Should the AAMC Establish an MCAT cut off

[RedState]

---

Members do not see this ad.

i vote < 28 or < 7 on one section = Fail with no score reported, only that you took the test. the mcat is the only truly standardized measure we have of entering students and all should be high quality. in our current system, you must be able to pass step I to be a good dr., so let's hold our applicants to a similar standard. this would prevent schools from accepting people who simply don't deserve to get in (ex: bac/MD's who don't put any effort into college, children of important people).

Would you want to wind up in an ER being treated by someone who got a 26 on their MCAT?

There are some good ideas here. I say don't report a failed score and don't quantify the person's "previous MCAT=Yes" status. That way single or triple MCAT repeats could be equally considered with no greater mark against them. And Chuck, glad to see you. I'd be glad to lend you some product to clear up our not so fresh scent.

 

[futureboy]

Exactly, you just supported my argument. Retake the test, get a better score -you have more school options, schools that accept you have better stats, broader applicant pool reaches for a higher standard and a minimum requiremnet is met. I think the MCAT is mostly about strategy, so yeah, proving that you can get yourself through it while acheiving a minimum standard might be a valid requirement.

If the owners of the MCAT designate a passing score, it would essentially transfer admission decisions from the medical schools to the administrator of the MCAT. Again, the schools are very capable of determining who should and should not be admitted.

As another poster said, standardized test scores are only one factor considered for admission. One can be an excellent student, but not as good at standardized tests.

 

[futureboy]

Also, some schools offer high school students a conditional admission to medical school, with no MCAT required, as long as the student maintains a certain undergraduate GPA. There are Caribbean med students that are admitted with no MCAT but still pass the boards, and obtain a residency and a medical license.

The MCAT is useful, but it is not an absolute necessity.

 

[Chuck's Right Foot]

This may be one of the most inane questions I've ever heard. It essentially reads: "Getting a <27 on the MCAT means you will be an incompetent physician". Since when was someones ability defined by a test they took 10 years ago. You should push for physicians public profiles to include all standardized test scores from the PSAT on up.

I'd be more worried about their evaluations during residency and their baord scores as better indicators of their clinical knowledge and ability. This thread is so full of FAIL.

 

[NotAndrew]

Would you want to wind up in an ER being treated by someone who got a 26 on their MCAT?

Let me start by saying that I am extremely prone to hyperbole, however this may be the most ignorant thing ever posted on this board. If I need to go to the ER I just want someone to treat me.

 

[pianola]

I think we should take it a step further and make the MCAT P/F.

Think about it.

That's a good one...

I'd like pass-fail, thank you 🙂 Then there wouldn't be huge pissing contests on SDN between who got a 36 and who got a 39 and who got a 42.

 

[RoadRunner17]

Why not something like, H/P/F? You get a H if you get above the 90th percentile. Gotta give people something to work for.

 

[Dr Lyss]

I'd like pass-fail, thank you 🙂 Then there wouldn't be huge pissing contests on SDN between who got a 36 and who got a 39 and who got a 42.

stop pissing on me sdn

 

[student1799]

Exactly, you just supported my argument. Retake the test, get a better score -you have more school options, schools that accept you have better stats, broader applicant pool reaches for a higher standard and a minimum requiremnet is met.

No, not exactly. I don't really think you understood my original point, so I'll try again. As I mentioned in my first post, I AM THE SAME PERSON I WAS WHEN I TOOK THE MCAT FOR THE FIRST TIME. My intelligence level has not changed, yet I'm only qualified for med school if I can do 52 PS problems without a calculator in 70 minutes? Exactly what does that have to do with either medical school or practicing medicine?

In addition, getting the higher score didn't get me "more opportunities" as you assumed. I didn't get into this in my original post, but the MCAT retake (which was this Jan) happened DURING this year's application process. Many schools knee-jerk rejected me fairly quickly because of the 7, while if I had gotten the good score earlier, I might well have been interviewed at those same schools, because my score was comparable to or higher than their reported averages. Considering that, again, I am the very same applicant I always was, it just highlights for me how arbitrary and meaningless it is for schools to rely on rigid cutoffs for MCAT scores, especially section scores.

