Step 1 on Tuesday, feeling like I failed

[gimv]

I took the exam last Tuesday (5/16), and I walked out of it in a semi-decent shape, feeling somewhat confidence I had at least passed. As days go by, I keep remembering questions and I can't stop myself from looking them up. So far I have about 12 incorrect answers (only from the few I remember) and I feel like they're actually so many more. I'm gradually starting to feel more and more anxious, as many questions were weird, ambigous and I have absolutely no clue what to do.

My stats weren't bad:

NBME 18: 240
UWSA 1: 251
NBME 19: 217 (what? Huge drop, horrible curve)
FREE 120: aprox 87%, don't remember
UWSA 2: 244

I can't be the exception, right? all my diagnostic tests can't have failed me. I WANT to believe I did a good job, but what if?

It's at least 3 more weeks til my score and my anxiety is thru the roof. Is anyone receiving their score in time after 4/24? I'm all over the place, this is madness.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[TheOther]

How could it not?

The scaled score accounts for any differences you might perceive on the exam.

The purpose of standardized tests is to...standardize. That's how it was for the practice exams as well. It worked the same way for the mcat.

I dont understand why this is such a hard concept for people. If it wasn't true, the test would be useless for comparison. If the tests weren't equivalent, then the getting different questions would invalidate the exam. If you're arguing that there's a small margin of error, then yeah... Even on the nbmes they claim +/-2 pts afaik.

The tests all pull from information that is fair game for the exam. If you got a test that hit your weaknesses, then it was the result of inadequate preparation not some conspiracy with the exam. The questions have been thrown through their paces before being put in the test bank.

I think it might be your use of 'equivalent.'

Fair, yes. Equivalent, no. The fact that some tests seem to be heavier on pharm/biochem/etc when my test had very little indicates exams are not all equivalent, imo

 

[ridethecliche]

Its not. Ridethecloch

i think youre confusing standardization via normalizing scores thru curving and standardization via replicating difficulty levels across exams. The former is essentially how all standardized exams account for variation and the latter is impossible to achieve.

Difficulty levels are addressed via the curve.

actually NBMEs claim +/- 10 points.

Refer to my statement regarding margin of error.

I think it might be your use of 'equivalent.'

Fair, yes. Equivalent, no. The fact that some tests seem to be heavier on pharm/biochem/etc when my test had very little indicates exams are not all equivalent, imo

Fair and equivalent. Equivalent does not mean that they all have the same breakdown on questions. The way the NBME breaks down questions into categories is also not the most straightforward thing. The exam gives % breakdowns of topics. There are ranges given there.

Equivalent works.

You're saying that they don't all test the exactly same thing. That does not mean they're not equivalent.

This legit feels like an MCAT thread from 5 years ago....

 

[LLCoolK]

.

 

[ridethecliche]

That's not refuting myself at all. Do you know what statistics is?

The questions are vetted and there is data in terms of % correct. If you get a question wrong, then that's not an aberration.

If you want to live your life thinking that you got dealt an unfair test that played to your weaknesses etc, then go for it. But don't misconstrue that.

The perceived difficulty doesn't affect the outcome. If you get anxious from that, then that's on you and not the test.

Normalization means that a test taker should score within the margin of error of any version of the exam on that day, regardless of the perceived difficulty. Sure, there are outliers, but that's just how statistics works.

Your arguments here are getting asinine. I'm going to bow out...

Good luck to you all.

 

[Newyawk]

That's not refuting myself at all. Do you know what statistics is?

The questions are vetted and there is data in terms of % correct. If you get a question wrong, then that's not an aberration.

If you want to live your life thinking that you got dealt an unfair test that played to your weaknesses etc, then go for it. But don't misconstrue that.

The perceived difficulty doesn't affect the outcome. If you get anxious from that, then that's on you and not the test.

Normalization means that a test taker should score within the margin of error of any version of the exam on that day, regardless of the perceived difficulty. Sure, there are outliers, but that's just how statistics works.

