New Medicine route required...

Dr. Ring

Ok so I'm one of those students who was absolutely delighted to hear about the HPAT when it was first introduced. I mean it gave me, and many like me, a much better chance of being able to study Medicine (a dream I've had since early second year).

Before the introduction of the HPAT, Medical students were expected to achieve a mammoth 600 Leaving Certificate points which was, let’s face it, out of the reach of many people who would make wonderful, caring and diligent Doctors. Those who managed to achieve 600 points were, for the most part, incapable of communicating with their patients because they were out of the comfort zone of their books. The HPAT was set to change all that by allowing students to be deemed eligible for Medicine provided they achieved a much more attainable 480 LC points and take the HPAT (out of 300).

It therefore baffles me when a student who receives 530 LC points STILL cannot gain entry despite being FIFTY points over the requirement. I thought the idea of the HPAT was to give everyone a fighting chance by subjecting them to the aptitude test yet last summer, many of the high-profiled GP's, Consultants, etc... who are fine Doctors in their own right could not even obtain 150 out of the 300 points. Just because they have done poorly in the HPAT does not mean that they are any less intelligent or any less capable to fulfil their duties as Surgeons/Doctors so I cannot understand why the same cannot be said for us?

The system is clearly flawed and it is my belief, and I'm sure many more whose dreams of studying Medicine have been impeded by the HPAT, that the selection process for Medical applicants needs another shake-up. Perhaps it should start from as early as 5th year. Students should be given the opportunity to study the subjects which would best aid them in their future careers.

E.g. for Medicine, students would study English, Maths, Biology, Chemistry and maybe a little Physics.

Obviously the Garda vetting and Medical clearance facilities would have to remain in effect but maybe an interview process could come into play. It is tried and tested but the best way to understand what one's motives are for something is an interview. They could understand from a conversation who could handle the stresses of a life of Medicine as well as who would have a good bedside manner. If they are well rounded academically (say get over 480 in the LC) they should be allowed to progress to Medical school provided they meet entry requirements (say HB1 in Bio, Chem...).

I heard the other day that there are not enough Junior Doctors in Ireland and we are currently attempting to bring some over from foreign countries. However if more places were allocated to each Medical institution, there would not be a shortage of Junior Doctors and instead of giving our jobs away we could give them to our fellow Irish men and women, so many of whom are currently unemployed or doing a course in which they have no interest.

Like so many others, I will once again be waiting for the results of the HPAT (due out this Monday) in the dim hope that I will have done significantly better than last year. If not, I will be forced to return to my boring Chemistry course and try again next year. All we can do is hope at this point.

What are your guys' opinions on this?
P.S. Thanks for reading. I appreciate it's long

LittleMissLost

I think the HPAT is a load of ****.

People spend hundreds and hundreds of euro doing preparation courses for it and are bound to do better than the person going in after only looking at the sample booklet.

Another major flaw and a money making opportunity IMO.

Sunny!!

i totally agree, i wish it was even the old way where you have to get the 600 even it be a better chance than i have now. Hpat isnt my thing.

cabbage kid

I'd really like to see a HPAT. Where can I get a copy of one?

LittleMissLost

http://www.hpat-ireland.acer.edu.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69:information-booklet&catid=12:practice-test

But it's €27.50. money, money money... :rolleyes:

2Scoops

The LC with HPAT is a superior selection process than LC alone, since I would have serious doubts about people who cannot do well in the HPAT. And it's far too easy to get 500+ points in the LC these days - not a good discriminator anymore.

I wonder if you'd still be against it if you were very likely to get in to a med course? I suspect not. The fact is, it's one of the very easiest ways into medicine in the English-speaking world and it's a transparent, merit-based system. Interviews have no discriminatory value and would heavily bias towards people with inside connections, which would be many in a medical community as small as Ireland's.

cabbage kid

LittleMissLost wrote: »

http://www.hpat-ireland.acer.edu.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=69:information-booklet&catid=12:practice-test

But it's €27.50. money, money money... :rolleyes:

I don't want to see one that badly :pac:

LittleMissLost

cabbage kid wrote: »

I don't want to see one that badly :pac:

lol you can have mine if you want? Think it's under my bed :L

cabbage kid

LittleMissLost wrote: »

lol you can have mine if you want? Think it's under my bed :L

Haha sound

electrictrad

. . .I'm glad the HPAT is in at the moment. . .and I'm a student well capable of getting the points required. . .if this test really does test suitability to study medecine, and I fail it, then obviously medecine is not the course for me. . .

