School exam scores and Step 1 score correlation

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
doctorstrangerthingz

doctorstrangerthingz

Full Member
5+ Year Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2018
Messages
50
Reaction score
39
Hi all,

I consistently perform slightly below average on class exams (which are in house). However I scored fairly above average on the few NMBE exams that we've had.
I feel like I know the material well, but sometimes about my test taking and mentality on test day is setting me back. At this point I'm just wondering if my performance on the school's exams is a predictor of what my Step 1 performance would be.
I was wondering how common is it for people who didn't do so hot on school exams to ended up scoring high on step 1? Can anyone speak from personal experience?

Any input is appreciated!
Members don't see this ad.
 
No one ever talks about this, but that correlation depends entirely on your curriculum. A school with a trash curriculum will put you at a disadvantage for boards. If the reason you do less than average is because you spend a lot of time on board material, then I'd expect it to correlate less so. However, if you're just doing bad all around, different story.
 
People who are good at memorizing a bunch of nonsense for class will likely be good at memorizing a bunch of nonsense for Step. In that sense, I'm sure there is a strong correlation between pre-clinical performance and Step 1 score.

If you are putting 100% effort towards class material and not doing well, you may want to reconsider your approach and try new strategies.
If you are following the Zanki+Wikipedia curriculum and not watching class lectures, then I think it makes sense to not do as well on in-house exams.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
doctorstrangerthingz said:
Hi all,

I consistently perform slightly below average on class exams (which are in house). However I scored fairly above average on the few NMBE exams that we've had.
I feel like I know the material well, but sometimes about my test taking and mentality on test day is setting me back. At this point I'm just wondering if my performance on the school's exams is a predictor of what my Step 1 performance would be.
I was wondering how common is it for people who didn't do so hot on school exams to ended up scoring high on step 1? Can anyone speak from personal experience?

Any input is appreciated!
Click to expand...
At decent med schools I would hope to see a decent correlation
My schools was between .75-.80...very high Exceptions from the rule always exist
 
Pretty good correlation between the two at my school, .7 or something. But they’re good at teaching board-relevant material. There is a higher correlation between practice tests and eventual board scores though. I’m not sure how it will all shake out with the new NBMEs but the old ones consistently underestimated your eventual board scores while UWSA 1 and 2 slightly overestimate on average.
 
doctorstrangerthingz said:
Hi all,

I consistently perform slightly below average on class exams (which are in house). However I scored fairly above average on the few NMBE exams that we've had.
I feel like I know the material well, but sometimes about my test taking and mentality on test day is setting me back. At this point I'm just wondering if my performance on the school's exams is a predictor of what my Step 1 performance would be.
I was wondering how common is it for people who didn't do so hot on school exams to ended up scoring high on step 1? Can anyone speak from personal experience?

Any input is appreciated!
Click to expand...
My gut tells me to trust the NBME exams more.

If in doubt, use both.

At our school (and others) preclinical GPA and shelf exams are spot on predictors of Boards performance.
 
You sound like an average student. Spot on. I was slightly below average on my core curriculum because of Anki, boards prep. In third year, I was slightly above average (60%ile). On Step 1 I was 50%ile. You will need to study really, really, realllyyyy hard to get above a 240.
 
Espadaleader said:
You sound like an average student. Spot on. I was slightly below average on my core curriculum because of Anki, boards prep. In third year, I was slightly above average (60%ile). On Step 1 I was 50%ile. You will need to study really, really, realllyyyy hard to get above a 240.
Click to expand...
Do you think Anki held you back?
 
Espadaleader said:
You sound like an average student. Spot on. I was slightly below average on my core curriculum because of Anki, boards prep. In third year, I was slightly above average (60%ile). On Step 1 I was 50%ile. You will need to study really, really, realllyyyy hard to get above a 240.
Click to expand...

How much effort did you put into step prep? Did you score 50% despite all putting in the maximum effort or would you see there was room to do more?
 
Dont worry about school material. study hard on step 1 content and you will be fine
 
7331poas said:
Dont worry about school material. study hard on step 1 content and you will be fine
Click to expand...
I mean that's not awesome advice. Its not like your school is completely trying to screw you over. It doesn't take that much time to run through each lecture 1 time at 1.5x+ speed. That way you at least get a notion of what the lecturer deems important. Some lecturers literally tell you what topics they test on. Like its been said 1000x. Lecture content (for the most part) is step 1 content...

Plus, I've gotten some uworld right on some random factoid that stuck in my head from a lecture. There are plenty of wastes of time with lectures, but to completely ignore them is terrible advice. I believe our GPA to board correlation is like .7 or something. not huge but its there. Its not like lecturers are teaching completely useless material I mean cmon
 
Chibucks15 said:
I mean that's not awesome advice. Its not like your school is completely trying to screw you over. It doesn't take that much time to run through each lecture 1 time at 1.5x+ speed. That way you at least get a notion of what the lecturer deems important. Some lecturers literally tell you what topics they test on. Like its been said 1000x. Lecture content (for the most part) is step 1 content...

