MCAT and GPA prediction of success in med school

[MrChance2]

---

Members do not see this ad.

http://medical-mastermind-community...ts-med-school-academics-better-than-uGPAs.pdf

I thought this was pretty interesting. From what I gather anything over a balanced score in the 24-27 range gives a low chance of academic difficulty in medical school and anything 30+ gives roughly the same chance of success in medical school in getting distinction or not having academic difficulty (95%), although the chance of academic difficulty decreases to virtually 0% for the 40+ MCAT crowd and the chance of distinction rises slightly.

MCAT is shown to be a fairly strong predictor with a .7 correlation to USMLE step 1. uGPA only has a .4 correlation. MCAT+uGPA combined is only a very slightly better predictor than MCAT alone (.72)

 

[MedPR]

Pretty old news.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

 

[Narmerguy]

Pretty old news.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

Still doesn't seem to have sunk in for most users yet.

 

[GlowInTheDark]

As someone who would've been/and probably was classified as "unlikely to succeed"...there is a lot to say for 'rising to the challenge'.

 

[AdrianVeidt]

Does anyone honestly think that 144 questions taken in 3 hours can accurately predict someone's ability to succeed in 4 years of school???

 

[Jamie561]

I do. The MCAT is designed with this goal in mind.

Sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk

 

[theherowedeserv]

Does anyone honestly think that 144 questions taken in 3 hours can accurately predict someone's ability to succeed in 4 years of school???

admissions committees seem to believe it lol

but i dont

 

[yellowfish]

Does anyone honestly think that 144 questions taken in 3 hours can accurately predict someone's ability to succeed in 4 years of school???

That's an extremely subjective question. There are objective answers in the link above.

 

[MedPR]

I do. The MCAT is designed with this goal in mind.

Sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk

Nevermind the fact that receiving a pretty thorough overhaul in 2015 might be an indication that the current setup is not working towards that goal.

 

[Spinach Dip]

Does anyone honestly think that 144 questions taken in 3 hours can accurately predict someone's ability to succeed in 4 years of school???

Not perfectly, but it is the best predictor of future success currently available.

 

[HughMyron]

MCAT scores...essentially replace the need for uGPAs in their impressive prediction of Step scores.

Now if only adcoms would get the picture. 😡

Does anyone honestly think that 144 questions taken in 3 hours can accurately predict someone's ability to succeed in 4 years of school???

Does anyone honestly think that a grade point mean, replete with all the problems of a statistical mean, and susceptible to school-specific variance, major-specific variance, professor-specific variance, etc can accurately predict someone's ability to succeed in 4 years of school???


Come at me brah. U mad or u mirin?

 

[Jamie561]

Nevermind the fact that receiving a pretty thorough overhaul in 2015 might be an indication that the current setup is not working towards that goal.

Well, just because it is being revised doesn't mean that the MCAT is not a predictor of medical school success. Everything can be improved upon.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[MedPR]

Well, just because it is being revised doesn't mean that the MCAT is not a predictor of medical school success. Everything can be improved upon.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I wasn't clear. Perhaps the mcat is designed to predict med school success. The fact that it is being changed so significantly indicates (to me at least) that in its current state it is not successful

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

 

[nysegop]

Does anyone honestly think that 144 questions taken in 3 hours can accurately predict someone's ability to succeed in 4 years of school???

Well said. Applies to the SAT too.

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

Does anyone honestly think that 144 questions taken in 3 hours can accurately predict someone's ability to succeed in 4 years of school???

It's a critical thinking exam that can possibly common all of that major subjects from the pre-med pre-reqs, and with the amount of questions they have it's enough to get an idea of what a student's general knowledge is (it's extremely unlikely that a person would have managed to only study exactly what was on their test and nothing more, or studied only what wasn't on their test). Furthermore, the MCAT is much like the USMLE (standardized test that covers a large breadth of scientific material), so it has a decent correlation to success on STEP 1.

Nevermind the fact that receiving a pretty thorough overhaul in 2015 might be an indication that the current setup is not working towards that goal.

Actually the changes are being made to reflect the new pre-reqs at most med schools starting in 2015 (psychology and biochem become pre-reqs, orgo 2 is no longer required). You'll notice that the MCAT is designed to be a test of pre-req knowledge and that each section on the MCAT matches a set of the standard pre-reqs (physics, gen chem, orgo, bio, and English).

