciences and want to take boards, you simply go to the dean, have him sign a letter that you've taken the required courses and are in good standing at a pod school, pay your test fee, and you get a seat for the exam. The only way the school could stop someone from taking boards is if they've flunked one or more of the required basic sciences; those students don't meet the NBPME requirements as an elgible testing candidate.

I've actually heard different: the people who don't take it go down as "did not pass" in the school pass rate because school pass rates are just for the July sitting. (ie 50 students in a class... 45 take the exam in July, 5 decide not to register, 40/45 pass, = 80% pass rate since 40 of 50 students at that school passed). I don't really know if that's correct or not, but what was mentioned about schools blocking weaker students from taking the test in July isn't really possible.
Click to expand...

Yes, the school can't force them not to take it, but they can "persuade" them them to not take it. That was my point and unless I was lied to by others who told me this at different schools, it is a possibility.

It is also hard to believe any school would count students not taking it the first time as a "did not pass". No school is going to allow their pass rate percentage to go down because a few didn't take it the first time. That makes no sense. Why would you say a student didn't pass when they didn't even take the test? That would be incorrect information. The board pass rate should be for those who took the test and passed or failed, not for those who didn't take the test.
 
bdaddyjolley said:
Also, I have heard from multiple sources that some schools will have their weaker students wait to take the boards at the second date so their first time pass rate looks higher than it would be.
Click to expand...

I've heard this rumor a few times but have never spoken with anyone from any of the schools where they said it happened. I mean, who in their right mind would wait to take that thing? Just get it over with already!
 
Members don't see this ad :)
bdaddyjolley said:
...It is also hard to believe any school would count students not taking it the first time as a "did not pass". No school is going to allow their pass rate percentage to go down because a few didn't take it the first time. That makes no sense. Why would you say a student didn't pass when they didn't even take the test? That would be incorrect information. The board pass rate should be for those who took the test and passed or failed, not for those who didn't take the test.
Click to expand...
I agree, but pass rates are published by the NBPME. The schools do not decide what their pass rate is, the testing agency formulates the pass rate and publishes it to the schools. I have no idea what their formula is...

Total total passing taker from that school divided by elgible test taker from the school?
Total passing divided by number taking the exam (incl re-takers)?
Total passing divided by number taking the exam for the first time?

IMO, it should be the third one listed. If you count re-takers, then the bad students can keep hurting the pass rate year after year. If they count total passers divided by total elgible beginning 3rd year students at ths school, that puts all who didn't register down as "did not pass."

In the end, I don't think overall board pass really matters aside from the pass or fail letter you get in your mailbox. The stats just end up being used in "school A is better than school B" arguments or overanalyzed by prospective students. The school you are accepted to having a 100% pass rate does you very little good if you can't pass physio flunk out 2nd semester. Similarly, a low pass rate might indicate some subpar students, but you can't save someone from themself. The schools obviously all teach the requisite material.
 
Feli said:
In the end, I don't think overall board pass really matters aside from the pass or fail letter you get in your mailbox. The stats just end up being used in "school A is better than school B" arguments or overanalyzed by prospective students. The school you are accepted to having a 100% pass rate does you very little good if you can't pass physio flunk out 2nd semester. Similarly, a low pass rate might indicate some subpar students, but you can't save someone from themself. The schools obviously all teach the requisite material.
Click to expand...

I agree. Passing boards has a lot to do with the individual just like being a good doc does.
 
The Dean of Curriculum at Scholl met with first year students a few weeks ago to discuss and inform us of changes to the curriculm that are to be implemented for next year's class. The hope is to start preparing them, so that within a set number of years, pod students will start to take the actual USMLE for boards instead of the ones we currently have. I think we were all in a bit of shock when she told us this.

And Scholl's first time pass rate this year was the lowest it has been in several years. I know I heard that there were a lot of issues with the new format. It'll be interesting to see how the class of 2010 does.
 
