10 year rule under review

[ryacha]

Hey everyone, I don't understand how the "drop the 30 credits" works. What if those credits are among the pre-requisites...also 30 credits would mean almost two years of classes right? Should the two years be consecutive?

PS: I phoned ubc today, the said they couldn't' tell me anything today. Everything will be posted tomorrow.

 

30 credits is generally 2 semesters -> 10 classes at 3 credits each? Perhaps your system is different but I would bank on dropping only one year of marks though, not two. I would assume the 2 semesters need to be consecutive? If they are posting it up tomorrow that should bring a lot of clarification to our questions.

[MarathonRunner]

Hey everyone, I don't understand how the "drop the 30 credits" works. What if those credits are among the pre-requisites...also 30 credits would mean almost two years of classes right? Should the two years be consecutive?

PS: I phoned ubc today, the said they couldn't' tell me anything today. Everything will be posted tomorrow.

 

30 credits is generally one year. 10 courses (5 per semester) at 3 credits each. Of course, every university seems to do things differently. I know some universities where a one-semester course is 0.5 credit, others where it is 1.0, and others where it is 3.0. Then some universities don't "add on" extra weight for labs, but others do. So a first-year chem course with a lab would be 3.0 credits (or 0.5 credits) at some universities, but 4.0 (or some other number) at others.

 

It can be confusing, that's for sure.

[maybeadoc]

I agree that it would have been quite considerate and appropriate to provide a warning that this will happen i.e. removal of the 10-year rule. Many have geared everything they do towards this policy and to have it cancelled without warning is quite unfair. I know that admssions is allowed to do what they feel is best, but I feel that they still owe it to their applicants who have lives, dependants, dreams to provide a heads for such a large policy change.

 

My 2cents...

[Chaplin]

Wow...I'm so suprised about all this. For me it's not the 30 credits vs last 60 that will destroy me but the pre-req average. I'm one of those people that had a horrible first year (I'm talking borderline failure) and took all my pre-reqs during that year. Taking out the lowest 30 creds but putting in an entire pre-req average is pretty drastic in my opinion... I'm praying for this year's admission twice as hard now

 

 

If they do this then it would negate the whole point of dropping the lowest year. Most people have a bad first year and UBC admissions itself recognizes this. If they remove the last 60 credit calculation BUT instead include the pre req average in score calculation then theres little use in dropping the lowest year average.I know it will be clear tomorrow but this idea is really horrible.

[terminator]

If they do this then it would negate the whole point of dropping the lowest year. Most people have a bad first year and UBC admissions itself recognizes this. If they remove the last 60 credit calculation BUT instead include the pre req average in score calculation then theres little use in dropping the lowest year average.I know it will be clear tomorrow but this idea is really horrible.

 

Totally agree. Just when you think it can't get worse...it does Hopefully the admission board really thinks this through. I have redone all my pre-req's (applying the 10 year rule), so also interested in if they will take the courses I did 13 years ago or last year.

[TankMasterFlex]

I can't remember if this was already posted but while the materials were still up it specified the year they drop would be sept-august. If there are more than 30 credits in the year they will simply drop the lowest 30 credits. I doubt many people out there had 3 full consecutive semesters but it means that if your summer courses were the lowest they can be dropped.

 

Also, people seem to be wondering what will happen with prereqs if they get dropped. I am almost certain that the AQ score will now simply be your new cgpa minus 1 year if it applies, and they will simply calculate the prereq average and use it as they use it now. They won't make you retake prereq courses or anything if they happen to be in the year that gets dropped. Other schools with a policy like this do it that way so I assume UBC will do the same.

 

This may also mean they change the AQ points system, maybe that will work in our favour somewhat (unlikely though...). At the info session and from speaking to them afterwards the people at admissions seemed well aware that you don't need 85+ averages for medicine. As it stands right now, people with lower overall averages (75-80) that got interviews generally had high last 60 averages, and without that now it essentially means that if they stick with their system it will be very hard to get an interview with anything lower than 80 unless the AQ points they award somehow take this into account. I guess we will see.

[notmeadoc]

Tent City outside the Faculty?

