Traditional and GEM entry to Medicine

suspectpackage

tallaght01 wrote: »

A) You can repeat the exam as many times as you want, I've just found out!!!! Working or not, there's only so much time it takes to learn basic sciences. Plus it's hardly that difficult if you have any kind of science degree!!





I don't think that should inform policy, personally.




:rolleyes: The oul elitism thing again. I do think the public are owed a god standard of doc. I think elitism is better than defending a system because it benefits you more than it does the healthcare system. I'm not sure that's any better of a quality in a med student than elitism

Plus medicine is different. It and vet seem to be the only courses where GAMSAT is used.

There has always been a back door into medicine. But it demanded very high standards. People used to either have to go back and sit the LC, or they had to do very well in a relevant degree. Fair enough, give a few more places to graduates proportionally, as we expand places. But not them all.

On one hand you have a 17 year old who has gotten 600 points in the LC by doing 2-3 hours studying per day (on top of school) over the course of two years.

On the other hand you have a 24-25 (not sure what the average age of a GEMer is? Probably close to 26-27 actually), who has already done 4 years in college and gotten a degree. Plenty more life experience than the young 17 year old and KNOWS what they want to do in life and is prepared to get a 100k loan to get into the course. Has covered Chemistry and Biology to A1 level in leaving cert imo, and also Organic Chem to college standard, and also some physics. As well as very good English skills and most likely A1 level at LC too.

Personally, I'd take the mature person who knows what they want over the 17 year old who has shown a work ethic but hasn't got the life experience of the older candidate.

Now, there is another point. You question the merits of the GEMer AFTER the course.

However, the GEMer has gone through an intensive 4 year course and has the same qualifications that the pimply faced teenager will get eventually. So how are they any less qualified to be good or bad after the course? Didn't the GEMer get a 100k loan to do the course? Did they do that so they could do the course and then piss about afterwards?

finty

tallaght01 wrote: »

I'm also not saying you shouldn't have a right to change your mind.You should have that right, to an extent. It shouldn't be at the cost of some kid not being able to make his choice for the first time, though.

Were you not going on about life not being fair a few posts ago? What about people repeating the leaving cert? Should we all get one go at the leaving cert, get a score and have to live the rest of our life by that? And you go on about aleviating the horrendous pressure on young people doing the leaving cert?

tallaght01 wrote: »

If you'd read the thread above, me and 2scoops were actually talking about how grad entry for all would be the fairest way to do med school. Have a read through the above posts to see that.

But it's very very hard to see how GAMSAT is better for healthcare....people with generally lower LC scores, who won't intercalate, places wasted at third level by people wanting a stepping stone to med, people with a 2:2 in tough degrees not even allowed sit the exam.

So does your plan of graduate entry for all result in "wasted" places at 3rd level? Was your 1st degree wasted?

tallaght01 wrote: »

A) You can repeat the exam as many times as you want, I've just found out!!!! Working or not, there's only so much time it takes to learn basic sciences. Plus it's hardly that difficult if you have any kind of science degree!!

you can go back and do the leaving cert as many times as you want. What exactly is your point here?

The GAMSAT tests peoples application of their scientific knowledge. Science subjects in the leaving cert are based on a set curriculum, learn it all off and you get 100%.

The leaving cert doesnt in any way test peoples ability to reason and solve problems, GAMSAT does. Surely these abilities are important in a good doctor?

tallaght01

finty wrote: »

Were you not going on about life not being fair a few posts ago? What about people repeating the leaving cert? Should we all get one go at the leaving cert, get a score and have to live the rest of our life by that? And you go on about aleviating the horrendous pressure on young people doing the leaving cert?



So does your plan of graduate entry for all result in "wasted" places at 3rd level? Was your 1st degree wasted?



you can go back and do the leaving cert as many times as you want. What exactly is your point here?

The GAMSAT tests peoples application of their scientific knowledge. Science subjects in the leaving cert are based on a set curriculum, learn it all off and you get 100%.

The leaving cert doesnt in any way test peoples ability to reason and solve problems, GAMSAT does. Surely these abilities are important in a good doctor?

Of course you should be allowed repeat the leaving. But doing that takes a lot more commitment than doing GAMSAT. Plus to repeat the leaving to get good points you have to do 6 papers. it's not comparable to the GAMSAT. You can proaly d GAMSAT 4 times in one year. It just seems a bit too easy to do that.

