The Student Room Group

Does going to a "prestigious" university benefit you as a Doctor?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 100
Original post by ukmed108
Canada does want UK GPs in rural areas but ones who have completed GP training. Taking a UK F2 grad would mean training them in residency which would cost Canada money.

Well since, its likely to be Australia and New Zealand that are the biggest choices. Would you say that UK grads would take up an Australia/New Zealand offer over a UK offer or is going abroad something you do because you can't find a UK offer?


In my experience, most people do not apply to both. It seems (anecdotally, at least) that the majority of people who go to Aus/NZ have deliberately chosen to do so and usually do not apply for UK training in that same cycle - though many only go out there for a year or two and then come back here for specialist training. There will be some who look into going overseas if they don't get a UK training job, but for most people it's an active decision not to join the UK process that year.

If you were to offer all UK grads a UK training job vs an Antipodean one, I imagine the majority would take the UK one simply because of the upheaval involved in moving to the other side of the world. But that doesn't mean that the people who do go are doing so because they can't get in in the UK!
Reply 101
There's a lot of battling back and forth here.. I just wanted to chip in my two pence, at least regarding the OP request. I haven't got solid evidence, but I can say - outside of the UK (and within I'm sure), recruitment to jobs and training posts ALSO includes soft factors (you know, going over the CV, did it catch the recruiters eye?). And while everyone in the UK knows all medical degrees are equal (hence, if you're going to stay here, it doesn't matter) - I reckon, if you're applying for a post abroad, it really helps if the panel have actually heard of your university. It might not trump actual hard accomplishments (e.g. publications), but with all else being equal, I imagine they'll go with the candidate from the school they've heard of. Wouldn't you? With all else being equal? I've experienced this somewhat myself, the reception you get when mentioning your medical school is quite different if they've heard of it vs. if they havent.
Original post by nexttime
The bottom half won't see any change, but the top half will go up? Percentile 50 stays at 50, but percentile 51 moves up? That doesn't make any sense. Using your own scenario - the two bottom halves are now converging to form 66% of the year. So 16% of those people are going to move up out of the bottom half. Everyone below them will move up also. Except the very bottom person.

I suggest you revisit this scenario and think it over.



You suggest pre-clinical doesn't form any part of the ranking? Or that pre-clinical marks are adjusted based on some test that aims to calibrate the Oxbridge and London exams?

They could do. Maybe i'm mistaken and they do. I don't think so though.


Personally I would have expected all candidates to have been given a z score at the end of their pre-clinical years (or it be recorded somewhere at least) this would have been a ranking based in their performance in their actual original cohort.

Then people move around for their clinicals. This should then have been treated as a new cohort and ranking be done on the clinical assessments etc. Then at the end of the penultimate year the pre-clinical z score and the clinical score could be combined at a 40:60 weighting and candidates could be ranked.

It seems unfair to allow candidates pre-clinical score to change based on factors beyond their control I.e changing cohort size.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by star10159

I've also heard, (from a doctor who went to oxford) that she did not have as much clinical skills as other FY1 doctors from med schools, is this true for other oxbridge students. Can anyone confirm or debunk this?


To be honest I think we are all taught the same skills and examined on them,

Yes some of us are taught and examined on them earlier, others during the clinical years. But at the end of it all we all need to be taught the skills set out in tomorrows doctors.

You could argue that being taught skills earlier and examined earlier and more frequently on clinical skills would make you better but I doubt this is significant.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Spaz Man
Your degree classification matters more than the prestige of the uni. Obviously however, it may help in a superficial way.

EDIT: Replies please? I'm genuinely interested.


There isn't really a degree classification in medicine, you either get your bachelor of medicine, bachelor of surgery or you don't.

For other degrees classification is more important but university is important too.

I.e a 2.1 from Oxford or a 1st from Oxford Brooke's?




Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by AnonymousPenguin
...


Was that my similar previous post?

It looks like most Peninsula graduates have either gone into GP or abroad. Interesting, although there do seem to be loads in CT/ST training around the hospital though.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Gridiron-Gangster
If your family despite their education/background genuinely believe that a degree from a non-Korean school isn't from Oxbridge or any Ivy League medical school then yes that is quite ignorant and moronic. The views of one Korean family doesn't determine the reputation of an institution worldwide. King's has a distinguished history as both a university, medical school and a centre of excellence in medical research which is better than most medical schools and universities in South Korea.

Also in one ranking KCL ranked 26th in the world (above certain Ivy League colleges) whereas the top university in Korea SNU wasn't in the top 150 so i your claims that people in Korea sneer at KCL for not being reputable is tad ironing.

But that detracts from my point that rankings mean jack all with regards to applying for jobs inMedicine hence the shed load of Asian doctors who have worked to the top of their fields in the UK and US and Canada. Frankly I think what is more important is the ability to perform clinical tasks competently and safely and that's more to do with the professionalism/integrity of the individual rather than the school they trained at.

Thanks.

This guy goes to King's
This guy is butthurt that his university isn't as well known as he thought
This guy is bleating on about King's history as if it was it was his own family's honor that he is defending

For god's sake it is just a university. Go there' get a degree, get a job, the name of the place will be a distant memory to you in 20 years.
Reply 107
Original post by peter12345
This guy goes to King's
This guy is butthurt that his university isn't as well known as he thought
This guy is bleating on about King's history as if it was it was his own family's honor that he is defending

For god's sake it is just a university. Go there' get a degree, get a job, the name of the place will be a distant memory to you in 20 years.


Ok hes not butthurt, but actually if you know the medical history King's aka GKT hospital was probably one of the best hospitals in London. In the 1700-1800s even into the early 1900s, Oxbridge didn't teach clinical medicine. That was left to London. GKT has graduated some very famous clinicians and scientists including Richard Bright, bright's disease, Thomas Hodgkin, hodgkin's lymphoma, Sir Astley Cooper, cooper's ligaments and Max Theiler, nobel prize medicine, vaccine for yellow fever.

So yes, King's isn't ranked very well in the league domestic tables, but actually its quite a prestigious school.
Original post by ukmed108
Ok hes not butthurt, but actually if you know the medical history King's aka GKT hospital was probably one of the best hospitals in London. In the 1700-1800s even into the early 1900s, Oxbridge didn't teach clinical medicine. That was left to London. GKT has graduated some very famous clinicians and scientists including Richard Bright, bright's disease, Thomas Hodgkin, hodgkin's lymphoma, Sir Astley Cooper, cooper's ligaments and Max Theiler, nobel prize medicine, vaccine for yellow fever.

So yes, King's isn't ranked very well in the league domestic tables, but actually its quite a prestigious school.

Don't care that Professor Poshington invented the Fluzebob Fluxmometer there. What matters is how good they are now.
Original post by ukmed108
Ok hes not butthurt, but actually if you know the medical history King's aka GKT hospital was probably one of the best hospitals in London. In the 1700-1800s even into the early 1900s, Oxbridge didn't teach clinical medicine. That was left to London. GKT has graduated some very famous clinicians and scientists including Richard Bright, bright's disease, Thomas Hodgkin, hodgkin's lymphoma, Sir Astley Cooper, cooper's ligaments and Max Theiler, nobel prize medicine, vaccine for yellow fever.

So yes, King's isn't ranked very well in the league domestic tables, but actually its quite a prestigious school.


Kings doesn't perform that well in the domestic league tables, but it does internationally rankings which focus more on reputation and citations rather than student satisfaction. E.g. http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/university-subject-rankings/2013/medicine

KCL is ranked 5th in the UK and 23rd in the world.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending