CutOff Posting

[Retsage]

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?

 

 

That's fine and I don't disagree, necessarily. I'm simply stating that people have a right to be pissed off when they miss arbitrary cutoffs.

 

Silvermen, that's patent nonsense.

[Jochi1543]

lol. Perhaps back in the early 1900s

 

Back in 1997, section cutoffs were 8 and WS was only N...cumulative was 3.52.

 

 

As I've said before, the thing I find most ironic in this whole process is that the physician interviewing you and subsequently making the decision to reject you based on subpar scores was probably an underachiever compared to you.

[The_B]

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.

 

You are right Jochi. From my knowledge, the administration would love to set cut off at something like a 3.0 and a 28 O or something like that. The problem would be the 1000+ interviews that would have to be conducted. That is precisely the reason why they are interviewing more people this year. They don't want the cutoffs to go any higher, but because people this year have ridiculously good marks/MCATs, they decided that instead of having really high cutoffs, they'd interview more.

 

If there was a belief that a higher cutoff would produce a better doctor, then they wouldn't have increased the interview spots.

 

I'd also like to add - this goes back to an earlier point I made in the thread. People seem to think you have to have some crazy high IQ for medicine. Intellect is but one facet of medicine, and the knowledge isn't difficult to understand. The volume is where the difficulty arises.

[Retsage]

I'd also like to add - this goes back to an earlier point I made in the thread. People seem to think you have to have some crazy high IQ for medicine. Intellect is but one facet of medicine, and the knowledge isn't difficult to understand. The volume is where the difficulty arises.

 

 

Intelligence will be what allows people to cope with the volume, as it directly ties into speed of learning.

 

[QueensInterview2009]

I think QI2009 is actually just enjoying playing with all of your emotions

Just relax...this is the best part (because theres still hope of an interview without the stress of a pending interview...is that too convoluted?).

 

I am only on here to try to answer any questions that you may have in order to relieve your stress.

 

Good luck.

[truffle]

lol. Perhaps back in the early 1900s

 

 

back then, any highschool graduate who applied got in. a prof of medicine at UofT told me this.

[truffle]

and then he laughed really hard and snorted. he looks like he's at least in his 60s, likely late 60s. he went to uoft med way back in the day.

[Alastriss]

Ok I jumped in here late

 

I'm with retsage. Just because its obective doesn't mean its fair, and I am in the same boat as retsage stats-wise, so you know I'm not hating because I may not get an interview (although you never really know). People work hard for something and when they don't know what to work hard for (so for queen's it would be letting VR, PS, and BS take a back seat while you practice WS really hard) it can be hurtful. Who on earth thought an 27<x<30 mcat with an R+ is better than a 30+ with a <R?

 

No one knows. And that's a problem in and of itself.

 

Secondly, this is directed to silverman85. Just because they put an R there doesn't mean that they think that having an R makes you a better doctor. They need a way to cut down the number of applicants because its too much. Cept drawing numbers out of a hat or throwing the applications down the stairs is too absurd. You would be drawing hundreds of numbers and you need a large flight of stairs to throw 3000 applicants on . So they use a computer to find out how to get the number of interviews they want.

 

Its faster, and less absurd sounding. Like Retsage said, intelligence to cope with volume.

[rmorelan]

Hmmm, I actually don't think that is all that was going on.

 

They could have raised any part of the mcat to reduce the number of people who qualify - Bump up bio, increase VR etc. All of these can be "justified" in some way. They specifically chose the WS to be an R to do it.

 

I think there really is a admin/doctor (or more than one) at Queens who does believe having the R is important. Probably believes WS = communication ability = better doctor. I am not saying that person is right, but I don't think that decision was arbitrary.

 

Yes it cut down applications, but there was a broader philosophy in play. Could be wrong though....

[Jochi1543]

Well, I guess it's either at the end of the day today or next Friday! Schools LOVE to send out invites on Friday afternoons, so they don't get flooded with calls right after.

[BigManOnCampus]

Regarding this debate on the unfair and arbitrary nature of the previous cutoffs and their ability to predict the competency of an applicant:

 

The debate is moot. ANY and ALL cutoffs will necessarily be arbitrary. There is no strict cutoff value that delineates people who will fail medical school terribly and those with the ability to become outstanding doctors. The predictive validity of the MCAT and GPA will never be as such. If the magic scores are 11/11/11/Q with 3.80 cGPA, for example, someone with 10/11/11/Q and 3.80 will not be unable to handle med school. No quantitative differences neatly distinguishe the qualitative differences.

