kalia Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 It'd be really interesting to figure out the cutoffs this year from those who got interview invites. With ppl's scores ranging all over the place, both in MCAT and GPA, I'm curious to know what Queen's cutoff scores will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonito23 Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Better yet just give us your phone number, and we will call you every 5 minutes and let you know there is absolutely no news what so ever about interview notifications. Or if you prefer we could make it every 3 minutes... That would be hilarious lol. Silvermen85: Hello rmorelan: Hey no news yet, bye! 3 minutes later.... silvermen85: Hi rmorelan: Did you know that........ there is no news yet! [and then quickly puts down the phone] Then 3 minutes later he would call again doing the same thing, and silvermen85 ensures it would be the last by readying himself with his air horn in hand lol. That would be super funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 That would be hilarious lol. Silvermen85: Hello rmorelan: Hey no news yet, bye! 3 minutes later.... silvermen85: Hi rmorelan: Did you know that........ there is no news yet! [and then quickly puts down the phone] Then 3 minutes later he would call again doing the same thing, and silvermen85 ensures it would be the last by readying himself with his air horn in hand lol. That would be super funny. I wonder if we are going to be like this with our first patients. ...Nurse what are the vitals on Mrs. Smith She is stable doctor, no change. ...Great I'll call again in 3 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alastriss Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 You know what. In about 1 week, this thread will no longer be the busiest thread. After invites go out, a few people who don't get them will get so pissed and start a thread synonymous to the following titles "Why Queen's admission is flawed" "Designing a better evaluation system for Queen's" "Queen's is unfair." You know its true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafield Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 You know what. In about 1 week, this thread will no longer be the busiest thread. After invites go out, a few people who don't get them will get so pissed and start a thread synonymous to the following titles "Why Queen's admission is flawed" "Designing a better evaluation system for Queen's" "Queen's is unfair." You know its true. Lol or try to say using an R in the writing sample is because they're white supremacists Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Lol or try to say using an R in the writing sample is because they're white supremacists Actually have heard that argument already at my school....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alastriss Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Lol or try to say using an R in the writing sample is because they're white supremacists LMFAO I REMEMBER THAT. Funny how that was quickly shut down when some guy stated that the highest mcat score ever was by an asian guy who also rocked the WS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rburgundy Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 c'mon 8 in verbal!! another long day of waiting... sigh Please God. Make the WS an O. Please jeebuz...pleassee.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Law Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Lol or try to say using an R in the writing sample is because they're white supremacists HAHAHA, that conversation was one of the stupidest ones I have ever read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redribbon Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 You know what. In about 1 week, this thread will no longer be the busiest thread. After invites go out, a few people who don't get them will get so pissed and start a thread synonymous to the following titles "Why Queen's admission is flawed" "Designing a better evaluation system for Queen's" "Queen's is unfair." You know its true. Why would they get pissed? Queen's is interviewing the most applicants out of any Ontario school. If they don't make the cutoffs, it's their own fault. If I don't make the cutoffs, I'm not gonna blame Queen's; I'm familiar with the Queen's admissions process (no cutoffs = no interview) therefore I'd blame myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafield Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 People always find a reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alastriss Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Why would they get pissed? Queen's is interviewing the most applicants out of any Ontario school. If they don't make the cutoffs, it's their own fault. If I don't make the cutoffs, I'm not gonna blame Queen's; I'm familiar with the Queen's admissions process (no cutoffs = no interview) therefore I'd blame myself. It happens, look at UWO. Mac interview thread already has quips as to how subjective the 5 questions are. It happened to queen's last year, it was the worst here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafield Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Whenever there is an imbalance... someone will complain about the section that's unbalanced. Why did Queen's have to chose an R.... the WS is useless.... Why did Western chose an 11 in bio.... do they only want bio majors.... If they jacked GPA... people would say the difference between having a 3.7 and 3.8 doesn't make a good doctor... And if they made everything perfectly balanced... they complain that hard cutoffs are useless and we should be more like the U.S. in file review or UofT. That's just the way it goes, the system will always be slightly unfair to someone, it's just whether they realize their it is nearly impossible to make a system that is fair to everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imagine Posted January 29, 2009 Report Share Posted January 29, 2009 Whenever there is an imbalance... someone will complain about the section that's unbalanced. Why did Queen's have to chose an R.... the WS is useless.... Why did Western chose an 11 in bio.... do they only want bio majors.... If they jacked GPA... people would say the difference between having a 3.7 and 3.8 doesn't make a good doctor... And if they made everything perfectly balanced... they complain that hard cutoffs are useless and we should be more like the U.S. in file review or UofT. That's just the way it goes, the system will always be slightly unfair to someone, it's just whether they realize their it is nearly impossible to make a system that is fair to everyone. QFT (+ Space filling characters) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redribbon Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Well, I don't think they're coming out this week, probably early next week. I'm so excited to see what the cutoffs are when they do come out; it'll be a little like detective work. Will the R remain? Will the GPA cutoffs increase? And I wonder if this is going to be a permanent thing, interviewing 760 applicants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalia Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I think the GPA cut is gonna increase. I know this is just me speculating, but I'm looking at the Mac interview invite thread and my eyes are going out like this at people's cGPAs (yeah, that's right, cGPAs, not last two years. So