If you could change ONE about the application process - what would it be and why?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Shadowcake
The ability to apply to any number of UK universities, without any restrictions, like they do in the US.
But then that would drag out the whole process more, as many people would put down far more choices than 4; it's not as if they'd have to write a different personal statement for each choice. This would mean that the administration aspect of the admissions process would take so long, and hence the waiting times would be a lot longer, which is what so many applicants complain about
This is from an international applicant's perspective:
1) Have the same number of spaces in each school (say 15-20 internationals per school). Right now some schools take 5-6 while others take up to 40, while some don't at all. We are good revenue for the schools so more of us should be encouraged to come
2) Remove the damn UKCAT. Stupid test and it in no way whatsoever indicated suitability/capability to be a physician
3) Remove the stupid "predicted grades" system. It has too many flaws to list but at the very least, it's an unreliable system. At its worst, there are cases where students get either under-predicted by stupidly strict teachers or over-predicted by teachers who may be family friends/chummy with the students, etc.
4) Have a hard deadline by which schools MUST return all decisions. Say Mar 31. It should be the hard deadline. If a school needs over 5 months to make decisions for 300 spots then it is a highly inefficient school.
5) Make it mandatory for all schools to publish in specifics their minimum requirements and put a deadline by which any amendments can be made. After said deadline, the policies are set in stone for that year's application process. There are cases where schools advise 1 set of requirements, while under the table, operate on completely different set. There are also case where schools change their policies mid-cycle.
1) Have the same number of spaces in each school (say 15-20 internationals per school). Right now some schools take 5-6 while others take up to 40, while some don't at all. We are good revenue for the schools so more of us should be encouraged to come
2) Remove the damn UKCAT. Stupid test and it in no way whatsoever indicated suitability/capability to be a physician
3) Remove the stupid "predicted grades" system. It has too many flaws to list but at the very least, it's an unreliable system. At its worst, there are cases where students get either under-predicted by stupidly strict teachers or over-predicted by teachers who may be family friends/chummy with the students, etc.
4) Have a hard deadline by which schools MUST return all decisions. Say Mar 31. It should be the hard deadline. If a school needs over 5 months to make decisions for 300 spots then it is a highly inefficient school.
5) Make it mandatory for all schools to publish in specifics their minimum requirements and put a deadline by which any amendments can be made. After said deadline, the policies are set in stone for that year's application process. There are cases where schools advise 1 set of requirements, while under the table, operate on completely different set. There are also case where schools change their policies mid-cycle.
Original post by Shadowcake
The ability to apply to any number of UK universities, without any restrictions, like they do in the US.
I think that would only increase the amount of work a med school has to do, but by no chance would it increase your chances of getting an offer, because everyone else has also applied to every med school and therefore the number of med school options would even out with the ridiculous number of students applying. Hence competition would even out.
A lot of people are arguing for the disbandment of the UKCAT so I was wondering whether you feel the same about the BMAT?
I only did the BMAT and even though I can see why a would-be excellent doctor may do poorly while a would-be rubbish doctor may de very well I would still argue that entrance exams are a good tool for sifting through the thousands of applications.
I think that a common misconception about the UKCAT and BMAT is that many believe that it is used to differentiate between 'good' and 'bad' doctors. This isn't the case. They are used to measure an applicants ability to undertake medical training based on their fundamental understanding of science (Section 2 BMAT), critical thinking (Section 1 BMAT) and ones ability to express oneself (Section 3 BMAT).
I by no means think that entrance exams should be the main factor in determining offers and rejections, A-level/IB grades, interview performance, personal statement and references are probably more important but they don't allow the admission teams to compare applicants on exactly the same bases. Entrance exams are currently flawed and there is definitely room for improvement but I would still argue that they form an integral part of medical admission.
I only did the BMAT and even though I can see why a would-be excellent doctor may do poorly while a would-be rubbish doctor may de very well I would still argue that entrance exams are a good tool for sifting through the thousands of applications.
