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
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

HPAT

1…1819212324

Comments

  • #1002
    MrPain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 440 ✭✭MrPain


    TheMightyDouche wrote: »
    Great post Statsman. Just hope the Irish Times got their figures right! Where were people getting the 3356 applicants i heard yesterday?
    Here:
    http://www2.cao.ie/dir_report/pdf/AppStats01Feb2009.pdf
    I think it also contains grad entries


  • #1003
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Is it 2900 or 3356? If it's 3356, then adjust what I wrote. I'd guess the cut-off point will be around 720-730. And depending on whatever bias the HPAT has towards high-points scorers, it could even be 740.


  • #1004
    dog_pig
    Registered Users Posts: 685 ✭✭✭dog_pig


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    Where are people going saying each percentile rank contains the same number of people? Does it say somewhere on the HPAT website that this is the case? I doubt it is; would the results not fit a normal distribution curve?

    Take IQ for an example: it follows a normal distribution. It certainly doesn't contain the same number of people in each percentile rank. My guess is that the HPAT would be no different.

    It's impossible to work out exactly how many people are in each percentile range without knowing what standard deviation they've used; as far as I know they haven't revealed any of their methods.

    If it does follow a normal distribution (or something similar) then the vast majority of people will have scored around the 50% percentile (it would be something like 68% of people within one standard deviation i.e. from 35% - 65%, or something similar - can't work it out without knowing their standard deviation). Again, something like 95% of people will fall within two standard deviations of the mean, which would be something like 20% - 80%. My guess would be that at an absolute max, only 7-8% of people will have scored above ~80%. People say that 2900 people took the exam, so that means (conservatively), that 232 people will have scored above 80%; which isn't an awful lot, really. (There's a bias on people posting their scores on Boards, so don't let that fool you. People aren't going to post their score if they've done badly, meaning more high scores will be posted on Boards, which doesn't give an accurate representation).

    Now, last year, 2.6% of Leaving Cert. candidates scored between 550-600 points in their Leaving Cert.; approx. 58k people took their LC last year, meaning ~1500 people scored between 550-600 points. Assume that the same will be true for this year, that means that 1500 people (if they ALL chose to go for medicine, which is unlikely, as there are other courses out there) will already have between 550 and 560 points in the bag. Now, what scores are these likely to get in the HPAT? Well, they should follow the normal distribution (i.e. that 68% of them will score within one standard deviation), but I'm assuming that there's some bias, and one third (just an arbitrary number) of these 1500 people score above the 75th percentile. That means that 500 people will have between 710 and 770 points. There are roughly 400 places, meaning that anybody (in my opinion) who scores above 720 will be in with a shot. (By the way, I hope I'm right, please don't get your hopes up because of me).

    The percentiles refer to the total number who took part


  • #1005
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    dog_pig wrote: »
    The percentiles refer to the total number who took part

    I'm not sure I get you...

    If it fits to a normal distribution, then the number who scored 150 and the number who scored 210 aren't the same. If it was, the graph of score vrs. the % who got that score, would just be a horizontal straight line.

    Edit: For example, it should fit a bell curve (I'm assuming it fits to a normal distribution), similar to this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IQ_curve.svg

    The only difference would be that the mean would be 150 instead of 100. As you can see the vast majority (68%) score within one standard deviation. This is true for all normal distributions, so it should be true for the HPAT (assuming it fits to a normal distribution, which it very well may not, in that case I'm wrong).


  • #1006
    TheMightyDouche
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11 ✭TheMightyDouche


    MrPain wrote: »
    Here:
    http://www2.cao.ie/dir_report/pdf/AppStats01Feb2009.pdf
    I think it also contains grad entries


    Is it possible that 456 people put down medicine as 1st preference but didnt sit the hpat?


  • #1007
    pathway33
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭pathway33


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    Is it 2900 or 3356? If it's 3356, then adjust what I wrote. I'd guess the cut-off point will be around 720-730. And depending on whatever bias the HPAT has towards high-points scorers, it could even be 740.

    3356 applied for medicine as their first choice in January. Another 10,000 applied for medicine on their CAO as a second or lower preference in January. 2900 did HPAT. Therefore up to 456 people who had medicine as their first choice either

    1. didn't know about HPAT or
    2. missed the exam through unfortunate circumstances or
    3. simply changed their mind about medicine between January and the HPAT.

