Gamsat 2013

Hypnos

demure wrote: »

Ahh do you realize it's less than 2 weeks :O!

Yeh and every moment I spare to think about that makes me feel nauseous. So I got good and not waiting for them I just carry on and I'll go into the nervous phase around the 18th if they're not out by then.

demure

I think you will have a great cause for celebration by the 18th
I have a good feeling about it, and all the work you have put in! It'll pay off!

Hypnos

demure wrote: »

I think you will have a great cause for celebration by the 18th
I have a good feeling about it, and all the work you have put in! It'll pay off!

Yeh because the 18th is my final exam of my undergrad degree Gonna really enjoy the day. As of the 18th I'm finished

demure

Brilliant, well done!

I am finished just the day before you... Have 2 more exams and currently loosing my faith in my abilities, just want this to be over so bad!!!

Hypnos

demure wrote: »

Brilliant, well done!

I am finished just the day before you... Have 2 more exams and currently loosing my faith in my abilities, just want this to be over so bad!!!

I still have another couple of days till I begin. Exams I'm not too worried about. I do have one very tricky one but since I only need a 2.1 and I'm holding a 1.1 from semester 1 I should be ok even if a couple are a bit downhill. So I just want to finish exams and hopefully do well on the GAMSAT so I can enjoy the summer Best of luck to you

yesman2000

For anyone from a non-science background who did well in the GAMSAT, how much study did you have to put in?

Also, what kind of strategy is best; a few hours (1-2) study everyday over a long period of time or a more intensive study plan over a shorter period.

Thanks for any replies.

demure

Hey YesMan

It's a very much of an individual thing, different styles work better for different people.

As for myself, I stayed in for 3 months straight working at it 9-5 (and serious overtime). This, however, may cause serious psychological distress, let me warn you But if you are motivated, have a good plan and you structure yourself, it is totally doable.

My advice is practice essays from day 1. And do them at least three times a week. And practice the exercises. It will be totally worth your while

Best of Luck!

nerrad01

yesman2000 wrote: »

For anyone from a non-science background who did well in the GAMSAT, how much study did you have to put in?

Also, what kind of strategy is best; a few hours (1-2) study everyday over a long period of time or a more intensive study plan over a shorter period.

Thanks for any replies.

i put a decent 3 months study in, i managed to get in first time, but if i was doing it again id absolutley hammer essays and section one...good essay advise on pagingdr forum and get some des o neill or examkrackers sections 1 stuff and practise practise practise!

obviously you have to get a solid enough science base, i found organic chem as a second language great as i hadnt ever done bio chem and it was 10 years since my junior cert chem! but get some good notes (des o neill/ grad med) and keep plugging away! remember timing is everything in the science section....eliminate 2 answers, go with your best guess from the remaining 2 and move on!

yesman2000

nerrad01 wrote: »

i put a decent 3 months study in, i managed to get in first time, but if i was doing it again id absolutley hammer essays and section one...good essay advise on pagingdr forum and get some des o neill or examkrackers sections 1 stuff and practise practise practise!

obviously you have to get a solid enough science base, i found organic chem as a second language great as i hadnt ever done bio chem and it was 10 years since my junior cert chem! but get some good notes (des o neill/ grad med) and keep plugging away! remember timing is everything in the science section....eliminate 2 answers, go with your best guess from the remaining 2 and move on!

Thanks for both of your replies, they should be very useful when I get down to study. Just one final question; are there many non-science heads who are successful at the GAMSAT/ many is gradmed. I heard of a few examples but in reality is it very science background dominated. It's just my degree is far removed from any science and this is my biggest worry.

Hypnos

yesman2000 wrote: »

Thanks for both of your replies, they should be very useful when I get down to study. Just one final question; are there many non-science heads who are successful at the GAMSAT/ many is gradmed. I heard of a few examples but in reality is it very science background dominated. It's just my degree is far removed from any science and this is my biggest worry.

At the open day they said about 1 in 5 are non-science heads.

letsdothis

nerrad01 wrote: »

i put a decent 3 months study in, i managed to get in first time, but if i was doing it again id absolutley hammer essays and section one...good essay advise on pagingdr forum and get some des o neill or examkrackers sections 1 stuff and practise practise practise!

obviously you have to get a solid enough science base, i found organic chem as a second language great as i hadnt ever done bio chem and it was 10 years since my junior cert chem! but get some good notes (des o neill/ grad med) and keep plugging away! remember timing is everything in the science section....eliminate 2 answers, go with your best guess from the remaining 2 and move on!

