MED 2015 Admissions Statistics is now posted

[zunik]

What do you guys think?

 

http://www.med.ubc.ca/__shared/assets/MED_2015_Admissions_Statistics22494.pdf

[spuddy999]

I posted in the other thread about this.

 

Mean age is way, way down, and it's surprising how many 3rd year applicants got in.

 

Averages have gone up, but this is somewhat misleading as there is a greater percentage of OOP's in the class (4.6% last year, 10% this year). This would correlate to a rise in grades needed to get in.

[eternalkeener]

I suddenly feel very sick. They're discriminating against older applicants. And by older, I mean older than 21!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

UBC frustrates me so badly. Why does BC have to be my home province? Sigh.

[zunik]

I suddenly feel very sick. They're discriminating against older applicants. And by older, I mean older than 21!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

UBC frustrates me so badly. Why does BC have to be my home province? Sigh.

 

One thing I found strange is that there are 4 students who are in the entering classs with average between 70-74.99. How did they manage to get a full file review?

[keepontrying]

Amen. Perhaps I'm biased since I'm a grad applicant, but admitting that many more 3rd year students isn't that wise. When other schools are moving towards the holistic approach (Queens, Calgary), UBC is moving backwards. They might as well set the pre-interview cutoffs for GPA and MCAT much higher then.

[keepontrying]

One thing I found strange is that there are 4 students who are in the entering classs with average between 70-74.99. How did they manage to get a full file review?

 

Aboriginal applicants may get exemptions?

[eternalkeener]

Yes, Aboriginal students' files are holistically reviewed with notes on how their GPA has improved. I am an Aboriginal applicant. HOWEVER, their MCAT is scrutinized much more in that case, and I wrote on September 1st instead of before August 31st (was feeling sick on August 23rd when I wrote the first time this summer and got a mediocre score from that sitting) so I can't use my great MCAT score from September 1st this year. I'm praying for a miracle again this year as an Aboriginal applicant even though I was on the Dean's list this past year. I'm already preparing for depression again! Good ol' UBC - that backwards school we all so love to want to be at!

[thehumanmacbook]

Amen. Perhaps I'm biased since I'm a grad applicant, but admitting that many more 3rd year students isn't that wise. When other schools are moving towards the holistic approach (Queens, Calgary), UBC is moving backwards. They might as well set the pre-interview cutoffs for GPA and MCAT much higher then.

 

same thing happened to Mac when CASPer was introduced. Lots of third years got in, mean age went down.

 

I think grad applicants have a lot to share though...you should have more pubs and research experience as well, right?

[songofdovely]

Amen. Perhaps I'm biased since I'm a grad applicant, but admitting that many more 3rd year students isn't that wise. When other schools are moving towards the holistic approach (Queens, Calgary), UBC is moving backwards. They might as well set the pre-interview cutoffs for GPA and MCAT much higher then.

 

I have met quite a number of these 3rd year students in my class and they all have very balanced lifestyles. It's unfair to assume that just because they are younger, they cannot contribute as much as someone who is older. Some of the most profound and mature comments that have been made in my small group sessions at school have come from 3rd year students.

 

Of course, this is not to say that older students do not have a place. The same argument equally applies to all age groups. I just wanted to write this to clear up the common misconception that 3rd yr student = less life experience = immature = will not be a good doctor = should not be admitted.

[ubcMDhopeful]

Amen. Perhaps I'm biased since I'm a grad applicant, but admitting that many more 3rd year students isn't that wise. When other schools are moving towards the holistic approach (Queens, Calgary), UBC is moving backwards. They might as well set the pre-interview cutoffs for GPA and MCAT much higher then.

 

Im biased too as I am a third year applicant, but why is it bad to have third years? That is = to younger doctors that can potentially serve more.

 

Also 3rd year students in general have less NAQ than grad students and that is because they have been on this planet for a shorter period....

