WSJ on the New 2015 MCAT

[BurghStudent]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Maybe you've already seen this, but here is an article(blog) on revisions the MCAT will undergo in the near future.


http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2011/03/31/the-new-mcat-less-science-more-critical-thinking/


I just love how it's repeated that the new MCAT will stress more critical thinking; and the current MCAT is based more on scientific knowledge. I find that kind of hard to believe. Isn't it already more critical thinking based?

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

The AAMC recommends that the new science sections of the test include more biochemistry and cellular and molecular biology

I think this will be the great part (at least for those taking the test in 2015). No more trying to memorize useless orgo. Although to be honest orgo was the section I studied the least on...I had heard before that they were already phasing it out and I was right, it was really low yield on my MCAT.

 

[eli20]

Eh, the science sections are semi critical thinking, a lot of times if you've had exposure to a topic before its much easier to answer questions that others are trying to tease out of the passages. And there's a pretty significant amount of discreet material. A lot of what people call "critical thinking" in the science section is simply application of concepts.

It seems to really be pointing towards implementing aspects of the test that see how well students can respond to non-clear cut situations (he cites behavioral sciences and ethics a few times). In my opinion you can't really measure this type of thing with MC questions, you need to include essay portions where students have to demonstrate their ability to read/think/synthesize/create an argument about some topic/issue that has no clear answer. However medical schools have decided that our current writing section is useless, and I can only assume they'd respond the same way to these sections. Why would we want thinkers when we could have science dictionaries? 🙄

 

[Drrrrrr. Celty]

They also supposedly want to include more statistics on the Mcat. Which I think is golden and has long been overdo.

 

[Geekchick921]

JMHO, but I thinks there's already plenty of critical thinking on the MCAT. A lot of those questions are designed/worded in such a way that they are TRYING to trip you up. It's not just regurgitating facts.

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

Yeah and hopefully would tilt the requirements towards at least a semester of stats...that way maybe they could have a semester of calc and a semester of stats as a requirement instead of the two semesters of calc now (which is totally useless for medicine).

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

JMHO, but I thinks there's already plenty of critical thinking on the MCAT. A lot of those questions are designed/worded in such a way that they are TRYING to trip you up. It's not just regurgitating facts.

I'd agree, the MCAT is probably more critical thinking based right now than any other test out there (except maybeee the LSAT but only because it has specific logic problem sections). Haha and anything that requires even more critical thinking will probably require the test to go to a longer format...in a test already renowned for its brutality.

 

[eli20]

Yeah and hopefully would tilt the requirements towards at least a semester of stats...that way maybe they could have a semester of calc and a semester of stats as a requirement instead of the two semesters of calc now (which is totally useless for medicine).

As far as I know a very tiny minority of schools require calc II, and some of the big ones that do are moving away from that (the only two I can think of that do are Harvard and Hopkins, and hopkins is getting rid of the requirement starting next cycle). Virtually everywhere I know recommends the calc/stats combo.

 

[SimplyMars9]

Yeah and hopefully would tilt the requirements towards at least a semester of stats...that way maybe they could have a semester of calc and a semester of stats as a requirement instead of the two semesters of calc now (which is totally useless for medicine).

Is that a new requirement? Because that's exactly what I took, 1 semester calc, 1 semester stats

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

You know you're right I forgot a lot of schools already just let you take one semester of calc and one of stats...I'm thinking of the requirements of my school for bio majors (which is just as useless).

 

[90minIPA]

There's always a lot of hype and hoopla surrounding new versions of standardized tests, but there isn't a lot of substance to any of the change. It'll still be a test you're gonna study your balls off for, and we'll still figure out an efficient way to conquer it. Diligent students who test well will perform just as well on any version of the MCAT.

This "more critical thinking" nonsense is just fodder for bloggers and pseudo-journalists to pontificate over.

 

[PressPforPi]

I wouldn't mind being tested for philosophy and stats. Two of my favorite subjects 🙂

 

[eli20]

My proposal would be that they beef up the writing section, score it on a 1-15 point basis and do the test out of 60 points so that 1) it actually counts for something and 2) I think it has the best shot of measuring some of the skills it seems like they want to test for.

