Nontrads and test scores

[blee]

---

Members do not see this ad.

A discussion within a different thread brought up this interesting document:

http://www.aamc.org/students/mcat/examineedata/sum2004.pdf

Looking specifically at age vs. average test scores, there's a definite trend for older applicants to get lower scores. While all of the age groups' scores are within one standard deviation of each other, the mean scores for test takers over 31 is between 1-2 full points lower than the scores for test takers under 21. The mean writing score is constant across all age groups at O.

What's most interesting to me is the fact that VR scores follow this trend. I guess most people are never as exposed to dense reading material as they are in college; if one assumes that more time away from a subject leads to lower MCAT scores, there's little proof here that being non-traditional is much of an advantage when it comes to academic prowess. Even more telling is the fact that writing scores do not improve with time.

As a nontrad myself, I expected to see different stats. I expected to see a downward trend in PS and BS, but not in VR or WS. To me, these data only reinforce the concept that being non-traditional is not itself an advantage. Instead, the focus needs to be on what's happened during all of these years after college, and what of those experiences would uniquely prepare the applicant for a medical career.

Rebuttals? Other comments? Just something to mull on this sticky Monday.

 

[efex101]

I think a lot of the issues are possibly that the pre-reqs are old and hence non-trads are "assuming" things have not changed and that via a prep book they can master all those old pre-reqs again, also some non-trads assume that they can take the MCAT w/o the pre-reqs (someone posted this here in this forum) and do well duh that is a no brainer, and lastly they may not take the test seriously and think it is like any old exam. This is all fine though...because guess what? for those that ARE prepared you for sure stand out and will get in. Let people make assumptions for others will benefit.

 

[QofQuimica]

It's hard to rebut those cold hard stats. 😉

Before I started applying, I visited several of my state schools, and had a long discussion with one of the admissions directors about how non-trads typically do worse on the MCAT compared with younger students. He said that in addition to the age bias, men tend to do better than women, and Northerners tend to do better than Southerners on the test. But no one should be too quick to underestimate us non-trad Southern gals. 😛

 

[blee]

Q, I deciphered your avatar earlier today. Good one! LOL.

One other thing I noticed about the stats was that a lot of older people take the MCAT, way more than I'd assumed. Nearly 5,000 of the ~60,000 examinees in 2004 were 28 or older. I wonder how many of those 5000 are re-takers in proportion to the number of <28-year-old re-takers, which would somewhat skew the actual age demographics.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

I'm wondering if these trends hold up for tests like the GMAT, GRE and LSAT. The LSAT is not knowledge-based at all, so finding a decrease based on age would be especially interesting to see. Honestly, I was sort of sarcastic in my earlier post about this in the other thread, but I do think working is sort of mind-numbing compared with being in school. I know that's not true with all jobs, but I think it's true with lots, including professional jobs. Also, you've got to factor in that older applicants are probably less used to taking tests, so they might suffer more anxiety than traditional students who are tested regularly.

 

[QofQuimica]

Q, I deciphered your avatar earlier today. Good one! LOL.

😀 Wish I had come up with it myself, but I have to confess that I swiped it off the internet somewhere.

 

[roja]

Its not hard to argue stats. Its very easy. You can prove anything with statistics. If you dont' believe it, just talk to Phizer about vioxx. A great 'prove it with stats' case.



And in general, it doesn't matter how much better or worse older students do. It matters how YOU do.

And as has been said ad nauseum, MCAT score alone does not get one into med school.

 

[MoosePilot]

Non-trads are sometimes also reapplicants, which naturally means they didn't get in the first time. Add in time out of school and away from the books and you get lower numbers. I bet non-trads actually fall in two curves. 😛

 

[blee]

Listen, I'm not trying to pick a fight. 🙂 My own MCAT scores were significantly higher than the means listed in that document. I certainly know from my own experience that non-trads can be every bit as good in classes and at standardized tests as the best undergrads.

I just think that some people decide they want to become physicians, then figure that their years of work in a different career somehow make them better candidates than the typical applicant. It's important to have dreams, but it's also really important in this process to be realistic. It's not realistic to take the MCAT five years after graduation with only a Kaplan course for preparation, or to think that average undergrad stats can be overcome simply with time and not with additional coursework. It's also not realistic, IMO, to think that a subpar postbac record can be explained with life circumstances. I think I'm preaching to the choir for the most part; almost everyone I see in this forum already knows what I'm talking about.