One of the teachers ran a course in our school preparing us for the HPAT exam. . .she photocopied the q's from the booklet, and told us about the underlying concepts behind interpersonal understanding skills, and what kind of person they were trying to identify from the tests. . .they're looking for logical, rational thinkers, who are good with people, and able to see things from other people's point of views. . .honestly, I believe that the people who get a place in medecine based on this test are the best doctors of the future. . .if I'm not one of them, so be it. . .

Dr. Ring

electrictrad wrote: »

. . .I'm glad the HPAT is in at the moment. . .and I'm a student well capable of getting the points required. . .if this test really does test suitability to study medecine, and I fail it, then obviously medecine is not the course for me. . .

One of the teachers ran a course in our school preparing us for the HPAT exam. . .she photocopied the q's from the booklet, and told us about the underlying concepts behind interpersonal understanding skills, and what kind of person they were trying to identify from the tests. . .they're looking for logical, rational thinkers, who are good with people, and able to see things from other people's point of views. . .honestly, I believe that the people who get a place in medecine based on this test are the best doctors of the future. . .if I'm not one of them, so be it. . .

Yeah I can see where you're coming from. And I agree with stuff you've said. But how can you rationalise that people who do poorly on the HPAT are not suited to the Medical profession when highly-ranked Doctors in our own country did poorly on the HPAT exam from February 2010? Doing badly in no way reflected their abilities as Doctors yet if we do badly we are deemed unsuitable? Do you see my point?

LittleMissLost

electrictrad wrote: »

. . .I'm glad the HPAT is in at the moment. . .and I'm a student well capable of getting the points required. . .if this test really does test suitability to study medecine, and I fail it, then obviously medecine is not the course for me. . .

One of the teachers ran a course in our school preparing us for the HPAT exam. . .she photocopied the q's from the booklet, and told us about the underlying concepts behind interpersonal understanding skills, and what kind of person they were trying to identify from the tests. . .they're looking for logical, rational thinkers, who are good with people, and able to see things from other people's point of views. . .honestly, I believe that the people who get a place in medecine based on this test are the best doctors of the future. . .if I'm not one of them, so be it. . .

Well don't you have kind and considerate teachers? Bet she passed her TPAT with flying colours ><,

I must commend the HPAT people for giving out the results before the CAO closes! I shall most likely be taking medicine off my CAO

Dr. Ring

2Scoops wrote: »

The LC with HPAT is a superior selection process than LC alone, since I would have serious doubts about people who cannot do well in the HPAT. And it's far too easy to get 500+ points in the LC these days - not a good discriminator anymore.

I wonder if you'd still be against it if you were very likely to get in to a med course? I suspect not. The fact is, it's one of the very easiest ways into medicine in the English-speaking world and it's a transparent, merit-based system. Interviews have no discriminatory value and would heavily bias towards people with inside connections, which would be many in a medical community as small as Ireland's.

I also agree with your point that interviews can be comprimised by "allies on the inside". I was merely suggesting an alternative selection process. I just feel that the HPAT is not working as well as it could have. Those who get 600 LC Points (560) and spend hundreds of euro on practise methods (prep courses and past papers) are more likely to gain entry than someone who has surpassed the expected benchmark of 480 and done a moderately-good HPAT exam.

I agree it is somewhat easier to achieve higher in the Leaving Cert than in history but just as the world has evolved, so too has our educational system. The exams have been changed so that those who work hard in school are rewarded and thos who dont sink to the bottom of the pile. People who achieve over 500 points have obviously worked hard to get their results and should not be overlooked as a possible candidate for Medicine just because the HPAT sc**wed them up. Do you know what I mean?

electrictrad

LittleMissLost wrote: »

Well don't you have kind and considerate teachers? Bet she passed her TPAT with flying colours ><,

I must commend the HPAT people for giving out the results before the CAO closes! I shall most likely be taking medicine off my CAO

We did pay a little bit. . .but less than the price of the booklets. . .:D

I agree with you. . .but twould be awful if you were restricting your CAO choices for an exam you did months before the CAO deadline closed. . .they have to be given out really. . .

2Scoops

Dr. Ring wrote: »

But how can you rationalise that people who do poorly on the HPAT are not suited to the Medical profession when highly-ranked Doctors in our own country did poorly on the HPAT exam from February 2010? Doing badly in no way reflected their abilities as Doctors yet if we do badly we are deemed unsuitable? Do you see my point?