 

[farrago]

I think it is just code-speak for "Certain groups of students are not doing well on the MCAT, we need to change the format to include more fluff". That has been the impetus behind endless revisions of every standardized exam in America for the last 60 years.

Look what they want to include more of: "the test should assess other aspects of learning that are usually taught as part of a broader liberal arts education, such as ethics, philosophy, psychology and cultural studies."

Hello FLUFF!

 

[Adaggiote]

but in addition, the test should assess other aspects of learning that are usually taught as part of a broader liberal arts education, such as ethics, philosophy, psychology and cultural studies.

this should be implemented....

 

[eli20]

Look what they want to include more of: "the test should assess other aspects of learning that are usually taught as part of a broader liberal arts education, such as ethics, philosophy, psychology and cultural studies."

Hello FLUFF!

Wow... way to discredit entire fields of knowledge generally accepted to define major aspects of humanity...

 

[circulus vitios]

Maybe they can cut out organic chemistry and do away with it as a prerequisite. God damn I hate organic chemistry.

 

[Adaggiote]

Wow... way to discredit entire fields of knowledge generally accepted to define major aspects of humanity...

Nice. That mean he's not human.

Nice. I love these pics.

 

[phnerd1105]

I love the idea of more liberal arts being incorporated. I think the fact that its going to be more based on critical thinking is a good and bad thing. Good in that there isnt going to be a crap ton of stuff to memorize-bad in that it will be harder to study for.

I'm just glad they acknowledged how much the admissions process relies on it.

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

but in addition, the test should assess other aspects of learning that are usually taught as part of a broader liberal arts education, such as ethics, philosophy, psychology and cultural studies.

Yeah but here's the problem with this- most of the time in ethics and philosophy there isn't really a "right" answer. Same thing with psychology (lots of competing ideas in some areas and no clear cut answer) and cultural studies a lot of the time. So what are they gonna do? Like was said before, make another writing type section? The problem with that is that medical schools know it doesn't score for a "right" answer and so they don't care that much about the score on it. The primary reason schools care about the MCAT is that, at a certain level, it can somewhat predict Step 1 scores (I know its a contested idea but its there). Step 1 is a totally mutiple choice test, so adding stuff that can't be answered with mutiple choice answers just gives another section for medical schools to ignore.

 

[Charles_Carmichael]

Yeah but here's the problem with this- most of the time in ethics and philosophy there isn't really a "right" answer. Same thing with psychology (lots of competing ideas in some areas and no clear cut answer) and cultural studies a lot of the time. So what are they gonna do? Like was said before, make another writing type section? The problem with that is that medical schools know it doesn't score for a "right" answer and so they don't care that much about the score on it. The primary reason schools care about the MCAT is that, at a certain level, it can somewhat predict Step 1 scores (I know its a contested idea but its there). Step 1 is a totally mutiple choice test, so adding stuff that can't be answered with mutiple choice answers just gives another section for medical schools to ignore.

Exactly. Who gets to choose what the "right" answer is?

Either way, it seems like these are just recommendations at the moment. We don't know how many of these suggestions will actually get implemented until 2012 it looks like.

 

[eli20]

Yeah but here's the problem with this- most of the time in ethics and philosophy there isn't really a "right" answer. Same thing with psychology (lots of competing ideas in some areas and no clear cut answer) and cultural studies a lot of the time. So what are they gonna do? Like was said before, make another writing type section? The problem with that is that medical schools know it doesn't score for a "right" answer and so they don't care that much about the score on it. The primary reason schools care about the MCAT is that, at a certain level, it can somewhat predict Step 1 scores (I know its a contested idea but its there). Step 1 is a totally mutiple choice test, so adding stuff that can't be answered with mutiple choice answers just gives another section for medical schools to ignore.

My criticism exactly. It's only furthered by the fact that the section is graded on a different scale and tacked on. If med schools don't care about it because there isn't a "right" answer they are missing the point of the entire exercise.

 

[deleted307836]

Yeah but here's the problem with this- most of the time in ethics and philosophy there isn't really a "right" answer. Same thing with psychology (lots of competing ideas in some areas and no clear cut answer) and cultural studies a lot of the time. So what are they gonna do? Like was said before, make another writing type section? The problem with that is that medical schools know it doesn't score for a "right" answer and so they don't care that much about the score on it. The primary reason schools care about the MCAT is that, at a certain level, it can somewhat predict Step 1 scores (I know its a contested idea but its there). Step 1 is a totally mutiple choice test, so adding stuff that can't be answered with mutiple choice answers just gives another section for medical schools to ignore.

