Is AAMC trying to make Pre-Med into a major?

[breakmon]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I strongly believe that the new MCAT was made with the intent of pushing colleges toward making "pre-med" specific majors. With the current MCAT, the courses required to succeed on overlap almost perfectly with normal biology/chemistry major requirements. Because of this near-perfect correlation, schools don't feel that they need to offer a major that is specifically geared towards pre-meds.

However, the new MCAT is different. It tests on two new subjects: Psychology and Sociology. At the very least, that's two extra classes that a student would have to take in order to learn the material, unless he planned on self-studying everything. And, what's more - they don't overlap with a biology/chemistry major at all.

I think that this was designed in order that schools would feel the pressure to make a pre-med major. It may not seem obvious right now, especially to the less astute, but I think that for someone like me who has been around the block and scored a 42 on the MCAT, it is clear that in the near future we will start seeing a significant number of schools offering pre-med specific majors. In fact, my prediction is that in 10 years, over 50% of the major colleges in America will have a major specifically designed for pre-meds, mostly due to the reformatted MCAT.

 

[NickNaylor]

No.

 

[Patros]

No.

Well, that's a wrap. Pack it up boys!

 

[ZeaL6]

I don't have any specific sources for this but I'm pretty sure 70-80% (at the least) of premeds take sociology and psychology anyway. I may be wrong about this. They can usually be taken as general electives that count towards your degree

 

[chenzt]

.

 

[NickNaylor]

Well, that's a wrap. Pack it up boys!

You think it's actually reasonable to suggest that requiring students to take two - two - additional courses that are actually somewhat relevant to practicing medicine and dealing with society means they're trying to push people into a pre-med major? Why would they even want to do that?

It just doesn't make any sense. The AAMC has no reason to want people to be locked into some permutation of a pre-med major. Understanding the basics of psychology and sociology will give you a good working knowledge of how different people operate. Sure, a lot of people may think that's excessive and unnecessary, but that doesn't make it any less useful. Principles you learn from those courses will probably be more relevant to your day-to-day clinical work than, say, much of the knowledge you learn from physics and organic chemistry.

 

[Boolean]

I'm currently in a "pre-med major", biomedical sciences. It's a biology degree with a focus on health sciences. In it, we cover many (read: 75%) of the topics covered in medical school. That said, I wouldn't go as far as to say this practice will become adopted everywhere. The degree itself is incredibly weak if one does not choose to continue to graduate level education.

 

[Keladry]

My college already has a premed major - didn't realize it was that uncommon!

 

[A7X]

What people don't seem to realize is that the majority of undergrad schools require a semester or two of social science for graduation. You can just take sociology and psychology to fulfill your graduation requirements as well as premed requirements, thus killing two birds with one stone. Taking two semesters of social science is not that out of the way unless your school does not have any social science requirements for graduation.

 

[Boolean]

What people don't seem to realize is that the majority of undergrad schools require a semester or two of social science for graduation. You can just take sociology and psychology to fulfill your graduation requirements as well as premed requirements, thus killing two birds with one stone. Taking two semesters of social science is not that out of the way unless your school does not have any social science requirements for graduation.

They should, if they don't. I think the whole point of the AAMC trying to make social sciences a focus of the MCAT is how relevant they are to our lives as future and current medical professionals. Mental health is a rising issue. People should be aware of the various factors that contribute to it, and how it can affect the health of their patients. Social science classes are a great way to gracefully present this introduction.

 

[kingjameslbj]

When do you guys think books and what not will be released for the new MCAT?

 

[WillburCobb]

Aside from already being gen ed requirements at most schools, and making you a much more well-rounded individual, lower level psych and soc classes are cake.

 

[Mt Kilimanjaro]

How would this serve their interests?

 

[deleted407021]

The new MCAT has nothing to do with the AAMC wanting to force a "premed major" on anyone. It's based solely on research and survey data from UG and med school instructors who increasingly believe that introductory psychology and sociology, as well as first semester biochemistry are important courses for success in medical education. They didn't poor millions of dollars of time and resources into this project flippantly.

 

[breakmon]

To be clear, I think that adding the two classes was just the tip of the iceberg. I think that this is the start of the AAMC increasingly forcing new requirements on pre-med students. I could easily see them adding another class. And then at quarter schools, that would be the equivalent of a whole 'nother quarter of classes.

