Gamsat 2012

UL_heart_throb

hi guys, in final year sports science in UL just discovered this forum now. Just did gamsat for the first time, found it so tough! finger crossed I get an offer for ul seems like the best course for me. Really like to do my own study and not bother with lecturers. Really think the clinically oriented will suit me and all the experience being groomed for GP.

hope to see a few of you kids there, so excited, will be so disappointed if i don't get in.

UL_heart_throb

leaoj wrote: »

You don't get any past papers in UL.

hi leo,

if you're in ul this week or next would you be able to meet up and have chat about the course, coffee is on me kid.

agraphia

Bella84 wrote: »

Theres a leoj in every class guys, best to ignore him, how you fare out in med school will be up to the study you put in and your personal enthusiasm for the course.

I forsee a certain person doing quite well in the science section.......... and very very badly in the humanities, with those people skills.

Pathology was just created for these guys. They really make me fear for the nation!!!!

Total and utter loser, a waste of oxygen.

well that's not very empathetic of you, is it? hehehe. arrogant people need a life's purpose too, though it's unfortunate that some of them never grow up, no matter how many people die under their care. i reckon there will be much more than one arrogant loon in each class, interested in competition rather than education. got to give the graduate programmes credit for looking for that quality (empathy i mean) in people.

einstein123

leaoj wrote: »

Then you don't disagree with me that Arts students are struggling; I'm not an uneducated arts basher, I have numerous friends in the UL grad programme and have done my homework on it. The course isn't suited to arts students. There's no biochem or microbiology taught or issued in the learning requirements. It will be very hard for non science grads to pick that slack up themselves. I don't know the person you are referring to; there's a clutter of people in UL who got in on poor gamsat scores and failed their christmas exams and most likely won't be there come next september (unless they have 25 grand to repeat)

I have a score of 70 from Gamsat last year but because I have a 2.2. degree in a Heathcare professional degree - I am not allowed in to Graduate entry Medicine in Ireland.
Can someone explain how a person with a 2.1 non-science degree, a low Gamsat score who as it turns out is seriously struggling on a Graduate entry PBL course is allowed a shot at Graduate entry medicine yet someone like me isn't allowed in?
WTF?

agraphia

is there no way you could re-sit a module from your degree to bring that up?
i don't see the reasoning really. seems they've also done away with interviewing candidates and just allow them in on gamsat scores, which seems a bit mad to me.

The3Musketeers

leaoj wrote: »

All my friends in gradmed say that gamsat is the easy part, biologic and doc2be say the very same on here.

I'm currently sitting medical finals and will be able to call myself a doctor in just one month so I think I'm well qualified here to tell you that you are a) very much incorrect and b) extremely arrogant.

I have friends who did the Gamsat on Sat who found it very difficult and they have a vast amount more core scientific knowledge than I do and I've done very well in my degree thus far. The basic sciences really don't matter after the first 2 years, it's personality and cop-on that counts then.

Coming onto a forum like this and making people who are just looking for a bit of comfort feel bad to give yourself an egoboost/whatever is very childish and mean and if that's the way you see fit to behave perhaps question your career aspirations. The karma police will get their man anyway no doubt.

ciara84

einstein123 wrote: »

I have a score of 70 from Gamsat last year but because I have a 2.2. degree in a Heathcare professional degree - I am not allowed in to Graduate entry Medicine in Ireland.
Can someone explain how a person with a 2.1 non-science degree, a low Gamsat score who as it turns out is seriously struggling on a Graduate entry PBL course is allowed a shot at Graduate entry medicine yet someone like me isn't allowed in?
WTF?

because they actually studied in college means they deserve it a bit more than you, GAMSAT is a bit of a hit and miss, I got 72, but I feel like if I had gotten different essay topics, and something I didnt prepare for in s3, I would have done really bad, so luck played a huge role in me getting a 72, but on the other hand, I'd like to think luck didnt play any role in my 1st class honours in commerce, because the degree award didn't just count one exam, it counted several, along with work placement evaluations, thesis etc, there are people in my class with way worse scores than me (okay all of them pretty much over 59 and 60 since I'm in RCSI), but they are REALLY intelligent and alot of them study alot less than me and do better in the course, GAMSAT isn't a real test of how well you're going to do in medical school, its the degree.

