Osteopathic Schools Ranked by MCAT

[Bones DO]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Relatively speaking, no there aren't. The majority of allopaths practicing scored <well> above a 24 on the MCAT. There are of course outliers, which I have mentioned.



Out of nearly 115,000 applicants. That's quite a small minority (2%).

I believe he was referencing accepted students, meaning you should take that percentage out of all allo accepted applicants. I don't know the exact number, and while it will remain a minority, it will be enormously more significant than 2%.

 

[J1515]

I believe he was referencing accepted students, meaning you should take that percentage out of all allo accepted applicants. I don't know the exact number, and while it will remain a minority, it will be enormously more significant than 2%.

You are grasping at straws. Whether the number is 2% or 5%, who cares. The majority of MDs scored significantly higher than a 24 on the MCAT. We all need to take a look at ourselves in the mirror and ask why that's acceptable in the DO world. This has nothing to do with what degree is better. It's all about accountability and selecting the best of the best to care for peoples' lives.

 

[Dr Yiot]

You are grasping at straws. Whether the number is 2% or 5%, who cares. The majority of MDs scored significantly higher than a 24 on the MCAT. We all need to take a look at ourselves in the mirror and ask why that's acceptable in the DO world. This has nothing to do with what degree is better. It's all about accountability and selecting the best of the best to care for peoples' lives.

Your holding way too much value over standardized exams. They test critical thinking which is something you want your doctor to have. However there are other things that these tests cannot account for, suchs as natural abiblity and effort. Also there are so many variables to account for when assesing someones capability in med school. The material is different, the strategies to studying in med school from what I hear are also different. You cannot predict someones success off of a standardized test. Plus you do realize that the average mcat in 2004 was a 28. Now lets rewind to see when it was a 24, probobly not too long ago, which means that doctors that have been out of residency for about 10 years probobly scored around a 24. The reason these averages continue to increase is because of the applicant pool. It has been increasing which means schools can take applicants with amazing numbers, however will this dictate whether they will be better doctors? i beg to differ. You simply cant put this much emphasis on a test man.

 

[ncguy2005]

I'm dead serious. A pre-med blurting out the obvious statement with authority "higher MCAT does not equal better doctor" means nothing to me, although I generally agree. I do believe the MCAT to have a general correlation with the USMLE and specialty boards, and these tests all together do = a knowledgeable doctor in my book. You will see the stress you go through once you begin medical school, from wondering whether or not you should take the USMLE during your 2nd and 3rd years, to wondering why Columbia won't even allow you to rotate or interview for a residency position at their hospital. If you want this nonsensical jumping through hoops to end, then yes, you need to perform overall as well as MD students. This includes MCATs, USMLE, and whatever else you can think of. Stop with the "one test doesn't dictate whether or not I'm a good doctor" garbage. Nobody wants to hear excuses.

Lastly, yes, I do believe DO schools more or less have to accept people with lower stats, as the majority of people use DO as a backup (excluding anecdotal evidence of you or your friend who got a 40 on the MCAT and chose a DO school). I don't agree with it, hence why I think they need to raise the average GPA/MCAT for accepted students which can be done by capping the class sizes and stopping expansion.

I pretty much agree with you. Its making me sick to see new DO schools pop up everywhere. And now talk of off-shore DO schools??

The only way DO schools can raise their stats is to stop growing for a while. I don't believe branch campuses are a bad idea...even the LCME allows it. Its a cheaper way for a new school to develop.

Heck, even UNC is doing some kind of variation on a branch campus (google Charlotte Medical School and read the news articles that come up). However its when a school has 3..4..5 branch campuses that it begins to look like a financial gain situation rather than a "for the good of American healthcare" situation.

 

[beckhunter116]

I can't believe this thread has gone on for so long first off. No one has made mention of something I posted way earlier in this thread and that is that while the MCAT correlates to COMLEX/USMLE scores, it isn't defining between a pass and fail score. Yes, someone who score 30+ probably will score high on step 1 and so on, but someone who gets a 24 isn't automatically going to fail step 1. If that was true then based on DO MCAT averages they'd have a ****load of people failing and that hasn't been the case.

I'm sure here is where everyone will jump and yell over TOURO-NY's 78% pass rate and people on here have already discussed their 2nd yr curriculum and the fact that they get to repeat classes over/fail multiple things so we know what the situation there is and why it lead to a significant difference in the national average.