 

[WillburCobb]

The new MCAT has nothing to do with the AAMC wanting to force a "premed major" on anyone. It's based solely on research and survey data from UG and med school instructors who increasingly believe that introductory psychology and sociology, as well as first semester biochemistry are important courses for success in medical education. They didn't poor millions of dollars of time and resources into this project flippantly.

Also, before someone jumps in complaining about the "new" biochem requirement, the current MCAT is already very biochem heavy, it's just not explicitly stated so. I've compared the content of the new MCAT to the old one and bio/biochem content really isn't that different. Also, bio I & II and cell bio should cover most (not all, most) of the material in biochem I.

 

[kyamh]

Life is not all about getting into medical school. Taking a bit of sociology/psychology is good for you as a person in this world. I think it's nice that AAMC is enforcing a little more relevant diversity into various students' pre-med curricula.

Edit: I speak as a strong proponent of a liberal arts education given the steady shift in society to make college basically mandatory for most positions.

 

[NuttyEngDude]

The way our nation is going, Sociology should be required as a core general education requirement., pre-med or not. I think high school civics should probably be reincorporated too.

Edit: and no they aren't trying to force a pre-med major. If they were they would be more explicit about it.

 

[Espadaleader]

I see what the OP is talking about. Yes, most schools require social science but not necessarily sociology and psychology. For example, I was a philosophy major, so I fulfilled my "social sciences" requirement in philosophy. If sociology and psychology was required, I would have not been able to complete my major in four years, with all of the required pre-med science courses. I think it will put more pressure on social science majors that do pre med like political science, philosophy etc. I cannot talk for all schools but I know a good number have a "sociology requirement" which can be fulfilled by several classes (sociopolitical philosophy, SOC 101, etc.) My philosophy course on social political theory counted toward my "sociology requirement" but would it count toward as AAMC sociology requirement?

Just being objective, "pre-med" is technically a major already.

Year of BIO- 8
Year of CHEM - 8
Year of MATH - 8
1 sem ORGO 1 sem BIOCHEM - 8
Year of PHY - 8

This is 40 credits, which is about the amount of credits for a non-science major. If you are a non-science major doing pre-med, you will probably take as many science classes as your major because there is little or no overlap. I do think the psych and socio courses are warranted but I don't think the OP's concern should be brushed off so easily.

I also understand that most of these science courses can count toward most schools gen eds. So they are counting toward your degree.

The AAMC isn't forcing pre-med as a major but I do think the new requirements will make things a little more difficult.

Also, before someone jumps in complaining about the "new" biochem requirement, the current MCAT is already very biochem heavy, it's just not explicitly stated so. I've compared the content of the new MCAT to the old one and bio/biochem content really isn't that different. Also, bio I & II and cell bio should cover most (not all, most) of the material in biochem I.

So true. BIOCHEM is so helpful. Its been a "requirement".

 

[nellbot2000]

As an undergrad I took 2 semesters of psychology and 3 semesters of sociology because I wanted to, not to fulfill any major requirements. This was before the AAMC officially stated they were making changes to the MCAT. Personally, I think that courses in social sciences (especially sociology) are a benefit to anyone who plans to pursue a career in a field that requires you to work with a diverse population, like medicine. Understanding race, ethnicity, and gender disparities could potentially make you a more well rounded candidate and eventual physician.

Also, I don't know how getting schools to make pre-med a major would benefit AAMC.

 

[Shinobiz11]

All i got from this was " i scored a 42, listen to me. "

Most schools require at least one or two social science courses for matriculation, as well as for general education degree requirements. Its not that big of a deal to take these TWO classes. Regardless, you're still going to have to study for the test anyway, some of it might be review.

 

[DrEnderW]

I don't think that will happen. More importantly, it shouldn't happen. I would feel bad for the majority of students that select that major if it does come about.

The vast majority of pre-meds do NOT become physicians and having a pre-med degree would be worthless in pursuing other careers. If you only took the premed sciences you'd be behind in science knowledge to PhD applicants or lab techs. Nothing like the stigma of applying to a business job as a premed major that clearly didn't make it to med school. There is absolutely no positive in creating a pre-med major.

