Premed6 Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 From last year's stats to the stats that just came out today, it appears like the TFR has decreased to get an interview: 1. 51.67/100 this year vs. 52.91/100 last year However, at the very end of the page where is says "Interview Candidates" the Average AQ last year was 27.48 for 87.75% GPA. This year the Average AQ is 27.47 for 88.05% GPA. So nearly identical AQ scores, but the % are definitely different. Is it possible they changed the AQ Formula this year? So that means the TFR decrease is not really a decrease at all.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yych208 Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 The numbers (I'm referring to AQ, NAQ, TFR) are arbitrary. Don't worry too much about it. What we know for sure is it's getting more competitive (at least academically), as reflected by the %. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlameGrilledChicken Posted December 4, 2017 Report Share Posted December 4, 2017 Well, the AQ (and NAQ) is technically standardized. So one can assume that as the pool gets more competitive in terms of GPA, that the same GPA will get you a lower and lower AQ as time goes by. Remember, their formula is not as simple as y = mx + b. It definitely involves a bell curve of some sort. The reason for the TFR to decrease very likely has something to due with the drop in the number of applicants. It was only a small drop of around 100 apps but the TFR drop (1.24) is also a relatively small drop. Remember, the TFR cutoff is basically set so that only 570 apps (or whatever # they actually want to interview) is above that cutoff. Fewer apps or less competitive pool means that they need to reduce the cutoff a wee bit to maintain the number of interviews sent out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepsis Posted December 5, 2017 Report Share Posted December 5, 2017 Actually it's as simple as y=mx+b. The formula is AQ = 1.626*AGPA - 115.7, based on the AQ scores of the people who just got their rejection letters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlameGrilledChicken Posted December 5, 2017 Report Share Posted December 5, 2017 48 minutes ago, sepsis said: Actually it's as simple as y=mx+b. The formula is AQ = 1.626*AGPA - 115.7, based on the AQ scores of the people who just got their rejection letters. That's interesting, I thought previous years that the linear formula worked reasonably well but still was always off by a little bit when calculating peoples numbers. Did every single point fall directly on that line?? If so they must still be using some form of standardization to determine the formula. Good to know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sepsis Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 21 hours ago, Nandos said: That's interesting, I thought previous years that the linear formula worked reasonably well but still was always off by a little bit when calculating peoples numbers. Did every single point fall directly on that line?? If so they must still be using some form of standardization to determine the formula. Good to know! Yup R2 = 1. Perfectly linear. I expected a normal curve or something, but I guess normalization is not needed since the applicant pool is a normal distribution anyways. Though I did only graph 15 data points... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ibelieve.icanmed Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 52 minutes ago, sepsis said: Yup R2 = 1. Perfectly linear. I expected a normal curve or something, but I guess normalization is not needed since the applicant pool is a normal distribution anyways. Though I did only graph 15 data points... It's as close as you can probably get but not perfectly linear. Because AQ is out of 50 and someone with 100 should have 50/50 but according to your formula: 100*1.626-115.7=46.9 Also when you apply some of the rejectee's scores, the AQ value is off by some decimals when this formula is used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfdes Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 13 hours ago, azm said: It's as close as you can probably get but not perfectly linear. Because AQ is out of 50 and someone with 100 should have 50/50 but according to your formula: 100*1.626-115.7=46.9 Also when you apply some of the rejectee's scores, the AQ value is off by some decimals when this formula is used. You're assuming it is possible to get a perfect 50/50 AQ score. Is that actually stated anywhere by UBC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnGrisham Posted December 6, 2017 Report Share Posted December 6, 2017 2 hours ago, jfdes said: You're assuming it is possible to get a perfect 50/50 AQ score. Is that actually stated anywhere by UBC? This. It may not be necessarily true that 100% = 50/50. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.