Also notice that the current MCAT is actually a shortened version of the pre-CBT test which clocked in at suicide-inducing 7 hours long and 214 questions (77 for PS and BS, 60 for VR, not counting the two writing prompts), so obviously AAMC thought that even that many questions wasn't needed.

 

[MedPR]

It's a critical thinking exam that can possibly common all of that major subjects from the pre-med pre-reqs, and with the amount of questions they have it's enough to get an idea of what a student's general knowledge is (it's extremely unlikely that a person would have managed to only study exactly what was on their test and nothing more, or studied only what wasn't on their test). Furthermore, the MCAT is much like the USMLE (standardized test that covers a large breadth of scientific material), so it has a decent correlation to success on STEP 1.



Actually the changes are being made to reflect the new pre-reqs at most med schools starting in 2015 (psychology and biochem become pre-reqs, orgo 2 is no longer required). You'll notice that the MCAT is designed to be a test of pre-req knowledge and that each section on the MCAT matches a set of the standard pre-reqs (physics, gen chem, orgo, bio, and English).

Also notice that the current MCAT is actually a shortened version of the pre-CBT test which clocked in at suicide-inducing 7 hours long and 214 questions (77 for PS and BS, 60 for VR, not counting the two writing prompts), so obviously AAMC thought that even that many questions wasn't needed.

Where did you read that pre reqs are being changed?

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

This seems odd, previous studies on here showed much more meager estimates. I remember JAMA's study showing numbers around .4 regarding step 1 performance.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Well said. Applies to the SAT too.

Except the SAT has a .15 correlation to college success. It's almost a completely useless measure. The mcat is at least somewhat good at it.

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

Where did you read that pre reqs are being changed?

Sent from my SGH-T999 using SDN Mobile

Um...everywhere? 😕 I thought it was pretty common knowledge at this point. Most SOM's admissions sites state that their pre-reqs will be changing in 2015, and many undergrad pre-med offices have been warning students starting with the 2015 class that the pre-reqs for them will be different than they are now.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Um...everywhere? 😕 I thought it was pretty common knowledge at this point. Most SOM's admissions sites state that their pre-reqs will be changing in 2015, and many undergrad pre-med offices have been warning students starting with the 2015 class that the pre-reqs for them will be different than they are now.

They're adding Biochem to the requirements, that's hardly a changing of the requirements.

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

They're adding Biochem to the requirements, that's hardly a changing of the requirements.

They're also adding psychology and sociology requirements as well I believe. And I thought I remembered hearing something about statistics as well.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

They're also adding psychology and sociology requirements as well I believe. And I thought I remembered hearing something about statistics as well.

I thought a lot of schools informally required them anyway?

Also just out of curiosity, what value is this study when a correlation is .7, but .6 variance can be attributed to chance? Also their multiple regression seems odd. Maybe that's why the JAMA study's mcat to step 1 pass rate correlation was more modest?

 

[MedPR]

Um...everywhere? 😕 I thought it was pretty common knowledge at this point. Most SOM's admissions sites state that their pre-reqs will be changing in 2015, and many undergrad pre-med offices have been warning students starting with the 2015 class that the pre-reqs for them will be different than they are now.

Show me one school that has said they are changing pre-reqs in line with the new MCAT courses (besides biochem).

If it's "everywhere" it shouldn't be a problem for you to post some links.

 

[yellowfish]

Show me one school that has said they are changing pre-reqs in line with the new MCAT courses (besides biochem).

If it's "everywhere" it shouldn't be a problem for you to post some links.

http://hms.harvard.edu/departments/admissions/applying/requirements-admission#New Required Courses

Edit: Well, I don't think this is "in line" with the 2015 MCAT

 

[MedPR]

http://hms.harvard.edu/departments/admissions/applying/requirements-admission#New Required Courses

Other Recommendations

Courses and extracurricular experiences and activities that prepare candidates to understand human behavior, to appreciate societal structure and function, and to achieve cultural awareness provide valuable preparation for the study and practice medicine. Courses in literature, languages, the arts, humanities, and the social sciences (e.g., psychology, sociology, anthropology, and ethics) are encouraged. At least 16 hours should be completed in these areas. In addition, familiarity with computers is necessary. Honors courses and independent study or research are encouraged, because they permit a student to explore an area of knowledge in depth and provide a scholarly experience that will facilitate a lifelong habit of self-education.

