I hate the CAO

revz

Me from another thread on the night of Sept. 1st...

Looks like i didn't get Pharmacy in RCSI.
I swear to god that better not go down by 5 points meaning I missed it by random selection for the 2nd year in a row.
If it did go down I'll march to the CAO head office to personally tell them what a sh*t system they have.
Ahh well, cyas in 5 years, off to England I go

So it happened. Pharmacy went down 5 points and I missed out on random selection.
I missed out last year as my school didn't tell the NUI i was exempt from irish, RCSI thought I had just skipped it, when i rectified the mistake they told me it was too late and "I would have missed out on random selection anyway".
So I thought I'd try my (clearly very bad) luck and re-apply to the CAO again. Random selection again this year.
I don't see why we can't have a more UCAS-style approach to a situation like this? If 3 people were on the same points going for 1 space in the course, their grades & personal statement (essay wrote to present/sell oneself as the right student for the college), as well as interviews english universities carry out.
UCAS looks after what 10x more students? And the logic behind it (although clearly more effort) is a lot better in my eyes. How come they can do all this with so many people yet we in such a small country rely on something completely random?
Maybe I wouldn't have got it if it came down to an interview, but at least I would've known I had presented myself as I wanted and gave it my all rather than just thinking there's some number on a computer that has blocked me from doing the course I really want.
Could they not even offer a deferred entry place to people with random selection? If there's nothing seperating 2-3 candidates then they should all be as entitled to study the course.
Just quite annoyed as this most likely means I'll be going to England to study it now, costing ~€8000 a year in tuition/accom fees. I live at home in Dublin so going to RCSI would be a lot cheaper :rolleyes:.
Hope everyone got what they wanted in the 2nd round anyway, and they don't have to put up with random selection!
/rant

Lawliet

Random selection is unbelievably cruel. They really need to find a better way of selection students tied on points. It a shame they can't just look at the individual grades of the people tied, and give places to the students who got the highest grade in subjects relevant to the course, or have an aptitude test or something. Leaving it up to chance might be "fair" (sarcastic air quotes) but it's not a very smart way of deciding peoples futures.

**Timbuk2**

Random selection is awful. I was just at the cut-off point for my course so I was very close (there was no random selection but I'm guessing with only 40 people I was probably the last in!). Imagine putting in the hard work, getting the required points and not getting in due to chance.

When you apply for a course, all the way back in January, you are assigned a completely random number (which you cannot find out). If a course goes down to random selection, it looks at the number of people, and uses the lowest-numbered people to fill the places remaining. The rest lose out due to random selection. So in essence, the lower number you have, the better - although as it was random, applying early, position on your list, etc. are irrelevant.
I think that's how it works anyway.

felic

I feel so sorry for you. Random selection is the worst way to lose out on a place on a course. While I do think the points system is fair, I do think there should be other factors determining who gets on a course. Particularly those courses with ridiculously high points like Medicine, Pharmacy, Veterinary, Dentistry. Yes an applicant may have the grades but do they have the personality, the nature, the necessary traits to suit them to a career? That HPAT is a step in the right direction but they need more of this interview and student statement. The UCAS system does seem to be a lot more efficient in that manner... and i really like the way they look at particular subjects and not just the 6 best subjects. I mean, currently, someone could enter into a pharmacy course with the minimum C3 grade in the sciences and with a string of A1s in say French, German, Spanish, History, that Computer Industry course and Geography... all having no baring whatsoever on a course in Pharmacy.. yet another student getting A2s in all three science and say a B1 in maths, irish and english will miss out. Its very unfair!

bleh!

I feel for you I hate random selection too :mad: My sister lost out on nursing in Dublin four times this year due to random selection. She lost out twice first round and twice again for the second round. :mad: Good luck with whatever you do OP and I hope everything works out for you.

Dafydd Thomas

I feel so sorry for you. Hope everything works out for you in the end. I didn't get into UL for Architecture because my portfolio didn't pass, but I got on very well in DIT with all the extra requirements thy have. This is of course a totally different situation, but I hve to leave Limerick now, hopefully I'll prefer Dublin. My point - London could be the best thing to ever happen to you (despite costs which I have the same problem with). Good Luck.

JamesJB

My sympathy goes out to anyone who missed out due to random selection...

