Everything HPAT and Medicine 2012

Mad Shark · 29-07-2012 11:40pm

back to back wrote: »

what i mean is, there is 130 places in tcd,anyone in top 4%hpat (130students)has200+points. all they need is 525points(excluding maths) to reach 750 points.however approx. 15% dont put tcd as there 1st choice. also a few will get 600+points and a hpat as low as 88% which will give them 746points . this will allow those with hpat of 197(top 6%) a place with lc of 525( before maths) to reach the 746 ,which is the additional 5 bonus maths added to last year minimum of 741

Thanks for that - I see where you are coming from so do you think then overall points will go up by about 5 to 8 pts for each college? or perhaps the gap between the colleges will get closer and NIUG will jump perhaps 10 or 12 pts since there will be a lot more hovering around the 550 mark this year ??

back to back · 30-07-2012 8:04pm

Mad Shark wrote: »

Thanks for that - I see where you are coming from so do you think then overall points will go up by about 5 to 8 pts for each college? or perhaps the gap between the colleges will get closer and NIUG will jump perhaps 10 or 12 pts since there will be a lot more hovering around the 550 mark this year ??

yes, i agree with you.it's going to be much tighter betweed tcd and ucg this year. i predict the minimum for ucg this year will be 741/742 ,for the reason you give. my reasoning for this is on my previous post on 15/july 17.33 and on 30/june 00.01.
i'm hoping i am wrong,and you can tell me why my reasoning is wrong ?
remember ,what happened other years is completely irrelevant.

MtHanrahan · 31-07-2012 7:03pm

I doubt the gap between NUIG and TCD will change much, points may certainly rise but the gap won't change because of the Hpat. The Hpat really has become a nuisance for getting into Med and it isn't serving it's purpose. It should be scrapped in my opinion. http://mthanrahan.blogspot.ie/2012/07/the-hpat-should-be-scrapped.html

Darksider · 31-07-2012 8:46pm

MtHanrahan wrote: »

I doubt the gap between NUIG and TCD will change much, points may certainly rise but the gap won't change because of the Hpat. The Hpat really has become a nuisance for getting into Med and it isn't serving it's purpose. It should be scrapped in my opinion. http://mthanrahan.blogspot.ie/2012/07/the-hpat-should-be-scrapped.html

I disagree. Who says you can't cheat the leaving cert in the same sense also? Grinds, courses, students paying to study extra subjects outside school just for the points?

Why should a students ability to (sometimes mindlessly) memorise loads of information be valued over their ability to think logically/critically and empathise with people? No test in the world is completely study proof unless its one in which nobody knows the actual subject matter. If someone put extra effort into the hpat why shouldn't they be rewarded similar to putting extra effort into the leaving? Tests are still a lot more objective than interviews/references where a lot of bias could come into play.

And the hpat only significantly reduces points for people who do absolutely outstanding in the hpat, but someone who can get 530 points + still should have the aptitude for medicine.

dcam · 31-07-2012 10:15pm

Hi everyone. I've been reading this thread and it's really informative, there's one thing I don't quite understand though. I heard that you must use LC points and HPAT score within two consecutive years of each other. Can anyone confirm this? And if so how is it possible that someone who did the LC before 2011 is able to do the HPAT this year and combine it with their LC points from a few years ago to get a place in medicine? Thanks

Canard · 31-07-2012 10:18pm

dcam wrote: »

Hi everyone. I've been reading this thread and it's really informative, there's one thing I don't quite understand though. I heard that you must use LC points and HPAT score within two consecutive years of each other. Can anyone confirm this? And if so how is it possible that someone who did the LC before 2011 is able to do the HPAT this year and combine it with their LC points from a few years ago to get a place in medicine? Thanks

It's possible from what I've heard, and I think it's 5 (might have been 3?) years for a LC and 2 for a HPAT. I'm not a medicine person though so someone else might know more.

Mad Shark · 31-07-2012 10:31pm

Darksider wrote: »

I disagree. Who says you can't cheat the leaving cert in the same sense also? Grinds, courses, students paying to study extra subjects outside school just for the points?

Why should a students ability to (sometimes mindlessly) memorise loads of information be valued over their ability to think logically/critically and empathise with people? No test in the world is completely study proof unless its one in which nobody knows the actual subject matter. If someone put extra effort into the hpat why shouldn't they be rewarded similar to putting extra effort into the leaving? Tests are still a lot more objective than interviews/references where a lot of bias could come into play.

And the hpat only significantly reduces points for people who do absolutely outstanding in the hpat, but someone who can get 530 points + still should have the aptitude for medicine.

Well said.... perhaps they may also bring in an interview process once you get to a certain level in LC and HPAT combined??? Will that solve it...

dcam · 31-07-2012 10:59pm

Patchy~ wrote: »

It's possible from what I've heard, and I think it's 5 (might have been 3?) years for a LC and 2 for a HPAT. I'm not a medicine person though so someone else might know more.

Thanks anyway Patchy this has been really confusing me!

Mr.Fun · 31-07-2012 11:52pm

All will be revealed soon

MtHanrahan · 01-08-2012 1:59am

Darksider wrote: »

MtHanrahan wrote: »

I doubt the gap between NUIG and TCD will change much, points may certainly rise but the gap won't change because of the Hpat. The Hpat really has become a nuisance for getting into Med and it isn't serving it's purpose. It should be scrapped in my opinion. http://mthanrahan.blogspot.ie/2012/07/the-hpat-should-be-scrapped.html

I disagree. Who says you can't cheat the leaving cert in the same sense also? Grinds, courses, students paying to study extra subjects outside school just for the points?

