MCAT scores, GPA, and "substandard physicians"

[Ernham]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Often times it appears that proponents for "lowered standards" claim that it doesn't matter how someone does in undergrad or on the MCAT. I'm gonna have to pull out the BS flag on this one.

The MCAT shows how fast you can swim through the pool of info in your brain and extract the important info for for solving a problem *as fast as possible.* The main difference between genius and ***** is that the ***** may take several hours to understand/solve the same problem that a genius could solve in a couple seconds. The MCAT is actually an aptitude test, thus it highly correlates with THINKING SPEED. No amount of medic al training will increase your thinking speed. Thus, the lower the MCAT, the lower the innate thinking speed. There are tons of studies linking thinking speed to IQ, reflexes, etc.

Seconds translates into lifetimes-- literally-- in the OR. How would you like one of those lifetimes to be yours?


As far as GPA. I think it's pretty much chaff for determining future performance as a doctor, but it probably correlates with performance in med school. The MCAT does mean quite a bit.

 

[zinjanthropus]

mcat scores correlate well with passing USMLE step 1

however, that does not mean that a low mcat score will keep a student from passing their boards and no one is walking around asking their physician what they got on the mcat (i hope)...

this argument is silly because nothing removes the fact that all medical students have to go through the same obstacles once they get to medical school if they want to become licensed physicians, therefore their 'quick thinking', etc will be tested equally over the course of their academic career

 

[Ernham]

I'm a proverbial pen-pal with an ER doctor in Michigan. He says that there is nothing in the coursework that prepares a medical student for the ER/OR, and that "thinking /acting fast" is 95% of the job. I think his admission is more important than your assumption.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Then why do we discriminate against lower MCAT blacks in favor of higher MCAT blacks, zinjanthropus?

 

[Nogpas]

Originally posted by Ernham
I'm a proverbial pen-pal with an ER doctor in Michigan. He says that there is nothing in the coursework that prepares a medical student for the ER/OR, and that "thinking /acting fast" is 95% of the job. I think his admission is more important than your assumption.

I'm fairly certain that your ignorance is much more relevant than your arrogance, which is misplaced. There are people that can finish the MCAT with 25 minutes left on each section, like I did, and still not get perfect scores. If you had holes in your coursework, quick thinking won't provide the formulae necessary to answer some questions in the P and B sections. I think your evaluation of other applicants and their abilities is, as you would say, "chaff." You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Get some real experience in the process an stop your idle and *****ic conjecture, jackass.

Also, your assumption that training(even that which happens after med schol) can't streamline thinking processes enough to overcome initial shortcomings reveals a striking lack of evolution in your own development. Lots of people improve their mental roadmap to solutions upon exposure. Just because you're not quick enough to do so doesn't provide you with the ammunition to assume that no one can.

 

[zinjanthropus]

because mcat scores are a very good predictors for passing boards, as stated in my previous post

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

So we SHOULD discriminate on the basis of MCAT?

 

[Ernham]

"There are people that can finish the MCAT with 25 minutes left on each section, like I did, and still not get perfect scores."

I bet Britney Spears, your study buddy, was a big help in your preparation.

"If you had holes in your coursework, quick thinking won't provide the formulae necessary to answer some questions in the P and B sections."

Well, who would be dumb enough to take the exam without covering those areas?? Ridiculous. You might as well say, "Well, if you had an aneurysm during the exam, you wouldn't be able to get a perfect score."

"I think your evaluation of other applicants and their abilities is, as you would say, "chaff." You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Get some real experience in the process an stop your idle and *****ic conjecture, jackass."

Wow, hurl some epithets; it really shows your incredible intelligence.

"Also, your assumption that training(even that which happens after med schol) can't streamline thinking processes enough to overcome initial shortcomings reveals a striking lack of evolution in your own development. "

I'd highly recommend using the euphemism "lack of evolution" sparingly in your future.

"Lots of people improve their mental roadmap to solutions upon exposure. Just because you're not quick enough to do so doesn't provide you with the ammunition to assume that no one can."

I'm sorry, but the only thing that can increase thinking speed is a stimulant. Your rhetoric of "streamlining" is bunk because both "43MCATer vs 23MCATer" are going to have this experience. The difference would largely remain the same; there is just way too much that goes on in an ER/OR that you cannot be experienced in to resolve. Are you an ER/OR doctor with ~15 years experience? I speak to one weekly, and I can definitely tell you are not.

 

[skypilot]

There are areas of medicine where getting an appropriate balanced answer for the patient over a longer period of time is more important than getting a quick answer.

Internal medicine and psychiatry are examples. Not everyone is cut out to be a surgeon but most surgeons would make lousy internal medicine docs.

