*Everything HPAT and Medicine 2013*

Who_Knows

Has anybody heard of anybody who got crazy high? What was 99th percentile? I heard last year the highest was about 236. The highest I've heard was 206 (97th percentile).

Also does anybody know roughly how many people take the hpat each year? I'm trying to work out how many people are in a percentile so I can guess what my chances are for getting that med--entry prize money.

SupDoc

Who_Knows wrote: »

Has anybody heard of anybody who got crazy high? What was 99th percentile? I heard last year the highest was about 236. The highest I've heard was 206 (97th percentile).

Also does anybody know roughly how many people take the hpat each year? I'm trying to work out how many people are in a percentile so I can guess what my chances are for getting that med--entry prize money.

I think you need the 100th percentile tbh some guy on here got over 230 and probably did that course.
What was your score and %tile, you don't have to say if you don't want too, I'm just curious.

mocker2012

SupDoc wrote: »

I think you need the 100th percentile tbh some guy on here got over 230 and probably did that course.
What was your score and %tile, you don't have to say if you don't want too, I'm just curious.

What if there is no 100th percentile?
A percentile is a comparison to others not a percentage, it tells you how many scored below a given level. The scale has an asmyptote at 100, you can get really close, but can't quite get there. Even if you had the top score and that score was perfect you didn't do better than yourself. The number represents the proportion of people you exceeded. But this is only my theory so I could easily be full of the brown.

nogivingup

mocker2012 wrote: »

What if there is no 100th percentile?
A percentile is a comparison to others not a percentage, it tells you how many scored below a given level. The scale has an asmyptote at 100, you can get really close, but can't quite get there. Even if you had the top score and that score was perfect you didn't do better than yourself. The number represents the proportion of people you exceeded. But this is only my theory so I could easily be full of the brown.

There is a 100th percentile in the HPAT.
Around 3000 people sat it, putting 30 in each percentile. So someone in 97th percentile would have >90 people ahead of them.

hal2013

SupDoc wrote: »

I just have a lot of borderline friends ranging from 734 to 747 and they were really supportive to me throughout the year. We all studied and worked really hard together. I just really want them to get into med as well and I'm trying to create a realistic idea for myself if they will be studying with me. (That is if I get in but I am aware as you said that I am almost gauranteed a place) :P

Ok that's very nice of you:) I suppose the only point to my post was to emphasise the fact that you're in an incredibly fortunate position! Hopefully some of your friends will get in anyway:)

Who_Knows

SupDoc wrote: »

I think you need the 100th percentile tbh some guy on here got over 230 and probably did that course.
What was your score and %tile, you don't have to say if you don't want too, I'm just curious.

Oh I was 206 97th percentile, really happy obviously but probably won't get that sweet sweet free cash from Med--entry.

SupDoc

mocker2012 wrote: »

What if there is no 100th percentile?
A percentile is a comparison to others not a percentage, it tells you how many scored below a given level. The scale has an asmyptote at 100, you can get really close, but can't quite get there. Even if you had the top score and that score was perfect you didn't do better than yourself. The number represents the proportion of people you exceeded. But this is only my theory so I could easily be full of the brown.

You are correct , it is mathematically impossible to get the 100th%tile because you can't get more than yourself i.e do better than yourself but you can get the 99.999999th%tile which Acer will round up to 100. I hate things like this which show such obvious math flaws.

mocker2012

SupDoc wrote: »

You are correct , it is mathematically impossible to get the 100th%tile because you can't get more than yourself i.e do better than yourself but you can get the 99.999999th%tile which Acer will round up to 100. I hate things like this which show such obvious math flaws.

Yeah, ACER should write something better in the percentile box for the best hpat score, e.g. We've reported you to the gardai for raping the Hpat :P

eyescreamcone

A few posters were earlier complaining about the HEAR candidates getting bonus points, but no mention yet of the elite sports scholarship candidates who can get UP TO 10% added to their LC points tally.

What do the masses who decry the HEAR candidates think about that??

(Specifically UCD and UCC)


I wonder is it possible to get BOTH elite sportsperson points plus HEAR points :-)

eyescreamcone

eyescreamcone wrote: »

A few posters were earlier complaining about the HEAR candidates getting bonus points, but no mention yet of the elite sports scholarship candidates who can get UP TO 10% added to their LC points tally.

