Is MSAR believable???

[jstuds_66]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

So I was browsing through MSAR 2007-08 and wondering how all the MCAT scores were so high. It even reports that the national median MCAT score in 2005 was about 31 Q. So, I checked it out with AAMC. Although they do not give the national median for VR, BS, and PS, they do for WS. According to this:

http://www.aamc.org/students/mcat/examineedata/sum2005.pdf

the national median WS in 2005 was N, not Q. If MSAR inflated that by 3 letters, are they inflating the other medians (ie national and school) too???

How much should I actually believe the stuff in MSAR 07-08???

 

[VPDcurt]

I'm not sure about this because I don't have the MSAR, but is it reporting the median of accepted students? Otherwise, I don't know what to tell you.

 

[chaldobruin]

So I was browsing through MSAR 2007-08 and wondering how all the MCAT scores were so high. It even reports that the national median MCAT score in 2005 was about 31 Q. So, I checked it out with AAMC. Although they do not give the national median for VR, BS, and PS, they do for WS. According to this:

http://www.aamc.org/students/mcat/examineedata/sum2005.pdf

the national median WS in 2005 was N, not Q. If MSAR inflated that by 3 letters, are they inflating the other medians (ie national and school) too???

How much should I actually believe the stuff in MSAR 07-08???

MSAR is reporting the median for ACCEPTED students. That threw me off at first too. Keep in a mind, a school may have an average MCAT of 35 for accepted students, but not all those students enroll.. The average of the incoming class could be a 33. Silly huh? they should have the average of the incoming class instead. The 31Q you are speaking of is the median of all accepted students.

 

[TPROrgoTutor]

MSAR is accepted examinees. AAMC is all examinees.

 

[jstuds_66]

I'm not sure about this because I don't have the MSAR, but is it reporting the median of accepted students? Otherwise, I don't know what to tell you.

You're right in that MSAR only reports the accepted MCAT scores. Thanks for that. But still, it seems wrong that MSAR reports:

WS Q

when http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2005/mcatgpastatemat.htm reports:

WS P

and that's from matriculants, not just acceptees.

 

[alwaysaangel]

You're right in that MSAR only reports the accepted MCAT scores. Thanks for that. But still, it seems wrong that MSAR reports:

WS Q

when http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/2005/mcatgpastatemat.htm reports:

WS P

and that's from matriculants, not just acceptees.

It makes sense that the letter of matriculants would be slightly lower than that for acceptees - because some lower stat people may get accepted into a school they don't really want to go to. So they don't enroll and they try again for a better school next year.

 

[Ari Gold]

the msar is the most believable aspect of the entire process. shame on you.

 

[Doctor~Detroit]

It makes sense that the letter of matriculants would be slightly lower than that for acceptees - because some lower stat people may get accepted into a school they don't really want to go to. So they don't enroll and they try again for a better school next year.

moreover, the msar should doublecount (or triplecounts, etc.) applicants. so someone who gets a 45S 4.0 GPA might be included in the stats for all top the ten schools, helping inflate their numbers.

 

[alwaysaangel]

moreover, the msar should doublecount (or triplecounts, etc.) applicants. so someone who gets a 45S 4.0 GPA might be included in the stats for all top the ten schools, helping inflate their numbers.

Yeah that occurred to me to, but then I was hoping they would account for that in the overall numbers but maybe not.

 

[dr.z]

the msar is the most believable aspect of the entire process.

Yep!

 

[heeseop]

umm msar better be trustworthy because i kind of based my whole list of schools on it..