DRchromatin wrote:
I don't know why there are people on here assuming how the test is scored. I think the best source for clearing up misconceptions on how the exam is scored is the Kaplan introduction by Dr. Daugherty. I don't know where people get the numbers from, such as 75% gets you a 95 and above and 60-65% will get you a pass or where they get the idea from that you are tested against other test takers. This is the reason why many IMGs have ideas such as........If you take the exam with US students, it's harder..............if you take the exam from Jan.-Mar., it's easier..........If you take it in the US, it's easier.

new_n_lost wrote:

Well what you have said its another rumor, it may be a bit hard believe but out of the IMGs scoring above 95% and above 50%-75% are out side US. So there is not statistical proof to it. Unless you have accumulated some data. This is another Misconception that US students have it easy. WEll yeah they do cos they ARE TAUGHT TO GIVE USMLE FOR 2YRS. Their every exm is based on USMLE type of questions. So by the end of 2 yrs they are ready enuf to score above 95%. Now if anyone of us was taught for 2 yrs on how to attempt the paper then we will score good.

So if we all started believeing in such misconceptions no matter how good we are will be affected by it.

DRchromatin wrote:
New_n_lost, my dear respected friend and fellow forum member........I think you completely misunderstood what I was saying. What I was trying to say was that due to these percentages that people make up without any statistical proof, we end up with IMGs who have misconceptions such as "If you take the exam with US students, it's easier", "If you take it between Jan.-March, it's easier", and "If you take it in the US, it's easier". I hope you now understand the message I was trying to get across. Maybe you misunderstood me because of the way I wrote the reply. Basically, what I want to say is that IMGs already have a tough time as it is and then we get people who don't go to the sources to get their information and instead rely on rumors and eventually spread them even further doing more harm than good.

genbot wrote:
deja vu,
i made a calculation once using the nrmpcharting outcomes tables and found that approx. 1.5% AMGs score more than 260 on step1 and about 4.5% on step2. The corresponding figure for IMGs was 0.5% and 1.5% respectively.
So obviously there is a clear discrepancy as far as the scores are concerned. But one thing to note, if u also look at 2005 match outcomes, is that the number of IMGs getting very high scores has increased dramatically , while there has been only a marginal increase in AMGs getting very high scores. So clearly the IMGs are catching up with AMGs. The reason of course demands another topic.

Another calculation i made using the nrmp charts was the thing u talked bout...how many people score more than 260 on both steps? Assuming that only people who have atleast 230 on one step are capable of getting a score higher than 260 on another step it turns out that u will have approx 25 AMGs with a score of 260 on both steps applying for match each year, while the corresponding figure for IMGs would be around 8. That is about 0.2% AMGs and 0.08% IMGs each year. Incredible numbers those!

genbot wrote:
i made a calculation once using the nrmpcharting outcomes tables and found that approx. 1.5% AMGs score more than 260 on step1 and about 4.5% on step2. The corresponding figure for IMGs was 0.5% and 1.5% respectively.

genbot wrote:
Assuming that only people who have atleast 230 on one step are capable of getting a score higher than 260 on another step it turns out that u will have approx 25 AMGs with a score of 260 on both steps applying for match each year, while the corresponding figure for IMGs would be around 8.