MCAT a good predictor of Med school success?

[lildave2586]

So I'm starting med school in the fall, and I was wondering if my low MCAT score says anything about my ability to perform well. I didn't have any problems in undergrad; I took all the hard classes I could to help me prepare for Med school (Biochem II, Histology, ect.). I had real problems with the MCAT, the best I could muster was a PS:10 V:8 BS:10. I feel like I'm a pretty sharp individual and can handle the material, but my low MCAT still haunts me. I almost want to take the freaking test again because it got the best of me. Does anyone have any opinions on this matter? Am I going to struggle with Step 1 because I couldn't master the MCAT?

Andrew

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dd128]

You're in, adcoms don't generally let in a whole lot of people they think can't cut it. Just let it go, or you're going to be dwelling on it for the next two years and completely psyche yourself out when step 1 comes. Just kick *** from here on out and never look back at that horrible horrible test...I know I sure won't 🙂

haha, anyone notice "bad" words are now *** out.

 

[OncoCaP]

Do not worry about things you have no control over. There will be plenty of things you can do something about. The MCAT is done and over with. Once you start school, focus on doing well there.

 

[Slide]

To put it short, no. All the MCAT really predicts is that you know how to prep/study for national standardized tests. It's no guarantee you'll survive M1 year.

 

[njbmd]

So I'm starting med school in the fall, and I was wondering if my low MCAT score says anything about my ability to perform well. I didn't have any problems in undergrad; I took all the hard classes I could to help me prepare for Med school (Biochem II, Histology, ect.). I had real problems with the MCAT, the best I could muster was a PS:10 V:8 BS:10. I feel like I'm a pretty sharp individual and can handle the material, but my low MCAT still haunts me. I almost want to take the freaking test again because it got the best of me. Does anyone have any opinions on this matter? Am I going to struggle with Step 1 because I couldn't master the MCAT?

Andrew

If someone here tells you that you have no chance of passing USMLE Step I with your MCAT score, are you going to withdraw from medical school? I sure hope not.

Seriously, if you really need to worry about something then worry about the following:

• How you are going to pay for moving expenses and find a good place to live.
• How you are going to learn all of the material that you will be expected to master.
• How you are going to pass all of your first and second year coursework.

After than, if you still need something else to worry about, you can start worrying about your Step I scores.

Bottom line: Worrying about anything just adds to your stress and doesn't change anything. You are either going to pass Step I or fail it and no amount or worrying will change that so focus your concerns on the tasks at hand.

Your MCAT score was good enough to get you into medical school and now it is up to you to do your best to stay there and thrive. Unless you are planning on retaking the MCAT(please don't do this), your MCAT scores are history (soon to ancient history) and mean nothing at this point and indicate nothing at this point. You are dead even with every other member of your class on orientation day.

Remember MCAT stands for Medical College Admissions Test and not Predictor of Step I Score Test.

 

[Hurricane95]

Not really.

I completely destroyed the mcat and am getting average grades in school. I know people who scored lower than I did and are doing better in classes now than I am. Part of the issue is also that I've been kind of lazy and unwilling to put in the massive effort that it would take me to be AOA and top 10 in my class. It's kind of diminishing returns...to do better, I'd probably have to put in twice the study time and I'm not willing to give up my life outside of school to study 24/7. I know that where I am now, I can get the residency I want anyway so it's not worth killing myself over. I am however studying til my eyes bleed for the step 1. That's important, as is rocking on my rotations starting in June. That's when stuff gets really serious.

OP, you'll do fine. You were accepted for a reason. Just study hard and I'm sure you'll have no trouble. Congrats on the acceptance and good luck!! 👍

 

[Pinkertinkle]

MCAT is a decent predictor of USMLE success

 

[DrDre311]

MCAT is a decent predictor of USMLE success

Haven't seen any data on this but in my case it was not. I had a relatively mediocre MCAT score which was not at all predictive of my scores on Steps I/II. Don't feel trapped by your MCAT score. That test sucked and was dumb.

I also thought the MCAT would be like the SAT and sort of winged it--not the case at all.

 

[ZagDoc]

MCAT is a decent predictor of USMLE success

The title of the study is "Validity of the Medical College Admission Test for Predicting Medical School Performance"

Link: http://www.academicmedicine.org/pt/re/acmed/abstract.00001888-200510000-00010.htm;jsessionid=LxLCb7hTbzHhs1q1KJXSP6JCWQNyZd78VQBww1vG2kvykT3dQpYL!31132260!181195628!8091!-1

The key to these studies is that is demonstrates trends, and it doesn't write laws. On a whole, people who do well on the MCAT do well on Step 1. Does that mean you cannot do well on Step 1 if you didn't do well on the MCAT? Of course not. Does it mean people with a 37 MCAT never bomb the USMLE? Of course not.