 

If you take one of those third years that got accepted and let them continue their work/research untill they were 25 I am sure that no one would doubt their credentials. So why discriminate against younger students who are showing huge potential in favor of older students who perhaps did not show the same potential when they were young but are competetive now because they have had more chances?

 

 

I am not saying that UBC should discriminate against older students as that would be extremely unfair for people who have high potential but maybe did not take things seriously when they were younger. What I am saying is that UBC is should be more fair towards younger students who are currently at a disadvantage due to the emphasis on NAQs. The admission stats are a good sign as they show that they are perhaps making it more fair for younger students.

[spuddy999]

Guys and gals, it's not like they set quotas for how many third year applicants get in and it's possible that the number of third year applicants this year was higher and that the third year acceptances will go down next year (ahhh.... so many possibilities). I wouldn't fret too much about third year applicants.

I would look more at the overall averages accepted and try to come within a reasonable deviation from it (taking into account if you're IP and OOP).

[songofdovely]

Guys and gals, it's not like they set quotas for how many third year applicants get in and it's possible that the number of third year applicants this year was higher and that the third year acceptances will go down next year (ahhh.... so many possibilities). I wouldn't fret too much about third year applicants.

I would look more at the overall averages accepted and try to come within a reasonable deviation from it (taking into account if you're IP and OOP).

 

That's actually a great observation. Another thing that people should remember is that this year, with the addition of the SMP program, there are ~32 more seats. This makes it hard to do year by year comparisons as the number seats are no longer consistent with the previous years. For example, the number of students going up in a particular age group or grade range could simply be due to the fact that more students were enrolled this year.

[spuddy999]

Plus 3rd year applicants are not eligible for the lowest dropped year, making UBC favour individuals who are maybe "less traditional."

[keepontrying]

Im biased too as I am a third year applicant, but why is it bad to have third years? That is = to younger doctors that can potentially serve more.

 

Also 3rd year students in general have less NAQ than grad students and that is because they have been on this planet for a shorter period....

 

If you take one of those third years that got accepted and let them continue their work/research untill they were 25 I am sure that no one would doubt their credentials. So why discriminate against younger students who are showing huge potential in favor of older students who perhaps did not show the same potential when they were young but are competetive now because they have had more chances?

 

 

I am not saying that UBC should discriminate against older students as that would be extremely unfair for people who have high potential but maybe did not take things seriously when they were younger. What I am saying is that UBC is should be more fair towards younger students who are currently at a disadvantage due to the emphasis on NAQs. The admission stats are a good sign as they show that they are perhaps making it more fair for younger students.

 

There's nothing wrong with the 3rd year applicants. It just shows that UBC is possibly moving towards a GPA heavy selection system instead of the holistic approach that it used in the past because like you said 3rd year applicants generally have less NAQ because of their age. I'm not AGAINST 3rd year applicants - I'm just not that fond of heavy emphasis on GPA over non-academics. Having said that, I have to disagree that the emphasis on NAQ is "unfair" to younger students. First of all, non academics are just as important as academics, for medicine at least. Although younger applicants obviously have less time to build their NAQ, you can't really justify comparing things that an older applicant has DONE compared to what a younger applicant WILL do. At the end of the day, what you HAVE done is what it counts.

 

And, I don't think the new system is discriminating against older applicants like what eternal said. If older applicants have great GPA, the new system will favor them as well.

[RiceWine]

Amen. Perhaps I'm biased since I'm a grad applicant, but admitting that many more 3rd year students isn't that wise. When other schools are moving towards the holistic approach (Queens, Calgary), UBC is moving backwards. They might as well set the pre-interview cutoffs for GPA and MCAT much higher then.

