Graduate entry test 2005

**saintgermain** · 24-10-2005, 01:30 AM

Since the 2004 applicants appear to have deserted the board in droves, I propose a new thread for those of us doomed to take the GEM test in 2005. So to those preparing for the test - or indeed those who have already taken it..

-Are you preparing for the test and, if so, what is your strategy?
-Does anyone want to share answers to the example questions provided on the medical school website?
-Can anyone propose potential essay questions for others to practice writing for?

I have attached a jpeg (cannot upload .doc files) of my answers to some of the numerical manipulation section. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding something but the test seems to have been written with a lot of tolerance for 'leaps of reason'. If noone else notices this then perhaps I've just misunderstood something important!

http://bmra.pharm.ox.ac.uk/GEEntranceTest.html

**saintgermain** · 24-10-2005, 01:31 AM

...

**macange** · 27-10-2005, 06:18 PM

Hi!

I have looked at your answers but I am not quite sure how you arrived at them. If you have time I'd really appreciate it if you could explain to me.

Regards,

macange

**AndreucciodaPerugia** · 27-10-2005, 06:38 PM

Originally Posted by saintgermain

...

Hi, I haven't looked at the table but I thought I'd add my 2c to what looks like a pretty good answer (just glancing over, I know).

for b. I would add: ability to fly (e.g. ostriches and emus became too heavy, or rather too big without the necessary increase in wing size and strength), survival competition (in general animals with larger offspring tend to have fewer offspring, but if there's a lot of survival competition for the young, it's beneficial to keep young small and plentiful since it increases chances of some surviving to sexual maturity - i know this happens with some fish) feeding habits, (related to above: if less food, less benefit to being big, type of food available may influence size, or if you have to run/fly from prey might be beneficial to be bigger (<-- though this works either way).) that's all I can think of right now (am in physics class, clearly not paying attention)

for c. I would add: again - ability to fly, (birds need to be able to overcome drag, and other forces, that said they get down to the size of hummingbirds) migration patterns (smaller birds generally don't migrate as far is my guess), availability of food year round (dunno if birds have fat reserves, so this may not apply), all I can think of...

**AndreucciodaPerugia** · 27-10-2005, 06:41 PM

Yeah - I'm kind of scared of this test.

I really don't know how you can prepare for it... Anyway - i know it can't help to panic, though any advice offered is much appreciated.

**saintgermain** · 28-10-2005, 02:35 AM

Originally Posted by AndreucciodaPerugia

Hi, I haven't looked at the table but I thought I'd add my 2c to what looks like a pretty good answer (just glancing over, I know).

for b. I would add: ability to fly (e.g. ostriches and emus became too heavy, or rather too big without the necessary increase in wing size and strength), survival competition (in general animals with larger offspring tend to have fewer offspring, but if there's a lot of survival competition for the young, it's beneficial to keep young small and plentiful since it increases chances of some surviving to sexual maturity - i know this happens with some fish) feeding habits, (related to above: if less food, less benefit to being big, type of food available may influence size, or if you have to run/fly from prey might be beneficial to be bigger (<-- though this works either way).) that's all I can think of right now (am in physics class, clearly not paying attention)

for c. I would add: again - ability to fly, (birds need to be able to overcome drag, and other forces, that said they get down to the size of hummingbirds) migration patterns (smaller birds generally don't migrate as far is my guess), availability of food year round (dunno if birds have fat reserves, so this may not apply), all I can think of...

Ahh now when I read the question I interpreted 'what factors might limit size?' as relating to the factors they had already given us! Seems like I'm being too narrow minded in my answers. You came up with a lot though - and many which I am kicking myself for not thinking of! Such a shame they don't tell us how much each question is worth.. it would be very frustrating to spend a lot of time on a '1 mark' question and neglect the hidden '20 marker'!

macange.. as for the table.. you need to look at the information they give you and see how that can be used to fill in the blanks. We are told that species B has a wingspan of 2S and a thrust of 4T.. so if species D has a wingspan of 4S (twice that of species B), I am presuming that that it must have twice the thrust of species B - 8T. The rest of the blanks get filled in in the same way. Hope that's useful.. (although it might not be correct of course!)

**macange** · 28-10-2005, 03:25 AM

Hello!!!

Thank-you very much for taking the time to reply to my query. However, I am still a little unsure of how you arrived at yor answers. Why for example is species C's thrust 5T? From what you have said, I thought that this species is 1 and a half times as big as species B, therefore shouldn't it have 1 and a half times the thrust- i.e 6T not 5T? I can't really figure out how you've worked out the other columns either- despite reading the introductory information. I think I understand why the weight and the heat production columns have the same numbers due to the 'directly proportionate' inference. Otherwise, I'm confused! I hope to hear from you soon.

Good luck with your application.

Regards,

macange

**munafiq** · 28-10-2005, 11:53 AM

Don't get too hung up on the example question, the ones in the test last year (except for the last one) were a lot less esoteric.

With regards to the model answer someone provided, I don't have the original question in front of me right now, but why are there discontinuities (e.g. 1T, 4T, 5T)?

**macange** · 28-10-2005, 01:40 PM

Hello!

I don't understand the discontinuities either and my conclusions to the problem are quite different. I know it's important not to get hung up on these questions- i'll try not to!

Regards,

macange.

**saintgermain** · 01-11-2005, 05:15 PM

You're right and now I'm confused by my own reasoning. It makes sense but then doesn't fit with some of the numbers already put in the table for us! If anyone can suggest another way to sort this then please share!