The way i think graduate entry should work (if you'd read above rather than just jumping in because you're angry) is that everyone does a pre-health science 'degree'. So, you do your basic biomedical sciences and some pathology for 2 years or whatever. Then, you all apply for whatever courses you want...physio,med, pharm, whatever. On a competitive basis. Very much like the U.S system.

My first degree wasn't wasted as it was biomedical sciences. If I'd taken up a physio degree that would arguably have been a place wasted.

Problem solving is all very well. It is important. But if you can problem-solve to the extent that you can pass honours maths, or honours physics, which the majority of medicine candidates from the LC will have done, then that's evidence enough. What they also have, that the GAMSAT people don't seem to have as much f, is evidence that they've cracked their nuts for 2 years, and can recall lots of information under pressure.

I know that's annoying to hear. But I guess I'm just more concerned about what's good for patients, rather than what's good for you. But I do see your point, and you have to be concerned for your own career.

But let's not kid ourselves that GAMSAT was the best they could come up with. It was the most convenient. Getting annoyed won't change that.

DrIndy

This whole moronic perception of elitist medicine actually pisses me off - please desist in using the phrase. It is only used by people who cannot achieve the entrance requirements - no medical class is at any times elitist - although despite the best efforts to the contrary, that is all that is perceived by certain envious other parts of society.

This is an example of Godwins law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Instead of an reductio ad Hitlerum - we instead have an reductio ad electissimus. If you cannot counter Tallaght01's salient counterarguments without referring to the word "elitism" - then stop (I would post similar points but he has beaten me to it).

MicraBoy

I know that's annoying to hear. But I guess I'm just more concerned about what's good for patients, rather than what's good for you. But I do see your point, and you have to be concerned for your own career.

But let's not kid ourselves that GAMSAT was the best they could come up with. It was the most convenient. Getting annoyed won't change that.

What's annoying to hear is your sweeping generalisation that people who do GAMSAT have not worked hard in:

A) Leaving Cert
Primary degree/Postgraduate level
C) Studying for GAMSAT.

We can discuss the merits of GAMSAT with out insulting the work ethic of those who choose to take it.

And then in the ultimate pot/kettle/blackism yourself and Indy get your knickers in a twist over being called elitist.

finty

tallaght01 wrote: »

Of course you should be allowed repeat the leaving. But doing that takes a lot more commitment than doing GAMSAT. Plus to repeat the leaving to get good points you have to do 6 papers. it's not comparable to the GAMSAT. You can proaly d GAMSAT 4 times in one year. It just seems a bit too easy to do that.

The way i think graduate entry should work (if you'd read above rather than just jumping in because you're angry) is that everyone does a pre-health science 'degree'. So, you do your basic biomedical sciences and some pathology for 2 years or whatever. Then, you all apply for whatever courses you want...physio,med, pharm, whatever. On a competitive basis. Very much like the U.S system.

My first degree wasn't wasted as it was biomedical sciences. If I'd taken up a physio degree that would arguably have been a place wasted.

Problem solving is all very well. It is important. But if you can problem-solve to the extent that you can pass honours maths, or honours physics, which the majority of medicine candidates from the LC will have done, then that's evidence enough. What they also have, that the GAMSAT people don't seem to have as much f, is evidence that they've cracked their nuts for 2 years, and can recall lots of information under pressure.

I know that's annoying to hear. But I guess I'm just more concerned about what's good for patients, rather than what's good for you. But I do see your point, and you have to be concerned for your own career.

But let's not kid ourselves that GAMSAT was the best they could come up with. It was the most convenient. Getting annoyed won't change that.

Who is angry? Just because I've pointed out the contradictions in your argument from one post to the next I'm angry? amused more like.

How exactly is setting up a graduate entry programme more convenient than just increasing the number of undergrad medicine places?......I'd like this point explained, you've made it more than once.

tallaght01

Simple. It's quicker. they need more docs fast. So, they've made more places to get people out quickly. That's why it's convenient. A U.S style system wouldn't be palatable, as discussed above.Every single person in medicine knows that.

I never said GAMSATers don't work hard. I'm saying you don't need to have worked harder than the LC kids to get in.

Like I kept saying, we owe it to patients that people have worked very very very hard to get into medicine. A lot of GAMSATers haven't worked particularly hard. I work with lots of them, who did it after a few months study. But that's far from the only issue.

