Medical Schools by Step 1 score
Started by AlexTrebek
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
first, where did you get this info? was it released by the school.
Second I very highly doubt there are schools that have 238 step 1 averages as is shown in that other thread linked above. There is just no way. My school is top 20 and we were told that usually we are at the average or just a couple points above. I would say that is likely the same for most schools and I'd be surprised if it wasn't.
I did speak to the different caliber of students in another thread but the caliber of students in my view does not correlate to board scores as anyone can study hard for a test and do well. Plus some schools teach to the test, give more time to study, etc so comparing schools via step 1 scores is not very useful. The caliber of a med school is based on the caliber of students coming from that school and board scores play a role but they are not the only thing nor the most important thing that counts.
I've interacted with some students with very good board scores from my school who pretty much suck imo with patients, working with a team, critical thinking, etc. It always baffles me how this can be. Granted, maybe I just think I am the best student ever and if someone doesn't do something exactly as I would then they are dumb but I don't think I'm like that lol.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Everyone I've talked to, including several who go to a top 10 school, have said their board scores were the result of their own studying far more so than their school preparing them. I imagine that certain schools will better prepare their students, but I think that the foundations are set across the board, and that the variability of individual students will far overshadow these differences in curriculum/teaching quality. I also imagine that the simple fact that top schools select for students who excel at standardized tests by putting great emphasis on importance will account for far more of the difference in average board scores than the aforementioned curriculum differences between top schools and the rest.
👍
However, it certainly helps if your school doesn't test over inane crap that obviously isn't Step material.
I think that the 8 schools that gave me an interview before having anything other than my piss-poor CV, my PS, and my Step 1 scores would tend to disagree on that last point.
UW 'reporting in'. The administration here doesn't disclose our average, but from what I've heard it's significantly below the national average. We're generally not very well prepared for boards, and given less time than average to study, so that might have something to do with it. Really hard to tell what sort of an effect this has on our match outcomes, though, since many people here begin with primary care as their goal.
This. Over and over and over again. We just had ~8 'authentic' board questions (from some archive somewhere) on a recent final. First legitimate board-style questions we'd seen this year. People freaked out because the questions didn't test the arcane, esoteric, useless information presented in lecture.
This. Over and over and over again. We just had ~8 'authentic' board questions (from some archive somewhere) on a recent final. First legitimate board-style questions we'd seen this year. People freaked out because the questions didn't test the arcane, esoteric, useless information presented in lecture.
Last edited:
Translation: It's impossible for a school that is not a "top 20" to have higher board scores than my school. If it is possible, however, high board scores actually don't mean anything ...That is unless you go to a top 20 school. This is the only time that a high board score equates to a good student.
This thread is pretty useless.
Students earn their board scores.
Students earn their board scores.
I've come to the conclusion that officedepot is a status/prestige *****.
No way!
Really now...
hold the phones!
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The school you go to isn't really going to impact how well you do on Step 1. Not sure what the point of this thread is.
Just like whatever undergrad you attended didn't make a difference for your MCAT score.
Just like whatever undergrad you attended didn't make a difference for your MCAT score.
Well said.
Now that I am in the midst of residency interviews, I don't quite understand the fixation with Step I scores. Plenty of to residency programs want to see how you do on Step II now as well before they commit to you. I have several residency directors even tell me that they find a stronger correlation between Step II and residency performance, which is why Step II is becoming increasingly important.
Of course I am not trying to take away from a rocking Step I score, but medical school applicants should move beyond using this as some strong benchmark for the quality of the school. I probably would have gotten the exact same score had I gone to any number of medical schools.
Unless of course you are at a "top 20" school, in which case you should probably just quite medical school if you score less than 1 SD above the average on any of these tests.
thanks! I agree.
but seriously I wouldn't call myself a *****. But I do think status/tier of a school often correlates with the skill of a physician coming from said school. Anyway, I won't talk about it again.
Is this through general observation or what? Pretty sure almost all schools teach the same crap out of the exact same books. Then MS3s do the same exact crap during clinicals. There is no magic dust they sprinkle on you at top tier schools.
I hope what you're trying to say is people who go to a top 20 are more likely to be motivated to be great clinicians. Going to a top 20 school in itself doesn't automatically make you God's gift to medicine....
The most important learning in medical school occurs in the third year (and fourth year to some degree, before the laziness sets in). The strength of the clerkships and rotation sites at a given school is what makes a good intern, in my opinion. You honored biochem and path at Harvard? Big deal, I really don't care. Can you admit a patient with a history of CHF, COPD, and alcoholism who is vomiting blood without killing him?