What changes are going to be happening??? Will the students take more classes with the MD students?
 
KHep said:
The Dean of Curriculum at Scholl met with first year students a few weeks ago to discuss and inform us of changes to the curriculm that are to be implemented for next year's class. The hope is to start preparing them, so that within a set number of years, pod students will start to take the actual USMLE for boards instead of the ones we currently have. I think we were all in a bit of shock when she told us this.

And Scholl's first time pass rate this year was the lowest it has been in several years. I know I heard that there were a lot of issues with the new format. It'll be interesting to see how the class of 2010 does.
Click to expand...


This is odd, I wasnt told of this. :confused:
 
KHep said:
The Dean of Curriculum at Scholl met with first year students a few weeks ago to discuss and inform us of changes to the curriculm that are to be implemented for next year's class. The hope is to start preparing them, so that within a set number of years, pod students will start to take the actual USMLE for boards instead of the ones we currently have. I think we were all in a bit of shock when she told us this.

And Scholl's first time pass rate this year was the lowest it has been in several years. I know I heard that there were a lot of issues with the new format. It'll be interesting to see how the class of 2010 does.
Click to expand...

Actually, I remember at the interview day they said about a curriculum change of making it 2+2 where you would finish ALL classes by the end of the second year. They also mentioned about getting rid of some chicago-city hospitals in favor of southern wisconsin and north chicago based ones (I'd rather have the city ones personally).

I talked to an admissions person today and they said nothing is set in stone but more information would be available after new years. The one change that has a chance of occurring is cutting out a portion of the summer vacation after 1st year (and putting in classes I'm assuming).

Let me know what you think about this.
 
Yea, the curriculum that we were shown was a week later presented to the administration...I thought they were going to be voting on it like a month ago, so I'm not sure what has happened since. It's definitely a 2+2 curriculum and because of that they have done away with the first summer off. But, beyond that they are talking about stepping up the curriculum to make it even more comparible to the MD curriculum. At the time that we were given the presentation, it didn't sound like they had any plans to have more joint MD/DPM classes. There are just too many classes specific to our field that we need to have under out belts prior to going out in our 3rd year. I believe that they have put a lot of thought into it and I hope that it works out.

The funny thing is that I didn't realize that there was such a huge push for parity by the year 2015 on the school level. I could've gone to med school, but chose podiatry and never cared if there was parity or not. But, the changes that they are attempting to make should make for better trained physicians and that can't be a bad thing.
 
KHep said:
The Dean of Curriculum at Scholl met with first year students a few weeks ago to discuss and inform us of changes to the curriculm that are to be implemented for next year's class. The hope is to start preparing them, so that within a set number of years, pod students will start to take the actual USMLE for boards instead of the ones we currently have. I think we were all in a bit of shock when she told us this.
Click to expand...

I don't think that DPM students are currently allowed to sit for the USMLE examination. As per the 2008 USMLE Bulletin, here are the qualifications needed to be eligible to take USMLE Step 1 and Step 2:

Step 1, Step 2 CK, and Step 2 CS

To be eligible, you must be in one of the following categories at the time of application and on the test day:

a medical student officially enrolled in, or a graduate of, a US or Canadian medical school program leading to the MD degree that is accredited by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME),

a medical student officially enrolled in, or a graduate of, a US medical school leading to the DO degree that is accredited by the American Osteopathic Association (AOA), or

a medical student officially enrolled in, or a graduate of, a medical school outside the United States and Canada and eligible for examination by the ECFMG.

None of the DPM students will fit into any of the above categories.
 
KHep said:
Yea, the curriculum that we were shown was a week later presented to the administration...I thought they were going to be voting on it like a month ago, so I'm not sure what has happened since. It's definitely a 2+2 curriculum and because of that they have done away with the first summer off. But, beyond that they are talking about stepping up the curriculum to make it even more comparible to the MD curriculum. At the time that we were given the presentation, it didn't sound like they had any plans to have more joint MD/DPM classes. There are just too many classes specific to our field that we need to have under out belts prior to going out in our 3rd year. I believe that they have put a lot of thought into it and I hope that it works out.