Plus, I've gotten some uworld right on some random factoid that stuck in my head from a lecture. There are plenty of wastes of time with lectures, but to completely ignore them is terrible advice. I believe our GPA to board correlation is like .7 or something. not huge but its there. Its not like lecturers are teaching completely useless material I mean cmon
Click to expand...

So you got a fact on Uworld correct by listening to lectures for two years of medical school. Sounds worth it

Schools absolutely are trying to screw students by teaching irrelevant content. Sometimes I think schools purposefully sabotage their students to increase their yield of primary care doctors.

Your GPA correlates because people who memorize random facts about a PhDs research more more likely to memorize random facts on step 1. Simple as that.
 
7331poas said:
So you got a fact on Uworld correct by listening to lectures for two years of medical school. Sounds worth it

Schools absolutely are trying to screw students by teaching irrelevant content. Sometimes I think schools purposefully sabotage their students to increase their yield of primary care doctors.

Your GPA correlates because people who memorize random facts about a PhDs research more more likely to memorize random facts on step 1. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
The logic here is asinine. I in no way am saying that the lectures are perfect, but I do feel like they actually give more real world context than memorizing a bunch of flashcards. Why in the hell would schools want to screw over their own students? They don't get good reputations that way and unless its their mission for primary care, then there is zero correlation to what you're saying. If they purposely had bad lectures, they would have more board failures, and they would lose accreditation. Also, sure memorizing step 1 is great but you kinda have to learn how to function as a doctor too (anki can't help you with that)

There's been a hell of a lot more people that I've met that have done well on step by actually trying in class too and not blowing it off. Right before dedicated? Sure forget lectures. But to throw it as a blanket statement like that makes literally zero sense and has no logical rationale behind it other than try hard gunners on SDN. My school collects actual data on this and for the majority of people, blowing everything off doesn't work and makes them do worse. And its terrible advice for first years who are actually looking for advice. Whatever you wanna do though.

EDIT: Also, how do you know whats irrelevant content?
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
Chibucks15 said:
I mean that's not awesome advice. Its not like your school is completely trying to screw you over. It doesn't take that much time to run through each lecture 1 time at 1.5x+ speed. That way you at least get a notion of what the lecturer deems important. Some lecturers literally tell you what topics they test on. Like its been said 1000x. Lecture content (for the most part) is step 1 content...

Plus, I've gotten some uworld right on some random factoid that stuck in my head from a lecture. There are plenty of wastes of time with lectures, but to completely ignore them is terrible advice. I believe our GPA to board correlation is like .7 or something. not huge but its there. Its not like lecturers are teaching completely useless material I mean cmon
Click to expand...

Depends completely on the school. On our class COMSAE (COMLEX practice test for those here not familiar with DO stuff) we had people at the top of the class get very low 300s. The people who did well are the people who have been studying board material for a while already. It is even more drastic with the NBME/UWorld Qs/UWSAs. The people who focused heavily on class are getting murdered, like 170s on UW1 and stuff like that. At my school at least you have to start preparing for boards early or you won't do very well.

Now it is possible to do well at both, so I should throw that in there. I think it's a fallacy that you have to throw school away to do well on boards, but you absolutely need to start preparing early.
 
7331poas said:
So you got a fact on Uworld correct by listening to lectures for two years of medical school. Sounds worth it

Schools absolutely are trying to screw students by teaching irrelevant content. Sometimes I think schools purposefully sabotage their students to increase their yield of primary care doctors.

Your GPA correlates because people who memorize random facts about a PhDs research more more likely to memorize random facts on step 1. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Ive always wondered this. Why in the heck do schools not teach to boards? What is the purpose? How is this advantageous to anyone? It makes the school look bad if board scores are low and it is certainly not beneficial to the student trying to match. Really frustrating. Some of my teachers guide their lectures with FA and other board tools yet others go way off on tangents about their research and other dumb crap that won't be on boards. Our GI block the professor that was supposed to teach us GI virology literally just taught his research on HIV the whole week
 
Deecee2DO said:
Ive always wondered this. Why in the heck do schools not teach to boards? What is the purpose? How is this advantageous to anyone? It makes the school look bad if board scores are low and it is certainly not beneficial to the student trying to match. Really frustrating. Some of my teachers guide their lectures with FA and other board tools yet others go way off on tangents about their research and other dumb crap that won't be on boards. Our GI block the professor that was supposed to teach us GI virology literally just taught his research on HIV the whole week
Click to expand...
Because yeah obviously step is massive but if they just taught random facts to step everyone would be pretty terrible once it got to clinical years. Obviously that’s not a blanket statement but if done well, my school lectures I feel like have prepped me well for post-step, even if I have to fill in some gaps for step.

