What purpose does Verbal serve on MCAT

[Midifelder10]

---

Members do not see this ad.

If you can perform on physical and biological section why is verbal weighed so heavy. If you are doing fine in other sections you do understand the language, can communicate with the patients. This section has kept some good students who wanted to be in med school from pursuing their dreams. It is so counterproductive and inefficient that people are taking this test multiple times just to get in.

Example A; P 11, V 7, BS 11 29
Example B: P 9, V 13, B 9 31

Who has a better chance of success in Med school? My vote A.

I don't want to start crap but a honest intellectual discussion only.

 

[gtbROX]

It is something but not common sense or intelligence. Rubiks cube is intelligence shakespear is not. My chem,phy,bio teachers could give me some unknown info and test my knowledge but using verbal as a medium to do it does not make sense.

I think this is the 2nd time you brought up shakespeare, and I have never heard of anyone getting a passage that is an actual excerpt shakespeare's work. I've never even seen it on practice tests from AAMC or elsewhere.

I wouldn't call VR common sense either because it's logic and logic, in this day and age, is not common at all. Your reasoning for saying that it's not "intelligence" is extremely irrational; why don't I say that quantum physics is not intelligence just because I don't understand it. If you actually read through your verbal answer choices and made it a point to understand the reasoning behind them, you wouldn't see VR as a lack of intelligence. If anything, VR is the closest thing to intelligence because it tests your reasoning skills without your prior knowledge.
Look up Bloom's Taxonomy. Memorization is the lowest indicator of intelligence because anyone can do it. Most med school applicants have sufficient memorization skills to become doctors. What most applicants lack are reasoning and logic. The mcat used to be a memorization test; it led to sub par healthcare and irrational doctors.

 

[Dianyla]

I think this is the 2nd time you brought up shakespeare, and I have never heard of anyone getting a passage that is an actual excerpt shakespeare's work. I've never even seen it on practice tests from AAMC or elsewhere.

A friend of mine got a passage on Milton's Paradise Lost. I'm not sure if it was a passage from it, or a passage discussing it in excruciating detail. (He's sooo not a lit guy, and pretty much had a meltdown over that and ended up voiding that entire MCAT over it.)

 

[LuciusVorenus]

A friend of mine got a passage on Milton's Paradise Lost. I'm not sure if it was a passage from it, or a passage discussing it in excruciating detail. (He's sooo not a lit guy, and pretty much had a meltdown over that and ended up voiding that entire MCAT over it.)

As long as you don't end up with a passage from Ulysses 😛

 

[Dianyla]

As long as you don't end up with a passage from Ulysses 😛

James Joyce? Kill me now.

 

[Midifelder10]

I think this is the 2nd time you brought up shakespeare, and I have never heard of anyone getting a passage that is an actual excerpt shakespeare's work. I've never even seen it on practice tests from AAMC or elsewhere.

I wouldn't call VR common sense either because it's logic and logic, in this day and age, is not common at all. Your reasoning for saying that it's not "intelligence" is extremely irrational; why don't I say that quantum physics is not intelligence just because I don't understand it. If you actually read through your verbal answer choices and made it a point to understand the reasoning behind them, you wouldn't see VR as a lack of intelligence. If anything, VR is the closest thing to intelligence because it tests your reasoning skills without your prior knowledge.
Look up Bloom's Taxonomy. Memorization is the lowest indicator of intelligence because anyone can do it. Most med school applicants have sufficient memorization skills to become doctors. What most applicants lack are reasoning and logic. The mcat used to be a memorization test; it led to sub par healthcare and irrational doctors.

Quantum physics is absolutely on top of intellectual stuff and if MCAT tests you for that and I get a 3, I would be the last person complaining. Verbal to me is not testing the part of brain that relates to science. They can give you random info in phy,chem and bio and still test your intelligence. giving it in the ways of verbal is not the most efficient way of doing it.

Please dont give me this preachy stuff abt not being able to study journals. I would be fine reading and understanding those because of my background in bio, chem and physics. It would have nothing to do with verbal. Verbal is nothing more than a tool we communicate with and a language we read. Anything more than that is a stretch.

This infatuation with shakespear is so overrated. Humanity majors have made a career of what that man was thinking many years back. Who knows what was he thinking and personally I could care less. If I take a control group of 50 unbiased individuals and ask half to watch a play by shakespear and other half to watch Transformers I could tell you right now xformers group would be lot more happy.

 

[Midifelder10]

I think this is the 2nd time you brought up shakespeare, and I have never heard of anyone getting a passage that is an actual excerpt shakespeare's work. I've never even seen it on practice tests from AAMC or elsewhere.

I wouldn't call VR common sense either because it's logic and logic, in this day and age, is not common at all. Your reasoning for saying that it's not "intelligence" is extremely irrational; why don't I say that quantum physics is not intelligence just because I don't understand it. If you actually read through your verbal answer choices and made it a point to understand the reasoning behind them, you wouldn't see VR as a lack of intelligence. If anything, VR is the closest thing to intelligence because it tests your reasoning skills without your prior knowledge.
Look up Bloom's Taxonomy. Memorization is the lowest indicator of intelligence because anyone can do it. Most med school applicants have sufficient memorization skills to become doctors. What most applicants lack are reasoning and logic. The mcat used to be a memorization test; it led to sub par healthcare and irrational doctors.

Verbal = logic is most illogical stuff I have ever heard. Keep on believing that and in toothfairy. Who has been feeding you this crap.

 

[gtbROX]

Verbal = logic is most illogical stuff I have ever heard. Keep on believing that and in toothfairy. Who has been feeding you this crap.

Translation: "Because I am bad at verbal, I am going to openly make an assumption that it is meaningless."

And to address your other post, the only person bringing up Shakespeare is you. The fact that you equate verbal to Shakespeare shows that you have not been actually practicing verbal. If you actually had bothered practicing verbal, you would have mentioned philosophy, political, natural science, healthcare history, and other fields that are generally the topics of verbal passages.

Doctors need to be people who can logically analyze facts as opposed to blatantly accept/memorize things as "truth." The only reason we know that the world is round is because logical thinkers back then used empiricism and analysis to challenge that notion. Healthcare cannot advance if future physicians don't bother scrutinizing and analyzing currently accepted facts.

http://www.internationalgme.org/Resources/Pubs/Academic Medicine.pdf
But here's a translation of a part of it since you'll probably forego reading it and just continue whining:
MCAT VR scores correlate to USMLE part 2.

http://www.usmle.org/step-2-cs/
Direct Quote from the link:
"Step 2 of the USMLE assesses the ability of examinees to apply medical knowledge, skills, and understanding of clinical science essential for the provision of patient care under supervision, and includes emphasis on health promotion and disease prevention. Step 2 ensures that due attention is devoted to the principles of clinical sciences and basic patient- centered skills that provide the foundation for the safe and effective practice of medicine."