Bella84

The3Musketeers wrote: »

I'm currently sitting medical finals and will be able to call myself a doctor in just one month so I think I'm well qualified here to tell you that you are a) very much incorrect and b) extremely arrogant.

I have friends who did the Gamsat on Sat who found it very difficult and they have a vast amount more core scientific knowledge than I do and I've done very well in my degree thus far. The basic sciences really don't matter after the first 2 years, it's personality and cop-on that counts then.

Coming onto a forum like this and making people who are just looking for a bit of comfort feel bad to give yourself an egoboost/whatever is very childish and mean and if that's the way you see fit to behave perhaps question your career aspirations. The karma police will get their man anyway no doubt.

Thank God for you, were all getting a bit heated around here!!!! The last of the gammy stress leaking out of the pores! I wish you luck in your finals and thank you for that comment, finally some sense from someone qualified to pass remark!!!

Bella84

einstein123 wrote: »

I have a score of 70 from Gamsat last year but because I have a 2.2. degree in a Heathcare professional degree - I am not allowed in to Graduate entry Medicine in Ireland.
Can someone explain how a person with a 2.1 non-science degree, a low Gamsat score who as it turns out is seriously struggling on a Graduate entry PBL course is allowed a shot at Graduate entry medicine yet someone like me isn't allowed in?
WTF?

Such a great score in GAMSAT should absolutely counteract your 2.2, its not fair at all that you should be denied entry. Many of us werent even thinking of Gradmed when we completed our first degrees and your position is very unfortunate. I feel for you. Its not fair.

Bella84

ciara84 wrote: »

because they actually studied in college means they deserve it a bit more than you, GAMSAT is a bit of a hit and miss, I got 72, but I feel like if I had gotten different essay topics, and something I didnt prepare for in s3, I would have done really bad, so luck played a huge role in me getting a 72, but on the other hand, I'd like to think luck didnt play any role in my 1st class honours in commerce, because the degree award didn't just count one exam, it counted several, along with work placement evaluations, thesis etc, there are people in my class with way worse scores than me (okay all of them pretty much over 59 and 60 since I'm in RCSI), but they are REALLY intelligent and alot of them study alot less than me and do better in the course, GAMSAT isn't a real test of how well you're going to do in medical school, its the degree.

Good points also, you could argue both sides tbh.

einstein123

ciara84 wrote: »

because they actually studied in college means they deserve it a bit more than you,

I didn't mention but I also have a Masters (level 9) with a 2.1 result.
Why can't this be taken into account by the authorities?

Jammyc

Personally, I think the 2.1 rule is a bit ****. Sure it should be used as a benchmark but for christ sake, they should also take into account other study. As in the case here, this person is obviously capable and suited to GEM, but the difference of what could possibly be as small as 1% on their finals is stopping them pursuing a course? Flawed system IMO.

einstein123

Jammyc wrote: »

Personally, I think the 2.1 rule is a bit ****. Sure it should be used as a benchmark but for christ sake, they should also take into account other study. As in the case here, this person is obviously capable and suited to GEM, but the difference of what could possibly be as small as 1% on their finals is stopping them pursuing a course? Flawed system IMO.

As it happeded I missed the 2.1 by two percent as the final year project had a heavy weighting towards the primary level 8 degree result and let's just say a personality clash erupted between myself and the lecturer in charge of my final year project.
I got pretty decent results in my exams (easily 2.1 standard).
At the Time I didn't really mind that I got a 2.2 degree result, I was just thrilled to have become a fully fledged Health professional.
I have to say I do feel I am missing out on a shot at GEM because of a personality clash with a lecturer.
Does anyone know who decides on the 2.1 level eight degree result (with no allowance for masters/phd's top ups etc) stipulation?

UL_heart_throb

einstein the 2.1 stipulation as you call it will not be changed. either doctor (lol) your results to make it look like you got a 2.1 and hope they never get around to checking your physical manuscript or just apply to georges.

you're wasting your breath questioning the system.

ciara84

UL_heart_throb wrote: »

einstein the 2.1 stipulation as you call it will not be changed. either doctor (lol) your results to make it look like you got a 2.1 and hope they never get around to checking your physical manuscript or just apply to georges.

you're wasting your breath questioning the system.

