Retakes Not Going As Planned

[adrian710]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Retaking 4 classes this year. Already retook 2 and ended up with B's. Although this helps my GPA since the original grades were C's, will schools see this as not favorable since I didn't Ace the course?

Thanks in advance people!

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

I mean, it's not exactly the end of the world, but it's not good either since most people have gotten higher grades in those classes their first time around. I think it's important however to reflect upon why you didn't get As in them however.

 

[Bones 2020]

I retook 3 classes, got B's in two of them and an A in the other. 5 interviews: 2 acceptances, a waitlist, the other interview declined (one more to go still). I think you'll be okay as long as you get A's in the next two

 

[adrian710]

I retook 3 classes, got B's in two of them and an A in the other. 5 interviews: 2 acceptances, a waitlist, the other interview declined (one more to go still). I think you'll be okay as long as you get A's in the next two

Mind asking me ur stats and where your interview invites were?

 

[DocWinter]

Retaking 4 classes all at once might be a factor. What courses are these?

 

[adrian710]

Retaking 4 classes all at once might be a factor. What courses are these?

Gen Chem 1 and 2, Physics 1 and 2. Got C's first time around in all 4 classes during freshman/sophomore year of college.

Only took 2 this semester, and taking 2 next semester. These classes have taken a back seat to my MCAT studying which I've been doing intensely since Oct and will continue doing so until test date first of April.

 

[DocWinter]

So you're taking 2 courses, each semester?

 

[adrian710]

So you're taking 2 courses, each semester?

Yeah I have to - I can't take Gen 1 and 2 together and same with Physics

 

[AzizImSorry]

Gen Chem 1 and 2, Physics 1 and 2. Got C's first time around in all 4 classes during freshman/sophomore year of college.

Only took 2 this semester, and taking 2 next semester. These classes have taken a back seat to my MCAT studying which I've been doing intensely since Oct and will continue doing so until test date first of April.

I feel like 6 months of "intense" MCAT studying is not worth doing (moderately) poorly on your retakes. If you focus more of your attention on your classes, you will be studying for the MCAT (gen chem 2 and physics 2) anyway. Right now it seems like you're doing two things half-assed. I don't understand why you would start studying for the MCAT so far out when you have way more immediate problems. And if you're acing your classes, I'm sure you're learning the material better than you would be studying "intensely" for the MCAT anyway.

Could you walk us through how you're "intensely" studying for the MCAT so far out? How do you plan on retaining all the info you've studied recently come test day in 4 months? I don't even think there is enough material to be spending a lot of time everyday on intense MCAT studying. I don't mean to rag on you, but this seems like a silly strategy.

To each his own.... but I have a hard time wrapping my head around the utility of 6 months of "intense" MCAT studying. Anything from 3 to 1 month of intense MCAT studying seems like plenty to me. Ace your classes, learn from them instead of taking them just to take them, and crush the MCAT. It's not exactly too late to change your strategy, but I think you've missed a pretty good opportunity to show adcoms that you can handle the basic material by acing relatively easy basic science classes. Good luck, I hope you get a 40+ equivalent MCAT with the amount of time you've put in. It would raise some serious questions about why you got Bs as retakes in pre-req courses while scoring that well, but you gotta do what you can at this point.

 

[adrian710]

I feel like 6 months of "intense" MCAT studying is not worth doing (moderately) poorly on your retakes. If you focus more of your attention on your classes, you will be studying for the MCAT (gen chem 2 and physics 2) anyway. Right now it seems like you're doing two things half-assed. I don't understand why you would start studying for the MCAT so far out when you have way more immediate problems. And if you're acing your classes, I'm sure you're learning the material better than you would be studying "intensely" for the MCAT anyway.

Could you walk us through how you're "intensely" studying for the MCAT so far out? How do you plan on retaining all the info you've studied recently come test day in 4 months? I don't even think there is enough material to be spending a lot of time everyday on intense MCAT studying. I don't mean to rag on you, but this seems like a silly strategy.

To each his own.... but I have a hard time wrapping my head around the utility of 6 months of "intense" MCAT studying. Anything from 3 to 1 month of intense MCAT studying seems like plenty to me. Ace your classes, learn from them instead of taking them just to take them, and crush the MCAT. It's not exactly too late to change your strategy, but I think you've missed a pretty good opportunity to show adcoms that you can handle the basic material by acing relatively easy basic science classes. Good luck, I hope you get a 40+ equivalent MCAT with the amount of time you've put in. It would raise some serious questions about why you got Bs as retakes in pre-req courses while scoring that well, but you gotta do what you can at this point.

