how come a lot of science grad students can't get 15?

[equityrange]

---

Members do not see this ad.

im not trying to be rude, but ive read through the forums and it seems like a lot of grad students cant get 15 in even one science section. for instance, biology grad student getting like 13 on BS. is it really that subjective? if they can only get a 13....... i'll probably only get 10

also, if an english professor/graduate student instructor took the Verbal can they get a 15? what about the publishers for mcat review books? i hope they can lol

 

[youngnflyy]

im not trying to be rude, but ive read through the forums and it seems like a lot of grad students cant get 15 in even one science section. for instance, biology grad student getting like 13 on BS. is it really that subjective? if they can only get a 13....... i'll probably only get 10

also, if an english professor/graduate student instructor took the Verbal can they get a 15? what about the publishers for mcat review books? i hope they can lol

Take the MCAT, and report back to us with your findings.

 

[shisimagum]

On top of being a test of your knowledge, the MCAT is also a test of you test taking skills...

 

[WashMe]

im not trying to be rude, but ive read through the forums and it seems like a lot of grad students cant get 15 in even one science section. for instance, biology grad student getting like 13 on BS. is it really that subjective? if they can only get a 13....... i'll probably only get 10

also, if an english professor/graduate student instructor took the Verbal can they get a 15? what about the publishers for mcat review books? i hope they can lol

Getting a 13 is still only missing like 2 out of 52 questions on a science section. I was a biology major and I "only" got a 13 on biological sciences. What this doesn't take into account is that the questions I missed (organic chemistry) aren't really an important part of the major.

Also, there isn't a huge benefit to having a graduate level education in one of the sciences because your research is often focused. You're just as likely as everyone else to have forgotten the basics that you haven't needed to know. It may be even tougher because grad students are farther removed from the very basic classes that are the source of MCAT questions.

Just do what you can and be realistic. If you can score mid thirties or above, that's great. If not, that's probably good enough.

 

[loveoforganic]

MCAT is a lot about extrapolating from previously unseen information anyway.

 

[s1lver]

A lot of these grads you're talking about could probably get a 15 if they had an extra 30 minutes.

 

[TribeQ]

From what iv read/heard, it seems that alot of people that take the MCAT are for the most part knowledgeable on the science that is tested on the MCAT. However, test taking skills are critical and the ability to extract info from a never seen before passage and applying it with basic concepts. Im sure if the test was just regurgitating info, alot more people would be getting great marks. I could be wrong just my 2 cents.

 

[Mister T]

Getting a 13 is still only missing like 2 out of 52 questions on a science section. I was a biology major and I "only" got a 13 on biological sciences. What this doesn't take into account is that the questions I missed (organic chemistry) aren't really an important part of the major.

Also, there isn't a huge benefit to having a graduate level education in one of the sciences because your research is often focused. You're just as likely as everyone else to have forgotten the basics that you haven't needed to know. It may be even tougher because grad students are farther removed from the very basic classes that are the source of MCAT questions.

Just do what you can and be realistic. If you can score mid thirties or above, that's great. If not, that's probably good enough.

Agreed.

I score a 12 on physics and I'm an engineering major. I didn't study for it at all, and had a good intuition for most of the equations but there were some things here and there that I didn't use too much during grad. school/undergrad.

But this time I'm studying for serialz, and its time to bring out the big guns do you know what I am sayin'?

 

[equityrange]

Getting a 13 is still only missing like 2 out of 52 questions on a science section. I was a biology major and I "only" got a 13 on biological sciences. What this doesn't take into account is that the questions I missed (organic chemistry) aren't really an important part of the major.

13 is only missing 2questions? holy.....

 

[BestDoctorEver]

13 is only missing 2questions? holy.....

13 is missing like 4 or 5 questios depending on the curve

 

[surftheiop]

Also to consider- A fair portion of people getting masters degrees aren't much "better" academically than the average undergrad.

I would pick a senior undergrad accepted to a "credible" (by that I mean they dont have to pay for it and are likely being paid) Bio related PhD program to score higher than someone who has completed a bio related masters.

 

[Isoprop]

The difference between a 13 and a 15 is probably more about luck and carelessness than knowledge or test-taking skills. Also, no one is perfect.

 

[WashMe]

13 is missing like 4 or 5 questios depending on the curve

Usually only 2, maybe 3 on a science section. 2 on the verbal. On a crazy administration, it might be possible to miss 4 and still get a 13 on a science section, but not on verbal.

 

[DrDre2001]

The MCAT is about: the basics + innate ability to quickly synthesize new information (whats given in the passages and question stems).

A grad student would be taking complex courses (ex: neurology) on specific topics in their subject (biology). They would take these classes over a span of a few years. In that few years, they may have never reviewed the basics.

On the other hand, the average MCAT taker just took the courses that go over the basics (the pre-reqs) a year or two ago.


So there is no reason to think that the grad student would get a better score.


This is basically the same argument as the one that many undergraduate pre-meds have when they ask if it is better to take the MCAT after sophomore year (right after taking the pre-reqs) or if it is better to take it after junior year after they take genetics, biochem, and physiology, etc.