I'd be wary of discussing such stuff after this here and how these forums are monitored by the various governmental organizations.

einstein123

ciara84 wrote: »

I'd be wary of discussing such stuff after this here and how these forums are monitored by the various governmental organizations.

In fairness Ciara he/she was being sarcastic there.
Do you think it's fair that additional level 9 (2.1 result) qualifications are not currently taken into account for entry into GEM?

ciara84

einstein123 wrote: »

In fairness Ciara he/she was being sarcastic there.
Do you think it's fair that additional level 9 (2.1 result) qualifications are not currently taken into account for entry into GEM?

if I got shafted in my B.Comm I would have said the same thing since I have a distinction in my MBA as well, I think there should be something for mitigating circumstances, I'm aware of some unis being asshats about awards, i.e. someone getting 69.4 and not getting a 1st because giving them few extra marks would qualify as like half a question on an exam if you add up all the marks in all the modules (happened to a friend of mine), this could easily happen with someone getting a 2.2 instead of 2.1, I think they should really use a mathmatical formula for entry and assign weights to both GAMSAT and degree appropriately, so if someone has a pass degree, they need an unrealistically high gamsat score to bring up their formulated result, and GAMSAT should really be limited to 3 attempts, or even 2, it might be fairer but we'll get alot of whinging about music students with 98%s in their final year and yet 40 something scores on GAMSAT becoming doctors, oh well such is life.

jtsuited

first of all, well done to everyone who did the gamsat on saturday. And that means everyone. Even those who feel traumatised at their first go of the exam, and those that are on their 7th time trying.
After doing the Gamsat for the first time last year and ROYALLY screwing up on section 3 (i'll find you the posts from on here to prove just how traumatised i was by it), I had a good long think about how the marking was done and realised a few things that were later proved to be true, despite the fact that they seem very odd altogether.
Right, bear with me here (no pun intended [you'll see what i mean]).

You and your buddies are attacked by a bear. You're an overweight chain smoker who can barely walk up a flight of stairs. You are done for. How can you outrun a bear?
Well it's irrelevant how you would outrun a bear, you simply need to be able to move faster than the slowest in your group. And in the gamsat, it doesn't matter how much you fcuked up section 3, you just need to have not fcuked it up as badly as some of the others.
The more impossible the section 3 is (beyond a certain point), the more the sections 1 and 2 come into play in deciding your score.
Put a crazy, unmanageable section 3 in a gamsat and you actually remove the edge the people with massive science backgrounds/pharmacology phds have over the competition with a non-science background.

I'm in RCSI this year and a good few of the first-time gamsatters who got in (well above the entry requirements i might add) got in with bogey section 3s (low 50s) but very high sections 1 and 2s (high 60s in section 1/high 70s-low80s in section 2).

Which is all well and good but surely such waffle-essay-masters will struggle when the nightmare of medschool first semester lands on them. Well yes, they all do, but by the time the exams came round (at least this year), they seemed to absolutely walk them (more firsts in our class than you could shake a proverbial stick at!).

As the playing pitch levels out, these 'science virgins' tend to be able to hang with the best, including the crazy-focused North Americans who often have biochem phds and a can-do assertive attitude, both of which are genuinely terrifying to chancers like myself for the first 3 months.

To be honest, not only do I think the gamsat is a good judge of those suited to studying graduate medicine, but it's a character building exercise you'll never forget. That drowning feeling i'm sure many of you experienced on saturday when you put over 20 c answers down as the time ran out on section 3 will stand to you.

Sometimes it's good to have an exam humble you to the point of crushing despair. I had never had a bad exam in my life until the gamsat, and i don't think i had ever failed any sort of test until the second MCQ of medschool (i'm not joking when i say that first semester was a shock to the bloody system. But come exam time, twas an absolute walk in the park).

The point is, you did the exam. If you didn't get a good score, fcuk it.

I'm not joking when I say medicine is not for those who aren't willing to get a good ass-whooping every so often. You have to be a little off-balance to dedicate your life to being a doctor in the first place. And I mean that in the best way.

