Why the GRE?

[projekt]

I'm skeptical of the GRE. I think it shows something about how much college-level English someone has read and how quickly they can do math, but aside from that I don't see how it can predict things like the ability to handle a vet school courseload. Other writers back me up on this (read Standardized Minds by Peter Sacks, for example.)

I personally have a GRE above 1500. I feel like I'm pretty smart. But I know people who have trouble with arithmetic but who could still be good diagnosticians. I know others who have lousy English vocabularies but can learn every anatomical term just fine.

Cornell, for example, places 25% of your admission on the GRE!

Have the schools (admissions people, please jump in) done the research about the GRE to make sure that it isn't causing them to reject good students?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

I have more of a problem with the verbal section than the math. The math is pretty much a universal language. Diagnostics and math are actually quite related - it is problem solving, taking all parts of the equation into account, and coming up with a solid answer.

But verbal...(and no offense to the foreign applicants here, this is just a subsection which I have seen)- I have seen foreign applicants with a terrible grasp of English study the "how to take the GRE " books and basically memorize how to do the verbal section, and score wonderfully. They memorize the vocab, they memorize how to do the specific sentence completion questions, etc. But they can't write a paper to save their lives, or teach a class, etc. I don't think the verbal section can definitely say anything about a person, with the exception of the reading comphrehension area.

 

[Myprecious]

Whereas your GPA could vary depending on your school, major, and courses you took, GRE is one standardized test for all applicant. Isn't it at least fair for all applicant?

It also gives a chance to prove their academic ability if your GPA is below average.

Plus, ad com wants to see what is your test skill like and how much effort you're putting into it.

And if foreign students can learn the tactics and score good then students here can score even better if making endeavor.

 

[david594]

Wouldn't the bigger question be why arn't we being required to take the MCAT instead of the GRE's?

We are required to take all the coursework necessary for the MCAT's, so it would seem that the MCAT would be a pretty fair comparison of applicants.

 

[Ailurophile]

Darn Toot'n; I bet I would rock the MCAT's.

 

[banditalfi]

Wouldn't the bigger question be why arn't we being required to take the MCAT instead of the GRE's?

We are required to take all the coursework necessary for the MCAT's, so it would seem that the MCAT would be a pretty fair comparison of applicants.

Yucky. I am so glad we don't have to talk the MCAT. That would have been such a gigantic pain in my butt. I'm much happier reviewing math and making flashcards, even if it's not as relevant as the MCAT could be. And, honestly, I think the only reason the MCAT is still around is because it's a rite of passage and the old MDs are just cranky they needed to take it, so they don't want to let the applicants get in without it.

 

[VAgirl]

Yucky. I am so glad we don't have to talk the MCAT. That would have been such a gigantic pain in my butt. I'm much happier reviewing math and making flashcards, even if it's not as relevant as the MCAT could be. And, honestly, I think the only reason the MCAT is still around is because it's a rite of passage and the old MDs are just cranky they needed to take it, so they don't want to let the applicants get in without it.

Oh my god I would have hated taking the MCAT. Not to mention I think a lot of older applicants (not old, mind you, but even a few years out of school) would not apply if that was required. We've already taken the course work and shown how we can do on it. Why have another test of that capability?

Not that I think the GRE is great shakes, but can you imagine trying to get in an MCAT prep course and do well on the MCATs along with chasing down all the random pre-reqs for all the different schools you wanted to apply to? I may be wrong, but I think that at least most med schools have a consistent set of pre-reqs. Maybe if we at least had that... but then the MCAT would still stink.

 

[ri23]

I definitely agree with the above two posters. The GRE is something that you can pretty easily prepare for and do well in. The MCAT, on the other hand, requires a great deal of studying, and it is almost necessary to take a course to do well in it. I'm extremely glad we only had to take the GRE.

 

[bakaduin]

The GRE is something that you can pretty easily prepare for and do well in.

