I don't understand this...

[csx]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

It always blows my mind away when someone has a high GPA (ie: +3.7) and a low MCAT score and justify their low score on the MCAT for being a "bad test taker." How could you be a bad test taker if you have had to take test after test after test to earn that high GPA of yours? Unless I am missing something, really, it is because you went to an easy university or you didn't study at all for the MCAT.

Another thing that I don't understand is when a URM (generally one who claims english is their second language) score poorly on the VR section of the MCAT but does well on PS and BS. Some attribute their poor score in the VR section due to the fact that english is their second language...reasonable BUT, in order to perform well in the PS/BS it requires very strong reading comprehension as is. So if you scored well in PS/BS but not in VR...how could english being a second language justify doing well in PS/BS but not in VR?

 

[binderring]

I think you're generalizing too much, I'm pretty sure there are native English speakers who have done horribly on the VR, and there are people (URM) who have done extremely well on the VR. I got a 12 on the PS but a 7 on the VR, I dont' know why but reading the VR doesn't click the way the PS clicks.

 

[coolingglasses]

If you think most undergrad tests are like the MCAT, you shouldn't.

 

[IslandStyle808]

It always blows my mind away when someone has a high GPA (ie: +3.7) and a low MCAT score and justify their low score on the MCAT for being a "bad test taker." How could you be a bad test taker if you have had to take test after test after test to earn that high GPA of yours? Unless I am missing something, really, it is because you went to an easy university or you didn't study at all for the MCAT.

Another thing that I don't understand is when a URM (generally one who claims english is their second language) score poorly on the VR section of the MCAT but does well on PS and BS. Some attribute their poor score in the VR section due to the fact that english is their second language...reasonable BUT, in order to perform well in the PS/BS it requires very strong reading comprehension as is. So if you scored well in PS/BS but not in VR...how could english being a second language justify doing well in PS/BS but not in VR?

VR shows how quickly one would pick up material if one just had only knowledge of the passage. BS and PS can be like VR at times (BS more so than PS) but the difference is that the background knowledge helps with the comprehension of the passage and questions. Knowledge from subject studying 1) prevents one from making radical conclusions and 2) fills in gap of understanding, when reading the passage and questions. This is why you can see high BS and PS scores with low VR.

 

[Roxas]

I'm assuming I fall into this category since my AACOMAS gpa's are 3.77c, 3.70s and I scored a 24 on my first MCAT. Firstly I don't attribute my score to being a "bad test taker". I actually feel like for regular college tests I'm a decent tester and a hard worker, but the MCAT is a totally different ball game. A lot of things can affect how someone performs on the MCAT.

On my first take (in April), I got caught up with a busy semester, work, and ECs which I feel is a common trap for a lot of people. After studying over the summer and sitting for the 8/15 exam I'm fairly confident that I did better, but only had a AAMC avg of 28. I've just accepted the fact that I'm not going to be one of those people that crushes this exam, especially since I didn't always have the time to invest that I wanted. As with many other people, my sciences were solid (averaged 10's on PS and BS) but struggled with VR (averaged 8). I also had a wide range of scores, from a 24 to scoring 31 twice, so I'm aware I had some serious content weaknesses.

Trust me, I don't love the fact that I have a good gpa with a crappy MCAT, since most schools prefer a better MCAT to gpa. It kinda feels like 4 years of hard work is insignificant, and I got bested by this cursed test and it's holding me back.

 

[Postictal Raiden]

It always blows my mind away when someone has a high GPA (ie: +3.7) and a low MCAT score and justify their low score on the MCAT for being a "bad test taker." How could you be a bad test taker if you have had to take test after test after test to earn that high GPA of yours? Unless I am missing something, really, it is because you went to an easy university or you didn't study at all for the MCAT.

Another thing that I don't understand is when a URM (generally one who claims english is their second language) score poorly on the VR section of the MCAT but does well on PS and BS. Some attribute their poor score in the VR section due to the fact that english is their second language...reasonable BUT, in order to perform well in the PS/BS it requires very strong reading comprehension as is. So if you scored well in PS/BS but not in VR...how could english being a second language justify doing well in PS/BS but not in VR?

