HPAT

holadivaldfe

Cillbill wrote: »

Hey guys ,
Well done to everyone who sat the HPAT and if you done well you should be proud of yourself.

This year I devoted myself to getting into medicine and basically lived a life of study . I didn't find it as easy as some claim as I had to strive to solve challenging maths problems daily and forego my music and sports. It was very difficult to be so diligent but I kept imagining myself sitting in that lecture hall studying a course I loved, I therefore concluded it would all be worth it.

I woke up at 6 a.m Monday morning bursting with excitement to view my HPAT results as I felt like it had gone excellently considering the low concentration level on the day. Looking at the score 150, made my heart drop . Had all my dreams gone out the window?

The max score I can now receive is 710 which is unlikely. But if I did get this would those in the know please tell me is it possible to attain a place?

I totally agree with the HPAT even though it did not serve me well this year but I think saying if someone did badly in it they are not intelligent enough for medicine is a highly ignorant comment. Personally I felt sick on the day and was not able to achieve to my highest potential. I know this because I aced the UKCAT.

For now I pray and hope against all hope that I get a break.
Well done to everyone and remember,
enjoy the summer and whatever happens , happens for the best even though it may not seem like it now .

cibill i feel your pain and know many just like you who did very good leaving certs and worked hard and deserved to get it. everything you said was on the button. the hpat is good but some people's scores don't actually reflect their ability at all. i know someone u used to get amoung the top in the practise and got below 20% in the real thing. he doesn't know what happened. 2 and a half hours of madness, and it's all over for some and then there's others who are pleasantly surprised and normally didn't do so well.

although the majority of the top scorers are very clever and well done!

JSK 252

JSK 252 wrote: »

Im the firm believer in beating the system.

Intelligence is involved in trying to learn off essays whether they are yours or not! If you say otherwise then you are highly mistaken as memory is an integral part of intelligence This is the LC! nobody cares if you wrote your essay off the cuff or not!

There's a difference in learning something off by heart and plagiarism.

Of course for the LC you have to learn a huge amount of information off by heart, it's inherent of the exam. But as for learning off essays that you didn't write, that isn't in the nature of the exam and it is just cheating. Maybe nobody does care if the essay is "off the cuff" or not, but at the least the student should. I'd rather fail an exam than spout out a pre-learned essay verbatim (especially one that isn't your own). Why? Because I want to give myself an education, and learning off another's essays isn't the way to do that.

cantona56

JW91 wrote: »

Cantona56,
You seem to have taken great offence to my post. Fair play to you for working and whatever but the reality is that if you did bad in the HPAT it probably means you aren't intelligent enough for medicine. This is fair enough as not everyone is like Einstein.

But to back up my point. Obviously you need to learn off definitions etc for things like Chemistry and Biology. What I meant by my comment is that if you for example learned off an essay for Irish, say it was an essay you got off the internet or one your teacher gave you and then you reproduce this exact essay in the exam then you have cheated.

If you learn off essays for subjects like Irish and English that aren't entirely your own work and then use them on the day then you are a cheat.

Your no better than the guy that brings notes into the exam hall and looks at them during the tests. And in fact I have more respect for the guy that brings in the notes as doing that takes serious guts.

i have been warned not to get personal but im very close to getting a red card here!!:mad:

JSK 252

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

There's a difference in learning something off by heart and plagiarism.

Of course for the LC you have to learn a huge amount of information off by heart, it's inherent of the exam. But as for learning off essays that you didn't write, that isn't in the nature of the exam and it is just cheating. Maybe nobody does care if the essay is "off the cuff" or not, but at the least the student should. I'd rather fail an exam than spout out a pre-learned essay verbatim (especially one that isn't your own). Why? Because I want to give myself an education, and learning off another's essays isn't the way to do that.