You're going to have to be driven by something a little wild, especially if like me, you decide at 27, to abandon your career and go become a doctor despite the fact that your ignorance of the sciences is beyond a joke and your preparation for that funny gamsat exam was 3 months of looking at 'less stress, more success LC biology/physics/chemistry' while trying to remember how to do long division.

Ah, I'm rambling, but I really do feel for you guys as it was only 12 short months ago that I left that exam hall in RCSI to go sit on a curb with my feet in a puddle and thought 'ah feck it. feck it anyhow.'

agraphia

well said that man.

Bella84

jtsuited wrote: »

first of all, well done to everyone who did the gamsat on saturday. And that means everyone. Even those who feel traumatised at their first go of the exam, and those that are on their 7th time trying.
After doing the Gamsat for the first time last year and ROYALLY screwing up on section 3 (i'll find you the posts from on here to prove just how traumatised i was by it), I had a good long think about how the marking was done and realised a few things that were later proved to be true, despite the fact that they seem very odd altogether.
Right, bear with me here (no pun intended [you'll see what i mean]).

You and your buddies are attacked by a bear. You're an overweight chain smoker who can barely walk up a flight of stairs. You are done for. How can you outrun a bear?
Well it's irrelevant how you would outrun a bear, you simply need to be able to move faster than the slowest in your group. And in the gamsat, it doesn't matter how much you fcuked up section 3, you just need to have not fcuked it up as badly as some of the others.
The more impossible the section 3 is (beyond a certain point), the more the sections 1 and 2 come into play in deciding your score.
Put a crazy, unmanageable section 3 in a gamsat and you actually remove the edge the people with massive science backgrounds/pharmacology phds have over the competition with a non-science background.

I'm in RCSI this year and a good few of the first-time gamsatters who got in (well above the entry requirements i might add) got in with bogey section 3s (low 50s) but very high sections 1 and 2s (high 60s in section 1/high 70s-low80s in section 2).

Which is all well and good but surely such waffle-essay-masters will struggle when the nightmare of medschool first semester lands on them. Well yes, they all do, but by the time the exams came round (at least this year), they seemed to absolutely walk them (more firsts in our class than you could shake a proverbial stick at!).

As the playing pitch levels out, these 'science virgins' tend to be able to hang with the best, including the crazy-focused North Americans who often have biochem phds and a can-do assertive attitude, both of which are genuinely terrifying to chancers like myself for the first 3 months.

To be honest, not only do I think the gamsat is a good judge of those suited to studying graduate medicine, but it's a character building exercise you'll never forget. That drowning feeling i'm sure many of you experienced on saturday when you put over 20 c answers down as the time ran out on section 3 will stand to you.

Sometimes it's good to have an exam humble you to the point of crushing despair. I had never had a bad exam in my life until the gamsat, and i don't think i had ever failed any sort of test until the second MCQ of medschool (i'm not joking when i say that first semester was a shock to the bloody system. But come exam time, twas an absolute walk in the park).

The point is, you did the exam. If you didn't get a good score, fcuk it.

I'm not joking when I say medicine is not for those who aren't willing to get a good ass-whooping every so often. You have to be a little off-balance to dedicate your life to being a doctor in the first place. And I mean that in the best way.

You're going to have to be driven by something a little wild, especially if like me, you decide at 27, to abandon your career and go become a doctor despite the fact that your ignorance of the sciences is beyond a joke and your preparation for that funny gamsat exam was 3 months of looking at 'less stress, more success LC biology/physics/chemistry' while trying to remember how to do long division.

Ah, I'm rambling, but I really do feel for you guys as it was only 12 short months ago that I left that exam hall in RCSI to go sit on a curb with my feet in a puddle and thought 'ah feck it. feck it anyhow.'

Remember reading your posts last year and thinking " God, I'd love it it worked out for me the same way it did for this guy!!"

This gives me hope.

I am considering using my post gamsat week off work to begin studying the chemistry again for a second go in Sept!!!! Just an hour a day, I swear!!!! Someone seriously needs to save me from myself.

leaoj

Listen guys I'm not here to irk people or get up everyone's noses, but I don't want people being fooled or going in with their eyes closed. Self directed learning in the basic sciences is going to be very very difficult for non science grads. Nobody should be excluded from the chance to do medicine, but there will genuinely be people 15k/25k out of pocket, and out of med school.

