Last edited:
You are more than fine lol! A 517 will take you farI recently got back my score and I'm scared that my low CARS might hinder me from applying to certain schools
Total: 517
C/P: 130
CARS: 125
B/B: 131
P/S: 131
Should I be worried?
CARS gets cut the most slack. Please spread the word. You're fine.I recently got back my score and I'm scared that my low CARS might hinder me from applying to certain schools
Total: 517
C/P: 130
CARS: 125
B/B: 131
P/S: 131
Should I be worried?
I usually find what is unbalanced in a 517 MCAT is the person making the complaint.
CARS gets cut the most slack. Please spread the word. You're fine.
Compared to other sections, there's a larger element of luck to CARS, and it's also the least relevant to medicine of the fourWhy does CARS get cut the most slack?
I'm just curious, with a score like this, would applying to some powerhouse schools be a good idea?
Why does CARS get cut the most slack?
Compared to other sections, there's a larger element of luck to CARS, and it's also the least relevant to medicine of the four
Lol, that'd be fine and all if it didn't involve inferring what some art historian from 1912 truly meant when he delicately criticized some Renaissance paintingI honestly don't think that CARS has anything to do with luck, not more than any of the other sections. It's just a different sort of skill. But being able to think critically, infer meanings from context and subtext, and filter information are important skills for physicians to have as well. I guess I'm just biased because it was my best section, ha ha.
I recently got back my score and I'm scared that my low CARS might hinder me from applying to certain schools
Total: 517
C/P: 130
CARS: 125
B/B: 131
P/S: 131
Should I be worried?
I honestly don't think that CARS has anything to do with luck, not more than any of the other sections. It's just a different sort of skill. But being able to think critically, infer meanings from context and subtext, and filter information are important skills for physicians to have as well. I guess I'm just biased because it was my best section, ha ha.
lol y'all. I had a 124 CARS, 512 overall and got 5 accepts. I say don't retake unless it's below a 124.. good thing I didn't listen to other people🙂
I got a 513 with 125 CARS and got 2 top 10 accepts so best of luck!! I’m pretty sure they overlooked my CARS because of my immigrant and ESL backgroundYou are my hope and inspiration! I am going in with a 514 and a 125.. Retoke from a 509 because cars was only 123.
Lol, that'd be fine and all if it didn't involve inferring what some art historian from 1912 truly meant when he delicately criticized some Renaissance painting
You are my hope and inspiration! I am going in with a 514 and a 125.. Retoke from a 509 because cars was only 123.
Why? Isn't it shown to correlate the most closely with intelligence and medical school success? Isn't that why the canadians make a big deal about it?CARS gets cut the most slack. Please spread the word. You're fine.
Why? Isn't it shown to correlate the most closely with intelligence and medical school success? Isn't that why the canadians make a big deal about it?
Yeah, I'm familiar with the argument for why CARS is important, and I didn't do badly on it by any means lol.I get the sentiment, but being able to read a piece on an unfamiliar topic and recognize the patterns in the writing is an important skill since pattern recognition is a big part of medicine. Cars just does it in a weird way, as the topics are often unfamiliar. The thing most people don’t get though is that the topic is irrelevant. You literally don’t have to know anything about the topic to get the right answers.
Of course I’m probably biased too since I really like cars.
I think it correlates more with the strength of your humanities and social science education than it does with intelligence, whether it involves taking hardcore philosophy classes or just being very-well read.Lol correlates with intelligence?
No, and no and I don't know.Isn't it shown to correlate the most closely with intelligence and medical school success? Isn't that why the canadians make a big deal about it?
Yeah, I'm familiar with the argument for why CARS is important, and I didn't do badly on it by any means lol.
It just wasn't a pleasant section for me. It'd be frustrating noticing shifting-standards in the internal logic test writers used to say which 50/50 response was correct. And if I found a passage especially boring, or if I became overconfident, or was tired or whatever it'd almost always show in my performance. I also didn't invest that much time into the section, maybe a moderate amount, so maybe it would've become a more pleasant experience had I practiced more.
CARS and intelligence??? Where did that come from????
I honestly don't think that CARS has anything to do with luck, not more than any of the other sections. It's just a different sort of skill. But being able to think critically, infer meanings from context and subtext, and filter information are important skills for physicians to have as well. I guess I'm just biased because it was my best section, ha ha.
intelligence tests are typically designed such that they require no outside information. CARS is the closest thing to that on the MCAT. Why else would the AAMC keep it in place. They aren't paying those authors for the fun of it. Neither is college board or ETS.No, and no and I don't know.