Why should a students ability to (sometimes mindlessly) memorise loads of information be valued over their ability to think logically/critically and empathise with people? No test in the world is completely study proof unless its one in which nobody knows the actual subject matter. If someone put extra effort into the hpat why shouldn't they be rewarded similar to putting extra effort into the leaving? Tests are still a lot more objective than interviews/references where a lot of bias could come into play.

And the hpat only significantly reduces points for people who do absolutely outstanding in the hpat, but someone who can get 530 points + still should have the aptitude for medicine.

Of course students cheat the leaving cert. itself all the time as you've mentioned. That's why the Hpat was introduced. But as you said yourself students can perform mindlessly, and that's what is happening in the Hpat too. However the leaving cert is a test of knowledge, not ability.

Imagine you wanted to find out your IQ. The first time you did the test you score 115. Then you decide to do another IQ test of equal difficulty and different questions and score 130. You score higher because the questions seem familiar. But which represents your ability better?
By this logic you could then go and actually study for the IQ test for a year and possibly score 160. Does this make you a genius?

My real problem with the Hpat is with the repeats (if you haven't noticed). I've written about the Hpat and the leaving cert. and grinds before on my blog

Canard · 01-08-2012 2:15am

In fairness, I think if someone has the aptitude to succeed in both the HPAT and the leaving cert to the point that they can achieve a combined score of 741, they're probably intelligent enough for Medicine whether they've done prep or not. Is the HPAT not mostly to prevent apathetic geniuses from getting into the profession and sort of spread some tact? Not that I think of doctors as heartless or something, I just always thought that was a large part of the idea.

I never had any interest in Medicine but I doubt I could've gotten the points. When I did section 2 of the HPAT (in class though) I got something like 96% from what I'd done but a lot of the more "intelligent" people scored lower. I'd probably have a relatively higher EQ than IQ, and surely an acceptable mix is necessary for a job where you're dealing with life and death. As far as I understand the HPAT prep courses are more directed toward the logical section 3 - I don't understand how you can teach section 2, but maybe you can.

Didn't mean to drag the thread off-topic and I don't know the ins and outs of the HPAT or its origins, just wanted to add a bit.

Sunny!! · 01-08-2012 12:36pm

The hpat should be scrapped, but we need something else here like interviews. I absolutely detest the hpat but it has to be better than the old system.

We cannot have it based solely on the leaving cert as the leaving cert tests memory not intelligence.

I also think its a good thing that people are getting in with less points, because anyone with around 500 points is able for medicine you should not have to get the full 600 like the old system.

PictureFrame · 01-08-2012 2:37pm

I actually think an Interview section should be added into the system for people applying for medicine.

Canard · 01-08-2012 4:53pm

Sunny!! wrote: »

We cannot have it based solely on the leaving cert as the leaving cert tests memory not intelligence.

Not that I disagree - the LC alone isn't enough to decide if someone should get medicine or not - but I disagree that it's a memory test, especially in the case of Medicine.

Medicine candidates would almost all have biology and chemistry. I didn't do either but from what I understand biology is rote-learning and chemistry is not. Geography, history, business are memory tests; English, Irish, Maths (especially HL), foreign languages, physics, applied maths all test intelligence too.

Memory is directly related to intelligence anyway. I don't mean memory as in being able to remember things from long ago but it depends how you use your memory - are you going to read the thing for hours til you remember it or are you going to use a mnemonic to help you? With the amount of learning there is in Medicine (which would require a good memory/LC) the better candidate would have a better memory.

Sunny!! · 01-08-2012 5:54pm

Patchy~ wrote: »

Not that I disagree - the LC alone isn't enough to decide if someone should get medicine or not - but I disagree that it's a memory test, especially in the case of Medicine.

Medicine candidates would almost all have biology and chemistry. I didn't do either but from what I understand biology is rote-learning and chemistry is not. Geography, history, business are memory tests; English, Irish, Maths (especially HL), foreign languages, physics, applied maths all test intelligence too.

Memory is directly related to intelligence anyway. I don't mean memory as in being able to remember things from long ago but it depends how you use your memory - are you going to read the thing for hours til you remember it or are you going to use a mnemonic to help you? With the amount of learning there is in Medicine (which would require a good memory/LC) the better candidate would have a better memory.

oh sorry i phrased it wrong, of course memory is essential for medicine, but intelligence is more important.

Taco Chips · 01-08-2012 7:07pm

Sunny!! wrote: »

oh sorry i phrased it wrong, of course memory is essential for medicine, but intelligence is more important.

They're not mutually exclusive though. I wouldn't call someone who scored over 550 in the LC unintelligent. The opposite in fact. A lot of doctors themselves say that memory skills are most useful when studying medicine.

jumpguy · 01-08-2012 7:26pm

MtHanrahan wrote: »

I doubt the gap between NUIG and TCD will change much, points may certainly rise but the gap won't change because of the Hpat. The Hpat really has become a nuisance for getting into Med and it isn't serving it's purpose. It should be scrapped in my opinion. http://mthanrahan.blogspot.ie/2012/07/the-hpat-should-be-scrapped.html

I think that the HPAT is along the right track as to where we need to go - I do think section 3 needs to go or be changed though, I really do feel it's easy to prepare for and do well in with enough practice (and, I'm saying this as it was my best section and I did prep.)