How do the examkracker 101 verbal passages compare to the actual section 1 in terms of difficulty? I know the type of questions on section one (graphs/diagrams/poetry) can be very different, but for comparable passages how do they compare? I've done two of them so far and got 39/60 in both.

How many essays would you say your wrote over the three months? I started preparing for the UK GAMSAT in the last few weeks and being from an entirely non-science background (I last looked at science for the JC and it was many, many moons ago), I've been almost entirely focussing on science up to now. I've made it through the physical chemistry and most of the biology and finding it less challenging than I expected! I am conscious of doing enough for section one and two but I still have more than 4 months to go.

nerrad01

letsdothis wrote: »

How do the examkracker 101 verbal passages compare to the actual section 1 in terms of difficulty? I know the type of questions on section one (graphs/diagrams/poetry) can be very different, but for comparable passages how do they compare? I've done two of them so far and got 39/60 in both.

How many essays would you say your wrote over the three months? I started preparing for the UK GAMSAT in the last few weeks and being from an entirely non-science background (I last looked at science for the JC and it was many, many moons ago), I've been almost entirely focussing on science up to now. I've made it through the physical chemistry and most of the biology and finding it less challenging than I expected! I am conscious of doing enough for section one and two but I still have more than 4 months to go.

i quite like examkrackers, even if its not the exact same level it gets you into that frame of thinking and when you read back the solutions its really good how they explain it!

to be honest i prob only wrote maybe 5 essays over the whole 3 months, but read alot on how to approach it on the Australian boards so sort of felt i knew what i was at (intro, argument for, argument against, take a stand,conclusion....done)

id get cracking on org chem as it could be a deal breaker and just keep practicing gamsat specific questions.

also the australian boards have a wealth of information, those guys have the gamsat down to an art form as you need at least a 70 to even get an interview over there!

the gamsat tests how good you are at sitting the gamsat, so learn the strategies and timing, apply them and you will do well!

letsdothis

nerrad01 wrote: »

i quite like examkrackers, even if its not the exact same level it gets you into that frame of thinking and when you read back the solutions its really good how they explain it!

to be honest i prob only wrote maybe 5 essays over the whole 3 months, but read alot on how to approach it on the Australian boards so sort of felt i knew what i was at (intro, argument for, argument against, take a stand,conclusion....done)

id get cracking on org chem as it could be a deal breaker and just keep practicing gamsat specific questions.

also the australian boards have a wealth of information, those guys have the gamsat down to an art form as you need at least a 70 to even get an interview over there!

the gamsat tests how good you are at sitting the gamsat, so learn the strategies and timing, apply them and you will do well!

Thanks for that! Yes, I get the feeling the Organic Chemistry is the big one. My strategy so far was can I even do chemistry? (yes) then a break from chemistry with some biology before hitting the heavy stuff. So I'm going to get going on that soon. Reading PagingDr as essay "study" sounds like my kind of prep so I'll do a lot of that too. Thanks again.

nerrad01

letsdothis wrote: »

Thanks for that! Yes, I get the feeling the Organic Chemistry is the big one. My strategy so far was can I even do chemistry? (yes) then a break from chemistry with some biology before hitting the heavy stuff. So I'm going to get going on that soon. Reading PagingDr as essay "study" sounds like my kind of prep so I'll do a lot of that too. Thanks again.

i cant recommend organic chemistry as a second language enough, i just worked through the book twice and felt i got a good grasp which i thought was good considering i could even remember what a chemical bond was when i started.

and obviously the essay advise isn't going to work for everyone and im sure my essays would have been a lot better if i practiced more! i know people who are in ucd with me who failed the science section and destroyed section 1 and 2 so got a decent gamsat score score, so dont under estimate it!

letsdothis

nerrad01 wrote: »

i cant recommend organic chemistry as a second language enough, i just worked through the book twice and felt i got a good grasp which i thought was good considering i could even remember what a chemical bond was when i started.

and obviously the essay advise isn't going to work for everyone and im sure my essays would have been a lot better if i practiced more! i know people who are in ucd with me who failed the science section and destroyed section 1 and 2 so got a decent gamsat score score, so dont under estimate it!