 

It's somewhat unnerving to see the strong overtones of scientific objectivism in this debate, as if selecting among applicants were analogous to measuring emission spectra energy values. Selecting matriculants is NOT a science; there are no universal laws underlying the process. Hell, psychology isn't even a "true" science, and I'm a psychology student, so it's not an easy admission. But, I digress. My point is that the whole selection process is arbitrary and will always be arbitrary, simply due to the imperfections and emergent and intangible qualities of human beings. Our agentic nature doesn't allow for universalities, hence there can never be a definitive applicant ranking ontology. Your particular selection methodology is no more valid than theirs and, I am certain, just as imperfect.

 

You're all right: it isn't fair; it is arbitrary; the cutoffs are too high; an R probably doesn't make a better doctor than a Q; etc. Guess what? No one made us want to become doctors. No one made us apply to any particular school, either. We are playing their game by CHOICE. No need to get all worked up about how unjust it all is. If it's too much, just quit. Otherwise - and I mean this in the nicest way possible - just shutup and play the game.

[meme me]

as if selecting among applicants were analogous to measuring emission spectra energy values.

You're a huge nerd!

[The_B]

Intelligence will be what allows people to cope with the volume, as it directly ties into speed of learning.

 

I swear, if I say duck, you'd jump

 

My point was that objective measures of who gets an interview, which are based on standardized tests, or extremely unstandardized marks, do not indicate success in Medicine. So long as you can reach certain standards (which are still high to meet. I mean a 3.0 is above average, and that is above average in an institution of higher learning, not in the general population), then you have the chops to handle medicine.

[supafield]

I really don't want to be strung out another weekend....

My studying has been fairly useless lately....

 

Here's to hoping I know my fate one way or another today.

And Here's to hoping I know it one was specifically! lol

[kalia]

I really don't want to be strung out another weekend....

My studying has been fairly useless lately....

 

Here's to hoping I know my fate one way or another today.

And Here's to hoping I know it one was specifically! lol

 

I think they're handing them out either next Monday or the 5th or 6th.

 

The ppl at the admissions office are really really nice; I've called them several times in the past asking about my social science/humanities credit and they're always very patient, very friendly.

 

Huge difference from admissions services in other parts of Ontario and US

[supafield]

I think they're handing them out either next Monday or the 5th or 6th.

 

The ppl at the admissions office are really really nice; I've called them several times in the past asking about my social science/humanities credit and they're always very patient, very friendly.

 

Huge difference from admissions services in other parts of Ontario and US

 

I've spoken to them twice as well.... very nice...

 

So are the ladies in the Western office.... When my whole 2nd degree thing seemed to lead to question after question, Darla invited me in just to sit down and talk and make sure I wasn't missing anything.... Very appreciated. Now if only they didn't chose that 11 in bio lol.

[BigManOnCampus]

I think they're handing them out either next Monday or the 5th or 6th.

 

The ppl at the admissions office are really really nice; I've called them several times in the past asking about my social science/humanities credit and they're always very patient, very friendly.

 

Huge difference from admissions services in other parts of Ontario and US

 

Out of curiousity, what gave you the impression that they were sending them out either Monday or later next week?

[supafield]

I don't think they're going to be sent out this week. I called today, and Corrine said they'll be sending them out the first week of Feb, both rejections and interviews

 

I think this is her source lol...

 

 

I had spoken to the office the day before (Monday) and Jen Saunders told me either the end of this week or the beginning of next.

[BigManOnCampus]

I was curious because there have been contradictory "leaks" from different people at the admissions office

[supafield]

I was curious because there have been contradictory "leaks" from different people at the admissions office

 

I imagine there's a chance we'll see them today, but they gave themselves the leeway to send them early next week and not have people say "But you said!!!"

[Wizard]

I think since nobody met Queens requirement of 40T they have decided to not have a class of 2013. Sigh.

[The Law]

Haha, too funny.

[BigManOnCampus]

it looks as if no news is indeed good news at this point

[skye]

does the office close at 5pm?

do they work on the weekend or can I stop being glued to the computer until Monday?

[imagine]

does the office close at 5pm?

do they work on the weekend or can I stop being glued to the computer until Monday?

 

At this point it's probably just lag from the server that's delaying the messages, I don't think there is someone physically watching over the email system.