Summary: VR reasoning is a good indicator of how well you'll be able to LOGICALLY apply medical science knowledge to patient care.

 

[CaribbeanBlue]

Translation: "Because I am bad at verbal, I am going to openly make an assumption that it is meaningless."

And to address your other post, the only person bringing up Shakespeare is you. The fact that you equate verbal to Shakespeare shows that you have not been actually practicing verbal. If you actually had bothered practicing verbal, you would have mentioned philosophy, political, natural science, healthcare history, and other fields that are generally the topics of verbal passages.

Doctors need to be people who can logically analyze facts as opposed to blatantly accept/memorize things as "truth." The only reason we know that the world is round is because logical thinkers back then used empiricism and analysis to challenge that notion. Healthcare cannot advance if future physicians don't bother scrutinizing and analyzing currently accepted facts.

http://www.internationalgme.org/Resources/Pubs/Academic Medicine.pdf
But here's a translation of a part of it since you'll probably forego reading it and just continue whining:
MCAT VR scores correlate to USMLE part 2.

http://www.usmle.org/step-2-cs/
Direct Quote from the link:
"Step 2 of the USMLE assesses the ability of examinees to apply medical knowledge, skills, and understanding of clinical science essential for the provision of patient care under supervision, and includes emphasis on health promotion and disease prevention. Step 2 ensures that due attention is devoted to the principles of clinical sciences and basic patient- centered skills that provide the foundation for the safe and effective practice of medicine."

Summary: VR reasoning is a good indicator of how well you'll be able to LOGICALLY apply medical science knowledge to patient care.

I don't believe any correlation between VR and USMLE is valid. Most of the people that take USMLE are medical students who had an average VR of between about 9 and 12.

I feel like it would be a more fair correlation if everyone who attempted the MCAT, whether they got into medical school or not also took the USMLE (which we know wouldn't happen).

For example, what about the kids who get PS10/VR6/BS10, but decide to not go to medical school because of VR? If they took the USMLE and scored poorly, we could see a more clear correlation in VR vs USMLE scores. Otherwise, most people that do WELL on the VR end up taking the USMLE anyway. Most medical students' VR scores were only a difference of ~4 questions wrong sometimes too so that is what all these USMLE/VR correlations are pointing towards.

I feel like none of us have the position to judge the importance of VR. There are people who even get lucky and get into medical school with a 7 and score very well on USMLE's, but I think we can all agree that those VR gods out there that get 12-13+ would have to really flop on their USMLE's to do badly.

Midifelder has some validity in his argument that verbal reasoning is not the same as reasoning with medical information. A lot of people on this thread make it seem like if you can't get an 8+ in VR, that you have the reasoning skills of a monkey and shouldn't practice medicine, regardless of how great your BS or PS scores may be with your interpretations of medical studies (BS passages).

 

[gtbROX]

I don't believe any correlation between VR and USMLE is valid. Most of the people that take USMLE are medical students who had an average VR of between about 9 and 12.

I feel like it would be a more fair correlation if everyone who attempted the MCAT, whether they got into medical school or not also took the USMLE (which we know wouldn't happen).

For example, what about the kids who get PS10/VR6/BS10, but decide to not go to medical school because of VR? If they took the USMLE and scored poorly, we could see a more clear correlation in VR vs USMLE scores. Otherwise, most people that do WELL on the VR end up taking the USMLE anyway. Most medical students' VR scores were only a difference of ~4 questions wrong sometimes too so that is what all these USMLE/VR correlations are pointing towards.

I feel like none of us have the position to judge the importance of VR. There are people who even get lucky and get into medical school with a 7 and score very well on USMLE's, but I think we can all agree that those VR gods out there that get 12-13+ would have to really flop on their USMLE's to do badly.

Midifelder has some validity in his argument that verbal reasoning is not the same as reasoning with medical information. A lot of people on this thread make it seem like if you can't get an 8+ in VR, that you have the reasoning skills of a monkey and shouldn't practice medicine, regardless of how great your BS or PS scores may be with your interpretations of medical studies (BS passages).

Actually, the study I posted had a mean of 9.57 for verbal with an SD of 1.7 so, realistically, their majority fell between 7.87-11.27, which rounds to 8-11. Keep in mind that there are outliers (low and high).

AAMC, which is the Association of American Medical Colleges, has this to say about the MCAT:
"The Medical College Admission Test® (MCAT®) is a standardized, multiple-choice examination designed to assess the examinee's problem solving, critical thinking, writing skills, and knowledge of science concepts and principles prerequisite to the study of medicine."

They describe their test as the bolded, and if the VR section was inconsistent with that phrase, it would not be part of the MCAT. I have yet to see any citations/research supporting the assertion that VR is not important. I said this before, and I'm going to say this again, the AAMC has committees of medical doctors that decided to put VR into the MCAT. Why would medical doctors, with experience in their respective fields of medicine, put a VR section into the MCAT if it weren't important? They have practical experience that have led them to this decision.

 

[Temperature101]

The pursose of VR in the MCAT is to prevent ESOL students from getting into medical school.

 

[ToldYouSo]

This is a topic that we'll have to agree to disagree about. I think that the verbal section is the most important yet also the hardest to improve out of the three. It's also a bit strange to be dismissive towards the classic literary works and then bring up quantum physics as some sort of justification.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

The verbal section tests logic. I.e the stuff used in science to actually deduce and elucidate new things. It's probably not only clinically relevant, i.e you hear information and then take it and combine it with other things, but it's relevant for life. A good example is my friend who is an engineer who in grad school never bothered memorizing a lot of complex things, but rather spent a few minutes and derived all of the things from simple postulates and logic.

Either way, there are weirder testing mediums that actually work. The relationship might not seem clear, but it exists, we can rest assured of that.

 

[Midifelder10]

Translation: "Because I am bad at verbal, I am going to openly make an assumption that it is meaningless."

And to address your other post, the only person bringing up Shakespeare is you. The fact that you equate verbal to Shakespeare shows that you have not been actually practicing verbal. If you actually had bothered practicing verbal, you would have mentioned philosophy, political, natural science, healthcare history, and other fields that are generally the topics of verbal passages.