I think that a common misconception about the UKCAT and BMAT is that many believe that it is used to differentiate between 'good' and 'bad' doctors. This isn't the case. They are used to measure an applicants ability to undertake medical training based on their fundamental understanding of science (Section 2 BMAT), critical thinking (Section 1 BMAT) and ones ability to express oneself (Section 3 BMAT).
I by no means think that entrance exams should be the main factor in determining offers and rejections, A-level/IB grades, interview performance, personal statement and references are probably more important but they don't allow the admission teams to compare applicants on exactly the same bases. Entrance exams are currently flawed and there is definitely room for improvement but I would still argue that they form an integral part of medical admission.
Original post by .eXe
This is from an international applicant's perspective:
1) Have the same number of spaces in each school (say 15-20 internationals per school). Right now some schools take 5-6 while others take up to 40, while some don't at all. We are good revenue for the schools so more of us should be encouraged to come
2) Remove the damn UKCAT. Stupid test and it in no way whatsoever indicated suitability/capability to be a physician
3) Remove the stupid "predicted grades" system. It has too many flaws to list but at the very least, it's an unreliable system. At its worst, there are cases where students get either under-predicted by stupidly strict teachers or over-predicted by teachers who may be family friends/chummy with the students, etc.
4) Have a hard deadline by which schools MUST return all decisions. Say Mar 31. It should be the hard deadline. If a school needs over 5 months to make decisions for 300 spots then it is a highly inefficient school.
5) Make it mandatory for all schools to publish in specifics their minimum requirements and put a deadline by which any amendments can be made. After said deadline, the policies are set in stone for that year's application process. There are cases where schools advise 1 set of requirements, while under the table, operate on completely different set. There are also case where schools change their policies mid-cycle.
1) Have the same number of spaces in each school (say 15-20 internationals per school). Right now some schools take 5-6 while others take up to 40, while some don't at all. We are good revenue for the schools so more of us should be encouraged to come
2) Remove the damn UKCAT. Stupid test and it in no way whatsoever indicated suitability/capability to be a physician
3) Remove the stupid "predicted grades" system. It has too many flaws to list but at the very least, it's an unreliable system. At its worst, there are cases where students get either under-predicted by stupidly strict teachers or over-predicted by teachers who may be family friends/chummy with the students, etc.
4) Have a hard deadline by which schools MUST return all decisions. Say Mar 31. It should be the hard deadline. If a school needs over 5 months to make decisions for 300 spots then it is a highly inefficient school.
5) Make it mandatory for all schools to publish in specifics their minimum requirements and put a deadline by which any amendments can be made. After said deadline, the policies are set in stone for that year's application process. There are cases where schools advise 1 set of requirements, while under the table, operate on completely different set. There are also case where schools change their policies mid-cycle.
I disagree with 1). Some schools have cohorts bigger than others (e.g. Aberdeen takes in less than 200 while Manchester has near 400). The international school intake should, as what they're doing now, be proportional to the size of the cohort. And as far as I'm aware of all unis take in international students, just that we are not allowed on some foundation courses?
But other than that, as an international student myself too, I agree with your other points.
Points 4) and 5) *cough* Leeds *cough*
Academics:
Change the emphasis on GCSEs. Some people only get the opportunity to do 6 or 7 GCSEs. The majority of people who apply to medicine have over 10 GCSEs. Cuts off a whole group of people.
Non-academic:
Better interviews, or possibly more. So many med schools do one 20-30 minutes interview. There's more to people that a simple 20 minutes.
Change the emphasis on GCSEs. Some people only get the opportunity to do 6 or 7 GCSEs. The majority of people who apply to medicine have over 10 GCSEs. Cuts off a whole group of people.
Non-academic:
Better interviews, or possibly more. So many med schools do one 20-30 minutes interview. There's more to people that a simple 20 minutes.
Original post by Girl.
There's more to people that a simple 20 minutes.