 

[cfdavid]

I'm sure there are exceptions, but medical school is about putting in the time. The people that do well (at least in the 1st 2 years) are the ones that work hard. I really don't know too many exceptions, but I'm sure there are some.

 

[cleothecat]

Best predictor of success in Med school is your Bio score.

10 is fine. Enjoy, do not worry.

 

[deucerp]

So I'm starting med school in the fall, and I was wondering if my low MCAT score says anything about my ability to perform well. I didn't have any problems in undergrad; I took all the hard classes I could to help me prepare for Med school (Biochem II, Histology, ect.). I had real problems with the MCAT, the best I could muster was a PS:10 V:8 BS:10. I feel like I'm a pretty sharp individual and can handle the material, but my low MCAT still haunts me. I almost want to take the freaking test again because it got the best of me. Does anyone have any opinions on this matter? Am I going to struggle with Step 1 because I couldn't master the MCAT?

Andrew

I had your same MCAT score. I ended up with good boards and AOA so take it for what you will. Just work hard...MCAT scores are forgotten by week 2 of first year.

 

[DrDre311]

I had your same MCAT score. I ended up with good boards and AOA so take it for what you will. Just work hard...MCAT scores are forgotten by week 2 of first year.

No one gives a crap about the MCAT once you get in and you might get stuffed in a locker if you bring it up. After all, med school is exactly like middle school.

And similarly, once you match, no ones gives a crap about your Step scores. Your test scores never mean as much to the people evaluating you as you think they do.

And as far as the study referenced above goes, big surprise that the AAMC came out with a study supporting a test you pay them to take. It is probably a better predictor of Step success (than undergrad GPA) because they're both uniform, standardized tests written by arms of the similar/associated organizations--so with the same amount of prep for both tests, your scores should be similar. Also, that study is from the early 90's, and I am sure that the content of both the MCAT and Steps I/II/III has evolved in the last 16 years. Additionally, it is a fact that Step I scores, especially those at the higher end of the spectrum, have been increasing steadily in recent years--to the point where some members of the AAMC have suggested replacing the Steps (with another test that would somehow be different)--how do I know that MCAT scores retain the same predictive value they had in 1993?

Having finished med school, I am aware that statistical trends are slightly less than written laws of prophecy. However, I've heard a lot more stories like "I had ~30 on the MCAT and destroyed the boards" than the other way around. Maybe it's because people have to actually learn to study in med school or they care more about the Steps so the prep is better, or learning methods get refined, I don't know.

But one thing is for sure. The MCAT is fat and dumb and you should forget about it the second you are accepted to medical school. Man, I hated that damn test...

 

[Pinkertinkle]

Haven't seen any data on this but in my case it was not. I had a relatively mediocre MCAT score which was not at all predictive of my scores on Steps I/II. Don't feel trapped by your MCAT score. That test sucked and was dumb.

I also thought the MCAT would be like the SAT and sort of winged it--not the case at all.

The data can easily be found on pubmed. Maybe you shouldn't have blown off the MCAT.

 

[Law2Doc]

The key to these studies is that is demonstrates trends,

Agreed. A trend is NOT a decent predictor. That is a misunderstanding of statistics. It just means that of the 15,000 or so med students that take the test, a statistically significant number will show improvement. But statistically significant still may be a small percentage. Meaning for most people out there it will not be a predictor at all, but for some percentage the trend exists. Assuming the study is a good one.

Big problems of relying on this kind of study though are that folks take the MCAT a good two to three years before the Step, so a lot could happen in that interval that could be responsible for the data. Additionally, the studies I have seen were done on students at a relatively small percentage of med schools out there, and since that data (in 1993, well over a decade ago), the percentage of women, nontrads, non-sci majors and minorities has all increased rather dramatically, and quite a few new med schools have appeared, so it's not even clear that data can be extrapolated to today's med school composition. Heck, both the MCAT and Step have undergone major changes since that time so we aren't even talking about the same tests that have been studied. In med school they teach you to read studies critically, and not buy into the premise in the title unless the data is solid and reproducible. This is a good example of data that, even if you agree arguendo that it was valid for 1993, is pretty sketchy if you rely on it today.