    We also have to assume that some of the other 10,000 who had medicine as a lower than first preference did do HPAT and possibly did quite well but will not change their first preference thereby giving medicine hopefuls....more hope.

    btw the 2900 figure seems too perfect. is that just rounded up or down?


  • #1008
    MrPain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 440 ✭✭MrPain


    TheMightyDouche wrote: »
    Is it possible that 456 people put down medicine as 1st preference but didnt sit the hpat?

    Well I was in the trinity test centre and in the rows on either side of me their was two empty seats with numbers on the table there could have been more but thats just what I saw.


  • #1009
    dog_pig
    Registered Users Posts: 685 ✭✭✭dog_pig


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    I'm not sure I get you...

    If it fits to a normal distribution, then the number who scored 150 and the number who scored 210 aren't the same. If it was, the graph of score vrs. the % who got that score, would just be a horizontal straight line.

    Edit: For example, it should fit a bell curve (I'm assuming it fits to a normal distribution), similar to this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:IQ_curve.svg

    The only difference would be that the mean would be 150 instead of 100. As you can see the vast majority (68%) score within one standard deviation. This is true for all normal distributions, so it should be true for the HPAT (assuming it fits to a normal distribution, which it very well may not, in that case I'm wrong).

    What you are saying now is exactly what I thought when I was trying to grasp how it worked.

    If we take the 99th percentile as an example and say that the total cohort is 3000 people. Then this percentile will be the top scoring 300 people who took the tests?

    Now what I am confused about is what happens if more than 300 people get the same score (which is likely around the average scores) which is sort of similar to what you are saying I think.


  • #1010
    MrPain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 440 ✭✭MrPain


    dog_pig wrote: »
    What you are saying now is exactly what I thought when I was trying to grasp how it worked.

    If we take the 99th percentile as an example and say that the total cohort is 3000 people. Then this percentile will be the top scoring 300 people who took the tests?

    Now what I am confused about is what happens if more than 300 people get the same score (which is likely around the average scores) which is sort of similar to what you are saying I think.

    I think you mean 30, Im not sure if this is what your asking, but if its an equal score for the last few places its given to people by random selection.


  • #1011
    ThehPatroniser
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 51 ✭✭ThehPatroniser


    Here's my letter to The Irish Times:
    Many thanks for your interesting an informative article in today’s Irish Times. There is intense interest among “the applicant community” in the question of the relative influence of the H-pat result. In order to make the necessary calculations it is necessary to know the number of persons who have applied for Medicine, and also to know the number of “places”. Lively discussion on the “Boards” has been based on the premise that 3,356 persons put Medicine as their first preference on their CAO application (see CAO stat http://www2.cao.ie/dir_report/pdf/AppStats01Feb2009.pdf ). Secondly, it has been assumed that there are 405 places in Medicine available (I don’t know where this statistic comes from) . On this basis the general feeling was that those on the 88th percentile (and upwards) could be reasonably confident of a place, if everything else were equal. Accordingly to your article less than 3,000 persons sat the H-pat. (This seems incongruous if the CAO figures are correct). You state that there are between 480 and 490 “places”: this is at odds with the figure of 405 which has been mentioned on the Boards. I very much hope that you will be writing about this matter again, and if you do it will be very helpful if you would look at the disparities in question. I have a number of more general criticisms to make of the H-pat process. In the first place the nature of the subject matter of test is cloaked in secrecy. Secondly, it appears that some of what might be described as the “emotional intelligence” questions are capable of more than one correct answer. Thirdly, not all those sitting the test last February suffered the same physical difficulties. Those who sat the test at the RDS were left standing around in the cold for more than an hour after the appointed time. The atmosphere was very much “crisis” – even before the test began. Persons sitting the test in other venues, apparently, were seated reasonably promptly. My fourth point is that communication with H-pat is extremely difficult. For example, the test results were supposed to be delivered by e-mail. I did not receive the necessary e-mail. Despite my best efforts I could find no telephone number to contact H-pat. Their website gives no telephone number and nobody else seems to have a telephone number for them. My fifth point is that there is no Appeal whatsoever. An applicant is not entitled to view his or her paper. The suggestion is that the system is “fool proof” and is incapable of human error. This reminds me of the Computer Voting debacle. Finally there is a more general point to be made. The real solution to the “crisis in medicine” is to produce more doctors, by increasing the number of places. The H-pat simply increases the “lottery element” in the selection process. It is an interesting and unpredictable variable, but, fundamentally, the system will not be improved until the number of medical places is increased.