 

 

not very grad student friendly at all approach

[eternalkeener]

Here's the crux: The elimination of the 10-year-rule, whose point was to level the playing field for older and younger students, has now made older students who now perform as well as the 3rd year/'younger' students and who have proven themselves as great potential medicine students completely drop out of the running. (I'll probably apply for 3 more years and then quit if I rely on UBC to admit me now). If they want to be 'holistic', they should state that although the 10-year-rule is maybe too 'blanket', that they will look at older students' RECENT POTENTIAL as an indicator of how well they will do... keep in mind they already do this for 3rd year/younger applicants!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I just want the system fair, I don't want UBC to discriminate against 3rd years, or pink panthers, or single moms or stay-at-home Dads, or older students. I don't think what I've said above favours or disfavours anyone. I'm saying that UBC has a long way to go towards making things fair for people who had hard times earlier on in their life which prevented them from having an amazing oGPA here and now.

 

AMEN.

[Wachaa]

This is a general response to people who moan about cutoffs being high, or the scoring being unfair to the typical applicant, all ages/ education, without exceptional burdens. I assume MOST applicants fall into this "typical" category.

 

What exactly is wrong with setting the cutoffs higher?

 

If you agree that 3rd year applicants are in no way discriminated against or preferred by the current scoring system, then accept the fact that 3rd year undergrads have achieved excellent grades and NAQs in a shorter time. **AND NAQ** There is no age-discrimination that I can see. I acknowledge that some have exceptional circumstances so this post is not meant to address those people. But 95% of people that I speak to, who want to enter medical school, when I tell them what most med students have done to get accepted (high grades, on top of volunteering or working at the same time during the school year), they say "dude... get a life". Or... "why are you're so hardcore". And then those are the SAME people who moan about the process not being fair to them. On the other hand, people who say "Oh, all right. That's what I'll do, I'll work harder" - they tend to get accepted.

 

 

The admission process, though I don't claim to know anything about it more than the average person does, looks at the overall picture of the applicant - you might bring some skills and qualities that comes with age, or you might have a higher degree...but if the rest of you is not competitive, then change yourself instead of asking the system to change for you. The evaluation is quite clear: you take your grades, and get an AQ score. If you got a low AQ score, then your grades weren't good in comparison to other people's. You took the same courses most people did who got in. Figure that one out.

You then take your extracurricular activities, and get an NAQ score. If you get a low NAQ score, then they weren't good in comparison. Speaking my mind about people who have claim they deserved higher NAQ scores than they received: No you don't deserve a higher score just because you think so. Get a real opinion.

 

VFMP-2014

[eternalkeener]

Um, I have changed. People do tell me to get a life and stop being so hardcore. My NAQ got way high mostly because of the past 3 years. I do have a competitive GPA... NOW. I didn't before. I showed myself to be 'good enough' for the new, higher cut-offs. So I'm NOT moaning. I'm actually saying that the system should be considering CURRENT ability and suitability and not disadvantage an applicant because he/she had serious troubles that prevented them from showing their potential off until the last few years.

 

Thanks for not judging.

[Wachaa]

As I was getting at in the first line of my post, my post does not apply to your case because it seems like you have had serious troubles in the past and so you weren't able to study or volunteer, one or the other, to whatever extent. I understand. I was, however, speaking towards the people whose only issues/ troubles were that they wanted to be "social", have a good time in university, etc, while waiting for good grades and outcomes... without figuring out that they can have fun and excel by just working harder than currently.

[eternalkeener]

As I was getting at in the first line of my post, my post does not apply to your case because it seems like you have had serious troubles in the past and so you weren't able to study or volunteer, one or the other, to whatever extent. I understand. I was, however, speaking towards the people whose only issues/ troubles were that they wanted to be "social", have a good time in university, etc, while waiting for good grades and outcomes... without figuring out that they can have fun and excel by just working harder than currently.

 

ok! Thanks for clarifying. +1

[keepontrying]

This is a general response to people who moan about cutoffs being high, or the scoring being unfair to the typical applicant, all ages/ education, without exceptional burdens. I assume MOST applicants fall into this "typical" category.

 

What exactly is wrong with setting the cutoffs higher?