Thanks for the recommendation I'll definitely get a copy of that. I already ordered the For Dummies book but I feel a second text for this will be necessary!

nerrad01

letsdothis wrote: »

Thanks for the recommendation I'll definitely get a copy of that. I already ordered the For Dummies book but I feel a second text for this will be necessary!

if you know where to look there is ebook copies available!! i found it handy as i could re-print the practise sections and fill them in and go over again

letsdothis

nerrad01 wrote: »

if you know where to look there is ebook copies available!! i found it handy as i could re-print the practise sections and fill them in and go over again

Thanks Sure aren't I looking at my own shiny copy of that book as we speak The resources out there are unbelievable. Had to go to amazon for the For Dummies book though but it was reasonable enough.

Any recommendations out there for a physics book?

chips365

letsdothis wrote: »

Thanks Sure aren't I looking at my own shiny copy of that book as we speak The resources out there are unbelievable. Had to go to amazon for the For Dummies book though but it was reasonable enough.

Any recommendations out there for a physics book?

Physics for dummies is pretty good. For a finish i didn't really do any physics and in the exam i was glad i hadn't spent too much time on it. Most of the paper was organic chemistry and the queerest biology questions i ever saw!

letsdothis

chips365 wrote: »

Physics for dummies is pretty good. For a finish i didn't really do any physics and in the exam i was glad i hadn't spent too much time on it. Most of the paper was organic chemistry and the queerest biology questions i ever saw!

Cheers, will have a look for that. I was planning on just giving it a week or so between now and September, hopefully that will be enough.

Stephan Grundy

yesman2000 wrote: »

For anyone from a non-science background who did well in the GAMSAT, how much study did you have to put in?

Also, what kind of strategy is best; a few hours (1-2) study everyday over a long period of time or a more intensive study plan over a shorter period.

Thanks for any replies.

Studied science like a maniac for three months straight, 8-10 hours a day.
For myself, I'd say more intensive over a shorter period. The object is really to get your mind into science-reasoning gear, more than it is learning how to do any specific thing (although, I can pretty well guarantee, you *will* be speed-reading and analyzing graphs!).


The things I found most helpful were: in sciences, the Gold Standard study book. This provides a straightforward, simple background - just worked my way through it.
I engaged a private tutor for physics, since that was the area in which I found myself 100% clueless - and given the way the questions are weighted (the fewer people that get it right, the more points, unless of course it's just a decoy to begin with), I figured that physics would probably be the weakest area even for a lot of science people planning to go into medicine.
I used the ACER practice exams to get used to the timing (this is crucial!) and the style; also to get a sense of what to expect. Last year the latter part of the strategy didn't altogether work because there was a huge amount of O-Chem on the practice exams and sod-all on the actual GAMSAT - busted my brains on acid/base calculations and chiral structure, got graphs on bat wee. However, the timing practice (don't have a clue? Guess and go on to the next one. Save your time for the questions that only take a bit of effort to figure out, or at least to rule out the two least likely answers - don't bust your brain trying to get one question right, because that time could keep you from answering two that you would definitely have gotten right) was crucial.

This allowed me to make an okay score on sciences (55), which, together with rather better-than-okay scores on the language and essay sections, left me very happy indeed with my final result (66).

For the essays, I can strongly advise: practice! There are a couple of on-line sources that grade practice essays; I am not sure how much they're worth in and of themselves, but the timed practice - strictly allotting minutes for each paragraph - is invaluable, as coherence is crucial to these. My other method of preparation for the essays was to make a list of likely topics - they tend to be pretty predictable - and choose several specific examples for each to memorize details on. Including, and I think this is really crucial, pieces from the news that could be made relevant to one or more topics, showing that I was, like, aware of social and political issues as well as history, literature, and philosophy. With my examples pre-chosen as building blocks, writing the essays that were wanted was pretty straightforward.

Sadly not much I can offer on the reading-comprehension part, as frankly I think the questions there, both in the practice tests and on the real thing, were often nebulous, badly phrased, and often enough things that are purely a matter of personal opinion - the examination composer's personal opinion, hope you felt the same way about the piece that he or she did, because you're not going to logic it out. And there were a couple of *their* answers on the practice exams in that section that *I* caught as being flat-out wrong. Possibly a case of too much knowledge in a field not actually being your friend on the GAMSAT! (though I suppose I did well enough in spite of what I, personally, perceived as some real flaws in the presentation). The best method of study is probably just doing as many practice essays as possible to get a feel for the style. It also helps if you're a fast reader. Some people actually read the questions first, then go back to look for the answers while they're reading the piece - try it both ways on the practice exams and see which works better for you!

