Retaking a 512? Pointless or beneficial?

[bumbleebee]

My GPA is currently a 3.89. My research is sort of grunt data collection in a hospital. I have typical clinical hospital volunteering and shadowing. Leadership in several clubs , nonclinical volunteering are "returning back to the community that raised me" themed. Overall, I think I'm a pretty cookie cutter applicant.

My question is, is retaking a 512 worth it? Am I correct to assume that, unless I do something spectacular (stronger research, start a non profit etc), that even if I score higher on the MCAT, I still won't be accepted into top medical schools?

On that note, what do ADCOMS perceive retakes as?

(unrelated, but I haven't been here in a while, does google login not work anymore?)

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[zurc2014]

That's a very dumb decision.

 

[efle]

My question is, is retaking a 512 worth it?

Short answer no.

Long answer...sometimes. Was the 512 in line with your scores on the AAMC official tests? Did you spend at least a couple months preparing properly for the test?

There are people that retake 32s and shoot up to 37+ changing the range of schools they are competitive for. But they are the outliers, it is far more common to retake and go +/- a couple points. Retaking a 32 will hurt you in some people eyes and doing the same or worse will not be good for your odds anywhere. Unless you have a good reason to expect much better performance the next time around, you should make peace with slim odds at Top XX schools and start looking into a fitting school list.

 

[Lucca]

If you get 518+ maybe yah. Otherwise, nah

 

[PooshBag]

I got a 511 and have 4 MD acceptances right now. I wouldn't retake it.

 

[mistafab]

Pointless

 

[libertyyne]

Pointlesss. Top schools will see your old mcat. You should get an acceptance, and apply to some reaches, but dont hold your breath for a call back from harvard.

 

[Nucleophile1]

I wouldn't recommend retaking a 512 unless you did very poorly in one of the sections.

 

[bumbleebee]

Short answer no.

Long answer...sometimes. Was the 512 in line with your scores on the AAMC official tests? Did you spend at least a couple months preparing properly for the test?

There are people that retake 32s and shoot up to 37+ changing the range of schools they are competitive for. But they are the outliers, it is far more common to retake and go +/- a couple points. Retaking a 32 will hurt you in some people eyes and doing the same or worse will not be good for your odds anywhere. Unless you have a good reason to expect much better performance the next time around, you should make peace with slim odds at Top XX schools and start looking into a fitting school list.

Yeah, I didn't study as smart as I could have, which was a dumb move on my part. I do think I could do much better, but would it be worth it in terms of ranking? I'm fine with being accepted anywhere, but I don't want my door at top schools to be closed just because of my MCAT.

 

[zurc2014]

Yeah, I didn't study as smart as I could have, which was a dumb move on my part. I do think I could do much better, but would it be worth it in terms of ranking? I'm fine with being accepted anywhere, but I don't want my door at top schools to be closed just because of my MCAT.

SDN is making people crazy. A 512 will not shut any doors. If you don't get into a top school its not cause of your mcat.

 

[Jillofalltrades]

I understand where OP is coming from. I had relatively cookie cutter ECs - research (a lot of it but no pubs), volunteering here and there, tutoring here and there, would not have stood out.

Scored a 32 first time - didn't study for the exam, but was lucky enough to have just finished taking biochem and physics 2 weeks before the exam (probably why I fared okay on the test). I will probably get a lot of bashing for this, but at this point in my life, I was not super committed as a pre-med and in hindsight should not have taken the mcat on a whim.

Since I didn't study for the mcat the first time, I thought I owed it to myself to actually re-take it after I studied. Plus I had an unbalanced score that was low on the verbal section. New mcat = 520.

Still a cookie-cutter applicant, but I feel like my metrics have certainly helped in getting interviews and my 1 acceptance so far.

TL;DR: OP, if you honestly think you can do substantially better and don't mind shelling out the big bucks/weathering the stress, I say go for it. If your score does improve, it certainly won't hurt you. Adcoms may not consider it/average the scores, but either way they can't criticize you for getting a higher score. All that, however, rides on your confidence that the re-take will be as good or better than the 512.

 

[gyngyn]

All that, however, rides on your confidence that the re-take will be as good or better than the 512.