Im sorry to tell you this but your sentiments are not the status quo where Im from anyway and I can tell whole honestly people who are getting high points are learning like parrots! Well thats the story down here in Cork anyway! Dont know about the rest of the cohort around the country

JSK 252

cantona56 wrote: »

i have been warned not to get personal but im very close to getting a red card here!!:mad:

I dare you to do the kungfu kick like he did in the crystal palace match!:D

Xtina!!

holadivaldfe wrote: »

cibill i feel your pain and know many just like you who did very good leaving certs and worked hard and deserved to get it. everything you said was on the button. the hpat is good but some people's scores don't actually reflect their ability at all. i know someone u used to get amoung the top in the practise and got below 20% in the real thing. he doesn't know what happened. 2 and a half hours of madness, and it's all over for some and then there's others who are pleasantly surprised and normally didn't do so well.

although the majority of the top scorers are very clever and well done!

I'm in exactly the same boat. 2 and a half hours that just went wrong. Time to consider plan B.....

JSK 252

JSK 252 wrote: »

Im sorry to tell you this but your sentiments are not the status quo where Im from anyway and I can tell whole honestly people who are getting high points are learning like parrots! Well thats the story down here in Cork anyway! Dont know about the rest of the cohort around the country

I know they aren't, my views are undoubtedly in the very small minority. Anyway, people can do what they want, it's their own life. But, in my opinion, learning off another's essay is a pointless act; it's pointless in the sense that you're fooling nobody but yourself.

Anyway, this is wildly off-topic.

holadivaldfe

i do admire your idealistic view of the world jammy, and your high moral standards, propriety and respect of raw intellect. i do. but there's a time and place for it. i'm afraid the leaving cert aint the place and this century aint the time jammy.

the phrase "cutting off the nose despite the face" springs to mind.

but don't let me stop you or anyone else for that matter, the competition is steep enough as it is!!

Indeed. I must be living in both the wrong time and wrong place, so. I'll still hold on to my quixotic view of education, though. Sure, as you imply, being a rote-learning drone is the only way to achieve high points (sarcasm).

Edit: Also, I believe the phrase you're looking for is "cutting off the nose to spite the face", which seems amazingly irrelevant to this conversation.

medcon

Exactly JSK 252,

The ability to understand and reproduce vast amounts of complex information is the key to passing exams in leaving cert and in medicine. Anyone who is of the opinion that pure "intelligence" - as apparently detected by the HPAT - is sufficient to get you through med school is seriously misguided. A reliance on one's "intelligence" can lead to one's massively inflated ego receiving a sharp pinprick when one is presented with one's end of semester exam results. I've witnessed this occurring, and it's not pleasant. Passing in medical school is mainly hard graft, whether you like it or not, and if you're not prepared to accept this fact maybe another course - something requiring only "intelligence" - would be more suited to you.

medcon

holadivaldfe

JW91 wrote: »

Cantona56,
You seem to have taken great offence to my post. Fair play to you for working and whatever but the reality is that if you did bad in the HPAT it probably means you aren't intelligent enough for medicine.

Your no better than the guy that brings notes into the exam hall and looks at them during the tests. And in fact I have more respect for the guy that brings in the notes as doing that takes serious guts.

let me just say that the 2.5 hours went well for some not for others, that can easily happen. what if someone's not sleeping well since their grandmother died the week before or they have a flu or they're wrecked from the mocks or they ran over their dog on the way to the test??? how could you be so callous as to insult someone you don't know like that and automatically assume they had the same chance as everyone else despite the fact that you don't know them. i did ok in the hpat but i am grateful i didn't have a headcold or too much drama in my life etc. everyone who did very well should be. the margin is TINY in fairness, and it was multiple choice so odds are some got unlucky while others got lucky.

if u were to be so harsh, judgemental and assuming with patients, you'd be given a land if not struck off eventually.

yes, some people want med who won't be able for it ever but it's not your place to tell them, especially if don't know them, and ESPECIALLY based on the friggin hpat results.

i also quoted the bit where you showed respect for those who actually cheat. cheating is very unethical, correct? it's recognised by all authorities as very serious. i know from having applied to med schools in the uk that if they detected that you held those sentiments, they wouldn't accept you. doctors should be law-abiding, honest citizens who understand the code of ethics and have utmost respect for human rights.

