UL Medicine

chanste

raftni wrote: »

the falsehoods coming out of your mouth are mind-boggling.
The people who do badly in the year are, for the most part, people who got crap gamsat scores (yes 53 is crap, to purport otherwise is just downright lies) and have weak science backgrounds.

a few fail because of a poor work ethic and the fact that the exams are not entirely fair to the students (we get questioned on stuff most of us didn't even know we had to know)

26 people failed our year and will sit repeats next week. About ten of those will not pass the repeats.

you can mock me all you like, unfortunately i'm posting warnings for the sake of those coming into the course.

As someone who has consistently struggled with passing exams chanste, I would have thought you'd offer a more honest assessment of the course rather than misleading would be students.

yes people with poor gamsat scores can excel in the course. those students are the exception rather than the rule.

the course is tough. but if you got a crap score (sub 57 for arguments sake), the course is going to be ten times tougher and you will have to work ten times harder.

there has been enough warnings posted here about this and would be students have their heads buried in the sand. I can't warn you again. The truth will eventually find you.

I just want to point out that I never mocked you. Nor have I ever mocked anyone on these boards.
You speak of my past struggles with exams which I am in no way ashamed of, but you don't know me, and while I don't claim to be a genius, anybody that does know me, knows I'm not a fool. Yes I got 56, but I have still never needed to repeat a year (including any other course) and I don't believe anything less than 57 was a crap score.
Going back to your original point, you are absolutely right that people should not take on this course lightly. But it is still, despite all my difficulties, the best decision that I ever made for my own career.
Please try not to be so confrontational, I do respect the point your trying to make but I think it comes across as a swipe at people who could turn out to be great doctors.

PeadarGalway

raftni wrote: »

anyone who got in on 53 and 54.....you better have a phenomenal work ethic about you is all I'm going to say.

Not this again.....

EVERYBODY needs a phenomenal work ethic in medschool. End of story.

ul hopefull

raftni wrote: »

chanste wrote: »

You seem to be implying a large gap in intelligence between people who are separated by only a few points. I've seen people on my course that got scores in their 60s who are struggling every bit as much as I did with my 56 back in the day. GAMSAT is a single exam and a tough one at that. Scoring a 53 is a good score in my opinion and its unfortunate that so many people seem to talk about these entrants as if they are somehow retarded.

Remember in many cases the people getting near 53 would have been the people to get near 65 when they try the GAMSAT again.

For those who got in on a 53 congratulations, and don't pay attention to this kinda thing because in a few years (if you work as hard as anyone else on the course) no one will remember or care what score you got to get in.

the falsehoods coming out of your mouth are mind-boggling.
The people who do badly in the year are, for the most part, people who got crap gamsat scores (yes 53 is crap, to purport otherwise is just downright lies) and have weak science backgrounds.

a few fail because of a poor work ethic and the fact that the exams are not entirely fair to the students (we get questioned on stuff most of us didn't even know we had to know)

26 people failed our year and will sit repeats next week. About ten of those will not pass the repeats.

you can mock me all you like, unfortunately i'm posting warnings for the sake of those coming into the course.

As someone who has consistently struggled with passing exams chanste, I would have thought you'd offer a more honest assessment of the course rather than misleading would be students.

yes people with poor gamsat scores can excel in the course. those students are the exception rather than the rule.

the course is tough. but if you got a crap score (sub 57 for arguments sake), the course is going to be ten times tougher and you will have to work ten times harder.

there has been enough warnings posted here about this and would be students have their heads buried in the sand. I can't warn you again. The truth will eventually find you.

How can u make assumptions about peoples intelligence based solely on their gamsat score. you have no idea about the conditions under which any individual sat the exam. For example someone who scored 60 in the gamsat on their second attempt after a year of intense study and grind course may not in fact be as intelligent as someone who scored 54 whilst getting a first class honors in their own degree. The only way in which the gamsat could be used to compare levels of intelligence is if two individuals sit the exam under the same conditions. So whilst you think you are doing people some sort of favour im sure most would be much happier if you kept these opinions to yourself.

Reality_Check1

Your Gamsat score = intelligence + work ethic

Im not sure what % is intelligence and what is work ethic but thats all it is

beardedmaster

Reality_Check1 wrote: »

Your Gamsat score = intelligence + work ethic

Im not sure what % is intelligence and what is work ethic but thats all it is

Intelligence + work ethic + luck, I would imagine! Whether it is good or bad luck, of course. Someone may do much worse than they deserve, or vice-versa.