 

[MoosePilot]

Listen, I'm not trying to pick a fight. 🙂 My own MCAT scores were significantly higher than the means listed in that document. I certainly know from my own experience that non-trads can be every bit as good in classes and at standardized tests as the best undergrads.

I just think that some people decide they want to become physicians, then figure that their years of work in a different career somehow make them better candidates than the typical applicant. It's important to have dreams, but it's also really important in this process to be realistic. It's not realistic to take the MCAT five years after graduation with only a Kaplan course for preparation, or to think that average undergrad stats can be overcome simply with time and not with additional coursework. It's also not realistic, IMO, to think that a subpar postbac record can be explained with life circumstances. I think I'm preaching to the choir for the most part; almost everyone I see in this forum already knows what I'm talking about.

The rock bottom truth about "realism" is that the reason people think that it can be overcome is that because some people manage to do it.

Like your comment about "It's not realistic to take the MCAT fiver years after graduation with only a Kaplan course for preparation..." What does that mean?

 

[blee]

Like your comment about "It's not realistic to take the MCAT fiver years after graduation with only a Kaplan course for preparation..." What does that mean?

Unless you're a biologist, physicist, or chemist, this prep strategy will not lead to an exceptional score. That's what that means. I'm sure there are people who could pull it off, but it doesn't seem worth the risk. Most of us are giving up established careers and comfortable lives to do this; is it really a good idea to take a gamble on something as important as the MCAT?

This is what I mean. Optimism is important and necessary in order to endure this process. Every postbac student I met was optimistic and committed to their dreams. Some of them, however, were blinded by their optimism, under the impression that they can make up for poor stats by just being a "special" nontrad. This is where realism comes in.

 

[blee]

Just to clarify (in case you thought I was directing my post to you).... I was referring to Q of Quimica's avatar.... it means "Don't rock the boat"

I know. 🙂 It took me a while before I realized that the second picture was a rock, not a thumprint, spot, stain, or something else.

 

[Jalopycat]

Non trads also may be working 1 or more jobs plus attending school at night which may explain lower test scores.

At least that was my reason.

 

[QofQuimica]

Yeah, look at Q of Quimica's score!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

She's my role model and MCAT hero!

Don't rock the boat!

Thank you, Megboo. 😳 Yes, the pictogram is "donut rock the boat." (For those of you who haven't taken organic yet, the conformation of that cyclohexane ring is called "boat," and you will spend many many weeks in class learning about it and another conformation called "chair". 😉 )

Back to topic: there are several nontrads applying right now with stellar scores (35+), like jmugele, MoosePilot, and TheDarkSide. The biggest non-trad anomaly I know of is Shrike, who scored that high not once but twice, and all without having taken all of the pre-reqs. 😱 But as someone's SDN signature that I read tonight says, the plural of "anecdote" is not "fact." 😛

P.S. If there are some more of you high-scorers that I don't know about, and you'd be interested in helping with the MCAT subforum, please PM me. 😎

 

[MoosePilot]

Unless you're a biologist, physicist, or chemist, this prep strategy will not lead to an exceptional score. That's what that means. I'm sure there are people who could pull it off, but it doesn't seem worth the risk. Most of us are giving up established careers and comfortable lives to do this; is it really a good idea to take a gamble on something as important as the MCAT?

This is what I mean. Optimism is important and necessary in order to endure this process. Every postbac student I met was optimistic and committed to their dreams. Some of them, however, were blinded by their optimism, under the impression that they can make up for poor stats by just being a "special" nontrad. This is where realism comes in.

Ah, that's why I asked. Like Q mentioned, I did well using exactly that strategy. Have you taken a prep class? I was amazed. I actually wondered at times why I went to college, because the prep class covered the material much more efficiently. I definitely learned things I hadn't known at the peak of my undergrad. My scores reflected it, too. Undergrad style prep got me a 31, then a 32 with a little bit of TPR (I took the class on how to teach it, but was lazy). As a non-trad I learned how to apply myself, learned how not to be lazy, and took TPR. I got a 36, which is the strong point of my app (plus my non-trad specialness 😛 ).