i'm not accusing you of not being a law abiding citizen or anything of the sort (how would i know?!), but i am accusing you of running your mouth without thinkning, being ott, cruel, discriminatory and just plain rude.

this is why they invented bells.

holadivaldfe

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Indeed. I must be living in both the wrong time and wrong place, so. I'll still hold on to my quixotic view of education, though. Sure, as you imply, being a rote-learning drone is the only way to achieve high points (sarcasm).

now everyone who learns things off is so beneath you that they're a "drone".

u strike me as such a warm humble character (sarcasm)

holadivaldfe

holadivaldfe wrote: »

now everyone who learns things off is so beneath you that they're a "drone".

u strike me as such a warm humble character (sarcasm)

Do you enjoy both purposely misinterpreting and taking out of context what I say? Look at my previous post, I said that obviously you had to rote learn large amounts of information for the LC, I said it's inherent of the exam. Now, this is where I draw the distinction: I said it's not ok to rote-learn somebody else's work. I said that it's not ok to plagiarise.

To quote you:

cheating is very unethical, correct? it's recognised by all authorities as very serious. i know from having applied to med schools in the uk that if they detected that you held those sentiments, they wouldn't accept you. doctors should be law-abiding, honest citizens who understand the code of ethics and have utmost respect for human rights.

In my opinion cheating = plagiarism. That was my point. I didn't say anywhere that I thought rote-learning in general was wrong. I said that rote-learning another's work was wrong. And you seem to agree.

holadivaldfe

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Do you enjoy both purposely misinterpreting and taking out of context what I say? Look at my previous post, I said that obviously you had to rote learn large amounts of information for the LC, I said it's inherent of the exam. Now, this is where I draw the distinction: I said it's not ok to rote-learn somebody else's work. I said that it's not ok to plagiarise.

To quote you:



In my opinion cheating = plagiarism. That was my point. I didn't say anywhere that I thought rote-learning in general was wrong. I said that rote-learning another's work was wrong. And you seem to agree.

he was talking about people who physically carry slips of paper with answers written on it into the exam. granted i can't imagine anyone being so silly as to attempt that but that's waht he was refering to. learing off things for the leaving cert's not cheating. i don't agree with you at all, get used to it.

sure according to you follens should be out of business, maybe we should wander the hills and frollick in the wind until the relevant course material pops into our heads and stays there. or, we could read books, underline important facts and later learn them off for the exams. it's actually advised that we do that. those of us who live on planet earth.

it's like your sucking on a lemon and you won't stop!

holadivaldfe

holadivaldfe wrote: »

he was talking about people who physically carry slips of paper with answers written on it into the exam. granted i can't imagine anyone being so silly as to attempt that but that's waht he was refering to.

That isn't all he was talking about. Maybe you would see what he was talking about if you didn't selectively quote. Here, I'll quote it for you:

JW91 wrote:

If you learn off essays for subjects like Irish and English that aren't entirely your own work and then use them on the day then you are a cheat.

Your no better than the guy that brings notes into the exam hall and looks at them during the tests. And in fact I have more respect for the guy that brings in the notes as doing that takes serious guts.

You'll see that he was making the comparison that those who rote-learn off another's work (i.e. plagiarism) to reproduce on the day is tantamount to physically cheating. This is the comparison that I made. You'll see in my prevous post I said, and I quote: "cheating = plagiarism".

learing off things for the leaving cert's not cheating. i don't agree with you at all, get used to it.

I know it's not cheating. I'll say this for the third time (and if you check back over my prevous posts you'll see that I've explicitly said this twice). Learning off information for the LC is inherent of the exam. It's impossible to do well in the exam without learning information off, simple. I completely agree with that statement.