Intense as in thoroughly going through each of the topics before I start to take practice tests a couple months out. I'm doing prob 2 chapters a week from EK and Princeton. It takes a long time to really understand EVERYTHING and then have months still to have time to do practice tests and REVIEW them the correct way. I do about 20 hours with my tutor a week alone and that's not counting my 20 hours of studying alone for the MCAT. Ur right I should have focused more on my classes but I think my upper level sciences show ADCOMS that I can handle tough material. It's easy to remember stuff so far out when you do recall sheets every day on those chapters. Honestly, GPA < MCAT.

 

[darknecrosforte]

Intense MCAT studying should not be longer than 4 weeks. I signed up for the first 2015 MCAT weekend and was taking general microbiology, ochem, anatomical kin, and exercise physiology for most of my MCAT study time. Focus on your classes. Stop "studying" for the MCAT. The only thing you should be doing for it right now is reading scientific papers like it's your hobby.

My MCAT prep: Filled out 4 weeks of 15 minute increment spreadsheet data so I could get A's in everything (except anatomical kinesiology... fking tendons...) and a 506 score. Getting 124 in the bio section was probably due to not taking intro bio yet, but YOU don't have to make that mistake. Intense study means you follow a strict schedule and tell your family and gf to feck off when you're in the zone. You turn off your phone and sit up straight. You want to study in a very well-lit area at 75 degrees or whatever temperature the testing centers are at. No music. Use pomodoros or timers to switch sections and if it goes off, you STOP. You actually remember more if you get interrupted during multi-discipline study. Work on two sections per day. I found that the sociology and physical sections paired well and then bio and CARS. Prevents interference in memory.

Pick scientific journals written about cancer, interleukins, or weird stuff like wnt signaling. Don't read the abstract. Give yourself a 90 second timer to skim the rest of it and then give yourself 90 seconds to write an outline of what you think the abstract would be. Compare your outline to the actual abstract. See what details you missed. You must train to automatically screen out small ideas and find the purpose, proof, methods, etc. of journals. I'd say over 65% of the MCAT was based on the ability to do this rather than memorize amino acids (which you should still do).

 

[darknecrosforte]

Honestly, GPA < MCAT.

What? The measure of a student's ability to put in hard work over time is less important than a standardized test? If you are a non-trad who has taken a lot of time off of school or are extremely busy being a single mother, business owner, or full-time worker, then yes you are correct. If you are a traditional student or have taken a gap year to deal with poor choices, then no, the MCAT isn't more important. GPA trends show your ability to make decisions concerning work load, study time budgeting, and improving your study habits or technique. You don't necessarily get that from the MCAT.

 

[adrian710]

Intense MCAT studying should not be longer than 4 weeks. I signed up for the first 2015 MCAT weekend and was taking general microbiology, ochem, anatomical kin, and exercise physiology for most of my MCAT study time. Focus on your classes. Stop "studying" for the MCAT. The only thing you should be doing for it right now is reading scientific papers like it's your hobby.

My MCAT prep: Filled out 4 weeks of 15 minute increment spreadsheet data so I could get A's in everything (except anatomical kinesiology... fking tendons...) and a 506 score. Getting 124 in the bio section was probably due to not taking intro bio yet, but YOU don't have to make that mistake. Intense study means you follow a strict schedule and tell your family and gf to feck off when you're in the zone. You turn off your phone and sit up straight. You want to study in a very well-lit area at 75 degrees or whatever temperature the testing centers are at. No music. Use pomodoros or timers to switch sections and if it goes off, you STOP. You actually remember more if you get interrupted during multi-discipline study. Work on two sections per day. I found that the sociology and physical sections paired well and then bio and CARS. Prevents interference in memory.

Pick scientific journals written about cancer, interleukins, or weird stuff like wnt signaling. Don't read the abstract. Give yourself a 90 second timer to skim the rest of it and then give yourself 90 seconds to write an outline of what you think the abstract would be. Compare your outline to the actual abstract. See what details you missed. You must train to automatically screen out small ideas and find the purpose, proof, methods, etc. of journals. I'd say over 65% of the MCAT was based on the ability to do this rather than memorize amino acids (which you should still do).

I like the science journals idea

 

[darknecrosforte]

I like the science journals idea

It will really save your butt because regular people are used to reading textbooks and getting straight-forward answers. If you can correctly ascertain the main goal of the paper, identify weaknesses in the protocol, and see future implications in research, you will not freeze on test day.

Watching nervous breakdowns is fun though.