Stephan Grundy

yesman2000 wrote: »

Thanks for both of your replies, they should be very useful when I get down to study. Just one final question; are there many non-science heads who are successful at the GAMSAT/ many is gradmed. I heard of a few examples but in reality is it very science background dominated. It's just my degree is far removed from any science and this is my biggest worry.

Oh - and my last interaction with science before I started my three months of maniac science study for the GAMSAT was "Biology for Boneheads" as an undergraduate in 1990, because everyone at my uni had to pass one science class before they were allowed graduate - so this was the one for totally clueless English lit majors.

So I don't think a non-science head has anything to fear from the GAMSAT at all, as long as they can crank in enough basic study on sciences to understand the questions by the day. Sounds as though they brought O-Chem back this year... Anyway, if you've a degree in a language-based subject, chances are that, so long as you can just manage an adequate score in sciences, your essay and reading-comprehension will bring your total up to a respectable number. It worked for me, anyway!

chips365

Try not to loose too much time on the science alone. Section 1 and 2 are equally if not more important. I spent 90% of my study on organic chemistry. Just know and accept now that you wont know every question on the exam. the skill is coming to that conclusion quick and moving to the questions you know you can answer. I'm from a science background (nursing) and the science section was an eye opener for me, how knowing enantiomers helps you put a catheter in is beyond me!

Stephan Grundy

Yep - and remember, a wrong answer is no worse than an unanswered question. A random answer is 25% better than no answer, because at least you've got that 25% chance to get it right, and don't lose any points if you fail. The biggest chronic cock-up people make on the GAMSAT is getting bogged down in something they could work out accurately with enough time - and failing to answer questions further down the line due to running out of time (another reason to do the ACER practice tests, just to see how the timing works for you).

Usually you can eliminate at least one or two of the answers given as obviously wrong without too much effort, and each definite rule-out bumps up your odds of getting the right answer, too. So if you're not a whiz at the subjects covered, you can still maximize your odds of getting the highest possible number of questions right with just a little strategy.

Hypnos

Enantiomers are not only relevant to chemistry but important in medicine too. It may seem trivial and useless to you now, but when administering drugs it becomes very relevant. Different enantiomers can have drastically different effects in the body.

Thalidomide cures morning sickness with one enantiomer only and the other causes deformities in unborn children. (R) and (S) salbutamol have different effects on the lungs (one causes bronchospasms) and other bronchodilation used to treat asthma. Methorphan can be either a cough suppressant or an opioid analgesic depending on it's stereochemistry.

+ EU and FDA regulations enforced that any drug on the market must be available enantiopure. Some drugs elicit different therapeutic effects depending whether they're (R) or (S) and in instances you can come across a drug where two enantiomers have difference therapeutic effects and both are prescription drugs...

Though I don't fully understand why the gamsat is the way it is I try to look for a reason to justify the test. Most med school entrance tests are along the likes...

Now the circular flights of bird species on the other hand I have a hard time relating to medicine. Physics I somehow can too...

Curse my need to defend medicinal chemistry

chips365

lol, i don't deny that you need a comprehensive understanding of the chemistry involved and drug interactions but i feel the exam should focus more on the medical side of things and interpersonal skills. The worst doctors I have worked with are those that haven't a clue how to communicate with patients and those piss off the nurses. I think there really should be interviews included in the admissions process. I say say with 100% certainty that if you are not good with people then medicine is not a career for you. The nurse within is starting to go on a rant lol. but like everyone else i'll be waiting until next week to find out if im cut out for medicine!

beardedmaster

chips - you're forgetting that there's many areas in medicine that aren't entirely clinically based.
A person who enters the GEM degree has all the same options coming out of it as does a person who does the undergraduate degree - this includes research, clinical or basic, and epidemiology or public health positions - where they don't need to be as "good with people", and so are unlikely to "piss off the nurses."

And I really don't think you'll be waiting until next week to find out if you're cut out for medicine - you'll be waiting to see if you did well in the exam, which is a completely different thing.
A person can take the GAMSAT a few months later with a bit of practice in between and do much better - are they more "cut out for medicine"? No, they just will do better in the exam. If people don't do well the first time round, it doesn't mean they're not cut out for it!

nerrad01

Hypnos wrote: »

Enantiomers are not only relevant to chemistry but important in medicine too. It may seem trivial and useless to you now, but when administering drugs it becomes very relevant. Different enantiomers can have drastically different effects in the body.