Now, this is where I draw the distinction: rote-learning another person's work with the intention of reproduction in an exam is plagiarism, and therefore is cheating. Do you not agree? You previously said that cheating was "very unethical" and that doctors should abide by the law and by ethics. In that case, they shouldn't plagiarise, hence they shouldn't learn off another's essay to reproduce in a LC exam.

sure according to you follens should be out of business, maybe we should wander the hills and frollick in the wind until the relevant course material pops into our heads and stays there. or, we could read books, underline important facts and later learn them off for the exams. it's actually advised that we do that. those of us who live on planet earth.

How you infer this from any of my posts is beyond me.

it's like your sucking on a lemon and you won't stop!

Yes, I'm sure it is.

holadivaldfe

i know he was making a comparison but he said he has MORE RESPECT for actual hard core cheaters! :eek:

next, there's no such thing as plagiarism in the leaving cert. lots of teachers write up sample answers on the boards and praise students that learn it off. in fact they even publish these answers in the newspaper and in books.

as far as i can see you hold two contrasting opinions at the same time and you just don't want to admit that i (and most others) have a valid point.

i'm not going to waste anymore energy on this absurd argument. no hard feelings dude (i don't know why but i think your a dude?!). my biggest problem, and the main reason i'm arguing so vehemently about this is that decent people are being insulted for no logical reason.

the whole "you're not intelligent enough" rant is bang out of order.

so calm down as you're not the one who made those allegations are you?

good night.

seriously no hard feelings. i agree to differ.

funkylana

Whoa.

Talk about hostilities!

:eek:

holadivaldfe

funkylana wrote: »

Whoa.

Talk about hostilities!

:eek:

i know!! i've been trying to keep it as light as possible but i feel compelled to stand up for the insulted and degraded. i actually always do this, my parents want me to do law. no thank you though, i like my blood pressure as it is!

anyways the thread is way off topic now, partly my fault, sorry!

so back to the hpat.... or shall we just stay sane and forget about it untill august?!

the whole "you're not intelligent enough" rant is bang out of order.

I agree with you here. It's just a hurtful and extremely arrogant claim for somebody to make.

Anyway, yah, let's leave it at that.


Oh, and to the Mods, sorry for dragging this thread painfully off topic.:pac:

holadivaldfe

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

I agree with you here. It's just a hurtful and extremely arrogant claim for somebody to make.

Anyway, yah, let's leave it at that.


Oh, and to the Mods, sorry for dragging this thread painfully off topic.:pac:

well said, i agree with you this time!

funkylana

holadivaldfe wrote: »

i know!! i've been trying to keep it as light as possible but i feel compelled to stand up for the insulted and degraded. i actually always do this, my parents want me to do law. no thank you though, i like my blood pressure as it is!

anyways the thread is way off topic now, partly my fault, sorry!

so back to the hpat.... or shall we just stay sane and forget about it untill august?!

haha i know the feeling- the debating mentality starts to kick in! got to stick up for the little guys:D
yeah everything about the hpat just depresses me now! and to think, merely a few days ago it represented hope....i have now come to the conclusion that hope is a myth! and yet i still come onto this thread everytime i get the chance lol.
ahh no, i'm disappointed but not depressed- i'm a firm believer in the 'everything happens for the better/when God closes a door, he opens a window' kind of philosophy, so we'll see what happens!:)

Butterz

funkylana wrote: »

ahh no, i'm disappointed but not depressed- i'm a firm believer in the 'everything happens for the better/when God closes a door, he opens a window' kind of philosophy, so we'll see what happens!:)

straight_As

medcon wrote: »

Straight_As,

I'm just after finishing another year of medicine, and I'd like to give you an insight into what is actually involved in doing the course in college. What is wrong with learning by heart? Medicine is a career that is based upon knowledge, and that knowledge, like it or not, can only be obtained by learning off by heart. You need to have the ability to learn off and reproduce on paper pages upon pages of drugs, diseases and diagnoses. From your first day in medical school until the day you retire from practicing medicine you need to be able to remember seemingly useless facts. You won't need to indicate which shape comes next in a series of four.