And are you aware how arbitary the MCAT's numerical scoring system is? Because there are so few questions in each section, yet 15 numerical score brackets (each representing a percentile range within which the person scored), the difference between one numerical score and another can be as little as a single question. Even in the relatively "fat" middle of the curve, the score bracket for an 8 (which many schools use as a cutoff because it is around the 50th percentile) is only about 4 questions wide. Do you really think someone's chances of getting into med school should hinge on 4 multiple-choice questions?

I did get 7 interviews and I have one acceptance so far (which was based on my old MCAT score), but all these schools are problematic for me, because they are very far from my home and would require me to leave my husband and children behind. So, thanks to the wonderful and highly scientific MCAT score cutoff system that you so clearly approve of, people like me have to suffer needlessly.

 

[RedState]

No, not exactly. I don't really think you understood my original point, so I'll try again. As I mentioned in my first post, I AM THE SAME PERSON I WAS WHEN I TOOK THE MCAT FOR THE FIRST TIME. My intelligence level has not changed, yet I'm only qualified for med school if I can do 52 PS problems without a calculator in 70 minutes? Exactly what does that have to do with either medical school or practicing medicine?

In addition, getting the higher score didn't get me "more opportunities" as you assumed. I didn't get into this in my original post, but the MCAT retake (which was this Jan) happened DURING this year's application process. Many schools knee-jerk rejected me fairly quickly because of the 7, while if I had gotten the good score earlier, I might well have been interviewed at those same schools, because my score was comparable to or higher than their reported averages. Considering that, again, I am the very same applicant I always was, it just highlights for me how arbitrary and meaningless it is for schools to rely on rigid cutoffs for MCAT scores, especially section scores.

And are you aware how arbitary the MCAT's numerical scoring system is? Because there are so few questions in each section, yet 15 numerical score brackets (each representing a percentile range within which the person scored), the difference between one numerical score and another can be as little as a single question. Even in the relatively "fat" middle of the curve, the score bracket for an 8 (which many schools use as a cutoff because it is around the 50th percentile) is only about 4 questions wide. Do you really think someone's chances of getting into med school should hinge on 4 multiple-choice questions?

I did get 7 interviews and I have one acceptance so far (which was based on my old MCAT score), but all these schools are problematic for me, because they are very far from my home and would require me to leave my husband and children behind. So, thanks to the wonderful and highly scientific MCAT score cutoff system that you so clearly approve of, people like me have to suffer needlessly.

I did not presume that you became a different person once you retook the MCAT; My point is that you put yourself in a different position with a better score. I relate to your personal situation. I just got out of the military, managed a great score and only have a couple low tier state schools to consider in the area where I was based. If my timing had been different, I would have had more opportunities (I believe), and am considering reapplying earlier so I can get the heck out of BFE.

My argument, is that a standard can be set and met with a cut off. You can't take the driving portion of your driver's license exam without passing the written portion, reagrdless of how wonderful a driver you are or what circumstances may have influenced your test taking. You and I may both choose to go with what we've got in terms of acceptances, but at the end of the day it will be our choice -no one is forcing us not to reapply for better options.

 

[cbrons]

Should The MCAT be a test that one can fail? That is, should the AAMC establish that an applicant must meet a certain threshold in order to even be a contender for medical school? If so what should the minimum score be?

nope that would mean less $ for schools who can just hit the deny button on some poor dumb bastard with a 15 who thinks he has a shot cause he never found SDN

 

[Chuck's Right Foot]

• I have yet to see any cogent arguments for a cutoff.
• There is no economic incentive for a cutoff for either AMCAS or the medical schools.
• The number of students who matriculate below such cut-offs are statistically insignificant anyway, so it would undoubtedly not affect the current state of affairs.
• Furthermore, the correlation, while statistically significant, does not approach 1 between MCAT and Medical School performance. It may account for between 49-64% of the variance. Nor does the correlation between school performance and clinical performance a high enough explanation of the variance.
• As a school entrance exam, there are no precidents of having a pass/fail situation. The boards serve the purpose of determining who becomes a doctor and who does not.
• Schools do have an incentive to produce doctors who can pass the boards and complete residency satisfactorilly, hence the already high standards to matriculate. It should also be stated that these standards are more than stats and produce a (somewhat) varied culture of medical professionals.

