Step 2 CK for Interviews

[Trigger]

(10-18-2017, 10:08 AM)MrGyrus Wrote: Remember that this only gives you an N=1. While programs may have cutoffs on Step 1, they certainly seem to be looking at other things as well. So just getting the reassurance of 1 instance does not give you at all an entire picture. If at all it just tells you that it is possible, but says nothing on likelihoods.
I scored >240 on Step 1 and >265 on Step 2CK, also have ok research experience and was not invited to WashU and U Wash and was harshly rejected from Utah. Most programs in the list above I did not apply to, others I did and got invited to. Granted, I do have other really good interviews, but just take info presented here with a large grain of salt as this process is clearly multifactorial and unfortunately not transparent enough to make truly accurate assumptions.

Thanks for the input. My purpose in making this thread was to determine whether schools have screens in place to reject applicants simply because no Step 2 CK score is present. In this case, an n=1 of someone who received an interview without Step 2 is good evidence that no such screen is in place.

Like you said, this process certainly is multifactorial. For what it's worth, I scored very well on Step 1 (>265) so I would like to not have to take Step 2 early if I don't have to. Knowing this information will help me schedule my aways/plan my summer and fall schedule/etc.

[Guest]

(10-18-2017, 10:08 AM)MrGyrus Wrote: Remember that this only gives you an N=1. While programs may have cutoffs on Step 1, they certainly seem to be looking at other things as well. So just getting the reassurance of 1 instance does not give you at all an entire picture. If at all it just tells you that it is possible, but says nothing on likelihoods.
I scored >240 on Step 1 and >265 on Step 2CK, also have ok research experience and was not invited to WashU and U Wash and was harshly rejected from Utah. Most programs in the list above I did not apply to, others I did and got invited to. Granted, I do have other really good interviews, but just take info presented here with a large grain of salt as this process is clearly multifactorial and unfortunately not transparent enough to make truly accurate assumptions.

define ok research experience

[MrGyrus]

(10-18-2017, 11:30 AM)Trigger Wrote:

(10-18-2017, 10:08 AM)MrGyrus Wrote: Remember that this only gives you an N=1. While programs may have cutoffs on Step 1, they certainly seem to be looking at other things as well. So just getting the reassurance of 1 instance does not give you at all an entire picture. If at all it just tells you that it is possible, but says nothing on likelihoods.
I scored >240 on Step 1 and >265 on Step 2CK, also have ok research experience and was not invited to WashU and U Wash and was harshly rejected from Utah. Most programs in the list above I did not apply to, others I did and got invited to. Granted, I do have other really good interviews, but just take info presented here with a large grain of salt as this process is clearly multifactorial and unfortunately not transparent enough to make truly accurate assumptions.

Thanks for the input. My purpose in making this thread was to determine whether schools have screens in place to reject applicants simply because no Step 2 CK score is present. In this case, an n=1 of someone who received an interview without Step 2 is good evidence that no such screen is in place.

Like you said, this process certainly is multifactorial. For what it's worth, I scored very well on Step 1 (>265) so I would like to not have to take Step 2 early if I don't have to. Knowing this information will help me schedule my aways/plan my summer and fall schedule/etc.

I’d argue that it is easier to score really well on step 2 and if you are able to carry a good score, this will look so much better. It is a risk, but I would take it. Most people don’t really study for step 2. If you give yourself a focused 4-5 weeks you’ll definitely hit the >260 mark. Chances that you just lucked out on step 1 are low. Your score at other test, while variable, would have likely been at or above 250 if subsequent examinations. But that is just my opinion

---

(10-18-2017, 12:17 PM)Guest Wrote:

(10-18-2017, 10:08 AM)MrGyrus Wrote: Remember that this only gives you an N=1. While programs may have cutoffs on Step 1, they certainly seem to be looking at other things as well. So just getting the reassurance of 1 instance does not give you at all an entire picture. If at all it just tells you that it is possible, but says nothing on likelihoods.
I scored >240 on Step 1 and >265 on Step 2CK, also have ok research experience and was not invited to WashU and U Wash and was harshly rejected from Utah. Most programs in the list above I did not apply to, others I did and got invited to. Granted, I do have other really good interviews, but just take info presented here with a large grain of salt as this process is clearly multifactorial and unfortunately not transparent enough to make truly accurate assumptions.

define ok research experience

It’ll just give you, again, a useless N=1. What would you consider ok research? Enough to get me interviews at academically focused programs. But that number is so different from applicant to applicant.

[Trigger]

(10-18-2017, 10:39 PM)MrGyrus Wrote:

(10-18-2017, 11:30 AM)Trigger Wrote:

(10-18-2017, 10:08 AM)MrGyrus Wrote: Remember that this only gives you an N=1. While programs may have cutoffs on Step 1, they certainly seem to be looking at other things as well. So just getting the reassurance of 1 instance does not give you at all an entire picture. If at all it just tells you that it is possible, but says nothing on likelihoods.
I scored >240 on Step 1 and >265 on Step 2CK, also have ok research experience and was not invited to WashU and U Wash and was harshly rejected from Utah. Most programs in the list above I did not apply to, others I did and got invited to. Granted, I do have other really good interviews, but just take info presented here with a large grain of salt as this process is clearly multifactorial and unfortunately not transparent enough to make truly accurate assumptions.

Thanks for the input. My purpose in making this thread was to determine whether schools have screens in place to reject applicants simply because no Step 2 CK score is present. In this case, an n=1 of someone who received an interview without Step 2 is good evidence that no such screen is in place.

Like you said, this process certainly is multifactorial. For what it's worth, I scored very well on Step 1 (>265) so I would like to not have to take Step 2 early if I don't have to. Knowing this information will help me schedule my aways/plan my summer and fall schedule/etc.

I’d argue that it is easier to score really well on step 2 and if you are able to carry a good score, this will look so much better. It is a risk, but I would take it. Most people don’t really study for step 2. If you give yourself a focused 4-5 weeks you’ll definitely hit the >260 mark. Chances that you just lucked out on step 1 are low. Your score at other test, while variable, would have likely been at or above 250 if subsequent examinations. But that is just my opinion

---

I agree with you on that. I don't doubt I can top my Step 1 score; however, how much will that really add to my application? I've always heard that a good Step 2 for someone with a high Step 1 gives almost no benefit but the risk of doing poorly can hurt your application. 

[Guest]

MrGyrus here: I don’t know man. Like you, I wish the process was more transparent so that we can make more informed and evidence-based decisions. PD from our home program (reputable program) has told us, though, that there is lately a bigger trend for programs that require Step 2CK for making their rank lists. While it will not, per se, determin whether an interview is offered or not if may affect how and if the program ranks you. For example, the word out there is that UCSF will not rank you unless they have your step 2 CK and CS. As it stands now, it looks like this process is driven just like our economy, by self fulfilling prophecy. When people here something that is not unreasonable, whether true or not, people seem to be making decisions that then drive the process to take it as the norm. It use to be, for example, that people only did one away rotation. However, nowadays, we do two and there are some crazy folk that do 3 or more aways, which seems to be more and more common. Eventually that may become the norm, who knows.

[Trigger]

Well if I plan to have Step 2 done by October then the score would be available in plenty of time for ranking. I'm not suggesting waiting until Jan/Feb of when I match.