This is fact. there are people in the current UL first years who are really really struggling and will not make it to second year.

People from non science backgrounds would be better off in RCSI or UCC where they will be taught the sciences in lectures. Everyone is entitled to go to medical school, but equally enough everyone should be given a fair chance at completing their degree. People with poor gamsat scores think they are after winning the lotto getting into UL, when in fact it is a curse on them. They would genuinely be better off repeating gamsat and trying to get into a didactic course.
The reason this issue is only coming to light this year, is because the years ahead had higher scores in gamsat to get in:
- linked to them teaching themselves more science to sit the gamsat
- better equipped at self directed learning
- generally more intelligent people

there are current first years who either
- spent thousands on prep courses and still only got 54 (one student spent three years of grinds and other prep courses and still only got 54 and is now one of the worst students ever to grace the medical school and it's no secret amongst staff and students alike)
- didn't study any sciences and lucked out and got a 54

In a normal year these people wouldn't have got into medical school. Unfortunately for them, they got in, and are now desperately struggling to survive the year.

The faculty know the challenges these students face, but there's nothing they can do about it. They know these people are in the wrong course but what source of remediation is available. None. It's disheartening for staff and students alike.

I don't mean to come across as a spoil sport, but I only want people to be made aware of what they are letting themselves in for. I have friends in the programme who have made me well educated on the course. I assure you all I only speak in facts and truths.

Leo

Jammyc

Thats fair enough and I accept it as your valid opinion, but its very difficult to believe you didn't want to come across as a spoilt sport or to irk anyone when you also said that you will enjoy watching someone else struggle to study certain aspects of medicine.

leaoj

Jammyc wrote: »

Thats fair enough and I accept it as your valid opinion, but its very difficult to believe you didn't want to come across as a spoilt sport or to irk anyone when you also said that you will enjoy watching someone else struggle to study certain aspects of medicine.

Only in response to her insulting me and saying she hopes I don't get into the course!! If she can't take it, she shouldn't be dishing it out in the first place!

tiredcity

jtsuited wrote: »

first of all, well done to everyone who did the gamsat on saturday. And that means everyone. Even those who feel traumatised at their first go of the exam, and those that are on their 7th time trying.
After doing the Gamsat for the first time last year and ROYALLY screwing up on section 3 (i'll find you the posts from on here to prove just how traumatised i was by it), I had a good long think about how the marking was done and realised a few things that were later proved to be true, despite the fact that they seem very odd altogether.
Right, bear with me here (no pun intended [you'll see what i mean]).

You and your buddies are attacked by a bear. You're an overweight chain smoker who can barely walk up a flight of stairs. You are done for. How can you outrun a bear?
Well it's irrelevant how you would outrun a bear, you simply need to be able to move faster than the slowest in your group. And in the gamsat, it doesn't matter how much you fcuked up section 3, you just need to have not fcuked it up as badly as some of the others.
The more impossible the section 3 is (beyond a certain point), the more the sections 1 and 2 come into play in deciding your score.
Put a crazy, unmanageable section 3 in a gamsat and you actually remove the edge the people with massive science backgrounds/pharmacology phds have over the competition with a non-science background.

I'm in RCSI this year and a good few of the first-time gamsatters who got in (well above the entry requirements i might add) got in with bogey section 3s (low 50s) but very high sections 1 and 2s (high 60s in section 1/high 70s-low80s in section 2).

Which is all well and good but surely such waffle-essay-masters will struggle when the nightmare of medschool first semester lands on them. Well yes, they all do, but by the time the exams came round (at least this year), they seemed to absolutely walk them (more firsts in our class than you could shake a proverbial stick at!).

As the playing pitch levels out, these 'science virgins' tend to be able to hang with the best, including the crazy-focused North Americans who often have biochem phds and a can-do assertive attitude, both of which are genuinely terrifying to chancers like myself for the first 3 months.

To be honest, not only do I think the gamsat is a good judge of those suited to studying graduate medicine, but it's a character building exercise you'll never forget. That drowning feeling i'm sure many of you experienced on saturday when you put over 20 c answers down as the time ran out on section 3 will stand to you.

