what's the point of MCAT when medskools require science/math classes

[Lukkie]

---

Members do not see this ad.

ok as i understand it, american med schools made the MCAT mandatory and pretty important a while ago because they were finding a lot of med students were dropping out. the med school material was too tough if the students did not understand the basic science concepts underlying advanced medicine.

so my question is, since you learn most of the stuff the mcat tests you in undergrad science classes, like bio/o-chem/physics etc that are required for entrance to med skool (BCPM) what is the point of the mcat. i'm guessing its to test if you were taught the material properly. obviously a molecular bio course taught in stanford will teach more than the same thing taught in some backwater skool in arkansas

i'm just curious.

 

[silverlining1]

I think the MCAT acts like an equalizer - everyone takes the same test, so everyone can be evaluated by the same standards. I believe that you're right in saying that not schools are the same. I have taken classes at two universities of different "caliber" (it's no secret which colleges... see my MDapps) and I saw clearly that there was a difference in the level of expectations and the depth of the material. Therefore, a 3.8 GPA at one school may be "worth more" than a 3.8 at a different university. The MCAT is one way to account for such variations.

 

[Vee]

they need something standardized to use to compare all applicants. yes, we all take the sciences, but at different schools. therefore it isn't the same across the board for us all. it's the same reasoning as every single other standardized test that's out there from the sat to the boards that we will be taking eventually.

 

[Lukkie]

I think the MCAT acts like an equalizer - everyone takes the same test, so everyone can be evaluated by the same standards. I believe that you're right in saying that not schools are the same. I have taken classes two universities of different "caliber" (it's no secret which colleges... see my MDapps) and I saw clearly that there was a difference in the level of expectations and the depth of the material. Therefore, a 3.8 GPA at one school may be "worth more" than a 3.8 at a different university. The MCAT is one way to account for such variations.

yep, thats what i expected. but i remember having the gpa discussion a few weeks ago, and its only worth about 0.1, MAYBE 0.2 at most. so the mcat is a good equalizer.

 

[vicinihil]

it's a thinking test. unlike other health science exams, mcats are grounded in analysis. if you can think, you will do well. Because medical schools have been compared to drinking from a fire hydrant, the analysis and fast synthesis of the material is necessary for success. this is what the mcat tests. (sorry for the ee cummings like prose) the shift key is far away.

 

[ADeadLois]

ok as i understand it, american med schools made the MCAT mandatory and pretty important a while ago because they were finding a lot of med students were dropping out. the med school material was too tough if the students did not understand the basic science concepts underlying advanced medicine.

so my question is, since you learn most of the stuff the mcat tests you in undergrad science classes, like bio/o-chem/physics etc that are required for entrance to med skool (BCPM) what is the point of the mcat. i'm guessing its to test if you were taught the material properly. obviously a molecular bio course taught in stanford will teach more than the same thing taught in some backwater skool in arkansas

i'm just curious.

You're completely missing the point of the MCAT. It is not meant to test your knowledge of basic science that you need for med school (the basic science you learn in undergrad will only take you a few weeks in med school).

The MCAT is meant to test your analytical thinking potential, not your ability to regurgitate concepts and details. Med schools don't care how well you were taught the Krebs cycle because (1) they'll teach it to you again and (2) it's completely irrelevant to the point of the entire application process: assessing your ability to succeed in med school.

 

[surfstarj]

You're completely missing the point of the MCAT. It is not meant to test your knowledge of basic science that you need for med school (the basic science you learn in undergrad will only take you a few weeks in med school).

The MCAT is meant to test your analytical thinking potential, not your ability to regurgitate concepts and details. Med schools don't care how well you were taught the Krebs cycle because (1) they'll teach it to you again and (2) it's completely irrelevant to the point of the entire application process: assessing your ability to succeed in med school.

Hallelujah! The MCAT is hard because med school is hard. Harder than college and therefore college grades, while useful at demonstrating work ethic and basic intelligence, are not as useful as the MCAT, which tests basic science, yes, but also more subtle and refined methods of thinking and reasoning which are essential for medical students.

Nobody loves a 5 hour test, but it's a necessary evil.

 

[TimeResonance]

i'm guessing its to test if you were taught the material properly. obviously a molecular bio course taught in stanford will teach more than the same thing taught in some backwater skool in arkansas

You ever been to Arkansas? I doubt it. Despite your ill-informed post, the material is not as important as analytical ability.

 

[smq123]

obviously a molecular bio course taught in stanford will teach more than the same thing taught in some backwater skool in arkansas

This may be true. But if that "backwater skool" in Arkansas can teach people how to spell, it's accomplished something useful.

The MCAT just makes sure that you can think analytically. Nothing that appears on the MCAT is actually useful in medical school.

 

[UnderdogMD]

Nobody loves a 5 hour test, but it's a necessary evil.

I would have loved to take a 5 hour MCAT.

 

[Quix]

As would I; nothing quite like the 8-hour paper-based test. 😉

 

[ChubbyChaser]

Yup the Great Equalizer, Harvard 4.0's are compared to nowherevilles 3.4s

 

[surfstarj]

Yup the Great Equalizer, Harvard 4.0's are compared to nowherevilles 3.4s

Is that sarcasm? Because wouldn't a more elite (implied: more difficult...and I am not using Harvard because...you know) school get some more flexibility in their GPA?

 

[ladyluck3]

Is that sarcasm? Because wouldn't a more elite (implied: more difficult...and I am not using Harvard because...you know) school get some more flexibility in their GPA?

perhaps, but it's common knowledge that harvard, and some of the other well known ivys, all suffer from a severe case of grade inflation.

