Step 1 Cut off - Need your info

This thread really only perpetuates the psuedo-myth that step 1 is they key to matching at a program. I think it will best serve the interests of everyone if it's brought up again after the match. I know the numbers at a few of the programs are lower than stated on here - however, I don't think people are going to be as willing to share their board scores and give up anonymity at this point in the process.

Stewie and others - I appreciate your responses. I accept that this thread is not going anywhere in terms of useful information for future applicants. However, I am also extremely disappointed at what I interpret to be a group of applicants that, on the whole, is simply buying into old myths.

What is our frickin problem with Step 1 scores? Why treat them as if they are a judgment from St. Peter at the pearly gates. Sure, they are predictive of how one does on the next standardized exam, not how good of a clinician they will be, not how good of a person they will be, and absolutely certainly not how good they will be at nailing a femur!

Overall, it is my opinion that we as a group need to take the lead in shaping the culture of medicine, or just orthopedics for now, where we stop making these invalid judgments all the time. Why not debunk the myths now, why wait? I am not understanding how objective (as possible in this context) information can perpetuate a myth. It either supports it or it doesn't.

That said, I can certainly sympathize with wanting to remain anonymous. Your posts could be all or part of your information, your friends information, or that information received from a program director. I just hope that your desires to remain anonymous aren't due to wanting to hide an "unworthy" score on some standardized examination. If that is the case, then we, as the next generation of orthopedists, are completely failing in creating a healthy atmosphere in which to learn and practice. But then again, that seems to be a big part of why so many people who would have been excellent educators have left the ivory towers for decades on end.

Duke - 205
U of Michigan - 205
MUSC - 205
Wake - 205
UCLA - 230
UC Davis - 205 (rotated)
Loma Linda -205
San Francisco/St. Mary's program - 230
Stanford-205
Yale-205
University of Florida - Jacksonville - 230, 205 (rotated)
University of Illinois - 228
Southern Illinois University - 228
University of Kansas - 228
UMKC- 230
University of New Mexico - 230
University of Oklahoma - 230
Oregon Health Sciences - 205
Brown - 228
West Virginia - 205
HSS - 215 (from the PD)

I agree we as a group probably put too much emphasis on board scores. If you look at the study put out by the NRMP last summer (which I think I memorized by this point) you see that people did match with a broad range of scores. Not only that but even with lower scores i.e. 200-210, more people matched into ortho than not.

I think that just reinforces the point that programs look at more than just how good a day you had between 2nd and third year. Now obviosuly if you scored high you are in a much better position, but if you did not so well, you aren't f@%#ed.

MD007-- it is true that board scores or clinical grades or reputation of medical school etc are not accurate measures of how good of an orthopaedist one can be, but when schools receive hundreds of applications, what other information is there that can differentiate one candidate from another? They have to make judgement somehow... I suppose if I have to make a gripe about the process, it would not be with how programs choose applicants, but rather the testing format and grading process themselves because they create the measures by which we are chosen. The boards for instance...is there such a huge difference by someone who gets 225 from someone who gets 232? or 232 from 245? Sure, someone who gets 260 probably has something more to offer in that category than a 225. AOA or not AOA -- it varies from school to school. Percentage of honors vs. not honors varies at each school, and even how the clinical years are graded varies as well. Having the hoops to jump through are not the problem, even if they are sometimes not great indicators of future performance, but making sure the hoops are designed well is more important.

in other words, board scores, grades, personal statement, and whatever else are not necessarily good for predicting who will become a great orthopaedist....they are simply ways (or hoops, if you will) of differentiating the candidates from one another in terms of studying ability, "game-day" performance, being a nice guy, and willingness to do the little things even if they don't seem to matter.