Why they care so much about the MCAT ...

[cubbbie]

This is not news, but kind of interesting. Sorry if this has been posted before.


Validity of the Medical College Admission Test for Predicting Medical School Performance.

Research Report
Academic Medicine. 80(10):910-917, October 2005.
Julian, Ellen R. PhD

Abstract:
Purpose: Since the introduction of the revised Medical College Admission Test (MCAT(R)) in 1991, the Association of American Medical Colleges has been investigating the extent to which MCAT scores supplement the power of undergraduate grade point averages (uGPAs) to predict success in medical school. This report is a comprehensive summary of the relationships between MCAT scores and (1) medical school grades, (2) United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step scores, and (3) academic distinction or difficulty.

Method: This study followed two cohorts from entrance to medical school through residency. Students from 14 medical schools' 1992 and 1993 entering classes provided data for predicting medical school grades and academic difficulty/distinction, while their peers from all of the U.S. medical schools were used to predict performance on USMLE Steps 1, 2, and 3. Regression analyses assessed the predictive power of combinations of uGPAs, MCAT scores, and undergraduate-institution selectivity.

Results: Grades were best predicted by a combination of MCAT scores and uGPAs, with MCAT scores providing a substantial increment over uGPAs. MCAT scores were better predictors of USMLE Step scores than were uGPAs, and the combination did little better than MCAT scores alone. The probability of experiencing academic difficulty or distinction tended to vary with MCAT scores. MCAT scores were strong predictors of scores for all three Step examinations, particularly Step 1.

Conclusions: MCAT scores almost double the proportion of variance in medical school grades explained by uGPAs, and essentially replace the need for uGPAs in their impressive prediction of Step scores. The MCAT performs well as an indicator of academic preparation for medical school, independent of the school-specific handicaps of uGPAs.

(C) 2005 Association of American Medical Colleges

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[MonkeyNuts!]

That's not a surprise. With all the different inflations, quality of teaching, difficulty of teaching, different teaching strategies, etc etc between every school - even between every school's courses, and even down to different student sections - there's no way GPA is a consistent measure of future med school performance.

 

[Depakote]

That's not a surprise. With all the different inflations, quality of teaching, difficulty of teaching, different teaching strategies, etc etc between every school - even between every school's courses, and even down to different student sections - there's no way GPA is a consistent measure of future med school performance.

agreed.

Now my question... what did they use before 1991?

 

[MonkeyNuts!]

agreed.

Now my question... what did they use before 1991?

An unrevised MCAT?

 

[cubbbie]

That's not a surprise. With all the different inflations, quality of teaching, difficulty of teaching, different teaching strategies, etc etc between every school - even between every school's courses, and even down to different student sections - there's no way GPA is a consistent measure of future med school performance.

It sounds like GPA is helpful, though. Except for board scores, for which it is meaningless.

 

[Stolenspatulas]

An unrevised MCAT?

a doctor i work with told me that when he took the mcat (decades and decades ago) he studied for about 2 days and got drunk the day before. if you look at really really old mcats you can see that most highschoolers these days could get perfect scores on them. no kidding.

 

[MonkeyNuts!]

Only helpful with a reference point, which is damn near impossible with all the possibilities. I mean we do have the "3.5-3.6 and above and you are competitive" thing, but I doubt that is reflective of absolutely EVERYONE.

 

[cubbbie]

a doctor i work with told me that when he took the mcat (decades and decades ago) he studied for about 2 days and got drunk the day before. if you look at really really old mcats you can see that most highschoolers these days could get perfect scores on them. no kidding.

Yeah, my dad told me he just got a study book and studied the two weekends before. It's NOTHING like it is now. He still doesn't understand why he lost all contact with me for four entire months between December '05 and April '06. He also doesn't understand why I would even consider applying to so many schools and going on so many interviews. This process has really changed.

 

[Maxster]

Well I read about this. Basically the MCAT measures your aptitude for learning and solving different problems on the fly. --> Better USMLE test scores.

uGPA measures how hard you work during your undergrad.

 

[cubbbie]

Well I read about this. Basically the MCAT measures your aptitude for learning and solving different problems on the fly. --> Better USMLE test scores.

uGPA measures how hard you work during your undergrad.

In a way, I'm kind of glad they changed the MCAT to one you actually have to study for. It rewards and also demonstrates hard work, which is crucial in med school (unlike high school or even undergrad sometimes). Although I'm certain I would have gotten a higher score if it were more like the SATs, which doesn't require study.