What do the masses who decry the HEAR candidates think about that??

(Specifically UCD and UCC)


I wonder is it possible to get BOTH elite sportsperson points plus HEAR points :-)

I see it's possible for elite athletes to get into Med in UCD with 685 points

Vito Corleone

Ridiculous how ones ability at sports can get them a place in college (in a non sports related course). Thankfully, it's not as common over here as in other countries.

EaSwe

eyescreamcone wrote: »

A few posters were earlier complaining about the HEAR candidates getting bonus points, but no mention yet of the elite sports scholarship candidates who can get UP TO 10% added to their LC points tally.

What do the masses who decry the HEAR candidates think about that??

(Specifically UCD and UCC)


I wonder is it possible to get BOTH elite sportsperson points plus HEAR points :-)

Unlike HEAR which serves to try to level the playing field for disadvantaged candidates (It's a blunt imperfect tool but serves its purpose) Sports scholarship on the other hand are just a way for universities to attract (and get) the best athletes for their sports teams. A talented rugby or Gaelic player isn't deservant of an extra 10% added to their points. They have no disadvantage that means the playing field should be levelled somehow for them. If you spent a lot of time training for whatever sport that's your business and it shouldn't give you an advantage in getting into a university.

That said, if schemes like this didn't exist at all some athletes may not get into college or feel they can dedicate enough time to their given sport and so, may in turn choose not to pursue sport at the highest level, which isn't good for Olympic medals etc.

Obviously, there are a lot more HEAR candidates than Sports scholarship recipients so maybe that's why there hasn't been anyone giving out about them so far.

eyescreamcone

EaSwe wrote: »

Unlike HEAR which serves to try to level the playing field for disadvantaged candidates (It's a blunt imperfect tool but serves its purpose) Sports scholarship on the other hand are just a way for universities to attract (and get) the best athletes for their sports teams. A talented rugby or Gaelic player isn't deservant of an extra 10% added to their points. They have no disadvantage that means the playing field should be levelled somehow for them. If you spent a lot of time training for whatever sport that's your business and it shouldn't give you an advantage in getting into a university.

That said, if schemes like this didn't exist at all some athletes may not get into college or feel they can dedicate enough time to their given sport and so, may in turn choose not to pursue sport at the highest level, which isn't good for Olympic medals etc.

Obviously, there are a lot more HEAR candidates than Sports scholarship recipients so maybe that's why there hasn't been anyone giving out about them so far.

Nearly 30 elite academy sportspeople in UCD
Some in Med, Physio and Vet Med
There is a quota of 2 per year for Med though.

The same criteria exists for elite performing artists in UCD.

Seems like there are plenty getting in under the radar

SupDoc

EaSwe wrote: »

That said, if schemes like this didn't exist at all some athletes may not get into college or feel they can dedicate enough time to their given sport and so, may in turn choose not to pursue sport at the highest level, which isn't good for Olympic medals etc.

I feel my sport suffered because I had so much study to do, does this mean there should also be two places reserved on each county football team for the academics?
If it works one way then why can't it work the other way.
EXTRA POINTS OR REDUCED POINTS NEED TO BE BANNED!!!!!

EaSwe

eyescreamcone wrote: »

Nearly 30 in UCD
Some in Med, Physio and Vet Med
There is a quota of 2 per year for Med though.

The same criteria exists for elite performing artists in UCD.

Seems like there are plenty getting in under the radar

I didn't realise there were quite that many and in the high competition courses like med. Time to get angry. Can't justify it for courses like medicine.

EaSwe

SupDoc wrote: »

I feel my sport suffered because I had so much study to do, does this mean there should also be two places reserved on each county football team for the academics?
If it works one way then why can't it work the other way.
EXTRA POINTS OR REDUCED POINTS NEED TO BE BANNED!!!!!

I agree completely with you I was just putting forward a possible defence for them. I don't agree with reduced points for athletes. It's completely unfair to see someone get in on reduced points because they're good at sport. ESP. In high competition courses like medicine.

