National Board Passing Scores

[DatMat0112]

---

Members don't see this ad.

All,
I'm not sure what are adequate passing scores on the National Boards. Graduating stucdents at one of the schools I applied to had an avareag passing score of 86 on the part I and 84 on part II. Are these good scores?? would this be a good school to attend??

Mat😕

 

[arns51]

Obviously I am not going to tell you that this is a good school to attend when all I know are its board scores, and I would recomend you dont base your opinion on just that.

However, and hopefully others can back me up on this, I believe an average of 86 on the part I is pretty good. Especially considering that you want a 90 to be competetive for a specialty and an average of 86 means a decent amount of people are getting 90+.

 

[ItsGavinC]

Good reply.

Further, I'm sure that there were students at that school that pulled 80s, and others that pulled 95+. I think it all boils down to how much work you want to put into it.

NBDE scores alone don't mean so much. Look at the curriculum, hours spent in class, lifestyle of the students, etc., to really gauge how much time they've put into studying for the exam.

 

[blankguy]

Originally posted by ItsGavinC
Good reply.

Further, I'm sure that there were students at that school that pulled 80s, and others that pulled 95+. I think it all boils down to how much work you want to put into it.

NBDE scores alone don't mean so much. Look at the curriculum, hours spent in class, lifestyle of the students, etc., to really gauge how much time they've put into studying for the exam.

But getting back to this. What does the score really say of a school if any or is it purely dependent on the individual??

 

[arns51]

I feel that the average score of a school is somewhat of an indication of how the school prepares the average student for the board.

However, if you are lazy and dont work you will not do that well, and if you want a much better score you can work your a$$ off and do better.

 

[boboli_chef]

I have a different way of looking at this. Passing rate (and everyone must pass, right?) is what's important. High average scores only indicate that a large number of students plan on specializing or pursuing some other post-grad objective. If you want to go right into practice as a general dentist, you can get a 79 with zero hours of studying. Then again, you could put in hundreds of hours (no mentioning of names here!) and get >90. But, no matter your goal, you need to pass -- which is why I feel that pass rate is a better indicator of a school's performance.

 

[ItsGavinC]

I think arns hit it right on the money.

The passing % would be somewhat indicative of how the school and the curriculum prepare the students.

Still the bulk of the learning rests upon the student. Seriously, even if a school prepares you VERY well, you'll probably have to review. Aferall, how much material from a 1st semester class are you going to remember after your 4th semester?* A student that spends more time reviewing is going to do better.

* Which is why more schools are shifting towards taking the boards following the first year. Nova does this, as does Arizona. I'm not sure about other schools, but the concept is a new one to dental education. Rather than make the students remember trivial science information for 2 years, just make them learn it all the first, review it, test on it, then move on to more dental-specific materials.

 

[Delta]

Does anyone know what are the passing scores in Part I and II for University of Maryland, Howard University and University of Pittsburg?