The proposal has no merit.

 

[Transmogrifier]

In regards to student1799:

Your situation is pretty crappy and points out some of the weaknesses of standardized testing. However, not every person who gets a 7 on PS just has bad test taking skills or is experiencing a lot of anxiety. If you look at the statistics for retakers you'll see that most do not improve their total score by 5 points much less the score for a single section. Many score a 7 (or 6 or 3 or 15) because that's what they're capable of.

http://www.aamc.org/students/mcat/examineedata/tables.htm

 

[junkct]

Why not something like, H/P/F? You get a H if you get above the 90th percentile. Gotta give people something to work for.

heck, why not make it a 43-tiered score? Maybe everyone should get some score between 3 and 45?

 

[Chuck's Right Foot]

In regards to student1799:

Your situation is pretty crappy and points out some of the weaknesses of standardized testing. However, not every person who gets a 7 on PS just has bad test taking skills or is experiencing a lot of anxiety. If you look at the statistics for retakers you'll see that most do not improve their total score by 5 points much less the score for a single section. Many score a 7 (or 6 or 3 or 15) because that's what they're capable of.

http://www.aamc.org/students/mcat/examineedata/tables.htm

Interesting there is a small negative skew to the distributions of improvement.

 

[DrSno]

Would you want to wind up in an ER being treated by someone who got a 26 on their MCAT?

Nope. I can't think of a good reason someone would score a 26 on the MCAT. I didn't study at all and did much better than that. Call me old school, but I still want doctors to be very intelligent.

 

[DrSno]

but not as good at standardized tests.

This always makes me curious when someone talks about people who aren't good standardized test takers. The commonality between the standardized tests (SAT, GRE, MCAT, LSAT) is that they all get at an individual's g. So does "not being good at standardized tests" mean that the person has low g? If so, the tests are providing us (society) a great service.

 

[Chuck's Right Foot]

This always makes me curious when someone talks about people who aren't good standardized test takers. The commonality between the standardized tests (SAT, GRE, MCAT, LSAT) is that they all get at an individual's g. So does "not being good at standardized tests" mean that the person has low g? If so, the tests are providing us (society) a great service.

They actually don't get at "g". There are cultural and psychological issues that obfuscate the ability of standardized tests to get at "g".

Further proof is that since the tests (event the SAT) are coachable, they can't, by definition, be registering an innate ability.

 

[RoadRunner17]

This always makes me curious when someone talks about people who aren't good standardized test takers. The commonality between the standardized tests (SAT, GRE, MCAT, LSAT) is that they all get at an individual's g. So does "not being good at standardized tests" mean that the person has low g? If so, the tests are providing us (society) a great service.

What are you referring to when you say "g"?

 

[Chuck's Right Foot]

What are you referring to when you say "g"?

general intelligence factor and is generally conceived as a useless measure by most researchers involved in intelligence.

 

[DrSno]

general intelligence factor and is generally conceived as a useless measure by most researchers involved in intelligence.

That is false. g is pretty much the standard in intelligence research except for the new crap like Gardner's theory of intelligence. But most serious intelligence researchers recognize that as the bull**** that it is. What is it that you think IQ tests are measuring?

Also I did not say that standardized tests are IQ tests; I said they all correlate with g, some more than others (such as the SAT and LSAT).

 

[MedStudentWanna]

Would you want to wind up in an ER being treated by someone who got a 26 on their MCAT?

I assume that whenever you go to the ER, you ask your doctor for his/her MCAT score?

I think this thread is about a bunch of whiny people who are pissed that people with lower MCAT scores got into med school and they didn't.