 

[powermd]

Originally posted by Nogpas
I'm fairly certain that your ignorance is much more relevant than your arrogance, which is misplaced. There are people that can finish the MCAT with 25 minutes left on each section, like I did, and still not get perfect scores. If you had holes in your coursework, quick thinking won't provide the formulae necessary to answer some questions in the P and B sections. I think your evaluation of other applicants and their abilities is, as you would say, "chaff." You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Get some real experience in the process an stop your idle and *****ic conjecture, jackass.

Also, your assumption that training(even that which happens after med schol) can't streamline thinking processes enough to overcome initial shortcomings reveals a striking lack of evolution in your own development. Lots of people improve their mental roadmap to solutions upon exposure. Just because you're not quick enough to do so doesn't provide you with the ammunition to assume that no one can.

(sarcasm alert for the impaired)

On behalf of the entire SDN community I'd like to thank you for this thoughtful, eloquent, totally-constuctive post.

Your winning attitude will certainly get you far.

(/sarcasm)

Ernham did not attack you personally, so instead of "hurling epithets", why not stick to arguing his points?

 

[cocoabutter]

Originally posted by skypilot
There are areas of medicine where getting an appropriate balanced answer for the patient over a longer period of time is more important than getting a quick answer.

Internal medicine and psychiatry are examples. Not everyone is cut out to be a surgeon but most surgeons would make lousy internal medicine docs.

I think that this is an excellent point. Ernham, you do realize that all physicians are not ER/OR docs, don't you? Also, do you feel that your Doctor contact knows all there is to know about getting into med school and excelling in all fields of medicine? He is just one person, whose information is valuable, but cannot be applied to every specialty.

 

[8744]

Hold on. I got only a so-so MCAT score but the reason had more to do with my absolute reluctance to study then with any lack of basic intelligence on my part.

Who's smarter? The guy who spends three months cramming and two-thousand dollars on a review course and gets a 32 or the guy who skims through the "Gold Standard" a few times and takes the test more or less "cold" for a 29?

(And yes, I was accepted to both medical schools to which I applied.)

Call me crazy, but optics, obscure biochemical pathways, and the majority of the MCAT testable items are about as interesting as watching paint dry and about as relavent to life.

The MCAT is a good weed-out tool because it seperates out the people who absolutely don't have a clue. But I think you are reading too much into it.

Let me guess: You got a high score and this is your way of bragging.

 

[skypilot]

Originally posted by Ernham
Often times it appears that proponents for "lowered standards" claim that it doesn't matter how someone does in undergrad or on the MCAT.

"over 70% of admitted URMs merely got their position due to the color of their skin."

With the attitudes like those you espouse in your posts I shudder for any minority patients you see when you become a doctor.

These posts alone make the case for aggressive efforts to recruit minority physicians if only to give an alternative for patients who are fearful of being treated differently because of physician bias.

Fact is

Lots of doctors are admitted with B averages in college.

Every doctor has to get through medical school and pass the USMLE steps 1, 2 and 3 to become a doctor. No one gets a free pass.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

I'll take the 3 month cramming 32 over the cold 29. You may indeed be more intelligent, but you lost at the point of competition. I'll take the hard working Mr. T over the "went into the fight cold" Rocky any day. Being the champ (or being more intelligent) does not give you the right to slack off.

 

[pinbor1]

To reiterate MCAT and how you do in undergrad has no correlation to how you are as a physician. They are just ways to measure prospective candidates. It shows that you can assimilate information but I does not mean that it will translate to real life. There are a couple of medical education articles that look at these correlations. I do not have them off hand, but you can do a search online. I vaguely remember checking this during downtime on a call night.

There are so many other factors that come into play. The most important two, regardless of what specialty you are pursuing are 1. Clinical Judgement (separate from knowing what's in a book, that's what makes starting M3's so dangerous, they know everything from studying for boards but they do not know how or when to apply it in a clinical situation.
2. Communication skills. Regardless of how well you do in undergrad and the MCATs, as well as on the Boards, it does not matter if you can't communicate with your patients and/or colleagues.

nuff said

 

[Ernham]

"To reiterate MCAT and how you do in undergrad has no correlation to how you are as a physician. They are just ways to measure prospective candidates. It shows that you can assimilate information but I does not mean that it will translate to real life. There are a couple of medical education articles that look at these correlations. I do not have them off hand, but you can do a search online. I vaguely remember checking this during downtime on a call night."

Umm, what? They have a "patients lost vs patientss served" stat on doctors? I'd doubt it. What exactly is the criteria they are using for correlation????