Your arguments here are getting asinine. I'm going to bow out...

Good luck to you all.

A test can be "difficult" and still test me on all my "strengths". Getting a Q wrong doesnt mean you were weak in that subject necessarily. It could just mean the Q was much more difficult.

For example, almost every NBME and UWSA ive taken have somehow told me that my "strength" is histo and my "weakness" is cardio. Believe me, this just wasnt true. In reality, the question writers tend to test histo on much easier levels than they test cardio. Hence, while I know much more cardio than i do histo, i still ended up doing better on the histo sections.

 

[ridethecliche]

That's irrelevant to the score in the end though.
Let me ask you this.

In a couple of sentences...what is your point?

 

[Newyawk]

That's irrelevant to the score in the end though.
Let me ask you this.

In a couple of sentences...what is your point?

My argument is pretty clear: every step 1 exam has a different level of difficulty, irrespective of an individuals "weaknesses".
Youre the one without any clear argument.

 

[ridethecliche]

My argument is pretty clear: every step 1 exam has a different level of difficulty, irrespective of an individuals "weaknesses".
Youre the one without any clear argument.

My point is simply that the perceived difficulty is irrelevant to the final score unless it gives the test taker anxiety, which is on them, not the test.

Your perceived strengths are also irrelevant because those graphs show your performances relative to other test takers. So you might feel weak in an area, but you're relatively good at it.

So my point is this...
The perceived difficulty has nothing to do with the outcome in a standardized test. Inadequate preparation ie having weaknesses, definitely affects things.

Again, i've been pretty clear that there's obviously a margin of error. That's totally different than someone getting 240s in practice failing the exam... That would be a significant outlier. There's really no way to prepare from a test from hell. Given the way the exam is made, getting a test from he'll is also statistically highly improbable. But I guess everyone wants to be the exception...

 

[Newyawk]

My point is simply that the perceived difficulty is irrelevant to the final score unless it gives the test taker anxiety, which is on them, not the test.

Your perceived strengths are also irrelevant because those graphs show your performances relative to other test takers. So you might feel weak in an area, but you're relatively good at it.

So my point is this...
The perceived difficulty has nothing to do with the outcome in a standardized test. Inadequate preparation ie having weaknesses, definitely affects things.

Again, i've been pretty clear that there's obviously a margin of error. That's totally different than someone getting 240s in practice failing the exam... That would be a significant outlier. There's really no way to prepare from a test from hell. Given the way the exam is made, getting a test from he'll is also statistically highly improbable. But I guess everyone wants to be the exception...

preparation is easily determined by practice scores and preclinical grades.

expectations and anxiety can certainly cause someone to perceive the exam as more difficult than that same person would have perceived it in a different setting. This is not the same thing as arguing that the exams do not vary widely in difficulty level.

You have taken one step 1 exam in your life and have formed an opinion that really requires years of step 1 experience. It is on you to prove your assertion and you cant do that without speculating that all of the sdn'ers are just perceiving the exams differently rather than there being an actual substantive difference in difficulty. How big of a sample size do you need to explain the phenomenon of multiple people claiming their exam was either much more difficult than the NBMEs or even easier than the NBMEs irrespective of their prior performance? Are you really going to attribute that all to test anxiety and "perceived difficulty"?

 

[ridethecliche]

It's a bloody standardized exam. The results would be invalid if my 'crazy assertion' was untrue. Do you know how hard it is to validate an instrument and how much data it takes to make sure the results are reliable?

Do you honestly think that the amount of variation you're claiming to exist would give this exam any semblance of utility.

Holy crap. Are you actually trolling now? I really can't tell if you are or if you have just never worked with anything resembling big data. I could make these exact claims never having taken the exam.

www.nbme.org/students/urban-legends/index.html

Read the bit about difficulty. The same applies to step 1.

I'm legit done here now.