[iwh333]

according to a student senator, the motion was passed... for those that were wondering (from what i heard from my friend who knows the senator). guess we'll have to wait for tomorrow for the official announcement, etc.

[rburgundy]

I can't remember if this was already posted but while the materials were still up it specified the year they drop would be sept-august. If there are more than 30 credits in the year they will simply drop the lowest 30 credits. I doubt many people out there had 3 full consecutive semesters but it means that if your summer courses were the lowest they can be dropped.

 

Also, people seem to be wondering what will happen with prereqs if they get dropped. I am almost certain that the AQ score will now simply be your new cgpa minus 1 year if it applies, and they will simply calculate the prereq average and use it as they use it now. They won't make you retake prereq courses or anything if they happen to be in the year that gets dropped. Other schools with a policy like this do it that way so I assume UBC will do the same.

 

This may also mean they change the AQ points system, maybe that will work in our favour somewhat (unlikely though...). At the info session and from speaking to them afterwards the people at admissions seemed well aware that you don't need 85+ averages for medicine. As it stands right now, people with lower overall averages (75-80) that got interviews generally had high last 60 averages, and without that now it essentially means that if they stick with their system it will be very hard to get an interview with anything lower than 80 unless the AQ points they award somehow take this into account. I guess we will see.

 

Considering an 80 gets you ~8 AQ, it'll be virtually impossible. I'd say you'd need a >82-83% to have a half-decent chance and >85% to be safe.

[TankMasterFlex]

Considering an 80 gets you ~8 AQ, it'll be virtually impossible. I'd say you'd need a >82-83% to have a half-decent chance and >85% to be safe.

 

True. Unless UBC changes the IP minimum to 80% I am sure they will change how AQ points are distributed as it doesn't make sense to set a 75% minimum when anything below 80% is already mathematically rejected.

[notmeadoc]

University of Toront er..I mean British Columbia.

[kylamonkey]

 

The removal of the last 60 credits will make it difficult / impossible to bring up low averages. It's hard to argue against this move because they have stated they are trying to bring their admissions criteria in line with the evidence and cgpa seems to be one of the best predictors of success.

 

It looks like going back to do a 2nd degree will not be nearly as beneficial as it will be incredibly hard to bring up overall averages (even after dropping one year). I wonder if the average age of accepted applicants will go down because of this?

 

So for me, when I drop my 30-credit "Annus horribilis", and assuming certain grades for this term, I'll be at 77.6%, this is with 210 credits included in this score. I would have had an 83% last 60. That's how long it takes to bring up bad marks, even when you drop a bad year.

 

If I start another degree next September, and get straight A+ marks for 120 credits, I can have a somewhat competitive GPA at 82% at the end.

 

 

It seems like UBC is now moving in line with many of the other med schools across Canada (i.e., CGPA as the primary academic selection criteria). Personally, this does me no favors, as I have a strong upward trend that will now effectively go unnoticed.

 

Calgary it is!

 

This is in line with many, but not most med schools in Canada.

(Sorry if I mess this up- I'm on pain meds and my brain is not 100% today)

 

For anyone looking to broaden their horizons, I have been researching this for a while. Keep in mind this is my own classification and some of these schools may be better for some people depending on their particular situation. Here's a very brief summary:

Schools that use overall GPA: MUN, UofT*, Mac, Manitoba*, UBC*, UofA*,

Schools that consider a second degree, but still use cGPA:McGill, NOSM

Schools that take into consideration some sort of "last 60" thing, or last 3yrs:

Dal, Queens, Ottawa, UWO, Saskatchewan, UofC**

*Schools with an asterisk have a special consideration or drop a significant number of courses (30 credits+) for students with a large amount of completed undergrad work.

**UofC is weird and unpredictable and secretive.

 

Looks like I might be moving to Alberta/NS for an IP spot unless by some miracle next year an 82% (with lowest year dropped) gets you an interview

 

ryacha- join the PPB crew! (OK, well so far it's just me...)

[Rwethereyet]

Looks like I might be moving to Alberta/NS for an IP spot unless by some miracle next year an 82% (with lowest year dropped) gets you an interview

 

C'est la vie. Sucks for me, but this might be an overall more accurate measure since it prevents student from escalating their last 2 years with less challenging classes (which is exactly what I have done!)