You suggest in your blog post a log-book system where you have to do a week's medical work experience. That would be disastrous, since those who have parents as doctors or in other hospital positions would have a massive leg-up. Even if we developed a fair system where every student had an equal chance to gain hospital experience, it would become a burden on the hospitals which they don't need. Can you imagine them having to deal with a bunch of underage teenagers milling around the hospital trying to fill a log book? It'd be a nightmare from the point of view of infection risk, patient comfort, and the safety of the youngins too.

A return to Leaving Cert only would just be trading the new problems for the old, which is not acceptable. Top-tier Leaving Certers don't necessarily make good doctors, and I think the HPAT broadens the variety of personalities that enter medicine.

I was hoping for a report on the HPAT this year, but I heard on the grapevine they're waiting for 5 years data now. I'm fairly sure it'll earmark section 3 for the chop.

MtHanrahan · 01-08-2012 8:27pm

jumpguy wrote: »

I think that the HPAT is along the right track as to where we need to go - I do think section 3 needs to go or be changed though, I really do feel it's easy to prepare for and do well in with enough practice (and, I'm saying this as it was my best section and I did prep.)

You suggest in your blog post a log-book system where you have to do a week's medical work experience. That would be disastrous, since those who have parents as doctors or in other hospital positions would have a massive leg-up. Even if we developed a fair system where every student had an equal chance to gain hospital experience, it would become a burden on the hospitals which they don't need. Can you imagine them having to deal with a bunch of underage teenagers milling around the hospital trying to fill a log book? It'd be a nightmare from the point of view of infection risk, patient comfort, and the safety of the youngins too.

A return to Leaving Cert only would just be trading the new problems for the old, which is not acceptable. Top-tier Leaving Certers don't necessarily make good doctors, and I think the HPAT broadens the variety of personalities that enter medicine.

I was hoping for a report on the HPAT this year, but I heard on the grapevine they're waiting for 5 years data now. I'm fairly sure it'll earmark section 3 for the chop.

I never meant for it to be hospital experience and I never meant that it should be worth anything to give anyone a leg-up. Anything would suffice just to show that you have a genuine interest in medicine which is really all you need to be a good doctor. High leaving cert and hpat is just to beat competition.

In england it is virtually impossible to be considered for medicine unless you've shown prior interest by doing some form of work-experience.

The log-book was just to get you thinking by having to write things down. We have learning logs in UCC which are nothing but an assessment of your handwriting. No marks are awarded for it but it is mandatory, so it just gets you thinking about what you've done in college and how you can improve. yes it can be cheated but effort is still required.

Its too late for a return to LC only, I agree with that, but if the Hpat isn't doing its job, then it needs to be revisited.

MtHanrahan · 01-08-2012 8:35pm

Patchy~ wrote: »

Not that I disagree - the LC alone isn't enough to decide if someone should get medicine or not - but I disagree that it's a memory test, especially in the case of Medicine.

Medicine candidates would almost all have biology and chemistry. I didn't do either but from what I understand biology is rote-learning and chemistry is not. Geography, history, business are memory tests; English, Irish, Maths (especially HL), foreign languages, physics, applied maths all test intelligence too.

Memory is directly related to intelligence anyway. I don't mean memory as in being able to remember things from long ago but it depends how you use your memory - are you going to read the thing for hours til you remember it or are you going to use a mnemonic to help you? With the amount of learning there is in Medicine (which would require a good memory/LC) the better candidate would have a better memory.

Patchy has this spot on.

Also why can't people accept that the LC measure memory and intelligence? However I do see how you could play the system and choose your subjects to make it purely one or the other.

jumpguy · 01-08-2012 9:06pm

MtHanrahan wrote: »

Its too late for a return to LC only, I agree with that, but if the Hpat isn't doing its job, then it needs to be revisited.

The log book idea is then flimsy. You could easily get your friendly local GP to sign you off, which'd be unfair to those who genuinely try to get the necessary experience. It'd be a pointless piece of bureaucracy.

In reality, the job of the HPAT was to balance the male-female ratio entering medicine, which it succeeded at. I also think it adds an element of ability-under-stress to the assessment.

I am concerned about how people repeating the HPAT fare better much of the time, and that's one issue I'd definitely like to see sorted. Sitting the HPAT for the first time shouldn't put you at a major disadvantage compared to veteran sitters. I suspect the reason the HPAT scores this year didn't rise is because the turnover of repeats sitting the HPAT has now stabilised. I also suspect section 3 is at the heart of many problems with the HPAT, but the people with all the answers will be those with access to the statistics on score and score rises in repeats. No real conclusion can be made until a report is released.

I think assessment will have to stay quite anonymous, given that we have the unique problem compared to the UK of being a small, quite well-connected nation with culture that often promotes the individual good over the common good. It's not as easy as "we'll do the same thing they do there!" Besides, the UK system suffers from its own flaws, even with their population being roughly 10 times greater than ours.

dcam · 02-08-2012 12:48am

Patchy~ wrote: »

Not that I disagree - the LC alone isn't enough to decide if someone should get medicine or not - but I disagree that it's a memory test, especially in the case of Medicine.