The original charting outcomes of the match gave odds ratios about which factors predicted success in the match. Step 1 score had the highest odds ratio. It was even more predictive of matching than being MD/PhD.
^this
theres nothing more important than step 1, followed closely by a good audition rotation
charting outcomes does not include things which are not so easily measured such as med school rep, where applicants were applying, grades in clinical years, etc. Step 1 is something every applicant has completed and is the easiest to assess as reseach experience and other various factors are harder to measure because it is so variable.
I'm not saying step 1 isn't important because it is for sure. But there's a ton of other stuff programs will look at when deciding upon who they want to interview and who will subsequently match.
Graduation from a top 40 NIH medical school, number of research experiences, and AOA were all factors they looked at. It's true that not every factor was included (how could they be?), but it was a pretty solid analysis. If you have good evidence to the contrary (aside from just a general feeling), it would be nice to see it.
As a general rule:
Step 1 >>>>>>>> audition/elective rotations/clinical grades >> everything else
Obviously, certain specialties may differ (Rad Onc) and many applicants will differ (superstars in other parts of app)
Reputation of medical school matters much less than individual achievement in medical school.....unless of course you are a certain poster in these forums who evidently attends one hell of a medical school 🙂
IMHO
Step 1 >>>>>>>> audition/elective rotations/clinical grades >> everything else
Obviously, certain specialties may differ (Rad Onc) and many applicants will differ (superstars in other parts of app)
Reputation of medical school matters much less than individual achievement in medical school.....unless of course you are a certain poster in these forums who evidently attends one hell of a medical school 🙂
IMHO
Have a look at the tables in this article:
http://journals.lww.com/academicmed..._Criteria_for_Residency__Results_of_a.24.aspx
There's even a breakdown by specialty.
i'm actually coming around to the position that Step 1 is more of a gateway thing than anything else. as in, programs want applicants to meet or exceed their "target score" when selecting people to interview, but other things become more important when it comes to the rank list (letters, clinical grades, interview).
if i'm right, then a 270 is almost never any more useful than a 250, and even 250 isn't that much more helpful than a 240 in most fields, unless you have very specific goals.
if i'm right, then a 270 is almost never any more useful than a 250, and even 250 isn't that much more helpful than a 240 in most fields, unless you have very specific goals.
Although step 1 score is not an independent variable, "charting the outcomes" shows that probability of matching continues to increase beyond scores of 250 for several specialties.
well sure, it continues to increase for all of them, i'd imagine. but that's not the relevant point; it's the extent to which those score increases help that's the issue. for IM you've got high 90s% for both 250 and 270. Derm your odds go from mid 80s% at 250 to low 90s% at 270. you can't tell me that other factors don't become more important at that point.
i qualified my position by saying that it didn't matter much for most applicants, unless they want something insanely competitive or need to do IM at Mayo. for most people, past a certain point it doesn't seem to matter much compared to other things.
Yep, it is kind of like Lake Wobegone where all of the children are above average.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
The look I usually see in peoples' eyes when I hand them my CV would argue otherwise.
There is an initial "Wow" factor if one sees an application with "270/99" for the Step 1 score, but someone with a 240 or 250 that gets an interview has just as much of a shot as you do. Sorry to burst your bubble. Once the interviewee walks through the door, it's all about what they do during the interview.
I'm sure this varies by specialty. I've had residents and attendings tell me that there is a pre-interview rank list and for many applicants the interview doesn't do much to move them up or down.
There's a reason a lot of people say the interview is more for the applicant than for the program
I can think of a number of interviews where the department had a scoring sheet in front of them with numerical scores for certain categories including step score, grades, research, etc. The interview was just one of 6-7 categories on the form. I doubt it would get you the spot in and of itself.
Last edited:
Our school has had an average as high as 237 (three years ago). Last year ('13) is apparently 233. Before that ('12), 231. The fluctuation tends to suggest (to me) it's more of an individual thing than related to the curriculum. Especially since I hate our curriculum.
We're given 8-12 weeks to study and take the exam. More if you want it. I'm starting to "study" in January (reading through First Aid and trying to tackle "review" and easy stuff first), doing Kaplan questions through March, and then hitting the ground running with USLME World questions and practice exams from Day 1 of my 2 month study period. This seems to have been the pattern that successful students says works the best.
Just do as many questions as humanly possible. It's really the best way to learn what you need to do to get the score you want.
