Jump to content
Premed 101 Forums

If you were the admissions officer


Recommended Posts

I say to hell with GPA. We all know GPA is a joke nowadays, and WAY far from being standardized. On one end of the spectrum, you have health sci at mac, where 4.0's are handed out like condoms at a free clinic, and on the other end you have programs like pathology at UofT where a 3.0 is really good. Given the blatant lack of standardization, I honestly don't see much value in it (and I'm saying that with a really high GPA, so i'm not biased).

 

MCAT on the other hand should be weighed much heavier than it is now. It is a standardized test that tests critical thinking, communication, science knowledge, intelligence, competence under pressure, preparation, etc... and it is standardized! Why is this not huge????... it weeds out the people getting high marks either because they take easy classes, are in a joke program, etc...

 

I say MCAT be like 60%

- writing sample as a cut-off (maybe P), due to it's subjectivity, but

communication and ability to critically evaluate (ie. a prompt) is

still important

- verbal and bio weighed a bit higher than physics, but all significant

- have cut-offs for each (9), for consideration, but then absolute scores

still matter

- and DEFINITELY have a penalty for multiple writes... i'm all for multiple

tries (by no means should you only have one shot), but I'm sick of the fact

that someone who gets a 34 after three writes being equal to someone who

gets it after one... they're pretty clearly not equal... the first dude has the

benefit of tapping out at the height of the test's inherent intraperson variability.

 

Nice post, but just two corrections. First, NOBODY in the LMP program at U of T will ever get 3.0. People who get into the program have basically 4.0's in first year, and it takes a lot to drop that far (but it is difficult nontheless, maybe around 3.7 range?).

 

Second, I agree with the inherent sentimentality of fairness within the idea of taking multiple attempts into account, and that someone who takes it multiple attempts to take the mcat "taps out" at their height. However, you can also argue that the person who managed 35 on their first time also knows that they were at the top of their game and that any retake of the test would significantly decrease their score (someone lucks out by doodling and gets 14 in VR, NEVER GOING TO retake it because they know that their true level is around 11). I say, make all med school agree to take the best MCAT attempt out of 3 or 4, so that there is absolutely no downside to taking the Mcat multiple times. That way, it would be implied that if you only took it once, you are either high enough that it doesnt matter anymore, or you implicitly agree that your first time MCAT score is likely the best you will achieve. Plus, with those extra chances, I would love to test my limits and see if I'm capable of a coveted 13 in VR...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Guest success100
Ahah don't get me started on the r score.... it's most complicated thing ever. I don't understand why they don't simply use grades for cegep students and GPA for university students.

 

True true...R-Score is the epic fail of systems.Anyone lucky enough to get into a group full of slackers can get an awesome score with the minimum of efforts...

I simply prefer the U.S./CA,much much much less complicated...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pre-Interview:

 

GPA/MCAT/ECs: 35/45/20

 

MCAT:

WS not considered(like virtually all U.S schools.. they pretty much ignore this section..)

Most recent score taken

Will not consider applicants who took it more than three times

 

Post Interview:

 

Combined Score Pre-Interview converted to /70, Interview /30

 

I for one don't hold interviews and EC's to a high regard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may have a point, I'm very naturally friendly, empathic and bleed patient centered are so I might be a bit presumptuous in thinking others necessary think the way I do. What would you think of a more extensive interview process then ,perhaps combining an MMI (with say six 20 min sections (instead of the 8*10 which I agree is prone to more bull****ters) that are more focussed on personal interaction as well as complex cognition) mixed with a couple open file panel interviews (45 min each), with you getting the higher panel interview score (because we know panel interviews are a bit more subjective), and take a 50/50 for a total interview score. The key for me is diversity, the more long social situations you're put in the harder it is to fake who you are.

 

I know this would be a pain in the ass to do, but I'm pretending we live in a resource rich world.

 

Interpersonal qualities are definitely very important attributes in a physician, but I believe that MMIs and panel interviews during an hour or so does poorly in assessing that ability. I was thinking more along the lines of people who have quite bad rapport with people generally, and if they used their everyday face and tone, they would be flat out rejected.

However, just for that 1 hour, they pretend to be a person they're not, and carefully manufacture an image they'd like to project. Then when they're in, they revert back to their old selves. They'd probably not put in the effort to "be fake" when its just them and their patients.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So...

 

Every premed thinks they will be an awesome doctor. Thus, every premed thinks what they have done and accomplished unequivocally proves this.

 

Large reason why some people are saying ECs and interview vs others saying GPA and MCAT.

 

Making this probably the most biased thread ever with every opinion likely highlighting each individuals area of perceived strength. I.E. I'm sure the large majority of premed responders would be highly competitive at their fantasy med school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what is your source for this? Besides, I get the feeling that 20 something year old are capable of distinguishing the direction that their life wants to go in, and a mere 5-6 year (for the 30 year old) isnt always necessary. After all, we arent talking about the difference between 13 year olds and 20 year olds. us younguns deserve the benefit of the doubt. After all, if the few 30 year olds were able to switch from some other career to med, that means that they got the benefit of the doubt too

 

I do not have the source but there have been numerous polls published in newspapers and such that many physicians would have taken a different route had they had the chance to repeat it all over again.

 

It also makes intuitive sense. Very few people at the age of 20 have really thought and considered various professions which may make them question their decision later in life. They very well may have made the right decision, but they won't know and the aura of uncertainty will make them question it and will hinder their happiness, ever so slightly.