Medicine candidates would almost all have biology and chemistry. I didn't do either but from what I understand biology is rote-learning and chemistry is not. Geography, history, business are memory tests; English, Irish, Maths (especially HL), foreign languages, physics, applied maths all test intelligence too.

Memory is directly related to intelligence anyway. I don't mean memory as in being able to remember things from long ago but it depends how you use your memory - are you going to read the thing for hours til you remember it or are you going to use a mnemonic to help you? With the amount of learning there is in Medicine (which would require a good memory/LC) the better candidate would have a better memory.

I'm delighted someone else agrees that the leaving cert is not just a memory test. I did four Hl languages for the leaving besides English and to say that you can rote learn for these exams is just ridiculous, you are required to manipulate spontaneously and have a real understanding of grammar. Of course there are some subjects which can be rote learned like Patchy said but in my opinion this only applies to a minority of subjects. In terms of the HPAT I agree that it should be scrapped it's just ridiculous that someone with 600 points might not get a place in medicine due to their HPAT score. I agree that the old system was not flawless and appreciate that the HPAT is supposed to broaden the personality types getting into medicine but overall I think the old system was fairer especially for the very high achievers who have enough points for any other course apart from medicine. In my opinion it's a disgrace that choosing the next picture in a series determines who will get a place in undergraduate medicine.

Darksider · 02-08-2012 1:09am

dcam wrote: »

I'm delighted someone else agrees that the leaving cert is not just a memory test. I did four Hl languages for the leaving besides English and to say that you can rote learn for these exams is just ridiculous, you are required to manipulate spontaneously and have a real understanding of grammar. Of course there are some subjects which can be rote learned like Patchy said but in my opinion this only applies to a minority of subjects. In terms of the HPAT I agree that it should be scrapped it's just ridiculous that someone with 600 points might not get a place in medicine due to their HPAT score. I agree that the old system was not flawless and appreciate that the HPAT is supposed to broaden the personality types getting into medicine but overall I think the old system was fairer especially for the very high achievers who have enough points for any other course apart from medicine. In my opinion it's a disgrace that choosing the next picture in a series determines who will get a place in undergraduate medicine.

If someone chose biology, ag science, chemistry, business, irish, french, maths, english they could essentially rote learn their way to a very high leaving. besides maths, the other 7 subjects benefit HUGELY from an ability to memorise large amounts of info.

though the 600 points not getting into medicine is a good point. that could possibly be helped by raising the ceiling to 575 in which case someone with 600 would only need a hpat score in the 70th percentile, which IMO is certainly reasonable to expect from someone looking to get into medicine.

Canard · 02-08-2012 1:19am

I think a very fair idea for Medicine would be to increase the value of certain grades. Someone who gets a C3 in chemistry probably shouldn't be there over someone who got an A1, more points could be awarded for higher grades in the candidate's best scoring 2 science subjects, but only 2, to prevent unfair advantages if someone happened to do physics/ag science too. Then again, people complain about the HL maths points so maybe not.

Darksider wrote: »

If someone chose biology, ag science, chemistry, business, irish, french, maths, english they could essentially rote learn their way to a very high leaving. besides maths, the other 7 subjects benefit HUGELY from an ability to memorise large amounts of info.

though the 600 points not getting into medicine is a good point. that could possibly be helped by raising the ceiling to 575 in which case someone with 600 would only need a hpat score in the 70th percentile, which IMO is certainly reasonable to expect from someone looking to get into medicine.

Well business, biology and ag science yes, but English is hard to do well in without a bit of a flair for it and Irish, French and Chemistry definitely aren't rote-learning subjects. Plus, if someone has the memory to get A1s in six rote-learned subjects they probably have some kind of great intelligence! :P

dcam wrote:

I'm delighted someone else agrees that the leaving cert is not just a memory test. I did four Hl languages for the leaving besides English and to say that you can rote learn for these exams is just ridiculous, you are required to manipulate spontaneously and have a real understanding of grammar.

It just plainly isn't, the people who say that are always the ones who chose subjects that rely solely on rote-learning and drop to pass in all the ones that require a little more. That's not meant in a bad way, it's just true from what I've seen - anyone I know who's ever said it was a memory test did OL Maths, Irish and whatever their third language was. A little understanding goes a long way in those subjects! Very jealous of your 4 HL languages, I only got to do 2 (Irish being one :rolleyes:) but I love them :pac:

dcam · 02-08-2012 2:44am

Darksider wrote: »

though the 600 points not getting into medicine is a good point. that could possibly be helped by raising the ceiling to 575 in which case someone with 600 would only need a hpat score in the 70th percentile, which IMO is certainly reasonable to expect from someone looking to get into medicine.

This would certainly be an improvement Darksider, but in my opinion 70th percentile is still quite difficult to obtain, and taking into account that some of the country's best doctors wouldn't manage this and that prep courses have been shown to be capable of significantly increasing an individual's percentiles, I still think scrapping the HPAT is the best option.

Patchy~ wrote: »

I think a very fair idea for Medicine would be to increase the value of certain grades. Someone who gets a C3 in chemistry probably shouldn't be there over someone who got an A1, more points could be awarded for higher grades in the candidate's best scoring 2 science subjects, but only 2, to prevent unfair advantages if someone happened to do physics/ag science too. Then again, people complain about the HL maths points so maybe not.

