Push by adcoms for lower MCAT scores?

[efle]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Let me try this again:

Top schools are aware that someone with score in the mid 20s to low 30s is already extremely likely to make it through.

In spite of this, they will continue not to draw many or any from this group. Which I guess means @LizzyM holds a very different position from others on her adcom and similar institution adcoms, if she feels scores in the upper 20s should be getting lots of consideration at her school.

 

[Sardinia]

@efle Just because she feels that kids with a 500 MCAT are going to be okay in medical school doesn't mean she has to compromise the status of her institution. It's like believing that eating fried chicken in moderation is not going to make you a diabetic, but you would never tell that to a diabetic patient presenting with symptoms of hyperglycemia. In the same way you feel that homes that possess a gun wouldn't necessarily endanger a child, but you wouldn't buy a gun and place it in your own home to test out the premise.

 

[jcorpsmanMD]

Let me try this again:

Top schools are aware that someone with score in the mid 20s to low 30s is already extremely likely to make it through.

In spite of this, they will continue not to draw many or any from this group. Which I guess means @LizzyM holds a very different position from others on her adcom and similar institution adcoms, if she feels scores in the upper 20s should be getting lots of consideration at her school.

What is your deal? Dude let it go. What are you trying to prove here because you are failing.

 

[enchantediris]

@efle Just because she feels that kids with a 500 MCAT are going to be okay in medical school doesn't mean she has to compromise the status of her institution. It's like believing that eating fried chicken in moderation is not going to make you a diabetic, but you would never tell that to a diabetic patient presenting with symptoms of hyperglycemia. In the same way you feel that homes that possess a gun wouldn't necessarily endanger a child, but you wouldn't buy a gun and place it in your own home to test out the premise.

Sure, but the examples she gives at her particular institution are more like 515 vs. 520+. The percentile difference (94th vs. 98th+) between the two is not really going to "compromise the status of her institution" -- I think she just wishes that after a certain point, other adcoms put more weight on extracurriculars and experience rather than higher and higher MCAT scores.

 

[ridethecliche]

Let me try this again:

Top schools are aware that someone with score in the mid 20s to low 30s is already extremely likely to make it through.

In spite of this, they will continue not to draw many or any from this group. Which I guess means @LizzyM holds a very different position from others on her adcom and similar institution adcoms, if she feels scores in the upper 20s should be getting lots of consideration at her school.

You still don't get it.

She's saying capable of succeeding as a binary pass/fail metric. There's way more to med school than that... Are you honestly trying hard not to get it? This pedantic nit picking and daftness seems to be a theme with you.

 

[efle]

What is your deal? Dude let it go. What are you trying to prove here because you are failing.

Does it seem like I'm upset by this or something? It's a thread about whether MCAT will be less emphasized, seems appropriate to point out that the worst offenders in MCAT emphasis are aware of the data but are not changing

 

[efle]

You still don't get it.

She's saying capable of succeeding as a binary pass/fail metric. There's way more to med school than that... Are you honestly trying hard not to get it? This pedantic nit picking and daftness seems to be a theme with you.

The "we want more than passing" thing is never explicit enough for me, that's all.

 

[LizzyM]

Believe me, when a huge donor's relative shows up with a 28 (508??), the person gets admitted. In said case, the student did well, passed the steps and matched well. Anyone who wants to question it will be told that those at the top of the curve can do well.

I doubt that the top schools will select mostly from the top of the curve (I keep typing "curse" -- very Freudian) because they are looking at other factors as well including research experience, GPA, communication skills, etc. that might very well track with MCAT.

 

[efle]

Sure, but the examples she gives at her particular institution are more like 515 vs. 520+. The percentile difference (94th vs. 98th+) between the two is not really going to "compromise the status of her institution" -- I think she just wishes that after a certain point, other adcoms put more weight on extracurriculars and experience rather than higher and higher MCAT scores.

