PA-CAT

[Wickeyleaks]

One of the schools I’m thinking of applying to is dropping the GRE in favor of the PA-CAT for the 2020-2021 application cycle. I can’t find much on this test.  Does anyone have any info on this?

 

[marktheshark89]

Right now it is being pilot tested at around 10 programs. They are not using scores in admissions decisions. In fact they are still deciding how to score the test. I doubt that it would be used in admissions decisions next year because outcomes of the pilot wont be really avaliable for 2 years or so (once the people taking the pilot this year have graduated and taken the pance and inferences/correlation can be made regarding pacat performance and pance performance).  Which program are you talking about?

[Wickeyleaks]

12 minutes ago, marktheshark89 said:

Right now it is being pilot tested at around 10 programs. They are not using scores in admissions decisions. In fact they are still deciding how to score the test. I doubt that it would be used in admissions decisions next year because outcomes of the pilot wont be really avaliable for 2 years or so (once the people taking the pilot this year have graduated and taken the pance and inferences/correlation can be made regarding pacat performance and pance performance).  Which program are you talking about?

Pfeiffer.  I dob’t think they mention it being part of a pilot on their website.

[marktheshark89]

perhaps next year more programs may start using it for admissions. Its definitely coming just a matter of when. I’d contact them if you have more questions about it. 

[Louns1g]

On 11/11/2019 at 3:14 PM, Wickeyleaks said:

One of the schools I’m thinking of applying to is dropping the GRE in favor of the PA-CAT for the 2020-2021 application cycle. I can’t find much on this test.  Does anyone have any info on this?

 

Central Michigan has just snuck something like this into the woodworks on their website as well. No specifics, just that now the PA-CAT will be required for admission in the 2020 cycle and not the GRE. One of the researchers behind the PA-CAT works at CMU, which is why it's happened there. I'm trying to scrounge up info as well, since I had wanted to apply there and I know next to nothing about the test except for that it's about as extensive as the MCAT and more expensive than the GRE. 

I think it's being used in place of the GRE this year. Lucky us. 

I'll let you know if I hear any more.

Best of luck!

[roundabout]

The exam is going to be implemented in May 2020 for schools to elect to use in their admissions decisions. I would imagine that all 36 schools that were part of the pilot study will be using it as well as many more. Some will likely give you the option of the PA-CAT or the GRE for the next year, and some programs may choose not to use it at all. 
 

The exam itself covers multiple subjects: A&P, Bio, Psychology, Chemistry, Biochem, Sociology, Genetics, and statistics. 

The exam I took was 200 questions, however, I heard the final exam will be 180. Not sure which is for sure.

 

 

[ChemPhysicsInstructor]

Once this exam becomes more widespread, you will be able to read about it in education journals.  Once they gather enough of a sample size for valid statistics, some articles may be published.  It is part of the process of promoting the test.  

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

It’s funny, AAPA had a news article on their website about it. Still pops up in the google search, but I guess they took it and their Facebook post down. Not that it is the fault of the AAPA. They did not implement this test. Sucks. Should’ve just gotten rid of standardized testing altogether. Big shocker U of Tampa pushed for it in research. Florida ruins everything...

I suppose it could help some applicants that messed up and want that “great equalizer” to show they are just as capable as the people who didn’t party away at college and have become more mature. So upside there.

[Tsmith29]

On 11/11/2019 at 3:51 PM, Wickeyleaks said:

Pfeiffer.  I dob’t think they mention it being part of a pilot on their website.

Did you end up reaching out to them about this? I'm planning on applying this cycle too and was wondering the same thing. It says the test won't be available until May 2020 so I'm wondering if it's a requirement and how it would effect our application times. 

