would you say it breathes new life into our understanding of emergency medicine?
2 Likes
Yeah, this.
We’ve got the rare issue where progressives and nazis are on the same side of things.
I have no doubt it will help URMs, but whites will also benefit bigly.
Assuming the scale hasn’t changed since I took the test, 24% over 1400 is pretty insane. That was a legit elite score when I was applying to colleges.
Oh, it has definitely changed.
According to 3 min of google, today 1400 is 95th percentile. In 1984 it was 99th percentile. I’m sure you took it after well after 1984, but I still think it would have been higher than the 95th percentile in ?late '90s.
What you’re describing is, to them, a feature instead of a bug. There are plenty who believe that valedictorian ought to be able to go to Berkeley.
I’m more wondering why anyone should give a shit about the SAT or ACT to be honest.
Medicine is taking a big step away from standardized tests beyond pass/fail, and it’s for the better.
1 Like
I think this is the concern:
But that post assumes that the sat/act is a good measure of past or future academic performance.
Is there any one factor that is a “good measure of past or future academic performance”?
Doesn’t make sense to just throw out information because isn’t perfect. None of the info on a college application (or medical school or residency) is.
I think it’s bad for both to go to pass/fail.
Even if you’ve already amassed these people, there are still degrees of stratification. I say, let them fight. You’ve got to dole out the competitive residency programs somehow. No one want to make it the only factor, but throwing it out is dumb, imo.
Mcat is still graded. Step 1 is pass fail now.
But I don’t think it should be based on step 1 (which it largely used to be) because step 1 is currently the dumbest medical exam we have to take now that step 2 cs finally died. Doling out who is an orthopedic surgeon, ophthalmologist, or dermatologist based on who can memorize the mechanism of out of date HIV meds and other minutiae.
1 Like
Texas (oddly) has the right idea with it’s top 10% automatically gets accepted to UT. They haven’t expanded UT so now they shuffle the lesser accomplished kids to the Tier 2 schools, but making the acceptance processes a lot less winner take all and give opportunity to basically anyone who can get to the top 10% whoever and wherever they are, makes for a better university system.
Having some kind of baseline + lottery to get into a school seems ideal to me
It’ll be interesting to see what the adjustment is. I’m guessing step 2 will become dominant, even though that’s fucking stupid as wel. At least that’s clinical though.
Maybe I’m just bitter that I did so much better on step 3 than step 2, and step 2 than step 1.
One of my step 1 questions involved someone putting ice water up someone’s asshole and me having to pick out the right graph of the temperature of the intraperitoneal probe, oral temp and skin temp.
Still have no idea what the answer was.
I’m pretty sure exactly no one is advocating for it to be the only factor. How much of a factor should it be? I don’t know, but I’d think that the professional educators that are making application decisions ought to be able to decide that. Much better than throwing it out, imo.
BTW, do you have any data to back up bolded. If that existed I’d be surprised.
It seems to me the unintended consequence is that it just makes Step 2 more high stakes. In the past a student would have two shots to get a good score. Now they’ve got one.
Is that unique to TX? I feel like I’ve heard of a similar system in other states as well.
Do those 10% get a full ride too or just acceptance?
This is a weird conversation. The SAT, like the GRE, is primarily a measure of income. Good riddance. Any dumbass with a tutor and time on their hands can ace either one.
3 Likes