Seems like the new MCAT stuff are merely recommended courses. I don't see any new requirements that are courses being tested by the 2015 MCAT.

 

[yellowfish]

Seems like the new MCAT stuff are merely recommended courses. I don't see any new requirements that are courses being tested by the 2015 MCAT.

Me neither. But coursework is being slightly modified in the same general direction of the new MCAT.

Here's another link: http://www.hpplc.indiana.edu/medicine/med-cw.shtml

IU recommends that premedical students take a sociology course and a psychology course.

From the JHU admissions Facebook, this is pretty telling:

"As you are aware, the MCAT will change in 2015 to a new format, the first change since 1991. The change will involve more social sciences, ethics, philosophy, etc. There have been questions about whether medical schools will be changing their prerequisites. I suspect some schools may change requirements, but those of you familiar with Hopkins and it's relatively new curriculum ("Genes to Society") know that in conjunction with the new curriculum we also changed our prerequisites (listed on our website). So while it is still somewhat early, I seriously doubt that we will change our prerequisites, particularly since the prerequisites are specifically to prepare for our curriculum, not the MCAT. This is likely true for all the other medical schools (it certainly was for my former medical school, which introduced a new curriculum approximately three years ago and had changed their prerequisites in anticipation of the new curriculum)."

tl;dr their prerequisites are not changing because they are geared towards preparation for their curriculum and not the MCAT

 

[MedPR]

Me neither. But coursework is being slightly modified in the same general direction of the new MCAT.

Here's another link: http://www.hpplc.indiana.edu/medicine/med-cw.shtml

IU recommends that premedical students take a sociology course and a psychology course.

From the JHU admissions Facebook, this is pretty telling:

"As you are aware, the MCAT will change in 2015 to a new format, the first change since 1991. The change will involve more social sciences, ethics, philosophy, etc. There have been questions about whether medical schools will be changing their prerequisites. I suspect some schools may change requirements, but those of you familiar with Hopkins and it's relatively new curriculum ("Genes to Society") know that in conjunction with the new curriculum we also changed our prerequisites (listed on our website). So while it is still somewhat early, I seriously doubt that we will change our prerequisites, particularly since the prerequisites are specifically to prepare for our curriculum, not the MCAT. This is likely true for all the other medical schools (it certainly was for my former medical school, which introduced a new curriculum approximately three years ago and had changed their prerequisites in anticipation of the new curriculum)."

tl;dr their prerequisites are not changing because they are geared towards preparation for their curriculum and not the MCAT

Agreed. My point was simply that there is not currently any evidence that come 2015 most medical schools will add psych, anthropology, healthcare ethics, etc to their list of pre-reqs just because the AAMC added them to the MCAT.

As someone who took many more ethics and social science courses than the average pre-med, I think it's good that they're becoming a "requirement" now.

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

Seems like the new MCAT stuff are merely recommended courses. I don't see any new requirements that are courses being tested by the 2015 MCAT.

Courses and extracurricular experiences and activities that prepare candidates to understand human behavior, to appreciate societal structure and function, and to achieve cultural awareness provide valuable preparation for the study and practice medicine. Courses in literature, languages, the arts, humanities, and the social sciences (e.g., psychology, sociology, anthropology, and ethics) are encouraged. At least 16 hours should be completed in these areas.

There you go.

 

[MedPR]

There you go.

They are recommended courses. Not requirements.

 

[Spinach Dip]

Seems like the new MCAT stuff are merely recommended courses. I don't see any new requirements that are courses being tested by the 2015 MCAT.

Hence why the 2015 overhaul is a misguided project. Granted, the current test is not perfect (VR!), but I feel that it is rather good at separating the wheat from the chaff, so to say.



GPA is far less precise. It rewards gunners who take all the easy professors or take simple classes for the sole purpose of padding their GPA. It also rewards those enrolled at easy universities, while hurting those that challenge themselves with difficult classes.

And what else could be used besides those 2?



In short, GPA can be manipulated. But the MCAT is standardized for all applicants.... Does that mean the MCAT is flawless? Should we just take everyone with a 30+ into med school and tell the others to come back when they can increase their scores? No. Not by a long shot. People can have bad luck on the MCAT (or good luck....) but it is by far more reliable than any other measure.