 

[MonkeyNuts!]

They were also called MedCats back in the day.

Well guess they are going back to easier times with the new version next year - 22 offerings and a third of the test cut out? Pssssh please. It is a premed rite of passage to slowly have your spirit destroyed by that monster up until the day of the exam, and then again afterwards while you are waiting for the scores to come in.

 

[Law2Doc]

They were also called MedCats back in the day.

The MCATs have changed several times since the cohorts in this study took it in 1992-3, and there have been substantial changes in the applicant pools, med schools and the USMLE since this time as well. And this study only followed students at 14 schools, about 11% of the current total. I wouldn't get too worked up over this study. Med schools don't.

 

[cubbbie]

The MCATs have changed several times since the cohorts in this study took it in 1992-3, and there have been substantial changes in the applicant pools, med schools and the USMLE since this time as well. And this study only followed students at 14 schools, about 11% of the current total. I wouldn't get too worked up over this study. Med schools don't.

Except that the study was written and sponsored by the AAMC

 

[Newton Bohr MD]

This is not news, but kind of interesting. Sorry if this has been posted before.


Validity of the Medical College Admission Test for Predicting Medical School Performance.

Research Report
Academic Medicine. 80(10):910-917, October 2005.
Julian, Ellen R. PhD

Abstract:
Purpose: Since the introduction of the revised Medical College Admission Test (MCAT(R)) in 1991, the Association of American Medical Colleges has been investigating the extent to which MCAT scores supplement the power of undergraduate grade point averages (uGPAs) to predict success in medical school. This report is a comprehensive summary of the relationships between MCAT scores and (1) medical school grades, (2) United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step scores, and (3) academic distinction or difficulty.

Method: This study followed two cohorts from entrance to medical school through residency. Students from 14 medical schools' 1992 and 1993 entering classes provided data for predicting medical school grades and academic difficulty/distinction, while their peers from all of the U.S. medical schools were used to predict performance on USMLE Steps 1, 2, and 3. Regression analyses assessed the predictive power of combinations of uGPAs, MCAT scores, and undergraduate-institution selectivity.

Results: Grades were best predicted by a combination of MCAT scores and uGPAs, with MCAT scores providing a substantial increment over uGPAs. MCAT scores were better predictors of USMLE Step scores than were uGPAs, and the combination did little better than MCAT scores alone. The probability of experiencing academic difficulty or distinction tended to vary with MCAT scores. MCAT scores were strong predictors of scores for all three Step examinations, particularly Step 1.

Conclusions: MCAT scores almost double the proportion of variance in medical school grades explained by uGPAs, and essentially replace the need for uGPAs in their impressive prediction of Step scores. The MCAT performs well as an indicator of academic preparation for medical school, independent of the school-specific handicaps of uGPAs.

(C) 2005 Association of American Medical Colleges

what if someone got V:8 P5 B14??? I would think they have a chance to blast the boards!!!

Hell someone with a V:5 P:5 B15 could blast the boards!!!

 

[e_phn]

Perhaps, they want to see you do some actual thinking in short amount of time. When you are a doc, you have to think quickly to help the patients sometimes, I think. For instance, the emergency doc? I dunno.

I mean, some people can just get straight A's in their pre-med classes without understanding any material (or just a little to get by, not the ins and outs of Physics, Chem, Bio). For instance, the cheaters? Hence the MCAT is essential. I dunno, it's just my opinion....

 

[modelslashactor]

i agree with you on both points, e_phn. i know people that cheated like crazy in damn near every class for their grades, but the mcat called them on it.

and this semester for me has been a case study in slothful studying, and i am now convinced that you can get out of college without learning ANYTHING at all. i literally cannot remember any of the answers to the questions i took just FOUR HOURS AGO.

 

[Law2Doc]

Except that the study was written and sponsored by the AAMC

AAMC does not equal med schools - there is plenty of autonomy in admissions. As can be seen from the variety of threads on here where high MCAT types aren't a shoo in, med schools obviously are weighting other factors pretty heavilly too. Most schools do not use a top down, accept the highest MCATs we can get approach above all else, as you might expect if you really thought that was the greatest correlated factor. They pretty clearly create thresholds and pick and choose people above that threshold based on a whole host of factors, many of which are subjective.

