How lethal can MCAT retakes be for MD schools?

[Doug Underhill]

---

Members do not see this ad.

We love general rules of thumb here on SDN, especially when the adcoms have been fairly explicit on the subject.

 

[efle]

We love general rules of thumb here on SDN, especially when the adcoms have been fairly explicit on the subject.

Its just funny that people think there's a universal set of rules for people aiming at being a doctor period (inc. DO) vs matriculating to a Top 10 or 20. How things like research hours or a 33-35 MCAT will be viewed changes drastically.

 

[Spector1]

If your mcat goes up its all good. If it goes down, then well that sucks

 

[Nietzschelover]

I was referred to this thread in good faith, and I'm afraid I learned a little more about the posters than the questions at hand.

Most of this thread digressed into a debate about re-taking high scores, with the subtext (mostly avoided) of whether gunning for a certain small set of schools is a worthy or entirely stupid pursuit. That IS an interesting discussion, and I think there could probably be a ton of interpretations of folks re-taking a 34/35 and actually getting a 38/39/40. Most seem to think that's insane, or selfish (narcissistic?), while some might view them as being super-confident and knowing they are going to do better and boost their chances to the cream of the crop.

What has not been answered is why a 31/32 earned on a re-take (after a lower score) isn't considered as good as a 31/32 on first take. And why there can't be a very positive interpretation on the character of someone who works hard to improve and sticks with it vs what seems to be the consensus view that the person used poor judgment in taking before ready and/or is not as talented as the individuals who hit 31/32 the first time. And what happens to the idea of a holistic review if the numbers (including how many times you took to get to that number) override the other stuff. And I'm guessing that the fear of not being considered holistically might lead to the temptation for relatively high scorers to try to score even higher. Sure, Harvard might accept 33s and 34s, but wouldn't you imagine that all things being equal, the folks with 37+ are in a better position for admission?

Here's another way at getting at my questions....for the schools that say up front that they AVERAGE the scores, what is their thinking behind that? And, if the average for considering candidates, do they also average when reporting stats for matriculants??? I'm guessing they do not do the latter.

 

[xffan624]

I was referred to this thread in good faith, and I'm afraid I learned a little more about the posters than the questions at hand.

Most of this thread digressed into a debate about re-taking high scores, with the subtext (mostly avoided) of whether gunning for a certain small set of schools is a worthy or entirely stupid pursuit. That IS an interesting discussion, and I think there could probably be a ton of interpretations of folks re-taking a 34/35 and actually getting a 38/39/40. Most seem to think that's insane, or selfish (narcissistic?), while some might view them as being super-confident and knowing they are going to do better and boost their chances to the cream of the crop.

What has not been answered is why a 31/32 earned on a re-take (after a lower score) isn't considered as good as a 31/32 on first take. And why there can't be a very positive interpretation on the character of someone who works hard to improve and sticks with it vs what seems to be the consensus view that the person used poor judgment in taking before ready and/or is not as talented as the individuals who hit 31/32 the first time. And what happens to the idea of a holistic review if the numbers (including how many times you took to get to that number) override the other stuff. And I'm guessing that the fear of not being considered holistically might lead to the temptation for relatively high scorers to try to score even higher. Sure, Harvard might accept 33s and 34s, but wouldn't you imagine that all things being equal, the folks with 37+ are in a better position for admission?

Here's another way at getting at my questions....for the schools that say up front that they AVERAGE the scores, what is their thinking behind that? And, if the average for considering candidates, do they also average when reporting stats for matriculants??? I'm guessing they do not do the latter.

You can't take Step 1 multiple times, unless you fail it. It's one shot, one kill. What you get, is what you get. Why wouldn't an ADCOM want to seen a similar approach from an applicant on the MCAT, the exam they take to get into medical school?

 

[Nietzschelover]

@efle, like your spirit. A little bit like ol' Rachiie. One can respect and even deeply appreciate authority but still challenge it. There is of course a cost. You won't be winning the Coach's Award, but then again, some do and some don't want the Coach's Award.

 

[Nietzschelover]

You can't take Step 1 multiple times, unless you fail it. It's one shot, one kill. What you get, is what you get. Why wouldn't an ADCOM want to seen a similar approach from an applicant on the MCAT, the exam they take to get into medical school?

Because the road to get to med school is different than actually being in med school? The barriers inherent in each are also vastly different. Seems like the system pressures for all acceptees to be decathletes (and increasingly rather than less so even with talk of "let's be more holistic"). Now maybe that often parallels who will be the best physicians, but perhaps not always.

 

[Gandyy]

What I want to know is why a 27 and 29 are grouped in the same category when a 29 is 13 percentile higher than a 27; however, the difference between a 30 and a 29 is treated as a catastrophic ending of the world even though a 30 is only 5-6 percentile higher than a 29?

My image of sane adcoms does not allow me to think that this is their actual thought process.

However here on SDN, if you have a 29, its game over because you are 5-6 percentile off of the "magic number". But a 27 and 29 are grouped as the same? Is this just the insanity of SDN or is something

else in play that I'm not aware of?

 

[xffan624]

Because the road to get to med school is different than actually being in med school? The barriers inherent in each are also vastly different. Seems like the system pressures for all acceptees to be decathletes (and increasingly rather than less so even with talk of "let's be more holistic"). Now maybe that often parallels who will be the best physicians, but perhaps not always.

Presumably when you're applying for medical school, you want to show the same qualities that are prized in medical school. One of them is the ability to prepare for, and take a high stakes standardized test, and give your best effort in doing so. Obviously there is some leeway given to applicants as many people retake the MCAT and are successfully admitted to medical school, but it's not a "plus" to your application to have to do so. Improving after a bad/mediocre initial score is not exactly a "plus" either. It's expected. Otherwise you will likely not even be considered at all.

 

[Nietzschelover]

Presumably when you're applying for medical school, you want to show the same qualities that are prized in medical school. One of them is the ability to prepare for, and take a high stakes standardized test, and give your best effort in doing so. Obviously there is some leeway given to applicants as many people retake the MCAT and are successfully admitted to medical school, but it's not a "plus" to your application to have to do so. Improving after a bad/mediocre initial score is not exactly a "plus" either. It's expected. Otherwise you will likely not even be considered at all.

Perhaps I communicated poorly. The stakes are different. If you Pass the Step 1, you're still in med school (and even if your Fail, LOL) and you're still going to be a physician. That's not the case for getting in med school. And I think we can all agree that different roads can lead to being a candidate who will make for a good med student. In the majority of cases, we're talking about 20, 21, and 22 year old kids taking the MCAT for the first time. Again, how can know FOR SURE if they are ready or not until they take it. Kudos to those who kill it the first time. Apparently that's 5% or even less of test-takers, so 95% get it wrong. That's a weird standard for dinging people for "poor judgment" in taking the exam at all.

 

[BruceWilly]

Retook the MCAT, third year med student here

 

[efle]

@efle, like your spirit. A little bit like ol' Rachiie. One can respect and even deeply appreciate authority but still challenge it. There is of course a cost. You won't be winning the Coach's Award, but then again, some do and some don't want the Coach's Award.

Rachiie tends to go off on people a few posts into an argument...I just want to point out when something seems counter to evidence or reason, regardless of who's saying it

Retook the MCAT, third year med student here

well I guess that settles it, /thread

.../s

 

[Banco]

LizzyM has stated that her school wouldn't necessarily look down on applicant that retakes a 34, because her school values high scores. It is school dependent, and if certain schools like high numbers, then they will be okay with you retaking to get high numbers. A lot of schools have 10%ile MCATs at 32-33 (Case Western, NYU come to mind)

Example: http://www.mdapplicants.com/profile.php?id=29088

This dude re-took a 33 --> 38, check the interviews.

This is a good thread to parse: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/army-cadet-seeks-help-unbalanced-mcat.1063044/#post-15076238

 

[efle]

LizzyM has stated that her school wouldn't necessarily look down on applicant that retakes a 34, because her school values high scores. It is school dependent, and if certain schools like high numbers, then they will be okay with you retaking to get high numbers. A lot of schools have 10%ile MCATs at 32-33 (Case Western, NYU come to mind)

Example: http://www.mdapplicants.com/profile.php?id=29088

This dude re-took a 33 --> 38, check the interviews.

This is a good thread to parse: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/army-cadet-seeks-help-unbalanced-mcat.1063044/#post-15076238

Wow, 3.9 at a top 20 and a top percentile MCAT, and he gets a single acceptance at his own university. I'll just tell myself he interviews really badly...

 

[Nietzschelover]

Wow, 3.9 at a top 20 and a top percentile MCAT, and he gets a single acceptance at his own university. I'll just tell myself he interviews really badly...

I was surprised too. I think I counted 19 interviews, which seems really, really high. What is the usual ratio between interviews to acceptances? 3 to 1? 5 to 1? 10 to 1?

 

[Gandyy]

I was surprised too. I think I counted 19 interviews, which seems really, really high. What is the usual ratio between interviews to acceptances? 3 to 1? 5 to 1? 10 to 1?

I think 5-7 interviews for the average MD applicant is considered to be pretty good, right?

 

[efle]

I was surprised too. I think I counted 19 interviews, which seems really, really high. What is the usual ratio between interviews to acceptances? 3 to 1? 5 to 1? 10 to 1?