1) I'm a dude if "she" is me!
2) I'm totally fine with emphasis of the very, very top end and I'm not in admissions

I just take issue with talk of 500 being good enough for med school, particularly when were pointing it out on a Yale server and having it posted by LizzyM, when there is no additional sentence saying keep in mind that "good enough for med school" is not what the MCAT emphasis to this degree is about to begin with.

Believe me, when a huge donor's relative shows up with a 28 (508??), the person gets admitted. In said case, the student did well, passed the steps and matched well. Anyone who wants to question it will be told that those at the top of the curve can do well.

I doubt that the top schools will select mostly from the top of the curve (I keep typing "curse" -- very Freudian) because they are looking at other factors as well including research experience, GPA, communication skills, etc. that might very well track with MCAT.

To clarify the above, you think schools are not actually trying to keep their MCAT medians in the top few percent, that just falls out as a natural consequence of trying to snag the best researchers, communicators etc?

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I think people neglect the vanity that is present in medical schools. A lot of these places want to advertise having the "best" students, especially seeing as it is a component of ranking systems like US news. High MCATs make their school just flat out look better. Whether they want to admit it or not a high MCAT can make up for a lot of deficiencies. An anecdote is one of my study friends who had a school list of mostly DO schools, got his MCAT score back of 522, and rapidly applied to some MD schools. Now will go to a UC after having 5 MD interviews and 2 of them at top 20s. I know the rest of his app, he would have never gotten looked at by these schools without that score. He probably could have scored a ~513 and wouldn't have gotten any MD invites.

High medians just mean that the school looks better on paper.

 

[QuestionsAnswers]

People with higher grades and better test scores are likely to have better content mastery, better reasoning/diagnostic skills, and will make fewer errors. High grades are also associated with conscientiousness. Personally, I'd rather have the physician with better analytical skills, better content mastery, and more attention to detail.

 

[freak7]

People with higher grades and better test scores are likely to have better content mastery, better reasoning/diagnostic skills, and will make fewer errors. High grades are also associated with conscientiousness. Personally, I'd rather have the physician with better analytical skills, better content mastery, and more attention to detail.

Jalby is that you?

 

[Lucca]

People with higher grades and better test scores are likely to have better content mastery, better reasoning/diagnostic skills, and will make fewer errors. High grades are also associated with conscientiousness. Personally, I'd rather have the physician with better analytical skills, better content mastery, and more attention to detail.

As has been discussed before, this kind of reasoning doesn't go much farther than being a simple conflation. Any data worth looking at shows that the correlation between standardized exams and the types of skills most valued in physicians is tenuous at best.

 

[enchantediris]

1) I'm a dude if "she" is me!
2) I'm totally fine with emphasis of the very, very top end and I'm not in admissions

I just take issue with talk of 500 being good enough for med school, particularly when were pointing it out on a Yale server and having it posted by LizzyM, when there is no additional sentence saying keep in mind that "good enough for med school" is not what the MCAT emphasis to this degree is about to begin with.

I was referring to LizzyM's argument, but I do remember you saying how the "elf" part of your username makes a lot of people think you're female 😛 I do agree that a lot of schools like Yale may talk the talk without necessarily walking the walk in terms of accepted student MCAT medians. Of course, I imagine that it's all relative because with about 50,000 people applying, you still have a couple thousand applicants with a 95th+ percentile MCAT for a class of 100.

 

[ridethecliche]

Hold the presses @efle , you're surprised that schools that are research heavy don't tend to pick from applicants with lower qualifications? What are the odds that two random applicants with high vs. low MCAT's have done the same level of ish?

You're acting like the MCAT is all that it's about. Those schools reject people with high scores in favor of those with lower scores due to the intangibles you're failing to grasp.

There's no magic algorithm here. You keep pining for one and it hasn't ever gotten you anywhere and it won't get you anywhere now. You're not going to get rid of the subjectivity in the process. At the end of the day two folks with the exactly same, well qualified, doctor can have totally different reactions to an interaction.

