technicity Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Instead of doing homework, I made a GPA-AQ correlation chart. R^2 = 0.99422 so for GPAs from 85-90 it should be reasonably accurate. There is also a spot where you can enter your GPA and have the AQ interpolated from that. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6252028/GPA-AQ%20Correlation.xlsx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rwethereyet Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Instead of doing homework, I made a GPA-AQ correlation chart. R^2 = 0.99422 so for GPAs from 85-90 it should be reasonably accurate. There is also a spot where you can enter your GPA and have the AQ interpolated from that. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6252028/GPA-AQ%20Correlation.xlsx Would AQ scores calculated by this for GPAs below 85 be biased higher than what they should be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeti187 Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Instead of doing homework, I made a GPA-AQ correlation chart. R^2 = 0.99422 so for GPAs from 85-90 it should be reasonably accurate. There is also a spot where you can enter your GPA and have the AQ interpolated from that. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6252028/GPA-AQ%20Correlation.xlsx Great job!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apixaban85 Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Instead of doing homework, I made a GPA-AQ correlation chart. R^2 = 0.99422 so for GPAs from 85-90 it should be reasonably accurate. There is also a spot where you can enter your GPA and have the AQ interpolated from that. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6252028/GPA-AQ%20Correlation.xlsx Wow, going by that... 90.68 = 48.24 90 = 46.73 89 = 43.93 88 = 41.23 87 = 38.47 86 = 35.73 85 = 32.98 That would be one strict curve! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niceshrp Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Wait, why are you guys saying that the AQ this year is reasonable and expected? Looking at the previous years, isn't this year's GPA for applicants invited for interview really high? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
technicity Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Wow, going by that... 90.68 = 48.24 90 = 46.73 89 = 43.93 88 = 41.23 87 = 38.47 86 = 35.73 85 = 32.98 That would be one strict curve! Sort of makes sense--most applicants are probably in the 80-90% range so this allows for separation. WRT accuracy at the extremities: probably not great, considering ~92% and up yields >50. 75% gives ~5, which may or may not be right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeti187 Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Wait, why are you guys saying that the AQ this year is reasonable and expected? Looking at the previous years, isn't this year's GPA for applicants invited for interview really high? They have an Adjusted GPA (AGPA) this year. Your worst year is ignored. I believe such a system did not exist in previous years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Medward Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 The admissions blog now has a a post about FAQs for not invited applicants. Does this suggest that all regrets have now gone out? http://admissionsblog.med.ubc.ca/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backpacker Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Instead of doing homework, I made a GPA-AQ correlation chart. R^2 = 0.99422 so for GPAs from 85-90 it should be reasonably accurate. There is also a spot where you can enter your GPA and have the AQ interpolated from that. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6252028/GPA-AQ%20Correlation.xlsx Cool stuff, but where did you get the parameters to make this chart? did you use people's stats from last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeti187 Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Wow, going by that... 90.68 = 48.24 90 = 46.73 89 = 43.93 88 = 41.23 87 = 38.47 86 = 35.73 85 = 32.98 That would be one strict curve! Keep in mind this curve only takes into account the OGPAs. Your pre-req and last 60 credit GPA is also considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
technicity Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Cool stuff, but where did you get the parameters to make this chart? did you use people's stats from last year? They're from this year's interim stats. It gives, for various groups of applicants, the average AQ and average OGPA/AGPA. Since OGPA/AGPA are the only things that determine AQ at this point ("The first cut-off for invitation to interview is based on a score derived from applicants’ Overall Academic Average or Adjusted Academic Average (if applicable)..."), that's where I took the data points from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakaqel Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 I can't believe they would use a linear fit to award AQ scores... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
technicity Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 I can't believe they would use a linear fit to award AQ scores... I doubt it's linear, but it at least appears to be linear in this region. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apixaban85 Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 The admissions blog now has a a post about FAQs for not invited applicants. Does this suggest that all regrets have now gone out? http://admissionsblog.med.ubc.ca/ Probably haven't even begun yet, I'd wager Keep in mind this curve only takes into account the OGPAs. Your pre-req and last 60 credit GPA is also considered. Not for the pre-interview score Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
technicity Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Keep in mind this curve only takes into account the OGPAs. Your pre-req and last 60 credit GPA is also considered. Not yet... at this stage it appears the prereq GPA is not considered, and there is no longer any last 60 GPA. Pre-Interview: The first cut-off for invitation to interview is based on a score derived from applicants’ Overall Academic Average or Adjusted Academic Average (if applicable) and a Non-Academic Qualities Score. At this stage the academic and non-academic scores are weighed equally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zakaqel Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 I doubt it's linear, but it at least appears to be linear in this region. It's definitely linear from the 85-90 range. Most applicants probably have GPA's within that region, so it's a stupid idea to use a linear fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
technicity Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 It's definitely linear from the 85-90 range. Most applicants probably have GPA's within that region, so it's a stupid idea to use a linear fit. Well, applying a curve in this range (to differentiate these more) would put much more emphasis on AQ over NAQ (assuming the NAQ distribution does not change), which presumably is not what UBC wants. Conversely, giving applicants in this range more similar AQ scores would do the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gourmet Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Wait, why are you guys saying that the AQ this year is reasonable and expected? Looking at the previous years, isn't this year's GPA for applicants invited for interview really high? it's almost identical to last year edit: the AQ scoring i mean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backpacker Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 They're from this year's interim stats. It gives, for various groups of applicants, the average AQ and average OGPA/AGPA. Since OGPA/AGPA are the only things that determine AQ at this point ("The first cut-off for invitation to interview is based on a score derived from applicants’ Overall Academic Average or Adjusted Academic Average (if applicable)..."), that's where I took the data points from. Ahh.. Well done. But I guess the actual thing may be slightly lower (ie people's actual AQ score maybe slightly higher than the output of your excel file), because some people will have 92+ GPA and would max out the AQ points but still contribute to the GPA score. But for all intensive purposes, I agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
technicity Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Ahh.. Well done. But I guess the actual thing may be slightly lower (ie people's actual AQ score maybe slightly higher than the output of your excel file), because some people will have 92+ GPA and would max out the AQ points but still contribute to the GPA score. But for all intensive purposes, I agree with you. Agreed, which is why I included the caveat that it's probably only accurate in the 85-90 range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animo_acid Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 I find it weird that they only take your worst year out if you have completed 4 years already....Most schools seem to take your worst out as long as you are in your 4th year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rwethereyet Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Some other thoughts - Interview decisions had been finalized last week or perhaps Monday to allow for the dissemination of the interim stats. I guess they are exercising checks and balances over the course of the week as a precautionary measure? In other words, the 640 interviewees had been determined prior to this week. The "cut-off" is an arbitrary one that's probably set by the lowest TFR score invited to interview. They probably rank all the IP applicants by TFR from 1-560 and set the 560th's TFR score as the "cut-off". This is done separately from the OOP pool. There are 48 fewer "interview seats" for IP applicants this year - and this is probably reflected in a comparatively higher (normalized) TFR score needed this year vs. last year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
backpacker Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Some other thoughts - Interview decisions had been finalized last week or perhaps Monday to allow for the dissemination of the interim stats. I guess they are exercising checks and balances over the course of the week as a precautionary measure? In other words, the 640 interviewees had been determined prior to this week. The "cut-off" is an arbitrary one that's probably set by the lowest TFR score invited to interview. They probably rank all the IP applicants by TFR from 1-560 and set the 560th's TFR score as the "cut-off". This is done separately from the OOP pool. There are 48 fewer "interview seats" for IP applicants this year - and this is probably reflected in a comparatively higher (normalized) TFR score needed this year vs. last year. Dont for get taking out the 10 year rule, which I thought would have brought down the GPA a bit, but i guess not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubcMDhopeful Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Agreed, which is why I included the caveat that it's probably only accurate in the 85-90 range. Not really, because you used the averages to derive the correlations of the 85-90 range and those averages are influenced by the ceiling effect of applicants getting 92+ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gourmet Posted November 15, 2011 Report Share Posted November 15, 2011 Dont for get taking out the 10 year rule, which I thought would have brought down the GPA a bit, but i guess not. The new grade conversion scale also causes students from schools like SFU to have a higher GPA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.