I disagree with this statement. You can certainly prepare for the GRE easier than the MCAT but even if you put an inordinate amount of time into studying your only going to get so far. Everyone has a range of what they are capable of on the GRE and if you dont study you will end up on the low range if you do you will end up on the high range.

I also think, like the SAT for undergraduate, its a good way to standardize all the applicants going to different schools with different difficulties. I know studies have shown there is a slight bias to white males but overall I think its pretty indicative of a persons relative ability. Its certainly not perfect, and maybe the MCAT would be something better, but it is a lot better than no test at all.

 

[projekt]

Whereas your GPA could vary depending on your school, major, and courses you took, GRE is one standardized test for all applicant. Isn't it at least fair for all applicant?

I suppose I don't think it's fair. I believe the GRE has a tenuous correlation to grades, and probably no correlation to ability to perform as a veterinarian. Of course, if low-GRE people never get into vet school, it's hard to say how they would ever perform as vets.

Suppose vet school required a physical test: mile run, chin-ups, flexibility, sit-ups. This is 25% of your application. Then, you get told that this test, not just your ability to complete previous coursework, is being used to determine your ability to do the curriculum.

This is the sort of situation that I'm getting at with the GRE. I have a very high score. I don't think that shows that I'm much better than other candidates. I think it's just a hurdle, and it's used to weaken otherwise strong candidates so they don't have to be considered.

 

[VAgirl]

I think it's just a hurdle, and it's used to weaken otherwise strong candidates so they don't have to be considered.

I doubt that very much. That statement is basically implying malicious intent on the part of adcoms. Even more, that makes it sound like they don't actually want the best candidates. Even if that's how the process makes it seems sometimes, I do not believe that at all.

 

[nyanko]

I suppose I don't think it's fair. I believe the GRE has a tenuous correlation to grades, and probably no correlation to ability to perform as a veterinarian. Of course, if low-GRE people never get into vet school, it's hard to say how they would ever perform as vets.

As previously mentioned, the GRE just serves to reduce variables between applicants. You can't say that a 3.5 in prerequisite courses mostly taken at community colleges is the same as a 3.5 in prerequisite courses taken at a four year university. Even within the same university, someone might have had a really tough ochem professor who worked on a strict bell curve and someone else might've had a really lenient one who made up a more generous curve. The schools still put a lot of emphasis on the GPA, though, I just think the point is to have something that is standard for all applicants.

When there are a limited number of places available in the class, you are going to reject many people who have the capacity to do great in the coursework and be superb veterinarians. This just serves as one more way to compare the applicants. Complaining about it is no different than complaining about any other facet of the admissions process really.

Let me put it another way, what would you propose doing in lieu of the GRE? Another standardized test? Because something really does have to be standard in the process...

 

[CalpardNY]

As someone who took both the MCAT - the 8 hour paper one mind you (what can I say...I'm a masochist who was considering human medicine at one point) and the GRE, I can tell you they are two very different tests.

I am very critical of any standardized test, be it SAT/GRE type exam or the big five personality test (OCEAN). I took a class my freshman year of college called "The Science and Culture of Testing." It was all about breaking down various types of "tests" and examining their accuracy, validity, reliability, etc. (It was great right after taking the SAT and a great way to start college!). Anyway, now that i've bored you with some pscyhobabble for a bit i do have a point.

I see the GRE, just like the SAT, as testing your ability to take a test. And while there is some level of skill and knowledge involved, if you are a good test taker, or study how to take the test you can do better on it. On the other hand, the MCAT, while still testing your ability to take a test (and your testing endurance - let me tell you!) is more of a test of knowledge that you have acquired. I feel that is why medical schools hang on to it and i question why vet schools don't use it. So my point is that because the GRE is testing your ability to take a test, and the MCAT your ability to use your knowledge on a test, while neither is a good correlate for being a good vet, the MCAT is probably a better evaluator of how you would do in vet school.

That all being said, the GRE is a much much easier test to study for and succeed (i took a class for the MCAT and just did ok and studied on my own for the GRE and did well). I didnt even use my MCAT scores and was so thankful that the GRE was so much easier than the MCAT.