Also for what it's worth, if you actually look at the statistical correlation data in that paper, rather than rely on the abstract/title, it is not exactly overwhelming (in my opinion), even if you could extrapolate it to the current genesis of the MCAT, USMLE and the 110 med schools not studied. Not something you want to rest your laurels on if you scored well. Sort of like expecting a baseball player who hit well in 1993 to still hit as well today (with or without steroids).

 

[Stolenspatulas]

Perhaps, they want to see you do some actual thinking in short amount of time. When you are a doc, you have to think quickly to help the patients sometimes, I think. For instance, the emergency doc? I dunno.

I mean, some people can just get straight A's in their pre-med classes without understanding any material (or just a little to get by, not the ins and outs of Physics, Chem, Bio). For instance, the cheaters? Hence the MCAT is essential. I dunno, it's just my opinion....

i think the test is more than just raw thinking ability.

can you handle the pressure of knowing its a make or break test for your future? Can you let the fear sink in and defeat it?
can you not choke when you have a limited amount of time and several tasks to complete? can you keep your cool? (will you be able to make sound decisions if a patient is in trouble and time is a huge factor?)
can you remain dedicated to a goal and prepare yourself so that you can excel?
There's a reason the test takes all day. Can you stay sharp for a long duration of ridiculous work (aka in residency you may be on the move for 20+ hrs in a row)?

Point--- you can extrapolate a lot of meaning from the MCATs due to the nature of the test and how its the cornerstone of your application.

 

[Darksmurf]

In a way, I'm kind of glad they changed the MCAT to one you actually have to study for. It rewards and also demonstrates hard work, which is crucial in med school (unlike high school or even undergrad sometimes). Although I'm certain I would have gotten a higher score if it were more like the SATs, which doesn't require study.

It rewards and demonstrates that you've got $1300 for Kaplan and recreational time to study.

 

[juice55]

Kaplan class is a waste of time. I thought the classes were pointless and I ended up just studying on my own instead of going to the last two or three classes. Only the tests were helpful.

 

[Law2Doc]

Kaplan class is a waste of time. I thought the classes were pointless and I ended up just studying on my own instead of going to the last two or three classes. Only the tests were helpful.

The administered full length exam simulations were pretty useful. Maybe not worth the cost of the whole prep course, but worth something.

 

[Anastasis]

I personally think prep courses are a waste of time if you have any kind of ability to stay motivated on your own.


But don't tell my boss I said that

 

[cubbbie]

It rewards and demonstrates that you've got $1300 for Kaplan and recreational time to study.

Exactly. Commitment. Financial and life commitment.

Recreational time??? What??? How can you possibly turn this into a class issue. I was working full-time and taking two night classes while I was preparing for the MCAT. Therefore, I started studying way early and dedicated every weekend and lunch hour and vacation time and random free evening to study. Hard work and commitment?

 

[45408]

It rewards and demonstrates that you've got $1300 for Kaplan and recreational time to study.

Tough. Wait until you're in med school. They only reward people with $150,000+ and no job, no life, and lots of dedication.

 

[Holistic]

If you read that study it paints a very clear picture, people experiencing academic difficulty above a certain threshold is not that much different, in other words if your science GPA is a 3.4 and your MCAT was a 28 your chances of failing out and having trouble passing step 1 are not much greater (a couple percent) than someone who has a 3.6 and a 31 MCAT, that is why I think they place way to much emphasis on these tests, if your numbers are over a certain threshold it should no longer be about the numbers, the reason they do it is all driven by US news and world report and ego boasting about how high there incoming classes averages are and that they are better than ever before and also how "our school got better standardized test taker book worm study geeks than your low stat school nany nany boo boo" if you ask me its a stupid process that breeds mindless doctors who aren't concerned with the pursuit of scientific inquiry and exploration of curing chronic disease.