A re-take with the same result (or a point or two better) will actually hurt at the very schools OP hopes to attend.
The ones where she is already a good candidate may overlook it, though, especially if she is from a lucky state..

 

[vernhart]

SDN is making people crazy. A 512 will not shut any doors. If you don't get into a top school its not cause of your mcat.

512 is well below many "top" schools. That said, why risk doing worse op? Your stats have you set up to do well. Will you get into a T10? Unlikely...but you will likely be a doctor...and that's just swell if you ask me.

 

[efle]

Yeah, I didn't study as smart as I could have, which was a dumb move on my part. I do think I could do much better, but would it be worth it in terms of ranking? I'm fine with being accepted anywhere, but I don't want my door at top schools to be closed just because of my MCAT.

What does the bold really mean though? Did you only review for a week or two? Not take practice exams?

SDN is making people crazy. A 512 will not shut any doors. If you don't get into a top school its not cause of your mcat.

A 32 does shut some doors. For a lot of top schools that is now the 10th percentile, for a handful the 10th is even up to 33-34 now, it's crazy

 

[Goro]

Retaking a perfectly good 512 ould get you rejected outright at @gyngyn's school, and also have you viewed as guilty of hubris and/or poor choice making at others.

On that note, what do ADCOMS perceive retakes as?

(unrelated, but I haven't been here in a while, does google login not work anymore?)

 

[Turkishking]

Pointless!

 

[Lnsean]

My GPA is currently a 3.89. My research is sort of grunt data collection in a hospital. I have typical clinical hospital volunteering and shadowing. Leadership in several clubs , nonclinical volunteering are "returning back to the community that raised me" themed. Overall, I think I'm a pretty cookie cutter applicant.

My question is, is retaking a 512 worth it? Am I correct to assume that, unless I do something spectacular (stronger research, start a non profit etc), that even if I score higher on the MCAT, I still won't be accepted into top medical schools?

On that note, what do ADCOMS perceive retakes as?

(unrelated, but I haven't been here in a while, does google login not work anymore?)

Nah don't retake. Scoring higher the 2nd time isn't impressive. You had your chance. I'd just run with the 512.

 

[Lawpy]

Nah don't retake. Scoring higher the 2nd time isn't impressive. You had your chance. I'd just run with the 512.

You don't think someone going from 512 to say 526+ is impressive?

If medical schools average a 512 and 526, the result is a 519, which matches the matriculant MCAT medians for top schools.

 

[Lnsean]

You don't think someone going from 512 to say 526+ is impressive?

If medical schools average a 512 and 526, the result is a 519, which matches the matriculant MCAT medians for top schools.

I am not an adcom...but scoring higher a second time...to me personally...is not impressive. Someone scoring 526 on the first attempt...that is impressive. I hope that adcoms at these top schools are not saying that someone with 512+526 is equal to someone getting a 519 on the first attempt...b/c it's not.

 

[619959]

I will be giving candies to everyone I see if I were to get a 512!

 

[bumbleebee]

What does the bold really mean though? Did you only review for a week or two? Not take practice exams?


A 32 does shut some doors. For a lot of top schools that is now the 10th percentile, for a handful the 10th is even up to 33-34 now, it's crazy

I didn't practice as much as I should/could have, and focused on a lot of detailed review instead (didn't even finish Section Bank...). So I was considering that, if I exhausted my practices, I could score higher.

Would increasing MCAT score affect my overall application that strongly for top schools? I don't think I particularly stand out elsewhere, but I suppose that doesn't matter if GPA+MCAT is the biggest factor?

Retaking a perfectly good 512 ould get you rejected outright at @gyngyn's school, and also have you viewed as guilty of hubris and/or poor choice making at others.

Oh wow, didn't know that. Granted I did have some poor choice making, but I wouldn't want to come off like that when I apply lol. Thanks!

 

[Lawpy]

I am not an adcom...but scoring higher a second time...to me personally...is not impressive. Someone scoring 526 on the first attempt...that is impressive. I hope that adcoms at these top schools are not saying that someone with 512+526 is equal to someone getting a 519 on the first attempt...b/c it's not.