We're not in school to be code monkeys. We're not judged solely on output. Tech firms can judge applicants solely based on problem solving skills because that's what they need at the end of the day. Those same workers are damn good at their job but don't have to talk to folks from all walks of life every day.

We're a different kind of monkey.

True story: This was the picture used for his georgetown med school application.

 

[efle]

Hold the presses @efle , you're surprised that schools that are research heavy don't tend to pick from applicants with lower qualifications? What are the odds that two random applicants with high vs. low MCAT's have done the same level of ish?

You're acting like the MCAT is all that it's about. Those schools reject people with high scores in favor of those with lower scores due to the intangibles you're failing to grasp.

There's no magic algorithm here. You keep pining for one and it hasn't ever gotten you anywhere and it won't get you anywhere now. You're not going to get rid of the subjectivity in the process. At the end of the day two folks with the exactly same, well qualified, doctor can have totally different reactions to an interaction.

We're not in school to be code monkeys. We're not judged solely on output. Tech firms can judge applicants solely based on problem solving skills because that's what they need at the end of the day. Those same workers are damn good at their job but don't have to talk to folks from all walks of life every day.

We're a different kind of monkey.

True story: This was the picture used for his georgetown med school application.

Counterpoint would be the MCAT score range jump that occurred in the mid/later 2000s, and how extreme it got. Places in the span of ~7-8 years moved their 10th percentile marks up past where their medians had been, and many places got up to 98-99th percentile medians. The type of school Penn is didn't change from 2006 to 2014 but the scores sure did.

You can tell yourself the best EC carriers also happened to all start scoring that high. I take the more cynical view.

 

[mwsapphire]

Counterpoint would be the MCAT score range jump that occurred in the mid/later 2000s, and how extreme it got. Places in the span of ~7-8 years moved their 10th percentile marks up past where their medians had been, and many places got up to 98-99th percentile medians. The type of school Penn is didn't change from 2006 to 2014 but the scores sure did.

You can tell yourself the best EC carriers also happened to all start scoring that high. I take the more cynical view.

Reading @ridethecliche 's posts, one word comes to mind:
butthurt

 

[LizzyM]

I am rather reminded of a recent essay in The New York Times reflecting on the level of preparation "rich kids" put into the SAT and the costs associated with that and the importance which is assigned to test prep by those kids compared with other students. (the Op-Ed piece was written by a HS student who had a "generous scholarship to attend the Phillips Exeter summer semester" ). It is possible to prep for the MCAT and better prep tracks, on a population basis, with higher SES. Targeting applicants based on high test scores almost always tracks with choosing students who come from high income families.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/opinion/how-i-learned-to-take-the-sat-like-a-rich-kid.html?_r=0

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Reading @ridethecliche 's posts, one word comes to mind:
butthurt

He has no reason to be butt hurt. He's at a good medical school and has a great career ahead of him.

 

[sullen-burger]

I am rather reminded of a recent essay in The New York Times reflecting on the level of preparation "rich kids" put into the SAT and the costs associated with that and the importance with is assigned to test prep by those kids compared with other students. (the Op-Ed piece was written by a HS student who had a "generous scholarship to attend the Phillips Exeter summer semester" ). It is possible to prep for the MCAT and better prep tracks, on a population basis, with higher SES. Targeting applicants based on high test scores almost always tracks with choosing students who come from high income families.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/opinion/how-i-learned-to-take-the-sat-like-a-rich-kid.html?_r=0

Do students from middle and upper class families make up a majority of med students more than lower?

 

[freak7]

Do students from middle and upper class families make up a majority of med students more than lower?

Yes

 

[mwsapphire]

He has no reason to be butt hurt. He's at a good medical school and has a great career ahead of him.

That' what makes it all the more strange that he's getting so angry
That would have been really mean if he , like, didn't get into med school or something.