  • Advertisement
  • #1012
    StatsMan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4 ✭StatsMan


    To clear up some more if I can

    1. If you dont do HPAT you cant qualify for undergraduate medicine.
    Therefore only max 2900 (approx, figure from this mornings Irish Times) are in the race

    2. there are 480-490 places (IT this morning)

    3. Some of these are kept for mature applicants and applicants from underprivileged backgrounds - guess this may take up 80 of the places (probably less)

    4. People sitting the HPAT can be broken down into
    (a) People under 23 for med- not from underprivileged backgrounds
    (b) People under 23 for med- from underprivileged backgrounds
    (c) Mature applicants


    A very unscientific guess would say group (a) contains 2,600 applicants
    (b) contains 150 and (c) contains 150

    Therefore for the majority using this fourm - you 400 places are on offer for 2600 applicants - 15% will get a place.

    Finally I am a conservative man - I think I have probably overestimated the number of places for people in groups (b) and (c) and I have underestimated the numbers going for these places - so maybe the chances are slightly higher for those people in group (a).

    Good luck to you all


  • #1013
    MrPain
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 440 ✭✭MrPain


    ThehPatroniser wrote: »
    Here's my letter to The Irish Times:
    Many thanks for your interesting an informative article in today’s Irish Times. There is intense interest among “the applicant community” in the question of the relative influence of the H-pat result. In order to make the necessary calculations it is necessary to know the number of persons who have applied for Medicine, and also to know the number of “places”. Lively discussion on the “Boards” has been based on the premise that 3,356 persons put Medicine as their first preference on their CAO application (see CAO stat http://www2.cao.ie/dir_report/pdf/AppStats01Feb2009.pdf ). Secondly, it has been assumed that there are 405 places in Medicine available (I don’t know where this statistic comes from) . On this basis the general feeling was that those on the 88th percentile (and upwards) could be reasonably confident of a place, if everything else were equal. Accordingly to your article less than 3,000 persons sat the H-pat. (This seems incongruous if the CAO figures are correct). You state that there are between 480 and 490 “places”: this is at odds with the figure of 405 which has been mentioned on the Boards. I very much hope that you will be writing about this matter again, and if you do it will be very helpful if you would look at the disparities in question. I have a number of more general criticisms to make of the H-pat process. In the first place the nature of the subject matter of test is cloaked in secrecy. Secondly, it appears that some of what might be described as the “emotional intelligence” questions are capable of more than one correct answer. Thirdly, not all those sitting the test last February suffered the same physical difficulties. Those who sat the test at the RDS were left standing around in the cold for more than an hour after the appointed time. The atmosphere was very much “crisis” – even before the test began. Persons sitting the test in other venues, apparently, were seated reasonably promptly. My fourth point is that communication with H-pat is extremely difficult. For example, the test results were supposed to be delivered by e-mail. I did not receive the necessary e-mail. Despite my best efforts I could find no telephone number to contact H-pat. Their website gives no telephone number and nobody else seems to have a telephone number for them. My fifth point is that there is no Appeal whatsoever. An applicant is not entitled to view his or her paper. The suggestion is that the system is “fool proof” and is incapable of human error. This reminds me of the Computer Voting debacle. Finally there is a more general point to be made. The real solution to the “crisis in medicine” is to produce more doctors, by increasing the number of places. The H-pat simply increases the “lottery element” in the selection process. It is an interesting and unpredictable variable, but, fundamentally, the system will not be improved until the number of medical places is increased.

    Good letter. This is constuctive critism, it could do with paragraphs (just makes it easier to read), the 405 comes from www.qualifax.ie. I think they are right to have no appeals since they adjust their marking scheme in very fancy ways and they would only have people complaining and would never get everyone happy and since its marked by computer the only human error is the candidate not marking the box correctly.


  • #1014
    dog_pig
    Registered Users Posts: 685 ✭✭✭dog_pig


    MrPain wrote: »
    I think you mean 30, Im not sure if this is what your asking, but if its an equal score for the last few places its given to people by random selection.

    Sorry yea I meant 30, typo.

    Why would it be done by random selection?