Furthermore, I had a 43 MCAT so I'm more astute than you .

 

[Goro]

No, it's designed to make you a more well-rounded student with some knowledge of life outside of the hard sciences. When you're dealing with a 9 year pateint from a homeless family and you have to call in the social workers or CPS, you're bathing in Sociology.


When you're explainging to a stressed-out mom why her kid with a virus won't benefit from antibiotics, and she wants them, NOW, or a parent who won't vaccinate thier kids, you're bathing in Psychology.

One can still be a History or Fine Arts major, and take the coursework needed to do well on MCAT.

The last thing I want is a student body that's 100% Biology or Chemistry majors.

I strongly believe that the new MCAT was made with the intent of pushing colleges toward making "pre-med" specific majors. With the current MCAT, the courses required to succeed on overlap almost perfectly with normal biology/chemistry major requirements. Because of this near-perfect correlation, schools don't feel that they need to offer a major that is specifically geared towards pre-meds.

However, the new MCAT is different. It tests on two new subjects: Psychology and Sociology. At the very least, that's two extra classes that a student would have to take in order to learn the material, unless he planned on self-studying everything. And, what's more - they don't overlap with a biology/chemistry major at all.

I think that this was designed in order that schools would feel the pressure to make a pre-med major. It may not seem obvious right now, especially to the less astute, but I think that for someone like me who has been around the block and scored a 42 on the MCAT, it is clear that in the near future we will start seeing a significant number of schools offering pre-med specific majors. In fact, my prediction is that in 10 years, over 50% of the major colleges in America will have a major specifically designed for pre-meds, mostly due to the reformatted MCAT.

 

[3838]

I don't think that will happen. More importantly, it shouldn't happen. I would feel bad for the majority of students that select that major if it does come about.

The vast majority of pre-meds do NOT become physicians and having a pre-med degree would be worthless in pursuing other careers. If you only took the premed sciences you'd be behind in science knowledge to PhD applicants or lab techs. Nothing like the stigma of applying to a business job as a premed major that clearly didn't make it to med school. There is absolutely no positive in creating a pre-med major.

Furthermore, I had a 43 MCAT so I'm more astute than you.

Put it back in your pants will ya?

OP, I've had time to be a Public Health Major, take pre-med classes (and then some), and take off the wall courses like Linguistics, Arabic, French, Economics. Adding required sociology and psychology courses is not an unreasonable requirement; it is a well-guided attempt to incorporate some much needed education about the humanistic side of medicine. Remember during your interview you said you were in it because you love helping people and you really don't want to be stuck all day in a lab-- you want to actually interact with people? Well...you should probably know a little something about how those people work...

 

[Boolean]

No, it's designed to make you a more well-rounded student with some knowledge of life outside of the hard sciences. When you're dealing with a 9 year pateint from a homeless family and you have to call in the social workers or CPS, you're bathing in Sociology.


When you're explainging to a stressed-out mom why her kid with a virus won't benefit from antibiotics, and she wants them, NOW, or a parent who won't vaccinate thier kids, you're bathing in Psychology.

One can still be a History or Fine Arts major, and take the coursework needed to do well on MCAT.

The last thing I want is a student body that's 100% Biology or Chemistry majors.

Fully 100% agree with the post, but if you don't mind me asking, what is the proper way of approaching that situation? I've had some very adamant families bombard me while volunteering about how vaccines are evil and how I'm doing work of evil (I've noticed these people are fairly headstrong in their beliefs)

 

[3838]

Fully 100% agree with the post, but if you don't mind me asking, what is the proper way of approaching that situation? I've had some very adamant families bombard me while volunteering about how vaccines are evil and how I'm doing work of evil (I've noticed these people are fairly headstrong in their beliefs)

Fight anecdotal evidence with anecdotal evidence. Here ya' go : http://www.voicesforvaccines.org/growing-up-unvaccinated/

The whole website is a useful one 🙂 I would print out a couple of the posts to give to the parents.

 

[DrEnderW]

Put it back in your pants will ya?

You missed the blatant sarcasm mocking how ridiculous it was that the OP said that.

 

[Boolean]

Fight anecdotal evidence with anecdotal evidence. Here ya' go : http://www.voicesforvaccines.org/growing-up-unvaccinated/

The whole website is a useful one 🙂 I would print out a couple of the posts to give to the parents.