Last, something that I don't think was really ever discussed was the effect that money has on your MCAT score. So many people take the Kaplan or other classes to improve their scores or pay to take the older tests on the aamc site (I believe that's where you get it). Some of us do not have the resources to pay close to 2k for the prep class or even 300 to take all those previous tests. That doesn't exactly level the playing field because someone who has taken 10 pre-tests is more comfortable with the test than the person who took 1. On the MCAT section the most toted study plan is a slew of books/10pre-test/doing only MCAT prep for 3 months--most of the non-trads can't take off 3 months to do it. We have to study 2 hrs a day for 3 months (or more months) so comparing that to 8 hrs a day no F'ing wonder there is a difference in scores.

I'm not saying that non-trads can't score well or that taking the class gets you an automatic 30 or anything like that. Just that there has to be some kind of thought given to the various situations surrounding taking the MCAT.

 

[MedStudentWanna]

Everyone says "many" medical schools don't teach biostats. I would like to see a list of these many schools. Furthermore, the biostats on the USMLE consists of 2-3 pages in First aid, so this is no excuse. And I find it hard to believe that a medical school doesn't teach biochem and genetics in this day and age. The ones I know of do, but again, I would like a list of those that don't.

I didn't say that schools don't teach Biochem and Genetics. I said they don't teach it extensively. They only go over what you need to know for that school. As for Biostats, neither VCOM, KCUMB, nor KCOM have it listed on their curriculum guides.

First off, to answer your question of who takes the MCAT, the answer is anyone. There were people at my undergrad who had B's and C's in their prereqs and sat for the MCAT.

So what? My point was that to make it to the MCAT, these people passed a number of difficult courses, even if they did it with a C.

My point isn't that anybody who scores below a 24 shouldn't be a doctor. My point is that they should be able to do better. Maybe they don't have the money to retake it, maybe they don't have the time due to family committments. But this isn't the majority that you hear of. It's almost always the premed who took it once and doesn't want to take it again, and wants to know if DO schools will accept him with his stats. And I understand there are outliers in acceptance rates especially in the MD world which seems to be the gold standard. I'm just upset with peoples' acceptance of mediocrity in the DO world. The whole "it's just one test" or "I'm a bad test taker" doesn't fly with me. I feel that if MDs are able to do it, so should DOs.

DO schools look for different things in their applicants. They realize that numbers don't make a good doctor and that rejecting someone automatically because of a 24 on the MCAT could result in turning down someone who would have made an amazing doctor.

 

[J1515]

Your holding way too much value over standardized exams. They test critical thinking which is something you want your doctor to have. However there are other things that these tests cannot account for, suchs as natural abiblity and effort.

This is where medical school differs from college and high school. You can put forth all the effort in the world, and fail out or be unable to pass the boards. The people who failed out in my class did so not because of a lack of effort, but they simply could not pass the tests. They were very hard workers and did everything in their power to pass. That's the scary thing about medical school. You start by hitting the ground running, give 110% effort, and pray it's enough.

. You cannot predict someones success off of a standardized test.

Overall it is a pretty good predictor of future standardized tests that need to be passed to succeed.

Plus you do realize that the average mcat in 2004 was a 28..

I don't buy it. Link me.

 

[J1515]

Last, something that I don't think was really ever discussed was the effect that money has on your MCAT score. So many people take the Kaplan or other classes to improve their scores or pay to take the older tests on the aamc site

All Kaplan does is present the information to you in a structured format. You can easily purchase the books and read them on your own and learn the same material with a little dedication.

 

[123165]

For those that don't know. The average MCAT for all individuals who took it in 2009 is 27.9. I am surprised myself. I am not sure how this data could be complete, but the average in 2008 was 28.1.

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table17-fact2009mcatgpa98-09-web.pdf\



*EDIT*

This is the data for all applicants, not test takers. Total different values. Thanks JP

 

[JaggerPlate]

For those that don't know. The average MCAT for all individuals who took it in 2009 is 27.9. I am surprised myself. I am not sure how this data could be complete, but the average in 2008 was 28.1.

http://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/table17-fact2009mcatgpa98-09-web.pdf

'Average for applicants and matriculants' ... not test takers. I'm 99% sure this is the data for all people who applied and/or (two different sections) were accepted to an allopathic medical school, not the data for everyone who took the test. People who took the test and didn't apply, took it for other types of programs (ie Pod), etc, aren't factored into these averages. I'm pretty sure the average for EVERYONE who takes the test in a given year in like 24.

 

[J1515]

I didn't say that schools don't teach Biochem and Genetics. I said they don't teach it extensively.

Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I don't buy this. This is one of the easy way out excuses I hear way too often. Quantify extensively. Do they not cover the TCA cycle? Do they not cover amino acid derivatives or Km/Vmax and all that crap? If they truly miss chunks of important information and you want to take the USMLE, first aid provides an excellent outline of what you need to know. I should add you really will have to know genetics and biochem for the COMLEX as well. Don't listen to anyone who tells you not to worry about it. STUDY EVERYTHING. I had it on mine. I specifically remember them asking about differentiating galactosemia vs galactokinase deficiency. The above is not an excuse anymore for doing poorly on the USMLE. Maybe 10 years ago it was, but not anymore.

As for Biostats, neither VCOM, KCUMB, nor KCOM have it listed on their curriculum guides.

Ok, so if you attend one of those three schools, you can memorize sensitivity/specificity, different types of studies, and how to calculate ratios from 2-3 pages in first aid - literally. Otherwise I'd venture to guess the majority of schools are now teaching at least the basics. Contrary to biochem and genetics, biostats is a very minute section of the USMLE that I paid little attention to other than a quick look at first aid the week before. Again, not an excuse for a dismal performance on the USMLE. Believe it or not, I actually had biostats questions on my COMLEX steps 1 and 2. I have no idea if these were experimental or real, but something you should think about.

DO schools look for different things in their applicants. They realize that numbers don't make a good doctor and that rejecting someone automatically because of a 24 on the MCAT could result in turning down someone who would have made an amazing doctor.

I didn't say to automatically reject someone because of a 24. But you will not convince me that MD schools are passing up all these amazing doctors who are scoring 24's and 25's. Sure there will be some diamonds in the rough and I understand giving a few people second chances and looking past the numbers. But not the majority. You are buying into all the DO propaganda.

 

[123165]

'Average for applicants and matriculants' ... not test takers. I'm 99% sure this is the data for all people who applied and/or (two different sections) were accepted to an allopathic medical school, not the data for everyone who took the test. People who took the test and didn't apply, took it for other types of programs (ie Pod), etc, aren't factored into these averages. I'm pretty sure the average for EVERYONE who takes the test in a given year in like 24.

SO I seeee. I wonder where the data would be made available. Now that I think, I would guess it is a static value since the test in on a sliding scale. Previous SDN posts have cited it at ~25 or 24

 

[JaggerPlate]

SO I seeee. I wonder where the data would be made available.

Probably though AAMC as well, just don't know where.

 

[beckhunter116]

All Kaplan does is present the information to you in a structured format. You can easily purchase the books and read them on your own and learn the same material with a little dedication.

I love how you only quote a small portion of my post and then take my point out of context.

My point was that some people do not have the money to purchase all of the study materials that others do not that they lack the determination to learn it themselves. And I'm sure here is where you post links to craiglist, the thread on here, or half.com for cheaper purchases.

 

[123165]

I didn't say to automatically reject someone because of a 24. But you will not convince me that MD schools are passing up all these amazing doctors who are scoring 24's and 25's. Sure there will be some diamonds in the rough and I understand giving a few people second chances and looking past the numbers. But not the majority. You are buying into all the DO propaganda.

You are ignoring the fact that most 24s do not get into ANY medical school. Even a 25 is under the DO average.

 

[EmersonAnne]

Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I don't buy this. This is one of the easy way out excuses I hear way too often. Quantify extensively. Do they not cover the TCA cycle?

I'm a first year at one of those schools mentioned and I can tell you that we've never had a Biochem lecture on the TCA cycle.

 

[MedStudentWanna]

Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I don't buy this. This is one of the easy way out excuses I hear way too often. Quantify extensively. Do they not cover the TCA cycle? Do they not cover amino acid derivatives or Km/Vmax and all that crap? If they truly miss chunks of important information and you want to take the USMLE, first aid provides an excellent outline of what you need to know. I should add you really will have to know genetics and biochem for the COMLEX as well. Don't listen to anyone who tells you not to worry about it. STUDY EVERYTHING. I had it on mine. I specifically remember them asking about differentiating galactosemia vs galactokinase deficiency. The above is not an excuse anymore for doing poorly on the USMLE. Maybe 10 years ago it was, but not anymore.

I can tell you right now that LECOM-B brags about never going over the TCA cycle. Things have changed since you were in school.

