How important is Step 1 studying time

[The Knife & Gun Club]

Hi Guys,

I've been lucky enough to get a few acceptances up to this point, and I was just wondering how much of a factor step 1 study time should be considered in making my decision. Of three schools, one "compresses" pre-clinical to 1.5 years and you take Step 1 early and get less dedicated study time (I think 5 weeks). The next uses the traditional system, take step 1 after two preclinical years, and get 6-8 weeks dedicated study time. The final one you take step 1 late, at the end of M3, and have >8 weeks study time.

Does anyone know how much of an effect this has on making step 1 more or less challenging? Is it a very serious factor to consider, or more of a "well that sounds nice" type of thing? Would it be worth forgoing other factors in order to go to the school with the most prep time (specifically, the first 2 schools have dedicated hospitals and the one that gives extra study time does not)?

Thanks for any replies and sorry for the long post!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WedgeDawg]

At my school, we take step 1 after M3 with like 7-8 weeks of study time (1.5 preclinical). Students who have gone through it swear by this system, going as far as saying that taking step 1 after your clinical rotations is essentially "cheating". We have very strong step 1 results. Of course, there may be a host of other factors that play into this, and I'm a first-year so I can't comment from personal experience.

My very inexpert advice would be to put it into the bag of factors you use to decide which school to go to, but don't by any means make it the decisive factor.

 

[operaman]

Absolutely meaningless. 4 weeks is more than enough. You will be pretty fried by that point and any longer is really diminishing returns. What happens is you hit a point where you start forgetting some things you studied at the start of dedicated prep time. Once you hit this plateau, it's time to just take the beast and move on. 4-5 weeks is when this tends to hit. You could honestly get by with much less time if you hit the ground running. I wouldn't let amount of prep time have any sway in choosing schools. They all provide plenty.

 

[DrDorianTurkleton]

@WedgeDawg

My state school will be switching to the 1.5 pre-clinical with Step1 taken during the spring of 3rd year so it's reassuring to here some positive vibes regarding that curriculum style!

 

[smithers12]

Absolutely meaningless. 4 weeks is more than enough. You will be pretty fried by that point and any longer is really diminishing returns. What happens is you hit a point where you start forgetting some things you studied at the start of dedicated prep time. Once you hit this plateau, it's time to just take the beast and move on. 4-5 weeks is when this tends to hit. You could honestly get by with much less time if you hit the ground running. I wouldn't let amount of prep time have any sway in choosing schools. They all provide plenty.

couldn't have said it any better. you will blow your brains out if you spend more than 5 weeks studying for step 1, and this is coming from someone who had absolutely no time to study during the year (i took it after clerkship year). closer to your study date you struggle acquiring new information with losing old information. i spent six weeks studying, peaked at 4, wish i had scheduled 5. i honestly think that last week hurt my score more than helped, but i was fortunate enough to do well enough for the specialty i intend to pursue.

At my school, we take step 1 after M3 with like 7-8 weeks of study time (1.5 preclinical). Students who have gone through it swear by this system, going as far as saying that taking step 1 after your clinical rotations is essentially "cheating". We have very strong step 1 results. Of course, there may be a host of other factors that play into this, and I'm a first-year so I can't comment from personal experience.

IMO, the amount of knowledge you gain during clerkship year that can be applied towards step 1 is not significant. you will certainly have an advantage when it comes to understanding patient presentations (you will know the classics better than any preclinical student - chest pain, aub, syncope, whatever) but at the end of the day step 1 is a preclinical exam that tests you on preclinical buzzwords. hardly are you ever tested on the wildly minute side effects of the drugs that cause hirsuitism, histological findings in MI, etc. in clerkship year. on my step 1 i can think of MAYBE one question that clerkship year paid off for me knowing, and this is after going through the entire step 2 uworld qbank before even touching the step 1 qbank. remember if you choose a curriculum that does clerkship year before step 1 you are sacrificing time that could be spent studying for step 1 for time that must be spent working in the hospital and studying for shelf exams.

