From: roger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig)
Newsgroups: rec.org.mensa
Subject: Re: MCAT scores?
Date: 13 Apr 92 19:24:54 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@ernie.Princeton.EDU

In article <1992Apr13.113718.1568@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:
>In article <1992Apr12.020045.25882@Princeton.EDU>, 
>roger@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Roger Lustig) writes:
>> In article <1992Apr10.163059.1553@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:
>>>> In article <1992Apr8.113356.1535@brandonu.ca> mcbeanb@brandonu.ca writes:

>>>>>Is anyone out there able to tell me how an MCAT score can be translated
>>>>>to "overall 95%" or overall any%?

>>>Just an off-shoot of this:  Why is a test such as the MCAT considered
>>>to be applicable to Mensa?  Any idiot savante (or anyone who could read
>>>even) could study their butts off for the MCAT and do quite well.

>> Go look up "idiot savant." Such people are incapable of studying any
>> part of ther anatomy off, on, or around.

>Ok, suppose we drop the technical term "idiot savant" and take into account
>the people who are capable of having vast knowledge of human anatomy
>(more than most who take extensive coursework) from reading a few choice
>books, yet they have quite average knowledge/intelligence otherwise.

Still won't get you far on the MCAT.  The MCAT doesn't depend on
reciting information, but on problem-solving.

>> Anyone who hasn't taken a lot of those subjects, and worked hard at
>> them, and who can make do with a little specific study for the test and
>> still do "quite well" is probably pretty intelligent.

>Probably, but not necesarily.  Ever studied really hard for a test,
>regurgitated the appropriate information, and promptly forgotten it?

Yes.  What does this have to do with your point?  

Especially since one can't regurgitate on the MCAT and get a good score,
even if the regurgitation is of the figurative variety...

>>>Reading Comprehension part is a snap if you read efficiently, and the

>> Something HIGHLY ocrrelated with intelligence as it is usually measured,
>> I might add...

>Correlation correlshmation  :)

Yeeees????

>>>written portion is so subjective that I can't see it being integrated
>>>very easily into an overall score anyway.  Mensa is the organization for
>>>high IQ, but MCAT has nothing to do with IQ.

>> You say that as though you'd ever studied the matter and determined a
>> lack of correlation.  I'd be very surprised if that were actually the
>> case, and I bet ACT has determined otherwise.

>I wouldn't know, I was just taking an educted guess.

Well, I've actually worked for a major testing firm and studied the
matter a bit.  Take it from me, there's a correlation between MCAT and
IQ.

>>>  It's more a test of education and the ability to utilize that education.

>> "Ability to utilize education" -- sounds like a pretty good definition
>> of intelligence from here...yeah.

>Sounds good, but the definition of intelligence (according to a couple
>Mensans here (one of them is quite qaulified to say so)) is "what is
>measured by IQ tests".  Whatever.

Snore.  Why are the tests constructed the way they are?

>>>> Of course, anyone who's taken the MCAT has probably also taken the SAT
>>>> or ACT (though I guess that's not on the list) and perhaps also the GRE.

>>>Well, I only took the MCAT (no more tests for me, thanks :) ).

>> Ah, didn't get in, eh?  No board certification, no licensing?  8-)

>Smiley or not, I still don't like this message.  I did fine and dandy on
>my MCAT, but that doesn't mean I'm going to be accepted by a med school.
>I won't know until June, and I'm still working on courses that will decide
>whether I'm "worthy" or not.

OK, sorry.  But trust me: there's plenty of tests still to go if you get
in.  You have two years of book larnin' before they hit.

Roger