SupDoc

EaSwe wrote: »

I agree completely with you I was just putting forward a possible defence for them. I don't agree with reduced points for athletes. It's completely unfair to see someone get in on reduced points because they're good at sport. ESP. In high competition courses like medicine.

When you and a friend miss a course by less than 10 points its difficult to watch a guy get in who has approx. 30 points less than you, especially for med. when you both have somewhere in the 730's and he has 701 or 702.
That's a 525 LC with a Hpat of 176 somewhere beneath the 80%tile.
Opposed to your 550+ LC and Hpat above the 80%tile.
No matter who that guy is or where he came from, it is difficult to accept that he deserves to be in the course more than you.
(These points and Hpat scores referring to medicine entry last year)

randylonghorn

EaSwe wrote: »

Unlike HEAR which serves to try to level the playing field for disadvantaged candidates (It's a blunt imperfect tool but serves its purpose) Sports scholarship on the other hand are just a way for universities to attract (and get) the best athletes for their sports teams.

Agreed.

I wouldn't actually mind if there were special provision for sportspeople on related courses like Sports Management, PE teacher, etc., or for performing artists on courses like Theatre Studies, or indeed for any of them on high volume courses like Arts. Nor would I particularly mind if there were financial incentives or free accommodation or whatever for any course.

Why on earth should they get reduced points for something like med though?

This isn't an attempt to level the playing field for those who are disadvantaged, it is the rewarding of those who are already an "elite" in at least one sense.

randylonghorn

SupDoc wrote: »

No matter who that guy is or where he came from, it is difficult to accept that he deserves to be in the course more than you.

It may be difficult to accept, but this (re: HEAR) is where we disagree. There's a damn good reason for HEAR arising out of inequalities in our society and in our education system which haven't been tackled, or at least not effectively. HEAR (imperfect blunt instrument which we can all agree it is) is an attempt to address this; it arises therefore out of principles like justice and equality.

Where are the principles of justice and inequality to be seen in giving reduced points to high-achievement sportspeople to do a course like med?

Btw, having asked around a bit informally over the last few days, the impression I get is that most HEAR candidates who get Med have the points for it, or at most are benefiting from a very insignificant points differential. For the vast majority, the real advantage of qualifying for HEAR is the extra financial support.

kofta12 wrote: »

hahaha a man once said "the fire of your enemy is at your heart" while your hating on those people with hear schemes their out their enjoying their courses and they don't give a hoop about what you have to say I got into medicine though the hear scheme and I wasn't that disadvantaged my parents really cared about my education and I went to the institute for both 5 and 6 year then I heard about this hear scheme and used it as an opportunity to help me get a place and it did (even though it just helped by few points)you need to realise the world is not perfect and opportunities may present themselves to those unworthy overall am very happy at where I am and while I might not have deserved that place and took the place of an other kid who was working just as hard tuff luck that's the way things are.

If you were really able to access HEAR despite being able to afford 2 years at the IoE, then they need to review their criteria tbh.

I have to admit that I'm a tad skeptical re: trolling given that this is your first ever post; I may be wrong, but let's say the thought at least occurs!

randylonghorn

randylonghorn wrote: »

If you were really able to access HEAR despite being able to afford 2 years at the IoE, then they need to review their criteria tbh.
I have to admit that I'm a tad skeptical re: trolling given that this is your first ever post; I may be wrong, but let's say the thought at least occurs!

I'm just worried about the lack of full stops and general grammar in his post. I know doctors tend to have bad handwriting but does it go that far?

SupDoc

kofta12 wrote: »

hahaha a man once said "the fire of your enemy is at your heart" while your hating on those people with hear schemes their out their enjoying their courses and they don't give a hoop about what you have to say I got into medicine though the hear scheme and I wasn't that disadvantaged as my parents really cared about my education even though we were poor and I went to the institute for both 5 and 6 year then I heard about this hear scheme and used it as an opportunity to help me get a place and it did (even though it just helped by few points)you need to realise the world is not perfect and opportunities may present themselves to those unworthy overall am very happy at where I am and while I might not have deserved that place and took the place of an other kid who was working just as hard tuff luck that's the way things are.

You went to the Institute of Education in Dublin?