Ok, so if you attend one of those three schools, you can memorize sensitivity/specificity, different types of studies, and how to calculate ratios from 2-3 pages in first aid - literally.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that those are the only three schools that don't include a biostats module. Those just happen to be the ones I knew about.

 

[J1515]

I love how you only quote a small portion of my post and then take my point out of context.

My point was that some people do not have the money to purchase all of the study materials that others do not that they lack the determination to learn it themselves. And I'm sure here is where you post links to craiglist, the thread on here, or half.com for cheaper purchases.

I don't have time to search for prices. If you can't afford a $100 MCAT review book, you probably can't afford the whole application process and flying all over for interviews. Again, you are grasping at straws and looking for excuses.

 

[J1515]

I'm a first year at one of those schools mentioned and I can tell you that we've never had a Biochem lecture on the TCA cycle.

TCA, GNG, glycolysis, and all the other hardcore metabolic pathways are traditionally taught during the GI block or during second year.

 

[J1515]

I can tell you right now that LECOM-B brags about never going over the TCA cycle. Things have changed since you were in school.

You are correct. I didn't consider PBL schools. They don't necessarily go over all the required material for the USMLE (or COMLEX for that matter). You need to take more initiative and ensure that you cover everything in first aid.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that those are the only three schools that don't include a biostats module. Those just happen to be the ones I knew about.

You may very well be right, but with all the false myths thrown around here I believe very little unless I see it with my own eyes. You should be skeptical of everything as well. As I said, the COMLEX started asking biostats questions. I don't know if this is an effort on their part to become more "research oriented" but it's something you should look over even if you don't plan on taking the USMLE.

 

[scpod]

I can tell you right now that LECOM-B brags about never going over the TCA cycle. Things have changed since you were in school.
....

Strange.... they tested me on it a couple of years ago.

 

[ShyRem]

I can tell you UNECOM had classes biochem, genetics, and yes, we even went over biostats. I'm not saying they were great courses, but there are always some that aren't great.

 

[scpod]

....As for Biostats, neither VCOM, KCUMB, nor KCOM have it listed on their curriculum guides....

Because it's not on the curriculum guides doesn't mean it isn't taught at all. A lecture here and there is all you really need to know what is on USMLE and COMLEX. I think we actually had it during one OPP lecture, during one mini-course lecture and during board review at the end of second year.

 

[MedStudentWanna]

Strange.... they tested me on it a couple of years ago.

All I can tell you is that during interview day, they told us that their tests aren't geared toward whether or not you memorized TCA cycle.

 

[J1515]

All I can tell you is that during interview day, they told us that their tests aren't geared toward whether or not you memorized TCA cycle.

What they might have meant is that they won't straight up ask you what enzyme catalyzes x--> y. However, if a patient has an enzyme A deficiency, what will accumulate and what clinical signs and symptoms will become apparent. This is clinically relevant and fair game in my book. Although not part of the TCA cycle, G6PD deficiency is extremely common, with possibly severe consequences. This is considered biochemistry. You will need to know this for the COMLEX, USMLE, during clinicals, and as a resident.

What you've claimed above is precisely how myths get spread. A pre-med hears something, they interpret it in their own inexperienced way, and go ahead and pass their interpretation on to everyone else as fact. This is why you need to get all your information first hand from people who have experienced it. Not what the AOA feeds you (we look at 'the whole applicant') or what the school tells you on interview day.

We are straying from the point. To get back to the original topic, there is no reason whatsoever for an osteopathic student to be unable to be successful on the USMLE. Well actually there is a reason, but people don't want to hear it. Stop arguing, stop making excuses. If you didn't do well on the MCAT, it's in the past. Take the COMLEX and USMLE in 2 years, score 99's, and then look me up on here and I will congratulate you. Hell, if you're in the area, I'll even buy you a beer.

 

[exPCM]

I have gotten an email from an SDN administrator that it is not appropriate to post volatile topics and this thread has been classified as a volatile topic so I will signoff on this thread.
Good luck to those who are trying to get into medical school and congratulations to those who have already been accepted.

 

[IDBasco]

What you've claimed above is precisely how myths get spread. A pre-med hears something, they interpret it in their own inexperienced way, and go ahead and pass their interpretation on to everyone else as fact. This is why you need to get all your information first hand from people who have experienced it. Not what the AOA feeds you (we look at 'the whole applicant') or what the school tells you on interview day.

Quoted because it needs to be repeated and is one of the most true things I have read on SDN recently. But god forbid anyone with experience tell a pre-med there is something they don't know.

 

[bioman2006]

.