Reality_Check1

beardedmaster wrote: »

Intelligence + work ethic + luck, I would imagine! Whether it is good or bad luck, of course. Someone may do much worse than they deserve, or vice-versa.

thats true I forgot about luck. But luck only plays a small part in it in my opinion. In saying that those that do very well will have you believe none of its luck and those who do badly will claim its mostly luck

jtsuited

PeadarGalway wrote: »

Not this again.....

EVERYBODY needs a phenomenal work ethic in medschool. End of story.

so the fact that 26 people are sitting first year repeats in UL next week is down to 26 people not having the work ethic necessary?

And the fact 0 (as far as i know) are sitting first year repeats in RCSI (GEP) next week is down to us having this 'phenomenal work ethic'? I can only speak for myself, but I have nothing resembling a great work ethic let alone a 'phenomenal' one.

In every area of life, there are those who have to work themselves half to death to stay afloat. Then there are others who do very well with a fraction of the effort.
To think medicine is some golden exception to the rule is a bit odd imo. Yes, even if you're smart you might have to actually knuckle down a bit more than you ever have before. But that doesn't mean that the normal variance in natural aptitudes and abilities doesn't exist. Just like in every other area, you'll see people work far harder than anyone else and not be near the top of the class. And you'll see people who have a genuine flair for stuff just nail it with less effort.

I'm not sure what's so difficult to grasp about UL having a very unimpressive cutoff score and therefore having certain students seriously struggling. I mean we've got the figures involved.

To anybody with any basic understanding of maths, the gamsat distribution curve along with the actual marking scheme (which is weighted towards the mean afaik) means that there is quite a difference between say a score of 53 and a score of 59.

PeadarGalway

jtsuited wrote: »

so the fact that 26 people are sitting first year repeats in UL next week is down to 26 people not having the work ethic necessary?

And the fact 0 (as far as i know) are sitting first year repeats in RCSI (GEP) next week is down to us having this 'phenomenal work ethic'? I can only speak for myself, but I have nothing resembling a great work ethic let alone a 'phenomenal' one.

In every area of life, there are those who have to work themselves half to death to stay afloat. Then there are others who do very well with a fraction of the effort.
To think medicine is some golden exception to the rule is a bit odd imo. Yes, even if you're smart you might have to actually knuckle down a bit more than you ever have before. But that doesn't mean that the normal variance in natural aptitudes and abilities doesn't exist. Just like in every other area, you'll see people work far harder than anyone else and not be near the top of the class. And you'll see people who have a genuine flair for stuff just nail it with less effort.

I'm not sure what's so difficult to grasp about UL having a very unimpressive cutoff score and therefore having certain students seriously struggling. I mean we've got the figures involved.

To anybody with any basic understanding of maths, the gamsat distribution curve along with the actual marking scheme (which is weighted towards the mean afaik) means that there is quite a difference between say a score of 53 and a score of 59.

I don't disagree with you. I was just reacting to the post as I thought it was another "lets all bash UL again, we haven't done that in about 12posts" type job. There's been enough of them to warrant being wary of any glib posts! I hadn't seen the ensuing replies and discussion because I was replying from an email notification that I read on my phone.

And yes, I know I replied to glib remark with a glib remark... next time ill keep my mouth shut

raftni

hey guys and girls

just thought i'd update you all on the repeats.

so of the 25 in our year who failed, three of them got igrades to resit the entire year.

20 people sat exams. one dropped out completely. one transferred to cork after re-doing the gamsat during the year.

8 failed. one of them unfortunately failed for the second year running and is now finished in the school and in debt close to fifty thousand, 15 thousand for a years fees, twenty five thousand to repeat the year the first time. not to mention cost of living etc.

im not sure how the second years got on as I wouldnt know too many of them on a first name basis. i know one of the 15 and she passed, not sure about the others,will post when i find out.

i dont know what those eight people will do now with their futures. it's very unfortunate and disappointing and I know our entire class has been rocked today after hearing the news. really puts a dampner on our first week back i have to say. we're in disbelief tbh.

now that the gamsat score went down to 51 it's even more worrying for those people coming in.