Thank you! Much appreciated.

 

[Goro]

Since it's highly unlikley that you'll convince them if you just try to reason with them and quote or show data, I'd start with "What are you afraid of?" and then follow up that with "How do you know this is true?"

If anyone brings up the MMR and the Lancet/Wakefield paper that fruadulently linked MMR with autism, then you can demolish their fear by pointing out the data was faked, and paper retracted.

By honing in on their fears, you have at least a crack in the door to try to introduce some understanding. But some people will never be convinced, until their kid is gasping for breath in the ER froma vaccine-preventable disease.

Don't forget to point out that Jenny McCarthy is an actress/model, and never had any medical training!

Fully 100% agree with the post, but if you don't mind me asking, what is the proper way of approaching that situation? I've had some very adamant families bombard me while volunteering about how vaccines are evil and how I'm doing work of evil (I've noticed these people are fairly headstrong in their beliefs)

 

[radkat101]

It seems to me that the only purpose of this thread was to brag about your 42 mcat.

 

[Roxas]

Isn't there something to be said for being able to major in something you like in undergrad (that isn't medical school related)? While a pre-med major may help students save a little time, I think it's good to get a variety of disciplines that apply for medical school. I'm a Human Nutrition major, and
I'm a little surprised that this isn't more common because it's been a very interesting way to complement all of the biology/chemistry classes I was taking for prereqs. So I don't really think this is the AAMC's intention with changes in the MCAT. If anything I think being a non-biology/pre-med major applying to med school is a plus.

 

[Boolean]

Since it's highly unlikley that you'll convince them if you just try to reason with them and quote or show data, I'd start with "What are you afraid of?" and then follow up that with "How do you know this is true?"

If anyone brings up the MMR and the Lancet/Wakefield paper that fruadulently linked MMR with autism, then you can demolish their fear by pointing out the data was faked, and paper retracted.

By honing in on their fears, you have at least a crack in the door to try to introduce some understanding. But some people will never be convinced, until their kid is gasping for breath in the ER froma vaccine-preventable disease.

Don't forget to point out that Jenny McCarthy is an actress/model, and never had any medical training!

I find it really ironic how people tend to think "Oh, I won't vaccinate them. If they get sick, I'll take them to the hospital". Curing problems acutely like that seems very... ill-advised.

Thank you for your insight! It's very much appreciated. IIRC, the M.D. who published the MMR w/ autism paper also had his medical license stripped. All the more reason to vaccinate.

 

[3838]

You missed the blatant sarcasm mocking how ridiculous it was that the OP said that.

Sarcasm doesn't work particularly well on the internet.

Since it's highly unlikley that you'll convince them if you just try to reason with them and quote or show data, I'd start with "What are you afraid of?" and then follow up that with "How do you know this is true?"

If anyone brings up the MMR and the Lancet/Wakefield paper that fruadulently linked MMR with autism, then you can demolish their fear by pointing out the data was faked, and paper retracted.

By honing in on their fears, you have at least a crack in the door to try to introduce some understanding. But some people will never be convinced, until their kid is gasping for breath in the ER froma vaccine-preventable disease.

Don't forget to point out that Jenny McCarthy is an actress/model, and never had any medical training!

This, and I would find a relevant story on the website link I gave you that specifically addresses THEIR concerns. I would also talk them through the consequences of their actions. I would ask them what they would do if their child came down with these diseases and explain the symptoms and complications. What would the experience be like for their children? Then I would talk them through what was in the vaccine and the risk factors of the vaccine and explain what that might be like for their children. A lot of people's concerns also come from the unknown. It depends on what kind of people they seem to be -- make some personality judgements and go from there.

 

[knv2u]

I think that this was designed in order that schools would feel the pressure to make a pre-med major. It may not seem obvious right now, especially to the less astute, but I think that for someone like me who has been around the block and scored a 42 on the MCAT, it is clear that in the near future we will start seeing a significant number of schools offering pre-med specific majors. In fact, my prediction is that in 10 years, over 50% of the major colleges in America will have a major specifically designed for pre-meds, mostly due to the reformatted MCAT.