Of course you need intelligence, but your problem solving ability is limited by the extent of your knowledge - which of course has been learned off by heart.

Therefore I believe that the leaving cert is a perfectly sufficient measure of one's aptitude for medicine. What for you contributes to an actual aptitude for medicine?

Please explain in greater detail how the leaving cert English course is an adequate gauge of one's interpersonal abilities? Communicating on paper is not the same as communicating in person - I know one or two "lab-rats" out there who got A1s in LC English.

Regards,

medcon

Well, I'm not in university yet, so my opinions are based on various accounts I've heard, and also my perceptions only on my educational experience thus far.

If you check my previous posts, you'll see that my opinions used to be very much in line with those of you yourself. I believed, naively, that the ability to vomit information onto a page was the ultimate necessity for a medical career, that understanding was futile when one could 'eat the book'.

I was always told of the excruciating difficulty of the LC, and how any subject that encourages intuition, such as maths, app maths, chemistry, physics, even some of the systems in biology (despite the fact these subjects are mostly oversimplified for LC), was impossible.

This, however, is not the case. The difficulty of the scientific subjects is such that as one's UNDERSTANDING increases, the amount and accuracy of what needs to be learned decreases. Certainly, detail is necessary, but detail, without a contextualizing understanding, is pointless, not applicable, and frankly, displays a lack discernment for the relevance and importance of the studied material. I think it may have been on this board but I once read something which, in essence, stated that if one understands something, they know it for life. Obviously, this understanding would be of little help when listing medicines, but at the same time, to administer and prescribe these medicines, a cumulative understanding of the disease mechanism, the patient's history and also the EFFECT of the drug (not just its name) and reasons for the effects, is required. Speaking as an onlooker, and that's all I am yet, I would classify these key traits as having twice the importance of the clerical competency required in correctly naming a drug.

I am planning on sitting the UKCAT soon and I recently read an interesting analysis of the relevance of its abstract reasoning section, or as you say, which shape comes next. To surmise the rather wordy paragraph, basically, the UCKAT tests abstract reasoning as such aptitudes are seen as important in acknowledging patterns in patients' conditions and recognition of relevant data. Now, granted, to apply this whilst diagnosing, one must have knowledge of disease and symptoms, but to belittle its importance is extremely ignorant.
The piece further continues, saying that abstract reasoning is key in medical research, citing an ability to recognise patterns as important in establishing links between various scientific parameters, from which a discovery or well thought-out conclusion can be drawn.

My opinions are also based on the numerous other students I know personally who want to study medicine. The overwhelming majority have little to none scientific, or indeed, rational intuition. Most learn English and Irish essays verbatim, and what's worse, they think it classifies them as proficient, or hilariously, some think it shows them to be gifted! The time they spend learning these essays is insane. If they spent these hours drafting ideas, insights, and most importantly, their opinions on the material, they would increase their chances of getting an A1. This aside, and probably most important, they would be affording themselves a real education, which would be of life time benefit, not one custom built for the LC and derived from the IOE's predictions.

For many, maths, chem and physics are no-goes. These subjects require some logical thought in explaining ideas and so, many med applicants I know, suck at these. Instead,they see the mission of these subjects is solely matriculation based.

Finally, medcon, may I say that just because you are, or are training to be, a doctor, does not mean you are more capable than some students who failed to get into the course because they respect and value self directed thought more than parroting. I have met some doctors who obviously got 600 points in the LC but due to their ignorance in thoroughly understanding the chemical and physiological nature of medicine, instead seeing it as giant hackable exam, have had severe negative impacts on my family.

I truly hope that aspiring medics of 2009 remember this: your mandate is to help people through a thorough comprehension of science, not through passing some arbitrary test.