 

[Doctor Bagel]

I don't agree that recent coursework is necessary. While my MCAT is not spectacular, it's solid, and physics was my only recent coursework at the time I took it. I guess I'd probably get maybe one extra BS point since I took biology this past year (took an intro bio course before but made a B, hated it and didn't learn the material, so I had to learn all the biology stuff on my own). I hadn't taken chemistry since 1997 and still managed to learn enough to pull off decent scores in BS and PS. I still maintain my VR score is a fluke because it's 2 points lower than every single practice test I took, but whatever. So, for me, recent coursework on top of Kaplan or PR might have boosted my scores a few points, but Kaplan by itself with old coursework was enough to do decently.

 

[eccles1214]

I ran the search feature at mdapplicants.com for each age group, and the downward trend is apparent: the averages of the older applicants were less for each successive age group. However, these are averages. Take the MCAT: There were 20somethings with low MCATs and a few 41+ people with great MCATs.

I also agree that sometimes non-trads think they are special just because they are non-trads. I, too, was blinded by this, but was kicked back into reality by ruthless grilling by admissions personnel and medical students at medical schools. They really made me realize how ordinary I am, and how subpar my performance to date has been. So, I'm kicking things into higher gear with my studies.

 

[blee]

I also agree that sometimes non-trads think they are special just because they are non-trads. I, too, was blinded by this, but was kicked back into reality by ruthless grilling by admissions personnel and medical students at medical schools. They really made me realize how ordinary I am, and how subpar my performance to date has been. So, I'm kicking things into higher gear with my studies.

This is what I'm driving at more than anything else. I was hoping to use the MCAT score data to show that we're not magically better candidates just by being non-traditional. It takes work, mostly likely more work than required by the typical undergrad, to rise to the top and make oneself stand out in this crowd of 35,000.

Moose, that's awesome! I didn't take a class, but I know many who did. The ones who put nothing into the course naturally got nothing out of it. The ones who did all of the work told me that they got some improvement out of the deal, but that they couldn't have done it without the courswork first. This was mostly because the instructors were not particularly great lecturers (yes, exceptions exist Q) and the material was by itself not conducive to self-study. Consider yourself an anomaly. 🙂

FWIW, I got a 37R last April. A few of the questions I missed -- I'd say less than five -- were due to missing knowledge, but the rest was my own undoing. Not too much fun taking three lab classes and studying for that test.

 

[MoosePilot]

This is what I'm driving at more than anything else. I was hoping to use the MCAT score data to show that we're not magically better candidates just by being non-traditional. It takes work, mostly likely more work than required by the typical undergrad, to rise to the top and make oneself stand out in this crowd of 35,000.

Moose, that's awesome! I didn't take a class, but I know many who did. The ones who put nothing into the course naturally got nothing out of it. The ones who did all of the work told me that they got some improvement out of the deal, but that they couldn't have done it without the courswork first. This was mostly because the instructors were not particularly great lecturers (yes, exceptions exist Q) and the material was by itself not conducive to self-study. Consider yourself an anomaly. 🙂

FWIW, I got a 37R last April. A few of the questions I missed -- I'd say less than five -- were due to missing knowledge, but the rest was my own undoing. Not too much fun taking three lab classes and studying for that test.

Great score! Congrats! That'll make apps easier... 😀

 

[efex101]

Although recent coursework may not be necessary to do well on the MCAT for a few minority, recent coursework is something that MOST adcoms want to see so they can evaluate your candidacy for medical school where you WILL be taking a lot of classes much worse than organic in the summer. So, sure if you had the pre-reqs less than seven years ago and you can go to a prep course and do well congrats *but* this is not the majority of folks! most folks have taken the pre reqs recently and still many manage to not do so well on the MCAt (trads and non), so of course it is best to have the gen chem/physics/orgo/bio recent to "improve" your chances...again not everyone is the same and just bc we have a couple of superstars here does not mean that most folks do well this way. BTW if adcoms want to see recent coursework because thsi proves that you can still attend class and pass them, then why not do this before the MCAT? this kills two birds with one shot..We will always hear stories of such and such had not taken the pre-reqs two decades ago and took a course or better yet just bought a review book and received a 38 on the McAT, we also hear of folks that did not take classes for two decades and managed to get in, these are the EXCEPTIONS folks! so this is great for those folks but the majority of us have to take recent courses and do well on the MCAT.