Teaching random research is dumb and shouldn’t have a place, but clinical management every now and then isn’t too bad
 
Deecee2DO said:
Ive always wondered this. Why in the heck do schools not teach to boards? What is the purpose? How is this advantageous to anyone? It makes the school look bad if board scores are low and it is certainly not beneficial to the student trying to match. Really frustrating. Some of my teachers guide their lectures with FA and other board tools yet others go way off on tangents about their research and other dumb crap that won't be on boards. Our GI block the professor that was supposed to teach us GI virology literally just taught his research on HIV the whole week
Click to expand...
Teaching to a test is never a good thing. You're professor is just trying to provide you with a foundation
 
Chibucks15 said:
Because yeah obviously step is massive but if they just taught random facts to step everyone would be pretty terrible once it got to clinical years. Obviously that’s not a blanket statement but if done well, my school lectures I feel like have prepped me well for post-step, even if I have to fill in some gaps for step.

Teaching random research is dumb and shouldn’t have a place, but clinical management every now and then isn’t too bad
Click to expand...
But is step just random facts? My micro teacher does a great job, same with anatomy and neuro with teaching to clinically relevant board material, but some of the other classes just seem like all PhD level minutae where they don't even teach clinical stuff its just tiny PhD level minutae-is that what step is?
 
Last edited:
Chibucks15 said:
Because yeah obviously step is massive but if they just taught random facts to step everyone would be pretty terrible once it got to clinical years. Obviously that’s not a blanket statement but if done well, my school lectures I feel like have prepped me well for post-step, even if I have to fill in some gaps for step.

Teaching random research is dumb and shouldn’t have a place, but clinical management every now and then isn’t too bad
Click to expand...

Step isnt random facts tho. There is a time to learn clinical guidelines, and that time is in clerkship or directly beforehand.
 
thegreatandmythical227 said:
First aid is one of the best preps for step 1? So that's a mute point. Point is, wait till dedicated until you start thinking about step. Focus on your classes. That;s been the norm for the longest time.
Click to expand...

First Aid is a great review source for Step yes, I don't see how what you are saying is relevant. No one is saying to just study FA for 2 years. As to the second half of your statement, people who wait until dedicated to think about Step are usually the ones who end up in the most trouble. It is very, very school dependent whether or not your curriculum prepares you well so telling everyone to focus on class and not think about Step until dedicated is how people end up with crap scores.

In fact, the only schools that I personally know people at where students can get away with this are the ones whose professors use NBME subject exams....
 
AnatomyGrey12 said:
First Aid is a great review source for Step yes, I don't see how what you are saying is relevant. No one is saying to just study FA for 2 years. As to the second half of your statement, people who wait until dedicated to think about Step are usually the ones who end up in the most trouble. It is very, very school dependent whether or not your curriculum prepares you well so telling everyone to focus on class and not think about Step until dedicated is how people end up with crap scores.

In fact, the only schools that I personally know people at where students can get away with this are the ones whose professors use NBME subject exams....
Click to expand...

This part is fake news. Explain why schools have 7., .8 and .9 correlations between preclincial grades and step 1. The administration at my school are all very confident that we will all pass step 1
 
thegreatandmythical227 said:
This part is fake news. Explain why schools have 7., .8 and .9 correlations between preclincial grades and step 1. The administration at my school are all very confident that we will all pass step 1
Click to expand...

Are you a first year?

It's not fake news. Not at all. Not all schools have such correlations, and on top of that there are the huge confounders such as the high performing students are also likely the most motivated to study for boards, they are often the ones that started studying for step earlier, etc. The only way to actually prove your point with a study would be to literally control when people start studying for Step. Just about everyone starts before dedicated starts. If you waited until then to think about it you are in the vast minority.

Lol "very confident we will all pass Step 1." Well yeah... the pass rate is like 96% or something. Odds are that you will pass. I'm not saying you won't pass, but almost every person who didn't score well will say "I wish I had started studying earlier" the moment you ask them what they think happened.
 
AnatomyGrey12 said:
Are you a first year?

It's not fake news. Not at all. Not all schools have such correlations, and on top of that there are the huge confounders such as the high performing students are also likely the most motivated to study for boards, they are often the ones that started studying for step earlier, etc. The only way to actually prove your point with a study would be to literally control when people start studying for Step. Just about everyone starts before dedicated starts. If you waited until then to think about it you are in the vast minority.