Doctors need to be people who can logically analyze facts as opposed to blatantly accept/memorize things as "truth." The only reason we know that the world is round is because logical thinkers back then used empiricism and analysis to challenge that notion. Healthcare cannot advance if future physicians don't bother scrutinizing and analyzing currently accepted facts.

http://www.internationalgme.org/Resources/Pubs/Academic Medicine.pdf
But here's a translation of a part of it since you'll probably forego reading it and just continue whining:
MCAT VR scores correlate to USMLE part 2.

http://www.usmle.org/step-2-cs/
Direct Quote from the link:
"Step 2 of the USMLE assesses the ability of examinees to apply medical knowledge, skills, and understanding of clinical science essential for the provision of patient care under supervision, and includes emphasis on health promotion and disease prevention. Step 2 ensures that due attention is devoted to the principles of clinical sciences and basic patient- centered skills that provide the foundation for the safe and effective practice of medicine."

Summary: VR reasoning is a good indicator of how well you'll be able to LOGICALLY apply medical science knowledge to patient care.

I bring up Shakespear because lot of people are saying that literary reading is = logical thinking. I am calling BS on that.

As far as people who did original research and scientific discoveries trust me they were hard core scientists and not the literary types.

Finally you have presented some scientific data and thanks for it. I will take that information seriously review it and then get back.

 

[Midifelder10]

Actually, the study I posted had a mean of 9.57 for verbal with an SD of 1.7 so, realistically, their majority fell between 7.87-11.27, which rounds to 8-11. Keep in mind that there are outliers (low and high).

AAMC, which is the Association of American Medical Colleges, has this to say about the MCAT:
"The Medical College Admission Test® (MCAT®) is a standardized, multiple-choice examination designed to assess the examinee's problem solving, critical thinking, writing skills, and knowledge of science concepts and principles prerequisite to the study of medicine."

They describe their test as the bolded, and if the VR section was inconsistent with that phrase, it would not be part of the MCAT. I have yet to see any citations/research supporting the assertion that VR is not important. I said this before, and I'm going to say this again, the AAMC has committees of medical doctors that decided to put VR into the MCAT. Why would medical doctors, with experience in their respective fields of medicine, put a VR section into the MCAT if it weren't important? They have practical experience that have led them to this decision.

Please take few mnts of your time to look at the research paper I have mentioned. That paper clearly shows there is a correlation but rather a weak one. So far the only scientific evidence out there is that the order of correlation is BS,PS and VR .i.e least correlated.

 

[Midifelder10]

The pursose of VR in the MCAT is to prevent ESOL students from getting into medical school.

There is a lot of truth to that. This section does hurt people who don't speak english at home. I don't know the reason but that is true.

Does that mean people who don't speak english cannot think logically, I guess most of the people are implying that. hmmmm.

 

[LuciusVorenus]

There is a lot of truth to that. This section does hurt people who don't speak english at home. I don't know the reason but that is true.

Does that mean people who don't speak english cannot think logically, I guess most of the people are implying that. hmmmm.

It's too early in the morning to be arguing about this!

 

[Midifelder10]

It's too early in the morning to be arguing about this!

This is a candid discussion and we are definitely not arguing. This is the only time I get because of other obligations.

 

[LuciusVorenus]

This is a candid discussion and we are definitely not arguing. This is the only time I get because of other obligations.

I just realized you probably don't live on the same coast as me, otherwise waking up at 5 am for work probably sucks 😛

I really don't think that too many people here are saying that those who do poorly on VR because they don't speak English as fluently as others are bad scientists or not as smart, I think they're saying that medical schools aren't just looking to fill their seats with scientists. The interaction between the patient and doctor is sometimes just as important as what goes on inside the doctor's head, and since some studies have shown that patient management/examination improves with the VR scores they've decided they're going to keep that section around.

For example, go on Vitals.com and look up some doctors. You'll be surprised how many doctors have poor ratings because "they're obviously very smart! But I felt unwelcome/he was detached/didn't pay attention to me/couldn't communicate with me/was too cold/I didn't feel comfortable." After all medicine is a business in some respects - with customers.

EDIT: Also! Transformers was a terrible movie! D: Didn't you watch the Mel Gibson version of Hamlet, or Coriolanus? :O

 

[Midifelder10]

I just realized you probably don't live on the same coast as me, otherwise waking up at 5 am for work probably sucks 😛

I really don't think that too many people here are saying that those who do poorly on VR because they don't speak English as fluently as others are bad scientists or not as smart, I think they're saying that medical schools aren't just looking to fill their seats with scientists. The interaction between the patient and doctor is sometimes just as important as what goes on inside the doctor's head, and since some studies have shown that patient management/examination improves with the VR scores they've decided they're going to keep that section around.

For example, go on Vitals.com and look up some doctors. You'll be surprised how many doctors have poor ratings because "they're obviously very smart! But I felt unwelcome/he was detached/didn't pay attention to me/couldn't communicate with me/was too cold/I didn't feel comfortable." After all medicine is a business in some respects - with customers.

EDIT: Also! Transformers was a terrible movie! D: Didn't you watch the Mel Gibson version of Hamlet, or Coriolanus? :O

I agree completely with your part about patient interaction and verbal. I will not debate that because I have also seen data that supports your claim. At the same time they should not reject students who have low verbal score because once again there is no scientific reason that they will not make good drs.

Would not watch Hamlet if they even paid me to. Hunger games another story.

 

[LuciusVorenus]

I agree completely with your part about patient interaction and verbal. I will not debate that because I have also seen data that supports your claim. At the same time they should not reject students who have low verbal score because once again there is no scientific reason that they will not make good drs.

Would not watch Hamlet if they even paid me to. Hunger games another story.

Just curious, what are you getting on VR? Because I really don't think you'll be rejected based on your VR score alone if you're getting an 8 or higher. The average for matriculants is around a 9 I think.

But it has Mel Gibson! He's crazy in it :O

 

[TheLadyVanishes]

Okay, I'll bite.

There is a lot of truth to that. This section does hurt people who don't speak english at home. I don't know the reason but that is true.

Does that mean people who don't speak english cannot think logically, I guess most of the people are implying that. hmmmm.

Maybe it does shaft people who are ESL, but the ability to communicate in English*, to understand and to express oneself, cannot be minimized in patient physician interactions.

I work in a mid-level position in health care. I've seen an almost tragicomic situation in which a staff member who was not a native English speaker and a patient who was also not a native English speaker, but spoke another language, at loggerheads because they simply couldn't communicate. A lot of my coworkers also do not speak English as a first language and repeatedly tell me they can't understand what I'm saying, or sometimes I can't understand what they're saying, but I have no problem communicating with other English speakers.

I'm not advocating that we should restrict medical school entrance to native English speakers. But I would suspect that even extremely bright, logical ESL students who have a poor grasp of English language and communication are going to have a very difficult time with patients and other staff members. That being said, I would not be comfortable going to a non-English speaking country to be a physician and would anticipate some of the aforementioned communication difficulties.