Exactly. Who gets to choose what the "right" answer is?

This is what I'm worried about too. The MCAT as it is isn't perfect, but it does at a minimum give schools a good idea of ones scientific reasoning skills. Other attributes of applicants -- the ones that are supposedly being inadequately assessed on the MCAT -- can be assessed in the many other phases of the admissions process -- ECs, personal statement, essays, interview, etc.

 

[Monocles]

I think this is an excellent idea, too bad it's not being implemented sooner. However that would mean that I spent the last few months studying for an irrelevant, outdated version of the test...

 

[farrago]

Wow... way to discredit entire fields of knowledge generally accepted to define major aspects of humanity...

No, the way to discredit them is to throw a few BS questions on the test. How do you propose they "assess aspects of learning" like philosophy? What does that even mean? Ethics? What, in a passage? In a few MC questions? Or what? Cultural studies? Code speak for - we need to increase minority enrollment. Sad but true.

 

[Narmerguy]

No, the way to discredit them is to throw a few BS questions on the test. How do you propose they "assess aspects of learning" like philosophy? What does that even mean? Ethics? What, in a passage? In a few MC questions? Or what? Cultural studies? Code speak for - we need to increase minority enrollment. Sad but true.

Well, I don't imagine this will change minority enrollment that much since most schools already actively look out for minority students. However, on top of that, it's pretty ridiculous for you to assume this is some "conspiracy" to promote minority students. I think all students could benefit from being able to show some cultural competency and just reading this forum is evidence enough that it is severely lacking.

Plus, the assumption shouldn't be that this is just some "free gift" but that these students possess something that is very valuable to the medical profession (as far as URM at least) that is not being quantified on the MCAT exam or GPA. As we know, these two are only parts of the puzzle. At the same time, shouldn't everyone be happy about this since they always complain about how much they would be able to understand/treat minority patients just as well as URM physicians?

 

[redlight]

glad i'll be dodging this BS bullet. i feel bad for the first couple waves of applicants who have to take this. there will always be growing-pains.

 

[loveoforganic]

Do the steps test on psychology, humanities, culture, etc? No? Then why include it? The MCAT is a measure to predict future success on the boards. GPA is a measure to predict our success in med school. Our extracurriculars are our measure as people. Trying to include that in a standardized test is meaningless imo.

 

[eli20]

No, the way to discredit them is to throw a few BS questions on the test. How do you propose they "assess aspects of learning" like philosophy? What does that even mean? Ethics? What, in a passage? In a few MC questions? Or what? Cultural studies? Code speak for - we need to increase minority enrollment. Sad but true.

This is a different point of view than calling entire fields "fluff" which is what you posted first, and the position that I have an issue with. I think it's not about putting discrete questions about philosophy/ethics. That's not critical thinking. The only way to do this legitimately would be to do essay questions that accept ambiguous answers and grade based on reading/thinking about/integration of multiple sources/putting forth and sustaining some argument logically. Which is also why I said they might as well increase the importance of the writing section that currently gets overlooked.

Do the steps test on psychology, humanities, culture, etc? No? Then why include it? The MCAT is a measure to predict future success on the boards. GPA is a measure to predict our success in med school. Our extracurriculars are our measure as people. Trying to include that in a standardized test is meaningless imo.

I think the argument against this would clearly be that, if like in another thread currently on SDN asserts, the MCAT is the most important aspect of comparing applicants because of its standardized nature, then it becomes more than a predictor of future board success. It becomes the primary evaluation tool for choosing future doctors, so the test could include any skill which the AAMC thinks is worthwhile in physicians. The thing they are asking about isn't about testing candidates humanity - I agree that this would be worthless. The language around this is indicative of a valuation of candidates who are comfortable with working with ambiguity and interacting with complex and unwieldy ideas about social structures/movements. If done right I think it would be vastly useful to see how capable candidates are about thinking.