At the caliber of schools he was interviewing at it can be a crapshoot, some people can interview at nearly every Top 20 and get almost all waitlists like he did (reminds me of GTLO's cycle, he was holding a single accept at Northwestern despite a 3.9/42 until near the very end of his cycle). Others get more accepts than waitlists.

With his number of interviews and stats there is definitely something more to the story though I think, either a lack of a critical EC or poor interviewing.

 

[efle]

I think 5-7 interviews for the average MD applicant is considered to be pretty good, right?

Yes, though it depends on the schools. Some places accept the majority of interviewees, others only about one in three.

 

[chewy2008]

If you have a high GPA, but low initial MCAT score which you then improve during a second MCAT testing, does this dramatically lower your chances of an MD acceptance or do they strongly consider your second score and downplay the first low score?

I talking about taking it the first time and scoring the equivalent of a 27 but then retaking it and getting a 30 equivalent. Would this still ruin MD chances severely if you have a 3.7+ and solid activities?

Update: Forgot to mention that these are NOT my scores (I haven't taken it yet). Just wanted to know because I was scoring average on practice tests

To share my anecdote, I scored a 28 the first time and got a 33 the second time. Got 2 MD interviews (one was a UC) and got an acceptance. Undergrad GPA 3.7, post-bacc 4.0.
My impression is that high caliber schools are more picky about taking the MCAT in one sitting because you only take the Step 1 to pass and don't get another chance to retake it if you already did.

 

[ridethecliche]

We love general rules of thumb here on SDN, especially when the adcoms have been fairly explicit on the subject.

Except, that they haven't and they're speaking to a the larger group of applicants not the ones that are applying to the top schools. The ones retaking a 'high' score aren't 'just' trying to get in. There's a difference. You keep missing it.

Also:

No Doug, no!

Wow, 3.9 at a top 20 and a top percentile MCAT, and he gets a single acceptance at his own university. I'll just tell myself he interviews really badly...

I think you might be right since in the other thread the OP reports speaking at length about research at the USUHS. I think it's easy to get carried away at interviews when you have to talk up your strengths as they relate to a schools mission. There are many ways to do them and having a coherent story is key when you interview, which is why practice is important.

 

[efle]

Except, that they haven't and they're speaking to a the larger group of applicants not the ones that are applying to the top schools. The ones retaking a 'high' score aren't 'just' trying to get in. There's a difference. You keep missing it.

Also:

No Doug, no!



I think you might be right since in the other thread the OP reports speaking at length about research at the USUHS. I think it's easy to get carried away at interviews when you have to talk up your strengths as they relate to a schools mission. There are many ways to do them and having a coherent story is key when you interview, which is why practice is important.

Honestly that makes it even more bizarre though, if he had lots of research on top of those stats he should've gotten more love from top 20's

 

[ZedsDed]

I think you might be right since in the other thread the OP reports speaking at length about research at the USUHS. I think it's easy to get carried away at interviews when you have to talk up your strengths as they relate to a schools mission. There are many ways to do them and having a coherent story is key when you interview, which is why practice is important.

Honestly that makes it even more bizarre though, if he had lots of research on top of those stats he should've gotten more love from top 20's

If there's one thing I've learned on SDN it's that acting like an ass during an interview will sink even the best applicant.

 

[Banco]

Wow, 3.9 at a top 20 and a top percentile MCAT, and he gets a single acceptance at his own university. I'll just tell myself he interviews really badly...

That's not really THAT rare to see. A lot of people end up getting waitlisted at majority of these top schools - his is an extreme example and is probably explained by interview skill being rusty - I don't think he updated it fully, so he could have had more acceptances.

 

[cooldriver]

It will hurt you more if you did worse on your retake than it will help you if you did marginally well on your retake...if you get a 27 or whatever the new equivalent to it is in the new format, then I would really spend more time studying for it and definitely retake it but only when I am confident enough in order to assure a better result.

 

[ridethecliche]

Honestly that makes it even more bizarre though, if he had lots of research on top of those stats he should've gotten more love from top 20's

USUHS wouldn't stress research as much as service in my view so...

 

[efle]

USUHS wouldn't stress research as much as service in my view so...

Yeah but I'm saying if his single thing is to hard sell his research he should've done great at the biggest names

 

[ridethecliche]

Yeah but I'm saying if his single thing is to hard sell his research he should've done great at the biggest names

Unless he talked up the wrong things there. Granted, he had waitlists at lots of places and is going to vandy so I think he did pretty well for himself.

That's enough hand wringing for me.

 

[familyaerospace]

What is the accepted absolute minimum MCAT score equivalent for a US MD school? From previous posts, I gather it is 30.

Even if one has a 3.85 GPA, would a 27-29 be too low for MD? (non-URM, traditional, not the child of a dean)

There are at least two people in my incoming class who got in with a 26. One has a 3.5 and is non-trad/URM/SES. The other had about a 3.7 and is traditional.