  • #1015
    hpat 123
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5 ✭hpat 123


    i did my lc this year n it says n/a on my hpat score 2.......so damn annoyd......first thy hav such a vague scoring system.... all under covr...now thy wont evn tel me wat my individual scores r .....apparently they r not availabl.......hate this:mad:


  • #1016
    TheMightyDouche
    Closed Accounts Posts: 11 ✭TheMightyDouche


    yeah good letter hPatroniser, hope they print it! Theres none in todays IT....and yeah RDS was ****, freezing and disorganised


  • #1017
    dontlikeurmam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 40 ✭dontlikeurmam


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    I

    This is true for all normal distributions, so it should be true for the HPAT (assuming it fits to a normal distribution, which it very well may not, in that case I'm wrong).

    Aren't those IQ graphs built up over years to produce a standard measure of the IQ of the population?...I would expect that the percentiles for the Hpat are more of a straight forward indication of your score in comparison to others, as in all the results are divided up or split up into one hundred roughly similar groups and then percentiles are allocated to the groups.I think it would explain why the percentiles for the 50%ish mark are fairly set (around 150?) and the percentiles for the high marks are over a range, e.g 99% between 195 and 202.

    I know i'm very late but i got 182 (91%) so i reckon I need 550 to get in
    550+182=732


  • #1018
    Waaahhh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭Waaahhh


    The boys over at the CAO have removed the breakdown of the results.... Must've been a mistake putting them up in the first place. From what I can remember from reading HPAT information a long time ago we were told that a breakdown of the results wouldn't be available. I'm guessing an angry phone call was made from ACER (I'm guessing they have a phone that makes calls and doesn't receive them, we all know how bloody impossible it is to get through to them:D:D) to the CAO telling them to sort it out quick!!


  • #1019
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,316 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    pathway33 wrote: »
    3356 applied for medicine as their first choice in January. Another 10,000 applied for medicine on their CAO as a second or lower preference in January. 2900 did HPAT. Therefore up to 456 people who had medicine as their first choice either

    1. didn't know about HPAT or
    2. missed the exam through unfortunate circumstances or
    3. simply changed their mind about medicine between January and the HPAT.

    We also have to assume that some of the other 10,000 who had medicine as a lower than first preference did do HPAT and possibly did quite well but will not change their first preference thereby giving medicine hopefuls....more hope.

    btw the 2900 figure seems too perfect. is that just rounded up or down?

    There will be the same number of people in each percentile, but the range for each percentile can be different. The 50th percentile could be a score of 149-150.5 while the 99th percentile could be 212+ or something similar. Range of scores is different, but the number of people is the same.


  • #1020
    hpat 123
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5 ✭hpat 123


    wat sorta percentile hav chances 2 get in???


  • Advertisement
  • #1021
    Ormo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4 ✭Ormo


    Great letter ThehPatroniser.

    Conditions at Blackrock weren't ideal as well, poor directions as well as the exam not starting till over an hour after it was supposed to.


  • #1022
    bythewoods
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,361 ✭✭✭bythewoods


    I wish I'd tried harder to get 600 points this year.
    Those 10 extra bad boys could have made some difference to me.

    (I already have 550 from last year, my HPATaroonie is 723. 733 would probably guarantee me, I'm not safe with 723)


  • #1023
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    dontlikeurmam wrote: »
    Aren't those IQ graphs built up over years to produce a standard measure of the IQ of the population?

    Some are, yah. But you could build up a normal distribution of IQ scores from any sized sample. For example, if you had 100 people, and administered a test which would give them some sort of a score, you would have to class them according to what the most common score was. If for the 100 people, the most common score was 15/20 (some arbitrary number) then this would be given a value of 100 on your scale. Then, depending on what "size" standard deviation you used, people with lower or higher scores would go either side of that 100 score, respectively. This would then be a normal distribution if it kept to a few simple rules, one is that 68% of the test takers would fall within 1 standard deviation of the mean (i.e. 100), generally, IQ tests use a standared deviation of 15, so that means that 68% of test takers would have an IQ between 85 and 115.

    So in essence, it doesn't really matter what sized sample you used.
    ...I would expect that the percentiles for the Hpat are more of a straight forward indication of your score in comparison to others, as in all the results are divided up or split up into one hundred roughly similar groups and then percentiles are allocated to the groups.

    I completely disagree. I'd say that every single candidate was measured relative to each other; I doubt it was split into groups.