Sometimes it's good to have an exam humble you to the point of crushing despair. I had never had a bad exam in my life until the gamsat, and i don't think i had ever failed any sort of test until the second MCQ of medschool (i'm not joking when i say that first semester was a shock to the bloody system. But come exam time, twas an absolute walk in the park).

The point is, you did the exam. If you didn't get a good score, fcuk it.

I'm not joking when I say medicine is not for those who aren't willing to get a good ass-whooping every so often. You have to be a little off-balance to dedicate your life to being a doctor in the first place. And I mean that in the best way.

You're going to have to be driven by something a little wild, especially if like me, you decide at 27, to abandon your career and go become a doctor despite the fact that your ignorance of the sciences is beyond a joke and your preparation for that funny gamsat exam was 3 months of looking at 'less stress, more success LC biology/physics/chemistry' while trying to remember how to do long division.

Ah, I'm rambling, but I really do feel for you guys as it was only 12 short months ago that I left that exam hall in RCSI to go sit on a curb with my feet in a puddle and thought 'ah feck it. feck it anyhow.'

Uhh that entire post was spooky - you're actually me. Right down to the failing the second MCQ of first year RCSI, curb sitting and struggles with long division!

It's a shame that people have been having problems in UL this year but that merely emphasises please don't go into grad med on a whim or just cause you got the marks. It's a heap of work and though that work is doable, you still need to be really motivated. I researched all the courses well before application time and I'd encourage people not just to settle for what you can get pointswise but think 'is this place going to be right for me'? I know people who *love* UL and are thriving but personally, I'm a little too fond of procrastination and know I'd have been even more at sea doing PBL that first year and not knowing where to start. I needed someone to explain things to me. You'll always have a few in any class who find things hard but you need to be really honest with yourself and ask a) is this right for me? and b) where will be most likely to help me reach that goal? Ultimately we all want to be competent doctors so you have to have a bit of self-reflection and know where your weaknesses lie and ultimately, if you're going to be able to give it the commitment it requires.

Bella84

I said that I didnt have any desire to see the individual in UL specifically, not that he shouldnt be in the course. Given the way his points were articulated, I dont think it should be surprising that I dont want to be the one pursuing my dream and spending 100,000 to be putting up with that **** in class.

Im nice and calm again now but I do think it would be beneficial if :

We agree to speak only for ourselves.

Accept that a horrific generalisation along the lines of all arts students will struggle with the course is point blank unfair.

And not make the assumption that a lower GAMSAT score, or a poor score in the science section automatically means that you're destined to struggle. Its not true that a humanities student cant pick up science, nor is it true that a science student cant pick up the humanistic elements of the course.

The students who are doing poorly at present could just as easily be disinterested, lazy or struggling with personal issues. They could be regretting doing the course at all, and if thats the case then they should get out and open up a place for someone else. It may have nothing whatsoever to do with the GAMSAT.

I think the evidence that has been presented on this board from people who are actually in med school have proven that a disciplined, enthusiastic and committed arts student can do just as well as a science grad. Thats my story and Im stickin' to it!!!!

Anyway, lets feel the love, we did enough writing about last saturday, we know what were talking about.....

einstein123

SandraNiD wrote: »

hey guys sandra here just felt like i wud register and let you all know about the course. im in ul first year, finding it very tough going honestly. leo you seem like a bit of a jerk and id appreciate if you didnt make such snide remarks just cause you have a science degree. i got grinds for two years and got 54 in gamsat and only by pure chance i got a place in the course. i did fail my christmas exams with 40% overall average, the pass mark is 56 percents. unfortunately theres a few others in the same boat as me but we will not give up not matter how hard it is. ill study all summer if i have to, there are repeats in august and ill pass them if my life depends on it.
we dont really do biochemistry or biology or pharmacy here, we dont get any los on them, but its not really clinically relevant anyway. the course is all focused on gp aspect and clinical side of things. you dont need to know any thing about the crebs cycle for gp practice and clincal placement. if you want to learn those science subjects then you should go to another school. ul focuses on clinical medicine and gets rid of those wishy washy subjects other schools teach but you dont really need to know. if anyone has questions please pm me id be too happy to help.

