Bad verbal score but good everything else?

[Kuantum]

I want to draw your attention to this article.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=16186610&dopt=Abstract

 

It states that the MCAT is strictly a good predictor of performance on the United States Medical Liscencing Exams (USMLE). So, its reasonable to infer that MCAT tends to favour those who are good at standardized tests designed by AAMC. Next, it says that "The probability of experiencing academic difficulty or distinction tended to vary with MCAT scores". So, the MCAT cannot tell us who will do well in medical school, however, that is not to dismiss the converse either that it can. The MCAT may be needed to determine who will be able to pass the USMLE, and you could argue that those individuals may make better doctors because they can actually pass the exams, however, I think that does not get to the heart of determining how to judge clinical skills, pre-clinical performance, or even suitability for the profession following training - the important factors in deciding who should gain admission. I am not making the claim that the MCAT should be completely disregarded because it may have some validity, however, I think generally speaking, other factors like GPA, soft skills, academic achievement in the past, and less emphasis on a standardized testing that has not shown predictive abilities on the Canadian liscencing exams should be considered? I'm pretty sure the US and Canada don't write the same liscencing exams and I know they are different in some ways that are noticeable. If you were, it is not necessarily sufficient for the successful completion of the other.

[scrubbed]

I think that this article from McMaster is the one the positively correlates the verbal reasoning section with performance on the clinical skills portion of the LMCC Part II.

 

1: Teach Learn Med. 2002 Winter;14(1):34-42. Links

Validity of admissions measures in predicting performance outcomes: the contribution of cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions.

 

• Kulatunga-Moruzi C,
  
• Norman GR.

Department of Psychology, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, L8S 4K1, Canada. kulatuc@mcmaster.ca

BACKGROUND: Admissions committees face the daunting task of selecting a small number of candidates who are most likely to succeed in medical school from a large pool of seemingly suitable applicants. While numerous studies have shown moderate correlations among measures of academic performance, predictors of the non-cognitive domain (e.g. interpersonal, communication, ethical) remain elusive, in part because of the absence of a sound criterion measure. PURPOSE: We examined the utility of several cognitive and non-cognitive criteria used in the admissions processes in predicting both cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions of the licencing examinations of the Medical Council of Canada (LMCC). METHODS: Predictors included: undergraduate GPA, undergraduate science GPA, an autobiographical letter, scores from a simulated tutorial, a personal interview and the MCAT. Of specific interest was the relation between measures of communication and problem-exploration skills as assessed during the admissions process and Part II of the LMCC Examination, a multi-station OSCE. RESULTS: Undergraduate GPAs were found to have the most utility in predicting both academic and clinical performance. Scores derived from the simulated tutorial did not predict future performance. The MCAT Verbal Reasoning score and the personal interview were found to be useful in predicting communication skills on the LMCC Part II. CONCLUSIONS: The results have implications for any school that uses the interview as an admissions tool.

PMID: 11865747 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE

[Kuantum]

I think that this article from McMaster is the one the positively correlates the verbal reasoning section with performance on the clinical skills portion of the LMCC Part II.

 

1: Teach Learn Med. 2002 Winter;14(1):34-42. Links

Validity of admissions measures in predicting performance outcomes: the contribution of cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions.

 

• Kulatunga-Moruzi C,
  
• Norman GR.

Department of Psychology, McMaster University, Hamilton ON, L8S 4K1, Canada. kulatuc@mcmaster.ca

BACKGROUND: Admissions committees face the daunting task of selecting a small number of candidates who are most likely to succeed in medical school from a large pool of seemingly suitable applicants. While numerous studies have shown moderate correlations among measures of academic performance, predictors of the non-cognitive domain (e.g. interpersonal, communication, ethical) remain elusive, in part because of the absence of a sound criterion measure. PURPOSE: We examined the utility of several cognitive and non-cognitive criteria used in the admissions processes in predicting both cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions of the licencing examinations of the Medical Council of Canada (LMCC). METHODS: Predictors included: undergraduate GPA, undergraduate science GPA, an autobiographical letter, scores from a simulated tutorial, a personal interview and the MCAT. Of specific interest was the relation between measures of communication and problem-exploration skills as assessed during the admissions process and Part II of the LMCC Examination, a multi-station OSCE. RESULTS: Undergraduate GPAs were found to have the most utility in predicting both academic and clinical performance. Scores derived from the simulated tutorial did not predict future performance. The MCAT Verbal Reasoning score and the personal interview were found to be useful in predicting communication skills on the LMCC Part II. CONCLUSIONS: The results have implications for any school that uses the interview as an admissions tool.