 

[MedStudentWanna]

Nope. I can't think of a good reason someone would score a 26 on the MCAT. I didn't study at all and did much better than that. Call me old school, but I still want doctors to be very intelligent.

That's not old school. That's just ignorant.

 

[Chuck's Right Foot]

That is false. g is pretty much the standard in intelligence research except for the new crap like Gardner's theory of intelligence. But most serious intelligence researchers recognize that as the bull**** that it is. What is it that you think IQ tests are measuring?

Also I did not say that standardized tests are IQ tests; I said they all correlate with g, some more than others (such as the SAT and LSAT).

I disagree. I think the field is divided on this one. ANd most that Ihave worked with view it as too contaminated to be of any use. However, the ex-wife of one of my professors disagrees:

http://www.psych.utoronto.ca/users/reingold/courses/intelligence/cache/1198gottfred.html

 

[student1799]

This always makes me curious when someone talks about people who aren't good standardized test takers. The commonality between the standardized tests (SAT, GRE, MCAT, LSAT) is that they all get at an individual's g. So does "not being good at standardized tests" mean that the person has low g? If so, the tests are providing us (society) a great service.

Sorry to bust up your neat little theory again, but you can't lump the MCAT in with the SAT, LSAT,etc. They are supposed to test APTITUDE, or an applicant's innate ability in verbal, math, logic, etc. The MCAT, despite its name, is NOT an aptitude test--it aims to test specific knowledge, in detail, in multiple subject areas.

Since I have described my problems with the MCAT, you might expect me to have scored badly on the other tests, but that's not the case. I scored in the 99th percentile on both the SAT and the GMAT (and went on to get an MBA with honors from a top-10 school). My "g," as you call it, is just fine.

In fact, the MCAT is the first and only standardized test I've ever had trouble with. (And that 's "trouble" as seen only by section-score-obsessed med schools, since I still scored 30 and 31 total even with the 7's in PS.)

But it's not just personal. My ordeal with the MCAT made me very curious about its origins, how it's scored, and how good a measurement tool the test is, and I ended up reading quite a lot about these issues in academic papers. There's not enough time to get into the evidence here, but the honest fact is that the MCAT is a mediocre measurement tool at best in predicting applicant success in med school and Step 1.Med schools compound the problem by treating the scores--especially section scores-- as being much more meaningful than even the test designers would claim them to be. The result, IMO, is a lot of arbitrary and flawed admissions decisions.

As you can probably tell, I think the MCAT is utter bull****. And I say this as someone who has now been deemed "smart" because I got a 33.

 

[Dissected]

Nope. I can't think of a good reason someone would score a 26 on the MCAT. I didn't study at all and did much better than that. Call me old school, but I still want doctors to be very intelligent.

Good for you. 👍

LOL! Im sure there are hundreds of docs in the ER and operating rooms this very instant proving that your comment here is extremely ignorant and insensible. I will be one of them in 10 years 😀. Sorry if my low physical sciences score hinders my ability to treat your cardiac arrest. Should have studied electrical circuits a little harder I guess. You should think before you write something like this. You never know who you will be working alongside someday, or what the circumstances will be that led them there.

 

[flip26]

Sorry to bust up your neat little theory again, but you can't lump the MCAT in with the SAT, LSAT,etc. They are supposed to test APTITUDE, or an applicant's innate ability in verbal, math, logic, etc. The MCAT, despite its name, is NOT an aptitude test--it aims to test specific knowledge, in detail, in multiple subject areas.

The MCAT tests analytical and reasoning skills of people with a base of scientific knowledge. You do need a certain base of knowledge, but most of the science you need to answer questions is contained in the passages...

If you approach it as simply a test of "scientific knowledge and facts" you are prepping for it in the wrong way...

I am no fan of the MCAT. It is important to make a certain threshold score if you are to have decent chances at med school admissions. But I truly believe that applicants obsess more over this test and the results than do most med schools.