 

[DrDre311]

The data can easily be found on pubmed. Maybe you shouldn't have blown off the MCAT.

I didn't care enough to do that. Too much effort for that piece of crap.

And you are correct--I shouldn't have blown off the MCAT, that was not smart. But somehow--against all odds--I managed to get into med school anyway. I subsequently fell out of bed and matched into integrated plastics.

So in the contest of me vs. the MCAT, I win.

Agreed. A trend is NOT a decent predictor. That is a misunderstanding of statistics. It just means that of the 15,000 or so med students that take the test, a statistically significant number will show improvement. But statistically significant still may be a small percentage. Meaning for most people out there it will not be a predictor at all, but for some percentage the trend exists. Assuming the study is a good one.

Big problems of relying on this kind of study though are that folks take the MCAT a good two to three years before the Step, so a lot could happen in that interval that could be responsible for the data. Additionally, the studies I have seen were done on students at a relatively small percentage of med schools out there, and since that data (in 1993, well over a decade ago), the percentage of women, nontrads, non-sci majors and minorities has all increased rather dramatically, and quite a few new med schools have appeared, so it's not even clear that data can be extrapolated to today's med school composition. Heck, both the MCAT and Step have undergone major changes since that time so we aren't even talking about the same tests that have been studied. In med school they teach you to read studies critically, and not buy into the premise in the title unless the data is solid and reproducible. This is a good example of data that, even if you agree arguendo that it was valid for 1993, is pretty sketchy if you rely on it today.

What Law said.

 

[DoctaJay]

Med school is quite different from the MCAT. I'm not the greatest standardized test taker ), and I just took my mock boards. For me, the mock boards were way better than the MCAT because it was more about knowledge and less about strategy (or so I felt). Also, you become a much more efficient studier in medical school so you will probably do better on tests anyway. Trust me, don't pigeon hole yourself into being a low Step 1 scorer. If you put in the work, chances are it will work out. Its like starting college...you really start with a clean slate and you can be the type of medical student that you want to be.

 

[DwyaneWade]

I didn't care enough to do that. Too much effort for that piece of crap.

And you are correct--I shouldn't have blown off the MCAT, that was not smart. But somehow--against all odds--I managed to get into med school anyway. I subsequently fell out of bed and matched into integrated plastics.

So in the contest of me vs. the MCAT, I win.

Oh snap!
(Congrats!)


To the OP: It doesn't matter and I don't think I know any one of my classmates MCAT scores except for a handful who just told me the first day for no good reason.

 

[AmoryBlaine]

MCAT = aptitude test
USMLE = knowlege test

I think you would be hard pressed to find people who did really well on the MCAT and then genuinely struggled in med school. You will, however, find alot of people kicking the crap out of med schoo who were in the 27-28 range.

There are two guys in my class that are pretty much superstars (both were AOA and both matched at A++ programs). Somehow it came up in convo that they got 27 and 28 respectively on the MCAT. Blew my mind since both of these dudes seem well above average at anything they try.

 

[kdburton]

So I'm starting med school in the fall, and I was wondering if my low MCAT score says anything about my ability to perform well. I didn't have any problems in undergrad; I took all the hard classes I could to help me prepare for Med school (Biochem II, Histology, ect.). I had real problems with the MCAT, the best I could muster was a PS:10 V:8 BS:10. I feel like I'm a pretty sharp individual and can handle the material, but my low MCAT still haunts me. I almost want to take the freaking test again because it got the best of me. Does anyone have any opinions on this matter? Am I going to struggle with Step 1 because I couldn't master the MCAT?

Andrew

One of my classmates got a 26 on the MCAT and she scores 85% on pretty much every test (I think thats probably above average at my school). So her below average MCAT was obv not a predictor of her success in medical school if you consider it a success I guess. If you don't? I know someone else who also got a 26 on the MCAT then went on to get honors (90+%) in every class for the first two years, scored over 260 on Step 1 and has only gotten less than honors in one clinical rotation (because of a difference of less than 1% on a shelf exam). This person studies significantly less than I do and I don't get those grades. This person took the MCAT two times and the 26 didn't improve. Those are two cases where MCAT scores don't correlate much in my opinion.

Personally I thought the MCAT was a lot more about understanding/ synthesizing information than memorizing while the first two years of med school is a lot more about memorizing than it is about understanding/ synthesizing (the material is easy)

 

[indo]

28 is fine. The only time anyone even cares about the mcat after you're in med school is when somebody mentions that someone got some silly score in the 40s.

BTW, you're going to struggle with step one because it is what it is.