I know you don't like to hear that. I know Micraboy gets frustrated that people actually practising have concerns. You can call it elitist as often as you want. But, from what i can see, my concerns relate to healthcare of the population. His concerns relate to him. I could return the personal attacks on that basis, but I wouldn't do that. I'm finished arguing with those who have to resort to that kind of thing. But you need to able handle heated debate rationally and politely for a career in medicine. Patients will say things you don't like, and so will colleagues. people will attack your research. You can't turn around and tell them they're just being elitist lol.

Interestingly, GAMSAT is likely to become part of the medicine "industry" in years to come. It's starting to get that way in oz. The kids who would be the equivalent of 530 point LC students are now including their undergrad degree as part of the medicine process from the start. It's going to be interesting to see how it pans out.

finty

DrIndy wrote: »

This whole moronic perception of elitist medicine actually pisses me off - please desist in using the phrase. It is only used by people who cannot achieve the entrance requirements - no medical class is at any times elitist - although despite the best efforts to the contrary, that is all that is perceived by certain envious other parts of society.

DrIndy,

you are so funny!

The irony is someone who tells people not to use the term elitist; then goes on to say that someone who does is "moronic", couldn't "achieve the entrance requirements" and that its somehow borne of envy.


Let me paraphrase what you have just said.

Stop calling me elitist, I am just smarter than you morons and you are all jealous!!

HELLO!!

Hitler will be on next giving out that somebody called him a Nazi.

:rolleyes:

Goonerette

tallaght01 wrote: »

You can proaly d GAMSAT 4 times in one year. It just seems a bit too easy to do that.

Actually, you can't. It's only held once a year in each country.

sillymoo

These arguements are going around in circles.

Those who did well and got in doing the leaving cert deserve to be there. Yes a lot got in by repeating the leaving cert and going to "grind schools" but they still deserve their place. As far as I am aware you can also repeat the GAMSAT and pay for Gradmed courses and the like?

Those who got in via GEP also deserve to be there. They have also worked hard and are prepared to go into debt to do medicine.

It really is not fair to try and compare these two routes through Irish medical schools yet as the first GEP class is only due to graduate next year.

This thread has deviated way off topic and im surprised it has not been closed 2 pages ago.

tallaght01

sillymoo wrote: »

These arguements are going around in circles.

Those who did well and got in doing the leaving cert deserve to be there. Yes a lot got in by repeating the leaving cert and going to "grind schools" but they still deserve their place. As far as I am aware you can also repeat the GAMSAT and pay for Gradmed courses and the like?

Those who got in via GEP also deserve to be there. They have also worked hard and are prepared to go into debt to do medicine.

It really is not fair to try and compare these two routes through Irish medical schools yet as the first GEP class is only due to graduate next year.

This thread has deviated way off topic and im surprised it has not been closed 2 pages ago.

I think that's sort of ignoring the issue, though. it's a bit of a "why can't we all just get along" way of thinking.

I guess this is an issue of what benefits healthcare on the whole, and what benefits graduate students. It's not always easy to reconcile the two. It's a healthy debate to have. And it's a debate that goes on in hospitals everywhere.
I know it annoys people. But it's a debate that has a place.

sillymoo

No its not ignoring the issue. If anything you are ignoring the title of the thread.

The title of this thread is "Whats the strangest degree from a GEM student" and I dont think this is the place to discuss GEM entry V's LC entry and I think you as a moderator should have closed this thread when it went off topic.

But you are very much involved in the arguing so perhaps Indy or Sam should.

Yes the debate has its place but not on this thread.

tallaght01

But you were arguing the point too!!!!!

I would have had nothing to take issue with if you didn't.

'You can't just rock in and say "yea they all deserve a place etc etc, GAMSAT is fine" and then demand we stop talking about it.

I'm more than happy for the thread to be split, if the others want. We don't usually do that here for off topic stuff, as conversations evolve. But I have no probs with it.

sillymoo

tallaght01 wrote: »

But you were arguing the point too!!!!!

I would have had nothing to take issue with if you didn't.

'You can't just rock in and say "yea they all deserve a place etc etc, GAMSAT is fine" and then demand we stop talking about it.

I'm more than happy for the thread to be split, if the others want. We don't usually do that here for off topic stuff, as conversations evolve. But I have no probs with it.