There are exceptions - Michigan lubs da big scores, WashU, too, and there are others. But I think that if your app is otherwise clicking on all cylinders and you can manage a 30 something MCAT (with balanced section scores), you apply broadly and early, you will have a good chance at success somewhere.

 

[Deepa100]

Sorry to bust up your neat little theory again, but you can't lump the MCAT in with the SAT, LSAT,etc. They are supposed to test APTITUDE, or an applicant's innate ability in verbal, math, logic, etc. The MCAT, despite its name, is NOT an aptitude test--it aims to test specific knowledge, in detail, in multiple subject areas.

Since I have described my problems with the MCAT, you might expect me to have scored badly on the other tests, but that's not the case. I scored in the 99th percentile on both the SAT and the GMAT (and went on to get an MBA with honors from a top-10 school). My "g," as you call it, is just fine.

In fact, the MCAT is the first and only standardized test I've ever had trouble with. (And that 's "trouble" as seen only by section-score-obsessed med schools, since I still scored 30 and 31 total even with the 7's in PS.)

But it's not just personal. My ordeal with the MCAT made me very curious about its origins, how it's scored, and how good a measurement tool the test is, and I ended up reading quite a lot about these issues in academic papers. There's not enough time to get into the evidence here, but the honest fact is that the MCAT is a mediocre measurement tool at best in predicting applicant success in med school and Step 1.Med schools compound the problem by treating the scores--especially section scores-- as being much more meaningful than even the test designers would claim them to be. The result, IMO, is a lot of arbitrary and flawed admissions decisions.

As you can probably tell, I think the MCAT is utter bull****. And I say this as someone who has now been deemed "smart" because I got a 33.

As someone who took GRE and GMAT before, I would have to agree with student here. I have a friend who flunked a pre-req after getting into a MD school...

 

[mmagnett]

Should The MCAT be a test that one can fail? That is, should the AAMC establish that an applicant must meet a certain threshold in order to even be a contender for medical school? If so what should the minimum score be?

no. when i interviewed at duke they said their last years class had mcat scores ranging from 21 to 45.

i diddnt get in. i got a 34.

where would the limit be? 20? 34? 40?

 

[RedState]

no. when i interviewed at duke they said their last years class had mcat scores ranging from 21 to 45.

i diddnt get in. i got a 34.

where would the limit be? 20? 34? 40?

The way things are going, if there aren't some standards put in place, there will be some shady schools opening up in the US that offer direct entry into medical school with no bachelor's degree and no MCAT at all. Why not? If this happens the residency system would be even more congested than it is now. Wouldn't it be better to impose some practical common sense standards then to have to spend massive amount of money later to solve the looming bottleneck issues. Maybe the limit shoudl be >30. The folks who don't succeed can go to a midlevel program and we'd hav more academics in medicine again. In regard to the who IMGs not taking the MCAT, I don't think they should be allowed to participate in the match at the same time anyway. I think there should be a step-wise ACGME match which matches and scrambles US MDs first, then DOs and then IMGs fill in the blanks.

 

[Dissected]

The way things are going, if there aren't some standards put in place, there will be some shady schools opening up in the US that offer direct entry into medical school with no bachelor's degree and no MCAT at all. Why not? If this happens the residency system would be even more congested than it is now. Wouldn't it be better to impose some practical common sense standards then to have to spend massive amount of money later to solve the looming bottleneck issues. Maybe the limit shoudl be >30. The folks who don't succeed can go to a midlevel program and we'd hav more academics in medicine again. In regard to the who IMGs not taking the MCAT, I don't think they should be allowed to participate in the match at the same time anyway. I think there should be a step-wise ACGME match which matches and scrambles US MDs first, then DOs and then IMGs fill in the blanks.

This is comical to me.