The kind of people who are rewarded in this system are the students who always raise there hand and ask "is this going to be on the test" (because if its not god forbid I learn it, I just need to memorize what I need to know so I can be at the top of my class and ace step 1 and be a cosmetic surgeon that never uses any of this knowledge, it will just lead to a lot of money and girls with big tits) I am in medical school right now and it depresses me to see how much it is still like undergrad.....(by the way I had below average matriculation stats and I am dominating medical school) I was studying for an immuno test the other night at school and wanted to know more about tissue graft rejection so I did a pubmed search and learned a lot by reading the recent literature on the subject, when I tried to share some of my findings with my classmates they said they didnt care because it might be different from what the professor wanted us to know they might miss the question about it, and I quote from several people "if its not in the syllabus its not on the test, dont waste my time with anything else"

This is the common theme among most of the students in my class, they got into medical school because they made really high grades and MCAT scores because they learn what will be on the test and never take the time to think outside the box and question the material.....I expected medical school to be more about the study of the human body and how to solve complex problems , but really its become a system that rewards the same kind of "is this going to be on the test" mentality. I dont always make A's because I don't spend time making sure I remember all the transcription factor abbreviations, but I always learn the systems and processes of things, because in the end, to be a great doctor its not about, Did you remember "what" with five answer choices staring at you in the face on an exam, its do you remember "how" "why" and "what to do" when your having a real conversation with a real person that doesn't have choices A-E written on their back which might require you think outside of the "will this be on the test" mentality.

 

[DoctorPardi]

Except that the study was written and sponsored by the AAMC

Ok but, what maybe we're all missing here is the next step in this whole process. Medical schools aren't just accepting people who should be good students, but hopefully people who could be good DOCTORS.

It is one thing to be able to memorize a bunch of information or perform well on tests. Being able to interact with patients and other staff is something else.

That is why interviews are so important lol. Your career is dealing with a diverse group of people and being able to explain to them their problems, and earning their trust.

So even if you made a 40 on the MCAT and you have a 4.0, you might not be the best applicant. If you never did any volunteer work, or never had any clinical experience. This is a case of extremes, but I think it is important to point out that medical schools have more in mind than just performance in medical school. How well does GPA or MCAT predict if you'll be a good, caring doctor? What does the MCAT show about your intentions of going into the field? I only point this out because the debate seems to be MCAT vs GPA but what medical schools are (or should) be looking for is the applicant who is likely to be the best doctor (but can also excel in the academic part of medicine).

 

[mdvargas]

From the MSAR 2007-2008, p. 20: "the [MCAT] is a test of achievement, not aptitude; the MCAT measures mastery of what one has learned rather than one's potential for learning"

Don't shoot the messenger

 

[maestro1625]

My dad always mentions how his test had a "general knowledge" section that was basically full of trivia. And actually IIRC, the major test in India still has a section like that which asks questions like "how many holes are on a typical golf course?"

 

[Stolenspatulas]

From the MSAR 2007-2008, p. 20: "the [MCAT] is a test of achievement, not aptitude; the MCAT measures mastery of what one has learned rather than one's potential for learning"

Don't shoot the messenger

the mastery of physics, orgo, biology, gen chem requires intelligence. people who get all As in these subjects do not necessarily do well on the sections in the mcat.

 

[mdvargas]

the mastery of physics, orgo, biology, gen chem requires intelligence. people who get all As in these subjects do not necessarily do well on the sections in the mcat.

Don't shoot the messenger.

 

[Stolenspatulas]

Don't shoot the messenger.

they were blanks i swear!

 

[mdvargas]

they were blanks i swear!

 

[NonTradMed]

a doctor i work with told me that when he took the mcat (decades and decades ago) he studied for about 2 days and got drunk the day before. if you look at really really old mcats you can see that most highschoolers these days could get perfect scores on them. no kidding.

Yeah, my dad told me he just got a study book and studied the two weekends before. It's NOTHING like it is now. He still doesn't understand why he lost all contact with me for four entire months between December '05 and April '06. He also doesn't understand why I would even consider applying to so many schools and going on so many interviews. This process has really changed.

Well, that makes me envious of all those doctors back in the days then. Minimal insurance hassles, easy entrance. Only downside is the grueling residency before the new rules were in place. But that makes me wonder....why didn't more people go into medicine? Why was it easier back then when it was (it seems) the 'golden' period of medicine?They said that doctors were happier and made a lot more money back in the days, yet why is it harder to get into med school now? Heh.

 

[Stolenspatulas]

Well, that makes me envious of all those doctors back in the days then. Minimal insurance hassles, easy entrance. Only downside is the grueling residency before the new rules were in place. But that makes me wonder....why didn't more people go into medicine? Why was it easier back then when it was (it seems) the 'golden' period of medicine?They said that doctors were happier and made a lot more money back in the days, yet why is it harder to get into med school now? Heh.

i dont know if they were happier...? they had more respect thats for sure. a lot more did it back then for the money and the pride. now patients are so much more willing to demand medications and go against a doctor's wishes. and back then they had CRAZY residencies. The hours now are cake in comparison.

