rmorelan Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 10-year rule is still in effect for applicants this cycle. Well at least that is more notice than most schools give before changing things - still considering the people using this rule potentially a very annoying wait. Hope you hear soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 10-year rule is still in effect for applicants this cycle. Well at least that is more notice than most schools give before changing things - still considering the people using this rule potentially a very annoying wait. Hope you hear soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 10-year rule is still in effect for applicants this cycle. Well at least that is more notice than most schools give before changing things - still considering the people using this rule potentially a very annoying wait. Hope you hear soon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylamonkey Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Just called, still no updates. When it is, it should be on here, the "Notes for Applicants": http://www.med.ubc.ca/education/md_ugrad/MD_Undergraduate_Admissions.htm (I know people are going to have mini-heart-attacks reading there is an update to this thread, sorry, but I wanted to get the linky-linky on here) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aquadon Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Just called, still no updates. When it is, it should be on here, the "Notes for Applicants": http://www.med.ubc.ca/education/md_ugrad/MD_Undergraduate_Admissions.htm (I know people are going to have mini-heart-attacks reading there is an update to this thread, sorry, but I wanted to get the linky-linky on here) Sorry to hear that Kyla! At least they're giving you lots of time with the new June 1st coursework deadline, right?? Right?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hking03 Posted February 24, 2011 Report Share Posted February 24, 2011 Just called, still no updates. When it is, it should be on here, the "Notes for Applicants": http://www.med.ubc.ca/education/md_ugrad/MD_Undergraduate_Admissions.htm (I know people are going to have mini-heart-attacks reading there is an update to this thread, sorry, but I wanted to get the linky-linky on here) I seem to remember that the new rule would be released sometime in march. Can you believe that june 1st is only 96 days away. So, for all those people working the applications- you've got 96 days to get some EC's in the bag. I can't really start anything new, but I've got a lot of stuff still on the go so at least that will help me a bit should I require an application for the next cycle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ab_Med Posted February 25, 2011 Report Share Posted February 25, 2011 So, the 10-year rule is in this current application, but not for 2011/12 cycle. interesting. Ab Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iwh333 Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 how much longer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hking03 Posted February 26, 2011 Report Share Posted February 26, 2011 how much longer... My guess- by the end of march. The latest- June 1st. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylamonkey Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 Oh god... Is it bad that I had a dream about this last night? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternalkeener Posted March 5, 2011 Report Share Posted March 5, 2011 I had a bad dream about the disappearance of this policy too! Also, I heard from someone who talked to someone who works on the 'student committee' for admissions policies (I didn't know there was such a thing!) and she said that the admissions committee wants people with 'youthful energy' and that they believe that the time to study medicine is 'when you are young', also because they want more years of service from the med students once they graduate. That... scared the heck out of me... especially since this person is well informed!! Isn't this ageism, flat out? It's actually anti-constitutional. They need to do something about the 10-year policy or they will have serious problems on their hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloh Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 I had a bad dream about the disappearance of this policy too! Also, I heard from someone who talked to someone who works on the 'student committee' for admissions policies (I didn't know there was such a thing!) and she said that the admissions committee wants people with 'youthful energy' and that they believe that the time to study medicine is 'when you are young', also because they want more years of service from the med students once they graduate. That... scared the heck out of me... especially since this person is well informed!! Isn't this ageism, flat out? It's actually anti-constitutional. They need to do something about the 10-year policy or they will have serious problems on their hands. It would only be unfair if they actually deducted points for age or gave additional points for being younger. They aren't doing any such thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
songofdovely Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 I had a bad dream about the disappearance of this policy too! Also, I heard from someone who talked to someone who works on the 'student committee' for admissions policies (I didn't know there was such a thing!) and she said that the admissions committee wants people with 'youthful energy' and that they believe that the time to study medicine is 'when you are young', also because they want more years of service from the med students once they graduate. That... scared the heck out of me... especially since this person is well informed!! Isn't this ageism, flat out? It's actually anti-constitutional. They need to do something about the 10-year policy or they will have serious problems on their hands. Ageism? In what way? Removing the 10 year rule actually allows applicants to be judged equally. I would argue that it is ageism WITH the 10 year rule, since it gives a certain set of privileges to individuals who are older. Older applicants (should) inherently have more work/life experience allowing them to gain an advantage in the NAQ portion. I don't see the necessity for this advantage to carry over in the AQ portion. I, for one, am glad that this rule is being taken out and will hopefully be replaced with a structure that will benefit a wider range of applicants (such as Manitoba's rule of dropping x amount of credits after taking y amount of credits). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ace of Spades Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 ...also because they want more years of service from the med students once they graduate. From the point of view of a taxpayer, who is helping to fund the training of new healthcare workers, as well as someone who will be needing medical care in the future, this makes sense to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maybeadoc Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 So I guess women shouldn't be doctors because they may take time inthe future to start a family and stay home to take care of children, this is happening by the way! This is a ludicrous argument considering noone knows how many years of service someone will give! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ace of Spades Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 So I guess women shouldn't be doctors because they may take time inthe future to start a family and stay home to take care of children, this is happening by the way! This is a ludicrous argument considering noone knows how many years of service someone will give! I can see where you're coming from. Yes, if a female doctor takes off 18 years of work to raise a child, that would be a big loss to the industry. However, I believe the benefits of hiring female doctors far outweigh the risk in terms of loss of labour. The provincial government has a vested interest in ensuring that it trains enough doctors to care for our ailing population. Given the changing demographics of developed nations, there is a requirement to adjust policies at all levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
