Gamsat 2012

insanity50 · 21-05-2012 2:12pm

Gordonia wrote: »

Are you sure? I haven't heard of anyone getting in on less than 54.

And at the open day, someone asked what the cut-off was last year and they said 54.

Yeah. the third round offers went down quite low and don't think they ever got publicised.

I have a friend in first year who got in on 51.

cliodashe · 21-05-2012 2:17pm

Thanks for your help everyone, gives me a little bit of hope, I guess all I can do now is keep the fingers crossed and hope for the best

Gordonia · 21-05-2012 2:19pm

insanity50 wrote: »

Yeah. the third round offers went down quite low and don't think they ever got publicised.

I have a friend in first year who got in on 51.

I'm surprised to hear that. They're obviously keeping it quiet.

I dunno if people should be getting their hopes up too much all the same. If people did get in on less than 54 it must have been a seriously random selection. Like if someone got in on 51, everyone on 52 or 53 would have gotten in, right? Or maybe there were special circumstances involved?

Like I said, I haven't heard of anyone in my class getting less than 54, but then again people don't tend to go around asking each other. I only know what a few people got.

Reality_Check1 · 21-05-2012 2:19pm

I heard people got into UL with a score of 50 last year but that is more than likely is just idle speculation. Its at 56 on the UL website because Id imagine they want to be taken semi seriously and they get a hard enough time as it is without giving people more ammunition.

This is my opinion on the curve (by no means definite

)

if you came in the 90th percentile you will get your first choice so anyone with a 60+ is laughing.

Now based on the curve distribution and taking into account the amount of places available its the top 25% that will get in so a score of 56 is required. However not everyone with a score of 56+ will accept their place - some will resit to get a preffered college. In that case being in the top 40% MIGHT get you in i.e. a score of 54.

No disrespect to UL but more people reject that college than any other so People sitting on 54 that want UL will probably have to hope others reject it so a spot opens up. It didnt happen in the first few years but the emerging stories over the last while mean more people have repeated instead of going there meaning lower scores get in.

Really best of luck to everyone hoping for a spot and congrats on the great results

jtsuited · 21-05-2012 2:25pm

Flange/Flanders wrote: »

Bit of idle speculation here but just comparing the percentile curve this year to last years, the curve is much steeper this year meaning that results are lower (Due to harder exam or less people did it this year - knew that maths degree wouldnt be totally wasted ). Even last years highest score was around 76, this years is around 72. So on that basis, scores could fall in august....

https://gamsat-ireland.acer.edu.au/results/normInfo.php?yr=2011

i doubt it. curve looks much the same in the business end of 90th to 80th percentile.

jtsuited · 21-05-2012 2:28pm

if you got 60+ you will get somewhere in dublin definitely. without a doubt. you can quote me on that. go get drunk and enjoy the next 3 months. come september you'll be envious of people doing the gamsat.

Flange/Flanders · 21-05-2012 2:34pm

jtsuited wrote: »

i doubt it. curve looks much the same in the business end of 90th to 80th percentile.

I still think they'll fall by a point in most colleges...

CiMaster · 21-05-2012 2:46pm

Does anyone know the start date for UCD? I know RCSI's is about the 12th of Sept (correct me if i'm wrong) ... think i heard UCD was way earlier..? Looking at booking a wee holiday... well you know, its been a very stressful year

Sidenote: cheers to everyone who has contributed to this forum over the last couple of months. Having no peers doing the exam and living abroad it has been indispensible for me. I would lurk on late at night and get comfort in hearing how everyone else was feeling miserable and scientifically inadequate too. Stopped me from throwing myself off the brooklyn bridge at times. Congrats to all today!!

(to those of you that are disappointed, i got 55 last year but never planned on taking course as wanted to save another year, went up to 61 this year so improvement is do-able. A doctor told me ages ago, if you want to be a doctor bad enough, you'll make it happen. Keep at it

)

cliona88 · 21-05-2012 3:10pm

hey guys. im pretty gutted, sitting on a score of 53. I think I'm gonna book gamsat for london in september. In the meantime, I'm gonna get myself a lot of physics and chemistry grinds and maybe some essay writing ones too. I know it's possible that the points could drop and I could get offered a place in UL, but Im afraid that I wouldn't handle the pbl very well. My science is very poor and I wouldnt want to risk failing. I noticed people have said that UL could possibly be embarrassed by their low entrance requirement. They have the greatest number of places available and therefore scores are bound to be lower. I don't think we should judge the quality of the course based on their entrance requirements.
I wonder how those people who got in the low 50's are getting on in UL? Anyways, the only consolation that i have is that i'm only 21 so another year of working won't do me any harm!