 

[mathnerd88]

I feel like 6 months of "intense" MCAT studying is not worth doing (moderately) poorly on your retakes. If you focus more of your attention on your classes, you will be studying for the MCAT (gen chem 2 and physics 2) anyway. Right now it seems like you're doing two things half-assed. I don't understand why you would start studying for the MCAT so far out when you have way more immediate problems. And if you're acing your classes, I'm sure you're learning the material better than you would be studying "intensely" for the MCAT anyway.

Could you walk us through how you're "intensely" studying for the MCAT so far out? How do you plan on retaining all the info you've studied recently come test day in 4 months? I don't even think there is enough material to be spending a lot of time everyday on intense MCAT studying. I don't mean to rag on you, but this seems like a silly strategy.

To each his own.... but I have a hard time wrapping my head around the utility of 6 months of "intense" MCAT studying. Anything from 3 to 1 month of intense MCAT studying seems like plenty to me. Ace your classes, learn from them instead of taking them just to take them, and crush the MCAT. It's not exactly too late to change your strategy, but I think you've missed a pretty good opportunity to show adcoms that you can handle the basic material by acing relatively easy basic science classes. Good luck, I hope you get a 40+ equivalent MCAT with the amount of time you've put in. It would raise some serious questions about why you got Bs as retakes in pre-req courses while scoring that well, but you gotta do what you can at this point.

I agree with this. I scored a 30 and 31 on my MCAT. I only studied for a month each time. That's with my biological science and physical science score of 12 and 11 on both times. My verbal is noticeably weaker than the other two.

OP, focus on your classes more. Once you actually understand the background from your classes you should be doing well on the MCAT anyways. MCAT isn't that difficult once you truly understand what's going on in your general science classes. If you can't even handle the easy classes, how can you handle the MCAT (which is notably more difficult?)

 

[mathnerd88]

What? The measure of a student's ability to put in hard work over time is less important than a standardized test? If you are a non-trad who has taken a lot of time off of school or are extremely busy being a single mother, business owner, or full-time worker, then yes you are correct. If you are a traditional student or have taken a gap year to deal with poor choices, then no, the MCAT isn't more important. GPA trends show your ability to make decisions concerning work load, study time budgeting, and improving your study habits or technique. You don't necessarily get that from the MCAT.

Depends on what you're looking for. I can take classes at CC and get a 4.0 without much effort than taking the courses at a university.

MCAT is what standardizes everything, because everyone takes it. It could also explain why someone in an engineering major got a 3.0 while someone in a psychology major got a 3.8. I think both are important, but it depends on the context you're looking for. College course difficulty honestly varies by degree, as well as the colleges themselves.

 

[AzizImSorry]

Depends on what you're looking for. I can take classes at CC and get a 4.0 without much effort than taking the courses at a university.

MCAT is what standardizes everything, because everyone takes it.

I agree with this, but think different schools value them both differently. I think it's tough to say which is more importantly generally, vs. on a school to school basis (just by looking at the matriculated students' stats)

 

[mathnerd88]

I agree with this, but think different schools value them both differently. I think it's tough to say which is more importantly generally, vs. on a school to school basis (just by looking at the matriculated students' stats)

Exactly. Also GPA is easily skewed because of the grade replacement policy. I can go to CC, get A's in all my prerequisites and science courses, and can easily obtain a 4.0 sGPA/cGPA.

Would you think someone with a 4.0 GPA and a 24 MCAT be better than someone with a 3.4 and a 33 MCAT? Personally, I would think the person with the 33 MCAT is more qualified to be a physician, because board scores are what gives you the degree, not your GPA, and that is what residencies really care about.

 

[AzizImSorry]

Exactly. Also GPA is easily skewed because of the grade replacement policy. I can go to CC, get A's in all my prerequisites and science courses, and can easily obtain a 4.0 sGPA/cGPA.

Would you think someone with a 4.0 GPA and a 24 MCAT be better than someone with a 3.6 and a 33 MCAT? Personally, I would think the person with the 33 MCAT is more qualified to be a physician, because board scores are what gives you the degree, not your GPA.

I've had this qualm since I started the application process. I wonder how someone with a 4.0 (or anything 3.7+ really) can get a 25-28 on the MCAT. Obviously they measure pretty different things, but I always question the quality of the school/classes if the GPA is so easily attained and the kids struggle with the MCAT. I really wonder how admissions committees account for that kind of thing #BitterAboutMyGPA

 

[deleted719840]

I retook 13 classes and didn't ace 5 of them the second time. I received 6 IIs. I think you will be fine!