 

[muscles]

NO

IT DOES NOT. I had the same score; ended up graduating AOA, going into a competitive residency. I cannot emphasize enough how the MCAT does NOT predict medical school success. And, you will not necessarily struggle on step I; perhaps you're not a good standardized test taker - I'm not a good one, but I busted my hump x 5 weeks to prepare for step I and did fine. Be confident buddy - you can do it!

 

[Pinkertinkle]

I didn't care enough to do that. Too much effort for that piece of crap.

And you are correct--I shouldn't have blown off the MCAT, that was not smart. But somehow--against all odds--I managed to get into med school anyway. I subsequently fell out of bed and matched into integrated plastics.

So in the contest of me vs. the MCAT, I win.

What Law said.

Sounds like you got things together in med school. I'm glad to hear that.

 

[Blesbok]

MCAT is a decent predictor of USMLE success

i beg to differ.

 

[DrDre311]

Sounds like you got things together in med school. I'm glad to hear that.

Nah...

The MCAT is just dumb.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

i beg to differ.

Then show me some data besides more anecdotes.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

Nah...

The MCAT is just dumb.

Is Step I dumb too?

 

[Doublecortin]

No one gives a crap about the MCAT once you get in and you might get stuffed in a locker if you bring it up. After all, med school is exactly like middle school.

And similarly, once you match, no ones gives a crap about your Step scores. Your test scores never mean as much to the people evaluating you as you think they do.

And as far as the study referenced above goes, big surprise that the AAMC came out with a study supporting a test you pay them to take. It is probably a better predictor of Step success (than undergrad GPA) because they're both uniform, standardized tests written by arms of the similar/associated organizations--so with the same amount of prep for both tests, your scores should be similar. Also, that study is from the early 90's, and I am sure that the content of both the MCAT and Steps I/II/III has evolved in the last 16 years. Additionally, it is a fact that Step I scores, especially those at the higher end of the spectrum, have been increasing steadily in recent years--to the point where some members of the AAMC have suggested replacing the Steps (with another test that would somehow be different)--how do I know that MCAT scores retain the same predictive value they had in 1993?

Having finished med school, I am aware that statistical trends are slightly less than written laws of prophecy. However, I've heard a lot more stories like "I had ~30 on the MCAT and destroyed the boards" than the other way around. Maybe it's because people have to actually learn to study in med school or they care more about the Steps so the prep is better, or learning methods get refined, I don't know.

But one thing is for sure. The MCAT is fat and dumb and you should forget about it the second you are accepted to medical school. Man, I hated that damn test...

yes, not many people realize that, that study that everyone quotes was done by the same organization who wants everyone to believe that MCAT is a great predictor of med school success

 

[Sartre79]

There is a guy in my class who got a 37 on the MCAT and will be repeating first year. He just didn't do the work b/c he had never had to study before. Just do the work and you will be OK. It is not a Med Schools goal to flunk students...they invest time/money in you, blah, blah, blah. Study hard, adjust, and you will be fine.

 

[DrDre311]

Is Step I dumb too?

Yes.

Most residents you talk to will be happy to share horror stories about people (former classmates, students, co-residents, interviewees, etc.) who make 270 on the boards but can't relate to patients or other members of the healthcare team. This is not to say that people that do well on the boards will all end up in rads or path because they can't talk to real people--that assumption is just as false as assuming that Step I predicts how good a doctor you'll be.

The truth of the matter is that patients don't come with multiple choice answers in their pockets, and the ability to take standardized tests does not predict good clinical decision-making, diagnostic, or technical skills. Also, you can do great on a test and be a total prick in real life, which does not facilitate good patient care either.

The MCAT, Step I, Step II CS, Step II CK, Step III, COMLEX--all dumb.

Med students get so hung up on these tests, and there's so much more to your med school/residency application/career than these numbers. I totally did not realize this until after I went through the Match and saw things from the other side.

The results of these tests are much more important to people that do well (and feel a need to inflate themselves with a number) than they are to anyone else, including residency program PD's who evaluate your app and decide whether you'll have a job after med school.

 

[AmoryBlaine]

Then show me some data besides more anecdotes.

Dude, on SDN anecdotes are data.

 

[DoctaJay]

Lol, quite true

 

[chr123]

You got in with a 28. So someone else got in with a 38. To me that 38 seems like a lot of wasted effort.