GOING4BROKE · 21-05-2012 3:11pm

I have forgotten how the whole CAO offers system works. Is it initially the first round offers then a few days later the second round based on those who do not accept their place?. If this is the case does any asterisk beside a number not mean the final round of offers?

Does any one have an opinion on the lower numbers who sat the test this year and what that will do to the final entrance scores?

Jammyc · 21-05-2012 3:16pm

GOING4BROKE wrote: »

I have forgotten how the whole CAO offers system works. Is it initially the first round offers then a few days later the second round based on those who do not accept their place?. If this is the case does any asterisk beside a number not mean the final round of offers?

Does any one have an opinion on the lower numbers who sat the test this year and what that will do to the final entrance scores?

Im not sure about rounds but the asterisk means that on everybody with that score got a place and that those with that score were offered a place based on random selection.

insanity50 · 21-05-2012 3:19pm

cliona88 wrote: »

hey guys. im pretty gutted, sitting on a score of 53. I think I'm gonna book gamsat for london in september. In the meantime, I'm gonna get myself a lot of physics and chemistry grinds and maybe some essay writing ones too. I know it's possible that the points could drop and I could get offered a place in UL, but Im afraid that I wouldn't handle the pbl very well. My science is very poor and I wouldnt want to risk failing. I noticed people have said that UL could possibly be embarrassed by their low entrance requirement. They have the greatest number of places available and therefore scores are bound to be lower. I don't think we should judge the quality of the course based on their entrance requirements.
I wonder how those people who got in the low 50's are getting on in UL? Anyways, the only consolation that i have is that i'm only 21 so another year of working won't do me any harm!

tbh cliodhna if you're from a non science background you're better off re-sitting.

the current first year cohort have some non science grads who have failed and really face a challenge to get into second year. The reality is these students would have found it difficult in any college, but would most likely have slogged through in a didactic course. These are also students who invariably got low gamsat scores (meaning they didn't do very well in the first place) and wouldn't ordinarily have gotten a place except for the fact the points went so low. Everyone should be offered a chance to do medicine, but equally everyone should be offered an equal chance of progressing. It's very unfair on these students and there's not a whole lot the school can do for them as it is a self directed course and there's nobody really there who can help you if you're having major problems.

You need a background in one of micro/bio/pharm/anat/physiology/immuno to really be able to cope with the ul course. [There are exceptions to the rule of course; however it's more likely you'll be the rule rather than the exception to the rule]

GOING4BROKE · 21-05-2012 3:21pm

Ye then is must mean the final round and anyone who gets in lower is because people may accept places and prolong the option before deciding not to do it.

From what I remember of my primary degree people were starting when we were several weeks into the course based on second and third round offers and had to play catch up so this could also account for the lower scores not published on the Limerick site.

cliona88 · 21-05-2012 3:40pm

insanity50 wrote: »

tbh cliodhna if you're from a non science background you're better off re-sitting.

the current first year cohort have some non science grads who have failed and really face a challenge to get into second year. The reality is these students would have found it difficult in any college, but would most likely have slogged through in a didactic course. These are also students who invariably got low gamsat scores (meaning they didn't do very well in the first place) and wouldn't ordinarily have gotten a place except for the fact the points went so low. Everyone should be offered a chance to do medicine, but equally everyone should be offered an equal chance of progressing. It's very unfair on these students and there's not a whole lot the school can do for them as it is a self directed course and there's nobody really there who can help you if you're having major problems.

You need a background in one of micro/bio/pharm/anat/physiology/immuno to really be able to cope with the ul course. [There are exceptions to the rule of course; however it's more likely you'll be the rule rather than the exception to the rule]

Thanks for the advice. The girl who i bought all of my gamsat material from is currently in UL. Last year when she was going into second year, she said she was doing okay but it was really tough. She did the gradmed prep course in London which is really intense and i can see from her notes that she had a much better grounding in the sciences than i do now. Also I hear that UL is great for people who want to be gps and not so great for more in depth disciplines ( which i would be more interested in). Time to start studying again i guess!

dmccormack01 · 21-05-2012 3:41pm

insanity50 wrote: »

tbh cliodhna if you're from a non science background you're better off re-sitting.

the current first year cohort have some non science grads who have failed and really face a challenge to get into second year. The reality is these students would have found it difficult in any college, but would most likely have slogged through in a didactic course. These are also students who invariably got low gamsat scores (meaning they didn't do very well in the first place) and wouldn't ordinarily have gotten a place except for the fact the points went so low. Everyone should be offered a chance to do medicine, but equally everyone should be offered an equal chance of progressing. It's very unfair on these students and there's not a whole lot the school can do for them as it is a self directed course and there's nobody really there who can help you if you're having major problems.