PMID: 11865747 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE

 

1. So, it appears that in Canada, GPA is more effective...at least according to McMaster.

 

2. I don't deny that the MCAT may have some utility, however, I believe it is given too much emphasis in Canada. We have pretty standardized educational programs across the country, so you can't really go wrong regardless of where you go. However, I cannot say the same about the US. The US certainly does have their own standards, however, due to the fact that our medical schools are publicly funded, there are fewer, and the medical education community is smaller, it is easier to keep tabs on that kind of stuff.

[Kuantum]

While I don't agree with you at all, fortunately, there is the option of applying to McMaster / UofO where they do not consider the MCAT at all. Furthermore, the MCAT is only part of selection criteria by medical schools, and while there are a lot of problems with standardized tests, you can not deny they are an effective equalizer: GPAs, "soft skills", extracurriculars, can and often are embellished.

 

As to the predictive powers of the MCAT, a lot of people have posted on SDN that different sections of the test are better predictors of the different steps int he USMLE. While I don't have an article with me to support my point, I believe some poeple ahve mentioned the VR on the MCAT is a good predictor of success on the Canadian licensing exam.

 

Anyways, just throwing some random throughts out there. I have an exam to cram for.

 

I don't see how you can completely disagree with me. I can see how some of the stuff I am saying is certainly debatable, however, to not agree with any of it in the slightest I think is putting too much faith in the MCAT. Also, I think you should step back for a second. Imagine if you had bombed the MCAT like so many do every year, would you still have as much faith in the MCAT?

 

I know I have posted my scores numerous times on this forum, and I will do so again 13PS 6VR 12BS WS S. I just want to make it clear at this point that I am not against the MCAT because I did poorly, because I was doing well, I still don't know what happened in verbal. I have been against the idea of standardized testing for something like medical admissions for a long time because I don't believe it accurately fulfills what admissions committees look for.

 

So what would standardized testing be good for? When admissions committees seek out highly specific, quantifiable skills like science aptitude or writing ability/prose construction skills. For writing ability, you may think that is also subjective, but writing has its rules and if a person doesn't follow those, then they clearly do not know what they are doing.

[ManGuy]

Hey guys,

Ya, I agree with Kuantum. Thing is, there are sooo many people who get into UofO or Mac that don't do well on the mcat. And these same people are often the ones at the top of their classes and do well on the LMCCs. I know several of these people. I can't speak for why they didn't do well on the mcat..maybe they didn't study. I know several med students at UofT who are actually #1 or #2 in their whole class and only got 8 or 9 in verbal. I know people who get 14 in physical and get 8 in verbal. These people are obviously very intelligent.

 

I also know that when UofO did have the mcat requirement, they were matching poorly in Carms...not sure why. Now, they are matching very well. Everyone who says that verbal is a good indicator of USMLE or LMCC success tends to do well on verbal. It's sort of a bias statement. However, my smartest friends actually struggle to get anything past 10 on verbal. I myself am not a fan of the mcat at all. I also know that several ppl at UofT admissions also don't like the mcat. Anyways...just some thoughts.

 

DaGuy

[EMD]

I want to draw your attention to this article.

 

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=16186610&dopt=Abstract

 

It states that the MCAT is strictly a good predictor of performance on the United States Medical Liscencing Exams (USMLE). So, its reasonable to infer that MCAT tends to favour those who are good at standardized tests designed by AAMC. Next, it says that "The probability of experiencing academic difficulty or distinction tended to vary with MCAT scores". So, the MCAT cannot tell us who will do well in medical school, however, that is not to dismiss the converse either that it can. The MCAT may be needed to determine who will be able to pass the USMLE, and you could argue that those individuals may make better doctors because they can actually pass the exams, however, I think that does not get to the heart of determining how to judge clinical skills, pre-clinical performance, or even suitability for the profession following training - the important factors in deciding who should gain admission. I am not making the claim that the MCAT should be completely disregarded because it may have some validity, however, I think generally speaking, other factors like GPA, soft skills, academic achievement in the past, and less emphasis on a standardized testing that has not shown predictive abilities on the Canadian liscencing exams should be considered? I'm pretty sure the US and Canada don't write the same liscencing exams and I know they are different in some ways that are noticeable. If you were, it is not necessarily sufficient for the successful completion of the other.

There are other papers that suggest the writing sample and VR predict clinical performance. LMCC part II performance is correlated with VR scores according to this paper (as you point-out above)... and I imagine there are papers that correlate MCAT scores with the new USMLE part 2-CS.

 

The abstract points out that:

* the MCAT is an equalizer for uGPA-- which is dependent on the college (university) and the course of study. It is hard to compare intermediate basket from mickey-mouse university to rocket-science from world-renown-Nobel-laureate-factory university. I think for that reason alone, the MCAT will not go away.