 

[werd]

i think i once saw data that gpa is a better predictor of med school success than mcat score. mcat score correlates weakly but positively with step 1 score (it's something like plus/minus 19 pts with 70% confidence). i've read that the best indicator of performance as an intern is step 2 score (vs. step 1 or grades).
all these data are somewhere on pubmed... the available data for this stuff is very limited, but it's probably more helpful than to just stab at it or try to reason through what the relationships should be. hope this is helpful.

 

[DrDre311]

i think i once saw data that gpa is a better predictor of med school success than mcat score. mcat score correlates weakly but positively with step 1 score (it's something like plus/minus 19 pts with 70% confidence). i've read that the best indicator of performance as an intern is step 2 score (vs. step 1 or grades).
all these data are somewhere on pubmed... the available data for this stuff is very limited, but it's probably more helpful than to just stab at it or try to reason through what the relationships should be. hope this is helpful.

I'd like to see the AAMC (or better yet, an independent organization) publish a new study on the correlation of MCAT score and undergraduate GPA with: med school GPA, Step I/II/III scores, and possibly Match success/resident performance on inservice exams.

 

[DrZeke]

Yes.

Most residents you talk to will be happy to share horror stories about people (former classmates, students, co-residents, interviewees, etc.) who make 270 on the boards but can't relate to patients or other members of the healthcare team. This is not to say that people that do well on the boards will all end up in rads or path because they can't talk to real people--that assumption is just as false as assuming that Step I predicts how good a doctor you'll be.

The truth of the matter is that patients don't come with multiple choice answers in their pockets, and the ability to take standardized tests does not predict good clinical decision-making, diagnostic, or technical skills. Also, you can do great on a test and be a total prick in real life, which does not facilitate good patient care either.

The MCAT, Step I, Step II CS, Step II CK, Step III, COMLEX--all dumb.

Med students get so hung up on these tests, and there's so much more to your med school/residency application/career than these numbers. I totally did not realize this until after I went through the Match and saw things from the other side.

The results of these tests are much more important to people that do well (and feel a need to inflate themselves with a number) than they are to anyone else, including residency program PD's who evaluate your app and decide whether you'll have a job after med school.

I also want to add that I've been bumping into a lot of FMGs recently who are studying for the boards and here's something to keep in mind. Some of them are scoring 240+, but they have also been studying upwards of 3 months, because they have an extra semester off to study for the boards. Since the boards is a knowledge based test, some of the people scoring really high might not score as high if they only have the traditional 4-6 weeks that many people in the US have for study time....

So, it just goes to show that there are a lot of circumstances surrounding the boards and the different stories you hear.

 

[parto123]

The MCAT may not be such a strong predictor of med school grades or step 1, but its by far the best predictor there is. better than even undergrad gpa.
http://www.aamc.org/newsroom/reporter/march06/mcat.htm

Also, unlike the GRE or LSAT, the MCAT really isn’t an aptitude test (aside from the verbal section).

 

[Doublecortin]

I also want to add that I've been bumping into a lot of FMGs recently who are studying for the boards and here's something to keep in mind. Some of them are scoring 240+, but they have also been studying upwards of 3 months, because they have an extra semester off to study for the boards. Since the boards is a knowledge based test, some of the people scoring really high might not score as high if they only have the traditional 4-6 weeks that many people in the US have for study time....

So, it just goes to show that there are a lot of circumstances surrounding the boards and the different stories you hear.

i thought the boards also involve a lot of problem solving and synthesizing knowledge, like MCAT, or is it a lot more knowledge based than MCAT? 😕

 

[Doublecortin]

The MCAT may not be such a strong predictor of med school grades or step 1, but its by far the best predictor there is. better than even undergrad gpa.
http://www.aamc.org/newsroom/reporter/march06/mcat.htm

Also, unlike the GRE or LSAT, the MCAT really isn't an aptitude test (aside from the verbal section).

" . . . there is other research evidence that high scores on the writing sample indicate a high level of future clinical competence."


" . . . the writing sample was a good predictor of performance in the third year of medical school"

Please tell me this is complete bullcrap!!!

Also, please keep in mind that this research was done by AAMC, who administers the test and in whose best interest it is to show that the test is worth something. I don't believe any studies done by AAMC on the predictive value of MCAT because of egregious conflict of interset

 

[Doublecortin]

"This does give support for continuing to use the MCAT for selecting who is going to do well in the basic science classes and beyond," said Ellen Julian, Ph.D., associate vice president of the AAMCSection for Applicant Assessment Services and author of the report "Validity of the Medical College Admission Test for Predicting Medical School Performance".