As for the debate about why we have verbal on the MCAT, my personal theory about the entire MCAT is that it's making sure your prerequisites were actually worth their salt. I've been in classes where if you have a temperature you can get a 4.0, and in other classes where you have to spend hours studying and in office hours to eke out >3.0. Medical schools have know way of knowing which category your courses fell into.

Most medical schools are pretty uniform in their prerequisites: physics, chemistry, organic chemistry, biology, English/humanities. What is covered on the MCAT? PS (physics/chemistry), BS (organic chemistry/biology), VR/WS (English/humanities).

* as demographics change, the ground shifts too: in some parts of the country a person who speaks, say, fluent Spanish would have an advantage over someone who only speaks English.

 

[LuciusVorenus]

Okay, I'll bite.



Maybe it does shaft people who are ESL, but the ability to communicate in English*, to understand and to express oneself, cannot be minimized in patient physician interactions.

I work in a mid-level position in health care. I've seen an almost tragicomic situation in which a staff member who was not a native English speaker and a patient who was also not a native English speaker, but spoke another language, at loggerheads because they simply couldn't communicate. A lot of my coworkers also do not speak English as a first language and repeatedly tell me they can't understand what I'm saying, or sometimes I can't understand what they're saying, but I have no problem communicating with other English speakers.

I'm not advocating that we should restrict medical school entrance to native English speakers. But I would suspect that even extremely bright, logical ESL students who have a poor grasp of English language and communication are going to have a very difficult time with patients and other staff members. That being said, I would not be comfortable going to a non-English speaking country to be a physician and would anticipate some of the aforementioned communication difficulties.

As for the debate about why we have verbal on the MCAT, my personal theory about the entire MCAT is that it's making sure your prerequisites were actually worth their salt. I've been in classes where if you have a temperature you can get a 4.0, and in other classes where you have to spend hours studying and in office hours to eke out >3.0. Medical schools have know way of knowing which category your courses fell into.

Most medical schools are pretty uniform in their prerequisites: physics, chemistry, organic chemistry, biology, English/humanities. What is covered on the MCAT? PS (physics/chemistry), BS (organic chemistry/biology), VR/WS (English/humanities).

* as demographics change, the ground shifts too: in some parts of the country a person who speaks, say, fluent Spanish would have an advantage over someone who only speaks English.

UCLA/UCI/USC come to mind as schools that actually explicitly say Spanish would be nice to have. I think Chinese/Korean/Farsi are also worth having in Southern California (although probably to a lesser extent than Spanish).

 

[Midifelder10]

Just curious, what are you getting on VR? Because I really don't think you'll be rejected based on your VR score alone if you're getting an 8 or higher. The average for matriculants is around a 9 I think.

But it has Mel Gibson! He's crazy in it :O

More like 5/6's after trying hard. PS and BS comfortable double digits without trying.Seems like I am 4/5 questions away from 8. There is a freaking compression in the scale.

Mel Gibson - don't like this bigoted and abusive aussie.

 

[Midifelder10]

Okay, I'll bite.



Maybe it does shaft people who are ESL, but the ability to communicate in English*, to understand and to express oneself, cannot be minimized in patient physician interactions.

I work in a mid-level position in health care. I've seen an almost tragicomic situation in which a staff member who was not a native English speaker and a patient who was also not a native English speaker, but spoke another language, at loggerheads because they simply couldn't communicate. A lot of my coworkers also do not speak English as a first language and repeatedly tell me they can't understand what I'm saying, or sometimes I can't understand what they're saying, but I have no problem communicating with other English speakers.

I'm not advocating that we should restrict medical school entrance to native English speakers. But I would suspect that even extremely bright, logical ESL students who have a poor grasp of English language and communication are going to have a very difficult time with patients and other staff members. That being said, I would not be comfortable going to a non-English speaking country to be a physician and would anticipate some of the aforementioned communication difficulties.

As for the debate about why we have verbal on the MCAT, my personal theory about the entire MCAT is that it's making sure your prerequisites were actually worth their salt. I've been in classes where if you have a temperature you can get a 4.0, and in other classes where you have to spend hours studying and in office hours to eke out >3.0. Medical schools have know way of knowing which category your courses fell into.

Most medical schools are pretty uniform in their prerequisites: physics, chemistry, organic chemistry, biology, English/humanities. What is covered on the MCAT? PS (physics/chemistry), BS (organic chemistry/biology), VR/WS (English/humanities).

* as demographics change, the ground shifts too: in some parts of the country a person who speaks, say, fluent Spanish would have an advantage over someone who only speaks English.

Couldn't agree more, you should be able to communicate. That is not the problem as I went to school here and teach freshman kids. It is the subtelities of the language where I have to make a distinction between subtle things.

Foe e.g. Is object A like, comparable, compatible, equivalent,identical, matching, alike, akin or same as object B?

This crap is deciding my fate but people think this is logic. I think it is BS.

 

[red doctober]

More like 5/6's after trying hard. PS and BS comfortable double digits without trying.Seems like I am 4/5 questions away from 8. There is a freaking compression in the scale.

I think you need to diagnose what specifically your personal difficulty with the test is. It could be due to a few reasons: reading speed, reading comprehension, forgetting details, approaching the questions wrong, etc. Once you've got it nailed down to a couple reasons, you should do whatever it takes to improve upon them. For example, people say the simplest way to improve reading skills is to read a lot, and while that has a lot of truth to it, it's not quite as simple as that. When you practice reading or are working on improving skills, it should feel like work and not leisure. Put Harry Potter back on the shelf and pick up some dry, scholarly articles in the most boring topics of academia. The library at your college probably has subscriptions to many journals that are at your disposal, use them. If you think your problem is with the questions and not the passages themselves, make sure that you are reading the answers carefully and understanding exactly why your answer wasn't the best (notice how I didn't say "right.") It might help to go over answers with a friend who is also studying for the MCAT, especially one who is doing very well on verbal. What they can offer is insight into a different perspective that seems to work well. There will be many obstacles in your path to becoming a physician, you just have to prove that you're up for taking on anything. Once you're an attending looking back on your past, verbal will seem like a speed bump compared to some of the other challenges.

 

[gtbROX]

I bring up Shakespear because lot of people are saying that literary reading is = logical thinking. I am calling BS on that.

As far as people who did original research and scientific discoveries trust me they were hard core scientists and not the literary types.

Finally you have presented some scientific data and thanks for it. I will take that information seriously review it and then get back.