 

[QofQuimica]

Moose, that's awesome! I didn't take a class, but I know many who did. The ones who put nothing into the course naturally got nothing out of it. The ones who did all of the work told me that they got some improvement out of the deal, but that they couldn't have done it without the courswork first. This was mostly because the instructors were not particularly great lecturers (yes, exceptions exist Q) and the material was by itself not conducive to self-study. Consider yourself an anomaly. 🙂

FWIW, I got a 37R last April.

That is a truly excellent score, for any test-taker, of any age, with any academic background. 👍 And you don't have to worry about me taking offense if your particular instructors were not "great lecturers". Many instructors are just not experienced; typically they have just graduated from college and are getting ready to start med school, and they stop working after just one or two test cycles because they are so busy with school. But I promise you that you'd feel differently if you'd had a guy like Shrike, who is a full-time professional test-prep instructor, as your prep course teacher. 😉

BTW, blee, I wanted to comment about something else you wrote before. You said, "Unless you're a biologist, physicist, or chemist, this prep strategy will not lead to an exceptional score." Interestingly, if you look at the AAMC stats, there is also a difference among even scientists. Life scientists (biology or health background) do not perform as well on average as physical scientists (chemistry, physics, engineering) or mathematicians/computer scientists. Several of the people on SDN at the extreme high end of the spectrum have physical science backgrounds, even if they are traditional students. For example, lorelei, who scored a 43, is a computer engineer. Wiggy, who scored a 42, was a chemistry major. It is also interesting to me that humanities majors come out so highly according to the stats, and this confirms my own anecdotal experience with my students; as I posted previously, I find that humanities majors tend to be among the highest-scoring students. Biology majors tend to do the poorest, particularly if they are "pre-med" majors, as opposed to straight biology majors. (Yes, we *do* actually have a major here called "pre-medical sciences" 🙄 )

 

[blee]

BTW, blee, I wanted to comment about something else you wrote before. You said, "Unless you're a biologist, physicist, or chemist, this prep strategy will not lead to an exceptional score." Interestingly, if you look at the AAMC stats, there is also a difference among even scientists. Life scientists (biology or health background) do not perform as well on average as physical scientists (chemistry, physics, engineering) or mathematicians/computer scientists. Several of the people on SDN at the extreme high end of the spectrum have physical science backgrounds, even if they are traditional students. For example, lorelei, who scored a 43, is a computer engineer. Wiggy, who scored a 42, was a chemistry major. It is also interesting to me that humanities majors come out so highly according to the stats, and this confirms my own anecdotal experience with my students; as I posted previously, I find that humanities majors tend to be among the highest-scoring students. Biology majors tend to do the poorest, particularly if they are "pre-med" majors, as opposed to straight biology majors. (Yes, we *do* actually have a major here called "pre-medical sciences" 🙄 )

Yeah, isn't that strange? IIRC, the physical science majors actually scored higher in BS than their biological science counterparts. Not sure how to read that; perhaps it's an indication of the kind of thinking skills necessary to do well on the test, and further support of the belief that you really do need to be well-versed in a wide variety of disciplines to get a high score.

 

[efex101]

I think that we blee was referring to was taking the MCAT w/o any courses then those majors mentioned would be probably the only ones to do well, a score above 30..that is the way that I understood it.

 

[QofQuimica]

Yeah, isn't that strange? IIRC, the physical science majors actually scored higher in BS than their biological science counterparts. Not sure how to read that; perhaps it's an indication of the kind of thinking skills necessary to do well on the test, and further support of the belief that you really do need to be well-versed in a wide variety of disciplines to get a high score.

Obviously, what it means is that all pre-meds who are serious about acing the MCAT should be chemistry majors. 😛

 

[blee]

Obviously, what it means is that all pre-meds who are serious about acing the MCAT should be chemistry majors. 😛

I was a chem major for two years until I got a D in honors orgo and switched to computer science. Ah, undergrad....I got every grade between A+ and F, except for C- and D-. Maybe if I'd stayed in chemistry...