 

[MedPR]

Hence why the 2015 overhaul is a misguided project. Granted, the current test is not perfect (VR!), but I feel that it is rather good at separating the wheat from the chaff, so to say.



GPA is far less precise. It rewards gunners who take all the easy professors or take simple classes for the sole purpose of padding their GPA.

And what else could be used besides those 2?



In short, GPA can be manipulated. But the MCAT is standardized for all applicants.... Does that mean the MCAT is flawless? Should we just take everyone with a 30+ into med school and tell the others to come back when they can increase their scores? No. Not by a long shot. People can have bad luck on the MCAT (or good luck....) but it is by far more reliable than any other measure.

Considering the irrelevance of everything on the MCAT once medical school begins, I'm going to disagree with you and say that VR is the least imperfect part of the current MCAT. Critical reading and reading comprehension are important in the profession.

 

[OCDOCDOCD]

They are recommended courses. Not requirements.

Did you not see the bolded and underlined part that said 16 hours of those "recommended" courses is required? You get to pick and choose from the humanities and social sciences, but you still need 16 hours of some combination of them.

 

[MedPR]

Did you not see the bolded and underlined part that said 16 hours of those "recommended" courses is required? You get to pick and choose from the humanities and social sciences, but you still need 16 hours of some combination of them.

Fair enough. The 16 hours aren't "new" though. Most schools already have random "requirements" like these.

Current recommended courses

We encourage candidates to complete at least 16 hours in literature, languages, the arts, humanities, and the social sciences and become familiar with computers. We also recommend honors courses and independent study or research, as they offer in-depth exploration of an area of knowledge.

New recommended courses

Courses in literature, languages, the arts, humanities, and the social sciences (e.g., psychology, sociology, anthropology, and ethics) are encouraged. At least 16 hours should be completed in these areas.

 

[Spinach Dip]

Considering the irrelevance of everything on the MCAT once medical school begins, I'm going to disagree with you and say that VR is the least imperfect part of the current MCAT. Critical reading and reading comprehension are important in the profession.

I say bio is most important, especially in its current iteration which has a focus on reading experimental passages and being able to use the information in the passage to come to scientifically valid conclusions. Of course, the Bio section also expects you to be able to regurgitate some important lessons from your intro to bio classes, but that is unavoidable and even beneficial if they stay away from pointless minutiae. In short, I believe it is the best section for testing someone's abilities to reason critically, while simultaneously synthesizing what is in the passage with general knowledge of biologic systems.

The reason I detest the 2015 re-work is that they are going in the opposite direction. Focusing more on ethics and psychology, rather than hard sciences and synthesizing information presented.


But we can agree to disagree if you wish.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Hence why the 2015 overhaul is a misguided project. Granted, the current test is not perfect (VR!), but I feel that it is rather good at separating the wheat from the chaff, so to say.



GPA is far less precise. It rewards gunners who take all the easy professors or take simple classes for the sole purpose of padding their GPA. It also rewards those enrolled at easy universities, while hurting those that challenge themselves with difficult classes.

And what else could be used besides those 2?



In short, GPA can be manipulated. But the MCAT is standardized for all applicants.... Does that mean the MCAT is flawless? Should we just take everyone with a 30+ into med school and tell the others to come back when they can increase their scores? No. Not by a long shot. People can have bad luck on the MCAT (or good luck....) but it is by far more reliable than any other measure.

Yes, but it's certainly not an amazing measure either. It's moderate in its correlative power. But at least it's better than other standardized tests like the SAT.

 

[MedPR]

I say bio is most important, especially in its current iteration which has a focus on reading experimental passages and being able to use the information in the passage to come to scientifically valid conclusions. Of course, the Bio section also expects you to be able to regurgitate some important lessons from your intro to bio classes. In short, I believe it is the best section for testing someone's abilities to reason critically, while synthesizing what is in the passage with general knowledge of biologic systems.

The reason I detest the 2015 re-work is that they are going in the opposite direction. Focusing more on ethics and psychology, rather than hard sciences and synthesizing information presented.


But we can agree to disagree if you wish.

I would agree if the BS section was only biology. I'm not sure why the MCAT isn't more of a pre-test to med school. I suppose taking all the relevant courses would make it too difficult on non-science majors.

