what do you think the correlation of this is?

[Gumshoe]

Not to bring it up again, but the correlation MCAT/Med school accomplishment is a very tenuous one. Consider:

Yes, it probably predicts your science aptitude. But you forget the first 2 years and then it's all about your clinical + specialty training ... so I figure if you are at least greater than about a 25 or so it's all the same. I know the standards have to be maintained but don't get too caught up in this MCAT as a predictor when being a really good doctor is all about learning how to be a great clinician and then learning the SPECIALTY really well. (I guess that what I'm trying to say is that after a certain cutoff point, the MCAT means NOTHING)

Any thoughts?

Gumshoe

Good luck to all
(there's no such thing as luck, it's all probability)
my best wishes, then

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Rapid Decomposition]

Maybe, but I would put the "cutoff" point much higher than 25. I mean, 24 is average - I don't think the top 40-50% of MCAT scorers are "equal" in terms of their ability to do well in med school. That's too big of a chunk. Maybe the top 20% or something - what is the 80% percentile? 30 or something?

 

[wolferman]

I disagree. The MCAT tries to test your ability to apply scientific and biological concepts from your pre-med courses. It is my opinion that good clinicians are capable of applying their vast knowledge of medicine from medical school to their patients cases. Therefore, the MCAT is just an attempt to identify the students who will be able to do this.

 

[Wrigleyville]

Admissions committees need a way of comparing students and measuring their relative academic aptitudes. The GRE would probably do just as good in this regard, but the MCAT has the added benefit of testing your ability to apply old concepts to new problems.

I wouldn't say there is a cutoff point for MCAT scores in terms of someone's ability to succeed in medical school. But I would say that scores suffer from diminishing returns as they get higher. The difference between a 37 and a 40 is much less meaningful than a difference between a 27 and a 30.

 

[Gleevec]

Standardized tests at best corellate to grades in the first one or two years, which is all they can feasibly do. Trust me, if there was a test to determine how good a doctor you would be regardless of med school performance, the AAMC would use it. But since there isnt the MCAT is better than nothing.

I would rather have a standardized test partly influence med school admissions rather then how much you can suck up to your interviewer.