Ok so thats my ramble about tests and how i think none of them are good predictors of a good vet (though they do put a quantitative value to standardize applicants - regardless of how fair and accurate that may be). I hope i made sense somewhere in there and didn't bore you all too much!

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

I see the GRE, just like the SAT, as testing your ability to take a test. And while there is some level of skill and knowledge involved, if you are a good test taker, or study how to take the test you can do better on it. On the other hand, the MCAT, while still testing your ability to take a test (and your testing endurance - let me tell you!) is more of a test of knowledge that you have acquired. I feel that is why medical schools hang on to it and i question why vet schools don't use it.

I agree. While it would be a huge pain in the butt, an MCAT would be a much better indicator of future academic success in vet school than the GRE, in my opinion. MCAT = a standardized test that actually tests your "academic dedication" (via acquiring knowledge and studying - remember that ~70% of your time vet school is purely academic/score-based/grade-based!) of the field...not your ability to memorize vocabulary.

What ever happened to the VCAT?

 

[bakaduin]

I see the GRE, just like the SAT, as testing your ability to take a test. And while there is some level of skill and knowledge involved, if you are a good test taker, or study how to take the test you can do better on it. On the other hand, the MCAT, while still testing your ability to take a test (and your testing endurance - let me tell you!) is more of a test of knowledge that you have acquired. I feel that is why medical schools hang on to it and i question why vet schools don't use it.

I agree. While it would be a huge pain in the butt, an MCAT would be a much better indicator of future academic success in vet school than the GRE, in my opinion. MCAT = a standardized test that actually tests your "academic dedication" (via acquiring knowledge and studying - remember that ~70% of your time vet school is purely academic/score-based/grade-based!) of the field...not your ability to memorize vocabulary.

What ever happened to the VCAT?

Who knows if this is true but I heard the VCAT wasnt making enough profit because so few people apply to vet school, and therefore take the the exam, as compared to say med school.

I still think the GRE is a good "relative" indicator of your ability, though the MCAT may be more so. If you take it the first time and get a 1000 then go to say a Kaplan class study your butt off on all the vocab you maybe will jump 100 points but thats about it. Sure a few outliers may jump more but I dont think many people increase by more than 100. Its not like you can study so well that you can jump to a 1500. Of course your going to have some people who are by their own admission "bad test takers" and maybe they would have been great vets in the future but dont get in because of a poor GRE score. Thats an unfortunate casualty of the application process but the schools are looking for the people who they feel are most likely to be able to complete the course load and enter the field.

I have to add that while some of you dont think any test should be used at all, and others feel the MCAT should be used instead, the GRE seems to be working pretty well. The VCAT was discontinued in 2003 and yet through the GRE, GPA, and other variables vet schools are still graduating a very large number of students in each class. So it may be a better indicator of success than some think.

 

[thesonofdarwin]

I definitely agree with the above two posters. The GRE is something that you can pretty easily prepare for and do well in. The MCAT, on the other hand, requires a great deal of studying, and it is almost necessary to take a course to do well in it. I'm extremely glad we only had to take the GRE.

The MCAT is a better test for determining if you prepared for the field, ASSUMING you were a biology/chemistry/physics major, and I think that's the biggie right there. Not everyone who enters into vet school was.

I took the MCAT and didn't study at all - long story, but was to help my SO not feel stressed during the test - and I did much, MUCH better on the MCAT, which I only prepared for with whatever college courses I've taken compared to the GRE which I studied my *** off for.

So, what can we tell looking at the two. I happen to know a great deal about science and using it to explain different situations, but I'm not so great at memorizing vocab that 98% of the population has never seen and will never use. The math on the GRE didn't apply to anything I had to use in calc or physics classes, though I was able to use that knowledge to do very well on that section. The writing section was nice, though.