We're given 8-12 weeks to study and take the exam. More if you want it. I'm starting to "study" in January (reading through First Aid and trying to tackle "review" and easy stuff first), doing Kaplan questions through March, and then hitting the ground running with USLME World questions and practice exams from Day 1 of my 2 month study period. This seems to have been the pattern that successful students says works the best.
Just do as many questions as humanly possible. It's really the best way to learn what you need to do to get the score you want.
I hear from PDs and residents alike in smaller fields that once your foot is in the door (interview) it really boils down to personality and willingness to work with a person for several years. In larger programs personality may have less weight simply because they are not as intimate. That being said, the PD here looks for stories of people being 'hardcore' and will take them over a 270 any day as long as everything else is solid.
well when i started this thread it was more because my school had just released to us our score and while its a pretty good average, we were still 3 points short of the class before us and i wanted to see a comparison.
i have to say though, that if you compared med schools by average step 1 score, itd look a lot like if you compared them by their mcat scores. it takes the same test-taking skills to take the two tests, although the former requires a little bit of reading comprehension (that likely is the reason i only interviewed at 3 schools).
fact remains. your school DOES NOT provide you with enough teaching/material to do "well" on Step 1; it is entirely up to the individual student and how much time and money they spend on QBanks, etc. however, i would say that having a culture of stress and preocupation with Step 1 at my school makes everyone study a little harder. after all, if the 4th years got a 236 average, we can too, right?
i have to say though, that if you compared med schools by average step 1 score, itd look a lot like if you compared them by their mcat scores. it takes the same test-taking skills to take the two tests, although the former requires a little bit of reading comprehension (that likely is the reason i only interviewed at 3 schools).
fact remains. your school DOES NOT provide you with enough teaching/material to do "well" on Step 1; it is entirely up to the individual student and how much time and money they spend on QBanks, etc. however, i would say that having a culture of stress and preocupation with Step 1 at my school makes everyone study a little harder. after all, if the 4th years got a 236 average, we can too, right?
I agree with everything in this post, except that Step 1 and the MCAT are comparable tests. I have always felt the MCAT is foremost a test of reading comprehension. Your knowledge is secondary.
We (SMD2013) should have done so much better. Although I guess a 233 average isn't too shabby.
obviously step 1 requires a lot of rote memorization relative to the mcat but i think it overall would correlate well if you ranked schools be average matriculating mcat score.
There's a lot of data out there indicating that MCAT score tends to be the strongest predictor of USMLE score, especially for Step 1. Try here to start.
I wonder if the opposite effect doesn't also happen at some schools. I remember them telling us that the year ahead of us had more than 50 people (out of 240) score a 250 or above. I assumed we were smarter than they were (since we had outperformed them on 1st and 2nd year exams) and thus it shouldn't be that hard to outperform them on Step.
I wish my school would send out Step info. They sent out an email once saying that we had a 236 average and 99% pass rate, but that was before everyone had taken the exam and gotten their results. I'd love to see the distribution of scores in my class.
your school is an outlier. studies show R = .4-.5, a moderate correlation but the best one there is.
I would imagine lower ranked schools would have a weaker correlation because they have a higher proportion of students with lower MCATs and those who may be nontrads or late bloomers.
My school prides itself out getting people to outperform their MCAT. Not uncommon for people with mid 20s to score in the 230s and 240s. I had a pretty decent MCAT (33) but I outperformed it as well.
For sure. For data, I had MCAT of 33 (verbal was an 8) and 25+ on part 1 of usmle. I think the VR section of the MCAT is bs.
Last edited:
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
http://www.educus.com/Journals/18444195
for School v. Score = More inter-student variability than inter-school.
http://www.educus.com/Journals/17198300
for MCAT = Moderate correlation between MCAT biological sciences and verbal to Step 1 (r=0.60)
for School v. Score = More inter-student variability than inter-school.
http://www.educus.com/Journals/17198300
for MCAT = Moderate correlation between MCAT biological sciences and verbal to Step 1 (r=0.60)
This is possible. The national average is for people who take the test, not for students from AAMC accredited schools taking the test. DO students, Carribean school students, foreign graduates who want to practice in the States etc. all have to take this exam, cause it's a licensing exam This brings the national average down, possibly way down depending on the quality of medical education. So all American schools can have better as long as the classes perform better than the collective.
Not surprising, but interesting to see. Always figured that who you were/how you studied were much more important then schools, as most of them teach you the same things in similar ways. I was actually surprised to see the size of the student effect (15% variance compared to 27% inter-individual variance)
possible? yes. truth in fact? no.
Not true. This has been discussed before on this board; I used to be under the same (mis)impression.