* the variance explained by the MCAT is higher than the variance explained by the GPA, i.e. the MCAT is a stronger predictor of performance.

* when the MCAT and GPA are used to predict performance it is little better than if the MCAT is used alone. This suggests the GPA doesn't add much, i.e. it doesn't result in a significantly better prediction of whether a candidate will do well, if the MCAT is already used.

 

I think you might have read something into the text that isn't there. Note that the abstract tracks 14 different schools & two different cohorts... the McMaster paper is about just one school-- McMaster.

[Ollie]

I know several med students at UofT who are actually #1 or #2 in their whole class and only got 8 or 9 in verbal.

That's interesting, since we don't have class rankings. Unless you mean the gold and silver medalists, but we don't find that out until we graduate. Sorry for the off topic, just wanted to point that out.

[Kirsteen]

That's interesting, since we don't have class rankings. Unless you mean the gold and silver medalists, but we don't find that out until we graduate. Sorry for the off topic, just wanted to point that out.

 

Hi there,

 

A friend of mine recently graduated from the UofT medical school and her class ranking was included within her MSPR (medical school performance record)--the document which is required by CaRMS for residency applications.

 

Cheers,

Kirsteen

[ADD101]

Verbal seems to be the one component in the MCAT that is almost completely different from all the other sections. I am another one of those who applicants with everything else good except the verbal. But I am satisfied with my score: it was people like me that the verbal was aimed at selecting against: going through high school and then university I always have had trouble keeping up my reading speed with others. The gene of bad language skills runs in my family - my father first had difficulty gaining admission in an engineering program because of his poor language skills, and after barely making it, achieved first position in the same program at university level and had an article published on his achievement in the newspaper.

 

This is in addition to the fact that I am an immigrant and learned a different language as a child: I have heard that a certain part of the brain that is responsible for language skills develops only till age 7 and stops developing thereon. Can anyone tell me which part this is. Who knows scientists in the future develop drugs that can improve mental abilities. What will med schools look for when every applicant can make a fit doctor. One way or another I feel that life is all about having the better genes and environment. From who has the better looks all the way to personalities, intelligence and language skills. Are we not merely pawns doing what our brains are making us do in our changing environments. Med schools, I guess, are really just looking for those best set of genes.

 

All my dreams of becoming an interventional neuroradiologist with a PhD in X-ray science have been shattered. At the end the only thing I can think about to relieve myself is that millions of years will pass and what I did in my life or may do just will not matter. Likely a disease will take over or comet may have hit and like the dinosaurs humans will go to extinction. Then just like we arose from creatures like the lemur in 65 million years another intelligent species will arise from another mammal (possibly) and wonder on how we - the first intelligent life form ever to have lived on earth - lived in their archeology classes. By then it would just not have mattered who I was or what I did.

[Kiel]

Verbal seems to be the one component in the MCAT that is almost completely different from all the other sections. I am another one of those who applicants with everything else good except the verbal. But I am satisfied with my score: it was people like me that the verbal was aimed at selecting against: going through high school and then university I always have had trouble keeping up my reading speed with others. The gene of bad language skills runs in my family - my father first had difficulty gaining admission in an engineering program because of his poor language skills, and after barely making it, achieved first position in the same program at university level and had an article published on his achievement in the newspaper.

 

This is in addition to the fact that I am an immigrant and learned a different language as a child: I have heard that a certain part of the brain that is responsible for language skills develops only till age 7 and stops developing thereon. Can anyone tell me which part this is. Who knows scientists in the future develop drugs that can improve mental abilities. What will med schools look for when every applicant can make a fit doctor. One way or another I feel that life is all about having the better genes and environment. From who has the better looks all the way to personalities, intelligence and language skills. Are we not merely pawns doing what our brains are making us do in our changing environments. Med schools, I guess, are really just looking for those best set of genes.

 

All my dreams of becoming an interventional neuroradiologist with a PhD in X-ray science have been shattered. At the end the only thing I can think about to relieve myself is that millions of years will pass and what I did in my life or may do just will not matter. Likely a disease will take over or comet may have hit and like the dinosaurs humans will go to extinction. Then just like we arose from creatures like the lemur in 65 million years another intelligent species will arise from another mammal (possibly) and wonder on how we - the first intelligent life form ever to have lived on earth - lived in their archeology classes. By then it would just not have mattered who I was or what I did.

WOW:eek: Somebody is letting of some steam. Anyways, don't lose hope:)

[clive]

All my dreams of becoming an interventional neuroradiologist with a PhD in X-ray science have been shattered. At the end the only thing I can think about to relieve myself is that millions of years will pass and what I did in my life or may do just will not matter. Likely a disease will take over or comet may have hit and like the dinosaurs humans will go to extinction. Then just like we arose from creatures like the lemur in 65 million years another intelligent species will arise from another mammal (possibly) and wonder on how we - the first intelligent life form ever to have lived on earth - lived in their archeology classes. By then it would just not have mattered who I was or what I did.

 

I have to admit, I have these exact thoughts sometimes too.

[neutral]

Lets be wary here and take these research findings with a grain of salt. A number of the articles cited, particularly in journals such as Academic Medicine, are solicited and funded by AAMC itself. There is more than a slight chance that they present a somewhat skewed version of reality.

[EMD]

Hi there,

 

A friend of mine recently graduated from the UofT medical school and her class ranking was included within her MSPR (medical school performance record)--the document which is required by CaRMS for residency applications.

 

Cheers,

Kirsteen

I think things have changed from last year. U of T provides its student a copy of the MSPR and the class ranking as far as I can tell -- this year -- is NOT included.

[jazzy_h2o]

For those that didn't do well on the VR....don't loose hope......it is a very difficult section ....especially for the majority of science majors (but not all).....I went from a 6 in VR to an 11 (from one sitting to the next) ......just bust your butt out and figure out what is it about the section that troubles you.....once you know what exactly your weakness is you should have no trouble improving your score.....the tricky part is figuring out what exactly is hindering your performance.....and some of you are still in 3rd year.....you still have plenty of time to gain admission into meds......best of luck

[kaymcee]

I don't post nearly as often as I should, seeing as how I'm lurking in the shadows on what has turned into a daily basis. But Kuantum has inspired me.

 

You've clearly got the workings of an excellent application. What's more, you believe strongly that you should be accepted into medical school (this, too, is important). I understand that scoring a 31S with a 6 VR would be a let-down, but maybe your time would be better spent addressing the problem at hand rather than whining about the "validity" of the MCAT or how your VR score correlates with your future success as a physician. This rant of yours has spilled into two or three threads now.

 

ExamKrackers has a pretty straight-forward method that worked well for me. As did finding as much verbal reasoning practice material as I could. Your hard work up to this point is evident, and if you want to gain acceptance into medical school you will likely have to improve this weakness in your application. If you didn't know that getting into medical school involves some hoop-jumping, now you do.

 

Best of luck.

[Zuckman]

I didn't think Kuantum was ranting...he was just discussing along with many others.

 

Zuck

[Kuantum]

I don't post nearly as often as I should, seeing as how I'm lurking in the shadows on what has turned into a daily basis. But Kuantum has inspired me.

 

You've clearly got the workings of an excellent application. What's more, you believe strongly that you should be accepted into medical school (this, too, is important). I understand that scoring a 31S with a 6 VR would be a let-down, but maybe your time would be better spent addressing the problem at hand rather than whining about the "validity" of the MCAT or how your VR score correlates with your future success as a physician. This rant of yours has spilled into two or three threads now.

 

ExamKrackers has a pretty straight-forward method that worked well for me. As did finding as much verbal reasoning practice material as I could. Your hard work up to this point is evident, and if you want to gain acceptance into medical school you will likely have to improve this weakness in your application. If you didn't know that getting into medical school involves some hoop-jumping, now you do.

 

Best of luck.

 

Like Zuckman said, I am not ranting. I am not angry that I scored a 6VR (I am frustrated because I don't know what happened) but that is not the reason I question the validity of the MCAT. I questioned it before I wrote the test, while studying for the test, and after writing it. I've made this point many times. However, thanks for the words of encouragement.

[Jixe]

Any news on how they're looking at verbal this cycle? From what I remember reading on here, someone stated that last round they had so many applicants that they didn't consider any undergraduate applications with a 6 or below in VR. Any such policy this round?

[DMD]

I did bad on writing sample in my most recent MCAT (below N) but okay on other sections.. (it is funny how my WS dropped from P to N.. I was shocked) how is the admission going to look at my application? (I know I probably don't have much chance of getting an interview.. sigh)

[vip_138]

I did bad on writing sample in my most recent MCAT (below N) but okay on other sections.. (it is funny how my WS dropped from P to N.. I was shocked) how is the admission going to look at my application? (I know I probably don't have much chance of getting an interview.. sigh)

 

 

uof t cutoffs are N but they'll flag below that score. I would think that they might consider you if you have an M. L might be too low

[degoo_]

I've said it elsewhere, but I just wanted to say it again. UofT doesn't have strict cutoffs. They really do look at the complete individual. I know numerous people who did less than cutoffs in VR (good elsewhere, strong ECs, very high GPA), and matriculated UofT without even getting an interview anywhere else, and they are doing fine now.