Edit: And by pre-test I mean test the basics of what you actually learn in the pre-clinical years.

 

[yellowfish]

I say bio is most important, especially in its current iteration which has a focus on reading experimental passages and being able to use the information in the passage to come to scientifically valid conclusions. Of course, the Bio section also expects you to be able to regurgitate some important lessons from your intro to bio classes. In short, I believe it is the best section for testing someone's abilities to reason critically, while synthesizing what is in the passage with general knowledge of biologic systems.

The reason I detest the 2015 re-work is that they are going in the opposite direction. Focusing more on ethics and psychology, rather than hard sciences and synthesizing information presented.


But we can agree to disagree if you wish.

I think the idea is not to take away from testing critical thinking and cognitive ability, but to expand the test to also encompass a measure of the humanistic side of medicine.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I say bio is most important, especially in its current iteration which has a focus on reading experimental passages and being able to use the information in the passage to come to scientifically valid conclusions. Of course, the Bio section also expects you to be able to regurgitate some important lessons from your intro to bio classes, but that is unavoidable and even beneficial if they stay away from pointless minutiae. In short, I believe it is the best section for testing someone's abilities to reason critically, while synthesizing what is in the passage with general knowledge of biologic systems.

The reason I detest the 2015 re-work is that they are going in the opposite direction. Focusing more on ethics and psychology, rather than hard sciences and synthesizing information presented.


But we can agree to disagree if you wish.

Bio is the most predictive of anything.

Actually psychology and philosophy requires an enormous amount of synthesizing information presenting. If anything these passages will probably be extremely based in research methodology, statistics, and logic. And trust me it'll challenge your wits.

 

[MedPR]

Bio is the most predictive of anything.

Actually psychology and philosophy requires an enormous amount of synthesizing information presenting. If anything these passages will probably be extremely based in research methodology, statistics, and logic. And trust me it'll challenge your wits.

I only took intro to psych, and I found that it was mainly just memorizing terms. I'll agree regarding philosophy though. I double majored in bio and philosophy and while my main focus was bioethics/healthcare ethics, there is a lot of abstract thinking in "ordinary" philosophy as well.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I only took intro to psych, and I found that it was mainly just memorizing terms. I'll agree regarding philosophy though. I double majored in bio and philosophy and while my main focus was bioethics/healthcare ethics, there is a lot of abstract thinking in "ordinary" philosophy as well.

Really? I felt like it was more about learning broad concepts and the major famous studies within psychology. But regardless, upper level psych is all about learning and applying theories and critically analyzing things.
But yah, I'd actually like to see half of premeds deal with highly complex philosophy or trying to grasp logic that's not found within a problem set or memorization.

 

[GadRads]

MCAT = critical thinking. Medical school = memorization.

You can't memorize your way to even a 28 on the MCAT, but you can memorize your way to even honor medical school exams.

I don't know much about USMLE, but you could probably memorize your way to a good score on Step I as well.

 

[MrPriapism]

Considering the irrelevance of everything on the MCAT once medical school begins, I'm going to disagree with you and say that VR is the least imperfect part of the current MCAT. Critical reading and reading comprehension are important in the profession.

I'm going to disagree with your disagreement. Someone mentioned the JAMA article earlier. The study showed just how little correlation there is between the MCAT and Step 1 performance. And of all the sections, VR was the worst predictor. BS, however, had the strongest correlation to Step 1 performance (still sh**** though). ADCOMs know this and give more weight to the BS section (although they might not tell you that).

The administration and faculty at my school have done several internal studies to try and find good predictors of Step 1 performance. They looked at EVERYTHING that's involved in the admissions process. And I mean everything. If you had 3 bowel movements a day instead of 1, it was considered. You know what they found? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. So they expanded the scope of the review. It turned out that the best predictor of board scores was........... block grades.

 

[MedPR]

Really? I felt like it was more about learning broad concepts and the major famous studies within psychology. But regardless, upper level psych is all about learning and applying theories and critically analyzing things.
But yah, I'd actually like to see half of premeds deal with highly complex philosophy or trying to grasp logic that's not found within a problem set or memorization.

It was probably the way our tests were setup. Probably also because I didn't like psych at all.

 

[MedPR]

MCAT = critical thinking. Medical school = memorization.

You can't memorize your way to even a 28 on the MCAT, but you can memorize your way to even honor medical school exams.