The funny thing is that I didn't realize that there was such a huge push for parity by the year 2015 on the school level. I could've gone to med school, but chose podiatry and never cared if there was parity or not. But, the changes that they are attempting to make should make for better trained physicians and that can't be a bad thing.
Click to expand...

wow... i actually miss Scholl

congrats guys, ah to be young and lucky! Good luck!
 
dpmgrad said:
I don't think that DPM students are currently allowed to sit for the USMLE examination. As per the 2008 USMLE Bulletin, here are the qualifications needed to be eligible to take USMLE Step 1 and Step 2:

Step 1, Step 2 CK, and Step 2 CS

To be eligible, you must be in one of the following categories at the time of application and on the test day:

a medical student officially enrolled in, or a graduate of, a US or Canadian medical school program leading to the MD degree that is accredited by the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME),

a medical student officially enrolled in, or a graduate of, a US medical school leading to the DO degree that is accredited by the American Osteopathic Association (AOA), or

a medical student officially enrolled in, or a graduate of, a medical school outside the United States and Canada and eligible for examination by the ECFMG.

None of the DPM students will fit into any of the above categories.
Click to expand...

Actually a student who is enrolled in a DPM program that is affiated with an MD program can sit for the USLME if the MD school chooses to "sponsor" that student. This has not been done in the past, but the APMA is looking into having a small group of current DPM students sit for the USMLE to get an idea of how our students would do. The APMA's current projection is that the national pass rate for podiatry student would be slightly less than that of the DO students who take the exam each year. This would also provide them with some info that will help as the schools continue to undergo curriculum changes of the next few years. It is all part of the vision 2015 goal and the changes are occuring faster than anyone anticipated. Pretty exciting time to be a podiatrist. :thumbup:
 
gustydoc said:
Actually a student who is enrolled in a DPM program that is affiated with an MD program can sit for the USLME if the MD school chooses to "sponsor" that student. This has not been done in the past, but the APMA is looking into having a small group of current DPM students sit for the USMLE to get an idea of how our students would do. The APMA's current projection is that the national pass rate for podiatry student would be slightly less than that of the DO students who take the exam each year. This would also provide them with some info that will help as the schools continue to undergo curriculum changes of the next few years. It is all part of the vision 2015 goal and the changes are occuring faster than anyone anticipated. Pretty exciting time to be a podiatrist. :thumbup:
Click to expand...

As I said, it is admirable that Scholl is taking the initiative to make DPM education more on par with MD education. If they can make it happen, it would be great for DPMs. Currently, only Scholl and TUSPM are affiliated with MD schools. Hopefully, this can also apply to the DPM schools that are affiliated with DO schools.

At one point, TUSPM was also looking into an option for selected TUSPM students and alumni to obtain MD degree from Temple University School of Medicine. This was announced in one of the TUSPM alumni newsletter. I have not heard much about it since it was published in the TUSPM alumni newsletter.
 
I wonder which schools could be bringing the board pass rates down. Ie which schools scored below the 80% (20/100 failure rate)?

I thinks prospective students really need to consider this as a priority in selecting a school.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

D
Boards Part 2 3rd time Re-test.
Replies
9
Views
2K
Robin-jay
Robin-jay
richhomiequanhere
What's more important, passing boards on first time or high GPA?
Replies
10
Views
3K
Redsting
R
drbeebee
Discussion: First-Generation College Students
Replies
7
Views
2K
heybrother
heybrother
F
Boards Vitals
Replies
6
Views
2K
Robin-jay
Robin-jay
P
Boards Part 1 Question
Replies
9
Views
2K
Robin-jay
Robin-jay
Top