If you're referring the IMJ study of a few months ago, I should point out that highly-ranked doctors did not do poorly on the HPAT in this study - they performed similar to junior doctors and medical students. So, maybe it's true that HPAT is testing a consistent factor associated with medical careers..?

The study is actually quite poor. More here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=69824772

Dr. Ring

LittleMissLost wrote: »

Well don't you have kind and considerate teachers? Bet she passed her TPAT with flying colours ><,

Another good point. There are a lot of professions that could also be tested for one's "Suitability". Teachers for example: You could be the greatest psychopath in the world yet all you have to do to get to children is do an arts course, your HDIP and an interview or a similar route for primary teaching. We could all do well in an Arts course if we applied ourselves so why has the same mentality not been shared for Medicine?

Teaching young kids should be as important as having the ability to saves. In Medicine, you can be placed into a position where you are responsible whether a person lives or dies. But as a teacher, what you say and do can affect a childs psychological state and change their future (for better or for worse). So why do they not have to take an "aptitude test"?

jumpguy

LittleMissLost wrote: »

I think the HPAT is a load of ****.

People spend hundreds and hundreds of euro doing preparation courses for it and are bound to do better than the person going in after only looking at the sample booklet.

I know a good few people who have done excellently in the HPAT without a preparation course.

Having done a preparation course myself, I would not advise them. Most of it felt wishy-washy (stuff basically like "how to think" and a bunch of anecdotes from unnamed "students" to underline various obvious points about the HPAT) and was 350€ I wish I didn't spend.

Some common sense, appreciating how difficult the timing in the HPAT is, doing the sample booklets (which will help you with the timing), and asking people who have done it before for advice is a much cheaper and has about the same effectiveness as any prep course IMO. All that prep courses give you is maybe a bit of confidence - which one could gain with merely a little self-confidence.

I think achieving at least 550 in the LC to have a good chance is a fair enough ask - much better than having to achieve 590 to have a chance.

I think there needs to be more assessment that just written exams, with things such as interviews and stuff. However, in Ireland there would be a big problem with things like favouritism for unscrupulous reasons IMO. It would want to be a very well-monitored form of assessment.

2Scoops

Dr. Ring wrote: »

People who achieve over 500 points have obviously worked hard to get their results and should not be overlooked as a possible candidate for Medicine just because the HPAT sc**wed them up. Do you know what I mean?

I do know what you mean - it sucks to be deprived of your training of choice based on small differences in an exam. Unfortunately, it's the necessary result of operating a strictly mathematical selection process. It's 'fair' to an extent but with high demand, talented people will inevitably lose out. But at least you can always try again.

electrictrad

Dr. Ring wrote: »

Yeah I can see where you're coming from. And I agree with stuff you've said. But how can you rationalise that people who do poorly on the HPAT are not suited to the Medical profession when highly-ranked Doctors in our own country did poorly on the HPAT exam from February 2010? Doing badly in no way reflected their abilities as Doctors yet if we do badly we are deemed unsuitable? Do you see my point?

I see your point. However, these people are the best doctors at the moment. . .taken from an outdated entry system based on their memory ability in an examhall. . .this exam is looking for a new type of doctor. . .and I can't see a better alternative for attracting people with average academic ability, but who would be the best, most compassionate doctors in history. . .I have a friend who has his heart set on medicine. . .and he didn't get an A in his junior cert. . .the opportunity offered by this test has turned him into a person who studies all day every day, because, even though he knows he can't get 600 points, he can get 520 or 530 if he tries really hard. . .and that might be enough for him to get the course of his dreams. . .a course he'd have never got 5 years ago. . .if he is suitable for medicine, he'll ace the test, and Ireland will have a good doctor they'd have never got otherwise

. . .on the upside for medicine hopefuls like ourselves, there are 20 extra places in NUIG this year, and more are being brought onstream next year, if reports are to be believed. . .

LilMissCiara

I'm not convinced that HPAT preparation courses so much good (yes I'm sure they do some good but they won't change someones result by much I wouldn't think.)

At the end of the day the HPAT is an aptitude test. Those who have an aptitude for becoming a doctor will do well.

The system is not without it's flaws but it does help ensure people who have an aptitude for the course are the ones who get it.