 

[Doctor Bagel]

Although recent coursework may not be necessary to do well on the MCAT for a few minority, recent coursework is something that MOST adcoms want to see so they can evaluate your candidacy for medical school where you WILL be taking a lot of classes much worse than organic in the summer. So, sure if you had the pre-reqs less than seven years ago and you can go to a prep course and do well congrats *but* this is not the majority of folks! most folks have taken the pre reqs recently and still many manage to not do so well on the MCAt (trads and non), so of course it is best to have the gen chem/physics/orgo/bio recent to "improve" your chances...again not everyone is the same and just bc we have a couple of superstars here does not mean that most folks do well this way. BTW if adcoms want to see recent coursework because thsi proves that you can still attend class and pass them, then why not do this before the MCAT? this kills two birds with one shot..We will always hear stories of such and such had not taken the pre-reqs two decades ago and took a course or better yet just bought a review book and received a 38 on the McAT, we also hear of folks that did not take classes for two decades and managed to get in, these are the EXCEPTIONS folks! so this is great for those folks but the majority of us have to take recent courses and do well on the MCAT.

I have no problem with having recent coursework -- in fact, I do have it. However, there's no way I'm retaking the gen chem/organic sequence. I don't have the money or time to do it, and my local university doesn't offer any of the chemistry courses at night, so I'd be stuck doing it at a community college. I minored in chemistry in undergrad, and it just seems pointless in my situation to retake courses that I busted my a$$ on (and did well on) in the '90s. I know there are other people in my situation, and I think that it's not always the most efficient use of money and time to retake prereqs that you've already taken and done well on in the past. Sure, take classes, but if you aced your chemistry stuff in undergrad, why redo it a few years later?

Yes, recent coursework and higher mcat scores are probably necessary even for nontrads, but we don't all need to commit to a full a postbacc schedule.

 

[blee]

Yes, recent coursework and higher mcat scores are probably necessary even for nontrads, but we don't all need to commit to a full a postbacc schedule.

Everyone's in a different situation, so this makes sense. But surely even you had to do a fair amount of chem review? Luckily, the only science that has significantly changed at the fundamental/basic level in the last 10 years is biology. I would definitely recommend that anyone who hasn't taken a bio class within the last 3-4 years do so in order to prepare for the MCAT.

 

[efex101]

We are saying the same thing...yes if you are a chem major and have upteenhundred chem classes under your belt and did well in them, of course taking those over is redundant UNLESS the medical school requires it which some DO. I was trying to convey that most adcoms will like to see "recent" courses but not necessarily the pre-reqs...although if you do not do well on the MCAT and apply/reapply this may come up..the why did you not retake the pre-reqs to be better prepared..just fyi. Not all folks will fit the same mold but generally the adcoms expect certain elements to determine whom is worthy of a spot. Right or wrong this is their game and we all have to play by their rules.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

We are saying the same thing...yes if you are a chem major and have upteenhundred chem classes under your belt and did well in them, of course taking those over is redundant UNLESS the medical school requires it which some DO.

And I'm not applying to any of those schools. What I'm not relating to is this notion of the totally egotistical nontrad who thinks they can breeze through admissions (including the mcat and grades hurdle) without having to put any real effort into it. I've never met a nontrad like that, and I don't think anyone like that posts here. Sure, there are some lazy nontrads, but they're lots of lazy trads, too. I knew people in undergrad who didn't study for the mcat because they thought, hey, I've had recent coursework and am pretty smart, and they all did poorly. Granted, nontrads do more poorly on the mcat, but I'm not convinced that it's related to slacking on their part.

 

[efex101]

I have read many posts here from non-trads and trads (yes this absolutely goes both ways) regarding taking the MCAT just with reviewing on their own sans the courses (there is a thread here from someone asking that) and many do think (many but of course not all) that life experience does count moreso than gpa/mcat. Those questions pop up all the time for real.

 

[efex101]

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=224560

 

[Doctor Bagel]

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=224560

Okay, maybe you have a point. I guess I didn't fall prey to that because I've been in academic environments most of my life and know how important numbers are in spite of all other qualifications. Personally, I think it makes the process more fair, and I would hope other nontrads would agree.