 

[Goro]

Gawd, during the swine flu pandemic of a few years ago I was sitting at the pool, watching my little daughter taking swimming lessons, and I heard a mom say the exact same thing!

I still have the marks on my tongue where I bit down trying NOT to say "do you what a stupid idea that is?????!!!"

I find it really ironic how people tend to think "Oh, I won't vaccinate them. If they get sick, I'll take them to the hospital". Curing problems acutely like that seems very... ill-advised.

Thank you for your insight! It's very much appreciated. IIRC, the M.D. who published the MMR w/ autism paper also had his medical license stripped. All the more reason to vaccinate.

 

[Boolean]

Gawd, during the swine flu pandemic of a few years ago I was sitting at the pool, watching my little daughter taking swimming lessons, and I heard a mom say the exact same thing!

I still have the marks on my tongue where I bit down trying NOT to say "do you what a stupid idea that is?????!!!"

I'd really like to think it is just a fundamental lack of education on the topic that is preventing these people from vaccinating their children (i.e. something that we can actually change). It really breaks my heart to think that people knowingly and openly don't vaccinate their children despite knowing the highly negative consequences.

 

[Goro]

Some highly intelligent people can be also irrational at the same time. I've known several DOs who believed in the magic healing power of herbs or magents, and others who wouldn't vaccinate their kids! With these people, it's almost a belief system.

I'd really like to think it is just a fundamental lack of education on the topic that is preventing these people from vaccinating their children (i.e. something that we can actually change). It really breaks my heart to think that people knowingly and openly don't vaccinate their children despite knowing the highly negative consequences.

 

[Espadaleader]

The major point here is that requiring sociology and psychology could be an issue depending on major.
I am being nit-picky on purpose so don't flame me but I think this is a good example.

For example, you may have a student that took socialpolitical theory, political ethics, a course in womens studies, a course on African American political theory, Asian studies etc. Are you going to ding that person for not having SOC 101?

I think the AAMC should be flexible. You know how you can take PSY 200 (Psy Stats) or MAT 150 (Math Stats), I think the AAMC should require sociology but allow other courses with similar content to pass.
"Okay, you don't have SOC 101 but your PHI 231 course on sociopolitical theory in America will count."

 

[WillburCobb]

The AAMC doesn't say what pre-reqs are required, that's up to the school for the most part, and most schools do show quite a bit of flexibility in this area.

 

[mehc012]

No, it's designed to make you a more well-rounded student with some knowledge of life outside of the hard sciences. When you're dealing with a 9 year pateint from a homeless family and you have to call in the social workers or CPS, you're bathing in Sociology.


When you're explainging to a stressed-out mom why her kid with a virus won't benefit from antibiotics, and she wants them, NOW, or a parent who won't vaccinate thier kids, you're bathing in Psychology.

One can still be a History or Fine Arts major, and take the coursework needed to do well on MCAT.

The last thing I want is a student body that's 100% Biology or Chemistry majors.

Did my school have a completely different Sociology course than usual or something? Soc101, at least, had NOTHING to do with social work, nor the different cultures in the US (which would arguably be the more eye-opening subject for most of the sheltered rich kids at my school), but just random cultures around the world. I eventually swapped the class for something else, as the prof was incredibly boring and full of himself, but I cannot see at all how that would a) make me better at interacting with people or b) help me in the slightest in the sorts of situations you describe.

 

[Boolean]

Did my school have a completely different Sociology course than usual or something? Soc101, at least, had NOTHING to do with social work, nor the different cultures in the US (which would arguably be the more eye-opening subject for most of the sheltered rich kids at my school), but just random cultures around the world. I eventually swapped the class for something else, as the prof was incredibly boring and full of himself, but I cannot see at all how that would a) make me better at interacting with people or b) help me in the slightest in the sorts of situations you describe.

Much like how we volunteer in hospitals and the like to gain clinical exposure, it is important to gain cultural exposure. Sociology can do that. Sometimes this isn't always properly executed, but when it is, the result is tremendous. Having a decent understanding of other culture can make you quite a decent bit better at interacting with people. If you are able to understand their beliefs and cultural disposition, you will conversing with others much easier.