Jammyc

Well I wont be sleeping easy tonight after reading that...

chanste

For anyone that had to repeat they genuinely have my sympathies, I had a real fear of it myself, and it reflects the difficulty of the course. I haven't heard if anybody in my year failed yet, but I don't think they did.

Just thought I'd mention to anybody in UL that some of the UL faculty who may come across as a bit scary at times were really supportive when I felt like I was struggling and I would recommend people go talk to Nigel Lawes in particular. He never made me feel bad for needing help, and went out of his way to help people who asked for help from him.

speeding

raftni wrote: »

hey guys and girls

just thought i'd update you all on the repeats.

so of the 25 in our year who failed, three of them got igrades to resit the entire year.

20 people sat exams. one dropped out completely. one transferred to cork after re-doing the gamsat during the year.

8 failed. one of them unfortunately failed for the second year running and is now finished in the school and in debt close to fifty thousand, 15 thousand for a years fees, twenty five thousand to repeat the year the first time. not to mention cost of living etc.

im not sure how the second years got on as I wouldnt know too many of them on a first name basis. i know one of the 15 and she passed, not sure about the others,will post when i find out.

i dont know what those eight people will do now with their futures. it's very unfortunate and disappointing and I know our entire class has been rocked today after hearing the news. really puts a dampner on our first week back i have to say. we're in disbelief tbh.

now that the gamsat score went down to 51 it's even more worrying for those people coming in.

Sorry to hear about that. I'm actually heading into the 5 year med degree in rcsi after doing a radiography degree. I'm hoping that the 5 year is more manageable than graduate entry which seems very intense. Good luck to those eight individuals. Hope everything works out in the future for them !!

onehardslog

I know this thread is titled UL and this might be a silly questions but I am just wondering after reading the previous posts here...do a certain amount of people in UL have to fail every year, is the system graded as such that the bottom 5 fail or something like that?

If so, are the other three GEM courses graded the same way?

jtsuited

onehardslog wrote: »

I know this thread is titled UL and this might be a silly questions but I am just wondering after reading the previous posts here...do a certain amount of people in UL have to fail every year, is the system graded as such that the bottom 5 fail or something like that?

If so, are the other three GEM courses graded the same way?

I sincerely doubt medical schools could, in good conscience, run a 'fail quota'.
Equally, I doubt medical schools, for obvious reasons, can let people pass who shouldn't have.

In RCSI, none of us failed the year. Don't think anyone failed any exams either.

Reality_Check1

jtsuited wrote: »

I sincerely doubt medical schools could, in good conscience, run a 'fail quota'.
Equally, I doubt medical schools, for obvious reasons, can let people pass who shouldn't have.

In RCSI, none of us failed the year. Don't think anyone failed any exams either.

Apparently the PBL system doesnt have a pass mark per say and the bottom 10% of the class have to fail. The idea behind it is to drive the overall standard up by creating a competitive atmosphere. Last year was an exception and the standard was so low they failed 25% of the class. Bit ridiculous if you ask me

Jammyc

Reality_Check1 wrote: »

Apparently the PBL system doesnt have a pass mark per say and the bottom 10% of the class have to fail. The idea behind it is to drive the overall standard up by creating a competitive atmosphere. Last year was an exception and the standard was so low they failed 25% of the class. Bit ridiculous if you ask me

I'm not attacking you but to me, that sounds like bull****. Until I hear from the UL Med school office, I would not believe it,

Reality_Check1

Jammyc wrote: »

I'm not attacking you but to me, that sounds like bull****. Until I hear from the UL Med school office, I would not believe it,

yeah no worries Iv heard it from a good few people now that would have no reason to be making it up. There was a load of regular posters here after the results who were bound for UL but everyone seems to disappear when they get there! they would prob know

spagboll

Reality_Check1 wrote: »

Apparently the PBL system doesnt have a pass mark per say and the bottom 10% of the class have to fail. The idea behind it is to drive the overall standard up by creating a competitive atmosphere. Last year was an exception and the standard was so low they failed 25% of the class. Bit ridiculous if you ask me

• The pass mark is 60%, the highest of all the 6 schools in Ireland
• UL uses a green, orange and red grading system so students don't get over competitive with each other in years 1 and 2

raftni

we use the green orange and red lights but we also get our grades so we know how we are performing.

we also find out who the top thirty people in the year are in second year.