If you ask me, the idea of an anonymous system is very good, since it prevents the kind of bias that nobody wants in their 'most important exam ever'.

I also like the 6 subject minimum, since by the end of it you really are a more well-rounded individual, and possibly a bit more cultured to boot.

The points system is really another means of making a 'fair' system, but I think that it still needs work. As someone mentioned above, you could potentially get minimum grades in needed subjects (for matriculation purposes) and use totally unrelated subjects for scoring. I am not trying to say that people who speak several languages from their background, say, have an unfair advantage. Even though this means that they might easily get A1s. Same goes to people with a high natural ability in math, taking several math subjects. Its not 'unfair' (I say you're lucky and/or talented to have natural aptitude and/or advantages) but it is a little silly if they're using said subjects to get into something they wouldn't be as good at.

bottom line: there needs to be some way of grading that takes into account aptitude and interest in any college course. This could eliminate random selection, as was said, and it might also ease the points race somewhat if implemented correctly.

UpTheSlashers

Random selection is ridiculous, Im not saying that because it affected me. It didnt, nor any of my friends. I remember reading the CAO handbook in January and being gobsmacked with this stupid method of allocating University/College/IT places.

revz

I love the CAO!
Nah I kid, I still think its a ridiculous system,
but I got offered Pharmacy 2 days ago for RCSI so I'll finally be going there!
Only about a year and a month late but still :pac:
Must've been the 5th round of offers or something; delighted!

rainbowtrout

revz wrote: »

I love the CAO!
Nah I kid, I still think its a ridiculous system,
but I got offered Pharmacy 2 days ago for RCSI so I'll finally be going there!
Only about a year and a month late but still :pac:
Must've been the 5th round of offers or something; delighted!

This is the thing. Plenty of posts above saying I hate the CAO/random selection is stupid, but when it works in your favour, it's grand. It's the fairest system we have.

The vast majority of students are not awarded their places on random selection. If places were to be awarded for random selection based on the individual grades of students, how many different permutations would you have to consider? One of the options mentioned in another post was that the student doing 3 science subjects and scoring A2s should be given the post ahead of the student doing 1 science subject. Is that fair to the student that attends a small school where the subjects are simply not available? Because if that were to happen only the students who attend large schools with a wide range of subjects would be picked.

Also you need to consider that the UK had a far bigger population and a lot more third level colleges than Ireland, and a far bigger student population. Applications there as a result are fairly anonymous. Ireland is a very small place, where everyone knows everyone. Can anyone imagine an interview based system working fairly in this country?

revz

rainbowtrout wrote: »

This is the thing. Plenty of posts above saying I hate the CAO/random selection is stupid, but when it works in your favour, it's grand. It's the fairest system we have.

The vast majority of students are not awarded their places on random selection. If places were to be awarded for random selection based on the individual grades of students, how many different permutations would you have to consider? One of the options mentioned in another post was that the student doing 3 science subjects and scoring A2s should be given the post ahead of the student doing 1 science subject. Is that fair to the student that attends a small school where the subjects are simply not available? Because if that were to happen only the students who attend large schools with a wide range of subjects would be picked.

Also you need to consider that the UK had a far bigger population and a lot more third level colleges than Ireland, and a far bigger student population. Applications there as a result are fairly anonymous. Ireland is a very small place, where everyone knows everyone. Can anyone imagine an interview based system working fairly in this country?

I clearly meant it as tongue-in-cheek as I said in the 2nd sentence of my post. I'm not exactly going to be unhappy when it works in my favour; I still feel bad for the person that didn't get it that was hoping they may get it on random selection (& I know how it feels).

I can see how you think random selection is 'fair', but I see it as being...'equally unfair to everyone' if you get me. It's based on nothing but chance, which I think is ludicrous, obviously if you show an aptitude for the subject and the college think you would be a better graduate then you should be allowed to do the course?
In many interviews in England they ask you questions relevant to your course and see how you cope, which I feel is much better than it being completely random.
Many people take up subjects outside of school, if someone could only do Biology in school they could take up Chemistry outside it for example. (In fact I was quite lucky, I was able to do both in school even though my school is tiny; there was 22 other people in my year who sat the Leaving Cert).

