Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
*Everything HPAT and Medicine 2012*
Options
Comments
-
-
-
QueenOfLeon wrote: »200 is an absolutely exceptional score. By a rough estimate from the last 3 years graphs, not even 100 people have achieved that score each year, and there are over 400 places in medicine in the country.
Obviously I'm not saying that ye won't score well
But with such a small percentage of people hitting 200, don't set your sights on that and be disappointed with anything less. Getting anything from 180 up gives you a good shot, even with 170 there's a chance.
Gotta be the best though, my self esteem is riding on it! :pac:0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
ap·ti·tude test
Noun:
A test designed to determine a person's ability in a particular skill or field of knowledge.
The hpat fits this definition pretty nicely actually
If you believe what a politician says, the joke is on you!
No matter what changes do or do not happen people will always complain and certain subsets of people will be 'unfairly' excluded from medicine, there is no perfect system.. just deal with what's thrown at you and forget the rest. Will it really matter to you what the system for entry to medicine is in ten years?? I sincerely hope not! 0 -
I think the most glaring problem with it is that we, who sit the exam in the year of our Leaving Cert, are up against those who have already sat the HPAT once already and don't have to balance practice with studying for the Leaving Cert.
IMHO, one should have to sit the HPAT in the same year of the LC... But I'm biased though 0 -
-
Then they didn't devote enough time to practising/ aren't suitable. (assuming that HPAT can be studied for and it determines suitability for Medicine, which is a big assumption)
It seems a tad unfair to me to pit someone with more experience and time to practise against a newbie doing the exam in the, arguably, most stressful year of their life.
But then again I'm just mad that I there's more competition
0 -
ap·ti·tude test
Noun:
A test designed to determine a person's ability in a particular skill or field of knowledge.
The hpat fits this definition pretty nicely actually
If you believe what a politician says, the joke is on you!
No matter what changes do or do not happen people will always complain and certain subsets of people will be 'unfairly' excluded from medicine, there is no perfect system.. just deal with what's thrown at you and forget the rest. Will it really matter to you what the system for entry to medicine is in ten years?? I sincerely hope not!
By aptitude, I didn't mean suitability to be a doctor, rather academic intelligence-sorry, should have been clearer!
However, the HPAT fails to choose candidates who are more suitable doctors. It is not doing its job. It is choosing candidates who work hard at the HPAT moreso. That's the point I'm making. It is a studyable test, but I can see why you think its doing its job. A lot of people are fooled into thinking that.
As for trusting politicians, I don't trust people I don't know well, and I don't know Dr. Reilly well enough to trust him!:) However, both he and Quinn are working on changing the HPAT and it is under review.
Hopefully it won't affect us Hollingr in 10 years! Here's hoping both you and I are happy come late August;)DepoProvera wrote: »I think the most glaring problem with it is that we, who sit the exam in the year of our Leaving Cert, are up against those who have already sat the HPAT once already and don't have to balance practice with studying for the Leaving Cert.
IMHO, one should have to sit the HPAT in the same year of the LC... But I'm biased though
I know its unfair. I was in your position last year. However, do you not think its also unfair on somebody, for example, who was sick during the HPAT the first time around? Sickness on the day can and does sway your score. So, should they be denied becoming a doctor because of that? I missed out by a few points, yet was blessed with the L.C. score I obtained. I worked very hard all throughout school to obtain the points necessary for Medicine. Why should I be denied another chance to study it?
Your point does anger me, because it is incredibly unfair. However, believe me, I understand your frustration. It is the very fact that repeats tend to improve on their mark that suggests that the HPAT needs to be changed.
Now, I am curbing my worry and anxiety over the HPAT by eating an Easter egg:) Chocolate has a great effect;)0 -
DepoProvera wrote: »Then they didn't devote enough time to practising/ aren't suitable. (assuming that HPAT can be studied for and it determines suitability for Medicine, which is a big assumption)
It seems a tad unfair to me to pit someone with more experience and time to practise against a newbie doing the exam in the, arguably, most stressful year of their life.
But then again I'm just mad that I there's more competition
It's not a big assumption. A girl I know who repeated the HPAT increased by 80 points. Another lad by 50, another girl by 40. It's not hard to believe, maybe it's annoying to believe for you, but it's true.
Remember, I was like you last year. I was saying the same thing as you. I achieved a very acceptable mark which would have got me in with plenty to spare in 2009 and 2010, but the repeats did drive up the marks.