 

[efex101]

I think that those that have been in academics absolutely know what it takes...I truly believe that this is more prevalent in non-trads because most of them are far removed from academic endeavors and do not realize how difficult things are getting and how number driven it is. All this said, I think that if a person does not inform themselves adequately via interaction such as this board, or books for non-trads regarding the process, or talking to the schools, that then it is their fault period. The information is totally out there for all willing to find out. This is fine with me because like I have said before those that do know the ropes are the ones getting in.

 

[blee]

I've been asked to share with the latest crop of postbacs at my school some of my own experiences from last year, along with any advice I might give regarding classes and the application process as a whole. I think it's useful to know exactly what the non-traditional applicant faces when it comes to med school admissions, and what it takes to be successful. Of course, having only begun the interview process myself, I can't be completely authoritative, but at the very least I can help to dispel any perceptual myths and give some good advice on the right way to approach things. At that level, I think this has been a productive discussion.

 

[blee]

Okay, maybe you have a point. I guess I didn't fall prey to that because I've been in academic environments most of my life and know how important numbers are in spite of all other qualifications. Personally, I think it makes the process more fair, and I would hope other nontrads would agree.

I agree, but is this consistent with your prior statements in a different thread that med schools don't give enough credit to life experience?

 

[humuhumu]

I know. 🙂 It took me a while before I realized that the second picture was a rock, not a thumprint, spot, stain, or something else.

At first I thought it was a raisin, and I thought the first picture was a bagel. But "bagel raisin the boat" just didn't make sense....

 

[Doctor Bagel]

I agree, but is this consistent with your prior statements in a different thread that med schools don't give enough credit to life experience?

Well, in the prior thread, I wasn't arguing that med schools should accept subpar mcats or gpas due to prior life experiences. However, it might make sense to overlook things like taking classes at a community college, which is a must for a lot of us nontrads. If two applicants are equal or fairly close, I think previous life experiences should count as a plus. You get the feeling from this board that being a nontrad in and of itself counts as a negative, requiring one to have higher credentials than trads, which is troublesome and, yes, irrational on the part of adcoms.

 

[efex101]

I do not for one think that being non-trad is a negative at all. I think that it "can" work in your favor if all else is equal to another applicant such as GPA/MCAT. I also do not think that it will give an "edge" if the GPA/McAT is not competitive. I was way non-trad when I applied and received multiple acceptances and full rides and was given interviews at all schools except two (out of 32 applied to). So again, I think that as long as everything else is equal among two candidates the life experiences will count *if* these experiences are meaningful and gave more breadth as an individual. Remember, no matter what age you are adcoms are still looking for folks that can a) pass ALL medical school classes that are much more rigorous than undergrad a la organic style on steroids b) pass ALL boards that we take while in medical school hence the MCAT c) individuals that can get along with others and lead others hence the need for leadership/volunteering/getting along etc...

 

[humuhumu]

I do not for one think that being non-trad is a negative at all. I think that it "can" work in your favor if all else is equal to another applicant such as GPA/MCAT. I also do not think that it will give an "edge" if the GPA/McAT is not competitive. I was way non-trad when I applied and received multiple acceptances and full rides and was given interviews at all schools except two (out of 32 applied to). So again, I think that as long as everything else is equal among two candidates the life experiences will count *if* these experiences are meaningful and gave more breadth as an individual. Remember, no matter what age you are adcoms are still looking for folks that can a) pass ALL medical school classes that are much more rigorous than undergrad a la organic style on steroids b) pass ALL boards that we take while in medical school hence the MCAT c) individuals that can get along with others and lead others hence the need for leadership/volunteering/getting along etc...

Full rides?? I had no idea that any med schools could give a full ride. Impressive.

 

[efex101]

Actually many medical school give full rides. You will be notified if you have been selected for this great honor shortly after (although some schools wait a long time) your acceptance.

 

[MiesVanDerMom]

I don't quite get the point of all the discussion on this board about non-trads and lower test scores. If you want to know how well you'll do on the MCAT it seems to me looking at past standardized tests you've taken is the best predictor. I think standardized test-taking skills are about the stupidest possible way to choose future doctors though. Talk to people who actually see a lot of doctors and they'll tell you you're not only letting in a large proportion of people who have no people skills, but also a large amount of idiots. Just my 2 cents.... (and ironically, i perform extremely well on standardized tests. but don't hold it against me...)

