Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
Which were?
I have been told that avgs' are up nationwide this year.
Disagree, I would bet dollars to donuts there is a very statistically significant correlation between pass rate and increasing board scores. After all, if a school couldn't get all their students to 400, what about that curriculum says it is geared towards high performance? Even at the 92% national average that is 20+ students failing at many DO schools (15 if your 165, 20 if your 250, 28 or w/e for 330).
I just hope COMLEX doesn't screw with the scores again. Lots of places just use the numbers for a cut off, so making 50 percentile a 500 every year is a real disservice. I prefer the USMLE route where a 230 today is equal to the 230 of yesteryear, even if more people are hitting it. Its stupid to punish students because we perform better overall than our predecessors did.
I think there is an arms race between prep companies and test writers. As soon as something like sketchy comes out and students started becoming wizzes at relevent micro, numbers start rising and we start seeing more wtf micro on comlex. It's a constant struggle for test companies to stratify us while prep companies become wise to what stuff to teach students. All the while scores keep going up. Same thing happened with the MCAT. It seems 20 years ago a 30 was a guaranteed MD acceptance. Now I know several at my DO school with 33+ MCATs where it just wasn't impressive enough for MD
Might be a bit of both. I'd be shocked if the average this year is below 535. Then the surge in med applicants in recent years has more and more highly qualified applicants ending up at DO schools.
Agree, they also need to come out with a test that better predicts the performance of students tho. This whole if you get a 500+ on the COMSAE you probably won't fail business is malarkey.
You have 2 friends. They are each describing a party where there's a bunch of single girls. One guy says his party of 100 girls has an average rating of 7.3 with a 4% untirely undatable population. Your other friend says his equally populated party ONLY has a 2% undatable population but the average there is only 6.8. Which party are you going to?
Thats not how this is working. Why would the party with more undatable girls have a higher average rating? The same guy invited the 4% undatable as the 96 datable ones, thus proving that he was less effective at wooing good looking women. If you can pull an average of 7.3 why would you have 4 undatables in the first place? The guy who is pulling an average of 6.8 is obviously more likely to have undatables because his average is lower thus demonstrating his inability to pull higher quality girls consistently. Common man think with your head (the other one...well actually, maybe either in this example).
...boy can you read?
Your scenario is a logical fallacy. I will try explaining a different way: You get invited to those same two partys, but all you know is that one party has 4 undatables, and the other has 2. Which one do you think has the higher average attractiveness?
Your first, second, and third iterations of this post are all pretty weak. Think whatever you want.
Comlex scores have been odd this year. Among my friends and I, there is now zero correlation between usmle and comlex.
Is it common to have more than that? We only had 2.5 hrs and it felt like too much
just among my group of friends who took both and shared their scores, it's
