Med_new Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 That is a TON of work... but I can see why. With 1200 applications that's a total of 3600 reviews, so even at 100 each you'd need 36 people reviewing files... yeesh! your file gets reviewed once? or several ppl review it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Med_new Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 will it still be 537 interviews this year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Friendly Magpie Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 your file gets reviewed once? or several ppl review it? I read somewhere (it might be the MD Admissions blog for U of C) that four people review each application. I was a bit surprised when I read that, especially since I've heard of people having really good scores one year and terrible scores the next with the same 'Top 10.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSWschnoodle Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 I read somewhere (it might be the MD Admissions blog for U of C) that four people review each application. I was a bit surprised when I read that, especially since I've heard of people having really good scores one year and terrible scores the next with the same 'Top 10.' Holy cow, I though it was three people! Well, that obliterates my previous figure... adjust that to 4800 file reviews and 48 reviewers (given 100 files each) if that is the case! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Med_Pack Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 Although I didn't apply to U of C, I think to clarify...assuming ~1200 applicants, you'd only need 12 reviewers if each reviewer goes over 100 files. That's files though. Not total reviews/file. It would be 400 total file reviews/reviewer then for 100 applicants. But if they wanted to keep it to 100 total file reviews per reviewer, then they would need 48 reviewers as MSWschnoodle mentioned, and then you're looking at 25 individual files allotted to each reviewer...not 100 individual files per reviewer. I don't know if that adds anything useful to the conversation but I just noticed it so I thought I would mention it anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearpuppy Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 Although I didn't apply to U of C, I think to clarify...assuming ~1200 applicants, you'd only need 12 reviewers if each reviewer goes over 100 files. That's files though. Not total reviews/file. It would be 400 total file reviews/reviewer then for 100 applicants. But if they wanted to keep it to 100 total file reviews per reviewer, then they would need 48 reviewers as MSWschnoodle mentioned, and then you're looking at 25 individual files allotted to each reviewer...not 100 individual files per reviewer. I don't know if that adds anything useful to the conversation but I just noticed it so I thought I would mention it anyway. Sorry but your math is wrong. 1200 applicant * 4 reviews = 4800 reviews If 1 reviewer can do 100 reviews, you need 48 reviewers. If each reviewer only did 25, you would need 4800/25 = 192 file reviewers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Med_Pack Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 Sorry but your math is wrong. 1200 applicant * 4 reviews = 4800 reviews If 1 reviewer can do 100 reviews, you need 48 reviewers. If each reviewer only did 25, you would need 4800/25 = 192 file reviewers. I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I did do that math (and agree with your math for sure), that's why I said: "if they wanted to keep it to 100 total file reviews per reviewer, then they would need 48 reviewers..." that's reviews, which is different than number of files (because the other posters mentioned files, although you said reviews so I think we're actually talking about the same thing...number of reviews, not files:)). Since each file has 4 reviews, 25 files would result in 100 reviews, so to do 1200 files (or 4800 reviews, same thing in this case), you'd need 48 reviewers.I didn't say that each reviewer would do only 25 reviews, I said 25 files...so definitely not 192 reviewers (could you imagine lol, that's close to how many ppl are accepted each yr!). Hope that clarifies my math. If like other posters mentioned each reviewers gets given 100 files 1200/100 = 12 reviewers BUT for 4 reviews/file, that equates to 400 reviews for every 100 files..craziness...hopefully they have 48 reviewers so that each person only has to do 100 file reviews for a batch of 25 files. They really work so hard! That's good quality assurance, 4 reviews for each file. But still, I guess ratings can still come out different each year, there's so many things to consider like the applicant pool etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narwhale Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 I read somewhere (it might be the MD Admissions blog for U of C) that four people review each application. I was a bit surprised when I read that, especially since I've heard of people having really good scores one year and terrible scores the next with the same 'Top 10.' That happened to meeee and it was sad haha. We'll see how this year goes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearpuppy Posted October 14, 2015 Report Share Posted October 14, 2015 I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I did do that math (and agree with your math for sure), that's why I said: "if they wanted to keep it to 100 total file reviews per reviewer, then they would need 48 reviewers..." that's reviews, which is different than number of files (because the other posters mentioned files, although you said reviews so I think we're actually talking about the same thing...number of reviews, not files:)). Since each file has 4 reviews, 25 files would result in 100 reviews, so to do 1200 files (or 4800 reviews, same thing in this case), you'd need 48 reviewers.I didn't say that each reviewer would do only 25 reviews, I said 25 files...so definitely not 192 reviewers (could you imagine lol, that's close to how many ppl are accepted each yr!). Hope that clarifies my math. If like other posters mentioned each reviewers gets given 100 files 1200/100 = 12 reviewers BUT for 4 reviews/file, that equates to 400 reviews for every 100 files..craziness...hopefully they have 48 reviewers so that each person only has to do 100 file reviews for a batch of 25 files. They really work so hard! That's good quality assurance, 4 reviews for each file. But still, I guess ratings can still come out different each year, there's so many things to consider like the applicant pool etc. The underlined part is what doesn't make sense. OK. lets first agree on the following: Calgary has stated several times that they have 4 people review each file (I believe it's 1 student, 1 faculty member, 1 community member , and 1 allied health professional?). Thus we agree that each file is reviewed 4 times by 4 different people total. A reviewer is not going to write 4 reviews on the same file. Hence, with 48 reviewers, there needs to be 100 reviews = 100 files each... Think of it this way: Reviewer 1 reviews applicants/files 1 - 100 Reviewer 2 reviews applicants/files 1 - 100 Reviewer 3 reviews applicants/files 1 - 100 Reviewer 4 reviews applicants/files 1 - 100 Reviewer 5 reviews applicants/files 101 - 200 ... etc. etc.. Thus, 4 reviewers PER 100 files/applicants. 4*1200 / 100 = 48, with each reviewer looking at 100 files or applicants, not 25. As an aside: this implies that there are 12 volunteer students, 12 faculty, 12 allied health prof., and 12 community members aiding in reviews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narwhale Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Dr. Walker posted a reply to someone's question in the admissions blog. Looks like it's about 1215 applicants. 180 OOP and approximately 1035 IP. There were 1332 IP applicants last year (255 OOP), so that's 300 less IP (22% decrease) and 75 less OOP (29% decrease). I wonder how that will change the percentage of offers for interviews or if it will remain relatively the same. If they still interview 537 applicants and 436 of those are IP, it's about a 42% of IP receiving an interview based numbers alone... quality of applications aside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 Dr. Walker posted a reply to someone's question in the admissions blog. Looks like it's about 1215 applicants. 180 OOP and approximately 1035 IP. There were 1332 IP applicants last year (255 OOP), so that's 300 less IP (22% decrease) and 75 less OOP (29% decrease). I wonder how that will change the percentage of offers for interviews or if it will remain relatively the same. If they still interview 537 applicants and 436 of those are IP, it's about a 42% of IP receiving an interview based numbers alone... quality of applications aside. As much as I'd like to get in on merit alone, I have to admit I don't hate the reduction in my applicant pool... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
narwhale Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 As much as I'd like to get in on merit alone, I have to admit I don't hate the reduction in my applicant pool... Me too! I'm liking the numbers, but they aren't too much different than the application year before last (2013-2014 had 943 IP), and I didn't get an interview then either. So we will see! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.