I don't know much about USMLE, but you could probably memorize your way to a good score on Step I as well.

If a pre-med could memorize as much info for the MCAT as med students can for Step 1 I'm fairly confident that pre-med could get a 28.

 

[MedPR]

I'm going to disagree with your disagreement. Someone mentioned the JAMA article earlier. The study showed just how little correlation there is between the MCAT and Step 1 performance. And of all the sections, VR was the worst predictor. BS, however, had the strongest correlation to Step 1 performance (still sh**** though). ADCOMs know this and give more weight to the BS section (although they might not tell you that).

The administration and faculty at my school have done several internal studies to try and find good predictors of Step 1 performance. They looked at EVERYTHING that's involved in the admissions process. And I mean everything. If you had 3 bowel movements a day instead of 1, it was considered. You know what they found? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. So they expanded the scope of the review. It turned out that the best predictor of board scores was........... block grades.

Yea that's true. I was thinking more along the lines of "if any one section was kept around without being improved which would it be?". I would pick VR because I don't think it can be improved much, while I do think that BS could be made a lot more relevant and therefore an even better predictor than it is now.

 

[Pattycake25]

I'd like to know if that comparison still holds for schools like EVMS, where you are taking a full slate of courses for entire semesters (as opposed to 1 or 2 at a time for a month or so apiece). Time management is critical to success here.

http://medical-mastermind-community...ts-med-school-academics-better-than-uGPAs.pdf

I thought this was pretty interesting. From what I gather anything over a balanced score in the 24-27 range gives a low chance of academic difficulty in medical school and anything 30+ gives roughly the same chance of success in medical school in getting distinction or not having academic difficulty (95%), although the chance of academic difficulty decreases to virtually 0% for the 40+ MCAT crowd and the chance of distinction rises slightly.

MCAT is shown to be a fairly strong predictor with a .7 correlation to USMLE step 1. uGPA only has a .4 correlation. MCAT+uGPA combined is only a very slightly better predictor than MCAT alone (.72)

Anyway my point being...cmon adcoms, show me some more love for my 33 and 3.4 😀

 

[GadRads]

If a pre-med could memorize as much info for the MCAT as med students can for Step 1 I'm fairly confident that pre-med could get a 28.

You can score a 23 on the MCAT and score >225 on Step I. I have seen it happen. I know someone who scored a 236 after scoring 24 on the MCAT.

I believe a doctor with good critical thinking skills is always better, but I honestly doubt this standard is all that important at the medical school level. So far, my medical school exams have mostly been a measure of how well you memorized random details. You can have a poor understanding of the material and still do well, in so far as you memorize as much as you can.

 

[MedPR]

I'd like to know if that comparison still holds for schools like EVMS, where you are taking a full slate of courses for entire semesters (as opposed to 1 or 2 at a time for a month or so apiece). Time management is critical to success here.

I'm not sure I follow. Why would time management be more critical in one curriculum than the other? I'd imagine the volume of information is the same for both curricula.. The only difference is how that volume is organized.

 

[MedPR]

You can score a 23 on the MCAT and score >225 on Step I. I have seen it happen. I know someone who scored a 236 after scoring 24 on the MCAT.

I believe a doctor with good critical thinking skills is always better, but I honestly doubt this standard is all that important at the medical school level. So far, my medical school exams have mostly been a measure of how well you memorized random details. You can have a poor understanding of the material and still do well, in so far as you memorize as much as you can.

I should rephrase. If a pre-med took MCAT memorization as seriously as a medical student takes Step 1 memorization, a 28 could be had.

 

[IslandStyle808]

Considering the irrelevance of everything on the MCAT once medical school begins, I'm going to disagree with you and say that VR is the least imperfect part of the current MCAT. Critical reading and reading comprehension are important in the profession.

I'm going to disagree with you on the VR being the least imperfect. As it stands, the VR section is the least predictive of success in medical school (not just USMLE and COMLEX success).

http://internationalgme.org/Resources/Pubs/Donnon%20et%20al%20(2007)%20Acad%20Med.pdf

http://www.jaoa.org/content/109/11/592.full.pdf

@OP, the studies were done before 2009 so things may have changed. The first link still shows that there is only a .4 correlation with predictive success in medical school and .6 correlation with predictive success in the USMLE.