UKCAT

Bek · 02-09-2007, 08:38 PM

Everyone works very hard to achieve the highest grades they can for GCSE's and they obtain the required grades of B's, A's and A*'s. Then comes As levels, so again you work your hardest to get the A's and B's you need. So far you have achieved everything you need to get into medical school, I mean at least the most important bits. Then comes the Ukcat probably the most irrelevant test ever, i am sure it doesnt even give an accurate representation of your intelligence. You may then have a bad day and get pretty bad in your ukcat, something you didn't expect to get. Does that mean all your hard work from the last 5 years are all gone with one test.
The non-cognitive doesn't even give a proper description of your personality, how are they suppose to know what you are like, i am pretty sure they can find out your personality during interview. So this all brings me to the conclusion that the UKCAT is pointless.

OH by the way i am not saying this because i did bad infact i got an average of 647.5 and a very good description of me saying i am outgoing engaging person who ballances arguments when a conflict is about to arise and so on

kittykat07 · 02-09-2007, 08:53 PM

Can't you just understand that with THOUSANDS of students all with similar grades/work experience/personal statements/academic achievements/extra curriculars etc etc admission tutors need SOME POSSIBLE WAY of differentiating between candidates?

And seeing as you initally say that you are 'sure that it doesn't give an accurate representation of [candidate's] intelligence' and then go on to say that your score is actually 'a very good description of you', don't you see that your whole argument is flawed?!

The UKCAT won't be removed because some students are put off by the extra work. It seems like it's here to stay, so this post is a bit pointless, imho.

Bek · 02-09-2007, 09:01 PM

how is my argument flawed, i am sure you have done well so you think its an ok test. How did they differentiate between the candidates before the ukcat i am sure they can still do the same thing.

kittykat07 · 02-09-2007, 09:05 PM

I haven't taken the test this year yet so I don't just think it's an 'ok test'.

And they only has to introduce the UKCAT when applicant numbers for medicine sky-rocketed and more and more people began to get better results. And it's easy for you to say that you are 'sure that they can still do the same thing' - you're not the one that has to decided between the applicants and reject thousands of students who would been perfectly suited for your medical school but you simply do not have the funding or spaces to accomodate them.

Your argument is flawed because on the one hand you say that it doesn't prove anything about a person but then go on to say that your test score from the test accurately portrays your personaility. Do you understand what I mean?

Bek · 02-09-2007, 09:11 PM

I did not say it portays and accurate representation of me, i think you should re-read it. I only said that i am not moaning for getting a bad result which i didnt. Well your concerns for money and accomodation are very good, so who cares if the university loose a little money for an extra good student.

kittykat07 · 02-09-2007, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bek

Well your concerns for money and accomodation are very good, so who cares if the university loose a little money for an extra good student.

Omg you haven't got a clue how it works do you? It's not their decision how many students they take. The government decides and allocates a number of places to each medical school depending on how many clinical school places there at the teaching hospitals.

Maybe you should read up more about the system before complaining about it.

And you said it shows a 'very good description of [you]', which I understood to be that you meant an accurate representation, I apologise, but I still believe you basically meant the same thing.

Arch_Angel · 02-09-2007, 09:20 PM

We all know of the irrelevance of the UKCAT, but as was just said, it's simply another level of admissions for more people to fall at. There's no point trying to be nice or mincing words here, the whole point of the admissions department is to eliminate people, why not use such a test?

I feel like a bit mean saying this, but (and I know it's not you here) if you haven't done very well in it then you've failed what they expect you to be able to do and are therefore less able (even if only in ability to pass these sort of tests) than people that did better than you.

The same argument ("there's no point and it makes me look bad") could be leveled at A levels, or interviews, or the BMAT, or GAMSAT etc. I understand where you are coming from, but think you are wrong.

With massive over subscription they need more and more ways of discerning from Jimmy who has 5 A's at A2 level was captain of this, that and the other has DoE platinum, has been knighted, already has a PhD at the age of 17 etc. and someone else with a different name and equal qualifications.

It's either this, or make the A levels harder. It doesn't really seem fair to everyone else to take the latter route.

In my eyes, the UKCAT is fair, even if it is a tad silly.

Nik

Bek · 02-09-2007, 09:23 PM

Woah how cld u say i havent done my research, if i didnt know that there was a goverment imposed quota i wouldnt be applying for medicine. All i was trying to get across to you was that very able people do loose the chance of being admitted to medical school due to the UKCAT.