30 people in our class failed in the summer, eleven failed the resits.

two or three students transferred to other schools

jtsuited

quick, simple question....
how many of the 11 that failed the repeats got in through gamsat?

MLH1

jtsuited wrote: »

quick, simple question....
how many of the 11 that failed the repeats got in through gamsat?

100%

onehardslog

• The pass mark is 60%, the highest of all the 6 schools in Ireland
• UL uses a green, orange and red grading system so students don't get over competitive with each other in years 1 and 2

[/Quote]


If you say the pass mark is 60% in UL, what is it in the other GEM programmes (RSCI, UCD and UCC)?

Tazzle

onehardslog wrote: »

• The pass mark is 60%, the highest of all the 6 schools in Ireland
• UL uses a green, orange and red grading system so students don't get over competitive with each other in years 1 and 2

If you say the pass mark is 60% in UL, what is it in the other GEM programmes (RSCI, UCD and UCC)?

UCC is 50%

Reality_Check1

pretty sure UCD is 40% for the first 2 years and the 50% for the clinical years I'm open to correction there though. 60% is a really high pass mark especially in Med school where you can take it from granted the highest mark you will ever get is 80% and that would be with perfect work!

just putting in perspective a 60 is a B- which under the UCD rubric is described as

A thorough and well organised response to the assessment
task, demonstrating
· a broad knowledge of the subject matter
· considerable strength in applying that knowledge to the task set
· evidence of substantial background reading
· clear and fluent expression
· quality presentation with few presentation errors

A substantial engagement with the
assessment task, demonstrating
· a thorough familiarity with the relevant literature or theoretical, technical or
professional framework
· well-developed capacity to analyse issues, organise material, present arguments clearly and cogently well supported by evidence, citation or quotation;
· some original insights and capacity for creative and logical thinking

bill buchanan

Reality_Check1 wrote: »

pretty sure UCD is 40% for the first 2 years and the 50% for the clinical years I'm open to correction there though. 60% is a really high pass mark especially in Med school where you can take it from granted the highest mark you will ever get is 80% and that would be with perfect work!

just putting in perspective a 60 is a B- which under the UCD rubric is described as

A thorough and well organised response to the assessment
task, demonstrating
· a broad knowledge of the subject matter
· considerable strength in applying that knowledge to the task set
· evidence of substantial background reading
· clear and fluent expression
· quality presentation with few presentation errors

A substantial engagement with the
assessment task, demonstrating
· a thorough familiarity with the relevant literature or theoretical, technical or
professional framework
· well-developed capacity to analyse issues, organise material, present arguments clearly and cogently well supported by evidence, citation or quotation;
· some original insights and capacity for creative and logical thinking

I don't think percentages are all that relvant when you're comparing different exams. It's not 20% harder to pass first year in UL than in UCD.

raftni

bill buchanan wrote: »

I don't think percentages are all that relvant when you're comparing different exams. It's not 20% harder to pass first year in UL than in UCD.

yeah it's 100 times harder.

other college exams are modular. UL all subjects (physio, pharm, path, anat etc) are ****ed into one massive end of year exam.

Reality_Check1

ah doubt its harder UL just think it is because you all did worse in the GAMSAT
(joke) before I start a war

bill buchanan

raftni wrote: »

yeah it's 100 times harder.

other college exams are modular. UL all subjects (physio, pharm, path, anat etc) are ****ed into one massive end of year exam.

Yea that's the classic PBL exam. One exam, but less info is actually tested. The one exam (with 2 papers. That's becoming the norm anyway) usually isn't the equivalent to all the individual modular exams (ie the end of year mega exam isn't 8-10 papers long) usually, though I don't know if that's the case in UL. So it's a bit of a trade off.

jtsuited

MLH1 wrote: »

100%

So to answer the question that has plagued this forum for the past 14 months - 'are the gamsat cutoffs too low?' - we now have a definitive answer. Yes, a 54 in gamsat does not guarantee that you are bright enough to study medicine.

Unless those 11 failures were those people who got above 59/60 and chose UL as their first choice. Which is highly unlikely (although I'm open to correction).

raftni

Yeah you're right they were all people who got in on low GAMSAT scores. one of the people repeating had sat the gamsat twice every year for four years and couldn't get their score above 53.

there's 164 people in first year and already eight of them have dropped out, after only three weeks.