 

Realistically, this is entirely possible with some stellar EC's. I've messed around with my SSC a little bit, and am hovering around 81.8 after the drop. I am optimistic that UBC will make it possible for people in the 80-83 range to have a realistic shot.

 

Anybody good with statistics? For BC applications this cycle, oGPA avg for interview candidates was 83.91. It would be interesting to predict what this number would have been with the new rules for a drop. What I'm getting at is - are the majority of the higher scoring candidates consistently scoring 85+%'s year after year? If so, the 83.91 should continue to hover near this number. If the applicant pool is made up of mostly non trad's and those who have had medical/family issue-related "off"-years, then their better years should shift this maybe 1-2% points higher (maybe). I would estimate that with the drop, at most, 83.91 this year would've been around 84.5, maybe pushing an 85. Which means the drop should definitely help people such as myself relative to the applicant pool.. I was at a 79.8 oGPA with around an 83 last 60... which was dismal in my eyes (one bad year from a medical procedure). With the new rules, I think that I stand a better chance at 82% to score an interview.

 

And I've always wanted to work / volunteer in lieu of doing more unnecessary coursework.

 

Of course, my math could be way off and that 83.91 might translate into an 86 after drops. Thoughts?

[kylamonkey]

Realistically, this is entirely possible with some stellar EC's. I've messed around with my SSC a little bit, and am hovering around 81.8 after the drop. I am optimistic that UBC will make it possible for people in the 80-83 range to have a realistic shot.

 

 

I was thinking that the #s would add about 2-3% after the drop, but now with no last60 I'm not sure.

 

The other big variable in all this is how AQ will actually be calculated. The change last year- I'm not sure if you know this- gave another big advantage to high GPAs. Even though it's still supposedly weighted 50-50 AQ-NAQ, the bell curve for the AQ is much greater. Someone with 5yrs as a nurse and a 78% GPA may get a 20 NAQ and a 4 AQ, but an applicant with a 93% GPA and minimal, typical extracurrics will get a 25 AQ and about 10 NAQ.

 

I have never seen an NAQ above about 21. Above 17 is pretty extraordinary.

 

I hope this makes sense, mathematically.

[Rwethereyet]

I was thinking that the #s would add about 2-3% after the drop, but now with no last60 I'm not sure.

 

The other big variable in all this is how AQ will actually be calculated. The change last year- I'm not sure if you know this- gave another big advantage to high GPAs. Even though it's still supposedly weighted 50-50 AQ-NAQ, the bell curve for the AQ is much greater. Someone with 5yrs as a nurse and a 78% GPA may get a 20 NAQ and a 4 AQ, but an applicant with a 93% GPA and minimal, typical extracurrics will get a 25 AQ and about 10 NAQ.

 

I have never seen an NAQ above about 21. Above 17 is pretty extraordinary.

 

I hope this makes sense, mathematically.

 

This just seems to go against the whole "diversity" push UBC has claimed to be stressing the past couple of years. If the above AQ/NAQ scoring remains the same, they're essentially selecting for those with 85%+ with weaker EC's/life experience. Just doesn't make sense to me for them to overlook so many qualified applicants in the 80-85 range.

 

Another stat jumps out at me... 608/996 BC applicants were interviewed... 60%. That's a pretty large chunk. I would imagine a lot of those in the 80-83 "warm zone - I'm gonna call it" after the drop would be included in that 60%.

 

It'd be interesting to see what is actually hammered out - I'll be applying for the first time this cycle at the tail end of my research masters. My ECs aren't stellar but they include some overseas volunteering and a few things that also stand out. But nothing extraordinary. I've got a decent mcat, so I actually hope that that will be given more weight (I mean if UBC is going to go with the rest of Canada, why not?).

 

For the non-trads, I think the fact that UBC looks at EC's is a good thing. Throwing in the MCAT would just be icing on the cake, I think anyone can do well on it with a little bit of hard work.

[songofdovely]

Realistically, this is entirely possible with some stellar EC's. I've messed around with my SSC a little bit, and am hovering around 81.8 after the drop. I am optimistic that UBC will make it possible for people in the 80-83 range to have a realistic shot.