 

[stixx]

"is this going to be on the test" mentality

I'll admit I subscribe to this...its moreso in my science undergraduate classes because that's the overwhelming atmosphere of the classes. Everyone's trying to get into med school...

And professors are so passionate about their topics but they're speaking to a dead, robotic classroom. And the academic pressure gets to the point that you can't truly 'learn' in all your subjects without sacrificing your gpa Guess I should look forward to that continuing.

The only way I keep my sanity is my arts classes (majoring in econ) Exams test your understanding of the material and your ability to apply it. Memorizing doesn't help if you can't interpret a problem when it's presented to you out of textbook context. Which I think is closer to what doctors do in their daily lives at least. *sigh*

 

[dynx]

by the way I had below average matriculation stats and I am dominating medical school)

I dont always make A's because I don't spend time making sure I remember all the transcription factor abbreviations, but I always learn the systems and processes of things

Sounds like you aren't dominating a damn thing.
Your post reeks of sour grapes. And, Ive heard this "other people score better than me because they just memorize but I "understand" the concepts" BS before. It comes from people that are middle of the road or below and need to make themselves feel better with some justification. Thier middle of the road performance continues through STEP 1, in the clinical years and as a result...in residency. You won't believe whatim saying when you read this post, its too hard to take an honest look at yourself now, but it will become evident down the line. Im typing this in vain only hoping you may not screw others over by spreading your bad advice.

 

[Holistic]

to the above poster, I dont have sour grapes, I have an all A average in medical school, I was the only student in my class of 230 to place out of first year medical biochemistry and I have been approached by the director of both the biochemistry and physiology department to get in the MD/PhD program, I was hired by my school to tutor biochemistry to my classmates. The difference is I am not a grade *****, if I make a B on an exam because I forgot about a few TF-3b's or maybe I misread a question or didnt understand the semantics on the question it doesn't mean I didn't understand what the hell was going on. Get with the program man, life isn't a multiple choice contest, they are not fair assessments of anyones knowledge (Darwin, Einstein, Hawkins didnt have predetermined answers to there theories, they actually thought outside the box and came up with new ideas that wouldn't have been A-E choices on their tests) and all multiple choice culture breeds is grade grubbing "is this going to be on test" people like you, another thing, what do I have to get bitter about, I got into my first choice school and I only applied once, sounds like your pissed because you cant believe people dont kiss the ground you walk on because your really great at bubbling in scantrons......whats gonna happen when the answers not there and you have to come up with it all on your on, terrifying isn't it......oh wait my opinions don't matter because I'm middle of the road and I have inferior intelligence to you, I bet you had a 4.0 and 35 on your MCAT so you must be better than me in all aspects of life, including relationships, communication skills, abstract reasoning, musical aptitude, and spatial reasoning........what was I thinking to voice an opinion in your all knowing master bubbler presence.......please forgive me........you really do a great job sizing me up based on my stats.......jokes on me.......I'm middle of the road destined for a life in family medicine or internal medicine, or pediatrics, or OB/GYN because Im an idiot (not trying to offend anyone in these fields with this, I respect these fields and think primary care is one of the most mental demanding fields that master bubblers disrespect only because of lower pay and uneasiness in not being an expert that always has the right answer) and dont measure up to your superior intellect.......you embody everything thats wrong with the admissions process.......thats something I know your statistics inflated ego will never UNDERSTAND

 

[dynx]