Dr. Ring

2Scoops wrote: »

If you're referring the IMJ study of a few months ago, I should point out that highly-ranked doctors did not do poorly on the HPAT in this study - they performed similar to junior doctors and medical students. So, maybe it's true that HPAT is testing a consistent factor associated with medical careers..?

The study is actually quite poor. More here:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=69824772

Point taken. Some studies have very weak arguments and are only born out of spiteful bias towards the exam itself. But the very thing the HPAT tests for has been learned by many of the doctors of today through practical experience.

I dont think you could actually say for 100% certainty that Medical applicants from as little as 10 years ago had the best logical reasoning and communication skills. But as they began to deal with patients on a daily bases, they have adapted and learned. In first year of Med school they would have been taught about bedside manner and they would have learned how to diagnose where communication is impeded or non existant. In the real world they would have had to make decisions and where they made the wrong ones, consequences would ensue and they would have learned from them.

Potential Medical students today are not being given this same opportunity. I whole-heartedly appreciate the concept of the HPAT exam and I commend those who introduced it for all the right reasons. I just feel that it carries too much weight in deciding whether you'd make a good doctor or not. I know several doctors who all "learned their craft" by this method and they are better doctors as a result.

electrictrad

Dr. Ring wrote: »

Teaching young kids should be as important as having the ability to saves. In Medicine, you can be placed into a position where you are responsible whether a person lives or dies. But as a teacher, what you say and do can affect a childs psychological state and change their future (for better or for worse). So why do they not have to take an "aptitude test"?

True.

In fact, this is probably where most degree courses are headed. . .

Arts is not a fair example though IMO. Alot of art students have no intention of teaching. Some view it as a gateway degree, either to other degrees, to postgrads in subjects they couldn't get pts for, and others just want a degree to boost pay in civil service jobs. .

I do agree that education courses specifically should require aptitude tests. . .hdips, primary teaching courses and other similar courses. . .nursing, physio, and podiatry are other courses where aptitude tests would be useful.. .

However, courses like science, arts, and maths courses probably should remain CAO-based, given the academic nature of the courses, and the fairness of the CAO system. . .

Dr. Ring

2Scoops wrote: »

But at least you can always try again.

But isint that stement alone proving that the HPAT is flawed? If the HPAT is an exam that tests your aptitude for being a Doctor than you should do just as poorly one year as you did the year before. Yet now we're seeing people who are attempting the HPAT for a 2nd and 3rd time doing significantly better.

Dr. Ring

electrictrad wrote: »

True.

In fact, this is probably where most degree courses are headed. . .

Arts is not a fair example though IMO. Alot of art students have no intention of teaching. Some view it as a gateway degree, either to other degrees, to postgrads in subjects they couldn't get pts for, and others just want a degree to boost pay in civil service jobs. .

I do agree that education courses specifically should require aptitude tests. . .hdips, primary teaching courses and other similar courses. . .nursing, physio, and podiatry are other courses where aptitude tests would be useful.. .

However, courses like science, arts, and maths courses probably should remain CAO-based, given the academic nature of the courses, and the fairness of the CAO system. . .

If that's the case, any line of work that places you in a position with other people should have an aptitude test. Hairdressing, serving at a supermarket, being a librarian... All of these need good interpersonal skills too. I know that your life/wellbeing is not on the line with those professions but the point remains the same.

2Scoops

Dr. Ring wrote: »

But isint that stement alone proving that the HPAT is flawed? If the HPAT is an exam that tests your aptitude for being a Doctor than you should do just as poorly one year as you did the year before. Yet now we're seeing people who are attempting the HPAT for a 2nd and 3rd time doing significantly better.

I suspect that this has far more to do with poor preparation in early attempts than anything else. There is a certain skill in taking a time-attack MCQ test that increases with experience. I think that with good preparation, the score would plateau.

EDIT: and you could repeat the LC instead! Points go up there as well. It's completely uneven between individuals (different subjects) and shows a strong gender bias - and yet you rarely hear people complain about these issues and their implications on med entry. :pac:

._.

The way the HPAT scores are calculated is bollox.
The amount of points you get for each question depends on how many other people get it correct, making it extremely difficult to do better than the average.

As bad as the old system was, I think they've actually managed to make it worse.

If you get 600 points, I personally believe that not doing well on some BS HPAT test shouldn't prevent you from doing whatever it is you want to do, because after that amount of work, you should be able to stroll into whatever course you feel like IMO.

I know people who have gotten 600 points, but not offered medicine, which in my opinion is an absolute joke.