 

[ridethecliche]

Counterpoint would be the MCAT score range jump that occurred in the mid/later 2000s, and how extreme it got. Places in the span of ~7-8 years moved their 10th percentile marks up past where their medians had been, and many places got up to 98-99th percentile medians. The type of school Penn is didn't change from 2006 to 2014 but the scores sure did.

You can tell yourself the best EC carriers also happened to all start scoring that high. I take the more cynical view.

Step scores have been increasing as well. Congrats. Scores for everything everywhere are going up. Did you bother to look at the number of applicants and MCAT takers in the same span? The same distribution with more numbers to it means that there will be more people on the pointy end that are applying. Spots for school haven't kept pace.

I never said EC carriers specifically. I was referencing research heavy schools, which target high caliper applicants that have research experience. Those same folks are usually high achieving on tests in order to get to those places.

As a side note, when I was interviewing folks for a research gig, many resumes had the applicants MCAT score on it. That got a few lulz from me...

Reading @ridethecliche 's posts, one word comes to mind:
butthurt

Okay.

He has no reason to be butt hurt. He's at a good medical school and has a great career ahead of him.

Thanks bud! Hope you're doing well.

That' what makes it all the more strange that he's getting so angry
That would have been really mean if he , like, didn't get into med school or something.

I'm sorry everything I say isn't puppy dogs and rainbows. If my words are coming across as angry to you, your emotional sensors need to be recalibrated. They may be defective from the factory.

Actually, I'm not sorry. Deal with it.

Everyone whines about how unfair the process is and how scores and averages are so high. Put your back into and study like you mean it. Go through the process once and do it the right way. Put your bloody back into it. Then when you get in and start studying for boards you'll realize how things change when all of a sudden those people in the top 10-20% of MCAT takers are all your peers and what that means for the Step distribution. But then you remember to just sit your ass down and put your back into it.

I applied four years after I graduated to get crap together. I didn't expect schools to bend over backwards for me because I was a nice person that got a 30 and an average GPA. I did better.

There's enough written about this process that it isn't a mystery. Obviously there are outliers to the process just like there are for everything in life.

Trying to quantify what makes a good doctor is rife with myriad intangibles. That's why numbers are part of the process. It's also why when you look around your med school class you'll realize that there are a ton of personalities that did tons of cool **** before they got there.

Then you'll realize how useless all this hand wringing really is.

 

[efle]

I am rather reminded of a recent essay in The New York Times reflecting on the level of preparation "rich kids" put into the SAT and the costs associated with that and the importance with is assigned to test prep by those kids compared with other students. (the Op-Ed piece was written by a HS student who had a "generous scholarship to attend the Phillips Exeter summer semester" ). It is possible to prep for the MCAT and better prep tracks, on a population basis, with higher SES. Targeting applicants based on high test scores almost always tracks with choosing students who come from high income families.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/opinion/how-i-learned-to-take-the-sat-like-a-rich-kid.html?_r=0

haha, I'd be interested to hear this student's response to the National Association for College Admissions Counseling report (and/or related research) that found all that SAT prep nonsense has a minuscule effect (10-20 pts in math, 5-10 in reading ... SAT was on a 2400 pt scale at that time)

 

[efle]

Did you bother to look at the number of applicants and MCAT takers in the same span? The same distribution with more numbers to it means that there will be more people on the pointy end that are applying. Spots for school haven't kept pace.

I never said EC carriers specifically. I was referencing research heavy schools, which target high caliper applicants that have research experience. Those same folks are usually high achieving on tests in order to get to those places.

As a side note, when I was interviewing folks for a research gig, many resumes had the applicants MCAT score on it. That got a few lulz from me...

Haha I hope you're kidding, of course I ran numbers on how many apps/MCAT takers there were in the time periods. Big shock - moving your MCAT median from 32 to 38 in half a decade far, far outpaces the rate that the high scoring pool grew. And percentiles on the MCAT have been quite static unlike the step - here is the 2006 distribution with a 30 and 33 the same as today, at 79th and 91st percentiles.