imagine what their last two years must be). But then again, maybe it's just Mac's formula that resulted in higher GPAs. But if we look at Western, where the GPA cuts went up, I'm not surprised if they do so for Queen's as well. This is just pure speculation, helps relieve some of the stress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retsage Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Why would they get pissed? Queen's is interviewing the most applicants out of any Ontario school. If they don't make the cutoffs, it's their own fault. If I don't make the cutoffs, I'm not gonna blame Queen's; I'm familiar with the Queen's admissions process (no cutoffs = no interview) therefore I'd blame myself. Look mate, when you spend years and years of your life striving towards something, rejection hurts - a lot. People need something to blame, and they're not wrong for it - the process is ridiculous. And this is coming from someone who is assured an interview at Queen's. Stop being so arrogant as to state how other people should feel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redribbon Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Look mate, when you spend years and years of your life striving towards something, rejection hurts - a lot. People need something to blame, and they're not wrong for it - the process is ridiculous. And this is coming from someone who is assured an interview with Queen's. Well, I'm talking about pre-interview, not post. Post-interview and being rejected, it's a bit harder to say where your mistakes occurred as the grading scheme may be a bit more ambiguous. Pre-interview, it's either MCAT or GPA, and both are in your direct control; I think it's harder to blame someone else (especially the medical institution) if your GPA messes up or you miss the MCAT by a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Retsage Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 And I'm talking about both. An 'R' in the WS last year was, by no means, a fair way to distinguish between applicants in their ability to become doctors. The fact that it was an objective measure did not, in anyway, make it a fair measure. And that's the point. If someone misses the cutoff because they have a 10 instead of an 11 in BS, or a 'Q' instead of an 'R' in the WS, they're rightly going to be upset at the arbitrary cutoffs placed by the system. If the cutoffs were not arbitrary, if there was true reasoning behind why an 'R' is required to practice good medicine and make a good physician, you would be correct. But as long as the cutoffs are merely a tool to arbitrarily reduce the applicant pool, people have every right to place blame on the schools. They want fairness, not objectivity. But schools cannot offer fairness in this process, as it is intrinsically flawed and unfair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I wonder if we are going to be like this with our first patients. ...Nurse what are the vitals on Mrs. Smith She is stable doctor, no change. ...Great I'll call again in 3 minutes. Medics do vitals at least every 15 mins on stable pts....every 5 on unstable...I did 5 BPs in 10 minutes on my most recent patient, who was suffering an MI. And by "I," I mean the ECG machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 And I'm talking about both. An 'R' in the WS last year was, by no means, a fair way to distinguish between applicants in their ability to become doctors. The fact that it was an objective measure did not, in anyway, make it a fair measure. And that's the point. If someone misses the cutoff because they have a 10 instead of an 11 in BS, or a 'Q' instead of an 'R' in the WS, they're rightly going to be upset at the arbitrary cutoffs placed by the system. If the cutoffs were not arbitrary, if there was true reasoning behind why an 'R' is required to practice good medicine and make a good physician, you would be correct. But as long as the cutoffs are merely a tool to arbitrarily reduce the applicant pool, people have every right to place blame on the schools. They want fairness, not objectivity. But schools cannot offer fairness in this process, as it is intrinsically flawed and unfair. I'd rather take hard cut-offs over completely subjective evals, such as Mac's 5 Qs mentioned earlier. Here's an example: last year, I applied to U of C and U of A. U of C rated my ECs below their interviewed average. U of A rated my ECs above admitted average. Applicant pools were probably quite similar, considering the schools are in the same province and I was IP. Crapshoot much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvermen85 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 And I'm talking about both. An 'R' in the WS last year was, by no means, a fair way to distinguish between applicants in their ability to become doctors. The fact that it was an objective measure did not, in anyway, make it a fair measure. And that's the point. If someone misses the cutoff because they have a 10 instead of an 11 in BS, or a 'Q' instead of an 'R' in the WS, they're rightly going to be upset at the arbitrary cutoffs placed by the system. If the cutoffs were not arbitrary, if there was true reasoning behind why an 'R' is required to practice good medicine and make a good physician, you would be correct. But as long as the cutoffs are merely a tool to arbitrarily reduce the applicant pool, people have every right to place blame on the schools. They want fairness, not objectivity. But schools cannot offer fairness in this process, as it is intrinsically flawed and unfair. In this case it's not about whether a person with a Q is going to be a good doctor or not, but would a person with a R has the potential to be a better doctor. Apparently many canadian schools think it does, and as well as for those with 3.8 GPA will more likely be a better doctor than those with 3.7. It might not be accurate, and it mostly likely isn't, but for many canadian schools, those numbers are the only thing they can use to measure people's potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochi1543 Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 In this case it's not about whether a person with a Q is going to be a good doctor or not, but would a person with a R has the potential to be a better doctor. Apparently many canadian schools think it does, and as well as for those with 3.8 GPA will more likely be a better doctor than those with 3.7. It might not be accurate, and it mostly likely isn't, but for many canadian schools, those numbers are the only thing they can use to measure people's potential. I really don't think this is the logic behind the numbers, it's just the result of having too many applicants. If we had 200 applicants for 100 spots - trust me, the cutoffs would've been like 3.2 and 24 N. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalia Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 I really don't think this is the logic behind the numbers, it's just the result of having too many applicants. If we had 200 applicants for 100 spots - trust me, the cutoffs would've been like 3.2 and 24 N. lol. Perhaps back in the early 1900s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supafield Posted January 30, 2009 Report Share Posted January 30, 2009 Or the 60's and 70's where I hear old doctors make fun of me and say I would never do what you're doing.... when I went to medical school I had 2 years at a 72% average.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.