Dongzhuo Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 I agree completely. But then is a 84% theoretical physics major from MIT better or a 94% Lakehead communications major better? Since right now UBC does not appear to make the distinction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
optimism101 Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 Not that it makes any difference at this point, but do you think they would drop your lowest "year" if it was a half year of 15 credits? I'm on co-op, with one term of school still to go, so I dont have enough credits to drop a full year, but there is a half year in there that could be dropped and leave me with more than 90 credits (and it's a crummy year gpa-wise, so i'd like to see it go!!). Any thoughts? Just trying to convince myself it's not all lost... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zunik Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 I agree completely. But then is a 84% theoretical physics major from MIT better or a 94% Lakehead communications major better? Since right now UBC does not appear to make the distinction. Its not just UBC; almost every med school in N.A does not make that distinction - what a shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larrivee Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 Its not just UBC; almost every med school in N.A does not make that distinction - what a shame. pretty sure most US med schools DO care what school you went to actually. Harvard > than some no name school Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubcMDhopeful Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 The Academic requirements at UBC seem to be getting higher and higher with each batch. I am going to start recommending to young students to seriously consider going to Kwantlen or Langara as a way to get easy percentage points without having to fight the the death for a 92% GPA at UBC. Unless UBC takes into account the degree difficulty and school prestige, I predict the phenomenon of taking easy courses at a college will be the next big thing for UBC admissions. I think the academic requirements are where they should be. There are so many people here in UBC who are getting A+ averages. There are science majors with most of their students in the 90s. This is not because the courses are easy but due to the fact that many are putting their emphasis on academics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obi Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 There are science majors with most of their students in the 90s. Its because their courses are easy. Don't kid yourself that the majority is going to put in the effort to carry a 90. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
songofdovely Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 Its because their courses are easy. Don't kid yourself that the majority is going to put in the effort to carry a 90. Actually I'd argue that its a result of the individuals applying into the program. Entering first year average for pharmacology was something like 86% two years ago. Pharmacology courses are NOT easy...but class averages are high because the individuals in the program are already really bright. Same goes with other majors like biochem, physiology, microbio which generally require good 1st and 2nd year marks for entry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murphy303 Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 I agree completely. But then is a 84% theoretical physics major from MIT better or a 94% Lakehead communications major better? Since right now UBC does not appear to make the distinction. Tell me about it. I did a double major in difficult applied science and got a 3.5 GPA. Then I went to UBC and I am carrying a 95% average because my BA was easier than applied science. Surprising? not really.... program difficulty is important. the problem is that it is also subjective like everything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rwethereyet Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 I have a friend who got regrets today at the end of the day... Thanks for the info lolas - are you sure it was a regret and not a DQ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubcMDhopeful Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 Its because their courses are easy. Don't kid yourself that the majority is going to put in the effort to carry a 90. Like songofdovely has mentioned, as a Pharmacology student I can say that the courses are definitely not easy but this is irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. My point here is that the 87% average of invited applicants sounds about right and is not a result of inflated marks from college students as others suggested because there are many students with those marks at UBC Science (ie. Physiology, Pharmacology and Microbi students). Also jumping in into another topic, I do agree with others in that a small difference in marks is not necessarily an indicator of a better physician but as Mithril has pointed out since there are too many qualified candidates applying, there has to be an objective way of selecting people and being "picky" on marks is one such way because it does not have alot of bias and it is a good indicator of intelligence and work ethics (albeit not a perfect one). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lolas Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 Thanks for the info lolas - are you sure it was a regret and not a DQ? She got an AQ and NAQ score, so I assume it was regrets and not a DQ... But I could be wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