The fact that you bring up Shakespeare is exactly why I said that you probably never bothered to practice for verbal...
I'll say it again, I HAVE YET TO SEE A SHAKESPEARE EXCERPT AS A PASSAGE. And beyond that I've only seen one passage that was a part of a poem, in ALL OF MY VERBAL STUDIES. If you can't tell the difference between essays and poems, then all the years of required English class have been wasted on you.

As for the research, the only reason I didn't post it earlier on was because other people already had and you didn't bother to read it.

At this point, if your exam is coming up, you can continue to complain and forego practicing verbal or you can actually try and practice verbal efficiently. It's really up to you.

 

[TheLadyVanishes]

I think you need to diagnose what specifically your personal difficulty with the test is. It could be due to a few reasons: reading speed, reading comprehension, forgetting details, approaching the questions wrong, etc. Once you've got it nailed down to a couple reasons, you should do whatever it takes to improve upon them. For example, people say the simplest way to improve reading skills is to read a lot, and while that has a lot of truth to it, it's not quite as simple as that. When you practice reading or are working on improving skills, it should feel like work and not leisure. Put Harry Potter back on the shelf and pick up some dry, scholarly articles in the most boring topics of academia. The library at your college probably has subscriptions to many journals that are at your disposal, use them. If you think your problem is with the questions and not the passages themselves, make sure that you are reading the answers carefully and understanding exactly why your answer wasn't the best (notice how I didn't say "right.") It might help to go over answers with a friend who is also studying for the MCAT, especially one who is doing very well on verbal. What they can offer is insight into a different perspective that seems to work well. There will be many obstacles in your path to becoming a physician, you just have to prove that you're up for taking on anything. Once you're an attending looking back on your past, verbal will seem like a speed bump compared to some of the other challenges.

Agreed. When I first started the TPRH verbal workbook, I would literally get 3-4 wrong on each passage. I've always loved reading and the difficulties that I ran into on the verbal were a shock to me.
Then I started getting the Economist and the New Yorker from the library, finding the most boring or confusing articles, and forcing myself to read them and get something, anything, out of it. My verbal scores on the AAMC practice tests were 10-15.

 

[LifeTake2]

Oh the irony.

125+ posts trying to use written logic, reasoning to argue that the section on MCAT dedicated to logic & reasoning is valid.

If someone can't see the value of being able to read an article about something you know nothing about, and make logical deductions form it...they aren't going to be won over by logic and reason on a message board!

 

[Midifelder10]

The fact that you bring up Shakespeare is exactly why I said that you probably never bothered to practice for verbal...
I'll say it again, I HAVE YET TO SEE A SHAKESPEARE EXCERPT AS A PASSAGE. And beyond that I've only seen one passage that was a part of a poem, in ALL OF MY VERBAL STUDIES. If you can't tell the difference between essays and poems, then all the years of required English class have been wasted on you.

As for the research, the only reason I didn't post it earlier on was because other people already had and you didn't bother to read it.

At this point, if your exam is coming up, you can continue to complain and forego practicing verbal or you can actually try and practice verbal efficiently. It's really up to you.

Please don't press the cap locks, it is annoying.
I went over the paper you presented and others mentioned. They all talk abt step 2 with some correlation to verbal. Nobody talks abt step 1 as it does not even exist. Now please read the paper I have mentioned and it shows such a strong correlation with BS and not so much with verbal. Moreover that is done by multiple authors at multiple schools.

Now getting back to your paper. Talk about a flawed study, I am not even sure how it got published. First it is about one school only which they don't mention. Next they show a strong correlation between GPA and performance. Not many people have been able to show link between GPA and medical school performance as there is so much variation from one to another institution. 3.5 at Harvey Mudd is not the same as 3.9 at Farmers University of Central Kentucky.

I do appreciate your concern abt my studies but I am done and waiting for the results. I have a pretty good idea what it will be too, double digits in sciences and another pissy 5 maybe in verbal.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

More like 5/6's after trying hard. PS and BS comfortable double digits without trying.Seems like I am 4/5 questions away from 8. There is a freaking compression in the scale.

Mel Gibson - don't like this bigoted and abusive aussie.

Have you tried reading it and digesting the material prior to going onto the questions? I mean while you're reading think about the material and try to predict based on the limited information you have what the author might be trying to say, what the point and purpose is, and whether the argument is significant. If you start doing this you'll be averaging 9s easily.

 

[Midifelder10]

Agreed. When I first started the TPRH verbal workbook, I would literally get 3-4 wrong on each passage. I've always loved reading and the difficulties that I ran into on the verbal were a shock to me.
Then I started getting the Economist and the New Yorker from the library, finding the most boring or confusing articles, and forcing myself to read them and get something, anything, out of it. My verbal scores on the AAMC practice tests were 10-15.

You are amazing .15 on verbal, I probably will go blind looking at you. Good Luck!

 

[Midifelder10]

http://www.siumed.edu/academy/jc_articles/Colliver_0610.pdf

Here is another article. Please see the table, which section has the least correlation of course - verbal.

 

[LifeTake2]

http://www.siumed.edu/academy/jc_articles/Colliver_0610.pdf

Here is another article. Please see the table, which section has the least correlation of course - verbal.

If this were a random college course required for your degree that you kept failing...would you spend this much energy trying to argue that they should not require you take the class because it isn't relevant or would you find a way to pass?

A good bit of what you take in college has little to no relevance for life, yet requirements still exist and every hour of your life you spend arguing that isn't fair isn't going to change the fact that you have to fix your VR performance or you don't get to be a doctor. Fair...probably not, Life...you bet.

 

[Narmerguy]

Oh the irony.

125+ posts trying to use written logic, reasoning to argue that the section on MCAT dedicated to logic & reasoning is valid.

If someone can't see the value of being able to read an article about something you know nothing about, and make logical deductions form it...they aren't going to be won over by logic and reason on a message board!

This has drifted pretty far and still people keep making the same point. No one suggests that logic and reasoning are not valuable and shouldn't be examined. I am simply stating that the verbal section, as designed, is not an effective tool for measuring that. It's just a poorly designed section. Not one that should be nixed, but that should be renovated significantly.

Indeed, perhaps the difference between an 8 and a 13 is illustrative of some difference in reasoning/reading/logical thinking capacity. But the differences between a 13 and a 14? Or an 11 and a 12? Or a 12 and a 14? These are 3 point swings that are interpreted very differently. If the test is going to be designed to be so sensitive to a single question, it must also be designed such that a completely rational, logical, reasonable approach will not ambiguously lead to the wrong answer. If the test is not designed in such a way, if at any point one could produce multiple logical answers based on equivalently logical and rational assumptions, the test no longer has the capability to discriminate between those test-takers that demonstrate a clear understanding of the passage, a consistent application of logic, and a clear use of reasoning from those that don't. If the penalty on the test taker for being incorrect is so severe, the precision and accuracy demanded of the test must be that much more extreme.