They were put under so much pressure to do something about the situation with medicine they just decided to change something, which no actual emphasis on making entry into medicine better (and I don't mean easier).

There's a world of improvements that could be made to the system, but i'll already be qualified as a Doctor before they've done anything judging by the rate they're going.

And about these prep courses.. I went to one in Yeats Galway this year (for free though). It really did help.
This year was my second time doing the HPAT (no course first time because it didn't exist back then), and in the 3 or so practice booklets + answers we got, section 3 went from being my worst section the first time, to my best section (judging by their answers).
I'll see on Monday exactly how much of a difference it made..

Dr. Ring

2Scoops wrote: »

I suspect that this has far more to do with poor preparation in early attempts than anything else. There is a certain skill in taking a time-attack MCQ test that increases with experience. I think that with good preparation, the score would plateau.

But therein lies my point: Poor preperation. You should not have to prepare for the HPAT in any way, shape or form if it's underlying principles are to test someone's suitability. When taking the exam, most people know the time constraints yet still some run out of time. This indicates that they are incapable of adequately keeping track of time or there are simply too many questions and not enough time. But in failing, they LEARN and the next time they are much more conscious of the allocated time and do better.

Feeding back to my point of learning through experience.

Dr. Ring

2Scoops wrote: »

EDIT: and you could repeat the LC instead! Points go up there as well. It's completely uneven between individuals (different subjects) and shows a strong gender bias - and yet you rarely hear people complain about these issues and their implications on med entry. :pac:

This much is also true. But do you not see how someone who gets 515 in the LC having to repeat is an absolute joke? People who get over 500 points are in the top 10% of results in the country. So they are academically gifted to start with.

By any standards, 515 is an excellent LC but I actually know someone who got that last year and is repeating because they felt they would not do any better in the HPAT this year. If they get 600 this year (560) and do margainly better than the average in the HPAT they may get offered a place thus rendering the HPAT ineffective. DO you think?

kellogscoffey

Dr. Ring wrote: »

Before the introduction of the HPAT, Medical students were expected to achieve a mammoth 600 Leaving Certificate points which was, let’s face it, out of the reach of many people who would make wonderful, caring and diligent Doctors. Those who managed to achieve 600 points were, for the most part, incapable of communicating with their patients because they were out of the comfort zone of their books. The HPAT was set to change all that by allowing students to be deemed eligible for Medicine provided they achieved a much more attainable 480 LC points and take the HPAT (out of 300).

Have to say i disagree fundamentally with this. 3 good friends of mine are applying for Med, and each of them is capable of 600 points, and put in enough work to deserve 600. I know these 3 would make excellent doctors and are all excellent communicators themselves. Its easy to claim that academic excellence fosters a social ineptitude or some form of communication deficieny, but in reality, it doesn't.

Also, I personally think the minimum requirement of 480 points is too low. Medicine is among the most highly contested courses - its not unreasonable to think it should command an exceptional level of special treatment. I've no problem with the HPAT lowering the minimum points requirement, but in reality, noone is getting in to medicine with <530/540 points. I don't think asking for a minimum of 530/540 is unreasonable, given the prestige associated with the medicine.

But that's just me :P

2Scoops

._. wrote: »

The way the HPAT scores are calculated is bollox.
The amount of points you get for each question depends on how many other people get it correct, making it extremely difficult to do better than the average.

~50% will always do better than average. :pac: Weighting scores actually improves the spread of the distribution, making it easier to identify people who do exceptionally well.

If you get 600 points, I personally believe that not doing well on some BS HPAT test shouldn't prevent you from doing whatever it is you want to do, because after that amount of work, you should be able to stroll into whatever course you feel like IMO. I know people who have gotten 600 points, but not offered medicine, which in my opinion is an absolute joke.

Why, if a person can get 600 points in the LC, can they not even get an average HPAT? Something doesn't add up there, I'm afraid. I would much rather a 520 pointer with a stellar HPAT than a 600 pointer who can't get answer a few straight forward questions.

NotExactly

Dr. Ring wrote: »

But isint that stement alone proving that the HPAT is flawed? If the HPAT is an exam that tests your aptitude for being a Doctor than you should do just as poorly one year as you did the year before. Yet now we're seeing people who are attempting the HPAT for a 2nd and 3rd time doing significantly better.

You would think that but no. You can improve yourself at everything. When you're born you're not born to be a doctor. You can improve at IQ tests if you keep practicing them, there's tonnes of more of examples.