Update on the U of M Admissions Site (Old news, though)

[Guest silverjelly86]

Check this site:

 

umanitoba.ca/faculties/me...lying.html

 

If any of you are unsure about what we've already beat to death, this should clear all that up.

[Guest silverjelly86]

I also talked to B. Jennings, and she said that she'll try to mail the first round letters on the evening of May 14th (a Sunday!) She said that AGPA may factor into the first round of acceptances, 'cause Manitoba students' transcripts should be available to the admissions office by the beginning of May. However, they have to leave some leeway for students whose transcripts are not yet ready (OOP, I guess). But I'm pretty happy about that, because if my AGPA is factored in, I have a better chance of, if I am accepted, getting the letter earlier. Only 18 days left, folks!

[Guest Jag]

Considering aGPA is only 10% and the fact that almost every applicant has nearly identical GPA, i think that will only make the difference for 1 or 2 people tops

[Guest silverjelly86]

I heard that for the 10%, a 3.6 (the minimum) AGPA is 1 on a scale of 1-10 up to 10 for a 4.5. Thus, say that the interview is marked and converted to a percentage scale. The difference between someone who scores, say, a 90% and someone who scores a 75% is only 6 points, since the interview is worth 40%. So, having like a 4.0 AGPA compared to someone with a 4.4 is already 4 points (if that's true about the 1-10 scale, which I have no idea).

 

And if you look at the people who were "successful" applicants, regular category MB, there are about equal numbers with a 4.0 as a 4.4, same with 4.5. Not much difference between how many people had a 3.8 and a 4.1, and I don't think those are identical AGPAs. I really do think APGA could make the difference for me.

[Guest Jag]

well if gpa is on a scale of 1-10, does that mean the interview is on a scale of 1-40 and the mcat is a scale of 1-50?

 

Considering 90% of the grade is accounted for, do you really think a bunch of people with a 4.0 are going to get kicked out in favor of 4.2 gpas?

 

I really do think the only reason they even humour us by including gpa is to initially filter out all applicants below a 3.6, and then to check if the applicant passed biochem and english, followed by seeing if they are even eligable to graduate their undergraduate degree in the first place. It is basically an excuse to get a hold of the transcripts for this purpose. As soon as you make the gpa and MCAT cutoffs, the interview is going to make or break you.

[Guest silverjelly86]

Maybe.

 

And I didn't say anything about the MCAT/interview being on a scale. I was only reporting on what I've heard (and I was careful to mention that I wasn't sure).

[Guest Jag]

I wouldn't worry too much about the finer details such as aGPA. Just sit back and relax the next few weeks (easier said than done).

 

Besides, I would not be satisfied gaining acceptance to medical school at all if i knew I was squeezed in based on something so wildly varying depending on program/school and stupid as a grade point average

[Guest Jag]

Which is why I am glad U of M keeps GPA right at the bottom of its priority list where it belongs. I would like to see interview worth a bit more than MCAT too, but now that would just be getting picky

[Guest silverjelly86]

Yeah, I should relax. Thanks, Jag. I do agree that MCAT's worth way to much (how can something that you can easily improve on really be so indicative on how well you'll do in med school?)

 

However, I would be perfectly fine with squeezing in based on AGPA. I worked hard for my marks, and there's no shame in that!

[Guest Jag]

Since your school is out, you should get out there and enjoy the weather! People like me are stuck locked in tiny rooms hunched over textbooks while all the children frolick happily in the fields.

[Guest Jag]

I agree with the MCAT thing. U of M is really behind the times in that regards, all other schools are moving away from putting such a huge emphasis on MCAT. Apparantly the faculty thinks there is a strong correlation between MCAT marks and med school success? I don't see it though.

[Guest NRC boy]

I also wouldnt mind squeezing my way into med school because of my GPA. I would have no problem with that whatsoever!

 

"People like me are stuck locked in tiny rooms hunched over textbooks while all the children frolick happily in the fields."

