Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

What's the best medical school? Watch

Announcements
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renal)
    Which medical schools don't have a very high employment rate? :rolleyes:
    I said "so do most medical schools"...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beska)
    I recall Cambridge having one of the lowest graduate employment (98%) for medical schools in the 2011 rankings, so if you're going to arbitrarily pick out Cambridge for having a high employment rate then stop speaking out your ass.
    98% employment isn't high...?
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1F2R3)
    98% employment isn't high...?
    I am speaking relatively. It is the lowest employment % compared to other medical schools, yet you picked it as an example of a medical school with a high employment percentage.

    I reiterate my point. Don't speak out your ass.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beska)
    I am speaking relatively. It is the lowest employment % compared to other medical schools, yet you picked it as an example of a medical school with a high employment percentage.

    I reiterate my point. Don't speak out your ass.
    Where is the list of statistics then?
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1F2R3)
    Where is the list of statistics then?
    Have a look at any medical school ranking list for 2011 entry - there is one linked previously in this thread already. I used the Guardian's ranking.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beska)
    Have a look at any medical school ranking list for 2011 entry - there is one linked previously in this thread already. I used the Guardian's ranking.
    I have, Cambridge is ranked second overall on the Guardian's table but on other tables for 2011 it is ranked first overall. Last year, UCL had the same percentage which has gone up to 100 this year.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1F2R3)
    I have, Cambridge is ranked second overall on the Guardian's table but on other tables for 2011 it is ranked first overall. Last year, UCL had the same percentage which has gone up to 100 this year.
    The Guardian has Cambridge at 98%, which as I said, is the lowest % employment for graduates.

    My point is that using % employment as a measure of success for medical school is stupid. Perhaps only trumped in stupidness by giving Cambridge arbitrarily as an example of a medical school implying that it had some kind of employment rate that was superior to others, when it is actually low compared to the majority.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beska)
    The Guardian has Cambridge at 98%, which as I said, is the lowest % employment for graduates.

    My point is that using % employment as a measure of success for medical school is stupid. Perhaps only trumped in stupidness by giving Cambridge arbitrarily as an example of a medical school implying that it had some kind of employment rate that was superior to others, when it is actually low compared to the majority.
    Well, a few other schools have the same employment rates from those results as Cambridge. It varies year on year, if you look at previous statistics then Cambridge generally does have a high employment rate compared to other medical schools.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1F2R3)
    Well, a few other schools have the same employment rates from those results as Cambridge. It varies year on year, if you look at previous statistics then Cambridge generally does have a high employment rate compared to other medical schools.
    Is my point going completely over the top of your head or what?

    I agree with what Renal said. You have no idea what the **** you're talking about. Don't give advice like "Cambridge has better graduate employment, go there" to pre-applicants when you obviously have no idea how MTAS or the foundation programme works.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beska)
    Is my point going completely over the top of your head or what?

    I agree with what Renal said. You have no idea what the **** you're talking about. Don't give advice like "Cambridge has better graduate employment, go there" to pre-applicants when you obviously have no idea how MTAS or the foundation programme works.
    You are obviously looking at statistics of one year, look over the last 15 years at the employment rates of Cambridge.

    Do you advise candidates to apply to a medical school based on employment statistics alone? Do you ignore teaching quality and other such vital attributes medical schools may have?

    It is you who doesn't know what the **** you're on about.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1F2R3)
    You are obviously looking at statistics of one year, look over the last 15 years at the employment rates of Cambridge.

    Do you advise candidates to apply to a medical school based on employment statistics alone? Do you ignore teaching quality and other such vital attributes medical schools may have?

    It is you who doesn't know what the **** you're on about.
    My point is that you don't look at employment statistics at all.

    As I have done in this thread, I advise them based purely on what teaching style they prefer. Ranking, employment statistics and all that **** don't mean anything for medical schools.

    I know exactly what I'm talking about, mainly because I understand MTAS and how the foundation programme works and the fact it makes employment statistics worthless if a medical school is GMC accredited. You obviously don't, and it is funny that you are advising applicants when you have no idea what you're talking about.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tcrwt)
    That's my problem, I genuinely don't know. I love physics, and medicine is intriguing. If I do physics, I really want to do it at a great uni, for three reasons. Firstly, I have two cousins who both did physics at Oxford, and they both loved it and recommend it, since I like physics There's also a hint of competition here, in my family. Secondly, I want to go to a university which is nice, in a really nice place. Lastly, loads of my teachers have strongly recommended I go for oxbridge, because they think I'm good enough, based on my grades.
    [SIZE="2"](Sorry if that sounded really arrogant,

    I think your doing the right thing, good luck with it all!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    In my opinion Nottingham and Newcastle.