OP, step 1 is certainly important, but under the circumstances you have listed i would not consider it a motivating factor to choose one school over the other.

 

[Lost in Translation]

Students who have gone through it swear by this system, going as far as saying that taking step 1 after your clinical rotations is essentially "cheating".

Any ideas as to why this may be? I was under the impression that Step 1 was all about stuff learned in preclinical years.

 

[Krupke]

Isn't the benefit to taking step 1 after M3 not so much the study time as it is that seeing the preclinical info applied helps you better remember/understand everything?

Edit: Just saw the guy above's post, but I wonder if anyone else has an opinion?

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

At my school, we take step 1 after M3 with like 7-8 weeks of study time (1.5 preclinical). Students who have gone through it swear by this system, going as far as saying that taking step 1 after your clinical rotations is essentially "cheating". We have very strong step 1 results. Of course, there may be a host of other factors that play into this, and I'm a first-year so I can't comment from personal experience.

My very inexpert advice would be to put it into the bag of factors you use to decide which school to go to, but don't by any means make it the decisive factor.

Unless I'm mistaken, the schools who have this curriculum are Columbia, Penn and Baylor, which are powerhouse programs with excellent students. I'm sure there are advantages to taking step 1 after the clinical rotations, but student quality is probably the best indicator of a school's step 1 performance.

 

[WedgeDawg]

Yeah, again, I'm an M1 so I'm nowhere close to taking step 1, so I can't comment on any personal experiences with curriculum, I can only relay what others have told me about their own experiences. Ask me again in two years and I can give you something more substantial, sorry

 

[Krupke]

Unless I'm mistaken, the schools who have this curriculum are Columbia, Penn and Baylor, which are powerhouse programs with excellent students. I'm sure there are advantages to taking step 1 after the clinical rotations, but student quality is probably the best indicator of a school's step 1 performance.

FIU also has it and I've heard good things about that structure from students there

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

FIU also has it and I've heard good things about that structure from students there

Thanks, I wasn't aware. UCSF is also adopting this format, btw.

@darkjedi, any feedback?

 

[getdown]

This really all depends on the person. You can have all the time in the world and as much "clinical" exposure as you want but if you don't put the time into studying the minutia it won't really matter. Personally, I'd rather just have my 4-5 weeks after M2 year, take the test and start third year and don't worry about it. Otherwise you're just gonna have to start studying for Step 2 right off the bat. Sounds kinda stupid to take step 1 midway through MS3 year and then have to take Step 2 in the fall of MS4 year.

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

FIU also has it and I've heard good things about that structure from students there

That is precisely the school I'm talking about in my post! Their score average is pretty good (237), and it's making me reconsider the other two schools which are more prestigious/established

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

Thanks for all the responses I really appreciate so much feedback!

 

[TaroBubbleTea]

At my school, we take step 1 after M3 with like 7-8 weeks of study time (1.5 preclinical). Students who have gone through it swear by this system, going as far as saying that taking step 1 after your clinical rotations is essentially "cheating". We have very strong step 1 results. Of course, there may be a host of other factors that play into this, and I'm a first-year so I can't comment from personal experience.

I have heard that sentiment as well as well, but I don't necessarily think that's the case. Prior to med school, I really wanted to go to a school that took step 1 after M3 year because of claims that it made step 1 studying a breeze. Now that I'm an M1, I'm actually glad that I take step 1 soon after M2 year because I really don't want to worry about remembering all the preclinical minutiae for an additional year. Also, I can't imagine having to worry about rotations and stress about step 1 studying after...It's too much to handle!

In short, the timing of step 1 and how much time you are given is not that important. Either way, you gotta bust your butt OP.

 

[sliceofbread136]

I disagree with 4 weeks being enough. My school gave 5.5 and a significant proportion of the students didn't feel like they had enough time. Plus it doesn't leave much opportunity for vacation time. Factor it in for sure, but it's not a deciding factor

 

[Meeehai]

Studying is for nerds, just wing it.