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

What? The measure of a student's ability to put in hard work over time is less important than a standardized test? If you are a non-trad who has taken a lot of time off of school or are extremely busy being a single mother, business owner, or full-time worker, then yes you are correct. If you are a traditional student or have taken a gap year to deal with poor choices, then no, the MCAT isn't more important. GPA trends show your ability to make decisions concerning work load, study time budgeting, and improving your study habits or technique. You don't necessarily get that from the MCAT.

Actually the correlation between GPA and success in medical school and board scores is pretty weak. Adcoms have told me that a lower GPA and higher MCAT is better than a low MCAT but high GPA.

 

[darknecrosforte]

Actually the correlation between GPA and success in medical school and board scores is pretty weak. Adcoms have told me that a lower GPA and higher MCAT is better than a low MCAT but high GPA.

You are correct in what you said. I should have said that medical school class performance ("rank or GPA") is correlated with board scores. What I'm arguing is that beyond an acceptable threshold MCAT score (~509-510), the GPA gives more information about the student. Going beyond a specific MCAT minimum level (~509-510) shows "this person doesn't panic when taking standardized tests" or "this person can actually apply knowledge". Standardization is great for evaluating applicants and is a good equalizer across SES differences, but after seeing so many applicants post stuff like "my MCAT was great, but I don't know why _________", I'm trying to show where they may be communicating something through their choices in classes, grades, etc.

As for stating the differences in institutions and difficulty of degrees or courses, these are very easy to ascertain from course descriptions and school reputations. It isn't like they aren't going over these factors when evaluating applicants. They know when a student is trying to cheese them.

 

[AzizImSorry]

You are correct in what you said. I should have said that medical school class performance ("rank or GPA") is correlated with board scores. What I'm arguing is that beyond an acceptable threshold MCAT score (~509-510), the GPA gives more information about the student. Going beyond a specific MCAT minimum level (~509-510) shows "this person doesn't panic when taking standardized tests" or "this person can actually apply knowledge". Standardization is great for evaluating applicants and is a good equalizer across SES differences, but after seeing so many applicants post stuff like "my MCAT was great, but I don't know why _________", I'm trying to show where they may be communicating something through their choices in classes, grades, etc.

As for stating the differences in institutions and difficulty of degrees or courses, these are very easy to ascertain from course descriptions and school reputations. It isn't like they aren't going over these factors when evaluating applicants. They know when a student is trying to cheese them.

This is pretty silly. I don't like when people post with such a rigid stance on things. I'm no adcom expert, so these are legitimate questions. Not trying to antagonize you... Where is there proof about this supposed minimum MCAT threshold? So there isn't a marked difference between someone with a 515 and a 525? They've both shown that they don't panic when taking standardized tests? And what about a threshold for GPAs? Do you think that there is a threshold for GPAs to show "this person can handle the courseload they took"?

I think there's a lot more to this whole scheme than you or I understand

 

[mathnerd88]

You are correct in what you said. I should have said that medical school class performance ("rank or GPA") is correlated with board scores. What I'm arguing is that beyond an acceptable threshold MCAT score (~509-510), the GPA gives more information about the student. Going beyond a specific MCAT minimum level (~509-510) shows "this person doesn't panic when taking standardized tests" or "this person can actually apply knowledge". Standardization is great for evaluating applicants and is a good equalizer across SES differences, but after seeing so many applicants post stuff like "my MCAT was great, but I don't know why _________", I'm trying to show where they may be communicating something through their choices in classes, grades, etc.

As for stating the differences in institutions and difficulty of degrees or courses, these are very easy to ascertain from course descriptions and school reputations. It isn't like they aren't going over these factors when evaluating applicants. They know when a student is trying to cheese them.

Unfortunately, I doubt that schools have the time to evaluate every applicant on an individual basis based on the difficulty level of their classes and/or school. I would believe many of them just rank applicants through a computer system by GPA and/or MCAT, or perhaps even using a LizzyM calculation.

Then after they've sorted it out on their computer system, they'll probably look at the ranks that seem high in terms of GPA and MCAT and then evaluate more on an individual basis to grant an II.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

This is pretty silly. I don't like when people post with such a rigid stance on things. I'm no adcom expert, so these are legitimate questions. Not trying to antagonize you... Where is there proof about this supposed minimum MCAT threshold? So there isn't a marked difference between someone with a 515 and a 525? They've both shown that they don't panic when taking standardized tests? And what about a threshold for GPAs? Do you think that there is a threshold for GPAs to show "this person can handle the courseload they took"?