songofdovely Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 So I guess women shouldn't be doctors because they may take time inthe future to start a family and stay home to take care of children, this is happening by the way! This is a ludicrous argument considering noone knows how many years of service someone will give! So I guess women shouldn't be doctors because they may take time inthe future to start a family and stay home to take care of children, this is happening by the way! This is a ludicrous argument considering noone knows how many years of service someone will give! Hah, your sarcasm unfortunately really does reflect the view of some current doctors in our community. My research supervisor, who also works in public health, went on a 20 minute rant about how MMI favours females because they are typically able to express their feelings better than males. He is also on the UBC Med adcom and has lobbied to have MMI questions changed to more logic type questions as opposed to "feeling-type questions". Again, this is purely the position of my supervisor as I personally do not agree with it. He is definitely a public health kind of guy, working under him I can definitely you tell he is all about the results at the end of the day (no offence to MPH's ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayan Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 I heard from someone who talked to someone who works on the 'student committee' for admissions policies (I didn't know there was such a thing!) and she said that the admissions committee wants people with 'youthful energy' and that they believe that the time to study medicine is 'when you are young', also because they want more years of service from the med students once they graduate. I'm going to go ahead and reject this as hearsay. I'm not making a statement on eternalkeener's credibility. I am however not convinced in the slightest that third/fourth-hand information carries any merit whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternalkeener Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 that's too bad, because it's true information! i know the whole chain of speakers, but i am not naming names here. i guess we can all do what we will with this information and see it in all the different ways that we wish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maybeadoc Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 Hah, your sarcasm unfortunately really does reflect the view of some current doctors in our community. My research supervisor, who also works in public health, went on a 20 minute rant about how MMI favours females because they are typically able to express their feelings better than males. He is also on the UBC Med adcom and has lobbied to have MMI questions changed to more logic type questions as opposed to "feeling-type questions". Again, this is purely the position of my supervisor as I personally do not agree with it. He is definitely a public health kind of guy, working under him I can definitely you tell he is all about the results at the end of the day (no offence to MPH's ). i know it reflects some people's thinking AND this is on many occasions true, but does that mean women shouldn't doctors? NO!!! from a taxpapayers perspective perhaps it would make sense, but as a canadian I am proud that we as a society make decisions that do not always boil down to money! People should follow their dreams including pursuing an education that they want to - it is a privilige yes, BUT also a right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eternalkeener Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 i know it reflects some people's thinking AND this is on many occasions true, but does that mean women shouldn't doctors? NO!!! from a taxpapayers perspective perhaps it would make sense, but as a canadian I am proud that we as a society make decisions that do not always boil down to money! People should follow their dreams including pursuing an education that they want to - it is a privilige yes, BUT also a right! You hit the nail right on the head with that one, maybeadoc. That's exactly what Canada stands for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaplin Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 I had a bad dream about the disappearance of this policy too! Also, I heard from someone who talked to someone who works on the 'student committee' for admissions policies (I didn't know there was such a thing!) and she said that the admissions committee wants people with 'youthful energy' and that they believe that the time to study medicine is 'when you are young', also because they want more years of service from the med students once they graduate. That... scared the heck out of me... especially since this person is well informed!! Isn't this ageism, flat out? It's actually anti-constitutional. They need to do something about the 10-year policy or they will have serious problems on their hands. What age range do you mean when you say young? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylamonkey Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 Ageism? In what way? Removing the 10 year rule actually allows applicants to be judged equally. I would argue that it is ageism WITH the 10 year rule, since it gives a certain set of privileges to individuals who are older. Older applicants (should) inherently have more work/life experience allowing them to gain an advantage in the NAQ portion. I don't see the necessity for this advantage to carry over in the AQ portion. I, for one, am glad that this rule is being taken out and will hopefully be replaced with a structure that will benefit a wider range of applicants (such as Manitoba's rule of dropping x amount of credits after taking y amount of credits). Just in my defense, as someone who used the 10 yr rule, I'd argue that I was a very different person 10 yrs ago, and that is why I should have a chance to not have those marks counted. Not a different person in the sense that you're a different person from 1st yr to 4th yr university, but the same level of difference from a 16-yr-old to a 26-yr-old. That's all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylamonkey Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 Also, I don't think you can guess at someone's longevity in their career solely based on age. I might be older than some of you, but I can guarantee I will be working longer than many. And I'm young and fit, in any case, I'll be productive for a long time. Besides, there's quantity of work, and quality of work. A slightly older applicant who is a social worker, then decides to go into med, will have a huge base of ability/expertise not available to your average 21-yr-old. I worked as a personal trainer for a number of years, and it has given me an idea of how I perform when I have to explain things about the human body to my clients, and about the level of receptiveness/awareness of medical stuff the average person has. You're supposed to get that in your volunteering, but I'm not sure it's so easy to come by. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Ace of Spades Posted March 6, 2011 Report Share Posted March 6, 2011 I would still consider a 30 year old to be young enough. I'm talking about people who are 50 years old (granted, not at all common), who will be 55 or so once they graduate from medical school. Add on residency time, etc., and they only have a good ten years of service left in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.