Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

2014-2015 Application Cycle Interm Report


Recommended Posts

http://mdprogram.med.ubc.ca/admissions/admissions-statistics/

 

IP TFR cutoff: 52.65 (42.57% IP applicants got invite)

 

OOP TFR cutoff: 63.46 (11.16% OOP applicants got invite)

 

Relevant Admission's blog post: http://mdprogram.med.ubc.ca/2014/12/01/pre-interview-scores-faqs-20142015/

 

IP: Wow, 195 more applicants than last year. Seems like the jump from 51.10 (last year's cut off for IP) to 52.65 allowed them to compensate for these added applicants and only interview 574 applicants, just one more than last year. 1.55 point jump eliminating ~195 ppl... damn!

 

Here, have a panda to make yourself feel a bit better.

 

xOBuS.giffunny-gifs-pandas-playing-on-a-slide.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I am a re-applicant. I feel I have more activities and volunteer experiences than last year, but my NAQ score has not increasedWhy?

Each year, the applicant pool is different, as is the average applicant profile used by non-academic evaluators. In addition, while we look for the same aptitudes and qualities each year, we periodically revise how we evaluate and score these qualities. All of these may contribute to a lower-than-expected NAQ score."

This is a little worrying 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://mdprogram.med.ubc.ca/admissions/admissions-statistics/

 

IP TFR cutoff: 52.65 (42.57% IP applicants got invite)

 

OOP TFR cutoff: 63.46 (11.16% OOP applicants got invite)

Did the IP TFR increase by 1 point compared to last year?

 

"Academic scores, like non-academic scores, are standardized against the current applicant pool, which changes from year to year". Did they standardize the AQ scores before too, or is this new?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did the IP TFR increase by 1 point compared to last year?

 

"Academic scores, like non-academic scores, are standardized against the current applicant pool, which changes from year to year". Did they standardize the AQ scores before too, or is this new?

They standardized them last year, I believe. You can see a huge drop from 2012/13 to 2013/14 because of that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. IP TFR is higher than last year, and oGPA/aGPA is even higher than the year before last year, the highest one in the past few years.

 

 

Did the IP TFR increase by 1 point compared to last year?

 

"Academic scores, like non-academic scores, are standardized against the current applicant pool, which changes from year to year". Did they standardize the AQ scores before too, or is this new?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AQ= 1.526*(adjust/overall %)-104.89

 

Last year's AQ formula still kinda works, but it seems the lower gpa got lower AQ score while higher gpas got higher AQ (due to normalizing)... remember, all speculation!

I plotted the AQ and aGPAs and got this for a formula:

 

AQ = 1.4953 (aGPA) - 102.45

It's fairly similar, but it looks like this year is slightly more NAQ dependent than last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's fairly similar, but it looks like this year is slightly more NAQ dependent than last year.

That's a little scary considering how opaque UBC with regards to how they evaluate NAQ, although the same could be said for other schools. 

 

e.g.

- "Although there cannot help but be a degree of subjectivity involved, we feel the standardized process keeps this to a minimum."

- "While we look for the same aptitudes and qualities each year, we periodically revise how we evaluate and score these qualities." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I am a re-applicant. I feel I have more activities and volunteer experiences than last year, but my NAQ score has not increasedWhy?

Each year, the applicant pool is different, as is the average applicant profile used by non-academic evaluators. In addition, while we look for the same aptitudes and qualities each year, we periodically revise how we evaluate and score these qualities. All of these may contribute to a lower-than-expected NAQ score."

 

This is a little worrying 

its also worrying because they use random arts and lay people to score our NAQ. that doesn't bode well since I doubt that the average person is going to understand little nuances in NAQ like writing an abstract or proposal or literature review constitutes like 50% of the work in a research project, sometimes even more. too subjective for my taste. or I could just be bitter. lol. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...