Admissions to Medical School During the COVID-19 Era Without the MCAT

As medical schools cope with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, a new cohort of students will be admitted in the fall. Administrators are again challenged to make unprecedented enrollment decisions without standardized exams. This challenge provides unique opportunities to support holistic admissions but also abruptly bypasses a process that has been employed since 1928. This article highlights key factors that are being considered during current medical school admission cycles, including limited opportunities to take standardized exams, heightened student anxiety, and potential exam alternatives. These factors are framed and discussed within the context of the medical college admission test (MCAT) exam.

Admissions to Medical School during the COVID-19 Era without the MCAT

As medical schools cope with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, a new cohort of students will be admitted in the fall. Administrators are again challenged to make unprecedented enrollment decisions without standardized exams. This challenge provides unique opportunities to re-evaluate admission processes that has been employed since 1928 and support holistic admissions. This article highlights key factors that are being considered during current medical school admission cycles, including limited opportunities to take standardized exams, heightened student anxiety, and potential exam alternatives. These factors are framed and discussed within the context of the medical college admission test (MCAT) exam.

What Influences the Decision to Interview a Candidate for Medical School?

ABSTRACT Introduction Holistic review, in which medical schools seek to balance applicant attributes and experiences alongside traditional academic metrics in making admissions decisions, has been in place for over a decade. Medical school applicants and the admissions’ community are still trying to understand the impact of holistic review on the composition of those medical schools choose to interview and accept. Materials and Method The study cohort included all candidates who applied to Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USU) in 2014, 2015, and 2016 (N = 8,920). We conducted logistic regression analysis to examine the associations between the sociodemographic, academic, and military service variables of applicants applying to the School of Medicine and offers for interview. Results Medical College Admission Test scores and undergraduate grade point averages were important in predicting who would receive an interview. Having military experience, being a woman, and being self-reported African American race also predicted a higher likelihood of receiving an interview invitation. For example, controlling for all other variables in the model, if an applicant had previous military experience, the odds of being invited for interview was about 4 times that of an applicant who had no previous military experience. Leave this for the text and discussion. The resulting pool of interviewed and accepted students more increasingly represented the Military Health Service population served. Conclusions The use of holistic review generated a class with a composition different from that which would be predicted by Medical College Admission Test and grade point average alone. Further, holistic review produced an interview pool and class more representative of the wider Military Health Service beneficiary population. In the case of USU, holistic review allowed the school to better meet its mission to create a representative class able to “care for those in harm’s way.”

Once in the Door, Grit May Matter More: An Evaluation of Grit in Medical Students

ABSTRACT Introduction Health professions educators seek understanding of the process of learner performance and achievement. Grit, defined as passion and perseverance for long-term goals, has been implicated in this process. Research suggests that effort counts twice in achievement: skill times effort equals skill and, subsequently, skill times effort equals achievement. Research also suggests that an individual’s interest influences job performance and satisfaction. Grit, composed of Perseverance of Effort and Consistency of Interest, has been shown to positively correlate with performance and achievement in various disciplines. Limited research reveals Grit negatively correlates with resident attrition and physician burnout. This study evaluates relationships between Grit and medical student performance measures. We gather validity evidence for Grit scale use among medical students and, subsequently, use this data to evaluate for differences in Grit score by gender and assess whether there is a relationship between Grit and standardized exam scores. We hypothesize that Grit will not vary with gender and that it will be positively associated with standardized examination scores. Methods Enrolled students receive the 12-item Grit survey. An exploratory factor analysis evaluates validity evidence of Grit. Descriptive statistical analysis, Pearson correlation, and moderation analysis evaluate if Grit score differs by gender and if there are relationships with standardized exams. Results The survey response rate is 59% (412/698) and exploratory factor analysis replicates the two-factor structure of Grit found in other fields—Perseverance of Effort and Consistency of Interest. Average Grit scores do not significantly differ by gender. Grit weakly correlates with United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 (r = 0.10, = 0.36) and United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (r = 0.12, P=0.29). Grit weakly and negatively correlates with Medical College Admission Test score (r = − 0.18, P<0.05). Grit is not a significant moderator of the relationship between Medical College Admission score and Step exams scores. Conclusion Exploratory factor analysis results provide preliminary validity evidence for Grit scale use in medical students. Grit does not significantly moderate the Medical College Admission Test-Step score relationship. Grit correlates negatively with Medical College Admission Test scores. Though the correlations in this study were not significant, the results showed that Grit may tend to positively correlate with Step 1 and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge examinations. Given that these three exams are taken at different levels of training, the stepwise progression towards positive correlation may suggest that the theory “effort counts twice” applies to medical training.