Imperial College School of Medicine

switchday · 23-02-2008, 03:20 AM

Braps Mitul.

levantine · 24-02-2008, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gizmo says -

why do you say this, macca?

Because generally, King's is slightly easier to get into (with the exception of the odds of getting onto their GEP MBBS, that is). If you are a convincing enough applicant, you seem to have slightly more chance of getting in even without quite the grades required than with e.g. ICL or UCL, who seem to have more rigid glass ceilings for entry requirements... the advantage is that this gives people with potential a second chance if they genuinely just missed out due to circumstances rather than being plain not up to it, but the risk is that some of the people taken on are indeed simply not up to it and will produce results that reflect this. At least, that's been my impression so far, and it hasn't changed too much on making the transition from being a KCL student to staff.

Quote:

thats interesting, macca. Can you tell us why its outstanding, exactly and precisely, and ow this affects an undergraduate?

Two main reasons: the quality of research, and the people working there. Some of the world's greatest psychiatrists are at the IoP. As an undergraduate, if you're fortunate enough to have them teach you or supervise your projects, it's quite the experience - not to mention joining in on their ward rounds. Also, it means other experts keep visiting to see them... if you're interested in specialising in psychiatry, it's a great opportunity to learn and interact. I'm not actually intending to go into psychiatry, it's more like a side interest (if one can have time for such a thing in medicine), but have been incredibly inspired there. If you're a graduate or doing research, it's a place with a lot of clout in terms of securing funding and hosting major conferences and is generally a platform of opportunity.

Quote:

where exactly is the unfriendliness, macca? or do you mean the vicinity of south london is more open and friendly bustlin than west london self interested peeple?

I hadn't considered the setting, actually... I find London Bridge can be almost as snooty as West London sometimes, depending >_> But I meant in terms of the staff (overall) - hence referenced the self-report from an admins tutor. Not that it would put me off especially... actually, ICL is where I'd love to do my MBBS - I just never applied at any stage for anything there... >_> Slight problem, that

Gizmo says - · 24-02-2008, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by levantine

Because generally, King's is slightly easier to get into (with the exception of the odds of getting onto their GEP MBBS, that is).

so where is the evidence for this?
i dont mean considerations of peers based on no evidence either.

Quote:

If you are a convincing enough applicant, you seem to have slightly more chance of getting in even without quite the grades required than with e.g. ICL or UCL, who seem to have more rigid glass ceilings for entry requirements...

explain why they are more rigid please, macca. they appear pretty much the same to me.

Quote:

Two main reasons: the quality of research, and the people working there. Some of the world's greatest psychiatrists are at the IoP.

why are they the worlds greatest? dont other unis around the world 'ave worlds greatest psychiatrists too?

Quote:

If you're a graduate or doing research, it's a place with a lot of clout in terms of securing funding and hosting major conferences and is generally a platform of opportunity.

you do very little research as a medic, so i dont see your point. Furthermore, do you feel that the platforms provided by other unis are not the same? really, 'and on 'eart? ?? Beleif is one fing, but knowing is another, as is common sense that there must be a spread of experts at all unis...again not that this applies to an undergrad..

levantine · 25-02-2008, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gizmo says -

so where is the evidence for this?
i dont mean considerations of peers based on no evidence either.

explain why they are more rigid please, macca. they appear pretty much the same to me.

I don't know the equivalent for ICL, but UCL has a general college requirement of (last I checked was a couple of yrs ago) 3 Cs at -Level. This simply doesn't apply at KCL. You could get in with D grades so long as you have something else that's better in the mix, etc.

[quote why are they the worlds greatest? dont other unis around the world 'ave worlds greatest psychiatrists too?[/quote]

Every universty has its particular strengths and weaknesses, one of KCL's happens to be psychiatry. Of the so-called 'top 250 current leading experts' per field, 11 are at KCL, but 9 of those at the IoP. The head of my dep is the world's most cited psychiatrist on schizophrenia, for instance - which you may dismiss as a petty stat, but it takes a lot of funding and talent to earn it, and fields identify such individuals. Unless you're insisting that all medical schools are balanced in the same ways, have the same strengths and weaknesses, and have no particular qualities that differentiate them, which would be a bit untrue... students end up with the same MBBS, but the route is hardly the same.

And actually some medical schools have very poor psychiatry options to offer students especially interested in the field. Don't have some kind of table at hand, but it came up at a national psychiatric conference last week.

Quote:

you do very little research as a medic, so i dont see your point.

That depends entirely on your course and what you pursue. With the MB-PhD programs now on offer, it is possible to do a LOT of research as an undergraduate. Besides, intercalated students often do research projects, and some of those done sometimes make it to publication - I call that an early research opportunity. And on top of that, there are open slots at research teams across the IoP that people can volunteer on or work with part-time, or to supplement their studies - we have several undergrads (MBBS included) doing that on my team. It's not so conventional, but it's an opportunity up for grabs.

Quote:

Furthermore, do you feel that the platforms provided by other unis are not the same? really, 'and on 'eart? ?? Beleif is one fing, but knowing is another, as is common sense that there must be a spread of experts at all unis...again not that this applies to an undergrad..

Again, some universities just don't have the same focus on every speciality. KCL has an entire 7-floor once-independent school dedicated to psychiatry; it would be ridiculous to equate this platform to a medical school where there may just two teaching academic psychiatrists (which does happen - we only have two academic reproduction physiologists teaching the medics at GKT, for instance (/cry!)). The Wellcome Trust recently identified that psychiatry, along with two related fields, didn't even have a proper category for funding (now does) due to the scarcity of appropriate numbers of academic psychiatrists in medical schools, and the 'spread' was highlighted as another issue currently in imbalance, with some medical schools identified as not really pulling anything in for this field at all (they wouldn't say which ones). Being taught by someone who is very active in the research components of their field has its undeniable benefits.

Someone earlier pointed out that ICL is RICH and that this is great for students. Very true - ergo a specialist school that is able to secure a lot of funding (which often needs to have reputable PIs applying to a rich body to really keep securing it) is going to be a great resource.

To be honest I don't really understand your insistence on parity between specific branches of medical schools. If you really want to explore the statistical basis, there's a plethora of league tables and research stats etc out there. If I wanted to specialise in, say, stem cell matters or psychiatry and I had an open choice, I'd pick GKT in a heartbeat. For other specialities though, there are places I'd probably have a better time in.