Thalidomide cures morning sickness with one enantiomer only and the other causes deformities in unborn children. (R) and (S) salbutamol have different effects on the lungs (one causes bronchospasms) and other bronchodilation used to treat asthma. Methorphan can be either a cough suppressant or an opioid analgesic depending on it's stereochemistry.

+ EU and FDA regulations enforced that any drug on the market must be available enantiopure. Some drugs elicit different therapeutic effects depending whether they're (R) or (S) and in instances you can come across a drug where two enantiomers have difference therapeutic effects and both are prescription drugs...

Though I don't fully understand why the gamsat is the way it is I try to look for a reason to justify the test. Most med school entrance tests are along the likes...

Now the circular flights of bird species on the other hand I have a hard time relating to medicine. Physics I somehow can too...

Curse my need to defend medicinal chemistry

you will never need to know the chemical configuration as a doctor in fairness, all you learn is the MISCI of each drug and job done...i think they have to use a mechanism to test your basic problem solving skills so why not use science based puzzles (which is essentially what they are on the gamsat, problem solving puzzles which you need to know the basic sciences in order to solve).

In my class there is no major correlation between gamsat scores and how good your going to be as alot of people just keep doing it until they get their required score, be but i guess its all we have got and i dont have any complaints about it

chips365

beardedmaster wrote: »

chips - you're forgetting that there's many areas in medicine that aren't entirely clinically based.
A person who enters the GEM degree has all the same options coming out of it as does a person who does the undergraduate degree - this includes research, clinical or basic, and epidemiology or public health positions - where they don't need to be as "good with people", and so are unlikely to "piss off the nurses."

And I really don't think you'll be waiting until next week to find out if you're cut out for medicine - you'll be waiting to see if you did well in the exam, which is a completely different thing.
A person can take the GAMSAT a few months later with a bit of practice in between and do much better - are they more "cut out for medicine"? No, they just will do better in the exam. If people don't do well the first time round, it doesn't mean they're not cut out for it!

I'm not forgetting that, but I'm talking about the doctors who treat patients on a daily basis. Nursing is the same, I have the option of staying in the clinical environment or taking up a teaching post. For me, the real enjoyment is being "on the floor" while others love the research/ teaching aspect of it. In addition, the emphasis of the curriculum is designed for clinical practice.

Perhaps I should have stated that i was being very sarcastic about the exam determining whether im cut out for it or not, my bad. The exam is part of the whole admission process but I still fail to see its true value in selecting appropriate candidates.

WoolahUrma

chips365 wrote: »

I'm not forgetting that, but I'm talking about the doctors who treat patients on a daily basis. Nursing is the same, I have the option of staying in the clinical environment or taking up a teaching post. For me, the real enjoyment is being "on the floor" while others love the research/ teaching aspect of it. In addition, the emphasis of the curriculum is designed for clinical practice.

Perhaps I should have stated that i was being very sarcastic about the exam determining whether im cut out for it or not, my bad. The exam is part of the whole admission process but I still fail to see its true value in selecting appropriate candidates.

Couldn't agree more with you on this count.

I know a few medics. Some are affable and self conscious enough to understand how their behaviour affects patients and colleagues. Others don't feel the need to use manners at work.

Some doctors get away with it because of the respect that the profession has traditionally had but I think that the general public have less tolerence for poor behaviour from people in authority.

The arrogent doctor is dying out anyway. Maybe a generation or two ago there would have been a higher proportion of them back when priests and doctors were infallible.

Also, I would brick it if I had to go through the interview but I agree, it should be part of the process. Weed out the sociopaths!

nerrad01

WoolahUrma wrote: »

Couldn't agree more with you on this count.

I know a few medics. Some are affable and self conscious enough to understand how their behaviour affects patients and colleagues. Others don't feel the need to use manners at work.

Some doctors get away with it because of the respect that the profession has traditionally had but I think that the general public have less tolerence for poor behaviour from people in authority.

The arrogent doctor is dying out anyway. Maybe a generation or two ago there would have been a higher proportion of them back when priests and doctors were infallible.

Also, I would brick it if I had to go through the interview but I agree, it should be part of the process. Weed out the sociopaths!

i think its very much a generational thing, we get a lot of lectures on the legal implications and owning up to mistakes and admitting them, there and then.

the old days of the doc being god are long gone, as you make a mistake and act like an arrogant twat you WILL be sued and nothing will, take these docs back down to earth like a day in the high court and being named and shamed whether they are guilty or not!