I was among those who struggled very hard to get a "passing" score on VR. I was able to score 10+ on the sciences, despite having to deal with some verbal(ish) PS and BS passages. Verbal on the other hand was different. I was never able to put a finger on it. For the most part, I understood the passages well, but somehow ended up misunderstanding the underlying "purpose" for writing the passage. With maintaining great faith God and working hard, I was able to bring my verbal score from 3 (on my first attempt) to 7(on my second attempt). Yes, 7 may not be a "passing" score in your book, but it was an A+ in mine.

Verbal is very different from PS and BS. I have no doubt that anyone, and I mean ANYONE is capable of scoring 12+ on the sciences, given the sufficient time, efforts, and material to study. Very few non native English speakers, on the other hand, could score above 10 on verbal.

 

[ortnakas]

I agree with O Grady. I'm a high GPA/low MCAT applicant. The MCAT is very different than any exam I ever took, in undergrad or graduate school. Studying was also essentially my job in undergrad, while I studied for the MCAT on top of a 40+ hour work week and other "grown-up" responsibilities.

 

[NontradCA]

You'll find that in general, DO students have lower MCAT scores. The MCAT is not like an undergraduate test.

 

[HopefulReapp]

There are some extenuating circumstances. Perhaps the student absolutely must take the MCAT at a certain point, but lacked a course like physiology at the time and had to teach themselves. Compound that with working 70 hours a week over the summer and it should start to make sense why a low mcat score is possible.

 

[Eremba]

There are some extenuating circumstances. Perhaps the student absolutely must take the MCAT at a certain point, but lacked a course like physiology at the time and had to teach themselves. Compound that with working 70 hours a week over the summer and it should start to make sense why a low mcat score is possible.

This.... I had not had genetics yet and my BS section was mostly genetics based questions. Yes, I studied for thjs exam for 3 months, took a prep class even, but i also worked 40-50 hours a week and took 3 upper level science classes at the same time.... I know I could have done better but I have 2 interviews so far so I did well enough, I guess. 🙂

Standardized tests are nothing like unit exams or even finals for undergraduate exams. I don't generally score what I should on standardized exams...
As a somewhat similar example, I had a 4.0 in high school (AP classes included) and could not break 29 on the ACT... I know it's not the same level as MCAT but I do struggle with standardized exams. It's stupid that I do...but there it is.

 

[Goro]

Not all coursework is assessed by standardized tests.
MCAT is not graded on a curve
MCAT doesn't use True/False; but college exams will
I had professors who would throw out the lowest test score, our would reward rising trends; MCAT won't do that.


It always blows my mind away when someone has a high GPA (ie: +3.7) and a low MCAT score and justify their low score on the MCAT for being a "bad test taker." How could you be a bad test taker if you have had to take test after test after test to earn that high GPA of yours? Unless I am missing something, really, it is because you went to an easy university or you didn't study at all for the MCAT.


The easy answer is that the MCAT VR section is perverse. I can't figure it out the disconnect either. But, keep in mind that a lot of the PS and Bio sections are pattern recognition, rather than analyzing a stanza of Keat's poetry or a paragraph of an O. Henry story.


Another thing that I don't understand is when a URM (generally one who claims english is their second language) score poorly on the VR section of the MCAT but does well on PS and BS. Some attribute their poor score in the VR section due to the fact that english is their second language...reasonable BUT, in order to perform well in the PS/BS it requires very strong reading comprehension as is. So if you scored well in PS/BS but not in VR...how could english being a second language justify doing well in PS/BS but not in VR?[/QUOTE]

 

[gmcguitar4]

People major in things like communications/art history/dance/marketing. Not so hard to get a good gpa. Also many schools have krap programs and just dish out A's

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

It's different because life has more an ability to rear its ugly head during a dedicated 3 month period of studying than it does does during a semester of realistically 10 to 15 hours of actual dedicated studying while also in an environment demanding of studying.

I mean it's really easy to learn content when a professor is guiding you and educating you and preparing you for his test. It's a whole different ball game when you're studying with limited content instruction and for a test with more material density the 4 classes that prepared you for it.