 

[efex101]

I have to somewhat disagree for some folks that aced the SAT/ACT did very poorly on the MCAT. I think that yes, some standardized exams do resemble each other but not most. For example I have known folks to take the GRE which is also standardized and kicked bootie to then take the McAT and do very poorly (scoring less then a 20). I think that for the most part the MCAT is like no other exam out there as far as difficulty goes. There is some correlation regarding MCAT and USMLE that was published but that is the only correlation I know of. You may very well think that standardized exams are stupid but how else will you evaluate the applicants and more so how will you evaluate which medical students are competent to treat patients? it is not just all about people skills you also need the ability to problem solve, think fast on your feet, and be able to absorb large amounts of information AND be able to be tested on this information. Sure it would be nice if we could just say "hey I know my stuff" and not have to take exams ever...I wouls sign up for that right now! but alas that is not possible hence exam after exam. I have not seen many idiots in medical school yet although sure I am sure there are some...but idiots abound everywhere.

 

[blee]

I think standardized test-taking skills are about the stupidest possible way to choose future doctors though. Talk to people who actually see a lot of doctors and they'll tell you you're not only letting in a large proportion of people who have no people skills, but also a large amount of idiots. Just my 2 cents.... (and ironically, i perform extremely well on standardized tests. but don't hold it against me...)

Well, the MCAT is only one facet of admissions. You've probably heard this before, but it's a good metric of critical problem-solving acumen, accurate work under pressure, and actual retention of basic science knowledge. Furthermore, it's the closest thing we have to a nationwide objective evaluation of applicants. By administering roughly the same test to all applicants under roughly the same conditions, and by very carefully managing the scoring of the test, MCAT scores become useful indicators of relative performance. Nothing else is quite as standardized.

I agree, though, that letting people into med school solely for their MCAT scores is a bad idea. Most schools would have us believe that they take into account much more -- grades, MCAT, ECs, interview, etc. I'm inclined to believe them.

 

[efex101]

You should believe them because the do! it would be insane to just take folks based on MCAT scores! that is why GPA that demonstrates long term "sticking" with studying and doing well is also part of the picture, adcoms do know that one test day cannot vouch for a four year or more studious dedication, they also look at EC's like volunteering to see if you put your $$$ where your mouth is about giving back to the community and wanting to help folks, they also look at LOR's to see how others think of you and your potential to become physicians, etc..so MCAT scores are not the only thing but they *are* a big component of the application. Adcoms have to have some quantifiable way to figure out who will be able to pass the rigors of medical school curricula.

 

[QofQuimica]

Having a 35+ MCAT score is not necessary and certainly not sufficient to get a person into medical school, although if you have a score like that, it will come up as a topic of conversation because other people are curious about it. People are interested in extremes, as this very discussion exemplifies. Probably the worst thing that a person with high stats (MCAT and also GPA) could do though is to act as if their academic accomplishments alone entitle them to a seat in a medical school. *All* of the requirements (pre-req classes and MCAT, but also volunteering, shadowing, other ECs, strong LORs, PS, interviews) are important, and all of them should be taken seriously, not just the academic ones.

 

[efex101]

Yup, you said it.

 

[housecleaning]

Full rides?? I had no idea that any med schools could give a full ride. Impressive.

She's URM, if you didn't know.

 

[efex101]

thanks for pointing that out but the full rides I was offered had nothing to do with being a URM they were mostly merit based scholarships from the Deans offered to a variety of medical students URM/non-URM.

 

[efex101]

It is still unreal to see people that feel compelled to bring up the URM issue just because someone was offered scholarships or even received an acceptance..amazing. Of course we URM's have nothing else in our application that stands out except that we are a minority sheesh.

 

[humuhumu]

It is still unreal to see people that feel compelled to bring up the URM issue just because someone was offered scholarships or even received an acceptance..amazing. Of course we URM's have nothing else in our application that stands out except that we are a minority sheesh.

Are you from Madrid, as your signature implies? Just curious.