grapz Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Hey guys, I've heard from multiple people that UG transcripts were required for UofT's radiology program. However on CaRMs program description, I don't see that requirement. Can anyone who have been through this process before comment on the need for UG transcripts for UofT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Hey guys, I've heard from multiple people that UG transcripts were required for UofT's radiology program. However on CaRMs program description, I don't see that requirement. Can anyone who have been through this process before comment on the need for UG transcripts for UofT? ahh I didn't have to send them one two years ago. That wasn't one of the programs for rads that wanted it. Could have changed of course but if they don't ask for in the description then they still don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chamilt Posted September 23, 2014 Report Share Posted September 23, 2014 Which programs DO require undergrad transcripts? Most? And are there other programs (ie Gen Surg, Derm etc...) that also require undergrad transcripts? I have heard of this in Quebec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamham Posted September 25, 2014 Report Share Posted September 25, 2014 Which programs DO require undergrad transcripts? Most? And are there other programs (ie Gen Surg, Derm etc...) that also require undergrad transcripts? I have heard of this in Quebec. I recalled reading Calgary ENT and Derm require undergrad transcripts in previous years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NervesNormalBreathNormal Posted October 3, 2014 Report Share Posted October 3, 2014 How closely do you think these are evaluated (if at all)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted October 4, 2014 Report Share Posted October 4, 2014 How closely do you think these are evaluated (if at all)? sometimes HUGE - some program directors I have talked to, the ones that believe in some objective measure of something to evaluate applicants by, use it as the main selection criteria to interview. Otherwise it is all just "subjective fluff" as one said. You don't have the grades, you don't get an interview sort of thing. It is interesting seeing how various programs organize themselves. There is a lot of variability out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Let'sGo1990 Posted October 16, 2014 Report Share Posted October 16, 2014 sometimes HUGE - some program directors I have talked to, the ones that believe in some objective measure of something to evaluate applicants by, use it as the main selection criteria to interview. Otherwise it is all just "subjective fluff" as one said. You don't have the grades, you don't get an interview sort of thing. It is interesting seeing how various programs organize themselves. There is a lot of variability out there. Ugh, this is pretty discouraging. Edit: Also, were the 2 PDs you talked to from rads? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NervesNormalBreathNormal Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 Ugh, this is pretty discouraging. Agree, total bummer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 Agree, total bummer. this is the major downside to a pass fail medical school system - there is nothing objective so It used to be a lot more stressful - stressful because you knew exactly what was required to get top residency positions. You had to get the grades, and so everyone around was trying to do that same thing. On the plus side that stress made you study harder and study something useful for clinical practise (i.e. medicine). Now we have a pile of subjective things that aren't directly related to medicine but are all attempted proxies - elective comments, research output, ECs, networking (not that there wasn't that stuff before as well, but just like GPA is so important now medical school grades were important before). Of course you may not be interested in any of that stuff because you are only interested in clinical medicine. Your education is distracted in a sense and you run around still trying to show the same thing as before - you are smart, hard working, and know yourself. Just that some aspects of the medicine likely are not as sharp as you aren't studying it as intensely (I think there are usually points all of us thought That is enough of subject X since it has nothing to do with subject Y which I am going into (says the second year resident studying psych for the MCCQE part 2 right now as a radiologist resident ) all the schools, programs and what they are looking for in an application is all on the carms site. You can see what each is looking for as the master source as it were! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NervesNormalBreathNormal Posted October 21, 2014 Report Share Posted October 21, 2014 Fair enough, I realize the value of objective data like marks in such a grossly subjective process. I'm just not confident what the value is of data that in many cases is 7+ years old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 Fair enough, I realize the value of objective data like marks in such a grossly subjective process. I'm just not confident what the value is of data that in many cases is 7+ years old. oh I agree but it is all they have There was one school that did not ask for transcripts where I was in the final interview with the program director and offered to show him my medical school transcript (the one that actually has the grades on it). His face actually let up at the suggestion. just noticed this rather old document but probably still relevant from the mid 1990s from the CMA http://www.cmaj.ca/content/153/7/919.abstract?related-urls=yes&legid=cmaj;153/7/919 given the choice back then only 8% for the over 90 program directors would prefer a pass/fail system vs nearly 75% for either percentage or letter grade system. more recently some of the issues with the lack of transparency created by the current system are discussed here: http://www.cmaj.ca/content/186/13/979.full?sid=99f67d6b-b72d-4d1a-8f02-98171875955d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralk Posted October 22, 2014 Report Share Posted October 22, 2014 It's questionable whether the old graded system, or looking at undergraduate marks, is an objective marker or just gives the illusion of one. Grades are an imperfect marker of short-term knowledge acquisition, which is itself an imperfect marker of long-term knowledge, which is furthermore an imperfect marker of aptitude in a clinical setting. That's before getting into the massive problem of evaluating marks between schools. That's part of the reason medical schools went to a pass/fail system. Residency programs were putting too much stock in a problematic indicator of aptitude. Taking that mess of inconsistencies and applying it to undergrad grades - which may have little or no direct significance to medicine - goes beyond rational. Just because there's numbers attached to a process doesn't make it objective... all these programs are doing is achieving quantitative subjectivity that's far more removed from clinical practice than the other, less quantitative subjective measures they were already using. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.