Getting a 526 in itself is impressive because it is extremely rare to get a score that high. Going from a 512 to a 526 defies statistical reports of only +2 points max increase in retake (if not the same or even worse). A 14-point improvement cannot be explained simply by better test taking strategy/mental confidence etc. If anything, it would show that the 526 guy would have actually scored the same or similar amount in the first attempt (something went wrong on the 1st attempt to be that low), because at this point, the minor differences rest on innate reasoning/analytic ability and natural intelligence.

Also, you think 512 + 526 is worth less than the accepted/recommended average of 519? That's surprising.

 

[Jillofalltrades]

Perhaps someone with more insight can chime in here...

From reading these threads, why is it that the logic regarding MCATs seem to run somewhat counterintuitive to certain "qualities" that medical schools look for?

Why does multiple retakes (assuming improvement in score) not show determinism or a commitment to excellence (why must this go to hubris)? I was also under the assumption that schools weigh your most recent score most heavily, but somehow there's also a great emphasis on doing well the very first time around?

Medical schools also like applicants to show resilience/overcoming various challenges. If someone improved dramatically from one sitting to the next, why would the first score matter so much? Or do adcoms generally view the first sitting as "most reflective of student's ability" and subsequent ones as "improving from experience" and/or "student got lucky"?

Is it more important to not re-take a perfectly "good" score or is it more important to have a score an applicant feels is reflective of their capabilities? One could say that students may not be very good at evaluating their own abilities, but the mcat would theoretically be the judge of that. Why the general discouragement of re-takes? Simply high-risk, low yield?

I've always been so curious about this line of thinking. We have post-bacs/SMP/grade replacements for GPA improvement. EC's can always be improved/expanded. The MCAT seems to be the odd one out - high pressure, do it right once or certain doors will slam shut and never open again.

 

[efle]

Obvs not an adcom but here is what I've gathered in my lurking and that makes sense in my brain

why must this go to hubris

Because you are retaking an MD-competitive score. It pretty clearly telegraphs that you care about things that may not strike a reviewer as good motivators for a potential physician (arrogance/prestige seeking, hyperachieving, etc).

I was also under the assumption that schools weigh your most recent score most heavily, but somehow there's also a great emphasis on doing well the very first time around?

Taking such an important exam without properly preparing does not bode really well for someone taking the step 1 a couple years later / important exams you need to seriously prep for throughout the process.

If someone improved dramatically from one sitting to the next, why would the first score matter so much?

Why was performance so much poorer the first time? Can you think of any answers that reflect well on the person?

high-risk, low yield

bingo

high pressure, do it right once or certain doors will slam shut and never open again.

I think it really depends on what score is being retaken. Retake a 25 is different than retake a 32. For the first one the retake looks to be because they really want to get into med school. For the second, that answer doesn't fit so well

edit: not at all intending to say I agree with the logic above btw. I would've retaken a 32.

 

[Lnsean]

If anything, it would show that the 526 guy would have actually scored the same or similar amount in the first attempt (something went wrong on the 1st attempt to be that low), because at this point, the minor differences rest on innate reasoning/analytic ability and natural intelligence.

Huh? How are you even able to make that claim...lol...and no it's not fair to the person getting 519 on the first attempt...the guy taking it the 2nd time has a the advantage of seeing the exam one time already.

 

[efle]

Huh? How are you even able to make that claim...lol...and no it's not fair to the person getting 519 on the first attempt...the guy taking it the 2nd time has a the advantage of seeing the exam one time already.

Have you ever taken the MCAT? Preparing involves seeing many exams ahead of time. Getting a score in the top fraction of a percentile is impressive regardless of a prior sitting!

 

[Lnsean]

Have you ever taken the MCAT?

Yes..already accepted. It's an exam you can definitely study for and do well on. Taking it a 2nd time having known your performance on the 1st attempt is very advantageous.

 

[efle]

Yes..already accepted.

And do you feel like if you sat for the exam again next month you'd hit a 524+ ?

 

[Lnsean]

And do you feel like if you sat for the exam again next month you'd hit a 524+ ?

It's an exam you can definitely study for and do well on. Taking it a 2nd time having known your performance on the 1st attempt is very advantageous.

But again..that's not the argument we're having. I am saying that getting a 512+526 on two attempts isn't impressive as someone doing 526 on the first attempt. It should not even be on par with someone getting a 519 on the first attempt.

 

[efle]

It's an exam you can definitely study for and do well on. Taking it a 2nd time having known your performance on the 1st attempt is very advantageous.

