How hard is it to get a 240 on step 1

[snoopy69]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Okay, so I've hear that to get into many of the competitive specialties you need to get board scores around 240. Can any of you compare what this score would equate to an mcat score? Like would it be just as hard to get a 240 on step 1 as it would be to get a 35 on the mcat? Is there some sort of way to predict what score you can achieve similar to how they use sat scores to predict mcat scores?

 

[DW]

A 240 on the boards, while a great score, is far from unattainable. the average Step 1 score is a 217 with 23 as the standard deviation, so while it is
at the higher end of the bell curve, it isn't as absurd as getting like a 40 on the MCAT or something.

How to predict how well you do on the boards, thats easy. Work hard your first two years, plain and simple. There is no magic formula that given your MCAT score you will get a Step 1 score. Different tests, and if you rest on your laurels thinking "I'm a good test taker" in your approach to Step 1, prepare for an unpleasant experience.

The correlation you'll see reported is that MCAT scores do have a positive correlation to Step 1 scores, but that is clear since those students who organize and work hard for the MCAT will likely do the same in med school.

The harder you work the first two years, the higher your Step 1 score. There really isn't much else to discuss.

 

[DrDarwin]

Okay, so I've hear that to get into many of the competitive specialties you need to get board scores around 240. Can any of you compare what this score would equate to an mcat score? Like would it be just as hard to get a 240 on step 1 as it would be to get a 35 on the mcat? Is there some sort of way to predict what score you can achieve similar to how they use sat scores to predict mcat scores?

I know this is anecdotal, but someone told me that 240 on step 1 is comparable to 31-32 on the MCAT, which is solid, but not ridiculous by any means.

 

[njbmd]

Hi there,
Getting a 240 on USMLE is quite attainable as is doing well on the MCAT but do not make the mistake of trying to use your MCAT score as any kind of predictor of your USMLE Step I performance. Step I is a different kind of animal. You need to make sure that you review well for Step I. It is far less convoluted than the MCAT because the subject matter is a little more compact.
nbjmd 🙂

 

[Smurfette]

I know this is anecdotal, but someone told me that 240 on step 1 is comparable to 31-32 on the MCAT, which is solid, but not ridiculous by any means.

No way. My class average MCAT was 31-32; our average Step I was 220ish. And given that the national med school average MCAT is around 30 and that the average step 1 is 215 or so...it doesn't correlate.

From personal experience, a 240 on step 1 is much harder than a 35 MCAT. The work involved in a great board score is much more than the work done for a good MCAT, IMO. Although experiences will vary on SDN I am sure.

 

[Ramoray]

i believe step 1 rewards a hard working student more so than mcat. I could not have studied any harder or knew the material better for the mcat yet i am just not super bright and a bad test taker and did average. V. step 1 i believe it is possible to learn everything. The more hours you put in, the more you learn, the better you do. I dont think it rewards the inherently smart person as much. Mcat, if you are really smart and a great reader, you could walk away with 33 or more with minimal studying. not the case with the step

 

[thackl]

I know this is anecdotal, but someone told me that 240 on step 1 is comparable to 31-32 on the MCAT, which is solid, but not ridiculous by any means.

Since the avg med student gets around a 28 on the MCAT and each pt is avout .25 st dev....... a 32 would be one st dev above.

I've been told to watch your performance on the NBME's (esp Path). Suposedly, the correlation is pretty good, which makes sense since NMBE's are written by the same people who write the USMLE questions.

 

[thackl]

No way. My class average MCAT was 31-32; our average Step I was 220ish. And given that the national med school average MCAT is around 30 and that the average step 1 is 215 or so...it doesn't correlate.

From personal experience, a 240 on step 1 is much harder than a 35 MCAT. The work involved in a great board score is much more than the work done for a good MCAT, IMO. Although experiences will vary on SDN I am sure.

Congrat's for being at a school with such high entry scores. If you go to the the AAMC web site it will show that the MCAT show almost NO correlation to MLE scores, with a only slight significance to the VR section. MLE has more to do with school and student attitudes. UTMB has pretty much the lowest entering stat's for TX schools and a few yrs ago, they had horrible MLE stats. A few changes (or many) and 3 yrs later, they have some of the highest MLE stat's in the state.

 

[YouDontKnowJack]

it'll probably be easy to get in the 230's. But reaching that 240 will be hard.

let's see if i remember my statistics from back in 1999. If 1 SD above mean is a 240, that would mean only about 16% of total test takers get that kind of score.

so yeah. it's pretty damn hard. I'd say that unless you're in the top 16% of your class, AND you go to a 2nd tier or below school, hitting a 240 is gonna be rough. Most people at UCSF, on the other hand, can probably hit a 240 easily.