 

[Midifelder10]

This has drifted pretty far and still people keep making the same point. No one suggests that logic and reasoning are not valuable and shouldn't be examined. I am simply stating that the verbal section, as designed, is not an effective tool for measuring that. It's just a poorly designed section. Not one that should be nixed, but that should be renovated significantly.

Indeed, perhaps the difference between an 8 and a 13 is illustrative of some difference in reasoning/reading/logical thinking capacity. But the differences between a 13 and a 14? Or an 11 and a 12? Or a 12 and a 14? These are 3 point swings that are interpreted very differently. If the test is going to be designed to be so sensitive to a single question, it must also be designed such that a completely rational, logical, reasonable approach will not ambiguously lead to the wrong answer. If the test is not designed in such a way, if at any point one could produce multiple logical answers based on equivalently logical and rational assumptions, the test no longer has the capability to discriminate between those test-takers that demonstrate a clear understanding of the passage, a consistent application of logic, and a clear use of reasoning from those that don't. If the penalty on the test taker for being incorrect is so severe, the precision and accuracy demanded of the test must be that much more extreme.

Could not have said it any better. There is no solid reason why someone comes to one conclusion and there are multiple ways to get there. Using a language as a tool to test logic is not only insane but inefficient also. People making 5 on verbal are not stupid as every other poster are implying without any data.

Show me the data and I will listen to you all day long. Just regurgitating and repeating the same mantra over and over again " verbal = logic, no verbal = chimp" does not cut it in scientific world. I am showing hard nos and what I am getting in return is, it is logic, you don't think right, it is reasoning. That is the biggest baloney I have heard in my lifetime.

It seems like lot of people are in one giant echo chamber and keep on hearing and repeating the same stuff and if some one questions you that person is stupid.

Trust me I have seen dolphins and whales and chimps communicating but I have not seen them solving differential equations.

I don't mean to be disrespectful but I was trying to get my point across.

 

[red doctober]

In a way, they are renovating verbal reasoning in the 2015 MCAT. I think they are changing the name to something along the lines of Critical Analysis and Reasoning. The core of the section will probably be the same as before: reading passages in science, social science, and humanities and answering questions based on the information presented in the passages. Overall, they are increasing the length of the test to 60 questions, which will probably address the issue you gave that the difference between scores is only a couple right answers. The raw to scaled score conversion will probably look something like this: 60=15, 59=14, 56-58=13, 53-55=12, 49-52=11, 44-48=10, 40-43=9. With this format, it should be "easier" to get up to a 12, but a lot more difficult to get a 14 or 15. By adding the new social science section, it will dilute the individual importance of the other sections. However, I think a 7 will again be the typical "cut-off" for any section, and that anything below that won't be saved by high scores on the other sections.

 

[TheLadyVanishes]

Thanks midifielder 🙂 I just took the real MCAT and am waiting a long month for my score.

This has drifted pretty far and still people keep making the same point. No one suggests that logic and reasoning are not valuable and shouldn't be examined. I am simply stating that the verbal section, as designed, is not an effective tool for measuring that. It's just a poorly designed section. Not one that should be nixed, but that should be renovated significantly.

My theory upthread is that the MCAT tests medical school applicants on all the prerequisites (English/humanities, physics, chemistry, organic chemistry, bio), in order to make sure that they are actually proficient and didn't get their 4.0 from a diploma mill.

Virtually all medical schools stipulate an English or humanities requirement. Why?

When I was an undergrad, I complained to my mom about spending the weekend reading King Lear (yes, I did take Shakespeare in college!), and why do I have these arts/humanities requirements for graduation when I am majoring in science?

She said that in her day that there was a strict distinction made between the broad well-rounded education of a university graduate, which entails exposure to culture via courses in literature, history and other humanities, and the more limited education of a technical college graduate, which usually involves coursework only relevant to major. The university graduate is judged to have the superior education and to be the superior scholar. The technical college graduate is subsequently restricted to jobs that are not intellectually demanding, the university graduate has a lock on prestigious fields such as academia, law, and, yes, medicine.

Today the distinction may not be as stark but it still persists, reflected in the English/humanities requirement for medical schools and the VR section of the MCAT, which tests the analytic capabilities so valued in humanities courses. Future MDs are expected to fall into the category of the well-educated university graduate

Allied health majors fall into the technical college graduate category, even if we graduate from a four year university. We learn the health sciences that are relevant to our duties, the humanities are rarely emphasized in our curriculum. But on the other hand, our jobs are acknowledged as purely functional and we are not of the same caliber as a physician.

Now, as for relevance, that may be the thinking behind the revamped 2015 MCAT which I think emphasizes social sciences more than traditional humanities. However, I have not paid attention to it as I hope that the MCAT will soon be as relevant to me as the SAT!

 

[Renaissance Man]

This has drifted pretty far and still people keep making the same point. No one suggests that logic and reasoning are not valuable and shouldn't be examined. I am simply stating that the verbal section, as designed, is not an effective tool for measuring that. It's just a poorly designed section. Not one that should be nixed, but that should be renovated significantly.

Indeed, perhaps the difference between an 8 and a 13 is illustrative of some difference in reasoning/reading/logical thinking capacity. But the differences between a 13 and a 14? Or an 11 and a 12? Or a 12 and a 14? These are 3 point swings that are interpreted very differently. If the test is going to be designed to be so sensitive to a single question, it must also be designed such that a completely rational, logical, reasonable approach will not ambiguously lead to the wrong answer. If the test is not designed in such a way, if at any point one could produce multiple logical answers based on equivalently logical and rational assumptions, the test no longer has the capability to discriminate between those test-takers that demonstrate a clear understanding of the passage, a consistent application of logic, and a clear use of reasoning from those that don't. If the penalty on the test taker for being incorrect is so severe, the precision and accuracy demanded of the test must be that much more extreme.

So because you don't agree with the rationale provided for practice passages and answers you assume that Verbal Reasoning on the actual MCAT is not precise and accurate? It couldn't be that your "logical, reasonable approach" could be wrong? Just because 3 people read a question and come up with 3 different answers doesn't mean that the question is faulty.

On an unrelated point to the OP's question, I have never understood people who complain about their 11 on VR (insert any number here) because, "I was only 2 right answers away from a 12!!" Oh yeah? Well the guy with the 12 was only a question or two away from a 13. Where does the slippery slope end? You deserve the score you got.