I mean realistically there's so much you can do wrong here, you can fool yourself into believing that you can take a few days off. You can sign up for a mcat review course that will only waste your time ( I believe strongly that Kaplan screwed me majorly). And finally you also can make the major mistake of studying at home where you will soon find yourself being pulled to do other things, help the family, and quickly find yourself abstaining from your so called plan of going to the library daily to study.

So in short, it's easier to study for classes for so many reasons. In the end I think for many people of they were allowed a mcat vacation of solitary study they'd be well on their way to a 30+. But for many students they end up wasting time and losing out on their shot.

 

[pattr]

Another thing that I don't understand is when a URM (generally one who claims english is their second language) score poorly on the VR section of the MCAT but does well on PS and BS. Some attribute their poor score in the VR section due to the fact that english is their second language...reasonable BUT, in order to perform well in the PS/BS it requires very strong reading comprehension as is. So if you scored well in PS/BS but not in VR...how could english being a second language justify doing well in PS/BS but not in VR?

The VR is a completely different beast than the PS/BS sections. In fact other than it being the hardest section on the test I would go so far as to say that it is biased against non-native English speakers. It tests your ability to come up with information and comprehend things very quickly simply by reading a passage and based on limited prior knowledge... something that non-native speakers struggle with. It also relies on your ability to pick up on cues, idioms, and tonal elements that are very difficult to appreciate unless you're well-read in the English language - and I'm talking about LITERATURE not just science textbooks.

I am a fluent Spanish speaker but non-native (I took several years in high school and college and speak well in daily conversations at work and with friends) but if a test asked me to read a passage in Spanish about Latino/Spanish philosophy or law or behavioral science and answer questions about it I would have a lot more trouble than if it were simply a passage explaining experiments or concepts in chemistry, biology, or physics which I'm much more comfortable in and have probably seen in some form or another outside of the test.

 

[NontradCA]

The VR is a completely different beast than the PS/BS sections. In fact other than it being the hardest section on the test I would go so far as to say that it is biased against non-native English speakers. It tests your ability to come up with information and comprehend things very quickly simply by reading a passage and based on limited prior knowledge... something that non-native speakers struggle with. It also relies on your ability to pick up on cues, idioms, and tonal elements that are very difficult to appreciate unless you're well-read in the English language - and I'm talking about LITERATURE not just science textbooks.

I am a fluent Spanish speaker but non-native (I took several years in high school and college and speak well in daily conversations at work and with friends) but if a test asked me to read a passage about Latino/Spanish philosophy or law or behavioral science and answer questions about it I would have a lot more trouble than if it were simply a passage explaining experiments or concepts in chemistry, biology, or physics which I'm much more comfortable in and have probably seen in some form or another outside of the test.

But then again, you're not trying to take tests in Spanish speaking countries. 👍

 

[csx]

People major in things like communications/art history/dance/marketing. Not so hard to get a good gpa. Also many schools have krap programs and just dish out A's

this. We've beat the horse on the VR notion. Everyone is ignoring the pink elephant in the room though regarding the high GPA low MCAT and saying they are a poor test taker. Insufficient studying is a legit excuse but not a good test taker...cmon.

 

[NontradCA]

this. We've beat the horse on the VR notion. Everyone is ignoring the pink elephant in the room though regarding the high GPA low MCAT and saying they are a poor test taker. Insufficient studying is a legit excuse but not a good test taker...cmon.

It's a standardized test, of course not being a good test taker factors in. Take the test, you'll see.

 

[csx]

It's a standardized test, of course not being a good test taker factors in. Take the test, you'll see.

You take tests all through out college though and I find it hard to believe you are a "bad test taker" if you have anything higher than a 3.5 GPA. I know what the MCAT is like, its still a test none the same. I understand that the format of the test can cause problems but to attribute your issues to it being a "test" and you being a "bad test taker" doesn't make sense.

 

[Roxas]

You take tests all through out college though and I find it hard to believe you are a "bad test taker" if you have anything higher than a 3.5 GPA. I know what the MCAT is like, its still a test none the same. I understand that the format of the test can cause problems but to attribute your issues to it being a "test" and you being a "bad test taker" doesn't make sense.