 

[mehc012]

Much like how we volunteer in hospitals and the like to gain clinical exposure, it is important to gain cultural exposure. Sociology can do that. Sometimes this isn't always properly executed, but when it is, the result is tremendous. Having a decent understanding of other culture can make you quite a decent bit better at interacting with people. If you are able to understand their beliefs and cultural disposition, you will conversing with others much easier.

I agree with THAT, however, I completely and utterly disagree that taking a sociology class is going to give me a decent understanding of other cultures. There are not enough words in the english language to describe how inconceivably wrong I believe that idea is.

 

[Boolean]

I agree with THAT, however, I completely and utterly disagree that taking a sociology class is going to give me a decent understanding of other cultures. There are not enough words in the english language to describe how inconceivably wrong I believe that idea is.

No class is going to give you an understanding of a topic. While a class can certainly sway you towards understanding, the actual process of understanding ultimately lies with you. I'd say that taking such a class is certainly beneficial because at the bare minimum you're exposed to the resources you would need to gain an understanding of other cultures.

 

[Goro]

Did you learn anything from the course? If so, what?

Did my school have a completely different Sociology course than usual or something? Soc101, at least, had NOTHING to do with social work, nor the different cultures in the US (which would arguably be the more eye-opening subject for most of the sheltered rich kids at my school), but just random cultures around the world. I eventually swapped the class for something else, as the prof was incredibly boring and full of himself, but I cannot see at all how that would a) make me better at interacting with people or b) help me in the slightest in the sorts of situations you describe.

 

[BamaNicole]

there's many schools that already require social science courses so no matter what your major is you're required to not take just science.


Nice humble brag on your score there though

 

[mehc012]

Did you learn anything from the course? If so, what?

I learned a bunch of random trivia and some cool things to bring up in conversation. I wouldn't actually bring them up in conversation with someone FROM one of the cultures we learned about, because nothing slams a door in your face quite as quickly as making wild assumptions based on stereotypes (even academically-supported ones) which you assume apply to someone.
When I want to know about someone's culture, I learn it from them.
I am fortunate enough to have grown up in a wide range of socioeconomic classes (each with their own culture, believe me) in this country, which I have so far found to be of far more use.
The most useful skill you can have on this front is simply the ability to check your judgement (and fear, as that seems to be the most common response to misunderstanding someone) at the door. That is something that no class is going to teach you.
A little respect will get you a long way with almost anyone, whether you run in the same circles or even speak only a few words in the same language. Learning the basics of social structure in various cultures has very little to do with having positive interactions with anyone.

 

[DermViser]

You think it's actually reasonable to suggest that requiring students to take two - two - additional courses that are actually somewhat relevant to practicing medicine and dealing with society means they're trying to push people into a pre-med major? Why would they even want to do that?

It just doesn't make any sense. The AAMC has no reason to want people to be locked into some permutation of a pre-med major. Understanding the basics of psychology and sociology will give you a good working knowledge of how different people operate. Sure, a lot of people may think that's excessive and unnecessary, but that doesn't make it any less useful. Principles you learn from those courses will probably be more relevant to your day-to-day clinical work than, say, much of the knowledge you learn from physics and organic chemistry.

Not to mention at most undergraduate institutions (at least the good ones) - Psychology 101 and Sociology 101 are General Education requirements for any undergraduate degree. Hardly taxing. I guess I have to realize that premeds are still in binary thinking that somehow medicine is all just science only with a big paycheck.

 

[mehc012]

Not to mention at most undergraduate institutions (at least the good ones) - Psychology 101 and Sociology 101 are General Education requirements for any undergraduate degree. Hardly taxing. I guess I have to realize that premeds are still in binary thinking that somehow medicine is all just science only with a big paycheck.

I have never heard of Soc101 being a requirement before...and I went to a LibArts school (a good one, just because you mentioned it), so it's not like they were light on the requirements.

 

[DermViser]

I have never heard of Soc101 being a requirement before...and I went to a LibArts school (a good one, just because you mentioned it), so it's not like they were light on the requirements.

I'm referring to major universities whose strength isn't just in "Liberal Arts" but also have strengths in the sciences, engineering, business, etc.

 

[kingjameslbj]

I'm referring to major universities whose strength isn't just in "Liberal Arts" but also have strengths in the sciences, engineering, business, etc.

Indeed. I went to a major university. Majored in lib arts and had to take psyc