 

It's the same deal with kids that get married at 20 (yes, I said kids). I think people should sleep and **** around for a while before they decide to settle down for the rest of their life. I am not saying that marrying your highschool sweetheart can't work out; it does, but there's a lot more benefit in delaying it.

 

Furthermore, giving small bonuses (and 1 point/year is a small bonus) for maturity will not tip the scales dramatically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not have the source but there have been numerous polls published in newspapers and such that many physicians would have taken a different route had they had the chance to repeat it all over again.

 

It also makes intuitive sense. Very few people at the age of 20 have really thought and considered various professions which may make them question their decision later in life. They very well may have made the right decision, but they won't know and the aura of uncertainty will make them question it and will hinder their happiness, ever so slightly.

 

It's the same deal with kids that get married at 20 (yes, I said kids). I think people should sleep and **** around for a while before they decide to settle down for the rest of their life. I am not saying that marrying your highschool sweetheart can't work out; it does, but there's a lot more benefit in delaying it.

 

Furthermore, giving small bonuses (and 1 point/year is a small bonus) for maturity will not tip the scales dramatically.

 

hmm... interesting, but is there any evidence that the physicians unhappy with their jobs are mainly made up of the younger physicians? It is also conceivable that the ones who switched careers initially suddenly wanted to switch careers again, thinking that no, LAW is the thing for me? Also, one implication of your system is that any 50 year old person would be given an almost insurmountable advantage in the app process, despite their other qualificiations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hmm... interesting, but is there any evidence that the physicians unhappy with their jobs are mainly made up of the younger physicians? It is also conceivable that the ones who switched careers initially suddenly wanted to switch careers again, thinking that no, LAW is the thing for me? Also, one implication of your system is that any 50 year old person would be given an almost insurmountable advantage in the app process, despite their other qualificiations.

 

Sure but the system defends itself:

 

1. School is expensive

2. School is time-intensive

3. School/exams/licensing protocol for an older person will be more difficult

4. The working potential is limited

 

The great advantage of it is that if the 50 year old really wants to work against those barriers, the chances are they will be enthusiastic and productive members of the workforce.

 

Nevertheless, the points for age cater to only one group specifically: those people around the age of 30 who had a change of mind but screwed up their GPA b/c at the time had no intention of going to a GPA-intensive career (or screwed up due to immaturity). A person at 18 can literally screw up ALL their chances in the first 2 years and that's just tragic. If that person is willing to go through the hoops (MSc, PhD, MCAT) and wait for a few years, then that shows dedication and I think those people should have the chance of making it.

 

At the moment, the only way those people can get back into the competitive pool is to repeat a Bachelors which will see absolutely zero use. An MSc/PhD is much more fulfilling and useful that another degree that's just there for the sake of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure but the system defends itself:

 

1. School is expensive

2. School is time-intensive

3. School/exams/licensing protocol for an older person will be more difficult

4. The working potential is limited

 

The great advantage of it is that if the 50 year old really wants to work against those barriers, the chances are they will be enthusiastic and productive members of the workforce.

 

Nevertheless, the points for age cater to only one group specifically: those people around the age of 30 who had a change of mind but screwed up their GPA b/c at the time had no intention of going to a GPA-intensive career (or screwed up due to immaturity). A person at 18 can literally screw up ALL their chances in the first 2 years and that's just tragic. If that person is willing to go through the hoops (MSc, PhD, MCAT) and wait for a few years, then that shows dedication and I think those people should have the chance of making it.

 

At the moment, the only way those people can get back into the competitive pool is to repeat a Bachelors which will see absolutely zero use. An MSc/PhD is much more fulfilling and useful that another degree that's just there for the sake of it.

 

Interesting, but would not the very fact that the older people may have a cognitive deficit during med school being a very good reason for not accepting them? Med school admissions is based on perceived ability to be (and be licensed as) a practicing physician, not based one's innate drive to go into medicine. Perhaps a better system would be to somehow count a graduate degree AS a second undergrad somehow (clean start) but without any inherent age-based point system (which might also be unconstitutional, as it might be considered a form of age-based discrimination)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The argument is again self-defeating; there are no students at 50 year of age.

 

what would you consider to a very likely age then, around 35ish? but the possibility of it being challenged as unconstitutional still stands (lol... if such a system was in place, I would probably be inclined to challenge it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The argument is again self-defeating; there are no students at 50 year of age.

 

Actually, I don't know if you remember the Mac show called Med Students (or something like that), but one of the 1st year med students was a 50 year old. I think he was a former teacher or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would definitely be a step in the right direction with regards to picking better applicants. In my opinion, the more people evaluating the applicant, the better. Also, MMI stations are too cut and dried...answer the question and then stone silence. That's senseless.

You hit the nail on the head with regards to diversity. We need to bring back the open file panel interviews, as they are better to detect a person's character in my opinion.

But this will never happen due to time constraints.

 

You may have a point, I'm very naturally friendly, empathic and bleed patient centered are so I might be a bit presumptuous in thinking others necessary think the way I do. What would you think of a more extensive interview process then ,perhaps combining an MMI (with say six 20 min sections (instead of the 8*10 which I agree is prone to more bull****ters) that are more focussed on personal interaction as well as complex cognition) mixed with a couple open file panel interviews (45 min each), with you getting the higher panel interview score (because we know panel interviews are a bit more subjective), and take a 50/50 for a total interview score. The key for me is diversity, the more long social situations you're put in the harder it is to fake who you are.

 

I know this would be a pain in the ass to do, but I'm pretending we live in a resource rich world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


×
×
  • Create New...