IMO, the GRE tests memorization and the MCAT tests knowledge and utilization of what you've learned over the years to solve completely unique situations. You CANNOT memorize all that you need to do well on the MCAT - you can for the GRE.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

The MCAT is a better test for determining if you prepared for the field, ASSUMING you were a biology/chemistry/physics major, and I think that's the biggie right there. Not everyone who enters into vet school was.

That may be true, but (and I do not say this to be snobby or anything like that)

1) It is the responsibility of people who didn't major is science/medical areas to be up to speed (and I very much respect those who do the work to get there!!) and have a good amount of scientific knowledge (because you'll need it or else vet school is much more difficult).

2) The disadvantage is not very great, considering applicants will have taken the required science/chem/etc pre-reqs which will give you a good amount of background necessary to do well, or at least to study effectively

 

[CalpardNY]

I still think the GRE is a good "relative" indicator of your ability, though the MCAT may be more so. If you take it the first time and get a 1000 then go to say a Kaplan class study your butt off on all the vocab you maybe will jump 100 points but thats about it. Sure a few outliers may jump more but I dont think many people increase by more than 100. Its not like you can study so well that you can jump to a 1500. Of course your going to have some people who are by their own admission "bad test takers" and maybe they would have been great vets in the future but dont get in because of a poor GRE score. Thats an unfortunate casualty of the application process but the schools are looking for the people who they feel are most likely to be able to complete the course load and enter the field.

IMO thats exactly what shows the whole GRE=how well do you take a test and MCAT=what have you learned? So GRE measures a combination of an innate skill, and what you have learned through your countless school years on testing, while the MCAT tests what knowledge you gained (albeit with some requirement that you can take a test). You can't really change your GRE score that much unless you memorize every vocab word possible or something. You usually get within a range of how you did. While the MCAT, though its tough to just study and raise your score, it can be done.

As critical as we are, and its easy to be right now, they do have to use something. I guess its better then them throwing the applications down the stairs and picking the ones that land face-up...though sometimes it really feels like thats what they do!

 

[projekt]

That statement is basically implying malicious intent on the part of adcoms. Even more, that makes it sound like they don't actually want the best candidates.

Here's my take on it, and I neither imply malicious intent nor a desire for substandard candidates:

The test is sold to the postgraduate system as a way to screen applicants to find the best candidates. I believe that the research has shown that this claim is bad.

Nearly every American school uses the GRE. If everyone uses it, it can't be bad, right? It's like they used to say, "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."

I think admissions committees believe they are getting better students when they accept ones with higher GREs. But I think they have not done the research to find out if that is the case. If the critics of the test are right, then the GRE is handicapping some good students and benefiting some bad ones. Is it, on average, making a better class makeup? I don't know, and so I want to know if adcoms have studied it.

How is the GRE correlated to being a good vet student? There is only one study in PubMed (1), and it is looking at failure rather than success. (It sees what is related to the bottom 10%ile.) Bad grades, bad GRE, unselective undergraduate schools and older age are all correlated with failure. I don't have access to the full article, so I can't comment on how correlated, or the methodology used.

I have read a meta-study (2) that puports to show generalized predictive validity for the GRE, for all kinds of graduate school. I don't quite buy the methodology, and the authors themselves discuss that the previous studies of the GRE have found both positive and negative predictive validities. Since validity is a correlation coefficient, that means some studies "show" that higher GREs mean worse performance in (some kinds of) school.

Food for thought!
--

1. Rush BR, Sanderson MW, Elmore RG. "Pre-matriculation indicators of academic difficulty during veterinary school. J Vet Med Educ. 2005 Winter;32(4):517-22. PMID: 16421838

2. Kuncel NR, Ones DS, Hezlett SA. "A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the graduate record examinations: implications for graduate student selection and performance." Psychol Bull. 2001 Jan;127(1):162-81. PMID: 11271753

 

[thesonofdarwin]

2) The disadvantage is not very great, considering applicants will have taken the required science/chem/etc pre-reqs which will give you a good amount of background necessary to do well, or at least to study effectively

I'm agreeing with you that the MCAT should be the test Vet applicants need to take, but there would be heavy disadvantage for anyone taking the test who has taken just the pre-reqs rather than focused solely on Biology/Science for their 4 years. The test asks so many questions specific to upper tier science courses that aren't pre-reqs for vet school.