[Patricia5827]

USF states they might be using it next year but I talked to an admissions director and he said they’ll still also accept the GRE too so I might just retake the GRE

[Skidawg]

Here is a novel concept. Instead of having individuals take a test that supposedly predicts their success in PA school, or can be used to measure applicants against each other, the schools need to get back to basics. That entails remembering the professions roots, and making sure applicants have full time paid medical experience before applying, and limiting the number of new programs opening up. The reason the profession was and has been successful is because it was a condensed version of medical school taught in the medical model to individuals that had already been working in the medical field with patients, around nurses, physicians, other specialists. There is a knowledge base and comfort that one develops in that environment that can not be taught. I'm afraid the PA profession is suffering because of the greed of the universities (PA programs are cash cows), and the number of applicants being accepted with no previous medical experience, no work history. As a PA I will say that a big advantage NPs have over many of these PAs getting churned out is that they were actually RNs first and have experience working in medicine and to not have it is not waiverable.

[ProSpectre]

18 hours ago, Skidawg said:

Here is a novel concept. Instead of having individuals take a test that supposedly predicts their success in PA school, or can be used to measure applicants against each other, the schools need to get back to basics. That entails remembering the professions roots, and making sure applicants have full time paid medical experience before applying, and limiting the number of new programs opening up. The reason the profession was and has been successful is because it was a condensed version of medical school taught in the medical model to individuals that had already been working in the medical field with patients, around nurses, physicians, other specialists. There is a knowledge base and comfort that one develops in that environment that can not be taught. I'm afraid the PA profession is suffering because of the greed of the universities (PA programs are cash cows), and the number of applicants being accepted with no previous medical experience, no work history. As a PA I will say that a big advantage NPs have over many of these PAs getting churned out is that they were actually RNs first and have experience working in medicine and to not have it is not waiverable.

While I think prior medical experience is definitely valuable, I don't think it should be the end-all-be-all for PA admissions. There is a program director that frequents this board that has commented on this topic before; they looked at stats for students in their program and noted a complete lack of correlation between prior experience (both type and amount) and success in the program and on the PANCE (it was basically a crapshoot). What did correlate, if I recall, was prior academic performance. 

Anecdotally, a few of the people in my PA class who had the "best" prior experience (years as paramedics) ended up performing somewhat poorly (one had to restart with the next cohort after failing a class) and they both ended up failing the PANCE as well. Other students with "weaker" prior experience performed strongly throughout the program and rocked the PANCE. I think prior academic performance therefore has to remain as a strong factor in admissions. 

And to your point about NPs, check out a list of the top NP programs. Go down the list and tell me how many actually require prior RN experience these days (I can save you some time -- last time I checked, only 2 of the top 10 programs required prior experience as an RN). More and more nurses are going directly from their BSN into an NP program without ever working as an RN, and the quality of NP grads is suffering for it. NP programs lack the standardization and rigor of PA school, and there is quite a backlash on other forums against the "degree mill" NP programs these days. There are no "degree mill" PA programs.  

I'm not sure if this PA-CAT thing was the best method of screening applicants, but I for one am glad that PA programs continue to have high standards of entry and rigorous training while NP programs only seem to be getting worse. 

[roundabout]

In regard to academic performance in PA school, one of the largest factors for prediciting success has been the last 60 credit hours GPA.  Overall and Science GPA do not predict any significant numbers in regard to success in school or on the PANCE. 

[ProSpectre]

On 2/24/2020 at 8:55 AM, johncfl said:

In regard to academic performance in PA school, one of the largest factors for prediciting success has been the last 60 credit hours GPA. 

Do you know of a paper with data supporting this? I would be curious to see it. 

On 2/24/2020 at 8:55 AM, johncfl said:

Overall and Science GPA do not predict any significant numbers in regard to success in school or on the PANCE. 

Some of the research I have looked at disputes this claim. 

This 2010 study done retrospectively with admissions data from 6 universities found a significant positive correlation between multiple predictors and passing the PANCE; those predictors were GPA, GRE scores (surprisingly), and performance on the PACKRAT. 

This 2014 study also found that higher first-time PANCE scores were correlated with higher admission GPA. It also looked at relationship of grades in pathophysiology and biochem, and found that PANCE core increased with grade in these courses. 

This 2011 study looked to find predictors of poor academic performance within the program. Using data from 3 prior classes, they used undergrad cumulative and science GPAs, plus GRE scores to rank students into quintiles. Over 90% (12/13) of students that had academic difficulties in those 3 classes fell into the lower end of that scoring system based on the included factors. 

Another 2011 study found a positive correlation between undergrad GPA and passing the PANCE.