You need a background in one of micro/bio/pharm/anat/physiology/immuno to really be able to cope with the ul course. [There are exceptions to the rule of course; however it's more likely you'll be the rule rather than the exception to the rule]

how is an extra year going to change your aptitude for science or learning in general? all it will do is make you better at solving gamsat style science puzzles (which is what they are). Surely the first year/ two is going to be an extremely hard slog for non science grads but after that i assume everyone is on an even playing field. hard work, pays off...simple!

i have absolutely no doubt i would be able for the course and have no doubt that everyone else would be able for it too once you put the work in!

hannah90 · 21-05-2012 3:42pm

The asterisk beside the score means that not all applicants with that score were offered a place in that round but may have been offered a place in later rounds. If you follow this link and go to the list of the points required for 2011 Level 8 courses and find graduate medicine here rather than the list of the Graduate Medicine cut-offs for 2011 you can see the scores that were offered places in the final round. It does say 54 for UL but maybe if people did get in on lower scores than that it just wasn't released as it was so late? Just an idea!!

nailer23 wrote: »

as regards points last year http://www.cao.ie/index.php?page=points&p=2011 first round

Gordonia · 21-05-2012 3:44pm

Jammyc wrote: »

Im not sure about rounds but the asterisk means that on everybody with that score got a place and that those with that score were offered a place based on random selection.

No, it means that not everyone with that score was offered a place. So if the score is 57* it means everyone with 58 or higher gets in and some people with 57, based on random selection.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure that's how it works.

GOING4BROKE · 21-05-2012 3:51pm

Yeah Gardonia that is how I think it works. Then the score of 56 posted on Limerick is the first round or tranche or applicants admitted and when this was filled it then dropped to 54/55 whereby all of the 55 got in and some of the 54.

Gordonia · 21-05-2012 3:55pm

insanity50 wrote: »

You need a background in one of micro/bio/pharm/anat/physiology/immuno to really be able to cope with the ul course. [There are exceptions to the rule of course; however it's more likely you'll be the rule rather than the exception to the rule]

I think you may be misleading people by implying that most non-science people are at the bottom of the class as a rule. Though those (10% or so) at the bottom tend to be non-science, there are plenty of borderline people with strong science degrees, as well as non-science people who are doing really well. I think it's fairer to say 'the rule' is, if you put the work in you will tend to do fine. The 'exception' being some people who put the work in, but still fail to pass.

I would advise the Cliona to swot up on science, not so much for Gamsat, but for the actual course itself. Maybe consider doing a short science course for a year or something? You have plenty of time so don't worry.

insanity50 · 21-05-2012 4:06pm

dmccormack01 wrote: »

how is an extra year going to change your aptitude for science or learning in general? all it will do is make you better at solving gamsat style science puzzles (which is what they are). Surely the first year/ two is going to be an extremely hard slog for non science grads but after that i assume everyone is on an even playing field. hard work, pays off...simple!

i have absolutely no doubt i would be able for the course and have no doubt that everyone else would be able for it too once you put the work in!

Not sure what position to comment you are in.

May I ask what your knowledge of the course is?

If you've spoken to any non-science grad in UL they will tell you the same thing.

I'm basically saying to cliodhna that her science is already very poor (based on her admission and her gamsat score). Thus her chances of passing her exams would be easier in a didactic school.

The non-science students who do well in UL are typically ones who also did well in gamsat/taught themselves a lot of science for gamsat and thus have a better background in science than someone who doesn't know any science, got a crap score of 52, and by sheer fluke got a place. (like if cliodhna got a place). such a person would struggle , and those are the very types of people who are struggling.

Gordonia · 21-05-2012 4:12pm

insanity50 wrote: »

Not sure what position to comment you are in.

May I ask what your knowledge of the course is?

I'm in first year UL.

Yes, you might have a point that the non-science people who do well might have done a lot of work for the Gamsat. I don't know if you can put your finger on what the rule is across the board. It seems to vary a lot from what I can make out.

You might be right that a diadactic course would suit a non-science person better, but I wouldn't necessarily go turning down UL based on that alone. You have to weigh up your options and other opportunities.

OMG - can't believe this is all getting dragged up again!! :mad::mad:

insanity50 · 21-05-2012 4:19pm

My post was directed at dmcormack who i quoted, not you.