 

[werd]

so it looks like that's right... mcat is actually a better predictor of step scores and grades than gpa. link below.
i think the mcat is both an aptitude test and a knowledge test... if you have the knowledge, it becomes a critical thinking and aptitude test, but if you don't have the requisite knowledge for (PS and bio) sections, it doesn't matter how clever you are. in this way, it tests both critical thinking and the ability to retain large volumes of knowledge. having one or the other won't produce a good sccore. i, personally, would expect it to be a valid test for this reason. data back the mcat up so it probably won't go anywhere... but hey - at least it's not 8 hours long anymore 🙂.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16186610?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=5&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

 

[DrDre311]

so it looks like that's right... mcat is actually a better predictor of step scores and grades than gpa. link below.
i think the mcat is both an aptitude test and a knowledge test... if you have the knowledge, it becomes a critical thinking and aptitude test, but if you don't have the requisite knowledge for (PS and bio) sections, it doesn't matter how clever you are. in this way, it tests both critical thinking and the ability to retain large volumes of knowledge. having one or the other won't produce a good sccore. i, personally, would expect it to be a valid test for this reason. data back the mcat up so it probably won't go anywhere... but hey - at least it's not 8 hours long anymore 🙂.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16186610?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=5&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

I don't care what the AAMC says about the MCAT, it's still dumb. Nobody cares about your score once you get in. It's just a number and once you get into med school it doesn't set your future in stone.

 

[lildave2586]

so it looks like that's right... mcat is actually a better predictor of step scores and grades than gpa. link below.
i think the mcat is both an aptitude test and a knowledge test... if you have the knowledge, it becomes a critical thinking and aptitude test, but if you don't have the requisite knowledge for (PS and bio) sections, it doesn't matter how clever you are. in this way, it tests both critical thinking and the ability to retain large volumes of knowledge. having one or the other won't produce a good sccore. i, personally, would expect it to be a valid test for this reason. data back the mcat up so it probably won't go anywhere... but hey - at least it's not 8 hours long anymore 🙂.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16186610?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=5&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed

I think I would have prefered the 8 hour test with a larger sample size. When I took the test, I had three immunology passages and I knew NO immuno whatsoever. I only had 7 organic questions, and that was my strongest subject. Man I was pissed.

 

[DrZeke]

i thought the boards also involve a lot of problem solving and synthesizing knowledge, like MCAT, or is it a lot more knowledge based than MCAT? 😕

Much more info on the boards there there is on the MCAT, and of course it's more knowledge based. Yes it involves synthesis of concepts, but there are NO PASSAGES on the boards. Everything comes from outside knowledge.

 

[roja]

this has actually been looked at. (I used to have the citations but am not sure where they are buried).

There is little correlation between hiegth of MCAT and performance in medical school (class standing, aoa, gpa) OVER about 24. So, if you got over a 24 there is no correlation that exists between these performance measures and your MCAT.

 

[AmoryBlaine]

I don't care what the AAMC says about the MCAT, it's still dumb. Nobody cares about your score once you get in. It's just a number and once you get into med school it doesn't set your future in stone.

The problem with these threads is that they turn into sounding boards for people with relatively low MCATs to brag about how well they are doing in medical school. That's fine and dandy but the MCAT is worth something.

Pre-med/Med school is all about performing to the task set in front of you. Does getting an A in Orgo lab predict success in medical school? Probably not very strongly but AdComs still like to see it. Does rocking your biochem class in med school mean that you'll be a good resident? No, but a trend of high performance on multiple challenges looks good when you are applying to anything - med school or otherwise.

 

[dd128]

I'm not very certain one way or another, but it just seems like the mcat is just a simple snapshot in terms of tested concepts (more so with the CBT), and performance on a given day. Someone who takes the test and gets a relatively uncompetitive score (27-29) does not have a good chance to succeed in med school, but then what if they retake and make mid to high 30's? Are they all of a sudden magically equipped to handle a course load better?

 

[OrnotMajestic]

One of my classmates scored lower than you on the MCAT and got a 260+ on Step 1. Meanwhile, I have several classmates with MCAT scores up near 40, and they are currently middle of the class. It really doesn't mean much.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

One of my classmates scored lower than you on the MCAT and got a 260+ on Step 1. Meanwhile, I have several classmates with MCAT scores up near 40, and they are currently middle of the class. It really doesn't mean much.

I know some people who got around 40 on the MCAT and 260+ on step I, prove much to you?

 

[DrZeke]

this thread is officially stupid. I'm sure everyone has several personal examples to support their arguments. This seems pointless.