med advice (1 Viewer)

[rm93]

is it possible to get a MBBS if your UAI is below the cut off?

n.b. looking more at UWS and UNSW

 

[darkprincess28]

Only if you have a UMAT score of over 290

Good luck with that.

 

[Fogell]

UWS not so much, but i heard UNSW uses all three(umat, uai and Interview) so u can get uai below cuttoff uai and still get in

 

[Raif]

What' the cut-off mark for it?

 

[Charity F]

technically there is no 'cutoff', due to other entry requirements (uai + umat/interview, or a combination of all three)
check out those UAC guides

general estimations:

UWS
non-GWS (greater western sydney) applicant = uai threshold of 95
GWS applicants = uai threshold of 93

UNSW
generally accepted that median uai is ~99+

Only if you have a UMAT score of over 290

Good luck with that.

um no

 

[Dr_Fresh]

u need the minimum uai to be considered. they will not accept some1 with a 90 uai regardless of how high their umat is. u need 95 uai and above to get in. even then, u still need a minimum of 220 umat (very very high) to even get an interview. so for some1 with a 95 uai, 220 is still borderline and u will still need to do very well in the interview.

for uws, there is a minimum cutoff of 93 for ppl in the western syd area and a realistic cutoff in the 99s for ppl not from the western syd area (its highly competitive, when u think of good students from syd who dont live in the western syd area and didnt get into unsw).

the above is for non rural applicants which i assume u are.
and cutoffs are applied strictly.

the cutoffs are there basically to make sure that people who get into the course can actually cope with the level of work and be able to pass the tests. and studies have shown that ur uai is a good indication of success in university. it is a reflection of your study habits and level of intelligence over the course of 2 years while the umat is just a 2.5 hr multiply choice test where you have a 1 in 4 chance of guessing a question correctly.

 

[Wooz]

u need the minimum uai to be considered. they will not accept some1 with a 90 uai regardless of how high their umat is. u need 95 uai and above to get in. even then, u still need a minimum of 220 umat (very very high) to even get an interview. so for some1 with a 95 uai, 220 is still borderline and u will still need to do very well in the interview.

for uws, there is a minimum cutoff of 93 for ppl in the western syd area and a realistic cutoff in the 99s for ppl not from the western syd area (its highly competitive, when u think of good students from syd who dont live in the western syd area and didnt get into unsw).

the above is for non rural applicants which i assume u are.
and cutoffs are applied strictly.

the cutoffs are there basically to make sure that people who get into the course can actually cope with the level of work and be able to pass the tests. and studies have shown that ur uai is a good indication of success in university. it is a reflection of your study habits and level of intelligence over the course of 2 years while the umat is just a 2.5 hr multiply choice test where you have a 1 in 4 chance of guessing a question correctly.

UAI at UNCLE and UWS is based on a threshold once you exceed 95, etc they only consider your umat score for the interview.

There are other ways of entering medicine such as non-standard entry, esp if your uai score is not suffice, but you have an excellent umat score.

You can enter the following unis as a non-standard:

JCU
BOND
UWS
UNE/UNCLE JMP
UWA
UTAS
UNSW
U.Adel (Only if you attended the university, etc)

 

[chinaski]

the cutoffs are there basically to make sure that people who get into the course can actually cope with the level of work and be able to pass the tests.

I disagree. Medicine isn't rocket science. You don't need to be uber intelligent to cope with "the level of work". Bright, yes. Freakishly bright? No.

 

[rm93]

i heard that
uws = 90+ (something about my are)
unsw = 95

correct?

 

[Bacilli]

Incorrect

 

[sundirtwater]

UAI at UNCLE and UWS is based on a threshold once you exceed 95, etc they only consider your umat score for the interview.

There are other ways of entering medicine such as non-standard entry, esp if your uai score is not suffice, but you have an excellent umat score.

You can enter the following unis as a non-standard:

JCU
BOND
UWS
UNE/UNCLE JMP
UWA
UTAS
UNSW
U.Adel (Only if you attended the university, etc)

what does non-standard mean?

 

[Dr_Fresh]

I disagree. Medicine isn't rocket science. You don't need to be uber intelligent to cope with "the level of work". Bright, yes. Freakishly bright? No.

u need good work ethic combined with intellect. perhaps unis feel that a greater portion of those ppl who get lower uais dont have the latter? its a generalisation which may or may not be fair, but certain assumptions must be made to make the selection process easier. theres no way of knowing if some1 with a uai of 85 has a good work ethic or not. but on the other hand you can be pretty sure that some1 with 95+ uai would have both in varying degrees.
the umat is mainly a test of intelligence, are u against this as a means of selection? unless u are of the view that it does not test intelligence and can be revised for?