CalpardNY, many professors DO grade by randomly assigning grades. They may not throw the papers down (or up as my Philosophy teacher preferred) the stairs, but it's essentially the same. Group papers based on quality, A's, B's, C's and randomly assign a score within.

 

[CalpardNY]

CalpardNY, many professors DO grade by randomly assigning grades. They may not throw the papers down (or up as my Philosophy teacher preferred) the stairs, but it's essentially the same. Group papers based on quality, A's, B's, C's and randomly assign a score within.

I was referring more to how random the acceptance process seems that the stairs must be how they choose among the applicants. However, you make a good point that i hadn't thought about. I mean i have had a professor give me a B++ grade on something because i "could always have written more" and professors grade down because they "know you can do better" (at least at my small undergraduate college). But we think of grading as quantitative and indicative of work and potential and yet it can be just as random.

So really is there just no good way to compare applicants fairly and we should stop being so hard on the adcoms? haha!

 

[thesonofdarwin]

I was referring more to how random the acceptance process seems that the stairs must be how they choose among the applicants.

[...]

So really is there just no good way to compare applicants fairly and we should stop being so hard on the adcoms? haha!

Now where's that slap forehead emoticon... LOL, I totally misread what you wrote. I'm sure they have decided over the years what works best - what selection process produces the best vets at the end of it all. That's all that really matters.

 

[ri23]

Yes, the VCAT was discontinued as a result of lack of profit.

If the MCAT was required for vet schools, many would have to change their pre-requisites.

I understand that people get frustrated with standardized tests, but a bad test taker will do poorly on both tests. I think there is a need to have a standardized. For all of those that don't feel the GRE is a good indicator of success, and it may not be, what about the tests to get into undergrad? The SAT is pretty much the exact same as the GRE. Also, vet schools don't require amazing scores for admissions, and it is good to see that a student will be able to take a test well.

The GRE is definitely a great way for students who did poorly in undergrad to show that they have improved.

 

[dyachei]

Yes, the VCAT was discontinued as a result of lack of profit.

If the MCAT was required for vet schools, many would have to change their pre-requisites.

I understand that people get frustrated with standardized tests, but a bad test taker will do poorly on both tests. I think there is a need to have a standardized. For all of those that don't feel the GRE is a good indicator of success, and it may not be, what about the tests to get into undergrad? The SAT is pretty much the exact same as the GRE. Also, vet schools don't require amazing scores for admissions, and it is good to see that a student will be able to take a test well.

The GRE is definitely a great way for students who did poorly in undergrad to show that they have improved.

Agreed. Also, its a good thing to test test-taking skills before accepting students. Without good test-taking skills it will be a lot harder for that student to succeed in vet school (like this week and a half where we've had three substantial tests).

 

[projekt]

The SAT is pretty much the exact same as the GRE.

I agree. On the other hand, there are numerous undergraduate schools, some of high caliber, that do not require the SAT or the ACT. Bard college, Bowdoin college, UTexas, ...

The GRE is definitely a great way for students who did poorly in undergrad to show that they have improved.

Really? Perhaps I don't understand what you meant.

 

[projekt]

Without good test-taking skills it will be a lot harder for that student to succeed in vet school (like this week and a half where we've had three substantial tests).

That's probably true. Some accomodation would have to be made if you recruited people who had bad test-taking skills (or talent). There are some undergraduate schools that have no exams and no grades and turn out well educated people.

Of course, when you leave vet school, you'll probably be taking the NAVLE, so test-taking is required somewhere along the way.

 

[bakaduin]

Here's my take on it, and I neither imply malicious intent nor a desire for substandard candidates:

The test is sold to the postgraduate system as a way to screen applicants to find the best candidates. I believe that the research has shown that this claim is bad.

Nearly every American school uses the GRE. If everyone uses it, it can't be bad, right? It's like they used to say, "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."