 

I actually had the exact same thought process as you. It's very tough for people to score a ~85% WITH a bad year, so the bulk of these candidates most likely have consistent years OR years with minor deviation (one year 83%, another 87%, for example). So I think dropping the lowest year will definitely benefit people like us in terms of where we stand in the applicant pool.

 

And just to keep everyone on the optimistic side, I still scored an interview even with a cgpa of 77%. After some comparison with people who have posted stats, my AQ was about 7-8, meaning my NAQ was anywhere from 21-25. If people want to refer to 80-83% as the "warm zone", I still managed to pull through in the cold zone - so it is entirely possible for people between 80-83% to get an interview so long as their EC's are strong.

[Rwethereyet]

I actually had the exact same thought process as you. It's very tough for people to score a ~85% WITH a bad year, so the bulk of these candidates most likely have consistent years OR years with minor deviation (one year 83%, another 87%, for example). So I think dropping the lowest year will definitely benefit people like us in terms of where we stand in the applicant pool.

 

And just to keep everyone on the optimistic side, I still scored an interview even with a cgpa of 77%. After some comparison with people who have posted stats, my AQ was about 7-8, meaning my NAQ was anywhere from 21-25. If people want to refer to 80-83% as the "warm zone", I still managed to pull through in the cold zone - so it is entirely possible for people between 80-83% to get an interview so long as their EC's are strong.

 

Very well put, song. Congrats on the interview. May I ask what your last60 was?

 

And yes I agree that those in the "cold" zone (anyone with < 80 please don't be offended by this, just some terms song and I are planning on trademarking) should have a shot with the new scoring system, even with half decent EC's. Remember - 60% IP are going to be interviewed each year.

 

Please see my PM, Song.

[MEDLIL]

website updated a minute ago!

http://www.med.ubc.ca/education/md_ugrad/MD_Undergraduate_Admissions/Evaluation_Criteria.htm#adjusted%20academic%20average

[Chaplin]

So i suppose they will include the prerequisite average in the AQ calculation ???

[TankMasterFlex]

So i suppose they will include the prerequisite average in the AQ calculation ???

 

It looks like they're considering it. I don't think it really makes sense to include the prerequisite average in the AQ score. Generally people likely took the prerequisites at the start of University when most people are probably going to have a year excluded. This defeats the purpose of dropping a year and trying to forgive students who may have started out slow. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

If they include the prereq average pre-interview, I think that will be the last nail in the coffin for many applicants (myself included).

[Chaplin]

This defeats the purpose of dropping a year. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

 

Not only that but it sweetly removes the Last 60 average rule too. All this policy changing is at the moment giving the perception of a Net Disadvantage. What benefit is to be gained I dont understand.

[GinaM]

what does it mean that the removal of 30 credits will only apply for some applicants? Does your year have to be below a certain level to count..or will they just take your best three years provided you have at least 120 credits?

[songofdovely]

If they include the prereq average pre-interview, I think that will be the last nail in the coffin for many applicants (myself included).

 

Yea it does look like they are including the prereq average in the pre-interview. BUT, they also seem to be including the MCAT in the preinterview as well. Most schools use the MCAT and pre-req average hand in hand. In other words, people with very strong MCAT can have low pre-reqs and vice versa...so I wouldn't necessarily count yourself out if you have a strong MCAT.

[iwh333]

so is overall average, overall adjusted average, as well as pre req average calculated? at least that's what it says on the website under "These academic evaluations are calculated:"

 

But then under pre-interview it says: 'The first cut-off for invitation to interview is based on academic criteria which may include: Overall GPA (minus academic year with lowest academic average if applicable),prerequisite average, MCAT scores ...'

[spuddy999]

It says "currently under review" by the section regarding academic score. Thus there could be some changes to it. As agreeing with the general consensus, the prerequisite average does appear to contradict the lowest dropped year rule. Though a higher overall average is undoubtedly worth more than the prerequisite average.

 

Considering most people take at least one prerequisite average in each of their first four years, this new rule is honestly pretty awful, and has benefit on a minute and random amount of people.