 

[loveoforganic]

I think the argument against this would clearly be that, if like in another thread currently on SDN asserts, the MCAT is the most important aspect of comparing applicants because of its standardized nature, then it becomes more than a predictor of future board success. It becomes the primary evaluation tool for choosing future doctors, so the test could include any skill which the AAMC thinks is worthwhile in physicians. The thing they are asking about isn't about testing candidates humanity - I agree that this would be worthless. The language around this is indicative of a valuation of candidates who are comfortable with working with ambiguity and interacting with complex and unwieldy ideas about social structures/movements. If done right I think it would be vastly useful to see how capable candidates are about thinking.

I gotcha and can see that pov. Misinterpreted the gist of the idea a little based on the other posts. The problem I see is that the minimum requirements for social sciences for admissions are like... one 101 class, and which 101 class isn't specified, so anything tested would have to be like verbal with no direct background knowledge necessary. I mean... I'm curious to see what the implementation would be like through a sample passage or something... but I don't think it'd be great (I am a senior psych major, just so you know I'm not predisposed against the material 🙂)

 

[deleted307836]

As eli mentioned the only way to really test on these subjects is through essay questions (as far as I can see, anyway). However, even this would just test writing and rhetorical skills more than the actual content -- and writing samples on standardized tests should be PURPOSELY non-political. It would be too easy for graders to take into account whether they agree with something or not when assigning a grade. I just don't see how this can be positively implemented at all, but I'll keep an open mind and see what's proposed in the future.

 

[eli20]

I gotcha and can see that pov. Misinterpreted the gist of the idea a little based on the other posts. The problem I see is that the minimum requirements for social sciences for admissions are like... one 101 class, and which 101 class isn't specified, so anything tested would have to be like verbal with no direct background knowledge necessary. I mean... I'm curious to see what the implementation would be like through a sample passage or something... but I don't think it'd be great (I am a senior psych major, just so you know I'm not predisposed against the material 🙂)

Well I think when you add up things like english/humanities reqs with social/psych its probably ~12-18 hours. My view of how this would be done at least would be providing ~5 documents of various sources (even various fields), having to read them and then answer a non definitive question by using/combining/synthesizing ideas within to establish and support an argument. I'd argue this skill is pretty essential for any field.

Full disclosure: I go to a liberal arts college and am a biology/english double major, so I'm genuinely vested in being liberally educated. I think the only way where this situation becomes more than lofty talk about "whole" applicants is when you can track some changes that show the system values these traits legitimately.

 

[eli20]

As eli mentioned the only way to really test on these subjects is through essay questions (as far as I can see, anyway). However, even this would just test writing and rhetorical skills more than the actual content -- and writing samples on standardized tests should be PURPOSELY non-political. It would be too easy for graders to take into account whether they agree with something or not when assigning a grade. I just don't see how this can be positively implemented at all, but I'll keep an open mind and see what's proposed in the future.

Just to push back at the grading issue, this is always a concern with essay questions which are almost always opinion pieces on tests like these. Still - there are guidelines to avoid this - I think by this point in standardized testing there have to be pretty legitimate schemes to govern grading in things like SAT/ACT/AP/MCAT/etc. The grading would need to be in line with the point behind the exam - which, if it is to judge ability to synthesize sources, insert ones' self in an argument, sustain that argument logically and interact with complex and ambiguous concepts/ideas, would avoid focusing on the overall opinion.

 

[barcoderider]

I don't really know what that article is talking about. There is already a section on the MCAT designed to test critical analysis and reasoning. It also includes examples from liberal arts, social sciences etc. It's called verbal.

Honestly though, in my mind it already is a critical thinking test, just aimed at those with a scientific background. I doubt it will change very much until they eventually make it adaptive like the GRE.

 

[ewa012]

i think the test should stay out of 45, and the new section should not be graded in terms of number but instead letters just like the writing section that it is being removed. It should be graded just like personality tests, like you are given a personality type based on ur responses,it should show if you are liberal, moderate etc, that would make more sense to me and it would allow schools to admit people based on the personality types they want. do you get what im saying?

 

[Mornhavon]

.

 

[Thego2guy]

"Cultural competency"

So there is going to be a whole test section devoted to how many racial stereotypes one can memorize?

Wonderful.

Thread is over a year old bro, the latest info can be found on the AAMC website. No more speculation 👍