I completely agree Patchy. People should be capable of getting a high grade in science subjects if they are expected to make it through med. As regards HL maths bonus points I think people would have less of a reason to complain about your suggestion than maths bonus points as the maths bonus points can be used for any course, even if they are entirely unrelated to maths, whereas your suggestion would just concern med applicants and of course science subjects are very relevant to med.

sparagon · 02-08-2012 12:21pm

Darksider wrote: »

If someone chose biology, ag science, chemistry, business, irish, french, maths, english they could essentially rote learn their way to a very high leaving. besides maths, the other 7 subjects benefit HUGELY from an ability to memorise large amounts of info.

Darksider if you think people can rote learn and thus do well in Irish, French, English and Chemistry then you clearly don'#t have a great knowledge of the LC or at least those subjects. For Irish and French you need to fully understand the know;edge to manipulate and apply it in/to new situations, in English you need to have a deep understanding of your pieces, aswell as be able to develop your own opinion and have a flair. And as for chemistry it is basically ALL understanding and application

Darksider · 02-08-2012 4:08pm

sparagon wrote: »

Darksider wrote: »

If someone chose biology, ag science, chemistry, business, irish, french, maths, english they could essentially rote learn their way to a very high leaving. besides maths, the other 7 subjects benefit HUGELY from an ability to memorise large amounts of info.

Darksider if you think people can rote learn and thus do well in Irish, French, English and Chemistry then you clearly don'#t have a great knowledge of the LC or at least those subjects. For Irish and French you need to fully understand the know;edge to manipulate and apply it in/to new situations, in English you need to have a deep understanding of your pieces, aswell as be able to develop your own opinion and have a flair. And as for chemistry it is basically ALL understanding and application

I'm only familiar with the older honours Irish course so it may have changed, but people who could learn off a bunch of essays had a huge advantage.

Learning notes off is also a big part of english for many people. You could be an expert writer but if you don't have the memory to remember the ridiculous amount of info on a single text, 3 comparative texts and several poets then you will suffer. the comparatives are basically learned off and just manipulated on the day.

chemistry is made much easier by an ability to understand the concepts but if you were able to just rote learn everything yoh would only suffer in a small number of areas (more difficult calculations and maybe a few abstract questions)

not sure why I inclured french though, French doesnt involve any rote learning imo.

I'm not saying these subjects can be flown through by anyone with just a decent memory, but if you take someone with the time, ability and dedication to rote learn massive amounts of info they will still do quite well, regardless of their ability in other areas

Taco Chips · 02-08-2012 4:43pm

Darksider wrote: »

I'm not saying these subjects can be flown through by anyone with just a decent memory, but if you take someone with the time, ability and dedication to rote learn massive amounts of info they will still do quite well regardless of their ability in other areas

Which is an integral part of learning for many people. Rote learning is important. Often understanding of topics comes after a heap of information has been committed to memory. Rote learning large volumes of information is also key to succeeding in medicine.

Darksider · 02-08-2012 6:29pm

Taco Chips wrote: »

Which is an integral part of learning for many people. Rote learning is important. Often understanding of topics comes after a heap of information has been committed to memory. Rote learning large volumes of information is also key to succeeding in medicine.

I agree, I just don't think that the leaving cert should be the only criteria for acceptance to medicine, since I don't believe it comprehensively assesses enough of the qualities a doctor should have. The HPAT hits on some more of these qualities (particularly sections 1 and 2).

In theory, interviews could be a good addition too but I think that would introduce a lot of bias. My favourite part of the UCAS system is that people need to show an actual interest in medicine by doing work experience in a similar field. That shows bias too though, as some students will easily be able to get a position through connections whilst others will struggle to get a work experience position.

The reality is that there will never be a perfect or ideal system for allocating med school places but I think the way it is currently is at least an improvement over the previous system.

mcnm1993 · 02-08-2012 7:58pm

Hi I've applied for Med this year but I'm not sure whether I'll get it or not?? I think I might be eligible for HEAR. Does anyone know if it's possible to repeat the Hpat and apply for HEAR without actually repeating the LC? Thanks

Mad Shark · 02-08-2012 9:23pm

Darksider wrote: »

I agree, I just don't think that the leaving cert should be the only criteria for acceptance to medicine, since I don't believe it comprehensively assesses enough of the qualities a doctor should have. The HPAT hits on some more of these qualities (particularly sections 1 and 2).

In theory, interviews could be a good addition too but I think that would introduce a lot of bias. My favourite part of the UCAS system is that people need to show an actual interest in medicine by doing work experience in a similar field. That shows bias too though, as some students will easily be able to get a position through connections whilst others will struggle to get a work experience position.

The reality is that there will never be a perfect or ideal system for allocating med school places but I think the way it is currently is at least an improvement over the previous system.

Totally agree with you no perfect system and this is the best attempt so far - perhaps bring in some interview process once you get to a certain level of LC and HPAT combined??

MtHanrahan · 03-08-2012 5:24pm

jumpguy wrote: »

The log book idea is then flimsy. You could easily get your friendly local GP to sign you off, which'd be unfair to those who genuinely try to get the necessary experience. It'd be a pointless piece of bureaucracy.

