TurkeyLocoGuacamole Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 ************** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uwphysmed Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostintime Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 Hahaha...I should've posted my rant on Mac here as well =P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waterlilac Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 hahaha great thread, you guys~ I have to say I was super bummed out that I got my rejection from mac which was the only school I applied to and the school that I want to get in the most. This was my first time applying. I'm glad there are ppl in the same boat as I'm~ I just can't believe that some ppl apply 3-5th time in a row..that's amazing... I need to learn from them. neways, good luck to those who are waiting for more interviews!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orchid Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 hey try not to worry too much about Mac... over 4,000 applicants for 500 - 550 interviews and sometimes a little bit of luck needed when reviewing the questions... cheers and good luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PCC Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 Okay so I am here to vent out my frustration at not applying to queens....I have a 9 is verbal and I got rejected last year. So I didnt bother with queens and western this year. turns out with an S in WS i actually had a pretty decent shot at the interview this year. why didnt they do this last year! stupid computerized MCATs...if only I had the slightest idea... Okay rant over. I think I'll have to wait a little more for my flight still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmlconkl Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 ok, so i have this picture that keeps running through my head and making me angry, so perhaps depositting it in this rant thread will help me stop thinking about it... so, i have this picture of the queens/uwo adcoms, just getting together in a room, with a computer that has all the applicants stats, and they just have this basic program that you can click the MCAT/GPA cutoffs up/down and see how many students get interviewed. my theory is, this is exactly what happens... there is just a few ppl using this stupic program, clicking up and down until they get the right # of applicants they want to interview, with no other rationale for the cutoffs chosen...a nd it makes me sooo angry to think about!! how else can the cutoffs be explained? is there SERIOUSLY a diffference between a 10P/10V/11B and a 11P/10V/10B in terms of how they will do in meds at uwo?!?!? or, a 10/10/10Q vs a 9/9/9R at queens? to make it even more annoying, i think what happens is, since the previous years cutoffs are available, only ppl who are close to those cutoffs apply, which would result in too many interviewees if the same cutoffs were used... thus, the cutoffs are "pseudo-randomly" altered (e.g., dropping VR and raising WS at queens) for the SOLE purpose of getting the desired # of applicants. why couldn't a school just MAKE UP THEIR MIND a priori what they are looking for (e.g., high overall MCAT score, high GPA, whatever) and then choose the students who do best in that category (or combination of categories?) i don't know... in the long run, i think this process is hurting the medical classes of schools like queens, who eliminate many high quality applicants without looking at ECs or even a holistic view of their statistics, vs a school like UofT where all is considered... ok, now i will never speak of this again and hopefully have no more nightmares about the adcom sitting around the table with the "cutoff" program Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madz25 Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 ummmmm that IS the whole purpose of cutoffs! and that's the reason they aren't posted earlier. the schools purposely wait until all applications are in so they can cut down the # of applicants based on mcat and gpa to an "interviewable" group. there is NO other reason why UWO/Queens does it that way... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orchid Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 ummmmm that IS the whole purpose of cutoffs! and that's the reason they aren't posted earlier. the schools purposely wait until all applications are in so they can cut down the # of applicants based on mcat and gpa to an "interviewable" group. there is NO other reason why UWO/Queens does it that way... yeah i'm gonna have to agree with this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmlconkl Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 ummmmm that IS the whole purpose of cutoffs! and that's the reason they aren't posted earlier. the schools purposely wait until all applications are in so they can cut down the # of applicants based on mcat and gpa to an "interviewable" group. there is NO other reason why UWO/Queens does it that way... No, sorry, it is not. If they just wanted to get a random sample of applicants to interview, you could just use a random # generator. The "whole purpose of cutoffs" is to use GPA & MCAT as a rough estimate of an applicants merit/ability to succeed in medical school. Consider two cases: A) A school sets MCAT/GPA cutoffs based on pre-defined values of what they think is important to the school. e.g., if they want to emphasize "verbal reasoning skills", consider cutoffs with VR higher than the others (9/9/10V, 10/10/11V, etc). That is, MCAT cutoffs can be chosen in a rational manner to screen applicants based on a preset criteria of what they are looking for. A school sets MCAT cutoffs that vary from year to year (9/9/9R, 10/10/10Q, etc) but do not follow consistent patterns as to which sections are most highly valued, etc. In this second scenario, the school is essentially randomy screening the group each year, one year with higher emphasis on BS, the next with higher emphasis on WS, simply to get the #'s they need. Think about it for a minute, it is QUITE different. The objection is not the use of cutoffs... it is the complete inconsistency in the extent to which each section vs GPA vs total score is valued from year to year. This serves neither schools nor students. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Persepolis Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 The schools manipulate cut-offs to get, say, the top 15% of applicants to their school from which they will select interview candidates for that particular year...the MCAT is supposedly an 'objective' measure of how you rank in comparison with the rest of those who wrote the test (ie the numbers/letters are not assigned based on 'number of questions answered correctly' but by percentile) on a particular skill category. That's why the cut-offs vary from year to year (as the applicant pool also varies) and perhaps it's not an entirely unreasonable approach considering the volume of applications they have to review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostintime Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 re: Mac, I was going to post in their thread, but I think it's more of a rant. I think a lot of us may be "bitter" not so much about the fact that there are more qualified applicants who got the interview, but more skeptical about their whole interview selection process based on those five questions. Personally, I know two people who are worlds apart from each other based on how qualified I (and many other people including professors etc) think they are for medicine, i.e. one person has no clinical experience, hardly any volunteer work, gets interview, while other person is a grad student with TONS of clinical experience, TA for many years, publications, etc. and similar GPAs too. Yes, I know; who are we to say why one person should get an interview over another. But it's just scenarios like these that make me kinda skeptical, that is all. And I know this may sound like I'm just saying it, but I honestly have NO problem at all with more qualified applicants getting interviews/offers. If someone is better/more deserving than me, I will be sad, but I know I just have to try harder. But ambiguous things like vague selection factors just frustrate me a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 The cutoffs are not only to find those who will succeed in medical school. They're to find those who can succeed, but at the same time, to reduce the application size. I guess this year, the 11 in BS cut applicants down substantially. It honestly sucks to not meet the cutoff, and I'm sorry to those who didn't... this whole process is a crapshoot! Just believe in yourself and stay persistent! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madz25 Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 No, sorry, it is not. If they just wanted to get a random sample of applicants to interview, you could just use a random # generator. The "whole purpose of cutoffs" is to use GPA & MCAT as a rough estimate of an applicants merit/ability to succeed in medical school. Consider two cases: A) A school sets MCAT/GPA cutoffs based on pre-defined values of what they think is important to the school. e.g., if they want to emphasize "verbal reasoning skills", consider cutoffs with VR higher than the others (9/9/10V, 10/10/11V, etc). That is, MCAT cutoffs can be chosen in a rational manner to screen applicants based on a preset criteria of what they are looking for. A school sets MCAT cutoffs that vary from year to year (9/9/9R, 10/10/10Q, etc) but do not follow consistent patterns as to which sections are most highly valued, etc. In this second scenario, the school is essentially randomy screening the group each year, one year with higher emphasis on BS, the next with higher emphasis on WS, simply to get the #'s they need. Think about it for a minute, it is QUITE different. The objection is not the use of cutoffs... it is the complete inconsistency in the extent to which each section vs GPA vs total score is valued from year to year. This serves neither schools nor students. honestly, why else would queens and western wait for all applications to come in before setting cutoffs? it is SIMPLY to reduce the # of applicants. schools like UofT and dalhousie that have pre-set cutoffs that stay the same year to year actually review the entire file before inviting for interview. having a random generator to come up with cutoffs doesnt help applicants. it helps the schools reduce the applicant pool. that is it. queens and western haveused this method for years. GPA is a better indicator of success in medical school than the MCAT. if they want successfull students, why not base it soley on gpa? yes, your two scenarios are completely different. but what is your point?? scneario 2 benefits the school in weeding out applicants. no help to the applicants themselves but it eases the load on the schools in a quick and easy way. nobody thinks that it's right to do it this way but thats how it's done. i missed out on queens and western when i applied by one lousy point in one section. did it really mean i was a bad applicant or would be unsuccessful? i suppose not since i was accepted elsewhere. it was just easier for them to have the cutoffs that they did and that was that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmlconkl Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 nobody thinks that it's right to do it this way but thats how it's done. i missed out on queens and western when i applied by one lousy point in one section. did it really mean i was a bad applicant or would be unsuccessful? i suppose not since i was accepted elsewhere. it was just easier for them to have the cutoffs that they did and that was that. er... exactly the point of my rant! all i was trying to say is that, since you have to weed out applicants anyways, why not set cutoffs based on, for e.g., minimum GPA required to provide correct number of applicants, or minimum total MCAT score (or say 50% of each)? these are just as easy as arbitrarily manipulating the section cutoffs, but have the advantage that they are systematic rational ways of determining which applicants to interview. i.e., if the school says "we will interview who ever has the highest GPA and total MCAT scores" (just as a simple example) then it is extremely simple for the school to select their applicants, and at the same time there is some likelihood (although FAR from an exact correlation of course) that those being interviewed will be more successful in med school than those who are not. contrast this with the alternate approach of simply varying the section categories from year to year, in which the students interviewed (10/10/11 vs 11/10/10) are not "more desireable" by the school in any systematic way that the school decided on beforehand. not sure why i'm having difficulty communicating this idea, but anyways, i just think there are better ways to determine the cutoffs (i.e., more likely to correlate in some small way to actual performance) than the seemingly arbitrary manipulation of section cutoffs. contrary to what everyone is saying, these alternatives are no harder to implement. i'm not sure why i'm having difficutly comminicating this idea, but i think there is room for improvement. hehe, i'll just work on my response if it comes up in one of those "how could the admissions process be improved" type interview questions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madz25 Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 who knows? thats how they do it...queens usually does have an overall mcat score requirement but it seems like they didnt use it this year...i guess it's good each school does it differently. different people are competitive at different schools. although it is easier to predict WHY you didnt get an interview at schools with cutoffs such as queens as opposed to schools that take the hollistic approach (which can be