to the above poster, I dont have sour grapes, I have an all A average in medical school, I was the only student in my class of 230 to place out of first year medical biochemistry and I have been approached by the director of both the biochemistry and physiology department to get in the MD/PhD program, I was hired by my school to tutor biochemistry to my classmates. The difference is I am not a grade *****, if I make a B on an exam because I forgot about a few TF-3b's or maybe I misread a question or didnt understand the semantics on the question it doesn't mean I didn't understand what the hell was going on. Get with the program man, life isn't a multiple choice contest, they are not fair assessments of anyones knowledge (Darwin, Einstein, Hawkins didnt have predetermined answers to there theories, they actually thought outside the box and came up with new ideas that wouldn't have been A-E choices on their tests) and all multiple choice culture breeds is grade grubbing "is this going to be on test" people like you, another thing, what do I have to get bitter about, I got into my first choice school and I only applied once, sounds like your pissed because you cant believe people dont kiss the ground you walk on because your really great at bubbling in scantrons......whats gonna happen when the answers not there and you have to come up with it all on your on, terrifying isn't it......oh wait my opinions don't matter because I'm middle of the road and I have inferior intelligence to you, I bet you had a 4.0 and 35 on your MCAT so you must be better than me in all aspects of life, including relationships, communication skills, abstract reasoning, musical aptitude, and spatial reasoning........what was I thinking to voice an opinion in your all knowing master bubbler presence.......please forgive me........you really do a great job sizing me up based on my stats.......jokes on me.......I'm middle of the road destined for a life in family medicine or internal medicine, or pediatrics, or OB/GYN because Im an idiot and dont measure up to your superior intellect.......you embody everything thats wrong with the admissions process.......thats something I know your statistics inflated ego will never UNDERSTAND

You screaming your accomplishments on an internet site makes me think you yearn for external validation that you're just not getting. If you're so on top of ****, are being recognized by your instructors (asked to tutor a class you didn't take?), and killing all your classes (with B's on some exams? maybe you go to upstairs school of medicine or the tropics but at my school a B on one exam with our curve pretty much puts you out of the running for an A in the class) then it seems you're fitting perfectly into the system you claim to despise...that is, you're a great scantron bubbler too and thats about it. The all A's you seem so proud of are the same multiple choice tests that everyone else took, good job!
Most likely your delusions of grandeur are all in your head, your raging against the machine doesn't really make sense. You're probably creating an internet fantasy persona of what you wish was happening in your life, if so, get help If not, congrats on being another great multiple guesser it seems your only real distinguishing feature is thinking you're more interested in material than other people. Whatever helps you sleep at night. Why you care enough about what other people are doing to get angry is what I will never understand.

 

[Anastasis]

Sounds like you aren't dominating a damn thing.
Your post reeks of sour grapes. And, Ive heard this "other people score better than me because they just memorize but I "understand" the concepts" BS before. It comes from people that are middle of the road or below and need to make themselves feel better with some justification. Thier middle of the road performance continues through STEP 1, in the clinical years and as a result...in residency. You won't believe whatim saying when you read this post, its too hard to take an honest look at yourself now, but it will become evident down the line. Im typing this in vain only hoping you may not screw others over by spreading your bad advice.

It's not justification for mediocrity, it's just the way some people learn. I can't memorize worth crap unless I put the information into some kind of framework to "understand" first. It means that sometimes my grades aren't as high as my classmates' (if the test is only regurgitation) but when it comes to applying that information I can kick their asses up and down the street.

 

[TMP-SMX]

I think there are a lot of assumptions and judgements being made that just don't have to be made. Cool it and be civil.

The struggle to be competitive with your scores is the nature of the beast. It's a problem that more people don't pursue their own independent study, but that happens in some cases with smaller class sizes and discussion. It is common in many humanities courses. It is also common in upper level science courses especially in smaller universities.

 

[Holistic]

Look dude, in your own strange way you called me an idiot, I simply voiced an opinion and your response was to belittle me and my life, so I deemed it necessary to give a few credentials to defend my position, I don't yearn for validation, but did need to state some facts about myself so you couldn't continue your character assassination. I am simple saying the system is broken and needs to be reevaluated.......why you came at me with a personal attack to invalidate my opinion tells me a lot about your character.....

 

[dynx]

It's not justification for mediocrity, it's just the way some people learn. I can't memorize worth crap unless I put the information into some kind of framework to "understand" first. It means that sometimes my grades aren't as high as my classmates' (if the test is only regurgitation) but when it comes to applying that information I can kick their asses up and down the street.

Ummm...so put the information in a framework and understand it then and it shouldnt be a problem. I know what you're saying, i've heard it for the past four years and Im telling you its just not true, you may wish it as much as you want but its not. Minus the real personality issues some people have, the people rolling through the first two years are on top in the last two as well when application is put to the test (as best it can be in a subjective setting). These people also get into the more competative residency programs. There is still room for the rest in almost every field and you can still be anything you want to be, but the "i understand it better but just dont do as well on tests" garbage is just that...garbage.

