For those of you who have taken the step II, what do you think of the mean on UW? Is it a good indicator of where you need to be to get a 216 or whatever the avg for step II is? How far above the mean did most of your guys get and did it reflect your actual step II score?
-
CycleTrack and SDN are teaming up to make medical school admissions more transparent and accessible! Read the announcement to learn how we’re supporting the future of CycleTrack’s free application-tracking tools .
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Step II UW Mean
Started by me454555
Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
me454555 said:For those of you who have taken the step II, what do you think of the mean on UW? Is it a good indicator of where you need to be to get a 216 or whatever the avg for step II is? How far above the mean did most of your guys get and did it reflect your actual step II score?
see this thread. it answers all your questions.
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=228830
Thanx for the link but I was asking more about the mean. The problem is that my overall score is lower than my last 300 or so Qs. This is probably b/c I'm studying pretty hard. I don't really know how to compare my overall to anyone else's b/c the scores fluctuate so much so I figured I'd ask about overall means for each test b/c that doesn't really change.
If anyone remembers how they did in relation to the mean on tests, it would be appreciated.
If anyone remembers how they did in relation to the mean on tests, it would be appreciated.
Haven't received my scores yet but people at my school are saying 70% and over and you're going to get a kick ass score. 60% and over you'll get a good score or above average score. Variations are wide within these two groups, however. If you correlate it, I have a feeling the correlation coefficient will probably be around 0.6 or 0.7....
Farbar said:I believe the real conversation is as follows:
Incorrect to Correct x 2.0 +200
So you should pass.
That doesn't make any sense at all.
Probably referring to answer changes, which in my case, have been greatly in my favor so far (15 incorrect to correct vs. 3 the other way around). But that formula still doesn't seem feasible...sophiejane said:That doesn't make any sense at all.
sophiejane said:That doesn't make any sense at all.
ok, 2 problems with my post. one, i wrote conversation instead of conversion. two, it was a joke and the fact that i have to explain it means it was not very effective.