Of all the studies I've read on using MCAT as a predictor for success in med school, I have yet to see anything convincing that one subsection is a better predictor than then entire exam.
Again:
In addition, many applicants are either ESL or 1st gen. Americans, and CARS is more tricky for them. Also keep in mind that tons of candidates did fine in college and the other parts of the MCAT, so there's something perverse about CARS!
If you look at the score breakdowns for med school acceptees, the median CARS score is a full point below the other categories.
I've had students who scored a 5 in the old VR section, but scored 10s in Chemp/Phys and Bio. They did fine in our curriculum. We only screened out people who had poor speaking skills at interviews.
CARS and intelligence??? Where did that come from????
intelligence tests are typically designed such that they require no outside information. CARS is the closest thing to that on the MCAT. Why else would the AAMC keep it in place. They aren't paying those authors for the fun of it. Neither is college board or ETS.
Verbal reasoning also is typically the hardest section on most standardized tests to coach/tutor which lends some sort of evidence to it being correlated with innate ability.
Also, and this is totally anecdotal, I've never seen someone with a high CARS score who isn't also a high scorer in the three other sections.
intelligence tests are typically designed such that they require no outside information. CARS is the closest thing to that on the MCAT. Why else would the AAMC keep it in place. They aren't paying those authors for the fun of it. Neither is college board or ETS.
Verbal reasoning also is typically the hardest section on most standardized tests to coach/tutor which lends some sort of evidence to it being correlated with innate ability.
Also, and this is totally anecdotal, I've never seen someone with a high CARS score who isn't also a high scorer in the three other sections. The data you quoted seems to point at that too. There are no discretes on CARS that can be answered with rote memorization of some factoid which can inflate the score. If you are lacking analytical skills, it really shows on CARS, and critical and analytical abilities are usually a part of most psychologists definitions of intelligence.
I'm not making the argument that CARS is an outright IQ test, but it's much closer to being one than the other three sections.
I'm not sure I buy that it's closer to being an IQ test than the other sections. If it is, the difference probably isn't too significant.intelligence tests are typically designed such that they require no outside information. CARS is the closest thing to that on the MCAT. Why else would the AAMC keep it in place. They aren't paying those authors for the fun of it. Neither is college board or ETS.
Verbal reasoning also is typically the hardest section on most standardized tests to coach/tutor which lends some sort of evidence to it being correlated with innate ability.
Also, and this is totally anecdotal, I've never seen someone with a high CARS score who isn't also a high scorer in the three other sections. The data you quoted seems to point at that too. There are no discretes on CARS that can be answered with rote memorization of some factoid which can inflate the score. If you are lacking analytical skills, it really shows on CARS, and critical and analytical abilities are usually a part of most psychologists definitions of intelligence.
I'm not making the argument that CARS is an outright IQ test, but it's much closer to being one than the other three sections.
I have.
My friend has a 513 that's propped up heavily by his CARS. I was telling him he should be a law professor, lol.Ouch..
Unrelated, the LSAT sounds miserable. Knew someone who was preparing for it, and I'll take physics over logic games any day.My friend has a 513 that's propped up heavily by his CARS. I was telling him he should be a law professor, lol.
Yeah, I don't think I'd be a fan. Was talking to a guy last week about that, he said he's the only person who likes the logic games.Unrelated, the LSAT sounds miserable. Knew someone who was preparing for it, and I'll take physics over logic games any day.
Unrelated, the LSAT sounds miserable. Knew someone who was preparing for it, and I'll take physics over logic games any day.
Yeah, I don't think I'd be a fan. Was talking to a guy last week about that, he said he's the only person who likes the logic games.
I'm also wondering if the LSAT would generally be easier than the MCAT, since it's less heavily selected for (most people sitting for the MCAT at least did alright in some challenging science courses, while you have people with easier coursework sitting for the LSAT)If anything, the lsat is closer to an intelligence test than any section on the MCAT. Mensa stopped accepting it though because the logic games have a finite number of formats that can be learned and practiced. Unless you take the lsat cold, it’s not super reliable as an indicator of intelligence.
It’s easier in that you don’t need a fund of knowledge to do well. You literally just have to have good analysis and reasoning skills and then learn the strategies for the different games and how to recognize them. It’s not an easy exam for someone who struggles with those, but I’m confident that anyone who can get above a 510 on the MCAT can destroy the lsat with a little bit of practice.I'm also wondering if the LSAT would generally be easier than the MCAT, since it's less heavily selected for (most people sitting for the MCAT at least did alright in some challenging science courses, while you have people with easier coursework sitting for the LSAT)
I believe it; for, one could be as damn/unread as hell while possessing an excellent ‘working memory’.I have.