I think admissions committees believe they are getting better students when they accept ones with higher GREs. But I think they have not done the research to find out if that is the case. If the critics of the test are right, then the GRE is handicapping some good students and benefiting some bad ones. Is it, on average, making a better class makeup? I don't know, and so I want to know if adcoms have studied it.

How is the GRE correlated to being a good vet student? There is only one study in PubMed (1), and it is looking at failure rather than success. (It sees what is related to the bottom 10%ile.) Bad grades, bad GRE, unselective undergraduate schools and older age are all correlated with failure. I don't have access to the full article, so I can't comment on how correlated, or the methodology used.

I have read a meta-study (2) that puports to show generalized predictive validity for the GRE, for all kinds of graduate school. I don't quite buy the methodology, and the authors themselves discuss that the previous studies of the GRE have found both positive and negative predictive validities. Since validity is a correlation coefficient, that means some studies "show" that higher GREs mean worse performance in (some kinds of) school.

Food for thought!
--

1. Rush BR, Sanderson MW, Elmore RG. "Pre-matriculation indicators of academic difficulty during veterinary school. J Vet Med Educ. 2005 Winter;32(4):517-22. PMID: 16421838

2. Kuncel NR, Ones DS, Hezlett SA. "A comprehensive meta-analysis of the predictive validity of the graduate record examinations: implications for graduate student selection and performance." Psychol Bull. 2001 Jan;127(1):162-81. PMID: 11271753

You keep arguing that the GRE MAY not be a good indicator of student success. The Veterinary Medical School Admissions Requirement Handbook states that from the years 2004-2007 (which is after the VCAT was discontinued) 43 students in all US and Canadian schools left Vet school because of grades. Thats 32 total schools of Veterinary Medicine and a total of 10,000+ applicants. Thats less than half a percent of the accepted students having to leave because they couldnt handle the rigors of vet school academics. The purpose of Vet school adcoms is to not only accept people who they feel would make good veterinarians but also those who they think will actually graduate. I would venture to say by these numbers they are doing a pretty good job of predicting that and the GRE is part of it. If the GRE is such a poor indicator of student performance I ask you how can these numbers be explained?

 

[ri23]

I agree. On the other hand, there are numerous undergraduate schools, some of high caliber, that do not require the SAT or the ACT. Bard college, Bowdoin college, UTexas, ...



Really? Perhaps I don't understand what you meant.

What I meant was that there are a lot of applicants that did not do well in the beginning of their undergrad, or their undergrad work was a long time ago and they don't feel it is reflective of their current abilities. You can't really significantly change your GPA, but by doing some studying you can show your abilities on the GRE. The math on the GRE is basic algebra, so with a little review people should be able to complete that section with a good score (hence why a 750 in that is a low percentile score, while a 750 in verbal is a very high percentile score). As for the verbal, while yes, it may be a pain to review vocab, it really just takes some memorization and studying, and the reading comprehension is fairly easy. The reading comprehension section is pretty important as that is a very necessary skill in pretty much whatever profession you plan on pursuing.

So basically, I was just saying that the GRE allows you to express your current leve of committment and dedication, whereas the GPA doesn't always allow that.

 

[thesonofdarwin]

If the GRE is such a poor indicator of student performance I ask you how can these numbers be explained?

Do you have comparison numbers for other higher education programs. Medical and vet schools aren't something you just decide to do because you think it will be fun, like most undergrad students. Not directed at you, but it'd be nice to see ratios of students accepted to students dropping out for medical schools and graduate institutions. That said, if the GRE is a good indicator of performance, it isn't the only one and not necessarily the best.

 

[LVT2DVM]

I think it's just a hurdle, and it's used to weaken otherwise strong candidates so they don't have to be considered.

I doubt that very much. That statement is basically implying malicious intent on the part of adcoms. Even more, that makes it sound like they don't actually want the best candidates. Even if that's how the process makes it seems sometimes, I do not believe that at all.