I know how frustrating it is:)0 -
ap·ti·tude test
Noun:
A test designed to determine a person's ability in a particular skill or field of knowledge.
The hpat fits this definition pretty nicely actually
If you believe what a politician says, the joke is on you!
No matter what changes do or do not happen people will always complain and certain subsets of people will be 'unfairly' excluded from medicine, there is no perfect system.. just deal with what's thrown at you and forget the rest. Will it really matter to you what the system for entry to medicine is in ten years?? I sincerely hope not!
I agree that there's always going to be complaints no matter what but the addition of interviews would be handy as it's a fairer assessment (in combination with the HPAT and LC) I might also say that the HPAT isn't an aptitude test for medicine no matter what anyone says. It simply isn't. I think the greatest example of this was when I sat with two professors of surgery (not to be named for the shame of it
) who went through a full HPAT exam and failed it miserably. My father is a doctor too and, without wanting to sound like a tool, he's a very good one. Works his ass off, very thorough in his work, always trying to get patients to the very best condition he can. I remember giving him 5 questions from Section 1 to look at, he got the answers but took about 15 minutes. If he sat it he'd fail it now too.
What the HPAT has done is it developed a trend where there are a number of people coming through who are very intelligent but shouldn't be doctors. It's more than just intelligence. I know a number of meds, 2 in particular, who I wouldn't ever want anywhere near me in a doctor patient setting. One of them has told me time and time again that "medicine is ****, I don't want to work with people, I can't stand dealing with people's issues, the only reason it'll be worth it is the money." This same guy got over 200 on the HPAT and 600 in the LC. An interview would have spotted this a mile off but instead we leave it to the ability to study to determine who should be a doctor. I know another lad who is frighteningly emotionally unstable, without wanting to go too much into his personal life he's honestly a bit of a mess. Very needy, very immature, extremely volatile moods. He's in medicine too. As a contrast, I know a guy who's 2 years older than me in a science based degree. Smart guy and really a truly lovely personality. Handles himself well and never seen him stress out. He'll be doing graduate medicine.
This was a similar issue with just having the Leaving Cert as a means to test it, it isn't enough. The HPAT and LC aren't enough. I think the likes of volunteer work is important, interview to gauge your personality for being a doctor, all these things should be mixed with the HPAT and LC.
I don't want this to come off as all the people in Medicine won't make good doctors, there are lots of really good people there at the moment, I know one guy especially who is an absolute gem, he'll be a brilliant doctor. What I am saying is that we have an unhealthy view towards medicine in this country. Every year a high percentage of the very brightest go for medicine, not because they want it, because they feel like it would be bellow them if they accepted anything else. 2 friends of mine who got 580 and 590 in the LC didn't do medicine because they didn't like the thought of it. The number of people who ask them why they didn't do medicine with a score like that is shocking, people assume that only the smartest should do it and if they choose not to it has somehow lessened their achievement. On the other hand, 3 of my friends who did get over 570 each and are in medicine have come to me at different points in the year to tell me they hate it and should have done something they were interested in.
Sorry about that rant, had to say it 0 -
I agree that there's always going to be complaints no matter what but the addition of interviews would be handy as it's a fairer assessment (in combination with the HPAT and LC) I might also say that the HPAT isn't an aptitude test for medicine no matter what anyone says. It simply isn't. I think the greatest example of this was when I sat with two professors of surgery (not to be named for the shame of it ) who went through a full HPAT exam and failed it miserably. My father is a doctor too and, without wanting to sound like a tool, he's a very good one. Works his ass off, very thorough in his work, always trying to get patients to the very best condition he can. I remember giving him 5 questions from Section 1 to look at, he got the answers but took about 15 minutes. If he sat it he'd fail it now too.
What the HPAT has done is it developed a trend where there are a number of people coming through who are very intelligent but shouldn't be doctors. It's more than just intelligence. I know a number of meds, 2 in particular, who I wouldn't ever want anywhere near me in a doctor patient setting. One of them has told me time and time again that "medicine is ****, I don't want to work with people, I can't stand dealing with people's issues, the only reason it'll be worth it is the money." This same guy got over 200 on the HPAT and 600 in the LC. An interview would have spotted this a mile off but instead we leave it to the ability to study to determine who should be a doctor. I know another lad who is frighteningly emotionally unstable, without wanting to go too much into his personal life he's honestly a bit of a mess. Very needy, very immature, extremely volatile moods. He's in medicine too. As a contrast, I know a guy who's 2 years older than me in a science based degree. Smart guy and really a truly lovely personality. Handles himself well and never seen him stress out. He'll be doing graduate medicine.