But its ok for you to "rock in" and totally change the topic of a thread?????

tallaght01

What;s that got to do with the point I made to you?

People had long stopped talking about what degrees they had when I started getting heavily involved in that side of things.

But, like I said, we don't get too stressed about off topicness here, unless people are trying to take about the original topic intermittently.

DrIndy

Ok - topic split into two threads.

let the debate rock on - I will chuck in my 2c later on!

sillymoo

tallaght01 wrote: »

What;s that got to do with the point I made to you?

People had long stopped talking about what degrees they had when I started getting heavily involved in that side of things.

But, like I said, we don't get too stressed about off topicness here, unless people are trying to take about the original topic intermittently.

Yes I gave a balanced view. I did not argue the toss either way. There should be another thread for that argument.

You dont get stressed about off topicness as you brought it off topic.

What started as a nice thread has become you arguing against the GEP's which I dont think is fair.

I am not going to argue with you Tallaght as I have seen that arguing with you is pointless in a lot of cases so this is the last im going to say on this.

tallaght01

sillymoo wrote: »

I am not going to argue with you Tallaght as I have seen that arguing with you is pointless in a lot of cases so this is the last im going to say on this.

There's really no need to be wanky about things. It's just not called for, in fairness.

Whatever about the rest of your point, which a PM could have easily sorted, you're just being nasty now.

DrIndy

come on folks - lets step back.

tone it down.

amen

The high LC points proved someone was able for the heavy work load

not true. Just means you have good memory attention. And anyway learing in university is different from school.
Min entry requirements for medicene last time I checked were relatively easy (several honours) but of there is a lackof places so the points go up.

I think if you have a primary honours degree and want to to sit the Gem you should be allowed to.

I have a 2.2 in Physics from 1994 and at that time out of 30 who graudated there were 2 1.1s, 4 2.1s and the rest 2.2s (a few fails).

this year on the same course nearly everyone got a 1.1 or 2.1. The population hasn;t got smarted grades have inflated.

Lassiecomehome

Tallagh01, as someone who is a fan of referencable statistics, I'm sure you will be able to provide us with the papers which say that doctors which are trained from the age of 17 are better than those who start at a later age/come from a non-medical back-ground. Or is it's just your own conjecture which suggests otherwise. Please reference your suspicions that GEM is destroying medicine in Ireland.

finty

I started GEM 2 weeks ago. Of the 30 or so irish graduates in the class the vast majority come from a science and more specifically biological science background.

At our welcome meeting everybody stood up introduced themselves and gave their background. Degrees varied from physiotherapists to pharmacists as well as quite a few biochemists, microbiologists and geneticists.

Of the non science backgrounds; 1 guy had a degree in english, another guy was from an engineering background and someone else did politics. As far as I remember that was it.

Everyone has a 2:1degree so obviously has the intelligence and work ethic to do well in medicine (as well as having very strong reasoning and problem solving abilities as found by them performing well in GAMSAT)


Even the few who haven't a background in science (for whom the mods here seem to have very little respect) managed to study biology, physics and chemistry to at least 1st year college level and apply this knowledge in a highly pressurised, problem based exam. Surely this shows an ability to assimilate and understand a large amount of information?

And all this while getting on with the rest of their lives, working, studying etc. something a 17yo LC student doesnt have to cope with, a remarkable achievement!!

tallaght01 wrote: »

So, look, I don't really wanna get into a big GEM row. I know the GEM students get a bit sensitive about it, and I can understand that. But I'm not making up my experiences, which is all I have to go on. It's a regular topic of conversation in the mess that the GEM students from certain backgrounds are not great. They'll pass med school. But they won't be great docs. Though, in fairness, there are lots of them that are great.

I love the way anybody who disagrees with you is getting sensitive, or angry or wanky. It saves you from having to open your ears and listen to any opinion except your own, hilarious.

tallaght01 wrote: »

It's a regular topic of conversation in the mess that the GEM students from certain backgrounds are not great. They'll pass med school. But they won't be great docs. Though, in fairness, there are lots of them that are great.

I'm sure your last sentence is applicable to any group of doctors no matter whether graduate entry or not. In fact I've met one or two crappy doctors in my time. Though, in fairness, there are lots of them that are great.