 

[C6H12O6-Glucose]

I disagree. Medicine isn't rocket science. You don't need to be uber intelligent to cope with "the level of work". Bright, yes. Freakishly bright? No.

yes chinaski you're right!
however, you must remember that this is easily the most prestigious and sought after degree at an undergraduate level and for that reason, the cutoffs are very high as the medical schools have a large number of people to choose from.

so yes, you may not need to be Einstein to be a doctor but you have to accept that to get into medicine at undergraduate level you do!

 

[black_kat_meow]

yes chinaski you're right!
however, you must remember that this is easily the most prestigious and sought after degree at an undergraduate level and for that reason, the cutoffs are very high as the medical schools have a large number of people to choose from.

so yes, you may not need to be Einstein to be a doctor but you have to accept that to get into medicine at undergraduate level you do!

More like you have to be of a certain racial background so you have no social life and your parents pay for ridiculous amounts of tutoring.

 

[C6H12O6-Glucose]

More like you have to be of a certain racial background so you have no social life and your parents pay for ridiculous amounts of tutoring.

well that would explain why i didn't get in (at a decent medical school that is)
my advice:
if you want usyd/monash/unsw med straight out of school
don't wait until last term of year 12 to start doing some work or you'll be doing graduate entry

 

[chinaski]

u need good work ethic combined with intellect. perhaps unis feel that a greater portion of those ppl who get lower uais dont have the latter? its a generalisation which may or may not be fair, but certain assumptions must be made to make the selection process easier. theres no way of knowing if some1 with a uai of 85 has a good work ethic or not. but on the other hand you can be pretty sure that some1 with 95+ uai would have both in varying degrees.

No, you can't. I can take a bright kid and hot house them, and turn them into a high achieving, fine candidate for a medical degree. Hot housing doesn't = a good work ethic, or aptitude for medicine, nor does it imply they're going into medicine for the right reasons, or even a comprehension of what they're in for. As such, a UAI of 95+ is potentially as subjective as a UAI of 85.

the umat is mainly a test of intelligence, are u against this as a means of selection? unless u are of the view that it does not test intelligence and can be revised for?

I am neither for or against UMAT, largely because I've never set eyes on a sample paper.

yes chinaski you're right!
however, you must remember that this is easily the most prestigious and sought after degree at an undergraduate level and for that reason, the cutoffs are very high as the medical schools have a large number of people to choose from.

so yes, you may not need to be Einstein to be a doctor but you have to accept that to get into medicine at undergraduate level you do!

Exactly. The high cut offs are not there predominantly to ensure candidates are capable of passing and "coping" with the course, as the OP was suggesting.

 

[Dr_Fresh]

it sounds like u are suggesting that the uai can be useless since people study/get coaching for it?
if some1 is being told when to study, how to study and the kind of things to study over 6 years. this will become virtually a habit/second nature. universities know this and hence have a cutoff to ensure that either their applicants have a high level of intellect/know how to study.
btw, not all people who get the high uais are "hot housed". and the interview weeds out these people.

med is a highly demanded course, and IF what u say is true, then y dont med schools just scratch the uai altogether and use other methods to select the "right applicants"? e.g. just use the interview/umat. its because they know the top students are more likely to perform better. studies have shown that the uai has greatest correlation to success in the med course.

also, based on my own exp in med, i can tell u now that some1 with an 85 uai will struggle with some of the concepts taught in med. esp with regard to biology/chemistry. some of the stuff is highly conceptual and not all rote learning as one may think.

lets not turn this into a debate about whether or not high marks equate to doing med for the right/wrong reasons here. u cannot be sure that ppl with lower uais are doing med for the right reasons.

