MCAT correlate with class rank and specialty match?

[Scrub MD]

Well does it? I know there are always cases where Joe Schmoe (21 MCAT) dominates med school and matches Derm. Does this generally correlate though?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[housemd]

Well does it? I know there are always cases where Joe Schmoe (21 MCAT) dominates med school and matches Derm. Does this generally correlate though?

Another thought. If a person didn't have preference whether DO/MD and had a 31 MCAT, would they be better going DO (for the DO match if they wanted Derm, Ortho, etc)? Thinking they would be more likely to be at the Top of the DO pool as opposed to middle of the pack MD.

please tell me youre not serious

 

[Scrub MD]

please tell me youre not serious

Sorry slow day around here. Just seeing if anyone is awake.

 

[DrBowtie]

In general people who are good at standardized tests are good at all of them so Good MCAT=Good Step 1. Thats the only conclusion that could be drawn.

 

[SticknRudder]

Our dean gave a presentation during orientation about this. Over a five year period, he tracked the performance of the students on step 1, step 2 and compared them to GPA and MCAT. His study showed very little correlation. I don't have his presentation or its numbers in front of me, but predictability for board scores based on both GPA and MCAT was somewhere around 20%. What his study did find was that for GPA's under 3.2 and MCAT below 23, there were signifacnt problems in passing classes and boards.

In general people who are good at standardized tests are good at all of them so Good MCAT=Good Step 1. Thats the only conclusion that could be drawn.

 

[Law2Doc]

What his study did find was that for GPA's under 3.2 and MCAT below 23, there were signifacnt problems in passing classes and boards.

So basically the study showed that the matriculants with better academic qualifications tended to pass more often -- how enlightening. I hope a lot of tuition money didn't get spent learning this.

 

[GenSurg]

MCATs scores matter very little, probably even less than SATs. I've also seen studies at my medical school that show that very few people that killed the MCAT also killed Step 1. Medical school is very different than undergrad. A lot of what goes into being at the top of your class has to do with how hard you work and what you are willing to give up. Adaptability also is a huge factor. There are some very smart undergrads who become very mediocre medical students.

http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=20049323

 

[GiantGiantsFan]

So basically the study showed that the matriculants with better academic qualifications tended to pass more often -- how enlightening. I hope a lot of tuition money didn't get spent learning this.

You're oversimplifying what StickNRudder said. The correlation is significant ONLY in the low GPA/MCAT range.

 

[GiantGiantsFan]

MCATs scores matter very little, probably even less than SATs. I've also seen studies at my medical school that show that very few people that killed the MCAT also killed Step 1. Medical school is very different than undergrad. A lot of what goes into being at the top of your class has to do with how hard you work and what you are willing to give up. Adaptability also is a huge factor. There are some very smart undergrads who become very mediocre medical students.

http://www.freeiPods.com/?r=20049323

I think that's very true. From what I have heard, success in medical school requires adapting to a 'sensing' learning style, which requires careful attention to details and structure, rather than an 'intuitive' learning style. Since our learning style is somewhat rooted in our personality and the natural way in which we see the world, this is not necessarily a trivial task. There are some good books written on the subject. One is called How to Excel in Medical School and another is called something like Study Skills and Test-taking Strategies for Medical Students.

 

[gerido]

So basically the study showed that the matriculants with better academic qualifications tended to pass more often -- how enlightening. I hope a lot of tuition money didn't get spent learning this.

Seeing that you have minimal understanding of statistics, may attribute to the fact that you were a lawyer, perhaps the original poster can enlighten you with more elaboration.

I can only guess that the dean compared people with mcat and gpa under 3.2 and mcat below 23 to students with higher number and found a significant difference.. which may attribute to motivation, learning style, laziness.. blah blah...

the 20% correlation may be a result of this significant difference. It's likely that subgroups with numbers above 3.2 and 23 are not likely to show a significant difference in the board score. Or, even if there is a significant difference, that the difference is small.