 

If you agree that 3rd year applicants are in no way discriminated against or preferred by the current scoring system, then accept the fact that 3rd year undergrads have achieved excellent grades and NAQs in a shorter time. **AND NAQ** There is no age-discrimination that I can see. I acknowledge that some have exceptional circumstances so this post is not meant to address those people. But 95% of people that I speak to, who want to enter medical school, when I tell them what most med students have done to get accepted (high grades, on top of volunteering or working at the same time during the school year), they say "dude... get a life". Or... "why are you're so hardcore". And then those are the SAME people who moan about the process not being fair to them. On the other hand, people who say "Oh, all right. That's what I'll do, I'll work harder" - they tend to get accepted.

 

 

The admission process, though I don't claim to know anything about it more than the average person does, looks at the overall picture of the applicant - you might bring some skills and qualities that comes with age, or you might have a higher degree...but if the rest of you is not competitive, then change yourself instead of asking the system to change for you. The evaluation is quite clear: you take your grades, and get an AQ score. If you got a low AQ score, then your grades weren't good in comparison to other people's. You took the same courses most people did who got in. Figure that one out.

You then take your extracurricular activities, and get an NAQ score. If you get a low NAQ score, then they weren't good in comparison. Speaking my mind about people who have claim they deserved higher NAQ scores than they received: No you don't deserve a higher score just because you think so. Get a real opinion.

 

VFMP-2014

 

Wachaa, the problem is that the cutoff is indirectly set lower for NAQ and higher for AQ. With a high AQ, one can get an interview with extremely low NAQ score under last year's UBC system, which is what I am disappointed about. Changes have been made for this year's system though for both AQ and NAQ, so we'll see how it goes.

 

I agree with your post in general. I should have worded my post better. Again, I'm not against a certain group of applicants - I just prefer a better balance between GPA and non-academics, that's all.

[ubcMDhopeful]

Wachaa, the problem is that the cutoff is indirectly set lower for NAQ and higher for AQ. With a high AQ, one can get an interview with extremely low NAQ score under last year's UBC system, which is what I am disappointed about. Changes have been made for this year's system though for both AQ and NAQ, so we'll see how it goes.

 

I agree with your post in general. I should have worded my post better. Again, I'm not against a certain group of applicants - I just prefer a better balance between GPA and non-academics, that's all.

 

What is wrong with this?

 

I find the NAQ VERY subjective while the AQ is not since most people are taking similar courses. So to put emphasis on AQ in my opinion is warranted.

 

The NAQ is set to see that people are well rounded and can potentially be good communicators as physicians; however, it is very easy for someone who does not meet those outcomes to artificially boost their NAQ to make it look like that. The interview on the other side is a better test. So it does make sense to weight down the NAQ pre-interview imo.

[keepontrying]

And the interview isn't subjective? Even in MMI, first impression goes a long way and I don't think that's exactly objective per se. You're right that NAQ is subjective, but to do well in NAQ, at least you actually have to put the effort and time to do something, whether it be working or volunteering or traveling, whatever. If AQ is the end all and be all, then we might as well use MCAT as the gold standard since it's standardized.

 

I'll just leave it at that. I'm an older applicant and so our views are different, and that's perfectly fine. Perhaps I'm just more old school thinking that life experience matters alot for medicine.

[ubcMDhopeful]

You're right that NAQ is subjective, but to do well in NAQ, at least you actually have to put the effort and time to do something, whether it be working or volunteering or traveling, whatever.

 

I never really looked at the NAQ from that perspective I always viewed it as trying to see people are "well rounded" .

 

But I guess looking at the NAQ from the standpoint of the effort/time people put into it while doing academics does show time management that does not depend on the age of the applicant.

 

Nice to see that we have come to an agreement on something

[regular]

I think there issues in prior years with students passing written exams in clerkship and perhaps "well-rounded" students don't do as well in those tests.