Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

OneDay91

Members
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    OneDay91 got a reaction from sun123 in DMD mcgill   
    Just got a call! Everyone be ready, and good luck!
  2. Like
    OneDay91 got a reaction from dentdreams101 in DMD mcgill   
    Just got a call! Everyone be ready, and good luck!
  3. Like
    OneDay91 got a reaction from MDDMD777 in DMD mcgill   
    Just got a call! Everyone be ready, and good luck!
  4. Like
    OneDay91 reacted to Lolomegabyte in November 2018 DAT Thoughts   
    That’s pretty harsh. All they’re saying that the past few years, the cut-off corresponded to all LOWEST mdt scores of those years. That basically guaranteed that anyone who even ‘touched’ the soap as you said, was able to apply. 
    Since the lowest score went down by one this year, they’re only asking if it’s possible to consider matching it as was done in previous years. That’s it. You’re not invalidating anything lol since McGill’s cut-off to begin with was the lowest score on the test. 
    They could’ve practiced for months, you never know. Maybe they went in shock from nervousness and absolutely messed up. And honestly, maybe their stats are beyond the roof, and just the mdt is stopping them. I don’t think it’s great to tell anyone that a career path they’re pursuing isn’t right for them.  
  5. Like
    OneDay91 got a reaction from Lolomegabyte in November 2018 DAT Thoughts   
    While true, if you look closely at the Feb 2018 DAT the lowest score was a 6 (68 people received) besides the 4 people who received a score of 0. A score of 5 did not exist on this sitting.
    Furthermore, if you look at the Nov 2017 DAT the lowest score was also a 6 (98 people received) besides the 3 people who received a score of 0. A score of 5 also did not exist on this sitting.
    The Nov 2018 DAT had similar if not the same percentiles but the lowest score given was a 5 (100 people received) with no one receiving a score of 6. 
    By looking at these results, one could assume that if they had preformed in the exact same manner as they did to receive a score of 5 on the Nov 2018 DAT they would have yielded a score of 6 in the other sittings. This sort of discrepancy should be allowed.
    Mcgill also just recently implemented the DAT as a requirement and from my point of view it looked as if they just wanted their applicants to achieve the minimum score (besides 0). Everyone who wrote in the previous 2 sittings would meet this requirement, besides the few who scored a 0. The same cannot be said for the Nov 2018 DAT. 
×
×
  • Create New...