Sandra don't take offense I'm not blaming you in the slightest for this situation but;
I have a 2.2 level eight degree (Science based Heath professional).
2.1 Masters.
Overall Score of 70 in the Gamsat.
Extensive experience working in Hospital as a Health Professional.
Taken on it's own merits My Gamsat score is good enough to gain entry to any GEM course.
Is it fair that there are people who are seriously struggling on the PBL course at UL because it seems they have no/little science background and entered on poor Gamsat scores BUT I am denied entry because of the level 8 2.1 degree result stipulation!
No allowance is given for doing very well in the Gamsat, lots of relevant experience & evidence of academic competence with an additional Masters (2.1 result) Degree.
Guys does anyone else think this is a bit of an injustice?
Please help (I'd love to go to UL btw)
How do I put this injustice right?
Who do I contact?
ps thanks to the peeps who have said kind words

UL_heart_throb

einstein123 wrote: »

I have a 2.2 level eight degree (Science based Heath professional).
2.1 Masters.
Overall Score of 70 in the Gamsat.
Extensive experience working in Hospital as a Health Professional.
Taken on it's own merits My Gamsat score is good enough to gain entry to any GEM course.
Is it fair that there are people who are seriously struggling on the PBL course at UL because it seems they have no/little science background and entered on poor Gamsat scores yet I am denied entry because of the level 8 2.1 degree result stipulation yet no allowance is given for doing very well in the Gamsat, lots of relevant experience & evidence of academic competence with an additional Masters (2.1 result) Degree
Guys does anyone else think this is a bit of an injustice?
Please help (I'd love to go to UL btw)
How do I put this injustice right?
Who do I contact?
ps thanks to the peeps who have said kind words

wtf is a science based health professional. why didn't you get a 2.1 in your degree if you're so clever. the rules are set in stone, they won't make exceptions for people who can't get a 2.1 in their degree (and why didn't you get a first in your msc?)

there is no injustice. you're not clever enough to get a 2.1 in a degree easier than medicine how to you expect to pass a medical degree? Here is who you contact with your 2.2. degree enquiries@sgul.ac.uk

Accept it, no more denial, no more personal insults, no more rants, no more raving. You will not be attending grad med in this country, why did you even do the gamsat? go the hpat route or go to london. discussion over.

PeadarGalway

jtsuited wrote: »

first of all, well done to everyone who did the gamsat on saturday. And that means everyone. Even those who feel traumatised at their first go of the exam, and those that are on their 7th time trying.
After doing the Gamsat for the first time last year and ROYALLY screwing up on section 3 (i'll find you the posts from on here to prove just how traumatised i was by it), I had a good long think about how the marking was done and realised a few things that were later proved to be true, despite the fact that they seem very odd altogether.
Right, bear with me here (no pun intended [you'll see what i mean]).

You and your buddies are attacked by a bear. You're an overweight chain smoker who can barely walk up a flight of stairs. You are done for. How can you outrun a bear?
Well it's irrelevant how you would outrun a bear, you simply need to be able to move faster than the slowest in your group. And in the gamsat, it doesn't matter how much you fcuked up section 3, you just need to have not fcuked it up as badly as some of the others.
The more impossible the section 3 is (beyond a certain point), the more the sections 1 and 2 come into play in deciding your score.
Put a crazy, unmanageable section 3 in a gamsat and you actually remove the edge the people with massive science backgrounds/pharmacology phds have over the competition with a non-science background.

I'm in RCSI this year and a good few of the first-time gamsatters who got in (well above the entry requirements i might add) got in with bogey section 3s (low 50s) but very high sections 1 and 2s (high 60s in section 1/high 70s-low80s in section 2).

Which is all well and good but surely such waffle-essay-masters will struggle when the nightmare of medschool first semester lands on them. Well yes, they all do, but by the time the exams came round (at least this year), they seemed to absolutely walk them (more firsts in our class than you could shake a proverbial stick at!).

As the playing pitch levels out, these 'science virgins' tend to be able to hang with the best, including the crazy-focused North Americans who often have biochem phds and a can-do assertive attitude, both of which are genuinely terrifying to chancers like myself for the first 3 months.

To be honest, not only do I think the gamsat is a good judge of those suited to studying graduate medicine, but it's a character building exercise you'll never forget. That drowning feeling i'm sure many of you experienced on saturday when you put over 20 c answers down as the time ran out on section 3 will stand to you.