    Assume for a minute that the sample was split into groups of 100 candidates. Just say in one test centre the candidates were of a particularly low standard, they would be marked relative to each other, meaning the the most common score would be given a mark of 150, and then better or worse scores would go either side. Now, if in another test centre the candidates were of a particularly high standard, they would be marked the same; i.e. the most common score would be given a value of 150. Now, relative to the first test centre, the second group of candidates have done much better, but they are getting the same end score. This isn't fair. It's for this reason that every candidate was marked relative to each other, and that the overall cohort wasn't split into individual groups. (This is my guess anyway).
    I think it would explain why the percentiles for the 50%ish mark are fairly set (around 150?) and the percentiles for the high marks are over a range, e.g 99% between 195 and 202.

    Whatever score was most common will receive a mark of 150, and depending on what standard deviation they've used, people who have done better will get a higher end mark and vice versa.


  • #1024
    Zenith23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 135 ✭✭Zenith23


    I'm expecting to get about 570 in the Leaving Cert but I only got a 126 in the frigging HPAT. Do I have a chance to get medicine in Trinity?


  • #1025
    funkylana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22 ✭funkylana


    Zenith23 wrote: »
    I'm expecting to get about 570 in the Leaving Cert but I only got a 126 in the frigging HPAT. Do I have a chance to get medicine in Trinity?

    To be frank you probably don't have a chance of getting in anywhere. Sorry to be so upfront about it but thats just the way some people have been screwed over by the hpat- including me.
    Totally sucks, but what can we do.


  • #1026
    poppy08
    Registered Users Posts: 113 ✭✭poppy08


    funkylana wrote: »
    To be frank you probably don't have a chance of getting in anywhere. Sorry to be so upfront about it but thats just the way some people have been screwed over by the hpat- including me.
    Totally sucks, but what can we do.

    i'm a repeat, expect 560 points , hpat score 158....opinion...any hope?


  • Advertisement
  • #1027
    pathway33
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭pathway33


    Zenith23 wrote: »
    I'm expecting to get about 570 in the Leaving Cert but I only got a 126 in the frigging HPAT. Do I have a chance to get medicine in Trinity?

    554 + 126 = 680. Very unlikely :(.

    Options

    1. hang out for the year doing the hpat in 2010 and get 176. Should get you in with 554
    2. start a degree so if you do same in hpat next year at least you have the option of graduate entry to medicine
    3. look abroad

    not great options


  • #1028
    funkylana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22 ✭funkylana


    poppy08 wrote: »
    i'm a repeat, expect 560 points , hpat score 158....opinion...any hope?

    To be honest i'm not sure- i wouldn't get my hopes up though. Still don't take my word for it, and DON'T take medicine off your cao. I'm just going by my own calculations, and by the calculations of others- generally people are saying you only really have a chance if you get 720+....but wait to see what happens.
    Anyhoo, good luck:cool:


  • #1029
    pathway33
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭pathway33


    poppy08 wrote: »
    i'm a repeat, expect 560 points , hpat score 158....opinion...any hope?

    i'd say there's 'decent hope' with 710


  • #1030
    pathway33
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭pathway33


    funkylana wrote: »
    people are saying you only really have a chance if you get 720

    i think it will be lower because and this is only anecdotal but i have heard of 3 people in the 90% percentile who do not have medicine as their first choice. One has dentistry and the other 2 are veterinary medicine. They are certainly interested in med but the HSE has put them off. Now if vet is 570 and they get 560 which gets them into med then that's bad news for you guys but the statisticians seem to be forgetting that the percentiles also include people who may not even accept medicine if they get it.


  • #1031
    funkylana
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22 ✭funkylana


    pathway33 wrote: »
    i think it will be lower because and this is only anecdotal but i have heard of 3 people in the 90% percentile who do not have medicine as their first choice. One has dentistry and the other 2 are veterinary medicine. They are certainly interested in med but the HSE has put them off. Now if vet is 570 and they get 560 which gets them into med then that's bad news for you guys but the statisticians seem to be forgetting that the percentiles also include people who may not even accept medicine if they get it.

    but at the same time its not going to be a substantial amount of people who don't have it as their first choice and yet did well in the hpat- it could give some people an ounce of hope, but not me- medicine in ireland is pretty much gone out the window for me.
    ah well, need to stop crying about it and move on to plan B.


  • Advertisement
  • #1032
    drrkpd
    Registered Users Posts: 236 ✭✭drrkpd


    Apparently the 2900-3000 is correct so all you mathematicians will have to redo your sums.
    The results are to quote "a sigmoid curve" - I will leave that to the mathematicians as well.
    But percentiles to me are exactly that -percentages out of 100 who sat the exam.
    So each percentile should contain 30 people not 35 as already guessed- more hope for many I would have thought!!!
    Now if we could just confirm that Qualifax is correct in 405 Undergraduate Places the statisticians could swing into action!!