 

Stop lying Jag! I dont remember seeing you reading at tyc or at the drinking bbq or at empire this last weekend. If drinking equals hunched over textbooks then yes, jag does a lot of that.

[Guest Jag]

Ah yes, the wonderful world of cutthroat competition. Anyone would feel great knowing that a person who took the History of Canada from 1911-1980 course to get an A+ surely deserves it over the person who took Advanced Human Anatomy as an elective instead and got a B+. Knowing you got into medicine based on dodgy undergrad tactics just gives you such a warm fuzzy feeling of acomplishment on the inside.

[Guest winter]

I may be a little biased, but I think you might be judging the U of M a little harshly with regards to the MCAT. Unfortunately it's tough to level the playing field in terms of the GPA. For example getting a B average in a particularly difficult or specialised program probably requires the same, if not more, work than an A average in a general program with a large number of electives. Unless the U of M, or Canadian schools in general, are willing to look at the "whole package" (i.e. GPA, MCAT and essay/resume/references) prior to the interviews and make applicant by applicant decisions, the MCAT really is the only consistent factor between applicants.

 

In this, I think that perhaps the US schools are on the right track with regards to med school admissions. They really do look at the "whole package" prior to offering an interview and while most schools have a high admission average, it is just that, an average and not a strict cutoff. In this way, your field of study, your grades, your life experience and standardised tests are all factored into the mix, rather than just your numbers.

[Guest Jag]

I think ideally they should use GPA for screening purposes and then toss it out, or perhaps just leave it at 10%. I wouldn't drastically change the way U of M does it, at most I would make interview worth more to say 50% and then make the MCAT 40%.

[Guest silverjelly86]

I still don't agree about the whole GPA thing. Excuse me for taking 30 cr. hours a year of pure science courses (that aren't easy) and getting good grades. I think what you're addressing, Jag, doesn't really play into med at U of M. One B or one A+ doesn't make a difference, since that B will most likely be dropped in the AGPA calculation. The way the U of M gets rid of so many courses, it probably accounts for those that are "smart" but took "harder" courses and got lower grades. There's a reason people are marked for what they do in University, and I don't think the system is THAT screwed up.

[Guest fromtheperimeter]

the only thing GPA measures is how good you are at playing the undergrad game and jumping through all the hoops....your ability to think critically, recognize problems and solve them appropriately, etc etc is measured much better by the MCAT, in my opinion.

 

While it is likely that those who would do well on the MCAT would also have at least reasonably high GPA's, I have met many more people who have very high grades and a low MCAT than I have people with bad grades and a high MCAT. You can study forever for undergrad exams, and use old exams to know what you're going to be tested on, so it's just a matter of doing the required amount of work. I agree with Jag; make the GPA a cut off and then throw it out.

 

Plus, I think it is good that MB has such a different weighting scheme than evey other school, because it allows people who have monster MCAT scores without the perfect GPA to still get into school.....if you are relying heavily on your GPA, then you would be a good applicant for nearly every other school.

[Guest Jag]

Actually silverjelly, the GPA thing really is that screwed up. For example, when I was taking organic chem at U of W, the class AVERAGE was 86%, meaning at least half of the class was given A+'s. What was the average at U of M, like 46%? Then you have the people who network around to get old tests which magically end up being exactly the same as the real exam, yet everyone in the class doesn't have such a luxurious advantage. Then you have people that research and scope out which professors hand out better grades than another in the exact same course, even if they find out after they have registered they will drop the course and take the course with the other professor. The more advanced mark whores will plan to take specific classes in spring as opposed to during the year to better marks, and ever go so far as transferring credits between U of W and U of M via spring and summer courses if they have figured out one class is easier to ace than another. And how about those that take 24 credits in the year to lighten their load and 6 credits in the spring? Those people are spreading out their workload yet still getting 30 credits in the year.