frustrating). either way, PFO sucks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlatan Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 GPA is a better indicator of success in medical school than the MCAT. if they want successfull students, why not base it soley on gpa? QUOTE] I also agree that the MCAT is less of a predictor of academic sucess than the GPA. Yes, standardized exams do eliminate grade inflation, but we all know that the quality of undergraduate education/marking systems are pretty consistent across the few Canadian universities. The MCAT is for US schools where there are much more variability, not Canadian schools. Would you be impressed if someone locks himself in a room and spends 3 years studying for ONE SINGLE MCAT exam and excel on it or would you be more impressed when one person takes a full courseload within 3 years and consistently score a 4.0 GPA? The point is that the MCAT allows you to study for whatever periods of time you want, not to mention the unlimited test attempts. Proponents of the MCAT tend to be those who have a crappy GPA yet achieve a decent (such as scoring 10/10/10 R on the MCAT and enjoying the victory of stealing a Queen's interview from someone with 14/14/14 Q) to excellent score on the MCAT (after studying for prolonged periods of time). From what I see, claims such as "MCATs are useful for admission" are usually made in a self-serving way when the MCAT plays in favor for that applicant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thecoolest47 Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 On the one hand, people are pointing out Mac's subjectivity in the selection process, and on the other some are complaining about Queen's use of an objective measure. I think that with the different types of admissions processes in Canada, you are bound to find one that works for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 I think that with the different types of admissions processes in Canada, you are bound to find one that works for you. Yeah, I agree. I like that there is variability in the system, at least if you don't do well at one place.. you have a shot somewhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmlconkl Posted January 29, 2008 Report Share Posted January 29, 2008 yep, good thing every school does it differently... haha, i geuss if you sum up many individual unfair/arbitrary/possibly biased admission systems, you get one overall relatively fair and unbiased system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMmd Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 yep, good thing every school does it differently... haha, i geuss if you sum up many individual unfair/arbitrary/possibly biased admission systems, you get one overall relatively fair and unbiased system yep every school is different... but for most, you still have to be IP... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneDay Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Everyone around me is so sick of my complaining and whining this week, turkeylocoguca good idea! Being a fourth time applicant, I know this is the dreaded week. I was rejected from Mac and Calgary so far. Mac sucks, their system sucks, everything about Mac sucks! I know people who had interviews with mac last year, and applied this year got rejected even though they are now applying as grad students. You know, being a student at mac (unfortunately) and working at Mac, MacMed Admissions asks even Administrative Assistants and other general Mac staff to rate the ABS portion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeyserSoze Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 Hello fellow ranters! I have enjoyed reading the posts written here and I wanted to make a contribution. Not only did I apply and get an interview at Mac last year, but I was also waitlisted for admission. I did not receive an offer of admission from the waitlist (it's not a fun thing to spend your summer waiting and waiting...), but I was certainly eager to try again. This year, I did not even receive an interview. I am more than a little bit disappointed and I have spent some time thinking about my application, the admissions process in general, and Mac's evaluation of applicants, etc. My situation (being waitlisted first time, no interview second time) is probably not that common, but it is not that different from the situation in which an applicant is offered an interview/waitlist on their second try and not their first. It's just backwards, I guess. Anyway, I can relate to many of the posts made so far and I just wanted to see how many other people are in a situation similar to mine. I think we're all trying to crack the admissions "code" here, but the situation I'm currently in is just puzzling me more. How can I even start to figure out how to improve my application for next year? Good luck to everyone and thanks for your rants. I am finding them very therapeutic and I hope my post will have a similar effect on someone else out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tdotter Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 I also felt the need to contribute to this thread, especially after my fantastically terrible day yesterday. Even after all the speculation about writing sample increasing, I held out hope until the bomb was dropped yesterday. Honestly, my biggest problem is that writing sample is the most subjective part of the test! Everything else is completely cut and dry, except this portion, and yet they chose (after how many years of having about the same cutoffs??) to raise it! I am seriously frustrated and angry at Queen's medical school. Having said that, I completely agree The Law's previous post. Every school in Canada is pretty different, so hopefully if an MCAT score or GPA isn't top of the line, you can interview somewhere. I actually put this thought in my Calgary essay about how to improve the application process. Anyways, best of luck to those with interviews! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
register Posted January 30, 2008 Report Share Posted January 30, 2008 My rant is not directed at the medical schools but the pre-med culture. I'm sick of people asking if a 0.1 GPA mark will make a difference. Or describing the process as a "crapshoot." I've had it with people who decide to take school courses that will help them on the MCAT instead taking courses they are interested in. I'm tired of the cynicism and the questioning of other people's motives and the argument that if I wanted to make money, I'd be in business. Premeds need to think for themselves instead of just absorbing information about the application process mindlessly. It's good to learn more about how to apply to medical school, but please don't ask how you should lead your life. Only you should be answering that. Look at everyone's comments and opinion objectively and decide if it applies to you or not. Think for yourself. END RANT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.