Or, as a simple analogy, its like a basketball player who will have a test in a year on fundamentals. Will he benefit most by doing Harlem Globetrotter tricks for a year or by practicing the basics?

 

[WashMe]

The MCAT is about: the basics + innate ability to quickly synthesize new information (whats given in the passages and question stems).

A grad student would be taking complex courses (ex: neurology) on specific topics in their subject (biology). They would take these classes over a span of a few years. In that few years, they may have never reviewed the basics.

On the other hand, the average MCAT taker just took the courses that go over the basics (the pre-reqs) a year or two ago.


So there is no reason to think that the grad student would get a better score.


This is basically the same argument as the one that many undergraduate pre-meds have when they ask if it is better to take the MCAT after sophomore year (right after taking the pre-reqs) or if it is better to take it after junior year after they take genetics, biochem, and physiology, etc.


Or, as a simple analogy, its like a basketball player who will have a test in a year on fundamentals. Will he benefit most by doing Harlem Globetrotter tricks for a year or by practicing the basics?

👍

The way I think of it is that you could administer a "Pop MCAT" to one of the best doctors in the country and he or she probably wouldn't get a 15 on either of the science sections for the reason you discussed.

 

[Mister T]

The MCAT is about: the basics + innate ability to quickly synthesize new information (whats given in the passages and question stems).

A grad student would be taking complex courses (ex: neurology) on specific topics in their subject (biology). They would take these classes over a span of a few years. In that few years, they may have never reviewed the basics.

On the other hand, the average MCAT taker just took the courses that go over the basics (the pre-reqs) a year or two ago.


So there is no reason to think that the grad student would get a better score.


This is basically the same argument as the one that many undergraduate pre-meds have when they ask if it is better to take the MCAT after sophomore year (right after taking the pre-reqs) or if it is better to take it after junior year after they take genetics, biochem, and physiology, etc.


Or, as a simple analogy, its like a basketball player who will have a test in a year on fundamentals. Will he benefit most by doing Harlem Globetrotter tricks for a year or by practicing the basics?

👍

The MCAT imo is more of a nuisance (if you're a bit older like myself) than anything else. It's not intellectually stimulating, but rather boring. It's not really a challenge in an intellectual sense, but just tests the same **** over and over again in different but subtle variations. It certainly doesn't compare to the LSAT which is a beast (logic puzzles, logical reasoning, analytical reasoning, etc). Even the feared verbal section on the MCAT doesn't really test understanding as much as it does extreme subtle detail. So basically it doesn't really test depth of knowledge but rather how much practice of superficial concepts (at the high school level really for a lot of the material) one has. Whatever.

The "innate" ability to quickly synthesize isn't just natural to everyone. It comes through practicing and honing the concepts through practice problems so that it becomes a sort of "Muscle memory reflex" AND through recognizing what concepts the passages are testing.

The concepts aren't hard, and you can explain any of them to a kid in middle school and they would understand them and even be able to answer them.

 

[garyinthehouse]

👍

The MCAT imo is more of a nuisance (if you're a bit older like myself) than anything else. It's not intellectually stimulating, but rather boring. It's not really a challenge in an intellectual sense, but just tests the same **** over and over again in different but subtle variations. It certainly doesn't compare to the LSAT which is a beast (logic puzzles, logical reasoning, analytical reasoning, etc). Even the feared verbal section on the MCAT doesn't really test understanding as much as it does extreme subtle detail. So basically it doesn't really test depth of knowledge but rather how much practice of superficial concepts (at the high school level really for a lot of the material) one has. Whatever.

The "innate" ability to quickly synthesize isn't just natural to everyone. It comes through practicing and honing the concepts through practice problems so that it becomes a sort of "Muscle memory reflex" AND through recognizing what concepts the passages are testing.

The concepts aren't hard, and you can explain any of them to a kid in middle school and they would understand them and even be able to answer them.

Yep, gotta agree with T here. 👍

The MCAT wants to test your reflexive skills, but then it also wants to see how you can incorporate new information. Like Mstr T said, it's all variations on a single theme.

Sometimes I'm taking the test, I'm like 😴 and then sometimes, I'm like

 

[equityrange]

also, if an english professor/graduate student instructor took the Verbal can they get a 15? what about the publishers for mcat review books? i hope they can lol

ok i understand. but what about this part? verbal just seems really random

 

[garyinthehouse]

ok i understand. but what about this part? verbal just seems really random

VR is random. Sometimes the cards play in your favor, other times, they don't. Just practice as much as you can, give it all you got, and be confident in yourself

 

[DrDre2001]

ok i understand. but what about this part? verbal just seems really random

Verbal is indeed somewhat random, as the poster above said.

I think you are worrying a lot about how random and fluky the test can be. I worried about the exact same thing when I was studying for my MCAT a year ago. I was mad that they shortened the test from 72 questions a section to 50, because this means more flukiness.

There's a thread though that should calm your nerves: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=653194

It shows that, on the real test, almost half (39.9%) of students score within 1 point of their practice test average.

So, though the test may seem very fluky, on the real thing you should expect to get a score that is true to your abilities.

Also, though I dont have any links for this, I remember seeing stats of MCAT retakers where it showed that most (a majority...~60-70%) of the students ended up getting within 1-2 points of what they got the first time.