 

[sandg]

A tangentially related question from a rising M1:
It would seem the playing field would be more even for Step I vs. the MCAT. For example, even though the AAMC says you only need basic biology, chemistry, and physics to reason through the MCAT, someone w/ additional knowledge of physiology, biochemistry, etc. is more likely to be familar with the material in a question (and therefore have to rely less on reasoning). Maybe I am wrong, but it would seem that all U.S. accredited medical schools must give their students the same info in the preclinical years. Thus, everyone should be equally armed to do well on Step 1. So, my question then is, how does someone earn a 240+ and beat the national average by one SD or more? Is it really as simple as DW posted--the harder you learn the material and review, the better you'll do?

 

[Xandie]

it'll probably be easy to get in the 230's. But reaching that 240 will be hard.

let's see if i remember my statistics from back in 1999. If 1 SD above mean is a 240, that would mean only about 16% of total test takers get that kind of score.

so yeah. it's pretty damn hard. I'd say that unless you're in the top 16% of your class, AND you go to a 2nd tier or below school, hitting a 240 is gonna be rough. Most people at UCSF, on the other hand, can probably hit a 240 easily.

I think 1SD puts you in the 75th %ile (1 SD is 50, 2 SD is 95, 3 SD is 97, as I recall). So 50 % of test takers score within 1 SD of the mean. That leaves the other 50 % outside of those scores, and you can assume that half of those (25 % overall) scored below, and the other half scored above. Does that make any sense at all?

Also, as far as comparing %iles on MCAT and USMLE, keep in mind that the pool is different. The average MCAT for matriculants is hovering around 30-31 now, which is (I think) around 75 %ile. That might be why someone said that a 240 is the same as a 31-32. However, the bottom 50 % or so of MCAT takers didn't go to medical school, so maybe that puts at the 50 %ile mark, leaving you with a 217. That's if the %iles correlate, which I don't think they do. (I'm making a lot of assumptions here, but I think it can be an interesting exercise).

The boards, as someone said earlier, are much more based on what knowledge you do and don't have. They give you a situation, and you figure out what's happening. The MCAT is about extracting information you've never seen or thought about and combining it with basic science stuff and coming up with answers.

 

[THP]

I think 1SD puts you in the 75th %ile (1 SD is 50, 2 SD is 95, 3 SD is 97, as I recall). So 50 % of test takers score within 1 SD of the mean. That leaves the other 50 % outside of those scores, and you can assume that half of those (25 % overall) scored below, and the other half scored above. Does that make any sense at all?

Also, as far as comparing %iles on MCAT and USMLE, keep in mind that the pool is different. The average MCAT for matriculants is hovering around 30-31 now, which is (I think) around 75 %ile. That might be why someone said that a 240 is the same as a 31-32. However, the bottom 50 % or so of MCAT takers didn't go to medical school, so maybe that puts at the 50 %ile mark, leaving you with a 217. That's if the %iles correlate, which I don't think they do. (I'm making a lot of assumptions here, but I think it can be an interesting exercise).

The boards, as someone said earlier, are much more based on what knowledge you do and don't have. They give you a situation, and you figure out what's happening. The MCAT is about extracting information you've never seen or thought about and combining it with basic science stuff and coming up with answers.

1 SD covers 66% of the population, 33% above and 33% below the mean. That leaves 33% outside 1 SD. Which does mean that only 16% of the population is above 1SD from the mean and 16% is below 1SD from the mean.

 

[nockamura]

1 SD covers 66% of the population, 33% above and 33% below the mean. That leaves 33% outside 1 SD. Which does mean that only 16% of the population is above 1SD from the mean and 16% is below 1SD from the mean.

THP is correct. Getting outside of the SD is pretty damn hard.

 

[thackl]

I think 1SD puts you in the 75th %ile (1 SD is 50, 2 SD is 95, 3 SD is 97, as I recall). So 50 % of test takers score within 1 SD of the mean. That leaves the other 50 % outside of those scores, and you can assume that half of those (25 % overall) scored below, and the other half scored above. Does that make any sense at all?

Also, as far as comparing %iles on MCAT and USMLE, keep in mind that the pool is different. The average MCAT for matriculants is hovering around 30-31 now, which is (I think) around 75 %ile. That might be why someone said that a 240 is the same as a 31-32. However, the bottom 50 % or so of MCAT takers didn't go to medical school, so maybe that puts at the 50 %ile mark, leaving you with a 217. That's if the %iles correlate, which I don't think they do. (I'm making a lot of assumptions here, but I think it can be an interesting exercise).

The boards, as someone said earlier, are much more based on what knowledge you do and don't have. They give you a situation, and you figure out what's happening. The MCAT is about extracting information you've never seen or thought about and combining it with basic science stuff and coming up with answers.

I take it thay aren't teaching a basic stat's course in WI? 🙄 Kidding

The national ave for matriculating students is still a 29.9 which is 1.5 st dev above all takers and amongst matriculants, the st dev is 1.7. Soooooo, someone with a 32 is 2 st dev above all takers and more than one st dev above all matriculants (not quite really since the avg is around 25 these days). http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2004/2004mcatgpa.htm
According to AAMC, GPA and MCAT do correlate well to the MLE http://www.aamc.org/students/mcat/research/bibliography/basco001.htm
But I saw some hard data a few yrs ago and beg to differ. Weak at best.