In reality, the job of the HPAT was to balance the male-female ratio entering medicine, which it succeeded at. I also think it adds an element of ability-under-stress to the assessment.

I am concerned about how people repeating the HPAT fare better much of the time, and that's one issue I'd definitely like to see sorted. Sitting the HPAT for the first time shouldn't put you at a major disadvantage compared to veteran sitters. I suspect the reason the HPAT scores this year didn't rise is because the turnover of repeats sitting the HPAT has now stabilised. I also suspect section 3 is at the heart of many problems with the HPAT, but the people with all the answers will be those with access to the statistics on score and score rises in repeats. No real conclusion can be made until a report is released.

I think assessment will have to stay quite anonymous, given that we have the unique problem compared to the UK of being a small, quite well-connected nation with culture that often promotes the individual good over the common good. It's not as easy as "we'll do the same thing they do there!" Besides, the UK system suffers from its own flaws, even with their population being roughly 10 times greater than ours.

Ya just wanted to point out that yes one of the aims was to rebalance the male-female ratio and it only managed to do this for the first 2 years I believe. After that it has more or less returned to the way it was.

jumpguy · 03-08-2012 6:31pm

MtHanrahan wrote: »

Ya just wanted to point out that yes one of the aims was to rebalance the male-female ratio and it only managed to do this for the first 2 years I believe. After that it has more or less returned to the way it was.

What source do you have for this? Looking at my own class, and leaving out the international students, the male-female ratio is roughly 50:50 (I think actually there may be a few more males.)

Pugzilla · 03-08-2012 7:14pm

jumpguy wrote: »

What source do you have for this? Looking at my own class, and leaving out the international students, the male-female ratio is roughly 50:50 (I think actually there may be a few more males.)

No way is that possible, my year has a nearly 70:30 ratio in favour of females.

jumpguy · 03-08-2012 7:44pm

Pugzilla wrote: »

No way is that possible, my year has a nearly 70:30 ratio in favour of females.

Did you start in September 2011, and is that discounting international students?

MtHanrahan · 03-08-2012 8:05pm

jumpguy wrote: »

What source do you have for this? Looking at my own class, and leaving out the international students, the male-female ratio is roughly 50:50 (I think actually there may be a few more males.)

I think I heard it on the radio at the time. More than likely the Pat Kenny show on RTÉ 1. but if you want a source right now then the third and second last paragraphs on this back me up http://igenders.tumblr.com/post/25018392572/testing-institutional-discrimination

Pugzilla · 03-08-2012 9:17pm

jumpguy wrote: »

Did you start in September 2011, and is that discounting international students?

I started in 2010. The majority of irish students in NUIG's medical school are female. It's especially apparent in lab groups and it's not a bad thing.

It means you'll have less competition for training schemes when you qualify if the powers that be want to keep the old boys' club or even just to preserve gender balance. That's not taking into account those that get knocked up or want to work part-time.

jumpguy · 03-08-2012 9:23pm

MtHanrahan wrote: »

I think I heard it on the radio at the time. More than likely the Pat Kenny show on RTÉ 1. but if you want a source right now then the third and second last paragraphs on this back me up http://igenders.tumblr.com/post/25018392572/testing-institutional-discrimination

Fair enough, and actually I forgot about a key group when I was thinking of the males and females entering my year (as some, around 20 I think, go straight into first year medicine, and around 60 going into premed.)

I'll reserve my judgement of the HPAT until the report is out, but if it's failing to even balance the male-female ratio entering medicine, then it's not looking good...

nogivingup · 04-08-2012 9:03pm

I am a Med student and I can honestly say that the ratio of males to females in my class is 50:50. The HPAT has succeeded in ensuring that there is a balance, in the top bracket at least.

Also, in realtion to the comments stating that the gap between Trinity and NUIG will be bridged- this can't happen. Given the fact that the HPAT scores have stagnated the rise should be universal with all colleges rising in terms of points. For there to be a smaller points difference between NUIG and TCD, then Leaving Cert results would have to be very, very close which, despite what you may believe, won't happen. People are considering the Maths points to be of greater importance than they are- most people in my class took Honours Maths and had over 550 points so most will only be getting 5 bonus points. I don't believe that that many people capable of receiving a high HPAT score will have a Leaving Cert of under 550!

Personally, I feel that the minimum points requirement for Medicine should rise from 480 to 550 as someone with less than 550 points is likely to struggle in Medicine. This would still ease pressure on Leaving Cert students (as was the aim when the HPAT was introduced) by allowing for a margn of error- you don't need 590/600 points to get Medicine but you still need to do reasonably well.

The fact that the Honours Maths points have the capability of allowing someone with 505 (before adding Maths points) points to get a place in Medicine is an absolute joke. 505 is a mediocre Leaving Cert and someone with this score does not deserve a place in the most highly demanded course in the country.

Canard · 04-08-2012 9:23pm

Not to mention the fact that some might only get 20 points for HL maths - e.g. getting 120 points for it instead of counting an A1 (would be strange, but possible).

But hey, 505 isn't mediocre, it's way above average and anything above 500 is the 92nd percentile. I guess for medicine it is though.

nogivingup · 04-08-2012 9:34pm

Patchy~ wrote: »

Not to mention the fact that some might only get 20 points for HL maths - e.g. getting 120 points for it instead of counting an A1 (would be strange, but possible).