    It's completely subjective and doesn't matter where you go regards career prospects.

    (Original post by M1F2R3)
    It is you who doesn't know what the **** you're on about.
    Haha. :rofl:

    (Original post by Beska)
    When you're trying to decide on a medical school (or narrow down choices), there are lots of things to consider. The main one is obviously the course structure, the location, the accommodation, the city, etc. but the prestige of the medical school is not something that you need to consider, at all. The consensus is that it makes no difference on what job you get at all. As has been said, all medical schools are GMC accredited which means when you graduate, you're a doctor. The only difference is the way they teach.

    If you're a independent self-learner who doesn't like lectures, Oxbridge will be the worst medical school while somewhere like Manchester will be the best, for example.
    You da man. This ^^ is the only response this thread required.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Stop looking at tables, of ANY kind. The best med school is the one you want to go to for your personal reasons, AND of course the one that accepts you.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tyraell)
    . Oxbridge doesnt have a higher employment rate for mediicne because all med schools have 99% / 100% employment rate. Also you go onto do foundation years after your med degree, and the university you went to is annonymous and so prestige cannot affect you, therefore going to oxbridge would not give you any advantages as getting in depends on your exam results and where you rank in your med school.

    True to an extent. However, Oxbridgers generally rank higher in terms of first-time pass rates for post-graduate exams (although I do realise you addressed this below) but more recently in achieving first choice foundation programme spot (at least compared to London). Whether or not this reflects better doctoring is debateable, of course, but it does not mean it doesn't have some influence on progression.
    True, however statistics that are used for this are very dated, even the ones from 6 years ago, because there use to be a huge difference in entry requirements for med schools and oxbridge did have the highest and so you could infer that they were most likely to get the best graded studnets and possibly they be the most intelligent and thus have the potential to do the best in graduate exams, because at the end of the day the entry requirements use to severly reflect the exam results and thus 1st prefernece.

    However with entry requirements being so high now, the same as oxbridge, someone who may be able to get into oxbridge may not be able to get into birmingham now because they have 7A* cut off for GCSE, or sheffiled who only look at the top 10% for UKCAt, my point being oxbridge no longer have those with the highest academics and i dont think they will now get any better results really than any other medical school .

    Btw the way im not slating oxbridge at all, i actually like oxford haha, but i just wanted to make this point, because so many people assume oxbridge is the best and has the highest entry requirements and that there students do the best haha.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Beska)
    My point is that you don't look at employment statistics at all.

    As I have done in this thread, I advise them based purely on what teaching style they prefer. Ranking, employment statistics and all that **** don't mean anything for medical schools.

    I know exactly what I'm talking about, mainly because I understand MTAS and how the foundation programme works and the fact it makes employment statistics worthless if a medical school is GMC accredited. You obviously don't, and it is funny that you are advising applicants when you have no idea what you're talking about.
    I also said in my first post about teaching quality... you obviously didn't read that part.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1F2R3)
    I also said in my first post about teaching quality... you obviously didn't read that part.
    :facepalm:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by M1F2R3)
    I also said in my first post about teaching quality... you obviously didn't read that part.
    Are you a medicine applicant, a medic or a junior doctor?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tcrwt)
    Yeah, I did think it was the case that they don't know where you studied.

    Are there many that will accept me without Biology?
    my mate got 4 offers withough biology. just choose your med schools carefully. he did sheffield, glasgow, manchester and durham
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Organ)
    Are you a medicine applicant, a medic or a junior doctor?
    Neither, my cousin is training to be a surgeon.

    Nobody has actually addressed my points... all people have done is facepalm. Who bases a decision to pick x medical school purely on employment prospects? Everybody is slating off Cambridge saying "it has the worst employment prospect", yes it is tied with the likes of Nottingham and Warwick. Overall, Cambridge is ranked second behind Oxford this year... nobody is looking at the bigger picture. The thread is about which medical school is the best, in my original post I clearly said the "best" applies to various areas such as graduate prospects [of which Cambridge is usually the best if you look at statistics] but this year it isn't the best
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.