At my medical school, a 90 and above is "honors." Do you think the student with an 89.8 knew the material any less than the one with a 90.2? Doubtful, but they get different grades, and that's life.

 

[Midifelder10]

So because you don't agree with the rationale provided for practice passages and answers you assume that Verbal Reasoning on the actual MCAT is not precise and accurate? It couldn't be that your "logical, reasonable approach" could be wrong? Just because 3 people read a question and come up with 3 different answers doesn't mean that the question is faulty.

On an unrelated point to the OP's question, I have never understood people who complain about their 11 on VR (insert any number here) because, "I was only 2 right answers away from a 12!!" Oh yeah? Well the guy with the 12 was only a question or two away from a 13. Where does the slippery slope end? You deserve the score you got.

At my medical school, a 90 and above is "honors." Do you think the student with an 89.8 knew the material any less than the one with a 90.2? Doubtful, but they get different grades, and that's life.

Math questions can be done in 100 different ways and you come up with the same result. Verbal is so subjective if you get the drift. An ambiguous section should not decide your fate.

There are so many shades of grey in a verbal section that it goes well beyond passage reading skills.

 

[Renaissance Man]

Math questions can be done in 100 different ways and you come up with the same result. Verbal is so subjective if you get the drift. An ambiguous section should not decide your fate.

There are so many shades of grey in a verbal section that it goes well beyond passage reading skills.

The people who are bad at math won't get it right...Anyways, you can't honestly believe that someone who got a 13 is just as likely to get a 8 or 9 the next time? Verbal reasoning is just making good guesses and getting lucky by picking the correct shade of gray? If that is the case, then how come your scores haven't fluctuated over 5-6? Random chance says they should.

 

[Midifelder10]

The people who are bad at math won't get it right...Anyways, you can't honestly believe that someone who got a 13 is just as likely to get a 8 or 9 the next time? Verbal reasoning is just making good guesses and getting lucky by picking the correct shade of gray? If that is the case, then how come your scores haven't fluctuated over 5-6? Random chance says they should.

I am not good at it, but to practice medicine do I need to be that good at it?

 

[Narmerguy]

Today the distinction may not be as stark but it still persists, reflected in the English/humanities requirement for medical schools and the VR section of the MCAT, which tests the analytic capabilities so valued in humanities courses. Future MDs are expected to fall into the category of the well-educated university graduate

I agree, these are valuable analytic traits, and I am a strong supporter of making sure that future doctors develop them. I went to a liberal arts college and had to take plenty of humanities courses and I found them powerfully different from any kind of knowledge I gained from my social science or natural/physical science classes.

So because you don't agree with the rationale provided for practice passages and answers you assume that Verbal Reasoning on the actual MCAT is not precise and accurate? It couldn't be that your "logical, reasonable approach" could be wrong? Just because 3 people read a question and come up with 3 different answers doesn't mean that the question is faulty.

On an unrelated point to the OP's question, I have never understood people who complain about their 11 on VR (insert any number here) because, "I was only 2 right answers away from a 12!!" Oh yeah? Well the guy with the 12 was only a question or two away from a 13. Where does the slippery slope end? You deserve the score you got.

At my medical school, a 90 and above is "honors." Do you think the student with an 89.8 knew the material any less than the one with a 90.2? Doubtful, but they get different grades, and that's life.

Well, firstly, these were past MCATs. Practice for me, sure, but very real for the individuals who originally took them. Certainly it's possible that my logical approach is flawed. In fact, I usually encounter multiple questions where I "see the light" afterwards and can understand where I went wrong. But I suppose it is also possible that my logical thinking capacity is so flawed that even when shown the answer, I am still incapable of comprehending how infallibly "right" the correct answer is over another seemingly "right" answer choice. I'm not talking about taking the test, I'm talking about seeing the correct answer and the accompanying justification for it.

That people can arrive at difference answers was never my point. Perhaps this illustrates my point on the dangers of ambiguity in writing. My point was that if any question has two or more answers which can logically be supported using equivalent assumptions and consistent, rational use of material in the passage, then what compels a test taker to choose one option over the other can no longer be construed as pure differences in logical/reasoning/reading capability. Instead, we are now capturing other effects, such as familiarity with previous MCAT tests and perhaps knowing the MCAT's propensity to lean on certain kinds of logical reaosning, or familiarity with the content of the passage, or the collection of knowledge/life experiences that compels the test-taker to utilize one set of assumptions over another, etc etc.

The importance of the small difference in questions missed and its effect on the final score is not in the opportunity missed, though I'm sure that bugs a lot of people. What is crucial about this scale is that it demands that the test be precise and accurate in its approach. It cannot allow a test taker to miss even a single question because a question allowed a logical, well-reasoned approach to equally support more than one answer choice--not if the interpretation of the score is to have any meaning. If the test makers claim that to miss two or three questions makes one two or three points worse than another, than I say that every question needs to be infallible in its logic for selecting the correct choice as the best choice.

 

[gtbROX]

Please don't press the cap locks, it is annoying.
I went over the paper you presented and others mentioned. They all talk abt step 2 with some correlation to verbal. Nobody talks abt step 1 as it does not even exist. Now please read the paper I have mentioned and it shows such a strong correlation with BS and not so much with verbal. Moreover that is done by multiple authors at multiple schools.

Now getting back to your paper. Talk about a flawed study, I am not even sure how it got published. First it is about one school only which they don't mention. Next they show a strong correlation between GPA and performance. Not many people have been able to show link between GPA and medical school performance as there is so much variation from one to another institution. 3.5 at Harvey Mudd is not the same as 3.9 at Farmers University of Central Kentucky.

I do appreciate your concern abt my studies but I am done and waiting for the results. I have a pretty good idea what it will be too, double digits in sciences and another pissy 5 maybe in verbal.

I caps-locked the points that I keep having to reiterate to you because you seem to have trouble reading them.

"Flawed study" because you don't agree with it? The fact is that they found a correlation, and we know that med school applicants often come from a wide range of backgrounds, even within state, and they have a good distribution of scores. Yes, it would have been better if they included the name of the institution, but the fact remains that they found a correlation with MCAT VR and USMLE 2. What ever they mentioned about gpa being a determinant is outside of our discussion; I will admit, though, that I don't agree with the gpa part for the same reasons as you.

Your article states that there is a "small to medium" correlation between the MCAT subjects and success on the USMLEs. It shows BS as being a greater determinant than VR, which I don't dispute, but shows that VR scores have been correlated to success on USMLEs as well.

Go find me an article that makes this statement:
"MCAT VR has no correlation to USMLE success whatsoever."

 

[Midifelder10]

I caps-locked the points that I keep having to reiterate to you because you seem to have trouble reading them.