 

And these are some of the tamer tactics I have heard people trying. The more advanced onces are absolutely sickening, but the odds of getting caught are greater. For example, I know a guy in a business degree right now who always gets a fake doctor's note before every exam to get it deferred, then calls up his friends to ask what is on the exam and goes in to ace the identical exam that the professor did not change a few days later.

 

Have one person practice all these tactics for 90 credits and have another person go into undergrad blindly for 90 credits and watch how much the transcripts will differ at the end. This is why I am glad GPA is worth next to nothing at U of M and barely even affects your acceptance chances. I would be even happier if they tossed it completely.

[Guest silverjelly86]

OK, Jag, you obviously have had issues with people who dig for grades. However, you have to realize that not everyone is like that. For example, I am not a "mark whore" and I don't think there's anything wrong with being rewarded for working hard and taking 30 credits a year in REGULAR SESSION ONLY; no summer session. If a couple of people somehow manage to get great grades in every single course, which I think is nearly impossible, then that's their problem. THOSE are the ones that should feel uncomfortable if they get into med school based on their grades. Either way, I think the MCAT and the interview should ofset these losers somewhat. Otherwise, the world is not fair and perfect. Those of us who care enough to actually do well without any "help" should feel proud and not undermined just because some people don't work for their grades.

[Guest Madz25]

I agree, silverjelly, that there are those people that do work hard for their grades and take tough courses on top of that. But how can an adcom differentiate between those that worked hard for their grades and those that used the underhanded tactics? For that reason, I think the MCAT is definitely a better indicator of a student's ability to succeed in medical school. The MCAT measures everyone on the same "playing field" and I'm glad UofM puts so much emphasis on it.

 

Madz

[Guest sunE]

I agree, silverjelly, that there are those people that do work hard for their grades and take tough courses on top of that. But how can an adcom differentiate between those that worked hard for their grades and those that used the underhanded tactics? For that reason, I think the MCAT is definitely a better indicator of a student's ability to succeed in medical school. The MCAT measures everyone on the same "playing field" and I'm glad UofM puts so much emphasis on it.

 

Madz25 is exactly right. U of M cannot seperate which students are truly righteous and honest and worked hard for their GPA's vs. those who used underhanded tactics. It is impossible. Which is where standardized testing comes in. The MCAT removes that bias.

 

Sure, be proud of your GPA (nobody told you not to be). But, I mean, you cannot truly expect U of M to distinguish you from the underhanded deviants.

[Guest silverjelly86]

But do you really think that enough med applicants get all their grades that way to really skew the system? I just simply don't - but maybe I only know good people.

[Guest Madz25]

Even if the majority of med applicants don't use underhanded tactics, how do schools differentiate between GPAs from different schools and different programs? In my opinion, a lower GPA from a tougher program is worth more than a higher GPA from a not-so-tough program. However, straight cutoffs (which many, if not all, Canadian schools use) don't benefit those that worked harder and took tougher courses.

 

Bottom line - standardized tests are fair for EVERYONE, regardless of the school/program you choose.

 

Madz

[Guest sunE]

Getting into medical school has become so competitive and "cut-throat" these days, so to speak.

 

As for you only knowing "Good" people, well that doesn't really make much sense to this argument. Let's use Jag's example earlier of Organic chem at U of W and the avg. being near 86%, whereas at U of M it was only 43-ish%. The people that went to U of W, they are not "bad" students. They simply chose to go to U of W for whatever reason they saw fit (be it tuition, location, family members went their, friends went their, the particular program, etc, etc). It does not make them "bad". That is simply how the system works. They just happened to be at the right school in the right course. So you can see, not all students are using these "devious" methods. Some students just fall into the "easier route" whereas others fall into the "harder route".

 

GPA simply has a built-in error. The best thing to do for the faculty of Med is to reduce this error to as small as they see fit. This is why it's only weighted 10% and will most probably remain weighted that way.

[Guest Jag]

And this isn't even limited to organic. Intro chem 1+2, Intro Bio 1+2, organic 1+2, and even biochem 1+2 have class averages sometimes 20%+ higher at U of W compared to U of M