 

[ADeadLois]

perhaps, but it's common knowledge that harvard, and some of the other well known ivys, all suffer from a severe case of grade inflation.

There isn't enough consensus on this topic to conclude its relevance to med school admissions. According to every single pre-med advisor in the country, the school he or she represents is "known for being difficult" and every other school inflates their grades.

 

[surfstarj]

perhaps, but it's common knowledge that harvard, and some of the other well known ivys, all suffer from a severe case of grade inflation.

So do non-ivys. I went to one and the science mean grades were set at a B-/C+...Meaning that you'd have to beat the mean just to get a B- (2.7) in some classes.

Let's just say that there were plenty of students who would go to state schools or even community colleges over the summer to get A's. I took one class at a state school that has a very good reputation but there is no way my "A effort" there would have cut it at my home school. It's not saying there aren't smart students there, but the bar is not set as high at every school. Med schools know this and some care more than others. But to pretend it doesn't exist is silly.

 

[Quix]

So do non-ivys. I went to one and the science mean grades were set at a B-/C+...Meaning that you'd have to beat the mean just to get a B- (2.7) in some classes.

Exactly; hence the great equalizer nature of the MCAT.

 

[surfstarj]

exactly.

and back we come to the point of this thread.

 

[vicinihil]

I once heard an adcom say that MCAT shows intelligence while GPA shows how hard one works

 

[ADeadLois]

I once heard an adcom say that MCAT shows intelligence while GPA shows how hard one works

This is often overlooked. Although the MCAT is, to an extent, an equalizer for GPAs, its relevance comes from its ability to assess your intellectual potential.

 

[ChubbyChaser]

I find that true to a certain extent, but there are always those exceptions!

 

[epinephrine]

If you can't handle a test like the MCAT, you sure as hell don't belong in med-school
anybody can get straight A's in undergrad science classes

 

[senseiturtle]

Applicants take the MCAT because

1) Equalizer between various undergrads.
2) More of a demonstration of raw intelligence, rather than ability to just memorize.

and most importantly...

3) Demonstration of standardized test taking ability.


While you can take the MCAT 4 times and get into medical school, if you fail the Step1 USMLE, you must retake before moving on.... and if you continue to fail, chances are you will never get your lisence.

http://www.fsmb.org/usmle_eliinitial.html


While the MCAT is hard, the USMLE is BEYOND hard. Next time you're at your favorite nation-chain bookstore, pick up a practice guide for it. You'll see what i'm talking about.

 

[pakbabydoll]

I think it is for people who for some reason did not do so good in classes then they have another chance or maybe some people don't do good in test but they might have done super in their classes so it equals things out.

 

[CubaLibre]

This may be true. But if that "backwater skool" in Arkansas can teach people how to spell, it's accomplished something useful.

The MCAT just makes sure that you can think analytically. Nothing that appears on the MCAT is actually useful in medical school.

OP knows how to spell school. He/She was merely expressing his/her disapproval of the English language's unnecessary and superfluous utilization of characters. Why 2 letters where 1 clearly suffices?

 

[artaxerxes]

Applicants take the MCAT because

1) Equalizer between various undergrads.
2) More of a demonstration of raw intelligence, rather than ability to just memorize.

and most importantly...

3) Demonstration of standardized test taking ability.


.

I don't know about number 2, I think you can do very well if you are superb at memorizing things. if you do enough problems, and memorized how to do them, there really is no need for intelligence.

 

[shaggybill]

It's for people like me who screwed up when they went to college at 19 and messed around 2 years, not knowing how bad it would bite them in the butt when they would finally realize that they want to go into medicine. Now I'm going to have a below average GPA. A good MCAT will let adcoms know that I am in fact smart enough to go to med school, and that my poor cumulative GPA isn't an indicator of how well I will perform in their school.

 

[artaxerxes]

It's for people like me who screwed up when they went to college at 19 and messed around 2 years, not knowing how bad it would bite them in the butt when they would finally realize that they want to go into medicine. Now I'm going to have a below average GPA. A good MCAT will let adcoms know that I am in fact smart enough to go to med school, and that my poor cumulative GPA isn't an indicator of how well I will perform in their school.

bitter much?

 

[senseiturtle]

I don't know about number 2, I think you can do very well if you are superb at memorizing things. if you do enough problems, and memorized how to do them, there really is no need for intelligence.

I used the qualifier "more of" in the original sentence for that reason.

There is a big amount of controversy about what defines intelligence, whether it be cultural factors, artistic ability, adaptability, etc... but point being, it's impossible to measure accurately and completely objectively.

But that doesn't mean that people wont try... and that doesn't mean you don't have to succeed.


If you ask me... when it comes to a standardized test... people show adaptability. There's no way in hell you can memorize everything and do well on the MCAT solely based on that... The analytical thinking charts in the sciences section would throw you way off.

 

[DeadCactus]

MCAT lets them measure where you stand against your fellow applicants.
GPA lets them measure where you stand against your peers in school.

MCAT is more about whether you have the academics for med school. GPA is more about whether you have the work ethic.

 

[mindquick]

i think MCAT's purpose is similar to the SATs, it's basically an IQ test but requires basic science knowledge.

 

[Jaymz]

I agree with the MCAT as the equalizer test. However, I do not agree that the MCAT is a test of IQ or intelligence. No, a 4.0 doesn't mean you will do very well on the MCAT, because the MCAT is a thinking test as mentioned before. If you practice enough, I think anyone with decent intelligence can do very well on it, so I don't know that it necessarily reflects intelligence. I've known plenty of med students have gotten very low MCAT scores (29ish) and have went on to be in the top % of their class and scored above 230 on step 1. I think MCAT is just a good indicator, but by no means is it definitive of one's capabilities.