I did find one paper that found no correlation between undergrad GPA and likelihood of passing the PANCE. I didn't see any mention of using the last 60 credit hours GPA as a predictor of PANCE performance though. 

This 2017 literature review does a good job of covering the factors associated with success in PA school and passing the PANCE. 

I think there is some decent data showing that undergrad GPA can be a predictor of success, but more research probably needs to be done on this topic. 

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

On 2/24/2020 at 12:14 AM, ProSpectre said:

While I think prior medical experience is definitely valuable, I don't think it should be the end-all-be-all for PA admissions. There is a program director that frequents this board that has commented on this topic before; they looked at stats for students in their program and noted a complete lack of correlation between prior experience (both type and amount) and success in the program and on the PANCE (it was basically a crapshoot). What did correlate, if I recall, was prior academic performance. 

Anecdotally, a few of the people in my PA class who had the "best" prior experience (years as paramedics) ended up performing somewhat poorly (one had to restart with the next cohort after failing a class) and they both ended up failing the PANCE as well. Other students with "weaker" prior experience performed strongly throughout the program and rocked the PANCE. I think prior academic performance therefore has to remain as a strong factor in admissions. 

And to your point about NPs, check out a list of the top NP programs. Go down the list and tell me how many actually require prior RN experience these days (I can save you some time -- last time I checked, only 2 of the top 10 programs required prior experience as an RN). More and more nurses are going directly from their BSN into an NP program without ever working as an RN, and the quality of NP grads is suffering for it. NP programs lack the standardization and rigor of PA school, and there is quite a backlash on other forums against the "degree mill" NP programs these days. There are no "degree mill" PA programs.  

I'm not sure if this PA-CAT thing was the best method of screening applicants, but I for one am glad that PA programs continue to have high standards of entry and rigorous training while NP programs only seem to be getting worse. 

 

5 hours ago, ProSpectre said:

Do you know of a paper with data supporting this? I would be curious to see it. 

Some of the research I have looked at disputes this claim. 

This 2010 study done retrospectively with admissions data from 6 universities found a significant positive correlation between multiple predictors and passing the PANCE; those predictors were GPA, GRE scores (surprisingly), and performance on the PACKRAT. 

This 2014 study also found that higher first-time PANCE scores were correlated with higher admission GPA. It also looked at relationship of grades in pathophysiology and biochem, and found that PANCE core increased with grade in these courses. 

This 2011 study looked to find predictors of poor academic performance within the program. Using data from 3 prior classes, they used undergrad cumulative and science GPAs, plus GRE scores to rank students into quintiles. Over 90% (12/13) of students that had academic difficulties in those 3 classes fell into the lower end of that scoring system based on the included factors. 

Another 2011 study found a positive correlation between undergrad GPA and passing the PANCE.

I did find one paper that found no correlation between undergrad GPA and likelihood of passing the PANCE. I didn't see any mention of using the last 60 credit hours GPA as a predictor of PANCE performance though. 

This 2017 literature review does a good job of covering the factors associated with success in PA school and passing the PANCE. 

I think there is some decent data showing that undergrad GPA can be a predictor of success, but more research probably needs to be done on this topic. 

Excellent work! Really great dive into the research and lying it out. It’s absolutely crazy to think that high GPA or high performance on standardized testing doesn’t correlate with successful completion of a rigorous scientific program and passage of PANCE. It’s another standardized test, so of course people who do well on other standardized tests they will do well again. 
 

My question though is does it correlate to being a good clinician, of which there is no evidence that it does. While certainly there are things from physicians we can mimic that would be for our benefit, but we also have a chance to prevent their mistakes. MCAT, USMLE exams, constant abuse by the system to people at the height of their creativity and compassion to build an automaton of clinical efficiency. We can do it again and do it right this time, in my opinion.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/25850120/

https://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2019/09/its-time-to-abolish-the-mcat.html

[ProSpectre]

On 2/28/2020 at 9:29 AM, LT_Oneal_PAC said:

Excellent work! Really great dive into the research and lying it out. It’s absolutely crazy to think that high GPA or high performance on standardized testing doesn’t correlate with successful completion of a rigorous scientific program and passage of PANCE. It’s another standardized test, so of course people who do well on other standardized tests they will do well again. 

Right, and this is exactly the point that I was trying to make. Obviously PA schools should look at criteria other than GPA and prior academic performance as well, but there does have to be some baseline measure(s) used to assess the likelihood that a given student is likely to be able to keep up with the rigorous curriculum and then pass the PANCE. I have no problem with holistic admissions standards, but they aren't very helpful if they get people into a program but don't reach their stated goal of actually getting more diverse applicants through a program and out the other side into clinical practice (i.e. they put too much emphasis on other factors and fail to put enough emphasis on factors that have been shown to select for students that are likely to succeed academically). 

 

On 2/28/2020 at 9:29 AM, LT_Oneal_PAC said:

My question though is does it correlate to being a good clinician, of which there is no evidence that it does. 

I do agree with you here. I'm not yet convinced that incorporating the PA-CAT is going to have a hand in creating better clinicians either.

However, I guess I'm looking at it from a different perspective, an an admittedly narrow one. I keep seeing the continual concerns (both online and when talking to clinicians in person) about the continual trend towards lower and lower standards for NP programs, and I'm honestly just glad that despite more and more PA schools opening, the goal still seems to be ensuring highly qualified candidates are selected and that programs remain rigorous (the PAEA just released a standardized End of Curriculum examination to allow programs to assess candidates prior to graduation as well).

I think that's one thing we have going for us in the "competition" between the PA profession and the NP profession is that PA education is more standardized and more rigorous, and I would like to keep it that way. Having said that, I do understand the concern about implementing standards that aren't objectively proven to create a better end product. 

[LT_Oneal_PAC]

10 hours ago, ProSpectre said:

Right, and this is exactly the point that I was trying to make. Obviously PA schools should look at criteria other than GPA and prior academic performance as well, but there does have to be some baseline measure(s) used to assess the likelihood that a given student is likely to be able to keep up with the rigorous curriculum and then pass the PANCE. I have no problem with holistic admissions standards, but they aren't very helpful if they get people into a program but don't reach their stated goal of actually getting more diverse applicants through a program and out the other side into clinical practice (i.e. they put too much emphasis on other factors and fail to put enough emphasis on factors that have been shown to select for students that are likely to succeed academically). 

 

I do agree with you here. I'm not yet convinced that incorporating the PA-CAT is going to have a hand in creating better clinicians either.

However, I guess I'm looking at it from a different perspective, an an admittedly narrow one. I keep seeing the continual concerns (both online and when talking to clinicians in person) about the continual trend towards lower and lower standards for NP programs, and I'm honestly just glad that despite more and more PA schools opening, the goal still seems to be ensuring highly qualified candidates are selected and that programs remain rigorous (the PAEA just released a standardized End of Curriculum examination to allow programs to assess candidates prior to graduation as well).

I think that's one thing we have going for us in the "competition" between the PA profession and the NP profession is that PA education is more standardized and more rigorous, and I would like to keep it that way. Having said that, I do understand the concern about implementing standards that aren't objectively proven to create a better end product. 

We certainly don’t disagree on the need for a highly selective application process. I’m not even opposed to some type of examination prior to matriculation. I just feel we have enough data points to identify an academically gifted student, and I don’t think that a PA-CAT will make the process more selective. Remember that even medical schools aren’t forced to use the MCAT and there are actually few mandatory admission criteria either. Plus, it will do nothing to force schools to adequately prepare students. A better way to maintain our academic superiority is to place more stringent requirements on the schools, not applicants or students. If we want to make our applicants stronger, which is fair, perhaps a better exam would be designed to test their ability to assimilate information quickly and then apply it practically. Perhaps even a portion designed by behavioral economists for humanistic traits we would find desirable. Just spit balling. No one with power is going to listen to me.

[JDraper]

The PA-Platform just did an interview with one of the researchers behind the PA-CAT that gives some more details to its implementation and intentions behind the PA-CAT.

https://www.thepaplatform.com/podcast/pa-cat-for-pa-school

[BayouCoco]

What are people scoring on the PA-CAT practice tests?