I agree with a lot of what you've said.

from cliodhnas posts I think a didactic course would better suit her or she'll end up like that sarah (I think her name was??sasha?sheena?can anyone remember?) who posted here a few weeks ago saying she was a first year in ul struggling miserably.

Lil2012 · 21-05-2012 4:42pm

Hey:)

I'm completely new to this so sorry if I'm interrupting a discussion...Don't know what I'm at!

I sat the GAMSAT this year but honestly didn't study because I had no time with final year and all but got 51. I know that's pretty bad but I didn't even know the layout going into it to be honest so I didn't have any expectations at all...Thought I'd get like 10! I'm doing Pharmacy right now so still have my pre-reg to do next year but thinking about sitting it in England in September and giving it a proper shot.

Is there any courses on during the summer or anything like that, that anyone here found useful?

Reality_Check1 · 21-05-2012 4:57pm

Gordonia wrote: »

OMG - can't believe this is all getting dragged up again!! :mad::mad:

with due respect its going to keep getting dragged up again and again and again. Its something people will have to deal with if they go to UL (unfairly I'll admit) but it takes a long time to lose preconceptions.

If UL didnt need high numbers to build the medical school (as in student fees) I genuinely think they would be better off going for smaller class sizes and get rid of the ridiculous rule that the bottom 10% of the class must fail

Stmp · 21-05-2012 5:01pm

Sitting on 59 and delighted with it.

Anyone else on a similar score hoping for UCD/RCSI? Chances?

Jammyc · 21-05-2012 5:34pm

Gordonia wrote: »

No, it means that not everyone with that score was offered a place. So if the score is 57* it means everyone with 58 or higher gets in and some people with 57, based on random selection.

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure that's how it works.

Apologies, correct. Stupid typo changing my entire point.

Babs_1208 · 21-05-2012 5:38pm

Congrats to everyone on your results!!! As someone who is only a month or so into studying for September in London, I'm very envious of you all!

Just as a reassurance/scare tactic for me, would any of you mind answering the below....I'd love to gauge where I sit in comparison with other's backgrounds, etc. Currently going cross-eyed trying to get up to speed with a LC chemistry book and feeling what seems like the usual (and reoccurring!) feeling of despair!

1. Science background? (I only have JC science from 11 years ago...)
2. Length of time studying? (I'll be doing May - Sept full-time)
3. No. of times you have sat GAMSAT? (My first time will be Sept!)
4. Score

I know it won't change anything, but I know no one else doing it so if I see a few non-science people coming out with good scores, I'll feel a bit better! Thanks a mill - and enjoy the celebrations!

jtsuited · 21-05-2012 5:46pm

I'm a current RCSI head having done the gamsat but i'll answer your questions babs.

1. Science background - ha....junior cert science, leaving cert ordinary level chemistry.
2.Length of time studying- roughly 3 months of very bad study.
3. Got it first time
4. Score: 61

There are loads of people in my class just like me. Very high sections 1 and 2. Dodgy sections 3 (as in around 50). Needless to say first semester was a barrel of laughs as half the class have pre-med (the North Americans see), while a good few of us quite literally didn't know our arse from our elbow.

cash2905 · 21-05-2012 6:12pm

Got a solid score, think I should get what I'm after. This forum has been absolutely indispensible for the last 3 months. I haven't contributed much to it, always a lurker, but if anyone has any questions about anything related to it I'll be glad to answer. Happy, happy days lads and lassies!

Sarah1379 · 21-05-2012 6:14pm

Babs_1208 wrote: »

Congrats to everyone on your results!!! As someone who is only a month or so into studying for September in London, I'm very envious of you all!

Just as a reassurance/scare tactic for me, would any of you mind answering the below....I'd love to gauge where I sit in comparison with other's backgrounds, etc. Currently going cross-eyed trying to get up to speed with a LC chemistry book and feeling what seems like the usual (and reoccurring!) feeling of despair!

1. Science background? (I only have JC science from 11 years ago...)
2. Length of time studying? (I'll be doing May - Sept full-time)
3. No. of times you have sat GAMSAT? (My first time will be Sept!)
4. Score

I know it won't change anything, but I know no one else doing it so if I see a few non-science people coming out with good scores, I'll feel a bit better! Thanks a mill - and enjoy the celebrations!

1. Science background, pffft non-existent. JC science too, which I took at ordinary level ‘cause I was bad and lazy back in the day.

2. I took a year, technically, to study. Ended up doing more like three months decent study on and off. Got a bunch of textbooks, watched Khan academy (gold).

3. Twas my first time.

4. 60 yay! hoping for UCD.

Any questions or need any advice/help, drop me a PM

Gamsat 2012

Comments