 

[Psai]

I took 7, I was ready by 5 and spent 2 weeks treading water. The benefit of taking it after clinical years is that a lot of the information is relevant. Maybe you don't need to recite the complement cascade or know all the little details about the electron transport chain but it's a lot easier to remember diseases when you've seen it in real life. Also, you have an extra year to study. I think that fit is the most important, followed by cost, then reputation.

 

[mimelim]

It doesn't matter. If you have reasonable study habits, you will do as well as you would anywhere else. School choice matters for clinicals and outside of classroom opportunities.

You can screw around with the pre-clinical curriculum all you want (or lop off 6 months like a lot of schools are), students will still do as well as their study habits will allow them to.

 

[Krupke]

That is precisely the school I'm talking about in my post! Their score average is pretty good (237), and it's making me reconsider the other two schools which are more prestigious/established

Oh cool. I interviewed at FIU a while ago and I really loved it. It would be my top choice, but I can't justify the $75k/year OOS tuition.

 

[lmn]

You will make due with whatever you get, and you aren't going to experience anything different any way, so you really won't be able to tell. The benefit of longer study time though is more vacation after you take the test before you head to the wards.

That is precisely the school I'm talking about in my post! Their score average is pretty good (237), and it's making me reconsider the other two schools which are more prestigious/established

I'd be wary of schools and what they claim their scores to be. Personally every single school I interviewed at told me their scores were well above the national average, and when I talked to friends that interviewed at other places that is what everyone else was told as well, schools don't have much reason to let people know their actual scores. Plus your step score is really going to come down to you and your studying, not what your classmates score/average.

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

You will make due with whatever you get, and you aren't going to experience anything different any way, so you really won't be able to tell. The benefit of longer study time though is more vacation after you take the test before you head to the wards.


I'd be wary of schools and what they claim their scores to be. Personally every single school I interviewed at told me their scores were well above the national average, and when I talked to friends that interviewed at other places that is what everyone else was told as well, schools don't have much reason to let people know their actual scores. Plus your step score is really going to come down to you and your studying, not what your classmates score/average.

I've always been under the impression the reason pretty much every US MD school can claim they're above the average is because there are tons of IMGs/FMGs taking USMLE (and DO students who have been prepped for COMLEX instead too). In this case I know the average scores of all three schools (231, 230, and 237) and was thinking maybe the higher score is indicative of a more effective pre-clinical curriculum.

Thanks again for all the responses, I especially appreciate so many current students coming over from Allo just to help!

 

[mimelim]

I've always been under the impression the reason pretty much every US MD school can claim they're above the average is because there are tons of IMGs/FMGs taking USMLE (and DO students who have been prepped for COMLEX instead too). In this case I know the average scores of all three schools (231, 230, and 237) and was thinking maybe the higher score is indicative of a more effective pre-clinical curriculum.

Thanks again for all the responses, I especially appreciate so many current students coming over from Allo just to help!

A lot of schools also fudge and/or make up their numbers. No school has a "more effective" pre-clinical curriculum. Certain schools may have a curriculum that better matches your best learning style (many people don't thrive as well with mandatory attendance for instance). Medical school class Step 1 scores depend a lot more on who makes up their student body than the small differences between pre-clinical curriculum.

 

[GrapesofRath]

A lot of schools also fudge and/or make up their numbers. No school has a "more effective" pre-clinical curriculum. Certain schools may have a curriculum that better matches your best learning style (many people don't thrive as well with mandatory attendance for instance). Medical school class Step 1 scores depend a lot more on who makes up their student body than the small differences between pre-clinical curriculum.

Is there anybody or group that medical schools are required to report their Step 1 score averages to? As an example, medical schools report their average class statistics to MSAR which is publicly available(although I'm not sure if they are required to do so so it might not be a good example). Is there something like this that medical schools report their statistics to, even if it is not publicly available? If not, then obviously its pretty clear why/how they fudge their numbers.

