Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a6georgia1)
    Yeah I was just thinking of the same - it would have been IMPOSSIBLE to include full descriptions of all of them parts; surely ability to calibrate equipment etc. are best to test in an interview rather than cram into a short application form.
    I guess that is part of what they are looking for though. Given the word limits, people will choose different ways of writing which will tell them a lot about how we are suited to the role, and how concise we can be. Writing to a word limit is a skill we should have as scientists, especially if we have considered academic careers - there are always word limits on writing research funding proposals, and submitting articles to journals to be reviewed for publication. Particularly if you go on to follow HSST this is a skill they will want to see. Plus, with so many applications per post we can't really blame them for not wanting to read longs essays for each longlisted applicant 😀
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ila10)
    I guess that is part of what they are looking for though. Given the word limits, people will choose different ways of writing which will tell them a lot about how we are suited to the role, and how concise we can be. Writing to a word limit is a skill we should have as scientists, especially if we have considered academic careers - there are always word limits on writing research funding proposals, and submitting articles to journals to be reviewed for publication. Particularly if you go on to follow HSST this is a skill they will want to see. Plus, with so many applications per post we can't really blame them for not wanting to read longs essays for each longlisted applicant 😀
    This is true, but I think hardly every student, undergraduate at least, will have a fully referenced published paper.

    I feel rather crushed now, reading the shortlisting criteria and realising I did not include everything they wanted! Even though I got a previous supervisor from the NHS to read it and give her opinion. I guess it's useful for next year though
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by librarygirl)
    This is true, but I think hardly every student, undergraduate at least, will have a fully referenced published paper.
    I agree it's not something we will have all have done, I meant more that it is something we should expect to do in the future and as such they will want to see potential in the way we write.

    Try not to worry, as like you say, it would be impossible for anyone to just tick all the boxes of the shortlisting criteria, and if we did it would likely make little sense as a cohesive piece of writing. Different people will like different styles of writing too and will see points we are trying to make even if we haven't explicitly stated them 😀
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ila10)
    I agree it's not something we will have all have done, I meant more that it is something we should expect to do in the future and as such they will want to see potential in the way we write.

    Try not to worry, as like you say, it would be impossible for anyone to just tick all the boxes of the shortlisting criteria, and if we did it would likely make little sense as a cohesive piece of writing. Different people will like different styles of writing too and will see points we are trying to make even if we haven't explicitly stated them 😀
    I hope you're right, since it's a programme for people who are just starting out in their careers. Soon, the state of applying for jobs will look like this:

    Name:  CVOWMnmWoAEZI1d.jpg
Views: 152
Size:  53.7 KB
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Hmmm. I am a little confused here:
    "Step one
    Long listing
    Remove from selection any applicant:
    • without the necessary qualification or evidence that they reasonably expect to achieve the qualification level required
    • scoring zero in three or more categories"

    I suppose this criteria was developed before aptitude tests were introduced. As for now longlisting is basically cutting off people with bad score in tests? So probably all this criteria are not really valid anymore.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by majagaja)
    Hmmm. I am a little confused here:
    "Step one
    Long listing
    Remove from selection any applicant:
    • without the necessary qualification or evidence that they reasonably expect to achieve the qualification level required
    • scoring zero in three or more categories"

    I suppose this criteria was developed before aptitude tests were introduced. As for now longlisting is basically cutting off people with bad score in tests? So probably all this criteria are not really valid anymore.
    Maybe, but don't the core specifications still apply today? I'm sure it's all definitely along those lines in the current documents. But longlisting has changed it seems.
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by librarygirl)
    Maybe, but don't the core specifications still apply today? I'm sure it's all definitely along those lines in the current documents. But longlisting has changed it seems.
    It would be great if this guidelines still apply, cause I think somehow my application meets most of them. But plenty looks like they are too specific, especially the ones about lab work etc.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by majagaja)
    It would be great if this guidelines still apply, cause I think somehow my application meets most of them. But plenty looks like they are too specific, especially the ones about lab work etc.
    To be honest, I'm finding it hard to believe that all the outlined criteria must be met purely in the application before interview. Surely fully discussing laboratory issues and troubleshooting are all points to be brought up when talking to interviewers. "Full descriptions" and "less than 250 words" is a bit of an oxymoron.
    But like Ila10 said, hopefully it's more that recruiters can see your potential to meet criteria, not that you've accomplished all this straightaway.
    Offline

    2
    That document isn't how they assess us. It's from 2011 which is before the STP existed in its current state and before you had to answer essay questions. Back then they simply asked you how you met the person specification.
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by nymv)
    Hi, I had an interview for Biochemistry last year and got 58/69 for the shortlisting. I was shortlist unsuccessful for Genetics, I scored 43/69. I'm not sure what the minimum is for an interview.
    This is a difference of 15 points for the same application in different subjects. There's not enough on that old form that could cause such a huge difference.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex83)
    That document isn't how they assess us. It's from 2011 which is before the STP existed in its current state and before you had to answer essay questions. Back then they simply asked you how you met the person specification.
    Indeed. Its a nice overlook but now the process must be a lot more streamlined seeing as the number of applicants is massive increased. I doubt there is any observance of this point:

    "The absence of evidence in an application form is not evidence that the required ability is necessarily missing from the person. Whilst the listed attributes are core and applicants should possess them all, we risk not shortlisting excellent candidates if they have failed to provide a minor piece of evidence about an ability, although they may possess it. As a result, candidates who score a zero against a particular criterion may still be shortlisted if the weight of evidence suggests overall competence." (Taken from that document).

