Its easy to pan someone who didnt do well on a test and then makes an excuse to justify it, i think that we all agree that when someone does this it is annoying, and it happens a lot sure.
But what annoys me more is when people make huge generalizations like "a good test taker is prepared, smart" etc...
i mean get out of here
its easy for the people with good scores to knock those who dont have them, simply because they think they are "justified" in their score. "I scored high, it must be for a reason, it CANT be arbitrary, it MUST be a positive, I DESERVE this"
I think this thinking is wrong.
I mean, yeah its a characteristic of lots of successful doctors, high test scores, but only because that is what it takes to become a doctor in the first place. You dont hear about any great doctors who are horrible test takers, only cuz they never get admitted to med school due to their bad test scores. They rarely get the chance to prove this stereotype wrong.
I consider myself someone who does well on standardized tests, but never someone who was GREAT at it, i.e. 1500 sats, 33+ mcat, etc...
So whats the difference between me and the guys who do score insanely high? Who knows!?
They could be smarter than me.
They could be more prepared than me.
(positive differences)
But, the differences could be negative too I feel. It could just be that these people dont analyze deeply, and dont get caught up on "tricks". Is that a good characteristic? Lack of analysis?
It could be that they pride themselves in their scores, and live and die by the test results, and are thus motivated to achieve by the prospect of their own self-worth.
I mean im not saying that all good test takers are like this, but some surely are, and are these good characteristics for a doctor? for any person?