Do GREs correlate with PA school success?

[gbrothers98]

This has been an interesting long running discussion.

Much in the way of anecdotal evidence.

 

I interview applicants at a PA program. I always like to see what their Ochem grade is. Ochem is a ballbuster at most schools and is an insight into how an applicant can sythesize and apply knowledge, further up Blooms taxonomy pyramid.

 

But there are 2 distinct separate questions asked here.

First, does a test taken prior to PA school predict success in PA school?

Second, what predicts competent clinical performance? A test? Experience? Age?

 

After 17 years as a PA, I have met some very intelligent people. They have done well on testing to get where they are. Likely they did well on the tests because they studied and worked hard. So the early test performance could be construed as a measure of validity concerning success. This can likely be translated to PA school. A successful student has to work hard and study.

 

But define success? Honor grad or meeting program standard? Just pass PANCE or score >90%?

 

These same people are not only intelligent but also clinically competent. I have no knowledge or insight into when and where this occurred though. Was it during a clinical year? During residency? After residency? During a first job? A second? Was the performance uneven until a mentor provided guidance? Was there a period of remediation forced upon them? Did they fail, learn from that and leverage the prior failure into success? 

 

The recent article quoted outlined the many measures to be used by a program including interviews, transcript review and standardized testing. The mix that produces an acceptance and eventual successful grad is varied, yet each program was able to produce a cohort of graduates that were able to exceed the standard measured, PANCE passage. Some programs, while seemingly on a level playing field, produced grads that performed better on ONE test than other program grads. Was this due to the individual program and it's resources? Due to students expending more effort? Or did the same group of individuals just have a better day than the other group coincidentally?

 

Here is food for thought. Regardless of one's opinion, education in this country is changing. I have young kids, ages 7 & 10 in grade school. What they bring home for schoolwork, the standards they have to meet, etc is far beyond what I recall at their ages. My kids are already used to quizzes and exams while I honestly dont recall any testing till I landed in junior high. As the generations unfold, will we see PA applicants that really dont need GREs or any other measurement because their basic education is head and shoulders above what prior applicants brought with them?

 

Does any of this truly matter enough to be measured and extrapolated? Or is it better for a program to realize that there is no guaranteed formula, just a mix of variables that will likely lead to success in the short term ie PANCE but for longer term success, it comes down to the individual and the skills, quality and values the program instills during the short time a student is with them? Instead of looking retrospectively at scores and other markers, look prospectively at what kind of PA graduate we want to produce.

 

G Brothers PA-C

[Teacher2PAC]

Not to open another can of worms, but let's not forget that research suggests these tests are culturally biased :D. 

[gbrothers98]

Not to open another can of worms, but let's not forget that research suggests these tests are culturally biased :D. 

Also there is an unknown amount of economic bias.

I have a close friend whose kid attends Dartmouth. 2 other kids in high school. 

Super intelligent parents, mom a lawyer, dad a CFO.

Kids have had private school, attentive parents, oldest had a year of SAT prep classes prior to taking test, not cheap. Siblings also enrolled in similar classes to prepare.

Versus a kid stuck in a chaotic social environment without resources.

A supportive successful environment inevitably breeds success.

GB PA-C

[Teacher2PAC]

It is the truth. 

[PAtoB]

standardized tests are utter bullshit outside of correlation to grades (assuming the test taker gave the same effort on the s.t. as he/she did in compiling the GPA).

[JohnnyM2]

We often talk about social and economic bias as though there was some form of "unfairness" involved. I don't want my PA, MD, or airline pilot chosen to create some form of equal opportunity fairness. It is definitely true that children who grow up in a stable family environment where their activities and friends are monitored, where there are boundaries, and where academics, moral values, and hard work are demanded, end up performing better in school and in the workplace. While it is unfortunate that some parents are a mess and deny their kids a fair shot at life, we should celebrate those who succeed and not confer success on those who fail.

[PAtoB]

m

[Teacher2PAC]

The problem is the social and economic bias goes far beyond being raised in a good household. I am not going to go too far into the topic because it is complex, but there are some great books that delve deeper into this, one being, "Privilege, Power, and Difference." Read it if you are interested. 

[Teacher2PAC]

Also, I am pretty sure this pertains to standardized tests across the board. We have unfortunately become a data driven world, we thrive off of these numbers. In my school we have come up with a little slogan:

 

Data = God

 

You need God. 

 

You need Data. 

[PAtoB]

that's the truth too, kmf. Without going into detail, all I'll say is that my dad is a lifelong factory work (I honestly don't know if I believe him when he says he graduated high school) w/3 kids who have, against crazy odds, all graduated college and have or will have advanced degrees. That shit just doesn't happen.