"There are so many other factors that come into play. The most important two, regardless of what specialty you are pursuing are 1. Clinical Judgement (separate from knowing what's in a book, that's what makes starting M3's so dangerous, they know everything from studying for boards but they do not know how or when to apply it in a clinical situation.
2. Communication skills. Regardless of how well you do in undergrad and the MCATs, as well as on the Boards, it does not matter if you can't communicate with your patients and/or colleagues. "

That's all well and dandy but try to stay on topic.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

So how would you design admissions? Treat GPA/MCAT as a minimum discriminator where after a certain point, a higher score does not receive extra consideration over a lower score (much like a driver's license test)? At what specific point should that pass/fail point be? A 30 MCAT? 40 MCAT?
How would you measure the primary discriminators you want to use, communication skills and clinical judgments?

 

[Ernham]

If communication skills are so important, why do they not even require any communication classes in the pre-med "must-haves"???

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Communication skills are important. However, that discriminator should be a minimum discriminator (anyone who can communicate at a reasonable level should be treated the same in admissions).

In point of fact, we do have a communication skills discriminator. It is the writing section of the MCAT. Funny how the schools place so little attention to it.

This whole line of debate illustrates the growing force of anti-intellectualism in this country. We try to place less value on academic discriminators like GPA/MCAT and more value on non-academic discriminators like ECs.

 

[Ernham]

Actually, they are probably better tested in the interview.

I think the essay section is a joke.

 

[Ernham]

There are some gaping holes in this scenario if this is to be believed. But judging from AAMC's willingness to outright lie to the public, it would not surprise me.

They claim that MCAT and college GPA are good indicators of Medical school performance.

They claim that MCAT and GPA do not correlate to professional job performance.


Accepting both of these as facts, see the logical error?


Are we to swallow our commonsense and believe that medical schools are wasting(making?) a whole lot of future physicians' time and money??

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

It sounds like you have somewhat recently have discovered what AA truly is. If you're like me, you thought AA was an anti-discriminatory measure when you were younger.

In any case, it looks like Bok and Bowen's prescribed AA strategy of lying to conceal the true nature of AA is coming back and biting them in the ass.

 

[deez4life]

>>>"I have a dream that my four children will one day live in a nation where they will be judged by the content of their character.... and the color of their skin."<<<

Ryo, what race are you? just curious.

 

[8744]

Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki
I'll take the 3 month cramming 32 over the cold 29. You may indeed be more intelligent, but you lost at the point of competition. I'll take the hard working Mr. T over the "went into the fight cold" Rocky any day. Being the champ (or being more intelligent) does not give you the right to slack off.

I wasn't "slacking off." I was working full time, taking the medical school pre-requisites and raising children. Not everybody has the leisure to cram for three months.

The other thing is, I got a 12 on the verbal section for which I certainly did NOT prepare. The physical science and biological sciences parts of the MCAT are just regurgitation. Any monkey can cram for a set period and barf up the correct answers if he is so inclined or has the time. The verbal section is a better indicator of one's "intelligence" or at least "general level of education."

I'm always amused to see people with high MCAT scores with low verbal scores. Like a 13-13-6 for a guy for whom english is not a second language. Wow.

And I'm not saying I'm more intelligent. I'm just saying that you all are reading too much into the MCAT.

 

[womansurg]

Originally posted by Panda Bear
The other thing is, I got a 12 on the verbal section

Actually, the verbal score is the only portion of the MCAT which has been shown to correlate with later clinical performance. Likely because, as you suggest, it is a real measure of some constant aspect of your ability to reason, whereas the science portions largely are simply a measure of your degree of preparedness in those topics at that particular snapshot in time.

 

[dcpark74]

Originally posted by Nogpas
You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Get some real experience in the process an stop your idle and *****ic conjecture, jackass.

I'll get myself involved by saying that both of you have valid points but I would have to give my nod to the OP.

Two people can start at the same level such as an MCAT score. (I had a 21 before I started studying...9 yrs had passed since I took a bio or phys course.) Another person had the same score as I did in every category.

We both studied fervently and had markedly different results. I received a 34 and she had a 24. I agree with Nogpas in that studying will help you learn more but it will not significantly improve your intelligence...There's a big difference between smarts and intelligence.

My 2 cents...but guys (gals) really just take the other's opinion for what its worth and agree to disagree. No amount of time and effort will change a person's view unless that person is willing to.

 

[saiyagirl]

Originally posted by Ryo-Ohki
I'll take the 3 month cramming 32 over the cold 29. You may indeed be more intelligent, but you lost at the point of competition. I'll take the hard working Mr. T over the "went into the fight cold" Rocky any day. Being the champ (or being more intelligent) does not give you the right to slack off.

i disagree 🙂 i'd want the smarter doc workin on me.