This was a similar issue with just having the Leaving Cert as a means to test it, it isn't enough. The HPAT and LC aren't enough. I think the likes of volunteer work is important, interview to gauge your personality for being a doctor, all these things should be mixed with the HPAT and LC.
I don't want this to come off as all the people in Medicine won't make good doctors, there are lots of really good people there at the moment, I know one guy especially who is an absolute gem, he'll be a brilliant doctor. What I am saying is that we have an unhealthy view towards medicine in this country. Every year a high percentage of the very brightest go for medicine, not because they want it, because they feel like it would be bellow them if they accepted anything else. 2 friends of mine who got 580 and 590 in the LC didn't do medicine because they didn't like the thought of it. The number of people who ask them why they didn't do medicine with a score like that is shocking, people assume that only the smartest should do it and if they choose not to it has somehow lessened their achievement. On the other hand, 3 of my friends who did get over 570 each and are in medicine have come to me at different points in the year to tell me they hate it and should have done something they were interested in.
Sorry about that rant, had to say it
Clear, logical and simply fantastic post! It's like you read my mind!0 -
Ah shucks thank you, all chuffed with myself nowMedicine333 wrote: »Clear, logical and simply fantastic post! It's like you read my mind! 0 -
Advertisement
-
I think the greatest example of this was when I sat with two professors of surgery (not to be named for the shame of it ) who went through a full HPAT exam and failed it miserably. My father is a doctor too and, without wanting to sound like a tool, he's a very good one. Works his ass off, very thorough in his work, always trying to get patients to the very best condition he can. I remember giving him 5 questions from Section 1 to look at, he got the answers but took about 15 minutes. If he sat it he'd fail it now too.
How did they fail it? You can't grade someone on the HPAT without putting them into the time constraints with the same questions as ~4000 other people. For all we know, the people who achieve 200 in the HPAT may only have got a third of the questions right. It all depends on how the HPAT is weighted and how everyone else does in that particular sitting.I know a number of meds, 2 in particular, who I wouldn't ever want anywhere near me in a doctor patient setting. One of them has told me time and time again that "medicine is ****, I don't want to work with people, I can't stand dealing with people's issues, the only reason it'll be worth it is the money." This same guy got over 200 on the HPAT and 600 in the LC. An interview would have spotted this a mile off but instead we leave it to the ability to study to determine who should be a doctor.
Really? No one will walk into an interview and say "I want to do this for the money". Interviews can be prepared for too, and if they bring them in for medicine, you'll have interview preparation courses everywhere, handing people pages of quotes and remarks that will make them seem like they care enough to be a good doctor.Every year a high percentage of the very brightest go for medicine, not because they want it, because they feel like it would be bellow them if they accepted anything else. 2 friends of mine who got 580 and 590 in the LC didn't do medicine because they didn't like the thought of it. The number of people who ask them why they didn't do medicine with a score like that is shocking, people assume that only the smartest should do it and if they choose not to it has somehow lessened their achievement
This is definitely true. If someone asks you how you did in the Leaving and your answer is in the high 500's, the amount of "Oh, I assume you'll be doing medicine then?" replies is ridiculous. Its quite insulting for someone who actually wants to do it, they didn't just happen to get the high points and think "Ah sure, medicine will be grand", they have genuinely worked towards it.
The elitism like this among the public is what draws the wrong people into medicine. How to stop that is difficult though. I don't agree it should be entirely on the LC (although being able to memorise and rote learn is still important in medicine), and I'm unsure about interviews (as well as the preparation, there are plenty of well known names in the medical field, with families of well known consultants coming in all the time, and Ireland is just too small to avoid bias completely). I think previous experience like work shadowing or volunteering should almost be made compulsory, if only to show people what hospitals are actually like to work in.0 -
-
-
-
-
I got 520 in the leaving many moons ago... +25 for maths i'm at 545. I'm a good 20-30 points behind the pack, so yes in my case 200+ will be necessary!
I think making a certain number of hours of volunteer work mandatory would be a good way to go. At least then people are forced to see what they are getting themselves into (regardless if they are doing the volunteer work for all the wrong reasons) whilst also helping out in the community.0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement