A proven method, live one-on-one sessions with the co-author of MMI Made Easy, and a free assessment before you book your test.
CASPer® is an online situational judgment test. You watch or read a short scenario, then answer open questions about what you would do and why. There is no answer key: raters look at the substance of your reasoning, not at your spelling or grammar.
The test samples what grades cannot show: professionalism, ethics, communication, empathy and social intelligence. Programs read the result alongside your GPA and MCAT, most often to decide who gets an interview.
It is not a personality test and it is not pass or fail. A lower result usually means the reasoning did not make it onto the page in the time allowed. That is the part you can work on.
You take CASPer® on your own computer, with the webcam on, in a single sitting. The video section comes first. Each answer is submitted automatically when its time runs out.
Two open questions per scenario, shown one at a time, each answered on camera.
Optional. The clock stops after the video section.
Two questions per scenario, shown together, both typed before the test moves on.
Optional, after the fourth typed scenario.
Answer time included, with the reading, the videos and the system steps between scenarios.
Source: AFMC 2027, CASPer® procedure.
Your answers are anonymized before anyone reads them. Each scenario goes to a different trained rater, who scores only that scenario and never sees your name, your age or your photo. No rater scores you twice.
The individual ratings are averaged, then standardized against everyone who took the same test. Programs on your distribution list receive the result. You receive a quartile in your Acuity account about four to five weeks after your test date.
A result is valid for one admissions cycle and one test type. You cannot retake it within a cycle, and there is no re-scoring. If you apply again next year, you write it again.
CASPer® is used by programs in Canada and the United States, and in a shorter form by teacher education programs in Australia. The weight of the result changes from one school to the next. The Canadian faculties of medicine below require it for 2027 admission, according to the AFMC guide.
| School | Test language | How the result is used |
|---|---|---|
| McMaster | English | Required of all applicants. One third of the formula used to select for interview, with GPA and MCAT CARS. |
| Queen's | English | Required. Used in the selection for interview. |
| McGill (MD-CM and Med-P) | English or French | Required. Counts for 20 percent of the non-academic part of the pre-interview score, with the CV at 10 percent. |
| Laval | French | Required. The result decides who is invited to the multiple mini interviews. |
| Montréal | English or French | Required for the MD program and the preparatory year. |
| Sherbrooke | French | Required. |
| Manitoba | English | Required. A threshold applies, then 30 percent of the score used to select for interview and 10 percent of the final ranking. |
| Saskatchewan | English | Required. Used in the selection for interview. |
| Dalhousie | English | Required. Used for interview selection only, with a minimum score set on a sliding scale against GPA. |
| Memorial | English | Required. No minimum; results in the third and fourth quartile are recommended. |
Requirements change from one cycle to the next. Confirm on the school's admissions page before you book.
Read the scenario and its two questions, then weigh every side of the dilemma before you answer. CASPer® scenarios come from everyday life and are not specific to the program or the profession you are applying to.
You are a research student working on a project in a laboratory during the summer. After a few cell line cultures have died, you overhear a frustrated research assistant on your team say to another member: "We'll just use the results the supervisor is expecting. The western blot and the immunohistochemistry worked, so why wouldn't this show similar results?" Then they both nod in agreement.
1. How would you approach this situation?
2. What would you do if telling the supervisor could get the research assistant fired?
Q1 This is a serious situation with many sides to consider. Research integrity is very important, but I also understand that my colleague is under pressure. I would try to find a balanced solution that respects everyone and keeps the lab working well together.
Q2 I would weigh the consequences carefully and act with empathy. Honesty matters, but so does a person's career, so I would try to do the right thing for everyone.
It names values and promises balance. It never says what you would do first, what you would need to know, or where you would draw the line. A rater has nothing to score.
Q1 I heard a plan, not a result yet. First I would talk to the assistant alone, say what I overheard, and ask what happened to the cultures and what he intends to submit. If the plan is to report data that was never produced, I would say I cannot be part of it and ask him to tell the supervisor himself, with me present if that helps. If he refuses, I would inform the supervisor, because a fabricated result harms every study built on it.
Q2 The risk to his job changes how I raise it, not whether I raise it. I would give him the chance to correct it first and I would describe what I saw, not what I assume he meant. If the supervisor decides to let him go, that follows from the choice to fabricate, not from my report.
Scenario 1 of the book MMI Made Easy.
Pick two free scenarios, answer under timed conditions and see where you stand before you choose how to prepare.
One-on-one sessions, live and online, built around timed scenarios and scored feedback, with the co-author of the method.
What to set up, what to practise, and what to have ready on test day.
Sessions are live and online, one-on-one, built around timed scenarios and scored feedback.
Candidates he coached are now in medicine, dentistry, optometry, pharmacy and other health professions programs across Canada and the United States.
“I did not have the perfect CASPer® score, not even the perfect MCAT or a 4.0 GPA. Dr. Benidir taught me how to actually think, like a physician.”
A bank of realistic scenarios scored against the competencies raters look for. Pick two free scenarios, answer under timed conditions, and see where you stand before you choose how to prepare.
Answer full scenarios under the real limits and have your reasoning scored, not your typing. The free readiness assessment gives you two timed scenarios and a score against the competencies raters look for. Coaching then works on what that score shows.
There is nothing to pass. CASPer® ranks your answers against every other candidate on the same test and reports a quartile. Interviews are only competitive for those who are not prepared: with a method that shapes how you reason, no scenario catches you off guard, whether you have seen one like it or not.
No published figure exists. In our experience the useful measure is the number of complete scenarios you have answered under the real limits, with a line of reasoning that meets the competencies raters score, not the hours spent reading about the test.
It depends on the school. Some use a threshold, McMaster counts it as a third of the interview formula, and Laval uses it to decide the invitation. Check the table above and your school's admissions page.
Between 65 and 85 minutes in 2026-27, including two optional breaks. There are 11 scenarios: 4 with video answers and 7 with typed answers.
Not within the same admissions cycle, and there is no re-scoring. A result is valid for one cycle and one test type, so you write it again if you apply the following year.
Free scenarios, timed, scored against the competencies raters look for.