I dunno man, many people study a lot and take many practice exams to get the prior experience advantage and fall way short of competitive, let alone high 520s. There's a reason only one in a thousand hit the top few points on the scale and it isn't because of having had the test once before or reviewing flash cards better than anyone else.

 

[Lnsean]

I dunno man, many people study a lot and take many practice exams to get the prior experience advantage and fall way short of competitive, let alone high 520s. There's a reason only one in a thousand hit the top few points on the scale and it isn't because of having had the test once before or reviewing flash cards better than anyone else.

That doesn't disprove my point. There are people that study alot and do extremely well on it...the first time.

 

[Lawpy]

Huh? How are you even able to make that claim...lol...and no it's not fair to the person getting 519 on the first attempt...the guy taking it the 2nd time has a the advantage of seeing the exam one time already.

It's very difficult to get a 526+ just with better familiarity, revised test taking strategy, better preparation etc. Scores that high (really, anything above 519+) depend highly on innate analytical reasoning abilities and natural intelligence. So getting a 526 in itself shows a strong innate academic aptitude, and thus, something did go wrong in the first attempt.

And the point of averaging the scores is to establish an equivalent metric to a single score. You may think it's not fair, but data and studies show that people with multiple MCAT scores are best treated as having an average score. The average provides a best estimate of their academic capability, so it is in fact fair to say that someone with a 512 + 526 has an academic aptitude of a 519 (which is still a top score).

That doesn't disprove my point. There are people that study alot and do extremely well on it...the first time.

I wasn't disagreeing with that. You claimed that getting a high score the second time is not impressive, and I disagree because it depends on the high score that was achieved in the first place. Yes generally taking the MCAT once is always the best, but sometimes things go wrong for whatever reason, and people retake. If they can score extremely high on the retake, that in itself is laudable because it is something that >95% of the applicants cannot do no matter how many times they take the exam and how long they study for the exam.

 

[efle]

That doesn't disprove my point. There are people that study alot and do extremely well on it...the first time.

I thought your point was that a 526 loses its luster when its not a first sitting? I'm pointing out that prior experience with the test does not make acing it unimpressive. Anyone that studies halfway properly will be going in with prior practice exams under their belt. It doesn't explain performance that high (and in the same vein, most people that retake only move +/- 2 points, there really isn't some massive advantage from a prior test day).

 

[efle]

it is in fact fair to say that someone with a 512 + 526 has an academic aptitude of a 519

I really doubt the averaging rule can be applied universally though. Someone jumping 14 points into the top fraction of a percent isn't the same as a single 519

 

[Lawpy]

I really doubt the averaging rule can be applied universally though. Someone jumping 14 points into the top fraction of a percent isn't the same as a single 519

If anything it would be higher than 519. I'm using the averaging as an effective lower bound.

I find it really difficult to understand how 512 + 526 can be lower than 519 (as in, why would 512 be weighted more heavily than 526, considering the latter is very difficult and rare to achieve)?

 

[Lnsean]

so it is in fact fair to say that someone with a 512 + 526 has an academic aptitude of a 519 (which is still a top score).

Definitely not...and I don't know anyone that shares that mentality. Only people who have had to retake MCATs multiple times feel this way.

Someone who has taken the MCAT already one time and knows his performance has a greater advantage the second time in preparing for it. The applicant who got the 519 on the first try should be on a higher level than someone who got a 512 and then retook for a 526. When you're a surgeon...you don't get two attempts at the same operation just because you made a mistake. You get sued.

 

[efle]

The applicant who got the 519 on the first try should be on a higher level than someone who got a 512 and then retook for for a 526.

Again, all the evidence goes against a prior test being that advantageous...

 

[Lnsean]

Again, all the evidence goes against a prior test being that advantageous...

No it doesnt...that's why AAMC does not let you know your score if you void. That's to prevent people from gaining that advantage. What's so hard about understanding this?

 

[efle]

No it doesnt...that's why AAMC does not let you know your score if you void. That's to prevent people from gaining that advantage. What's so hard about understanding this?

Wait, so now it's not the actual testing experience that is valuable, but knowing the score?

Again, the vast majority of people that retake do the same within a couple points above/below. How does that fit with your idea that repeat testers benefit massively?

