Why do smart people score low?

[Atny]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Is it because of not enough practice or lack of focus? Any thought?

 

[FalconSlice]

Is it because of not enough practice or lack of focus? Any thought?

Your question makes it seem that all "smart" people (whatever that means) score low. Not true. Many people score low and some of those people are highly intelligent people or people that do brilliantly in school (if that is what you mean by smart people).

If that is your question, the answer is simple: the same reason others score low. Not prepared enough for the MCAT (the MCAT is a different beast than schoolwork), test day disasters (probably the minority), test anxiety, extra-academic influences (personal stuff), etc.

 

[Atny]

Even people like Eistein failed the college admission test

http://www.neatorama.com/2007/03/26/10-strange-facts-about-einstein/

 

[Atny]

What if we change "critical reading" to "emotional reading" for the mental pain we feel.

 

[Doug Underhill]

A better question may be "why do unintelligent people score high on the MCAT?" I'm a big ******* and I got a great score.

 

[The Brown Knight]

Even people like Eistein failed the college admission test

http://www.neatorama.com/2007/03/26/10-strange-facts-about-einstein/

Lol at #6

 

[wuhsabee]

Lol at #6

I'm extremely intrigued by #10.

 

[FlatFour]

I'm not someone who can define smart or dumb, but I am intrigued when I hear about people with low GPA's scoring very well on the MCAT, and vice versa. I respect that normal school tests and the MCAT require a different type of thinking, but surely if someone slacked off during classes they don't have the background knowledge for physical and biological sciences, or the discipline necessary to study for the MCAT.

 

[Dr.Zoidberg]

Is it because of not enough practice or lack of focus? Any thought?

It's just a different test. I know two people who scored above 2300 on SATs/killed undergrad in tough majors who couldn't break 35. It's not like they choked on test day either. Even their practice tests weren't great. I think it's a different style of problem solving.

For instance, I was an engineering major, and my bread and butter was creativity on very hard problems on exams. If you're good at thought processes that involve A + B = X, where you're given A, you have to find or simply remember B, and X is the logical conclusion after knowing both, you're golden. However, if you're more used to creative problem solving like A + X + Y + Z = B, where you're given A and B, then you might struggle. I think a lot of people who do well in traditionally "tougher" majors get good at the second approach, but might not be as good at the first. It seems like the first approach is more relevant in clinical medicine, while the second is better for research, but I could be wrong about clinical medicine. That's just my experience so far (which is very little). I'm still waiting on my score, so we'll see if I managed to survive despite a new take on problem solving.