"Flawed study" because you don't agree with it? The fact is that they found a correlation, and we know that med school applicants often come from a wide range of backgrounds, even within state, and they have a good distribution of scores. Yes, it would have been better if they included the name of the institution, but the fact remains that they found a correlation with MCAT VR and USMLE 2. What ever they mentioned about gpa being a determinant is outside of our discussion; I will admit, though, that I don't agree with the gpa part for the same reasons as you.

Your article states that there is a "small to medium" correlation between the MCAT subjects and success on the USMLEs. It shows BS as being a greater determinant than VR, which I don't dispute, but shows that VR scores have been correlated to success on USMLEs as well.

Go find me an article that makes this statement:
"MCAT VR has no correlation to USMLE success whatsoever."

Every published paper I have says there is a very weak correlation. BS and PS have more and VR has least and I cannot change it. But you do agree with the premise that VR is least correlated so why do you keep on arguing.

You seem to live in a alternate universe where there is no reality. You dont have data but rhetoric. Why let facts get in the way because it is so inconvenient.

 

[LuciusVorenus]

Every published paper I have says there is a very weak correlation. BS and PS have more and VR has least and I cannot change it. But you do agree with the premise that VR is least correlated so why do you keep on arguing.

You seem to live in a alternate universe where there is no reality. You dont have data but rhetoric. Why let facts get in the way because it is so inconvenient.

I understand your frustration, because there is a lot about this process that isn't 100% fair. But there's really not much to be done about it, and it most likely will never change if it hasn't yet over the decades this test has been administered.

As someone else mentioned above, have you tried observing a friend who does well on the VR section take the VR section OUTLOUD in front of you? I actually know people who have done this and it's worked for them! Sometimes, you just kind of "click."

As for the research, I think people are trying to say that yes the correlation was weak, but the strength of the correlation does not make the study invalid. I've seen studies were the Beta value has a magnitude of 0.05 to 0.1 but the paper was still published in high ranking journals just because the p value was still < 0.01. For a process where you - unfortunately - have to weed out so many probably well qualified applicants simply because there aren't enough seats, I think the ADCOMS will stick to a criteria, even if the correlation between that criteria and success in medical school/residency is relatively weak.

This has drifted pretty far and still people keep making the same point. No one suggests that logic and reasoning are not valuable and shouldn't be examined. I am simply stating that the verbal section, as designed, is not an effective tool for measuring that. It's just a poorly designed section. Not one that should be nixed, but that should be renovated significantly.

Indeed, perhaps the difference between an 8 and a 13 is illustrative of some difference in reasoning/reading/logical thinking capacity. But the differences between a 13 and a 14? Or an 11 and a 12? Or a 12 and a 14? These are 3 point swings that are interpreted very differently. If the test is going to be designed to be so sensitive to a single question, it must also be designed such that a completely rational, logical, reasonable approach will not ambiguously lead to the wrong answer. If the test is not designed in such a way, if at any point one could produce multiple logical answers based on equivalently logical and rational assumptions, the test no longer has the capability to discriminate between those test-takers that demonstrate a clear understanding of the passage, a consistent application of logic, and a clear use of reasoning from those that don't. If the penalty on the test taker for being incorrect is so severe, the precision and accuracy demanded of the test must be that much more extreme.

I agree that the test - in a way - punishes test takers at the higher score ranges, but I really don't think this is just a problem with VR. Both the BS and PS section suffer from ambiguity as well.

For example, in the PS section a question might ask if A changes with B, and the change in A is from X.00000001 to X.00000002. So does it really change? Well it depends on the scale you're working on. If you're working with particles, then yes there is a change. In any other field (i.e. engineering) that change is insignificant. TECHNICALLY the answer is that A increases, but PRACTICALLY (given the context of the problem) the answer is that A does NOT change. Actually, most MCAT prep books would advise you to assume that A does NOT change because the math on the MCAT is so imprecise.

In the BS section of the test you might be asked which of the following A was a part of, and it might turn out that A was a member of B, but also of C because B is a member of C. TECHNICALLY you can say A is a member of C, but the "BEST" answer is B.

These two examples were of the type that have stuck out the most in my mind over the months, but honestly if you gave me enough time I could find papers that show there's an exception to the rule for many of the questions on the PS/BS section, especially when dealing with something as vague/general as physiology. That's why they constantly stress throughout the test to choose the "best" answer.

The entire test in general is designed to punish students on some level, I think. They pay a ridiculous amount of money for each question because they want people to get them wrong. It's as simple as that. The test would be useless if the average wasn't as low as it is (24). 70,000 people take that test every year, but only 43,000 apply any given year and only around 19,000 get in. Makes you think.

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

Every published paper I have says there is a very weak correlation. BS and PS have more and VR has least and I cannot change it. But you do agree with the premise that VR is least correlated so why do you keep on arguing.

You seem to live in a alternate universe where there is no reality. You dont have data but rhetoric. Why let facts get in the way because it is so inconvenient.

To be completely fair all of the scores have little correlation/predictive value of performance in medical school, in fact after you hit 27 the USMLE 1 step the pass rate plateaus. But again, we don't know exactly what the test is supposed to be testing and whether it is indirectly testing something else that is relevant.

 

[gtbROX]

Every published paper I have says there is a very weak correlation. BS and PS have more and VR has least and I cannot change it. But you do agree with the premise that VR is least correlated so why do you keep on arguing.

You seem to live in a alternate universe where there is no reality. You dont have data but rhetoric. Why let facts get in the way because it is so inconvenient.

Refer to LV's post. Call me argumentative, but this thread is composed mostly of your posts. My reality is one in which people can at least attempt to overcome difficulties in life as opposed to sitting in front of their computers complaining. I quite like my reality. =]

 

[MDforMee]

Refer to LV's post. Call me argumentative, but this thread is composed mostly of your posts. My reality is one in which people can at least attempt to overcome difficulties in life as opposed to sitting in front of their computers complaining. I quite like my reality. =]

Try reading your post out loud in a dork voice.

"I quite like my reality"
"Refer to LV's post"
"... composed mostly"
"My reality is one..."

If you ever talk like that in real life, people are going to laugh at you.

They're all gonna laugh at you.

 

[red doctober]

Try reading your post out loud in a dork voice.

"I quite like my reality"
"Refer to LV's post"
"... composed mostly"
"My reality is one..."

If you ever talk like that in real life, people are going to laugh at you.

They're all gonna laugh at you.

You don't go on the internets much, do you?

 

[MDforMee]

You don't go on the internets much, do you?

I'm just giving 'em a hard time for kicking the OP when he's down.

We all know that the OP is just disgruntled. Well, most of us, anyways.