PS: If -JammyDodger- decided to become a doctor, his integrity, helpfulness and genuine capacity to understand complex data would, in my eyes, far out-qualify him to study medicine, compared to any other applicants posting on this board. His attitude is what you all should be aspiring to.

holadivaldfe

i'm the same. i keep promising myself i'll forget about it until august but i just can't!! it's like as if a part of me thinks obsessing over will make it work out ok, which if anything it will do the opposite.

the thing is though, as a good student one usually has control over their results to a certain extent and having that taken away is a cold hard slp in the face. ouch!

but you have a great attitude, so things will work out in the end. sometimes bad things happen to me, and at the time i'm devastated but later on i look back and i'm grateful for it as it thought me things about myself and life i'd never have learned otherwise. still sucks at the time though, always does!

my plan of action is to throw myself into excercise, partying, and relaxation. how bad? :pac: i've also started reading a HUGE novel i won't finish it until 3008. that should wean me of hpat panic and back to normal life.

i'm afraid on offers day i'll b like a kid waiting at the foot of the fireplace thinking i see santa's boots, then the man climbs out and it's actually the grim reaper. DUN DUN DUN!

but in the grand scheme of things, there's a lot worse that could happen to you! i'm going to try anf remember that also.

good night, and i really mean it this time.

i think. :rolleyes:

funkylana

straight_As wrote: »

PS: If -JammyDodger- decided to become a doctor, his integrity, helpfulness and genuine capacity to understand complex data would, in my eyes, far out-qualify him to study medicine, compared to any other applicants posting on this board. His attitude is what you all should be aspiring to.

sheesh why don't you just go and make out with him?!;)

haha

KnifeWRENCH

OK this off topic tangent has gone on long enough. Everyone please get back on topic and keep this discussion about the HPATs.

If someone wants to start an argument about the flaws of the LC system and whether rote-learning essays is acceptable or not, start another thread.

Thank you.

medcon

straight_As wrote: »

Well, I'm not in university yet, so my opinions are based on various accounts I've heard, and also my perceptions only on my educational experience thus far.

If you check my previous posts, you'll see that my opinions used to be very much in line with those of you yourself. I believed, naively, that the ability to vomit information onto a page was the ultimate necessity for a medical career, that understanding was futile when one could 'eat the book'.

I was always told of the excruciating difficulty of the LC, and how any subject that encourages intuition, such as maths, app maths, chemistry, physics, even some of the systems in biology (despite the fact these subjects are mostly oversimplified for LC), was impossible.

This, however, is not the case. The difficulty of the scientific subjects is such that as one's UNDERSTANDING increases, the amount and accuracy of what needs to be learned decreases. Certainly, detail is necessary, but detail, without a contextualizing understanding, is pointless, not applicable, and frankly, displays a lack discernment for the relevance and importance of the studied material. I think it may have been on this board but I once read something which, in essence, stated that if one understands something, they know it for life. Obviously, this understanding would be of little help when listing medicines, but at the same time, to administer and prescribe these medicines, a cumulative understanding of the disease mechanism, the patient's history and also the EFFECT of the drug (not just its name) and reasons for the effects, is required. Speaking as an onlooker, and that's all I am yet, I would classify these key traits as having twice the importance of the clerical competency required in correctly naming a drug.

I am planning on sitting the UKCAT soon and I recently read an interesting analysis of the relevance of its abstract reasoning section, or as you say, which shape comes next. To surmise the rather wordy paragraph, basically, the UCKAT tests abstract reasoning as such aptitudes are seen as important in acknowledging patterns in patients' conditions and recognition of relevant data. Now, granted, to apply this whilst diagnosing, one must have knowledge of disease and symptoms, but to belittle its importance is extremely ignorant.
The piece further continues, saying that abstract reasoning is key in medical research, citing an ability to recognise patterns as important in establishing links between various scientific parameters, from which a discovery or well thought-out conclusion can be drawn.

My opinions are also based on the numerous other students I know personally who want to study medicine. The overwhelming majority have little to none scientific, or indeed, rational intuition. Most learn English and Irish essays verbatim, and what's worse, they think it classifies them as proficient, or hilariously, some think it shows them to be gifted! The time they spend learning these essays is insane. If they spent these hours drafting ideas, insights, and most importantly, their opinions on the material, they would increase their chances of getting an A1. This aside, and probably most important, they would be affording themselves a real education, which would be of life time benefit, not one custom built for the LC and derived from the IOE's predictions.

