Irish Uni Entrance requirements what the feck!?

I've recently been researching some courses in Irish universities like Trinity College Dublin and University College Dublin and ive notced a strange trend.
For example, to get into physiotherapy, the average candidate does gets 4 A's at A2 (yes four) while in contrast physiotherapy at liverpool or university of ulster needs only 3 B's. (I live in northern ireland)

I mean I would understand if ucd or trinity asked for 3 A's at the most (if they really are amazing uni's) but to ask for 4 A'2s from GCE candidates for a non-high brow course like physio is down right mad . The average smart a-level candidate in NI comes out with something around 3 good A2's; people rarely do 4 unless they do further maths or some stuff.

Am i missing something, are people from the republic of ireland friggin genius'? Or is the system just terribly flawed.


Cheers for reading,

Tom

I've noticed this too - it's very dodgy. I'm not sure, though, that there's a fairer way of doing it; if they ramped up the points to make A*A*A* equal 600 then that'd be unfair to Irish students since getting the grades for 600 seems a lot more difficult than getting A*A*A* at A Level. I'm planning on applying anyway since I've nothing to lose but the entry fee; my order's probably going to be English + Latin/History + English/English/History + Latin/History or something like that.

It's not dodgy. Requirements are high for every student applying, internal or external. A small percentage get over 500 points, which over half of Trinity's courses are, and less than 1% get 600 points. It's a very fair system. If they lower A-Level requirements to levels standard in UK universities, how is that fair on the majority of cndidates- ie. internal ones? 500 is very difficult to get, 600 is extremely rare. 500 alone needs 5 subjects out of 7 to be A's and B's. It is driven by competition, not academic calibre- though individual course requirements do apply. English and History are the most sought after TSM choices- both are over 500 points.

I'd say it's somewhat dodgy. :L
Tere could still be a fairer way of dealing with A-Level applicants. The standards definitely don't need to be lowered, they should just be changed so it makes more sense. At present, a candidate with ACCC at A-Level would get accepted above someone with A*AA. To me that doesn't seem fair or sensible.

4 equates much better with our 6, unfortunately. It's not only the amount of subjects that's the problem, it's the huge disparity with grades themselves. Ours are much more specific- they are in increments of 5%. Less than 1% get maximum points. That is definitely not the case with your system, so there is huge difficulty in equating the two. The majority of courses are below 500 points and therefore do not call for 4 grades. But they don't attract external candidates. Courses over 500 are extremely difficult for all students to achieve and the fairest way for A-Level students- lowering it to 3 for ALL courses, puts the majority at a huge disadvantage. A-Level grades are judged in reverse of how ours are in the UK. It is as fair as can be.

It's not dodgy. Requirements are high for every student applying, internal or external. A small percentage get over 500 points, which over half of Trinity's courses are, and less than 1% get 600 points. It's a very fair system. If they lower A-Level requirements to levels standard in UK universities, how is that fair on the majority of cndidates- ie. internal ones? 500 is very difficult to get, 600 is extremely rare. 500 alone needs 5 subjects out of 7 to be A's and B's. It is driven by competition, not academic calibre- though individual course requirements do apply. English and History are the most sought after TSM choices- both are over 500 points.