Do you really think any sort of majority going to one of those hypothetical schools you are talking about could pass the boards? or even do well on them?? That wouldn't muck up residencies because they wouldn't be competitive enough to be selected in the match!! Its not like the MCAT is an end all be all success predictor for future physicians. 30+ is quite a high bottom line standard as well. Retaking the MCAT after a poor score is a pretty balsy thing to do in and of itself. I couldn't bring myself to do it, I had had enough. It surprises me that you as a conservative (pulling from the other thread you started 😀) would feel that an overall governing body should mandate such a minimum score rather than allow each separate entity (medical school) decide for themselves what to do...Seems like your 'conservative' way of thinking about personal freedom differs a little on this issue.

I feel like Im feeding a troll...hmm...😕

 

[RedState]

This is comical to me.

Do you really think any sort of majority going to one of those hypothetical schools you are talking about could pass the boards? or even do well on them?? That wouldn't muck up residencies because they wouldn't be competitive enough to be selected in the match!! Its not like the MCAT is an end all be all success predictor for future physicians. 30+ is quite a high bottom line standard as well. Retaking the MCAT after a poor score is a pretty balsy thing to do in and of itself. I couldn't bring myself to do it, I had had enough. It surprises me that you as a conservative (pulling from the other thread you started 😀) would feel that an overall governing body should mandate such a minimum score rather than allow each separate entity (medical school) decide for themselves what to do...Seems like your 'conservative' way of thinking about personal freedom differs a little on this issue.

I feel like Im feeding a troll...hmm...😕

I'm not necessarily sold on a cut off either -I just think that some clear standards are needed. I think that medicine is being degraded by relaxed standards for some, either to satisfy some cultural void or to get legacy money in the door. I think schools should be able to admit any qualified applicant, and if the MCAT isn't an adequate predictor, then there ought to be some other measure by which people can categorically qualify or fail to qualify. And frankly, if you don't feel like the debate is meaningful don't participate. It is your choice👍 A lot of people think this process needs to be tightened up and I think the discussion is legit.

 

[flip26]

The way things are going, if there aren't some standards put in place, there will be some shady schools opening up in the US that offer direct entry into medical school with no bachelor's degree and no MCAT at all. Why not? If this happens the residency system would be even more congested than it is now. Wouldn't it be better to impose some practical common sense standards then to have to spend massive amount of money later to solve the looming bottleneck issues. Maybe the limit shoudl be >30. The folks who don't succeed can go to a midlevel program and we'd hav more academics in medicine again. In regard to the who IMGs not taking the MCAT, I don't think they should be allowed to participate in the match at the same time anyway. I think there should be a step-wise ACGME match which matches and scrambles US MDs first, then DOs and then IMGs fill in the blanks.

WTF are you talking about? "The way things are going?"

Like most pre-meds, you are placing way more importance on the MCAT than do med schools. MCAT is a critical element, but it is just one element in the admissions process.

Standards for admission are not going down. If anything, they are going up. Look at AMCAS matriculant stats over the last, say, 10 years. The trend in MCAT and GPA is up.

 

[Chuck's Right Foot]

WTF are you talking about? "The way things are going?"

Like most pre-meds, you are placing way more importance on the MCAT than do med schools. MCAT is a critical element, but it is just one element in the admissions process.

Standards for admission are not going down. If anything, they are going up. Look at AMCAS matriculant stats over the last, say, 10 years. The trend in MCAT and GPA is up.

Yes, MCAT matriculant averages are going up, year after year. The accreditation board won't allow schools to open that don't require the MCAT as an entrance exam. Even the new "for-profit" schools will have a pool of qualified applicants. The fact is there is no way to determine who can/can't pass boards except by giving the boards. There is no good way to institute a cutoff... And there isn't a need, because this degradation of qualifications is a figment of your imagination.

 

[NotAndrew]

It surprises me that you as a conservative (pulling from the other thread you started 😀) would feel that an overall governing body should mandate such a minimum score rather than allow each separate entity (medical school) decide for themselves what to do...Seems like your 'conservative' way of thinking about personal freedom differs a little on this issue.

This is the most ironic thing ever posted here.

RonaldRegan: It seems that your reasons for wanting an MCAT cutoff are actually better arguments for an accrediting board for med schools and an exam for practice rights as a doctor. These things already exist.