 

[ridethecliche]

haha, I'd be interested to hear this student's response to the National Association for College Admissions Counseling report (and/or related research) that found all that SAT prep nonsense has a minuscule effect (10-20 pts in math, 5-10 in reading ... SAT was on a 2400 pt scale at that time)

Back in my day the test was out of 1600.
(Well it was when I took it in like 9th grade. My actual test was out of 2400. I had no idea they changed it again.)

I think the test prep stuff honestly just helps give students discipline and get over their exam anxiety. My parents forced me to take a class. It did nothing for me. The prep companies make the first exam or two hard as balls anyway to show how wonderrrrfulllll your progress has been thanks to their awesomesaucetastic course.

 

[ridethecliche]

Haha I hope you're kidding, of course I ran numbers on how many apps/MCAT takers there were in the time periods. Big shock - moving your MCAT median from 32 to 38 in half a decade far, far outpaces the rate that the high scoring pool grew. And percentiles on the MCAT have been quite static unlike the step - here is the 2006 distribution with a 30 and 33 the same as today, at 79th and 91st percentiles.

Right, so that means that there are more folks at those same percentiles now with class sizes staying the same.

I think you'd mentioned limiting the number of applications somewhere, right? I think that would make for an interesting exercise. I did a stupid number of applications. Like... it was friggin absurd.

 

[efle]

Right, so that means that there are more folks at those same percentiles now with class sizes staying the same.

I think you'd mentioned limiting the number of applications somewhere, right? I think that would make for an interesting exercise. I did a stupid number of applications. Like... it was friggin absurd.

The growth has been far, far, far too small to explain the median going up an order of magnitude in rarity (top 12% to top 1%). The math is in this thread somewhere

I think that's Lucca's theory, I don't think this is actually a big issue because the median number of apps is still only like 15

 

[ridethecliche]

I think that this thread, like many others like it, reflect the dilemma that folks face when they try to answer the question: what makes a good physician?

There are myriad answers, which is reflected in the schools admissions process. Student bodies are very different depending on where you go, which is impressive since the intelligence level is about the same.

I guess I'm just not surprised that research heavy schools tend to focus on the numbers, while state schools tend to give folks incentives to stay in state and select applicants that they think will stay there. It would be interesting to see the difference between in vs. out of state admits at state schools. I mean, I guess they'll just let in high numbered folks to increase their averages, but when you factor in things like yield protection etc it might answer the question : who do you really want practicing on you and your family in the future?

 

[efle]

I think that this thread, like many others like it, reflect the dilemma that folks face when they try to answer the question: what makes a good physician?

There are myriad answers, which is reflected in the schools admissions process. Student bodies are very different depending on where you go, which is impressive since the intelligence level is about the same.

I guess I'm just not surprised that research heavy schools tend to focus on the numbers, while state schools tend to give folks incentives to stay in state and select applicants that they think will stay there. It would be interesting to see the difference between in vs. out of state admits at state schools. I mean, I guess they'll just let in high numbered folks to increase their averages, but when you factor in things like yield protection etc it might answer the question : who do you really want practicing on you and your family in the future?

I def do think OOS is used to buoy the medians. Oregon in particular IIRC even said on their website don't bother applying as an out of state applicant unless your GPA and MCAT are above our medians.

Its interesting to think about whether other major factors in admissions are any more valid. The studies I've read on interview scores for example found them pretty inconsistent, something like 50% of a person's score was based on who they happened to be interviewed by.

 

[bonedoc5576]

I'm in the camp that moving away from grades and MCAT scores only serves the interests of political correctness and will be championed by the less academically gifted but in my opinion serving the public interest of bringing the most talented individuals into medicine ought to be a meritocracy unadulterated by bias and I'd go so far as to say that moving away from objectivity in seeking the brightest, hardest working, and most organized physician candidates is immoral. Shame on the ad coms.