Lol "very confident we will all pass Step 1." Well yeah... the pass rate is like 96% or something. Odds are that you will pass. I'm not saying you won't pass, but almost every person who didn't score well will say "I wish I had started studying earlier" the moment you ask them what they think happened.
Click to expand...
Incoming second year to be more specific. Our administration tells us that your "theory" is unlikely. They seem to believe that their lectures prepare them for the clinical world more than any board source. They claim to poll students on outside resource use as well. In the end of the day, they want us to be a good doctor, not a good test taker. The best doctors I've talked to all didn't start studying for step till dedicated.
 
thegreatandmythical227 said:
Incoming second year to be more specific. Our administration tells us that your "theory" is unlikely. They seem to believe that their lectures prepare them for the clinical world more than any board source. They claim to poll students on outside resource use as well. In the end of the day, they want us to be a good doctor, not a good test taker. The best doctors I've talked to all didn't start studying for step till dedicated.
Click to expand...

Come back when you're taking practice tests, or better yet, after you have taken Step. You are arguing about things you don't understand. A word of advice, it's not a theory and you would do well to not take everything your administration says so readily.
 
AnatomyGrey12 said:
Come back when you're taking practice tests, or better yet, after you have taken Step. You are arguing about things you don't understand. A word of advice, it's not a theory and you would do well to not take everything your administration says so readily.
Click to expand...
I do have a disclosure to make. I mainly use BnB/Zanki to study since first semester M1 BUT that's because I do it to keep up with everyone else, not because I believe it will make a significant difference. I don't understand why the administration would want to lie
 
thegreatandmythical227 said:
I do have a disclosure to make. I mainly use BnB/Zanki to study since first semester M1 BUT that's because I do it to keep up with everyone else, not because I believe it will make a significant difference. I don't understand why the administration would want to lie
Click to expand...

If you think you don't need to study for boards until dedicated then why do you do it? You must think it will give some people an advantage over you if you don't do it.....

They aren't lying. They are simply giving you skewed data that doesn't account for many significant confounders.
 
AnatomyGrey12 said:
If you think you don't need to study for boards until dedicated then why do you do it? You must think it will give some people an advantage over you if you don't do it.....

They aren't lying. They are simply giving you skewed data that doesn't account for many significant confounders.
Click to expand...
Because I don't want to be left behind in this frenzy. Maybe deep down it does, IDK. The point is not everyone wants to do well, some people just wanna pass
 
thegreatandmythical227 said:
Because I don't want to be left behind in this frenzy. Maybe deep down it does, IDK. The point is not everyone wants to do well, some people just wanna pass
Click to expand...

That's my point. If you believe you will be left behind then deep down you know that it might just actually make a difference. Everyone should want to perform to the best of their abilities, whatever that may be.
 
thegreatandmythical227 said:
Point is, wait till dedicated until you start thinking about step. Focus on your classes.
Click to expand...

thegreatandmythical227 said:
I mainly use BnB/Zanki to study since first semester M1
Click to expand...

tumblr_o52vy7P9Ik1qj6sk2o2_250.gif
 
doctorstrangerthingz said:
Hi all,

I consistently perform slightly below average on class exams (which are in house). However I scored fairly above average on the few NMBE exams that we've had.
I feel like I know the material well, but sometimes about my test taking and mentality on test day is setting me back. At this point I'm just wondering if my performance on the school's exams is a predictor of what my Step 1 performance would be.
I was wondering how common is it for people who didn't do so hot on school exams to ended up scoring high on step 1? Can anyone speak from personal experience?

Any input is appreciated!
Click to expand...

Put it this way. Most of the people who did well on the NBME exams or even in-house exams did better on step 1. There was a few who went from “crap scores” on preclinical exams who did exceptional. Every average/below average med student though they were going to be “that guy” who crushed step 1. Let’s just say most of them were not that guy.
 
doctorstrangerthingz said:
How much effort did you put into step prep? Did you score 50% despite all putting in the maximum effort or would you see there was room to do more?
Click to expand...

I used only UWorld and memorized it cold. I did 3 passes + incorrects. I did not use First Aid, didn’t annotate, didn’t go above and beyond. I didn’t want to kill myself for 5 points on the exam. In retrospect, I was pretty depressed and burnout and refused to give the USMLE anymore of myself. If I did, I see 240+, but anything over 230 was fine since I was going to do Psychiatry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
Maximize Step 2 Score
Replies
4
Views
2K
PandaBaer
PandaBaer
B
Step 1 Advice Needed
Replies
7
Views
1K
BeeBoo420
B
P
Stanford SCORE program (anesthesiology)
Replies
0
Views
227
pvabc15
P
AJS59
Long term prep towards step 1 - AMBOSS?
Replies
2
Views
244
eteshoe
eteshoe
L
STEP 1 Prep Advice
Replies
2
Views
1K
eteshoe
eteshoe
Top