  • #1033
    A Neurotic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,779 ✭✭✭A Neurotic


    GO STATISTICIANS GO!

    Just tell me what I want to hear this time


  • #1034
    holadivaldfe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭holadivaldfe


    don't forget that postgrads also sat the hpat and there are well over 100 postgrad places, i think there might even be over 150 places. there may well be a lot of postgrads in the high percentiles and i thought the 2900 figure was the exact number who sat the hpat. which means there are 29 people per percentile. this means 580 people made the top 20% but if it's true about some people scoring high who don't have med as their 1st choice then, there might be hope. furthermore, some don't pass maths and some people accidentally didn't sit their eng, irish, math or other language this year which rules them out unless their 1st leaving cert was good.

    does anybody know how many people, or what percentage of students usually score above 550 in the leaving?? that might also help us make guesstimations of the marks needed to secure a place in medicine this year.


  • #1035
    whadabouchasir
    Registered Users Posts: 942 ✭✭✭whadabouchasir


    A Neurotic wrote: »
    GO STATISTICIANS GO!
    But where?really though statistical predictions are not really that accurate since they don't take into account the amount of people who did well in the HPAT but average in the LC or those that did well in the HPAT but now no longer don't want to do medicine or those that will be excluded because of Garda vetting and those who only put 2 or 3 colleges down.


  • #1036
    pathway33
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭pathway33


    funkylana wrote: »
    but at the same time its not going to be a substantial amount of people who don't have it as their first choice and yet did well in the hpat

    well 3,300 ish had med as their first choice and over 10,000 had med as a lower choice. Who is to say that of the 2,900 that showed up for the exam, at least 20% (580) of them were from the 10,000 bunch and who is to say that 50% (290) of this 20% are not in the 90% percentile?

    Now if those 290 people don't get offered med because they get their first choice. If they are in the 90% percentile then 75% of them are heading for 580 in the leaving. They are out of the equation.


  • #1037
    pathway33
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭pathway33


    holadivaldfe wrote: »

    does anybody know how many people, or what percentage of students usually score above 550 in the leaving?? that might also help us make guesstimations of the marks needed to secure a place in medicine this year.

    there is a link to that but i have forgotten where. try www.cao.ie and national stats on the drop down list?


  • #1038
    smndly
    Registered Users Posts: 222 ✭✭smndly


    Is there a 100th percentile or is the 99th percentile the highest?? :pac:


  • #1039
    whadabouchasir
    Registered Users Posts: 942 ✭✭✭whadabouchasir


    smndly wrote: »
    Is there a 100th percentile or is the 99th percentile the highest?? :pac:
    If you got the highest mark in the country then you would get 100%,since you did better than everyone else.


  • #1040
    holadivaldfe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭holadivaldfe


    thanks i found it. based on the fact that more people are sitting the l.c this year, and there will be many people who got 550 to 565 from last year and the previous year i'm guessing there will be thousands who get the l.c points of 550 and more, and therefore i'm guessing that not only would 720 be the minimum required points but maybe 730 or more. not good news for most. i hope i'm wrong. maybe there's loads of postgrads in the top 20% or maybe many in the top 20 % wont touch 500 points but i'm pretty sure they will, most of them anyway. oh well, hope there are some detailed stats to mull over and otherwise i'm going to try and forget about it. nothing we can do! oh and another thing that might factor people out are those who only applied to a few irish med schools as opposed to all of them and those who got better offers in the uk etc. i for one will take an offer i have for a med school in london if i get in, leaving someone behind me in the irish que a chance to step up! good luck everyone!


  • #1041
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    holadivaldfe wrote: »
    does anybody know how many people, or what percentage of students usually score above 550 in the leaving??

    It was 2.6% (or something very close) in 2008.
    whadabouchasir wrote: »
    If you got the highest mark in the country then you would get 100%,since you did better than everyone else.

    As far as I know, the 99th percentile is the highest possible. It's possible to get 100% in the test alright, but this would place you in the 99th percentile. If you were in the 100th percentile, you would have gotten a higher score than everybody, including yourself, as you're included in the sample. And, as is obvious, it's impossible to get a higher score than yourself.