If you've already made up your mind about something then you will only see evidence that affirms that opinion....not a good quality in any doctor:eek:

tallaght01

Reference:

tallaght01 wrote: »

It's not rocket science. It's not elitism. It's an opinion..

eth0_

Regarding the 'easiness' of getting a 2:1 in certain subjects/colleges, I do agree there should be universal parity agreements between universities regarding grading degrees.

For instance, I did my degree through the Open University, where a first class degree is 85% and above! In a "bricks and mortar" university, a first is usually 75% and above, from what i've been told. So my 2:1 is really more like a 1:1!

MedGal

I'm just going to add my personal experiences in here.

I did my LC, got good points but not enough for medicine. There are several reasons for this. It could have been my ability or it could've been the fact that the school I went to didn't have the resources to to give me the attention I needed to get great marks. I was 16 doing my LC and 17 going to college which in my opinion is way too young.

I got a 1.1 Arts degree (which included some Physics) and worked my socks off for that. In college 8am-9pm for most of it. I then went on to do an MSc and now I'm applying for GEM.

I think I've as much a right to get a place (providing I get a good GAMSAT score) as any 600 point LC student. I put 100% into everything I do and am willing to devote my life to help people through the area of medicine.

We all have our own story and this is just mine and hopefully i'll be able to say in a few years time that this is the route I've taken to become a doctor. Fingers crossed for March 2010!!

Boethius

I don't really understand how the entry process to medicine would affect the type of doctor produced. Surely it is down to the medicine school itself to instill the required qualities in its graduates. Is it possible tallaght that there is an issue with the quality of the GEM courses in Oz as opposed to the quality of the students?

Narkius Maximus

Hi, I've just been reading some of the posts here and it strikes me that there is some degree of romanticism/misconception involved in doing Medicine.

If the average age of someone entering GEM is 26-27 (or older) and it takes 4-5years to graduate then that graduate will be 30+ on commencing as an intern i'd reckon. Considering that at that point, one has a long path from there to get to what they want to be i.e consultant, G.P etc etc.

So I've some simple questions:

1) How long do you think it will take you to get to that point? (you can take me as a reference point I'm 28, a surgical registrar,hoping to get SpR for June 2011 entry, that's a very realistic target, and hoping to be a consultant at 40, which is optimistic)

2) Will you be able to do the hard yards as an Intern, SHO etc and take a dressing down from me when you DO stuff up (I'm presuming here that the good aul HSE won't be able to practically implement the EWTD in the next couple of years considering the shambles it's in at the moment)

3) When you ultimately finish, how many years will you be able to work for? (i.e for me as a consultant it would be 25years)

I'd be interested on your comments

etymon

1. If I start next September in a GEP I would be an intern at 30. A girl in my year at school is now in her intern year so I would be 5 years 'behind' the Leaving Cert grads.
2. Uh, unless some sort of unforseeable incapacitating disease takes hold of me, yes - and humility/willing to learn is NOT age-related. This is a really pointless question IMO.
3. Well if you can work as a consultant for 25 years then I could do 20 if I am 5 years 'behind'.

It could be argued that therefore I have had 5 years more fun than you!

tallaght01

I'm not really getting involved with this any more, as everyone gets so angry. But it's a real struggle doing the long shifts once you hit 30. I guess that's one of the reasons people traditionally tried to get on an SpR scheme before they're 30.

I never believed that hitting the big 3-oh would be a big deal. But my boss told me at the time that the shifts were going to get more unbearbable, and he was right. Well, I reckon I noticed at when I was about 31.

That's where surgery and paeds have a lot in common, in that they're both heavily registrar dependent, whereas a lot of the other specialties are SHO run.

Question 2 isn't "pointless" either. One of the commonest things you'll hear from the older students is them complaining that some registrar/SHO who's 5-10 year younger than them was bossing them around. But that has nothing to do with GAMSAT. That was as much of an issue with the graduates I knew who'd come into med without doing GAMSAT.

etymon

tallaght01 wrote: »

One of the commonest things you'll hear from the older students is them complaining that some registrar/SHO who's 5-10 year younger than them was bossing them around.

That's crazy! Who would be so stupid as to question someone who is trying to teach you? I take it back, so, if that's been your experience.
Well personally I have no problem taking instruction from people younger than me. Interestingly, I trained with people of all ages who did their apprentice year and took instruction meekly and humbly sometimes from people who were up to 15 years younger than them.
It was the young whippersnappers with an attitude who didn't take instruction in my experience.