repede Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 I think the academic requirements are where they should be. There are so many people here in UBC who are getting A+ averages. There are science majors with most of their students in the 90s. This is not because the courses are easy but due to the fact that many are putting their emphasis on academics. Heh, when I graduated (University of Toronto), I got an award for being the top student in the core advanced course of my Pharmacology stream. I got 85 - yup, I was the ONLY person in my program to get an A. Which is why it ruffles my feathers to know that some schools are handing out lots of 90s, giving those students a huuuge advantage. Calling it an "unbiased method of selection" is wrong. It's biased non-bias - employing an "objective" mechanism (where people aren't making an explicit decision) that inherently skews the pool of qualified applicants. I'm can live with that, because I don't even know where you'd begin with this problem; but I have a big problem with people insisting that there's nothing wrong with it, nothing that we can do about it, and nothing we should do about it. Sure, we might not have a solution to it yet, but I think everyone should at least acknowledge it's a huge problem that deserves attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kazin Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 Like songofdovely has mentioned, as a Pharmacology student I can say that the courses are definitely not easy but this is irrelevant to the point I was trying to make. My point here is that the 87% average of invited applicants sounds about right and is not a result of inflated marks from college students as others suggested because there are many students with those marks at UBC Science (ie. Physiology, Pharmacology and Microbi students). Also jumping in into another topic, I do agree with others in that a small difference in marks is not necessarily an indicator of a better physician but as Mithril has pointed out since there are too many qualified candidates applying, there has to be an objective way of selecting people and being "picky" on marks is one such way because it does not have alot of bias and it is a good indicator of intelligence and work ethics (albeit not a perfect one). The MCAT says hello. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gourmet Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 IMO the MCAT is not a very reliable tool to separate applicant's academic abilities from one another Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gourmet Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 I also want to add, does anyone think it's possible that UBC actually does take into account an applicant's university of study or his/her major program, but puts it in the NAQ calculation? I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case, it could be another reason why students from Physiology and Pharmacology at UBC have such high success rates in gaining admission into UBC Med. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubcMDhopeful Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 I wouldn't be surprised if this was the case, it could be another reason why students from Physiology and Pharmacology at UBC have such high success rates in gaining admission into UBC Med. Well those students maintain their high grades (first two years) after completing their degrees (3rd and 4th year), , so the reason why they have high acceptance rates is most likely due to their high grades and not their majors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gourmet Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 Well those students maintain their high grades (first two years) after completing their degrees (3rd and 4th year), , so the reason why they have high acceptance rates is most likely due to their high grades and not their majors. i'm in one of those two programs right now and I think most of my classmates have an overall average of about 86-90. For the students who have an 86-87, it's not high enough to ensure an interview, they would still need to have excellent NAQs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murphy303 Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 i'm in one of those two programs right now and I think most of my classmates have an overall average of about 86-90. For the students who have an 86-87, it's not high enough to ensure an interview, they would still need to have excellent NAQs. degree programs with ppl all in 90+ grades make me sick! i did a real degree program (i.e. heavy science). ive done 1000s of hrs of community service, with NAQ >16, TA'd & published research as undergrad, etc. etc. dedicated life to met but still cannot get an interview because i dont have jacked up marks. but hey that's life... take basket weaving courses and get ur 95's <-- ftw im not jaded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubcMDhopeful Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 degree programs with ppl all in 90+ grades make me sick! i did a real degree program (i.e. heavy science). ive done 1000s of hrs of community service, with NAQ >16, TA'd & published research as undergrad, etc. etc. dedicated life to met but still cannot get an interview because i dont have jacked up marks. but hey that's life... take basket weaving courses and get ur 95's <-- ftw im not jaded Ok this is once again going off topic but I have to address this . How is Pharmacology, Physiology or Microbiology not a "hard science" . Once again the courses are not easy its the students in them that make the averages high. Their averages are high BEFORE they enter those programs so you can blame med pre reqs and general first year courses that everyone take. So again going back to the