 

[chinaski]

it sounds like u are suggesting that the uai can be useless since people study/get coaching for it?
if some1 is being told when to study, how to study and the kind of things to study over 6 years. this will become virtually a habit/second nature. universities know this and hence have a cutoff to ensure that either their applicants have a high level of intellect/know how to study.
btw, not all people who get the high uais are "hot housed". and the interview weeds out these people.

med is a highly demanded course, and IF what u say is true, then y dont med schools just scratch the uai altogether and use other methods to select the "right applicants"? e.g. just use the interview/umat. its because they know the top students are more likely to perform better. studies have shown that the uai has greatest correlation to success in the med course.

also, based on my own exp in med, i can tell u now that some1 with an 85 uai will struggle with some of the concepts taught in med. esp with regard to biology/chemistry. some of the stuff is highly conceptual and not all rote learning as one may think.

lets not turn this into a debate about whether or not high marks equate to doing med for the right/wrong reasons here. u cannot be sure that ppl with lower uais are doing med for the right reasons.

I might qualify my comments by saying that I am a doctor, so you needn't tell me what it's like to be a medical student. You appear to be labouring under the misperception that medicine is a course (and career) that needs a super-high intellect. It doesn't. I'm of the opinion that most super-smart people shouldn't be wasted in clinical medicine - their academic aptitude could be channeled in so many directions apart from being a doctor. It's a shame that it's considered a "waste" of their UAI to enrol in courses that demand less than a subatomic UAI cutoff.

Furthermore, a person with a UAI of 85 can potentially shine in med, just as they similarly shine in graduate medicine. Ever wondered what UAI most grad entry students got when they left school? UAI is a measure of one moment of your life, which decays in relevance very, very quickly. It's not a crystalised indication of potential.

Take home message: don't invest so much faith in the UAI system. A high score doesn't necessarily mean you're a good candidate for medicine, nor does a low score mean that you're not - as I've said before, the system is subjective at both ends. The interview does not "weed out" all bad applicants. Like it or not, prestige demands that the "best" are selected for medicine, and the short sighted view of "the best" = kids with high UAIs.

 

[C6H12O6-Glucose]

I might qualify my comments by saying that I am a doctor, so you needn't tell me what it's like to be a medical student. You appear to be labouring under the misperception that medicine is a course (and career) that needs a super-high intellect. It doesn't. I'm of the opinion that most super-smart people shouldn't be wasted in clinical medicine - their academic aptitude could be channeled in so many directions apart from being a doctor. It's a shame that it's considered a "waste" of their UAI to enrol in courses that demand less than a subatomic UAI cutoff.

Furthermore, a person with a UAI of 85 can potentially shine in med, just as they similarly shine in graduate medicine. Ever wondered what UAI most grad entry students got when they left school? UAI is a measure of one moment of your life, which decays in relevance very, very quickly. It's not a crystalised indication of potential.

Take home message: don't invest so much faith in the UAI system. A high score doesn't necessarily mean you're a good candidate for medicine, nor does a low score mean that you're not - as I've said before, the system is subjective at both ends. The interview does not "weed out" all bad applicants. Like it or not, prestige demands that the "best" are selected for medicine, and the short sighted view of "the best" = kids with high UAIs.

sorry chinaski but i don't see where you're going with the comment "... the short sighted view of the 'best' = kids with high UAIs"

in all reality that is the truth about school leavers. the UAI depicts both a student's intellectual ability and their attitudes towards work (their work ethic). anybody who achieves 99+ has both shown that they are of reasonable intelligence but also that they see the value in working hard for what they want. these are both extremely inportant in selecting for prospective doctors who are soon going to be working 60+ hour weeks as an intern and their work ethic's need to show that they can do this without too much of a hassle. for this reason, the UAI is by far the best indicator for selection and do you really blame the universities for choosing the best?
after all they just want to attract a good reputation and having high quality students will always help!

 

[chinaski]

sorry chinaski but i don't see where you're going with the comment "... the short sighted view of the 'best' = kids with high UAIs"

in all reality that is the truth about school leavers. the UAI depicts both a student's intellectual ability and their attitudes towards work (their work ethic).

Sometimes, but not always. As I keep saying, it's a subjective measure. A UAI can be inflated by circumstance: a kid in a high ranking school, who gets extra tuition, who doesn't do much apart from eat, sleep and dream about school (be it from parental encouragement or an individual desire to do so) will likely blitz a similarly ambitious kid who goes to an average school, who doesn't get extra coaching, but who works just as hard as the first kid. I'm not criticising those kids who do well (kudos to them); I just don't automatically think of them as necessarily (without question) being "the best" for selection.

and do you really blame the universities for choosing the best?
after all they just want to attract a good reputation and having high quality students will always help!

I don't blame them, nor do I deny that they select on grounds of prestige.