 

[mwsapphire]

I'm in the camp that moving away from grades and MCAT scores only serves the interests of political correctness and will be championed by the less academically gifted but in my opinion serving the public interest of bringing the most talented individuals into medicine ought to be a meritocracy unadulterated by bias and I'd go so far as to say that moving away from objectivity in seeking the brightest, hardest working, and most organized physician candidates is immoral. Shame on the ad coms.

I can't tell if this is serious or not
sarcasm travels poorly over the electrons

 

[freak7]

I'm in the camp that moving away from grades and MCAT scores only serves the interests of political correctness and will be championed by the less academically gifted but in my opinion serving the public interest of bringing the most talented individuals into medicine ought to be a meritocracy unadulterated by bias and I'd go so far as to say that moving away from objectivity in seeking the brightest, hardest working, and most organized physician candidates is immoral. Shame on the ad coms.

What about selection bias? The ones getting the higher scores and grades tend to be the ones from good socioeconomic backgrounds. Sometimes meritocracy can actually be unfair.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

But note that the school that shared this was a top private institution.

and this supports my statement above that "doing well" means different things to AAMC vs the most selective med schools. No matter how many lecture slides about the middle of the distribution you find on Yale servers, they will continue to draw primarily from the very top end of the curve, because they are interested in academic ability far beyond what's required for graduating med school.

I do find it ironic that Yale shared this slide because their curriculum compels them to select for high MCAT scorers - pretty sure this was mentioned by @Med Ed earlier in this thread. However, it is very likely that top schools, that actually give exams, could have MCAT medians in the 34-35 range and still graduate a class that matches into selective academic residencies in high numbers.

 

[ridethecliche]

I def do think OOS is used to buoy the medians. Oregon in particular IIRC even said on their website don't bother applying as an out of state applicant unless your GPA and MCAT are above our medians.

Its interesting to think about whether other major factors in admissions are any more valid. The studies I've read on interview scores for example found them pretty inconsistent, something like 50% of a person's score was based on who they happened to be interviewed by.

MMI's. Recorded and graded by third party observers with a scoring rubric.
Original interviewer has one of the three scores. Outside observers have two.

There's one institution where I would have liked nothing more than to be interviewed by a different person. I've bombed job interviews in the past and ya know sheet happens, but this was by far the worst experience I'd had. Oh well, atleast the weather where I was happened to be say... 30-40 degrees warmer than where I lived. I even had to stay a day more because of flight cancellations due to a snowstorm back home.

Rough life hahahhaha.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

There's one institution where I would have liked nothing more than to be interviewed by a different person. I've bombed job interviews in the past and ya know sheet happens, but this was by far the worst experience I'd had. Oh well, atleast the weather where I was happened to be say... 30-40 degrees warmer than where I lived. I even had to stay a day more because of flight cancellations due to a snowstorm back home.

Rough life hahahhaha.

 

[spikes]

I'm in the camp that moving away from grades and MCAT scores only serves the interests of political correctness and will be championed by the less academically gifted but in my opinion serving the public interest of bringing the most talented individuals into medicine ought to be a meritocracy unadulterated by bias and I'd go so far as to say that moving away from objectivity in seeking the brightest, hardest working, and most organized physician candidates is immoral. Shame on the ad coms.

Zero support from parents, working to pay rent, tuition and generally stay off the street (hey, selling drugs is probably easier and definitely more profitable).

Still find time to study for the MCAT a few hours a night after class and work with old notes and hand-me-down prep books.

Proud of that 29? Why? That 37 is smarter, harder working, more academically gifted and going to make a better doctor.

 

[bonedoc5576]

Zero support from parents, working to pay rent, tuition and generally stay off the street (hey, selling drugs is probably easier and definitely more profitable).

Still find time to study for the MCAT a few hours a night after class and work with old notes and hand-me-down prep books.

Proud of that 29? Why? That 37 is smarter, harder working, more academically gifted and going to make a better doctor.

You sound very deserving but patients are more deserving and your challenges are immaterial to the needs of future patients

 

[cactusman]

Zero support from parents, working to pay rent, tuition and generally stay off the street (hey, selling drugs is probably easier and definitely more profitable).

Still find time to study for the MCAT a few hours a night after class and work with old notes and hand-me-down prep books.

Proud of that 29? Why? That 37 is smarter, harder working, more academically gifted and going to make a better doctor.

An independent drug dealer is estimated to make $20,000 to $30,000 a year. A low-level drug dealer working, with very little power, under someone else would likely make much less.

 

[sullen-burger]

Yes

I thought I had a tacit understanding of this but the link is what I needed. Thanks!

 

[spikes]

You sound very deserving but patients are more deserving and your challenges are immaterial to the needs of future patients

I wasn't describing myself but a friend who grew up in south Los Angeles and is now completing his second year of ortho residency.

If you "standardize" test preparation/time/support/etc, how do you know that person wouldn't do just as well with more resources available (like those available in medical school)?

 

[OchemOficionado]

You sound very deserving but patients are more deserving and your challenges are immaterial to the needs of future patients

You don't get it. The challenges are the main reason he didn't get a 37. That's kind of the point. Challenges that hindered students from top scores aren't going to hinder them from being great doctors.

 

[DrHart]

I'm in the camp that moving away from grades and MCAT scores only serves the interests of political correctness and will be championed by the less academically gifted but in my opinion serving the public interest of bringing the most talented individuals into medicine ought to be a meritocracy unadulterated by bias and I'd go so far as to say that moving away from objectivity in seeking the brightest, hardest working, and most organized physician candidates is immoral. Shame on the ad coms.

boi you ever heard of a run on sentence?!

try a period.... or a comma for gods sake

 

[bonedoc5576]

You don't get it. The challenges are the main reason he didn't get a 37. That's kind of the point. Challenges that hindered students from top scores aren't going to hinder them from being great doctors.

So you are advocating selection on the basis of being the most challenged? Or perhaps you can simply intuit who will be successful by "holistic review?" How do you know that person could have scored a 37? You don't and that's the point that you don't get

 

[JJRousseau]

I am rather reminded of a recent essay in The New York Times reflecting on the level of preparation "rich kids" put into the SAT and the costs associated with that and the importance which is assigned to test prep by those kids compared with other students. (the Op-Ed piece was written by a HS student who had a "generous scholarship to attend the Phillips Exeter summer semester" ). It is possible to prep for the MCAT and better prep tracks, on a population basis, with higher SES. Targeting applicants based on high test scores almost always tracks with choosing students who come from high income families.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/10/opinion/how-i-learned-to-take-the-sat-like-a-rich-kid.html?_r=0

I'm from a high income family and despite my age, I was lucky enough that they helped me out with the MCAT, application process and fees. But because of my age asking to help for these things was a noticeable experience (these costs would've been crippling for me in my financial situation independently). I can't imagine coming from a background where these expenses are crippling or even significant for a family as a whole. I haven't even started a career in medicine (recently admitted), but I'm already confident that it is not easily accessible to a student from a low-income family who has even the most liberal sense of being financial risk-averse. This should change IMHO. I would not be surprised if over the last twenty years we have missed some great doctors from working class let alone poor backgrounds. The disadvantaged and URM status help, but I think they are poor proxies for overall reform of the cost barrier, particularly considering the undergraduate barrier of education (e.g. a bright student in an inner-city school might not have college advising that informs them of the extensive financial aid).

EDIT: I should say I laughed at the cost of MCAT prep. My family could definitely afford it, but I could not justify imposing those fees on them, I can't imagine how folks cope when those numbers simply aren't affordable (and I can see why!)