Is it perhaps maybe medical schools do report their Step 1 scores but the odds of them getting called out/get in some kind of trouble for providing either very misleading or blatantly fabricated numbers to prospective MS1's is so low that they don't worry about it? Given how I've seen ADCOMs, both on here and some I've gotten a chance to talk to personally mention how they know there are a number of schools with high MCAT averages but relatively low Step 1 averages, I'd imagine that information does get out to some extent. I'm just wondering if it does so formally in anyway even if this process is relatively private and obviously not public info.

 

[mimelim]

Is there anybody or group that medical schools are required to report their Step 1 score averages to? As an example, medical schools report their average class statistics to MSAR which is publicly available(although I'm not sure if they are required to do so so it might not be a good example). Is there something like this that medical schools report their statistics to, even if it is not publicly available? If not, then obviously its pretty clear why/how they fudge their numbers.

Is it perhaps maybe medical schools do report their Step 1 scores but the odds of them getting called out/get in some kind of trouble for providing either very misleading or blatantly fabricated numbers to prospective MS1's is so low that they don't worry about it? Given how I've seen ADCOMs, both on here and some I've gotten a chance to talk to personally mention how they know there are a number of schools with high MCAT averages but relatively low Step 1 averages, I'd imagine that information does get out to some extent. I'm just wondering if it does so formally in anyway even if this process is relatively private and obviously not public info.

I can only speak to two schools that I know the process for, but the raw step 1 scores of an entire class are only released to one person at each school. It is sent as a PDF. Who that person (an administrative dean at both schools I know of) shares it with is entirely their prerogative. The information is not required to be shared with anyone. It was a relatively big deal when USNWR and others were reporting 'averages' from schools and one of the deans flat out said that the information hadn't been shared with anyone (yet), so it was completely bogus.

Honestly, I don't know how every school does it, but my general feeling is that anyone talking about Step 1 scores is making stuff up. The people that know it don't share it. There is little incentive to do so. So that is where my personal opinion comes from that trying to pick a school based on anything Step 1 related is just silly.

 

[Goro]

Yet another spot-on post from my learned colleague.

I know of at least two schools that game the system by not allowing their weakest students to take Step I until the reporting date has past, and then brag about the ~90% who did well.

I can only speak to two schools that I know the process for, but the raw step 1 scores of an entire class are only released to one person at each school. It is sent as a PDF. Who that person (an administrative dean at both schools I know of) shares it with is entirely their prerogative. The information is not required to be shared with anyone. It was a relatively big deal when USNWR and others were reporting 'averages' from schools and one of the deans flat out said that the information hadn't been shared with anyone (yet), so it was completely bogus.

Honestly, I don't know how every school does it, but my general feeling is that anyone talking about Step 1 scores is making stuff up. The people that know it don't share it. There is little incentive to do so. So that is where my personal opinion comes from that trying to pick a school based on anything Step 1 related is just silly.

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

Yet another spot-on post from my learned colleague.

I know of at least two schools that game the system by not allowing their weakest students to take Step I until the reporting date has past, and then brag about the ~90% who did well.

Jeez thats slimy...

 

[darkjedi]

Thanks, I wasn't aware. UCSF is also adopting this format, btw.

@darkjedi, any feedback?

Although of course I am biased since I attend a 1.5 year accelerated curriculum, I do personally believe I definitely benefited from being on clinics for an entire year before taking Step 1. Since the questions on Step 1 are generally set up as clinically relevant questions, I felt more comfortable with the material since I was able to recall information from a wider set of experiences/knowledge.

Say what you will about the publicly reported Step 1 data, but our internal data showed that our Step 1 scores dramatically increased in the year our school switched to the 1.5 year curriculum and has been slowly climbing since them as well.

Everyone will be different, and there's no doubt that the majority of what determines your Step score is your own personal ability, but I do think the 1.5yr + 1yr clinical time puts you in a better position to take Step. I wouldn't base a school choice off of that, because it's such a tiny aspect of med school/residency, but it seems that more and more schools are converting to this system and I think that's great.