 

[Lnsean]

Wait, so now it's not the actual testing experience that is valuable, but knowing the score?

Again, the vast majority of people that retake do the same within a couple points above/below. How does that fit with your idea that repeat testers benefit massively?

Yes that's why he wants to retake right? Cuz he got a 512. Did you not read OP"s original post? lol

The fact that AAMC does not score your exam if you void is evident enough. AAMC feels that it is advantageous enough to prevent this act.

 

[Lawpy]

Definitely not...and I don't know anyone that shares that mentality. Only people who have had to retake MCATs multiple times feel this way.

Someone who has taken the MCAT already one time and knows his performance has a greater advantage the second time in preparing for it. The applicant who got the 519 on the first try should be on a higher level than someone who got a 512 and then retook for a 526. When you're a surgeon...you don't get two attempts at the same operation just because you made a mistake. You get sued.

You are seriously underestimating how difficult it is to get a 526 (or really any score above 519+). This cannot be simply achieved by better preparation, prior knowledge, familiarity, better test taking skills, better mindset etc. Scores that high depend on innate reasoning ability and natural intelligence which cannot be studied/prepared for.

And why are you comparing taking a test to a surgery operation? The two are completely different in different scenarios, so that analogy is rather pointless.

 

[Lnsean]

You are seriously underestimating how difficult it is to get a 526.

No no..I am not. It's hard but it's much harder the first time. I think you're arguing something else totally. No one is saying that it isn't hard to score a 526. It is just much easier to score a 526 having taken the exam already knowing how your performed the first time.

 

[Lawpy]

No no..I am not. It's hard but it's much harder the first time. I think you're arguing something else totally. No one is saying that it isn't hard to score a 526. It is just much easier to score a 526 having taken the exam already knowing how your performed the first time.

Again, no it's not.

 

[Lnsean]

Again, no it's not.

Why yea it is...that;s why AAMC doesn't score your exam if you void. That's to prevent this.lol.

 

[Lawpy]

Why yea it is...that;s why AAMC doesn't score your exam if you void. That's to prevent this.lol.

It's not much easier to score >519+ just because you know how you did the first time whether you void/score the exam. The retake statistics commonly reported show a same if not worse retake results despite having familiarity on the real deal. At best, a retaker improves by 2 points, a difference seen as not meaningful by adcoms. These are established statistics, so it shows familiarity with the real deal hardly helps (if at all, or even hurts).

So when someone goes from 512 to 526, something else is at play beyond familiarity with the real deal. And this cannot be explained by better studying habits because nuances begin to matter, and this is something that's best mastered by those who are naturally good at taking tests.

 

[Lnsean]

It's not much easier to score >519+ just because you know how you did the first time whether you void/score the exam. The retake statistics commonly reported show a same if not worse retake results despite having familiarity on the real deal. At best, a retaker improves by 2 points, a difference seen as not meaningful by adcoms.
.

This doesn't disprove anything I have said. Just because there are people who retake and did worst doesn't mean there aren't people who retook and did better. There are many people who retook and did better because they had that advantage. AAMC agrees...and to prevent people from abusing this by sitting for as many attempts as they want...AAMC does not score your exam if you void. If AAMC feels the need to do this...then it is obviously an advantage. Many people...including myself...would pay AAMC for a service that offers scored but voided exams on various sittings.

If sitting for many attempts and knowing your performance did not give you an advantage...AAMC would allow you to do so.

 

[efle]

He might be onto something. After all, people who take the test and get a score back tend to blow it out of the water when they retake.

Oh wait nope that's backwards. A prior (scored) sitting results in no significant difference in the vast majority of retakes. Go figure.

 

[efle]

would pay AAMC for a service that offers scored but voided exams on various sittings.

You just described the purchase and use of AAMC official practice exams.

 

[Jillofalltrades]

@Lnsean just curious about where you stand on people who took both the old and the new mcat.

Old mcat: 32 (512/88%)
New mcat: 520 (98%)

Would you attribute the increase to experience with previous test, better prep, difference in exam, or test-taker doing poorly for some reason the first time? Do you think the old score or the new score is most reflective of this tester?

 

[Lnsean]

You just described the purchase and use of AAMC official practice exams.

LMAO...not even close to real testing settings.