 

[Anastasis]

Ummm...so put the information in a framework and understand it then and it shouldnt be a problem. I know what you're saying, i've heard it for the past four years and Im telling you its just not true, you may wish it as much as you want but its not. Minus the real personality issues some people have, the people rolling through the first two years are on top in the last two as well when application is put to the test (as best it can be in a subjective setting). These people also get into the more competative residency programs. There is still room for the rest in almost every field and you can still be anything you want to be, but the "i understand it better but just dont do as well on tests" garbage is just that...garbage.

But I'm comparing myself to the idiots in my ugrad classes, not the people who actually made it into a medical school class. I would hope the process weeds out the people who are completely unable to apply their knowledge and get by only on memorization.

 

[dynx]

damn repost.

 

[dynx]

Look dude, in your own strange way you called me an idiot, I simply voiced an opinion and your response was to belittle me and my life, so I deemed it necessary to give a few credentials to defend my position, I don't yearn for validation, but did need to state some facts about myself so you couldn't continue your character assassination. I am simple saying the system is broken and needs to be reevaluated.......why you came at me with a personal attack to invalidate my opinion tells me a lot about your character.....

Let me break it down for you:

You are angry because...

The kind of people who are rewarded in this system are the students who always raise there hand and ask "is this going to be on the test"

Then you go on to say how you are dominating medical school....and list several examples....i.e. you're being what? Huh? Oh yeah, REWARDED while not being like that.

So we have one of two or three situations going on here:
1. You don't see the contradiction in what you're saying and you're an idiot (we've been able to conclude that you're most likely not an idiot...don't get too excited sparky the jury is still out)
2. You're full of **** and not being rewarded/recognized as you say you are.
3. You're angry in general and this is a easy if not nonsensical way to vent your frustrations.

If you want me to agree that some people with a good memory and not much else going for them do well in medical school, I will. If you want me to agree that some people seem better on paper because they exclude studying "extra" information, I will. But saying that the system is "broke" in the way it evaluates people while at the same time exclaiming that it is evaluating you very favorably is well...stupid. Makes me think you're lying. Maybe I'll start a poll.

 

[Holistic]

Look, my problem with the system stems from being able to be rewarded for behaving in the manner I speak of, I understand the system and play the game, I dont try to be a rogue, to go far in the medical field you have to play the game by the current rules, and I am playing.....I simple have a problem with this method of assessment for medical professionals, I don't have all the answers and dont claim to (if I did that would make me an idiot) I'm smart enough to understand how the system works so I play by the rules and I have been rewarded, but that doesn't make it right.......I just dont feel the current system encourages intellectual curiosity that in my opinion is essential to furthering our scientific understanding....it is more geared to memorizing vast amounts of factual knowledge that will raise board scores.......I have an ethical dilemma with this being the current impetus behind students learning medicine......I don't have delusions of grandeur because I will admit that I do succeed because I excel in the current system, but it is that very system that makes me angry because its not the system a medical education should be based on....

 

[dynx]

Look, my problem with the system stems from being able to be rewarded for behaving in the manner I speak of, I understand the system and play the game, I dont try to be a rogue, to go far in the medical field you have to play the game by the current rules, and I am playing.....I simple have a problem with this method of assessment for medical professionals, I don't have all the answers and dont claim to (if I did that would make me an idiot) I'm smart enough to understand how the system works so I play by the rules and I have been rewarded, but that doesn't make it right.......I just dont feel the current system encourages intellectual curiosity that in my opinion is essential to furthering our scientific understanding....it is more geared to memorizing vast amounts of factual knowledge that will raise board scores.......I have an ethical dilemma with this being the current impetus behind students learning medicine......I don't have delusions of grandeur because I will admit that I do succeed because I excel in the current system, but it is that very system that makes me angry because its not the system a medical education should be based on....

Okay. I can agree with this. I misunderstood your point before. Sorry for insulting you.

 

[Law2Doc]

Well, that makes me envious of all those doctors back in the days then. Minimal insurance hassles, easy entrance. Only downside is the grueling residency before the new rules were in place. But that makes me wonder....why didn't more people go into medicine? Why was it easier back then when it was (it seems) the 'golden' period of medicine?They said that doctors were happier and made a lot more money back in the days, yet why is it harder to get into med school now? Heh.