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/collections/statsbk/2.shtml 1 st dev puts you in top 16% (or bottom, depending on how you see it).

 

[thackl]

THP is correct. Getting outside of the SD is pretty damn hard.

AOA is typically the top 1 sd dev

 

[conure]

but it would seem that all U.S. accredited medical schools must give their students the same info in the preclinical years. Thus, everyone should be equally armed to do well on Step 1.

How I wish this were true, but the truth is we are not all armed the same way for this thing. Sure we all probably have much of the same stuff for the preclinical years. The difference is in how we get it. Some schools teach directly to step 1 and others don't. After taking this exam I truly believe the differences come in how well a school integrates material across subjects.

 

[YouDontKnowJack]

How I wish this were true, but the truth is we are not all armed the same way for this thing. Sure we all probably have much of the same stuff for the preclinical years. The difference is in how we get it. Some schools teach directly to step 1 and others don't. After taking this exam I truly believe the differences come in how well a school integrates material across subjects.

How do schools teach to step 1? Do they say "know this know this know this, you don't need to know this...."

that job should be left to the review books, which everyone should be reading while they are studying for classes

 

[goal-getter]

I know this is off topic but what is AOA (I looked via search to no avail)?

Thanks,

Goal-Getter

 

[Kazema]

I know this is off topic but what is AOA (I looked via search to no avail)?

Thanks,

Goal-Getter

It's a medical school honor society:

http://www.alphaomegaalpha.org/

 

[Alexander MD NJ]

I scored a 28 MCAT and 238 boards. The MCAT you have to be able to speed read and answer stupid irrelevant questions. Board score is about common sense in medicine.

I know this is off topic but what is AOA (I looked via search to no avail)?

Thanks,

Goal-Getter

 

[lexrageorge]

From the following web link:

http://www.studentdoc.com/usmle-scores.html

Breaking 230 on Step1 puts you in the 75th percentile of test takers. The 75th percentile of MCAT scores for all examinees is 30.

Breaking 245 puts you in the top 8% of scores, a much more difficult feat. That is equivalent to breaking 34 on the MCAT.

As for correlation between the MCAT and Step1 scores, just remember that for Step1 you are competing with a pool of examinees that got into med school. Which means most people in this pool scored 40th percentile or higher on the MCAT. So, you cannot expect to break 240 on Step1 just because you scored, for example, 38 on the MCAT. Bottom line is that your MCAT score means nothing once you attend first day orientation at your school.

 

[dmitrinyr]

From the AAMC link regarding the correlation between MCAT scores and USMLE Step 1 scores, "When applicant MCAT scores were added to the model, the model explained 29.1% of the variation in USMLE Step 1 scores". This means (from our basic stat course), that 71.9 % of the variation in USMLE Step 1 scores can be explained by something other than MCAT scores (probably which med school you attend, med school gpa, study habits, motivation, etc). To me this is not a significant relationship, especially enough to say that "if you do well in one, you will do well in the other". As other people have posted, yes, if you did well on the mcat you probably have good grasp of the material, good test taking skills and motivation to study hard but that is not always the case. I've only just finished first year, but I think the best way to score well on step 1 is to do well in first two years of med school and study you butt off. There is no simple way of explaining these things except just work really hard. That is how people that score in the low to mid 20's end up with 230's and 240's on step 1 (there are not many of them, but they are out there, I know some personally), by being extremely motivated and working really hard.

good luck

 

[nockamura]

To figure out if there is statistical correlation, you need to calculate the Z score. It seems that with ~16,000 students, and a 30% correlation, that would be statistically significant.

 

[thackl]

I know this is off topic but what is AOA (I looked via search to no avail)?

I always think it's funny when people claim to have done a search and got nothing.

I did the search for you: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/search.php?searchid=1090316

 

[CuriousAsHeck]

I've only just finished first year, but I think the best way to score well on step 1 is to do well in first two years of med school and study you butt off.

And how did you do first year? Based on your grades, do you think you will be hitting a 240?

Just out of curiosity... 🙂

 

[Zong117]

I don't think anyone's mentioned that the MLE's testing population is roughly the top half of the MCAT's population, so being 75% on MCAT and everybody staying the same place in the distribution puts that 75%er at 50% or so. That's why getting a 75% on the MCAT doesn't correlate with a 75% on the MLE's, just like how getting into the top 10% at Harvard is different from getting into the top 10% of Podunk Community College.

 

[Shredder]

ZONG. heh i never hang out on this part of the forums but the one time i come and i see youre a step ahead. 3:20 am, with early waking time? get some sleep guy

usmle...ah thats such a long time away, who cares