Sometimes it's good to have an exam humble you to the point of crushing despair. I had never had a bad exam in my life until the gamsat, and i don't think i had ever failed any sort of test until the second MCQ of medschool (i'm not joking when i say that first semester was a shock to the bloody system. But come exam time, twas an absolute walk in the park).

The point is, you did the exam. If you didn't get a good score, fcuk it.

I'm not joking when I say medicine is not for those who aren't willing to get a good ass-whooping every so often. You have to be a little off-balance to dedicate your life to being a doctor in the first place. And I mean that in the best way.

You're going to have to be driven by something a little wild, especially if like me, you decide at 27, to abandon your career and go become a doctor despite the fact that your ignorance of the sciences is beyond a joke and your preparation for that funny gamsat exam was 3 months of looking at 'less stress, more success LC biology/physics/chemistry' while trying to remember how to do long division.

Ah, I'm rambling, but I really do feel for you guys as it was only 12 short months ago that I left that exam hall in RCSI to go sit on a curb with my feet in a puddle and thought 'ah feck it. feck it anyhow.'

Thanks for this, I really needed to read that! I've been feeling like a pile of the proverbial sh1t since Gammy Saturday...

Your post has put things into perspective for me, in many ways.

I'm an arts graduate with a first. Like yourself I've never had a bad exam in my life (except for one woodwork mock in juniorcert ) so I've never experienced that sinking feeling of actually not being able to complete an exam "properly". It has got me thinking that even if I get offered a place in UL I'm not sure if I'd take it: even after taking a year out to study and doing a prep course for the exam I don't think my science background would be strong enough to get me through UL. I couldn't just not learn all the biochem etc. Im not faulting UL in anyway, its just I'd always be wondering "why is that happening?". That's just the type of mind I have. I need the full picture. Seriously frustrating at times!!

Here's hoping for a miracle in sections one and two to get my ass into a didactic course!

tiredcity

einstein123 wrote: »

Guys does anyone else think this is a bit of an injustice?
Please help (I'd love to go to UL btw)
ps thanks to the peeps who have said kind words
I'm off to cry now

It sucks. I always feel for people in this situation but you're not alone. The entrance requirements have been debated endlessly since I first started considering the gradmed route in 2008 and to my knowledge no exceptions have ever been made re: the 2:2 standard. It may seem unfair in the context of your own circumstances but they had to draw a standard somewhere and unfortunately through a bad situation as you tell it, you're the wrong side of it. You have to post down transcripts which ARE checked so there's no way round it. Crap as it is you need to consider your realistic options which are a) apply to the two UK gradmed colleges - with your background, work experience and great GAMSAT you should have more than a fighting chance or b) apply for mature entry. If you want this as much as you seem to, you will find a way eventually but they're super strict on the entrance requirements and generally people accept that before putting themselves through the gamsat. I do hope you get in through one of the alternative routes but you should probably start to explore those other options because based off similar past stories, musing on it leads only to frustration and isn't going to change. Best of luck!

Edited to add: Er, your subsequent edit did you no favours there in my eyes "How do I put this injustice right? Who do I contact?" doesn't make you sound like you have the right mindset about this at all. Every second person in our class has science PhDs or Masters and I'm still doing better than half of them as a non-sci. The start of first year was rough but believe me, I've caught up. The only debatable "injustice" as I see it was you fell out with someone influential to your grade. Unfortunately personality clashes happen constantly in even the limited environment of med school and you *have* to be able to surmount them in a productive way. I don't know who was wrong or right in that situation and you're obviously really frustrated but you seem to be alienating people here needlessly with the tone of your argument, though it is a valid enough question for debate in the greater context of GAMSAT.

Bella84

With regards to my situation, I have to say that I found the science very interesting and I thought I was well able to absorb it, my frustrations stem from the fact that I only had six weeks of part time study so concentrated on O Chem (which I could write a book on....maybe not) and the usual acids/bases, rates, equilibria etc. To sit the exam and find that the topics studied hadnt come up was my issue, not that I struggled with the actual learning. I often found myself browsing through Guyton and Hall's phisiology book just for fun really (geek alert!!)

What did other people think? Was it that ye found the sciences tough to assimilate or that ye were just pissed off that the usual topics didnt arise?