 

[sullen-burger]

It's like the Janitor in Scrubs said, "Change begets change."

But in this case, SES begets SES.




You have any ideas on how to change the cycle?

 

[JJRousseau]

It's like the Janitor in Scrubs said, "Change begets change."

But in this case, SES begets SES.




You have any ideas on how to change the cycle?

Well for one, I've seen @Lucca recommend a school application number limit. I think I like that change.

 

[OchemOficionado]

So you are advocating selection on the basis of being the most challenged? Or perhaps you can simply intuit who will be successful by "holistic review?" How do you know that person could have scored a 37? You don't and that's the point that you don't get

No. I'm not advocating for anything. I was simply trying to help you understand the response you commented on a little better.

Those that are chosen with lower scores prove they have what it takes in different ways and at least meet the minimum of what it takes to be a successful doctor. Sociology proves that challenges many times impact education and standardized tests. To account for that should be applauded. You don't have to get a 37 to be a great doctor or to even be the best, how is that hard to understand?

Medical schools are giving people a chance with lower scores and it seems to be working out just fine.

 

[Lucca]

It's like the Janitor in Scrubs said, "Change begets change."

But in this case, SES begets SES.




You have any ideas on how to change the cycle?

The SES imbalance in professional school is a structural problem that goes far deeper than MCAT prep. Like I mentioned earlier, adcoms can do whatever they want but attracting primarily service-minded people who are also academically capable is a very challenging goal. It cannot be achieved if the material conditions of medical training and practice do not change.

Let's count some of the ways:

1. Maybe we can start with the fact that many working class people in this country don't even come into contact with a Dr unless its an emergency or they are getting their child's shots / physical done for school because they can't afford one in any other instance. A lot of pre-meds start out because of an experience they have with a family members illness (or even their own). For a lot of people that "experience with a family member's illness" is that they didn't have insurance and a family member's medical care left their family financially devastated, or that family member simply opted out of medical care and sought alternative or no other treatment. As a translator I've had to look people in the face and tell them there was nothing we could do when they asked us how to choose between receiving necessary treatment and feeding their family for a month. I dont think these people, their families, or their children are leaving with anything like a positive impression of the powers of the medical profession. They might, but I speculate that they are less likely to be inspired.

2. Prestige chasing matters a lot less in working class families. We all know plenty of people who got on this path (and maybe even stayed on it) because of the prestige of the medical profession. Students from working class families are also less likely to be around other students at every step of their educational career that care about this stuff.

3. Every step of this process is incredibly financially prohibitive and rewards those that do not have to finance their own education by working through school. I think this is sort of self-explanatory and has been discussed in the thread. Furthermore, taking on hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt that can be repaid slowly over a very long time period after a very long period of training might not be a very attractive option when there are other ways to get into the workforce faster, pay off undergrad debt, and help support your parents / family members.

Here's an idea: Make medical school free and have everyone pay for their training with mandatory service where they are needed most after their first years of medical training but before specializing (if they are thinking about specializing). I think this would get more of the 'right' people to line up and clear out some of the others.

 

[JJRousseau]

On top of school number limitation, if you could put in your social security number and your parents' social security numbers and fees for MCAT, MCAT prep subsidy, primary fee, secondary fee, and subsidizing flights to interviews could be determined instantly by prior year tax return recalled from those numbers that would be pretty sweet. Bear in mind I'd likely be paying full fees under this system, so this contribution is purely intellectual and not personally driven. The idea is we want the best physicians serving us as a society regardless of their history of SES (I'll be embarrassed if this acronym is not socio-economic status), so we agree as a society to ensure that the barrier to being a physician is purely based on personality and intelligence in some set of holistic measures. Thus, we subsidize any qualified individual from a disadvantaged SES the whole way with easy visibility (not reimbursement, but initial costs and so no financial risk until entry into physician income is all but guaranteed).