Also I don't really agree with your last point at all, How many people applied to the CAO this year? ~72,000 (http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0202/cao.html). Yes Ireland is smaller than england, but 'everyone knows everyone'?
Like I said I'd rather have not gotten my place as a decision from a member of the college (i.e head of Pharmacy or something like that) after an interview than by a completely random number.
Do mature students not have interviews to decide if they can have their places? That seems pretty fair,
and I think that it would be much fairer in deciding the outcome of 'random selection' situations.

rainbowtrout

revz wrote: »

Many people take up subjects outside of school, if someone could only do Biology in school they could take up Chemistry outside it for example. (In fact I was quite lucky, I was able to do both in school even though my school is tiny; there was 22 other people in my year who sat the Leaving Cert).

Also I don't really agree with your last point at all, How many people applied to the CAO this year? ~72,000 (http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0202/cao.html). Yes Ireland is smaller than england, but 'everyone knows everyone'?
Like I said I'd rather have not gotten my place as a decision from a member of the college (i.e head of Pharmacy or something like that) after an interview than by a completely random number.
Do mature students not have interviews to decide if they can have their places? That seems pretty fair,
and I think that it would be much fairer in deciding the outcome of 'random selection' situations.

If you live in any area of high population you have more chance to take up a subject outside school. If you live in the back arse of nowhere you don't. In the area I live in I am the only person that gives Chemistry/Ag Science grinds. I don't give grinds anymore. That's the only person in a 25 mile radius. So imagine the difficulty for a student in the north west who wants to take up the subject.

There would be a huge issue with using interviews to select a student for a random selection place. So there are 20 places on a course. 19 students get their places through the points system. One place remains to be given to one of three students. Student 1 gets it because they have A grades in science, Student 2 and 3 are rejected because they have C grades but did well in other subjects to make up their points. There are already students on the course who received C grades in science so Student 2 and 3 are no less able than the other 19. Why should they be refused? They could probably keep appealing it until they got in if that was the case. Random selection cuts out any personal bias towards a student, particularly when all the other students did not have to go through that method of entry to the course.

And yes, I stand over my comment that everyone knows everyone. It's that type of country. We see it in all other aspects of life here, why would college entry be any different.

randylonghorn

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Random selection cuts out any personal bias towards a student ...

This is the big point I think, which it's very hard to argue with.

That said, I always have huge sympathy with the frustration felt by those students who lose out on random selection. They got the same points as many of those who got their places, but because of a lottery they didn't. That has to be a PITA, tbh.

However, apart from the theoretical problems with basing selection on interviews, there's the logistical and cost implications. Probably wouldn't be much of an issue in a "3 candidates, one place" situation ... but realistically, there are often cases where it's "15 places, 200 candidates", and that's a high cost in terms of both human and financial resources, resources which the HEI's don't have.

And that's only considering doing it that way for those who are faced by random selection ... what then about the 500 people with 5 points less who will argue that if they had been afforded an interview, and that included in the weighting, they would have out-stripped those with higher points?

Wouldn't the argument then be that *everyone* should be interviewed?

What kind of human resource and financial costs would be involved then?

And I can guarantee you that the HEI's don't have the resources, and that the govt. won't fund it. Higher education in this country saw improved funding during the boom, yes, but even at that it never really recovered from the last recession relative to the situation in most comparable countries in the developed world. Now it is again being pared to the bone.

Complete recruitment freeze on admin posts, and retirements etc. encouraged; a small number of academic posts to be filled provided the college has met its targets in terms of reducing numbers of academic staff, and that sanction has been sought and granted by the HEA. All this while student applications and indeed student intake rises significantly. Anyone see the potential for chaos?

So we can discuss the validity of current admissions systems all we like, and argue about better ones; unless there is no cost or an actual reduction in cost, I can't see it happening.

I'm not a huge admirer of the points system for a number of reasons, the most important ones being that I think it doesn't adequately evaluate the full potential of the applicant; that it puts youngsters under too much stress; and that it encourages rote-learning and such practices, and a focus on exams to the actual detriment of education.

But what you can say for the CAO system is that it's relatively efficient and fair, and I suspect that's the best we're going to get in the foreseeable future.

revz

rainbowtrout wrote: »

If you live in any area of high population you have more chance to take up a subject outside school. If you live in the back arse of nowhere you don't. In the area I live in I am the only person that gives Chemistry/Ag Science grinds. I don't give grinds anymore. That's the only person in a 25 mile radius. So imagine the difficulty for a student in the north west who wants to take up the subject.