For many, maths, chem and physics are no-goes. These subjects require some logical thought in explaining ideas and so, many med applicants I know, suck at these. Instead,they see the mission of these subjects is solely matriculation based.

Finally, medcon, may I say that just because you are, or are training to be, a doctor, does not mean you are more capable than some students who failed to get into the course because they respect and value self directed thought more than parroting. I have met some doctors who obviously got 600 points in the LC but due to their ignorance in thoroughly understanding the chemical and physiological nature of medicine, instead seeing it as giant hackable exam, have had severe negative impacts on my family.

I truly hope that aspiring medics of 2009 remember this: your mandate is to help people through a thorough comprehension of science, not through passing some arbitrary test.

PS: If -JammyDodger- decided to become a doctor, his integrity, helpfulness and genuine capacity to understand complex data would, in my eyes, far out-qualify him to study medicine, compared to any other applicants posting on this board. His attitude is what you all should be aspiring to.

Straight_As

Of course an inherent understanding of the material to be learnt decreases the amount of hours spent studying and allows one to excel without the huge work load that I imagine would be required to learn off information that one does not understand. However, the fact that even at leaving cert this is true, only further proves my point: the leaving cert is an exam which adequately examines ones aptitude to study medicine. If one cannot grasp, comprehend, commit to memory and consequently reproduce leaving cert material, then perhaps medicine is not for them. The ability to do the above, in my experience anyhow, is enough to carry one through medical school.

And as for your point about abstract reasoning, I actually believe that it goes against the point of medicine, as reasoning, when involving a patient's health, should always be more than abstract and should come from a sound foundation of knowledge and experience. Just because something appears to make sense does not always mean that it actually does.

medcon

Kwekubo

straight_As wrote: »

I think it may have been on this board but I once read something which, in essence, stated that if one understands something, they know it for life. Obviously, this understanding would be of little help when listing medicines, but at the same time, to administer and prescribe these medicines, a cumulative understanding of the disease mechanism, the patient's history and also the EFFECT of the drug (not just its name) and reasons for the effects, is required. Speaking as an onlooker, and that's all I am yet, I would classify these key traits as having twice the importance of the clerical competency required in correctly naming a drug.

But it's not just drug names - memorising their mechanisms of action, side effects, interactions, the related disease mechanisms, et al., all require rote learning too. Learning huge amounts of details by heart is the only way to get to grips with such massive amounts of seemingly random material.

ALincoln

straight_As wrote: »

Well, I'm not in university yet, so my opinions are based on various accounts I've heard, and also my perceptions only on my educational experience thus far.

If you check my previous posts, you'll see that my opinions used to be very much in line with those of you yourself. I believed, naively, that the ability to vomit information onto a page was the ultimate necessity for a medical career, that understanding was futile when one could 'eat the book'.

I was always told of the excruciating difficulty of the LC, and how any subject that encourages intuition, such as maths, app maths, chemistry, physics, even some of the systems in biology (despite the fact these subjects are mostly oversimplified for LC), was impossible.

This, however, is not the case. The difficulty of the scientific subjects is such that as one's UNDERSTANDING increases, the amount and accuracy of what needs to be learned decreases. Certainly, detail is necessary, but detail, without a contextualizing understanding, is pointless, not applicable, and frankly, displays a lack discernment for the relevance and importance of the studied material. I think it may have been on this board but I once read something which, in essence, stated that if one understands something, they know it for life. Obviously, this understanding would be of little help when listing medicines, but at the same time, to administer and prescribe these medicines, a cumulative understanding of the disease mechanism, the patient's history and also the EFFECT of the drug (not just its name) and reasons for the effects, is required. Speaking as an onlooker, and that's all I am yet, I would classify these key traits as having twice the importance of the clerical competency required in correctly naming a drug.