We should probably establish what you think is a "bad" MCAT score. Different people have different goals.

I will admit that my first MCAT score was pretty bad, but as I said above I don't attribute that to being a bad test taker. People can do bad on this exam for other reasons. One other reason I neglected to mention above is the wide variety of science backgrounds people have coming in to this exam no doubt affects their performance. I'm a non BCMP major who took the basic prereqs and a few other classes, but I'm sure if i had chosen a bio/chem major that would have helped me with the test immensely. In addition there's the varying degree to which you learn the basic sciences at your school. For example, my G-chem and physics professors were terrible, and consequently I spent a lot of time trying to strengthen those areas.

 

[csx]

We should probably establish what you think is a "bad" MCAT score. Different people have different goals.

I will admit that my first MCAT score was pretty bad, but as I said above I don't attribute that to being a bad test taker. People can do bad on this exam for other reasons. One other reason I neglected to mention above is the wide variety of science backgrounds people have coming in to this exam no doubt affects their performance. I'm a non BCMP major who took the basic prereqs and a few other classes, but I'm sure if i had chosen a bio/chem major that would have helped me with the test immensely. In addition there's the varying degree to which you learn the basic sciences at your school. For example, my G-chem and physics professors were terrible, and consequently I spent a lot of time trying to strengthen those areas.

I am referring only to people who have high GPA's and use the excuse that they are bad test takers.

 

[gmcguitar4]

"Being a bad test taker" sounds like an excuse for not working hard enough in my opinion. If you are bad at something, you work and improve. Just like anything else. Some people have to work harder than others to get there. There are also people with severe test anxiety but that is totally understandable. Getting a good MCAT shows you are either intelligent and/or a hard worker.
GPA is way too variable from person to the type of degree to the professor they had to the school they attended. It is a krappy indicator of anything but schools need something to go by when selecting students.

 

[Jnet389]

Also the MCAT is timed, and very few undergrad tests are (at least at my school) also the MCAT is designed to test critical thinking skills. Most college tests have little critical thinking.

 

[coolingglasses]

Also the MCAT is timed, and very few undergrad tests are (at least at my school) also the MCAT is designed to test critical thinking skills. Most college tests have little critical thinking.

Your exams weren't timed?

 

[TriagePreMed]

Not all tests are created equal. I can say that 0% of my undergrad tests were like the mcat. Standardized tests are a different ballgame to many of us.

 

[Jazzy G]

Not all tests are created equal. I can say that 0% of my undergrad tests were like the mcat. Standardized tests are a different ballgame to many of us.

Not to mention the major difference between being bad at standardized tests and doing bad on a standardized test. There are so many other factors with the mcat. But... Like any test, sometimes it is just not your day.

 

[circulus vitios]

It's all about familiarity.

The PS questions were straight forward, textbook-style questions. I have an analytical mindset and I hammered these types of problems out during prep time, and so I did well on this section.

I wasn't a biology major and I had read maybe 2 journal articles in college. My BS section had passages almost exclusively derived from journal articles, and on topics that I had just learned a month or two ago while reviewing for the MCAT. I was not familiar with interpreting data in a journal format and I wasn't familiar with the material. I didn't do so well on this section.

Verbal I guess it comes down to innate ability and technique. I tried a new technique toward the end of my prep -- reading slowly and deliberately, how novel -- that seemed to work, but the material on the exam was longer and much more dense, and so I nearly had a panic attack while taking it. I did terribly on this section.

If:

1. I had more experience reading journal articles (maybe get a job in a lab)
2. I had taken physiology, genetics, and maybe biochemistry
3. I had verbal prep material that was representative of the real MCAT

I would have done much, much better, because I would have been more familiar with the material.

 

[csx]

Everyone is in the same boat coming in for the mcat. Being a bad test taker is no excuse.

 

[NontradCA]

Everyone is in the same boat coming in for the mcat. Being a bad test taker is no excuse.

No I don't think so. The test isn't straight forward- it requires a lot of critical thinking. Despite what anyone says, no amount of studying can bring you into this mindset. Also, the practice tests while very useful aren't very representative of the trickyness that comes along with the test; especially with timing. It's a very think on your feet kind of test, which I think is why it's weighed so heavily by admissions.