Definitely agree with that - some people may impress in 20 mins, but may come acorss differently if you have contact with them for any longer! and vice versa.
Original post by Renal
Reduce the academic requirements, increase the personality requirements.
I agree, this is a much better way of differentiating between potentially gd doctors and FAKES..
Original post by Caponester
Can I just check, have both of you actually taken part in a MMI?
Yep, and I hated it, the whole processed was rushed and they seemed to give me little time to answer my questions, which led to me trying to rush and in the end not answering the questions as well as I could've and in little depth, I hated how structured they made it so that the personality of the candidate is hard to recognise, however I understand that one MMI experience at a med school does not mean that every med school does it this way, and I could be biased as I did get rejected from the MMI med school
, but I think I thrived way more in the traditional interview format with more time to answer questions and that allowed me to answer the questions in more depth.Original post by .eXe
3) Remove the stupid "predicted grades" system. It has too many flaws to list but at the very least, it's an unreliable system. At its worst, there are cases where students get either under-predicted by stupidly strict teachers or over-predicted by teachers who may be family friends/chummy with the students, etc.
3) Remove the stupid "predicted grades" system. It has too many flaws to list but at the very least, it's an unreliable system. At its worst, there are cases where students get either under-predicted by stupidly strict teachers or over-predicted by teachers who may be family friends/chummy with the students, etc.
Totally agree! It was on the news afew weeks ago, about how many students were being over predicted just to get offers for the course, when in reality the chances of them getting the grades were low, and that schools are abusing the predicted grade system. Many students also telling their staff members what they need rather than the staff deciding what they are going to get.
However, I know many students who were under predicted and effectively had to take a 'forced' gap year, and still got their AAA or better.
I think emphasis should be made on AS grades, rather than 'predicted' and if someone does mess up and needs to re-take, then perhaps then they should consider applying in a gap year to get the grades.
Scrap the UKCAT, there is evidence to show that it does not indicate anything. Also don't let medical work experience abroad buy you a place because 99% of people that do it, do it to get in and from what I've heard off people who have done it, a lot of the people there really don't care and aren't willing to help. Plus the vast majority of people could never afford it.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by rohitbd
Yep, and I hated it, the whole processed was rushed and they seemed to give me little time to answer my questions, which led to me trying to rush and in the end not answering the questions as well as I could've and in little depth, I hated how structured they made it so that the personality of the candidate is hard to recognise, however I understand that one MMI experience at a med school does not mean that every med school does it this way, and I could be biased as I did get rejected from the MMI med school, but I think I thrived way more in the traditional interview format with more time to answer questions and that allowed me to answer the questions in more depth.
, but I think I thrived way more in the traditional interview format with more time to answer questions and that allowed me to answer the questions in more depth.I think you have a good point, and I haven't applied to med school yet. I think MMI is rushed and afew minutes isn't enough time to get the jist. Plus, people are nervous, and in a hall with other people and other stations makes it harder to concentrate. I understand why they use this system, but I don't think it gives the applicant to kind of 'sell' themselves, because at an traditional interview, you mention other things which relate to what they are asking e.g. work experience, your experiences.
Secondly, I believe some medical schools teach you communication skills too, obviously to the fine detail, and they expect you to be able to communicate easily at an interview, but like dealing with difficult situations is something you learn at med school; I understand why the test some things in MMI like empathy, because you can't teach someone that, but others are irrelevant.
Original post by happyhands
MMIs are a terrible idea overall, but, like the UKCAT, I suspect they're considered in vogue these days, so I don't expect to see the back of them soon.....
MMIs are a terrible idea overall, but, like the UKCAT, I suspect they're considered in vogue these days, so I don't expect to see the back of them soon.....
Why are they a terrible idea? This is essentially the same system that will be used to examine you through almost all of your medical career and is in my opinon much more effective than one 20-30 minute panel-style interview.
As much as we would all like more interviews, longer interviews etc etc, the resources available to medical schools and the time constraints just don't allow it.