    There is going to be a similar set of criteria based on the questions they have asked us and how we have fit it. I wouldn't be surprised if there was still a 0-3 scale of responses but I can imagine that they are a whole lot less forgiving.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SlipperyJohn)
    Indeed. Its a nice overlook but now the process must be a lot more streamlined seeing as the number of applicants is massive increased. I doubt there is any observance of this point:

    "The absence of evidence in an application form is not evidence that the required ability is necessarily missing from the person. Whilst the listed attributes are core and applicants should possess them all, we risk not shortlisting excellent candidates if they have failed to provide a minor piece of evidence about an ability, although they may possess it. As a result, candidates who score a zero against a particular criterion may still be shortlisted if the weight of evidence suggests overall competence." (Taken from that document).

    There is going to be a similar set of criteria based on the questions they have asked us and how we have fit it. I wouldn't be surprised if there was still a 0-3 scale of responses but I can imagine that they are a whole lot less forgiving.
    Maybe not less forgiving, it's just a different way of assessing us. We would never know for sure unless we saw the current shortlisting criteria.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by librarygirl)
    Maybe not less forgiving, it's just a different way of assessing us. We would never know for sure unless we saw the current shortlisting criteria.
    That is true, but I assume that with the large volume of applicants they won't be giving us the benefit of the doubt (as stated in that paragraph I quoted).

    Btw is everyone's deadline for hearing back the 21st of March?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SlipperyJohn)
    That is true, but I assume that with the large volume of applicants they won't be giving us the benefit of the doubt (as stated in that paragraph I quoted).

    Btw is everyone's deadline for hearing back the 21st of March?
    No you're right, but the criteria gleaned from applications may be less rigid and support future professional behaviour. (I'm being optimistic).

    Yes, it's from the 21st of March. Of course I don't expect to hear from them bang on that date, unless my score is really crappy!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm sure they have quite strict criteria for shortlisting.. the process needs to be as objective and transparent as possible and judging the 'potential' of a candidate based on 250 word answer is not really possible. The interview is a whole different story though..
    Btw. anyone applied for micro or histocompatibility/immunogenetics?
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by librarygirl)
    This is true, but I think hardly every student, undergraduate at least, will have a fully referenced published paper.

    I feel rather crushed now, reading the shortlisting criteria and realising I did not include everything they wanted! Even though I got a previous supervisor from the NHS to read it and give her opinion. I guess it's useful for next year though
    Remember, that getting a published paper is for the maximum marks. Getting 3 marks means that someone "fully meets or exceeds the criteria". Most applicants won't have any publications, but it's only one possible mark you miss out on, and it's probably not going to make or break your application. Anyone with an undergraduate research project could easily achieve 2 marks.

    3: a fully referenced, completed and published piece of research
    2: a significant, fully described but unpublished piece of research
    1: a description of structured research activity
    Offline

    2
    (Original post by Janu_55)
    I'm sure they have quite strict criteria for shortlisting.. the process needs to be as objective and transparent as possible and judging the 'potential' of a candidate based on 250 word answer is not really possible. The interview is a whole different story though..
    Btw. anyone applied for micro or histocompatibility/immunogenetics?
    There were 69 possible marks last year, so that would mean 23 criteria if they had 3 marks each. But they definitely don't just go off the person specification, a huge amount of marks seem to be associated with how your application is tailored towards the specialism, but the PS is quite vague - it could apply to all disciplines.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex83)
    Remember, that getting a published paper is for the maximum marks. Getting 3 marks means that someone "fully meets or exceeds the criteria". Most applicants won't have any publications, but it's only one possible mark you miss out on, and it's probably not going to make or break your application. Anyone with an undergraduate research project could easily achieve 2 marks.

    3: a fully referenced, completed and published piece of research
    2: a significant, fully described but unpublished piece of research
    1: a description of structured research activity
    I made reference to my MSc study but it was more to illustrate innovative thinking in my research design. I certainly couldn't have fully described it in the given word limit.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Are they just looking at the 4x 250 word statements or would you think they would use your work experience to answer for some of the criteria?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SlipperyJohn)
    Are they just looking at the 4x 250 word statements or would you think they would use your work experience to answer for some of the criteria?
    I imagine the majority of it comes from the statements, but pretty sure details of any placements or relevant employment will count towards marks on team work, specific lab skills, study-work balance etc.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 25, 2017
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

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

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