Vito Corleone

randylonghorn wrote: »

I have to admit that I'm a tad skeptical re: trolling given that this is your first ever post; I may be wrong, but let's say the thought at least occurs!

I do know of one case where someone is getting grinds in two subjects and is still eligible for HEAR, so it wouldn't surprise me at all tbh. Although the first post thing does send out alarm bells!

randylonghorn

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm just worried about the lack of full stops and general grammar in his post. I know doctors tend to have bad handwriting but does it go that far?

They tend (tended) to have bad handwriting due to years and years of taking detailed notes at speed, no other reason. While it's still prevalent, it tends to have improved a bit since the advent of things like Blackboard and Moodle.

Vito Corleone wrote: »

I do know of one case where someone is getting grinds in two subjects and is still eligible for HEAR, so it wouldn't surprise me at all tbh. Although the first post thing does send out alarm bells!

Grinds in two subjects in to-days market (where so many people are trying to make a few extra bob that the average price of grinds has fallen significantly) is a much much smaller financial outlay than 2 years in the Institute though.

Slow Show

randylonghorn wrote: »

I have to admit that I'm a tad skeptical re: trolling given that this is your first ever post; I may be wrong, but let's say the thought at least occurs!

I've heard of someone else before getting a reduction of about 15/20 points getting into Medicine in TCD through HEAR despite going to the Institute. No idea how that happened but it did and does. Attacking the system here and not the people that benefit from it as who wouldn't in fairness, but that's a bit ridiculous.

SupDoc

randylonghorn wrote: »

Grinds in two subjects in to-days market (where so many people are trying to make a few extra bob that the average price of grinds has fallen significantly) is a much much smaller financial outlay than 2 years in the Institute though.

I agree, but I think neither candidate is suitable for HEAR.

randylonghorn

SupDoc wrote: »

I agree, but I think neither candidate is suitable for HEAR.

Ah, but you don't think anyone is suitable for HEAR, or at least for any reduction in points no matter how small as a result of it, so that was to be expected!

SupDoc

randylonghorn wrote: »

very insignificant points differential

I think we can all agree there is no such thing as an "insignificant points differential", I completely agree with grants and financial aid for students though
I also agree that athletes getting extra points or reduced points is a greater injustice though.

Slow Show

Slow Show wrote: »

I've heard of someone else before getting a reduction of about 15/20 points getting into Medicine in TCD through HEAR despite going to the Institute. No idea how that happened but it did and does. Attacking the system here and not the people that benefit from it as who wouldn't in fairness, but that's a bit ridiculous.

That is definitely unfair. After all, there is 6 HEAR criteria and you only have to meet 4. However you must meet the "low income" criteria so I am baffled at how these people can say that they are disadvantaged and receiving a low income if they are sending their child to IoE?
I think a way to fix this should be that more criteria must be met to qualify for the scheme. I think I met all 6 to be honest but I would have to check again :P And I'm not going for Medicine, really looking forward to Pharmacy though

SupDoc wrote: »

I think we can all agree there is no such thing as an "insignificant points differential", I completely agree with grants and financial aid for students though
I also agree that athletes getting extra points or reduced points is a greater injustice though.

I do agree that any points reduction in medicine is not insignificant as with the 550 point max and HPAT scores that there are people missing Medicine by 1 point. However, for someone who would typically qualify for HEAR, the road of repeating simply isn't an option. I do think though that as long as they worked hard and aren't being handed a 30-40 point reduction, they have earned their spot in Medicine. After all, if points were 743 the year before and this applicant got 743 trying their hardest but points jumped to 745, they were at one point eligible for a spot in Medicine so why not this year?

Vito Corleone

randylonghorn wrote: »

Grinds in two subjects in to-days market (where so many people are trying to make a few extra bob that the average price of grinds has fallen significantly) is a much much smaller financial outlay than 2 years in the Institute though.

Agreed, but they do not deserve a place on the scheme. It should go to someone whose education has actually suffered due to their financial situation.

Slow Show

Well I suppose if a parent absolutely prioritises their child's education and has spent time saving and such, it's possible, though I have no idea what the income threshold is. It still sounds a bit mad though.