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by Hippokrates
Scrap the UKCAT, there is evidence to show that it does not indicate anything. Also don't let medical work experience abroad buy you a place because 99% of people that do it, do it to get in and from what I've heard off people who have done it, a lot of the people there really don't care and aren't willing to help. Plus the vast majority of people could never afford it.
I agree with the UKCAT.
But, disagree with the medical work experience abroad, because although I wouldn't go and do one myself, someone who wants to spend money on that, should be able to, and if they really can't get work experience here may find something there, and there are many caring people who take a gap year and want to get an feel for it. Another girl I know wanted to compare healthcare in UK, and Peru, so going work experience abroad helped her for her EPQ. However, people who only do work experience abroad, must be able to understand that the NHS here is very different. I would infact do one, if they were perhaps cheaper and was with a charity organisation rather than a company.
Original post by MsKazza
I agree, this is a much better way of differentiating between potentially gd doctors and FAKES..
so true, with like GCSES, especially Birmingham, which is why I like med schools like lancaster, and keele which have reasonable entry requirements. Having an A* in GCSE food tech isn't going to make you any better than someone with an A in GCSE French.
With A-levels I understand why they expect people to have AAA, partly because its so competitive. Secondly because you do have to strong to some extent academically to put you ahead, and it really does prepare students for medical school as although the work isn't as hard as a-levels apparently, the amount of stuff to learn is alot more. If the entry requirements were Cs, there are some students who could get that very easily, and then would be in for a shock when they start uni :/
Original post by AishaTara
With A-levels I understand why they expect people to have AAA, partly because its so competitive. Secondly because you do have to strong to some extent academically to put you ahead, and it really does prepare students for medical school as although the work isn't as hard as a-levels apparently, the amount of stuff to learn is alot more. If the entry requirements were Cs, there are some students who could get that very easily, and then would be in for a shock when they start uni :/
Back when I started medical school we routinely had students with Bs and Cs at A-Level, they didn't struggle. Medical school is fundamentally different from school, those who do well at the latter may struggle with the former and vice versa.
Personally, if I was a university, I would want to see what kind of person people are when they're not being watched, and they're not in an interview situation where they know they have to impress. I would hire an actor to play an applicant in the interview waiting room, and instruct them to act really nervous or burst into tears, and see how the other applicants react. I think that's the best way to test people's natural compassion/people skills.
Edit: and use that in conjunction with the rest of the interview.
Edit: and use that in conjunction with the rest of the interview.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Student finance mess
- Clearing while at uni?
- UCL PWP Feb 2024
- Police Vetting Process
- LSE september 2024 grad intake
- ARUP summer internship 2023
- No Offers from Universities
- MPhil in Machine Learning and Machine Intelligence at Cambridge 2024
- MFA Slade 2023 questions : )!
- Official UCL 2023 Undergraduate Applicants Thread
- Ucas extra kcl havent heard anything
- Is there any way I can be considered for extenuating circumstances?
- Questions on applying on UCAS as a private resit student
- Change of circumstance- next payment due next Thursday
- DWP work coach
- MPhil Politics and International Studies 2024
- Tesco seasonal job application
- Cambridge postgraduate application: Decision pending - application is under review
- Aviva Graduate Pathway 2024
- Official LSE Postgraduate Applicants 2023 Thread
Latest
Trending
Last reply 4 weeks ago
opinions on laptops/tablets which will be good for med school/uni in general?Last reply 2 months ago
Going abroad after studying at a UK medicine universityLast reply 2 months ago
Unsure on medicinary/dentistry or computing science fieldLast reply 2 months ago
Unintentional 'Gap Year' After Graduating Medical SchoolTrending
Last reply 4 weeks ago
opinions on laptops/tablets which will be good for med school/uni in general?Last reply 2 months ago
Going abroad after studying at a UK medicine universityLast reply 2 months ago
Unsure on medicinary/dentistry or computing science fieldLast reply 2 months ago
Unintentional 'Gap Year' After Graduating Medical School