It wasn't all that much easier to get in, and there were a lot of negatives associated with it. Bear in mind that there were a lot fewer allo med schools than now, the schools were smaller then than now, DO was not yet really in the picture during that era (they didn't practice in allo hospitals and had severe limitations on practice), and carribean schools were more of a hail mary shot at any residency as compared to today. So there were fewer on-ramps into the profession. Applicants had to be premed -- no nonsci majors could get in, no nontrads, no people with families. Women didn't generally apply in the numbers we see today. So it was a very different, very homogeneous, non-diverse, applicant pool applying for a much smaller number of spots. And everyone had to do an internship year at the other end, a gruelling year where everyone learned to become a generalist, before starting in on their specialty. An 80 hour work week would be considered a joke at that time, and some schools were famous for the every other night or every third night overnight calls, even in non-surgical specialties. You pretty much lived at the hospital for your internship and residency. Verbal abuse was far more prevalent, of lower ranking doctors, non-physician staff, and patients (read "House of God" for a flavor of this -- that part of it, at least, was not fiction). And lots of meds and technologies and procedures didn't exist yet, so a much larger percentage of patients didn't survive, which probably was a bit depressing. And the doctors on TV didn't have as glamorous and as exciting lives as those on Grey's, House, ER -- it wasn't as inspiring to become the next Ben Casey or even Hawkeye Pierce as it is to become the next Dr. McDreamy.
So sure, it was more lucrative, but I am not all that surprised that it is more competitive now.

 

[NonTradMed]

It wasn't all that much easier to get in, and there were a lot of negatives associated with it. Bear in mind that there were a lot fewer allo med schools than now, the schools were smaller then than now, DO was not yet really in the picture during that era (they didn't practice in allo hospitals and had severe limitations on practice), and carribean schools were more of a hail mary shot at any residency as compared to today. So there were fewer on-ramps into the profession. Applicants had to be premed -- no nonsci majors could get in, no nontrads, no people with families. Women didn't generally apply in the numbers we see today. So it was a very different, very homogeneous, non-diverse, applicant pool applying for a much smaller number of spots. And everyone had to do an internship year at the other end, a gruelling year where everyone learned to become a generalist, before starting in on their specialty. An 80 hour work week would be considered a joke at that time, and some schools were famous for the every other night or every third night overnight calls, even in non-surgical specialties. You pretty much lived at the hospital for your internship and residency. Verbal abuse was far more prevalent, of lower ranking doctors, non-physician staff, and patients (read "House of God" for a flavor of this -- that part of it, at least, was not fiction). And lots of meds and technologies and procedures didn't exist yet, so a much larger percentage of patients didn't survive, which probably was a bit depressing. And the doctors on TV didn't have as glamorous and as exciting lives as those on Grey's, House, ER -- it wasn't as inspiring to become the next Ben Casey or even Hawkeye Pierce as it is to become the next Dr. McDreamy.
So sure, it was more lucrative, but I am not all that surprised that it is more competitive now.

But what you've pointed out....fewer women, all science majors etc doesn't say anything about entrance to get into med school. It may mean med school won't accept variations in its population, but as long as you qualify in the racial/gender sense, it seems a sure bet.

Many people find it hard to get into med school today because the process is random and requires high GPA and the hurdle of a good MCAT score. Ok, so there's many 'off ramps', I'll grant you that since the carribean schools didn't take off until the late 70's and DOs were still heavily stigmatized, but if the MCAT was something akin to the SAT where one could study for a couple of weekends and get a score good enough to get in, that implies that the 'lower number of seats' did not affect the academic competitiveness of medical school.

If all it took to be a doctor who made a ton of money and had all this respect was to be a science major and spend a couple of weekends on the MCAT, then it seems easier to get into med school then than it is NOW. Unless it was freakin' hard to do well in your science classes back then. But I wonder....nowadays we have so many people reapplying that there's a whole industry growing around reapplicants (SMP masters, linkages, carribeans etc), and no one would ever suggest 'winging' it on the MCAT to get into med school as it is implied that some people used to do for the MCAT way back then. Hence, I have to think that unless colleges were much harder back then for the bio majors, then med school may have been less competitive decades ago.

 

[Ryo-Ohki]

Many people find it hard to get into med school today because the process is random and requires high GPA and the hurdle of a good MCAT score.

Indeed, many applicants give up and say the process is "random" and a "crap shoot" because of the whimsical, undisclosed and secret subjective factors that Law2Doc champions. Objective, merit based factors like MCAT and GPA are definitely not random.