There would be a huge issue with using interviews to select a student for a random selection place. So there are 20 places on a course. 19 students get their places through the points system. One place remains to be given to one of three students. Student 1 gets it because they have A grades in science, Student 2 and 3 are rejected because they have C grades but did well in other subjects to make up their points. There are already students on the course who received C grades in science so Student 2 and 3 are no less able than the other 19. Why should they be refused? They could probably keep appealing it until they got in if that was the case. Random selection cuts out any personal bias towards a student, particularly when all the other students did not have to go through that method of entry to the course.

And yes, I stand over my comment that everyone knows everyone. It's that type of country. We see it in all other aspects of life here, why would college entry be any different.

I can see where you're coming from, especially with the "5 points more; not as good grades in science subjects" part, but I suppose there has to be some sort of a cut-off point, and I'm specifically talking about random selection cases.
I also know what you mean as their not being any 'personal bias', but if it was done fairly and by a professional (as I had mentioned before, someone like the Head of Pharmacy of that college) I don't think there would be any personal bias (and if there was then that person would duly be disciplined). I just personally think it would be fairer to allow those students who are on the brink of getting it or not to fight their case in an interview/short aptitude test. You can't be annoyed with a determined result that shows you just missed it (from your own doing), rather than a random number that you had no control over.

Still not getting the 'everyone knows everyone' thing. I do not know any college officials on a personal level (and if I did, I assume they would act professionally in the allocation of course places). When starting my course last year (with lectures regularly of ~400 people) I knew maximum 5 people (and not closely) before walking in to the first lecture.

Also agree with a lot of randylonghorn (nice username ) has said, the financial costs could rule interviews out, but is there really that huge of an amount of people put on random selection? (in the case of 15 spaces for 200 people)?
I was on the phone to the admissions from RCSI and there was 14 people for 3 spaces (or so I was told) - even UCD arts (the biggest course in the country?) managed to get through this year with no random selection.

Saying all this, I've always been a bigger fan of the A-Levels/UCAS system (as you might've picked up) so that's probably influencing my opinion.

thetonynator

I think they should have their random selection system, but for fecks sake dont tell the people that missed out on it that they had enough points!!!

randylonghorn

revz wrote: »

I also know what you mean as their not being any 'personal bias', but if it was done fairly and by a professional (as I had mentioned before, someone like the Head of Pharmacy of that college) I don't think there would be any personal bias (and if there was then that person would duly be disciplined). I just personally think it would be fairer to allow those students who are on the brink of getting it or not to fight their case in an interview/short aptitude test. You can't be annoyed with a determined result that shows you just missed it (from your own doing), rather than a random number that you had no control over.

Still not getting the 'everyone knows everyone' thing. I do not know any college officials on a personal level (and if I did, I assume they would act professionally in the allocation of course places).

I can absolutely see where you're coming from, as I said I am far from thinking the current system is perfect.

I do think the "everyone knows everyone" is a bit of an exaggeration ... but I would also agree with RT that the chances of people knowing or having some link with who they are being interviewed by is higher in a smaller country like Ireland than in larger countries like the UK or France. And Ireland has an unfortunate history in that regard, though not in terms of third level admissions.

My biggest worry though would be around unconscious bias, and especially around the high points courses like medicine and law. The reality is that these professions quite often see children following in the footsteps of their parents, and given that they are relatively small professions, practitioners would know or know of many of their colleagues. That still doesn't say that bias would be conscious, but, for example, I have heard a Dean of Medicine in casual conversation say that he always liked to see the children of doctors entering med school as "at least they know what they're letting themselves in for!" He had a point, and he would certainly be shocked to be accused of bias for making it, and I am sure that in an interview situation he would try to be absolutely fair to everyone ... but to what extent would his views on the matter unconsciously shade his opinion, without him even being aware of it?

revz wrote: »

Also agree with a lot of randylonghorn (nice username ) has said, the financial costs could rule interviews out, but is there really that huge of an amount of people put on random selection? (in the case of 15 spaces for 200 people)?
I was on the phone to the admissions from RCSI and there was 14 people for 3 spaces (or so I was told) - even UCD arts (the biggest course in the country?) managed to get through this year with no random selection.

Small intake, high points specialised courses, probably not ... Science in TCD, depending on what the CAO figures throw up in a particular year, there could be a lot. Arts courses, *because* they are the biggest intake courses, and because they would have a higher proportion of non-acceptances anyway compared to the specialised courses, don't usually go to random selection AFAIR.

My biggest question though is: how do you justify interviews for some candidates and not for others? ... i.e. some candidates are admitted on the basis of interview and points, some just on points alone.

I know it works differently for mature students anyway, but the thing is they have a specific number of places set aside on courses for them, and they all compete on the same basis for those places.

You are suggesting two different admission strategies for the one set of places.

revz

randylonghorn wrote: »

My biggest question though is: how do you justify interviews for some candidates and not for others? ... i.e. some candidates are admitted on the basis of interview and points, some just on points alone.

I know it works differently for mature students anyway, but the thing is they have a specific number of places set aside on courses for them, and they all compete on the same basis for those places.

You are suggesting two different admission strategies for the one set of places.

That happens in the UK as well though and I just think its fairer. Some people are offered unconditional offers if their grades are of a very good standard whereas other people may have to have an interview first (if their grades aren't as good).
I don't see it as that big of a difference in admission strategies. In the current system some people are admitted on points alone, some on points & a random number next to their name.
If interviews were allowed then the best candidate from the people on the same points would be allowed do it.

The unconscious bias you mentioned is quite scary though. I admit that wouldn't be fair. I guess you'd just have to hope that they'd act in a professional manner and if they felt they had any family/friend connection to any candidate that they'd let the CAO know and allow an external professional (perhaps someone who also works in the relevant field from a different university or something similar) to conduct the interviews.

After saying that I can see how financial constraints would come into it, no-one would want to conduct a series of interviews on the cheap.
Guess it's just a pipe-dream of mine...I just hate random selection so much!

randylonghorn

revz wrote: »

The unconscious bias you mentioned is quite scary though. I admit that wouldn't be fair. I guess you'd just have to hope that they'd act in a professional manner ...

The thing about unconscious bias though is that it's ... unconscious!!

And the reverse can happen ... someone like the example I gave above who is aware that s/he may have a bias towards a certain group may end up unconsciously being tougher on that group for fear of giving them an unfair advantage.

You mention the UK btw ... discussions and indeed research into conscious and unconscious bias around admission interviews is ongoing there, and indeed in America.

Thing is, there are pros and cons to every system. One advantage of our current system (and I acknowledge that there are disadvantages as well) is that a computer running a random selection programme will not be biased towards or against a certain demographic.

Well, not at the moment anyway ... you may live to see AIs with personality quirks all of their own!! :pac:

LizT

rainbowtrout wrote: »

This is the thing. Plenty of posts above saying I hate the CAO/random selection is stupid, but when it works in your favour, it's grand. It's the fairest system we have.

The vast majority of students are not awarded their places on random selection. If places were to be awarded for random selection based on the individual grades of students, how many different permutations would you have to consider? One of the options mentioned in another post was that the student doing 3 science subjects and scoring A2s should be given the post ahead of the student doing 1 science subject. Is that fair to the student that attends a small school where the subjects are simply not available? Because if that were to happen only the students who attend large schools with a wide range of subjects would be picked.

Also you need to consider that the UK had a far bigger population and a lot more third level colleges than Ireland, and a far bigger student population. Applications there as a result are fairly anonymous. Ireland is a very small place, where everyone knows everyone. Can anyone imagine an interview based system working fairly in this country?

It's a good idea in theory - having interviews. And it seems to work in England. But as you said, Ireland is a small country. I have well connected family members in the world of medicine - that could definitely give me an advantage over some other candidates if I wanted to apply for medicine and do an interview and it wasn't controlled properly. And if someone like me did get into medicine then you'd have to deal with people saying "Of course she/he got in, his/her father/mother/brother etc knows someone on the interview panel, knows someone who knows someone." I know it's not the be all and end all but connections would have some bearing.

thetonynator

I can imagine corruption and/or nepotism being a problem with interview system. . .


you know people you get into college . .