Not to put words in Projekt's mouth, as he/she has already clarified what he meant, but I rather took this statement to mean for some applicants an inability to obtain a good GRE score actually weakens their otherwise strong record (hence a hurdle) but doesnt necessarily mean they wouldnt succeed in the graduate program of choice. An opinion with which I agree. Others, of course, would conclude that a low GRE score despite excellent grades would in effect = an inept applicant regardless, but I think schools understand this is not the case which is why they look at both. Otherwise we'd all just be submitting GRE scores and nothing else.

[Digressing]While that wouldnt serve well for me.. WOW! wouldnt that make things alot easier than typing 4-6 years worth of classes on the VMCAS application. I sure wish they'd figure out a way to transfer that info from year to year for us repeaters.

 

[bakaduin]

Do you have comparison numbers for other higher education programs. Medical and vet schools aren't something you just decide to do because you think it will be fun, like most undergrad students. Not directed at you, but it'd be nice to see ratios of students accepted to students dropping out for medical schools and graduate institutions. That said, if the GRE is a good indicator of performance, it isn't the only one and not necessarily the best.

It certainly isnt the only one, and the MCAT is a viable option, but I think youd agree that it would be tough to improve on under .5% of students dropping for academic reasons.

 

[chris03333]

.

Of course, when you leave vet school, you'll probably be taking the NAVLE, so test-taking is required somewhere along the way.

NAVLE test you veterinary diagnostic skills and knowledge. There is no way to learn "tricks" to help you answer those questions correctly. Either you know the answer or not. GRE and SAT are both tests that you can learn to do well in without actually knowing the correct answers.

Just because you score high on GRE, doesn't mean NAVLE will easy.

Oh and FYI that test is painful, I would have went crazy if I had to take it more than once

 

[projekt]

Just because you score high on GRE, doesn't mean NAVLE will easy.

Right, I'm just saying that if you have test anxiety to the point where any exam means failure, you won't get past the NAVLE.

 

[Habibti]

Right, I'm just saying that if you have test anxiety to the point where any exam means failure, you won't get past the NAVLE.

Ditto this thought.

Test taking skills, whether you like it or not, are required to be in veterinary school. These skills are required throughout vet school and they are required for the NAVLE and (most) board certification, if you are interested in that.

No standardized test is perfect, but a standardized test is necessary to make up for the fact that we all come from different schools of different calibers. My college education was not the same as those who went to Insert name here small private college or big name ivy league school. My biochem class may have been super easy and your's may have been astronomically hard, but our grades are still looked at, more or less, the same. What more does the MCAT prove? That you can memorize how to do physics problems and O chem? That you know basic genetics better than everyone else? That, just like memorizing vocab, doesn't really show that you'll be a better vet. It just requires more work to do well and it's just another imperfect standardized test.

 

[chris03333]

Right, I'm just saying that if you have test anxiety to the point where any exam means failure, you won't get past the NAVLE.

If you have test anxiety to the point where any exam means failure, you won't make it through vet school to qualify for NAVLE

 

[banditalfi]

Ditto this thought.

Test taking skills, whether you like it or not, are required to be in veterinary school. These skills are required throughout vet school and they are required for the NAVLE and (most) board certification, if you are interested in that.

No standardized test is perfect, but a standardized test is necessary to make up for the fact that we all come from different schools of different calibers. My college education was not the same as those who went to Insert name here small private college or big name ivy league school. My biochem class may have been super easy and your's may have been astronomically hard, but our grades are still looked at, more or less, the same. What more does the MCAT prove? That you can memorize how to do physics problems and O chem? That you know basic genetics better than everyone else? That, just like memorizing vocab, doesn't really show that you'll be a better vet. It just requires more work to do well and it's just another imperfect standardized test.

My thoughts exactly. If you're a bad test taker you're going to do horribly on the GRE and not much better on the MCAT. The other thing about the MCAT is that it tests things you've learned over three years of school - when on earth are you going to have to know all of that information in a setting that you can't look something up? It just seems ridiculous.