I am planning on sitting the UKCAT soon and I recently read an interesting analysis of the relevance of its abstract reasoning section, or as you say, which shape comes next. To surmise the rather wordy paragraph, basically, the UCKAT tests abstract reasoning as such aptitudes are seen as important in acknowledging patterns in patients' conditions and recognition of relevant data. Now, granted, to apply this whilst diagnosing, one must have knowledge of disease and symptoms, but to belittle its importance is extremely ignorant.
The piece further continues, saying that abstract reasoning is key in medical research, citing an ability to recognise patterns as important in establishing links between various scientific parameters, from which a discovery or well thought-out conclusion can be drawn.

My opinions are also based on the numerous other students I know personally who want to study medicine. The overwhelming majority have little to none scientific, or indeed, rational intuition. Most learn English and Irish essays verbatim, and what's worse, they think it classifies them as proficient, or hilariously, some think it shows them to be gifted! The time they spend learning these essays is insane. If they spent these hours drafting ideas, insights, and most importantly, their opinions on the material, they would increase their chances of getting an A1. This aside, and probably most important, they would be affording themselves a real education, which would be of life time benefit, not one custom built for the LC and derived from the IOE's predictions.

For many, maths, chem and physics are no-goes. These subjects require some logical thought in explaining ideas and so, many med applicants I know, suck at these. Instead,they see the mission of these subjects is solely matriculation based.

Finally, medcon, may I say that just because you are, or are training to be, a doctor, does not mean you are more capable than some students who failed to get into the course because they respect and value self directed thought more than parroting. I have met some doctors who obviously got 600 points in the LC but due to their ignorance in thoroughly understanding the chemical and physiological nature of medicine, instead seeing it as giant hackable exam, have had severe negative impacts on my family.

I truly hope that aspiring medics of 2009 remember this: your mandate is to help people through a thorough comprehension of science, not through passing some arbitrary test.

PS: If -JammyDodger- decided to become a doctor, his integrity, helpfulness and genuine capacity to understand complex data would, in my eyes, far out-qualify him to study medicine, compared to any other applicants posting on this board. His attitude is what you all should be aspiring to.

It's the most excruciatingly diffficult exam you sit...until you get to college. Then you'll see what it's like to tackle a test in a very hard subject without the rampant spoon feeding of secondary school.

HQvhs

ALincoln wrote: »

It's the most excruciatingly diffficult exam you sit...until you get to college. Then you'll see what it's like to tackle a test in a very hard subject without the rampant spoon feeding of secondary school.

The leaving cert is a difficult exam, especially if you are aiming for the kind of points medicine requires. Achieving 480, let alone 550 or higher is no walk in the park. Medicine does indeed involve a huge amount of memorizing (Not rote-learning, this implies that you're remembering things without knowing why and I'd like to think doctors don't do that).

However, the HPAT too is a very difficult exam, but for a different reason. Unlike the leaving cert it cannot be prepared for. People who have always achieved good grades through through exam technique and preparation find this hard to come to terms with. I know I did! The HPAT preparation courses and in depth discussions about the test can make us feel like we can control the outcome to a significant degree. Unfortunately, this is not the case and the test is designed so that you cannot prepare for it.

This is why I think the complaints about the HPAT are more to do with the fact people aren't used to not being able to prepare for an exam rather than it being inherently unsuitable for measuring medicine hopefuls.

If you can achieve an excellent leaving cert and an excellent HPAT (Both required for medicine, let's face it, it'd be extremely tough to get in on 480) then you deserve medicine and you'll probably make a good doctor. It shows not only that you can put in the work, but that you have the ability also.
The problem with the old system was that you could take "easy" subjects and leave the harder ones such as languages, honours maths etc.

Of course there are flaws in the system, but ultimately I think it is better than the old one. Rather than making it easier to get into medicine, it's now more difficult. Interviews may improve the applications process also but unfortunately Ireland is too small for this to work fairly.