But hey, 505 isn't mediocre, it's way above average and anything above 500 is the 92nd percentile. I guess for medicine it is though.

When you're talking about Medicine, anything below 550 is Mediocre. Anyone in my class not getting an Entrance Scholarship (for 560+) was ridiculed.

You're absolutely right about people not getting the full 25 points! Someone with 6 A1s with an A2 in Maths now gets 615, as opposed to the 625 you may expect them to get.
Is it just me or do these Maths points destroy the true meaning of Leaving Cert points? On results day people will be claiming to have massively inflated LC points- it's really just ridiculous.

dcam · 04-08-2012 11:41pm

nogivingup wrote: »

When you're talking about Medicine, anything below 550 is Mediocre. Anyone in my class not getting an Entrance Scholarship (for 560+) was ridiculed.

You're absolutely right about people not getting the full 25 points! Someone with 6 A1s with an A2 in Maths now gets 615, as opposed to the 625 you may expect them to get.
Is it just me or do these Maths points destroy the true meaning of Leaving Cert points? On results day people will be claiming to have massively inflated LC points- it's really just ridiculous.

You're absolutely right I think it's really wrong to give extra points for HL maths meaning that someone who has worked their ass off and achieved 5 or 6A1's or close to it but who did not do HL maths will not receive the credit that others would have gotten in previous years with the exact same points due to all these people with 625. No subject is more important than another and the sooner the department realise this the better. They are supposedly giving these bonus points to encourage students to study maths at third level but you can use these points to get into any course how does that make any sense?

Canard · 05-08-2012 12:52am

Well I dunno, if someone can get 6 A1s should they not be able for HL maths? Personally I'm hoping for a C3/D1 in it to offset geography which went badly, but overall I'll probably only end up with a 5-10 net gain in points from it.

On one hand the reality is that maths takes up a lot more time and was my most difficult subject by a million miles, but if you're extremely maths-orientated you won't even need the incentive I guess.

My opinion is that subjects like maths/French should be worth more for courses like engineering/languages, thats how the French system works, and it makes so much more sense - but I guess it has its flaws too, e.g. someone who doesnt get to do applied maths being at a huge disadvantage in competing for their course even if they were able for it.

Darksider · 05-08-2012 1:09am

nogivingup wrote: »

When you're talking about Medicine, anything below 550 is Mediocre. Anyone in my class not getting an Entrance Scholarship (for 560+) was ridiculed.

You're absolutely right about people not getting the full 25 points! Someone with 6 A1s with an A2 in Maths now gets 615, as opposed to the 625 you may expect them to get.
Is it just me or do these Maths points destroy the true meaning of Leaving Cert points? On results day people will be claiming to have massively inflated LC points- it's really just ridiculous.

wow are they really the type of people i'm going to study with in medicine? ridiculing someone for getting below 560 even though they still got admission?

that kind of elitism is absolutely shocking to me, and this is coming from someone who got more than that in the mocks so i'm not really taking it on a personal level or anything.

Taco Chips · 05-08-2012 2:11am

dcam wrote: »

You're absolutely right I think it's really wrong to give extra points for HL maths meaning that someone who has worked their ass off and achieved 5 or 6A1's or close to it but who did not do HL maths will not receive the credit that others would have gotten in previous years with the exact same points due to all these people with 625. No subject is more important than another and the sooner the department realise this the better. They are supposedly giving these bonus points to encourage students to study maths at third level but you can use these points to get into any course how does that make any sense?

Honours maths is well documented to be much more difficult however, and far fewer people do well in it than in other subjects. So the case is there to show that it requires much more work across the board for students to succeed in, so wouldn't it just be fair that extra work is rewarded with extra points?

Darksider wrote: »

wow are they really the type of people i'm going to study with in medicine? ridiculing someone for getting below 560 even though they still got admission?

that kind of elitism is absolutely shocking to me, and this is coming from someone who got more than that in the mocks so i'm not really taking it on a personal level or anything.

Agreed. And it's untrue. I'm assuming the OP is referring to TCD since he mentioned the Entrance Exhibition. I go to TCD and I am friends with a lot of people in Med. There was no ridicule of people who weren't at the Entrance Exhibition. In fact, there was little to no mention of LC points at all after the first week. People are too busy coping with the work that the course brings to be caught up in what become trivialities once you start.

QueenOfLeon · 05-08-2012 2:52am

nogivingup wrote: »

When you're talking about Medicine, anything below 550 is Mediocre. Anyone in my class not getting an Entrance Scholarship (for 560+) was ridiculed.

Well since the majority of universities only give entrance scholarships to the top ~10% combined LC/HPAT scores, you're talking about ridiculing 90% of your class...wherever you are, that sounds ridiculous. For my class, people who got the scholarship were congratulated by everyone else and there was certainly no elitism between those who did and didn't get it.

I know people who had a "below average" (in terms of the average LC scores in medicine) Leaving Cert who pass exams no problem and excel in the class, and those who got 600 points who are failing or barely passing.

I do think giving 480 as a target is a bit unrealistic, and it could be increased a bit, but its unfair to say anyone getting below 550 can't handle the course.