main point, not everyone who gets 90+ is taking "basket weaving courses" or are from colleges so admitting based on high grades is still valid and I do think that it shows objective differentiation better than NAQ scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zunik Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 Ok this is once again going off topic but I have to address this . How is Pharmacology, Physiology or Microbiology not a "hard science" . Once again the courses are not easy its the students in them that make the averages high. Their averages are high BEFORE they enter those programs so you can blame med pre reqs and general first year courses that everyone take. So again going back to the main point, not everyone who gets 90+ is taking "basket weaving courses" or are from colleges so admitting based on high grades is still valid and I do think that it shows objective differentiation better than NAQ scores. You're not getting it, are you? Its not about differentiating between different levels of sciences but between different faculties (hence difficulties). As someone previously mentioned, getting a degree in "basket weaving" or "communications" is not equivalent to the difficulty of physical chemistry, biochemistry or astrophysics! Its just a basic fact that med schools need to start accounting for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muhgel Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 to be fair, someone with an arts degree getting into medicine is far more admirable, don't you think? how often do art students get 80s? let alone 90s? on one hand I agree that academic competency is absolutely essential to medicine, I just hope medical schools have a better way of evaluating non science students (not that i am one, but i admire them). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kylamonkey Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 Good luck today people. I am away from a computer from 0600 until 2200 both today and tomorrow, but I look forward to whatever happens! Subjective review of "difficulty of academic program" takes out any sort of objectivity from the GPA. I encourage you guys, if you have 2.5 hrs, to listen to what UofC has done in their podcast. They do have a subjective academic review, but they are open in saying that subjectively saying U Lethbridge > U Sask or Pharmacology UBC > engineering at RMC is opening a gigantic can of worms with no end. We all make choices, and part of that is preparing yourself for the event you are not accepted. For the record, UBC will see my adjusted average as about 79-80%, which is what they will base my AQ on. I also have a 33R MCAT (I know it's not stellar, but it tells you where I'm coming from) I'm not shy about putting my GPA out there because I am confident in my academic abilities, but I can tell you it is extraordinarily hard to overcome a low GPA. If you see someone in a situaion where they are not caring about school, getting low marks, please tell them that their marks can follow them forever. I wish I had a mentor during that time to tell me to pull myself out. Hey- this sounds like a good MMI question! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithril Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 It's incredibly disingenuous and rude to imply that people with high marks in an arts major did not work just as hard as people with high marks in science majors. After all is said and done if you get an interview you are in the same playing field as everyone else. Maybe it's just the stress, but interview invite week certainly brings out the worst in people here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dongzhuo Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 I think that objectivity is the crux o the argument here. Objectivity, of course, is the best measure of ability. Unfortunately, in the case of medical admissions in Canada, "objectivity" is completely tainted with unfairness and unreliability. You can't just take some magic formula and plug in a few numbers, and voila your file review score is 84.73 and bam you're accepted. Things that are by nature subjective do not automatically become objective simply because someone arbitrarily assigns a number to it using dubious means. I think the process shouldn't even try to attempt to be objective. Do it like the ivy leagues- do it behind closed doors. Take a holistic approach. Dont get me wrong, this system has worked very well for me. Got in after 3 years, only applied to ubc. I also was science scholar all 3 years. But still I think the system is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepontrying Posted November 16, 2011 Report Share Posted November 16, 2011 I think that objectivity is the crux o the argument here. Objectivity, of course, is the best measure of ability. Unfortunately, in the case of medical admissions in Canada, "objectivity" is completely tainted with unfairness and unreliability. You can't just take some magic formula and plug in a few numbers, and voila your file review score is 84.73 and bam you're accepted. Things that are by nature subjective do not automatically become objective simply because someone arbitrarily assigns a number to it using dubious means. I think the process shouldn't even try to attempt to be objective. Do it like the ivy leagues- do it behind closed doors. Take a holistic approach. Dont get me wrong, this system has worked very well for me. Got in after 3 years, only applied to ubc. I also was science scholar all 3 years. But still I think the system is stupid. This takes time, effort, and resources, and unfortunately UBC chose the most convenient way of selection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.