I think there's a lot more to this whole scheme than you or I understand

This is a very true statement that applies to all of us here that aren't adcom members so I am definitely no expert here, but often the difference between a 515 and a 525 can be a matter of questions. The difference is most likely negligible in someone's ability to rock the boards or succeed in medical school. I don't have the research in front of me but I've seen studies that show someone's ability to succeed in medical school and their MCAT score only have a correlation until about an old 26/27. Once someone hits the thirties their chances of getting a 250+ score on USMLE is no worse than someone that got a 39. So no there really isn't a huge marked difference.

GPA is often a factor of a number of outside things, like the institution attended, types of classes, whether the student worked, and a myriad of other things. Which is why it is a much weaker correlate. Averages are so high because it is a seller's market, not because it really means someone with a 3.9 does better in medical school than someone with a 3.4

 

[darknecrosforte]

This is pretty silly. I don't like when people post with such a rigid stance on things. I'm no adcom expert, so these are legitimate questions. Not trying to antagonize you... Where is there proof about this supposed minimum MCAT threshold? So there isn't a marked difference between someone with a 515 and a 525? They've both shown that they don't panic when taking standardized tests? And what about a threshold for GPAs? Do you think that there is a threshold for GPAs to show "this person can handle the courseload they took"?

I think there's a lot more to this whole scheme than you or I understand

It's not a rigid stance. When you look directly at the percentile chart, it literally shows there is a tiny difference at the highest ranges. For example, 519-528 differ by two percentiles. Take that difference of 9 points at the midrange and you get a range from 34th to 68th percentiles. An extreme example is will adcoms ever say anything like "This guy got a 519, but this other guy got a 525 so he's probably better". Probably not. It will be a few years before they can even use the new MCAT to its fullest potential so right now, it's more of a "this guy is ______ above the mean score of 500".

The "proof" of a minimum MCAT has always existed. Nearly every medical school says what they screen out and they list their matriculate data. There have been standards for the longest time. Of course schools accept students below these standards, but it is rare and these students are usually URM, business owners, dragon slayers, etc. If you want to use the old standard of 30 is the "good" score, that means 509 (80th percentile). Human tendencies in being slightly OCD means 510. 500 and above is acceptable right now but it definitely will not be next cycle. This doesn't take data to figure out. It's common sense.

https://aamc-orange.global.ssl.fast...-4aa0-90cb-70184be8c8b8/percentilenewmcat.pdf

 

[darknecrosforte]

This is a very true statement that applies to all of us here that aren't adcom members so I am definitely no expert here, but often the difference between a 515 and a 525 can be a matter of questions. The difference is most likely negligible in someone's ability to rock the boards or succeed in medical school. I don't have the research in front of me but I've seen studies that show someone's ability to succeed in medical school and their MCAT score only have a correlation until about an old 26/27. Once someone hits the thirties their chances of getting a 250+ score on USMLE is no worse than someone that got a 39. So no there really isn't a huge marked difference.

GPA is often a factor of a number of outside things, like the institution attended, types of classes, whether the student worked, and a myriad of other things. Which is why it is a much weaker correlate. Averages are so high because it is a seller's market, not because it really means someone with a 3.9 does better in medical school than someone with a 3.4

This.

 

[AzizImSorry]

It's not a rigid stance. When you look directly at the percentile chart, it literally shows there is a tiny difference at the highest ranges. For example, 519-528 differ by two percentiles. Take that difference of 9 points at the midrange and you get a range from 34th to 68th percentiles. An extreme example is will adcoms ever say anything like "This guy got a 519, but this other guy got a 525 so he's probably better". Probably not. It will be a few years before they can even use the new MCAT to its fullest potential so right now, it's more of a "this guy is ______ above the mean score of 500".

The "proof" of a minimum MCAT has always existed. Nearly every medical school says what they screen out and they list their matriculate data. There have been standards for the longest time. Of course schools accept students below these standards, but it is rare and these students are usually URM, business owners, dragon slayers, etc. If you want to use the old standard of 30 is the "good" score, that means 509 (80th percentile). Human tendencies in being slightly OCD means 510. 500 and above is acceptable right now but it definitely will not be next cycle. This doesn't take data to figure out. It's common sense.

https://aamc-orange.global.ssl.fast...-4aa0-90cb-70184be8c8b8/percentilenewmcat.pdf

Isn't that the point though? That those people on the upper end can get those extra points that others can't, making them much more desirable for med school admissions? All other things equal, the 525 gets the spot over the 519 in a world where those two people are competing for one seat. In reality, both of those people probably get the seat (or both don't).

I see what you and grey are saying obviously, like you both said, it's easy to follow the correlations. I don't think your reasoning was solid when you posted about meeting certain minimums for panicking and applying knowledge but the ends remained the same. That was my main gripe, not the data behind it.

Anyway, I'm glad I'm done with this mess for a few years haha