Darksider · 05-08-2012 2:56am

QueenOfLeon wrote: »

Well since the majority of universities only give entrance scholarships to the top ~10% combined LC/HPAT scores, you're talking about ridiculing 90% of your class...wherever you are, that sounds ridiculous. For my class, people who got the scholarship were congratulated by everyone else and there was certainly no elitism between those who did and didn't get it.

I know people who had a "below average" (in terms of the average LC scores in medicine) Leaving Cert who pass exams no problem and excel in the class, and those who got 600 points who are failing or barely passing.

I do think giving 480 as a target is a bit unrealistic, and it could be increased a bit, but its unfair to say anyone getting below 550 can't handle the course.

I think the poster may have exaggerated a bit to bolster his own opinion, he seems to have a very negative view of people with 'mediocre' leaving certs (lol) getting into medical college.

Also, there are loads of student who end up getting points as low as the 400s, going off to med school abroad and getting their degree just fine, which sort of weakens this person's point.

nogivingup · 05-08-2012 11:17am

Taco Chips wrote: »

dcam wrote: »

You're absolutely right I think it's really wrong to give extra points for HL maths meaning that someone who has worked their ass off and achieved 5 or 6A1's or close to it but who did not do HL maths will not receive the credit that others would have gotten in previous years with the exact same points due to all these people with 625. No subject is more important than another and the sooner the department realise this the better. They are supposedly giving these bonus points to encourage students to study maths at third level but you can use these points to get into any course how does that make any sense?

Honours maths is well documented to be much more difficult however, and far fewer people do well in it than in other subjects. So the case is there to show that it requires much more work across the board for students to succeed in, so wouldn't it just be fair that extra work is rewarded with extra points?

Darksider wrote: »

wow are they really the type of people i'm going to study with in medicine? ridiculing someone for getting below 560 even though they still got admission?

that kind of elitism is absolutely shocking to me, and this is coming from someone who got more than that in the mocks so i'm not really taking it on a personal level or anything.

Agreed. And it's untrue. I'm assuming the OP is referring to TCD since he mentioned the Entrance Exhibition. I go to TCD and I am friends with a lot of people in Med. There was no ridicule of people who weren't at the Entrance Exhibition. In fact, there was little to no mention of LC points at all after the first week. People are too busy coping with the work that the course brings to be caught up in what become trivialities once you start.

Oh because you are so knowledgable because you have friends in Medicine? How would you know if there was mention of LC points or not? Were you there? No. Was I there? Yes.
When I said ridiculed, I meant in a far more good-natured way than all of you are all taking it to mean.

Also, Darksider, you are naive if you are shocked by such elitism.

Also, the later post about people with 400 points studying Medicine abroad: how many of these people do you know personally? I doubt you know any, not many exist. You seem to be ignoring the fact that for each of these students, there are hundreds with 580+ points that study in Irish Universities and get excellent degrees.

Also, in relation to Honours Maths, it doesn't consume that much more time than other subjects. It does not deserve an extra 25 points. Also, I think it's a shame that people with 575+Honours Maths will be claiming to have 600 points, when others with 6 A1s in Options an Languages had to work far harder to receive the same score.

Doc.Hpatgrind · 05-08-2012 11:53am

For those of you who are nervous about the cao offers or unhappy with your hpat scores, my message is don't worry. In my first year at it I did the courses and got 156 which is not a great score but okay. I was obviously disappointed and hated the hpat but then I went on into physiotherapy in UCD and had a great year while working on my hpat. I began to notice so many patterns and little sly tricks in them that just repeated and repeated and I took note of all of them. As soon as I began avoiding these traps and recognizing these patterns my scores went miles up and when I repeated the hpat I got in the top percentile and a score of 215. So to all of you who are nervous or unhappy, if you really want to get into this course you can. Just because you failed first time does not mean it's all over. Best of luck

Darksider · 05-08-2012 4:24pm

nogivingup wrote: »

Oh because you are so knowledgable because you have friends in Medicine? How would you know if there was mention of LC points or not? Were you there? No. Was I there? Yes.
When I said ridiculed, I meant in a far more good-natured way than all of you are all taking it to mean.

Also, Darksider, you are naive if you are shocked by such elitism.

Also, the later post about people with 400 points studying Medicine abroad: how many of these people do you know personally? I doubt you know any, not many exist. You seem to be ignoring the fact that for each of these students, there are hundreds with 580+ points that study in Irish Universities and get excellent degrees.

Also, in relation to Honours Maths, it doesn't consume that much more time than other subjects. It does not deserve an extra 25 points. Also, I think it's a shame that people with 575+Honours Maths will be claiming to have 600 points, when others with 6 A1s in Options an Languages had to work far harder to receive the same score.

Yes I know of 2 people in final year abroad, one in sudan, the other in romania. Both were in the 400s. I also know a guy who went to india to do dentistry who was also in the 400s. He graduated and is currently working on the exams needed to work over here.

Anyways, as long as I get admission I couldn't care less for futile internet arguments. I only need 505 points anyways :L

jumpguy · 05-08-2012 4:33pm

Darksider wrote: »

wow are they really the type of people i'm going to study with in medicine? ridiculing someone for getting below 560 even though they still got admission?

Not everyone you study with is going to be pleasant (naturally), but I've never come across elitism in terms of points (yet.) At least not in humoured jest between good friends. :P

*Everything HPAT and Medicine 2012*

Comments

Everything HPAT and Medicine 2012