    Again, this depends on whatever way they carry out their statistics, but in most tests, the 99th percentile is the highest possible. It also depends on what way they round off their figures.


  • Advertisement
  • #1042
    holadivaldfe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭holadivaldfe


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    It was 2.6% (or something very close) in 2008.



    As far as I know, the 99th percentile is the highest possible. It's possible to get 100% in the test alright, but this would place you in the 99th percentile. If you were in the 100th percentile, you would have gotten a higher score than everybody, including yourself, as you're included in the sample. And, as is obvious, it's impossible to get a higher score than yourself.

    Again, this depends on whatever way they carry out their statistics, but in most tests, the 99th percentile is the highest possible. It also depends on what way they round off their figures.


    that makes sense. so does that mean if there was 2900 people sitting the hpat there's 29 in each percentile and instead of 580 in the top 20% there's (29x19) 551 people in the country who count themselves amoung the top 20%??? that narrows it down a little. :)

    am i right? ish?


  • #1043
    holadivaldfe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭holadivaldfe


    but i thought only 2900 sat the hpat in the end. is 3000 accurate and definite?


  • #1044
    Zenith23
    Closed Accounts Posts: 135 ✭✭Zenith23


    I heard it's possible to do a 2 year science course in Trinity and then go right into medicine the following year.

    Is this true?


  • #1045
    pathway33
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,229 ✭✭✭pathway33


    holadivaldfe wrote: »
    but i thought only 2900 sat the hpat in the end. is 3000 accurate and definite?

    yes 2900 is what i heard. Where did 3000 come from?

    2900 / 99 = 29.2929292929 people per percentile.


  • #1046
    drrkpd
    Registered Users Posts: 236 ✭✭drrkpd


    pathway33 wrote: »
    yes 2900 is what i heard. Where did 3000 come from?

    2900 / 99 = 29.2929292929 people per percentile.
    official figure is 2900-3000 working on 3000 for ease of maths and also to use the biggest number to reflect worst possible denominator - all these are still better than 3400 initially thought!!!


  • #1047
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 4,630 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    holadivaldfe wrote: »
    that makes sense. so does that mean if there was 2900 people sitting the hpat there's 29 in each percentile and instead of 580 in the top 20% there's (29x19) 551 people in the country who count themselves amoung the top 20%??? that narrows it down a little.
    drrkpd wrote: »
    Need a mathematician here (didn't someone posting have an actuary to help them??) but if correct then 3000 divided by 99= 30.3 people per centile-still better than the 35 people were originally thinking.

    Yes, each percentile will contain the same number of people (although each percentile will have a different range). Although the 99th percentile is the highest possible, I'm still not sure about dividing the total by 99 instead of 100 to work out the amount in each percentile. It makes intuitive sense to divide by 99, but, I can't imagine it being called percentile if it was based on 99. Although, if for a sample of 3000, you divide by 100 and limit the maximum percentile to 99, 30 people suddenly disappear.


  • #1048
    A Neurotic
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,779 ✭✭✭A Neurotic


    -JammyDodger- wrote: »
    Yes, each percentile will contain the same number of people (although each percentile will have a different range). Although the 99th percentile is the highest possible, I'm still not sure about dividing the total by 99 instead of 100 to work out the amount in each percentile. It makes intuitive sense to divide by 99, but, I can't imagine it being called percentile if it was based on 99. Although, if for a sample of 3000, you divide by 100 and limit the maximum percentile to 99, 30 people suddenly disappear.

    OH F*CK


  • #1049
    Camih
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5 ✭Camih


    I got hpat yesterday, my score was 170 which is in the 81st percentile, wasnt really sure what that meant for me(either were my parents,they oooh-ed and aaah-ed but I knew that were about as clear as what that meant for my future as I was) but after reading all of these posts and that Irish Times article I feel that maybe there's hope for me.....IF I have nailed 550 in my LC,seems unlikely now but here's hoping!

    So basically thanks to everyone else on this thread, felt yesterday like nobody else in Ireland even knew about this test, never mind cared about results...


  • #1050
    Adventure
    Registered Users Posts: 81 ✭✭Adventure


    TCD - 700

    UCD/UCC/NUI Galway - 690

    RCSI - 685


    That's what i predict for points.


  • Advertisement
  • #1051
    holadivaldfe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 64 ✭✭holadivaldfe


    i'd love it if u were right, but i would also eat my hat.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement