Are kids that are good test takers just good test takers? Are good preppers good at prepping? Or does your undergrad training come into play? Cultural bias? Other factors?
I have no reason to ask this beyond curiosity, but my interest was piqued after reading a chance me thread.
I tutor the SAT/ACT. Sure, some kids are better test takers than others. Some students will get a high score without my help. But IMO, it is pretty easy for nearly all students to increase their scores on those particular tests. I can’t imagine the same could be said for the MCAT. It is meant to be truly challenging, with good reason.
My SisIL took MCAT and other grad school tests in college (decades ago). Did well on mcat and went to med school & became dermatologist.
We don’t have any experience with the MCAT. We do have some experience with the SAT followed by the GRE, and for one daughter with the SAT followed by the GRE followed by the NAVLE (North American Veterinary Licensing Exam). Of course there are four year or longer gaps between any particular student taking each exam.
I would say that in general for us results have been quite consistent across these various exams. One issue is that hard work plus the knowledge learned through years of study can help. Another issue is that the set of students who take each round of exams gets more selective as you get to exams taken by older and more advanced students (thus your percentile might drop even if you do similarly well on each exam).
Our daughter thought that the NAVLE was by far the most difficult exam that she had ever taken, and walked away with no idea whether she had passed or not. I did not tell her this, but based on her grades in graduate classes and how hard she had worked and how well she had done on the SAT and GRE I just privately to myself guessed on how she might do on the NAVLE and was pretty much spot on (and she did pass).
I would say that some kids are indeed good test takers. However preparation can make a significant difference. I think that there is indeed some correlation, but that it is not 100% and a student who goofed off in high school can still help themselves a great deal if they apply themselves in university.
Then there is “preparation” in the sense of studying for a few weeks for the exam, versus “preparation” in the sense of working hard through four years of high school or four years of university (or for the NAVLE through four years of graduate study). From what I have heard what you learn in four years of university will matter a lot for the MCAT, but we do not have any direct experience with this.
Research shows there is a moderately positive correlation between SAT score and MCAT scores (CE 0.54), with strongest correlation between the SAT verbal section and MCAT CARS which both test reading comprehension type skills.
There is a somewhat better (but not strong) correlation between ACT scores and MCAT scores because of the ACT’s test structure which tests discrete subject matter areas.
Neither a high ACT nor a high SAT score is a strong indicator that a student will score equally high on the MCAT.
So being a “good test taker” is not enough to guarantee a strong MCAT score.
(Also the test-taking pool for the MCAT is substantially different–and much more competitive-- than the test taking pool for the ACT or SAT.)
There is some element of cultural bias in the MCAT because it relies heavily on a student’s English language reading comprehension skills. Those whose first language is not English tend to score lower (esp on CARS) than native English speakers.
Undergrad coursework only provides the base knowledge for the MCAT; it doesn’t provide the necessary test-taking skills or the synthetic and applicative thinking skills tested on the MCAT.
Test prep is important. The test itself is long (almost 8 hours with very limited breaks) and the format is unlike other tests (SAT/ACT/GRE). Most students spend 6 weeks to 6 months doing intense test prep before the exam, refreshing their subject matter knowledge, learning how to pace themselves on the exam and learning how to properly decode the questions.
The necessity for test prep is another instance of MCAT bias since students from more advantaged economic backgrounds will be able to purchase more prep materials or take dedicated study time for the exam.
There is some correlation, but it’s not as strong as the SAT-ACT correlation or the SAT-GRE correlation.
Most students do prep for the MCAT, although there is always a group that takes it cold and they can do well if they are very strong test takers + very good students + major in a subject (e.g. Biology) that makes up a large part of the MCAT.
Here is one correlation matrix:
As other posters also summarized, there is a positive correlation–as one would expect, indeed to my knowledge there is some sort of positive correlation between all the major English-language standardized admissions tests.
But as correlations go, that is not particularly impressive, and I think the main reason is there is a lot of difficult, college-level subject material one needs to master to do really well on the MCAT, whereas the SAT tests for relatively modest subject material mastery of just English and Math, and just at a HS level.
So my two cents is a person generally good at taking tests like this who has been on a standard college prep track will usually find it relatively easy to do well on the SAT with only a modest amount of prep. But that same person will likely have to put a lot more work into mastering the MCAT, with some but fewer exceptions.
Many pre med student’s that have worked in my office take it the following year from graduating undergrad and take a mental break then study for the Mcat. These are all good student’s. But that should tell you something about the test itself and the prep needed. I don’t know if this is the norm but it seems to be common.
