What is the difference between being a "bad test taker" and just being dumb?

[Healer of Ills]

Thank God you're back.

To answer your question, it's the difference between being an alpha and being a beta personality wise. People that say they are bad test takers are weak human beings, and would make terrible doctors (luckily they never score well enough to get in)

This is genuinely one of the most ignorant statements that I have heard in my entire life. Do you honestly believe that your ability to answer 144 multiple choice questions has anything to do with your ability to treat and help human beings as a physician?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Noam Chomsky]

Many factors come into play when considering knowing the material vs. performing well on a test. Just because you know the material, doesn't mean you will perform well on the test. So obviously, test taking has nothing to do with intelligence and poor test takers are by NO means "dumb."

 

[Healer of Ills]

Hey Naom, that's a great quote man and entirely true in my opinion.

 

[dbeast]

This is genuinely one of the most ignorant statements that I have heard in my entire life. Do you honestly believe that your ability to answer 144 multiple choice questions has anything to do with your ability to treat and help human beings as a physician?

Successfultroll.jpg

 

[deleted393595]

Many factors come into play when considering knowing the material vs. performing well on a test. Just because you know the material, doesn't mean you will perform well on the test. So obviously, test taking has nothing to do with intelligence and poor test takers are by NO means "dumb."

Whoa! It's Noam Chomsky! Can I have an autograph?

 

[Noam Chomsky]

I wish I am half the man he is.

 

[Dr Love]

This is genuinely one of the most ignorant statements that I have heard in my entire life. Do you honestly believe that your ability to answer 144 multiple choice questions has anything to do with your ability to treat and help human beings as a physician?

If those questions related to medicine, then obviously yes.

 

[NickNaylor]

If those questions related to medicine, then obviously yes.

The MCAT doesn't apply.

 

[artsciencelove]

I always hear about people saying that they are "bad at multiple choice tests" or that they have have "bad test-taking skills"....are they just in denial about being dumb? I often hear this cliche from people with >3.8 GPA's and < 30 MCAT (or for other fields, a combination of high-end GPA with borderline/low-end standardized test score).

I used to think there was no difference, until I picked up a job tutoring science students. I think test taking skills involve the "bandwidth" a person has for transferring information from their environment into their mind, processing it internally, and then transferring it back out to manipulate their environment. The person may have a great fast "processor", but the bitrate of uploading or downloading information in and out of the brain could be very low. Dyslexia is the classic example; I tutor a couple of very smart students whose test scores are low simply because they don't read and write fast enough. They have to work for hours to absorb concepts that another person could grasp in 10 minutes, but once they understand, they demonstrate just as much facility applying the knowledge.

The MCAT requires you to read and think FAST, more than just about any exam you're likely to encounter in college. You have to jam all that data into your mind and come up with the correct answers quickly. High-bandwidth/fast processor people are rare; it is a gift for which the MCAT is intentionally selective. It gives "normal" people a taste of what a learning disability feels like. I think that may explain why someone could have a high GPA and a low MCAT score.

 

[circulus vitios]

I'm much better taking fill in the blank/essay tests than multiple choice tests. TBR pisses me off so much with ******ed 50 word questions and terrible phrasing that is confusing as hell "which of the following is not true doesn't not is not doesn't not not not is not true." Or "choose the best" for a graph and none of the graphs are exactly right. Or the question is poorly written and ambiguous as hell like not mentioning whether you're trying to find gauge pressure or absolute pressure and both gauge pressure and absolute pressure are possible choices.

 

[235788]

Not necessarily true. Language barriers, poor attention span, physical exhaustion, poor close eyesight etc could all be factors to score poorly on a written multiple choice exam but not necessarily be a mediocre doctor. Many universities know this and require you to perform practical exams which are graded subjectively. I have done multiple choice exams after being awake for 32 hours working nonstop and eating almost nothing and do poorly on the exam because of physical exhaustion.

Many people are just good at memorizing things like a parrot and forget everything the day after the test = Good exam score + mediocre clinical doctor.

Being a doctor requires you to be able to be systematic in your clinical exploration, know how to correctly interrogate the patient to get the most juicy and useful information in as little time as possible and be able to recognize patterns of specific diseases in your exploration. A droopy eye on just one side of the face might mean many things ranging from a birth defect to lung cancer. The parrot test taker won't recognize this but a doctor that is good at clinical exploration and how to distinguish what is normal and what is abnormal will be easy to distinguish.

Lastly, a poor test taker might be excellent at writing clinical notes putting the most useful information in a precise and concise manner. Being able to gain the trust of your patient and be good at managing work stress is independent on how good you are at multiple option tests.

disagree. If my doctor had any of these traits i'd get a new doctor.

 

[Laplace]

I always hear about people saying that they are "bad at multiple choice tests" or that they have have "bad test-taking skills"....are they just in denial about being dumb? I often hear this cliche from people with >3.8 GPA's and < 30 MCAT (or for other fields, a combination of high-end GPA with borderline/low-end standardized test score).

None. "Bad test taker" is just a euphemism for being dumb.

 

[timonski]

I used to think there was no difference, until I picked up a job tutoring science students. I think test taking skills involve the "bandwidth" a person has for transferring information from their environment into their mind, processing it internally, and then transferring it back out to manipulate their environment. The person may have a great fast "processor", but the bitrate of uploading or downloading information in and out of the brain could be very low. Dyslexia is the classic example; I tutor a couple of very smart students whose test scores are low simply because they don't read and write fast enough. They have to work for hours to absorb concepts that another person could grasp in 10 minutes, but once they understand, they demonstrate just as much facility applying the knowledge.

The MCAT requires you to read and think FAST, more than just about any exam you're likely to encounter in college. You have to jam all that data into your mind and come up with the correct answers quickly. High-bandwidth/fast processor people are rare; it is a gift for which the MCAT is intentionally selective. It gives "normal" people a taste of what a learning disability feels like. I think that may explain why someone could have a high GPA and a low MCAT score.

Nice analogy.

 

[45408]

I have done multiple choice exams after being awake for 32 hours working nonstop and eating almost nothing and do poorly on the exam because of physical exhaustion.

A situation in which many MCAT takers find themselves.....in Mexico maybe.