 

[Newyawk]

It's a bloody standardized exam. The results would be invalid if my 'crazy assertion' was untrue. Do you know how hard it is to validate an instrument and how much data it takes to make sure the results are reliable?

Do you honestly think that the amount of variation you're claiming to exist would give this exam any semblance of utility.

Holy crap. Are you actually trolling now? I really can't tell if you are or if you have just never worked with anything resembling big data. I could make these exact claims never having taken the exam.

www.nbme.org/students/urban-legends/index.html

Read the bit about difficulty. The same applies to step 1.

I'm legit done here now.

1. You should probably work on your patience before you start seeing patients. It seems you may get frustrated quickly.

2. Thanks for sharing that. Statements 2 and 3 prove what ive been arguing this entire time.

 

[ridethecliche]

Uh yeah, love the ad hominen attack, but I'm having a blast so far during third year. In my experience, making unrelated arguments is usually related to throwing in distractors when you've realized that you're out of substantive arguments.

And I'm quite certain that I've been saying that the perceived difficulty is irrelevant because it's a standardized exam. Maybe read past the first sentence?

Regarding question weighting... Im pretty sure that I've been talking about exam scaling not individual questions, so... If I misspoke, I stand corrected. My point has been and still is that the perceived difficulty is meaningless. I stand by that.

You're saying that tests have different levels of difficulty and I've been saying that it's irrelevant to the outcome. That's pretty much what the nbme said. I can't really make it any more clear than that. The thread was related to a poster that was scoring well claiming that they'd failed a test because they thought it was hard. I say, ad nauseam, that the perceived difficulty doesn't impact the outcome. That's what the nbme says too...

 

[Newyawk]

Uh yeah, love the ad hominen attack, but I'm having a blast so far during third year. In my experience, making unrelated arguments is usually related to throwing in distractors when you've realized that you're out of substantive arguments.

And I'm quite certain that I've been saying that the perceived difficulty is irrelevant because it's a standardized exam. Maybe read past the first sentence?

Regarding question weighting... Im pretty sure that I've been talking about exam scaling not individual questions, so... If I misspoke, I stand corrected. My point has been and still is that the perceived difficulty is meaningless. I stand by that.

You're saying that tests have different levels of difficulty and I've been saying that it's irrelevant to the outcome. That's pretty much what the nbme said. I can't really make it any more clear than that. The thread was related to a poster that was scoring well claiming that they'd failed a test because they thought it was hard. I say, ad nauseam, that the perceived difficulty doesn't impact the outcome. That's what the nbme says too...

I apologize for the ad hominem. It was more of a jab than anything.
Clearly I misunderstood your argument bc I was convinced you were saying that the actual difficulty of every Step 1 exam doesnt vary widely.

 

[ridethecliche]

That's why I asked what your point was! I wasn't asking it sarcastically. I was trying to get at the fact that we were both saying similar things but I was describing the effect of what you were saying ya know?

No harm no foul. Hope you have a good weekend ahead of you.

 

[gimv]

maybe well all get a surprise and get our scores earlier than the 28th.

I did not
But my permit has been removed from my ECFMG site, so I'm positive they'll come this Wednesday, fingers crossed.

 

[gimv]

How could it not?

The scaled score accounts for any differences you might perceive on the exam.

The purpose of standardized tests is to...standardize. That's how it was for the practice exams as well. It worked the same way for the mcat.

I dont understand why this is such a hard concept for people. If it wasn't true, the test would be useless for comparison. If the tests weren't equivalent, then the getting different questions would invalidate the exam. If you're arguing that there's a small margin of error, then yeah... Even on the nbmes they claim +/-2 pts afaik.

The tests all pull from information that is fair game for the exam. If you got a test that hit your weaknesses, then it was the result of inadequate preparation not some conspiracy with the exam. The questions have been thrown through their paces before being put in the test bank.

Your argument is absolutely reasonable.

 

[dwice]

Did you get your score today? @gimv