 

[Eremba]

You take tests all through out college though and I find it hard to believe you are a "bad test taker" if you have anything higher than a 3.5 GPA. I know what the MCAT is like, its still a test none the same. I understand that the format of the test can cause problems but to attribute your issues to it being a "test" and you being a "bad test taker" doesn't make sense.

I agree with this...format has a lot to do with it and also, as I posted in another thread....I have issue taking exams on computers. I had a professor let me take his computer exam on pencil and paper first aced it and then took it on the computer a week later and missed 4 questions....it was the same exam. The computer throws me off, I think. I am a tactile person. I am so used to taking pencil/paper exams where I can write on it, cross out and not have to "flip" back and forth between questions and essay that I always do much much better. Maybe this is not a legitimate excuse to you either but I struggle, and I am not a bad test taker. I did completely average on the MCAT....I just wonder what I'd have done if I had taken on paper.....of course I would just now be getting my score if I had hahaha.

 

[csx]

I agree with this...format has a lot to do with it and also, as I posted in another thread....I have issue taking exams on computers. I had a professor let me take his computer exam on pencil and paper first aced it and then took it on the computer a week later and missed 4 questions....it was the same exam. The computer throws me off, I think. I am a tactile person. I am so used to taking pencil/paper exams where I can write on it, cross out and not have to "flip" back and forth between questions and essay that I always do much much better. Maybe this is not a legitimate excuse to you either but I struggle, and I am not a bad test taker. I did completely average on the MCAT....I just wonder what I'd have done if I had taken on paper.....of course I would just now be getting my score if I had hahaha.

I'm just like you. I feel like most people would agree with this though.

No I don't think so. The test isn't straight forward- it requires a lot of critical thinking. Despite what anyone says, no amount of studying can bring you into this mindset. Also, the practice tests while very useful aren't very representative of the trickyness that comes along with the test; especially with timing. It's a very think on your feet kind of test, which I think is why it's weighed so heavily by admissions.

so we are all in the same boat 😛

 

[Eremba]

I'm just like you. I feel like most people would agree with this though.



so we are all in the same boat 😛

Yes they probably would all agree....I think the up and coming generation will not have the same issue since almost all schools are moving to computer testing and iPads for every student etc. if I had more exposure to computer format exams throughout school I'm sure I would have been better....lol. Of course I feel like I did well enough to secure interviews and I have gotten interviews so I guess I did what I needed to do. 🙂

 

[circulus vitios]

I agree with this...format has a lot to do with it and also, as I posted in another thread....I have issue taking exams on computers. I had a professor let me take his computer exam on pencil and paper first aced it and then took it on the computer a week later and missed 4 questions....it was the same exam. The computer throws me off, I think. I am a tactile person. I am so used to taking pencil/paper exams where I can write on it, cross out and not have to "flip" back and forth between questions and essay that I always do much much better. Maybe this is not a legitimate excuse to you either but I struggle, and I am not a bad test taker. I did completely average on the MCAT....I just wonder what I'd have done if I had taken on paper.....of course I would just now be getting my score if I had hahaha.

Yeah, this too. On the verbal section my eyes felt like they were going to catch on fire. Staring at a screen and maintaining utmost concentration for an hour straight is hell.

 

[Der Kaiser]

Very few non native English speakers, on the other hand, could score above 10 on verbal.

I am always super impressed when this happens. I did fairly well on VR and I can totally see how it could go badly if your English is lacking (2nd language). German is a second language I speak relatively fluently, but if I was given a German VR test I would bomb. VR does not require just fluency; rather, it requires an advanced understanding of grammar and syntax and the ability to draw reasonable conclusions. The brains of those ESL individuals who score 10+ on VR must have a lot of gyri.

Congrats on bringing your score up btw.

 

[Jnet389]

Your exams weren't timed?

No we used a testing center outside of regular class time and we could take as long as we wanted

 

[coolingglasses]

No we used a testing center outside of regular class time and we could take as long as we wanted

oh wtf, I would've loved unlimited time.