View Poll Results: How much did the removal of AR affect your UKCAT average?
- 87. You may not vote on this poll
23-12-2007, 07:13 PM #21
Nicnac, we're just getting a little annoyed about how Argh is contradicting herself and insisting that her mark was all due to her own effort (when she doesn't actually know for sure) and also insisting that those of us that did badly in that section did so 'fairly and squarely'. The fact that the section has been dropped suggests that this is not the case.PCMD- Year 5/IntercalatingImperial Cardiovascular Sciences 2013-2014
23-12-2007, 08:45 PM #22
- Join Date
- Apr 2007
And Nicnac, your assumption that it's because my own UKCAT score was lower is complete bollocks. I only applied to one medschool this year and I have an interview so my UKCAT score is neither here nor there really. I couldn't care less what my score was, as long as it was good enough, and thankfully it was
23-12-2007, 10:16 PM #23PCMD- Year 5/IntercalatingImperial Cardiovascular Sciences 2013-2014
23-12-2007, 11:15 PM #24
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
My points are as follows:
1. Whichever way you resolve the issue, some people will end up with artificially inflated averages (either through having tests marked too highly, or having the section they have done badly in conveniently removed). This is my mind is unfair. I think most people would agree if they thought about it.
2. The options that seem reasonable would therefore be to give the universities the information we had (some people's results are artificially high in the AR section, so if they have 900, doubt it) and the full UKCAT results so universities can judge whether or not they want to consider the AR score for that candidate. Or they should think about whether a test designed to measure four facets of your capacity remains a fair indicator of "clinical aptitude" if you remove one of those sections. I think not, in which case they should scrap the whole UKCAT for this year and refund us our money. I feel so strongly about this that *despite* having a good average, which apparently doesn't allow me to have an opinion on this topic, I think they should still scrap the test for this year.
3. Tact is indeed an important part of being a doctor. But tact as a doctor is never saying to someone dying of a brain tumour "Man, you think YOU have it tough? You should try having asthma, its REALLY annoying". Its not holding back your opinion on a message board so as not to theoretically offend people with a lower UKCAT average who may have had their averages lowered beyond the level of being accepted to any of their university choices (none of whom are in this thread and I doubt many of whom would be annoyed with what I am saying).
4. Frankly, I am annoyed when I give money to a company to run an exam, which is then cocked up even though they obviously initially piloted the test, then ran it last year. How hard can it be to create a computer programme that marks a section of the test correctly? I imagine not very. So naturally I am damn pissed off when I part with £75 and get incompetence in return. And I am then not informed of this incompetence for another two/three months after they are aware of it. That is just bad business and it is inexcusable.
I wonder if in the future you guys will tell your patients they aren't allowed opinions on medical issues because they don't have medical degrees.... I find it a rather strange attitude to take that a certain stance can only be taken if you have been HUGELY affected by it. I disapprove of the US government cutting international aid to any charity that supports abortion, but I am neither in a developing country, nor have I ever needed an abortion, nor am I American. Does that mean I can't have that opinion?Oxford GEP- offer- declined
Kings GEP- 5 year offer instead, accepted, now bumped to GPEP
QMUL GEP- Interview, then rejection
Southampton GEP- good old fashioned rejection
UKCAT- 744 (783 with AR)
23-12-2007, 11:37 PM #25
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
Think it's all got a little heated on this thread (possibly misdirected collective anger against Pearson Vue). But regardless of any of that, I just wanted to point out that looking at the poll right now (i.e. with 50 people's votes included) - the effect on results looks like there's actually now a slight increase in the majority of results (i.e. 52% of people saw an increase in their marks after the exclusion of the AR section). Which does imply that the speculation that the rescinding of that section being due to an over-inflation in peoples marks (or lots of people getting 900), might be somewhat unfounded... Obviously that's only 50 people, but still - interesting.
Last edited by adi; 23-12-2007 at 11:41 PM.
23-12-2007, 11:42 PM #26
Having the AR section dropped won't give people artificial averages as it is being dropped for everyone. So everyone's average will be calculated from the other three sections. What I think would be unfair is if colleges still decide to include the AR section despite the fact that people may have got an artificially higher average with it (ie some were given an easier version of the section). If this applies to every section, then yes I think they should scrap the whole test. Otherwise not for this year but they should certainly do something about sorting out that AR.
Although it doesn't really affect me (I'm bound to be rejected by three of my choices due to my grades and if the PMS average cut off is actually 600 then I was above that regardless), I am annoyed as well that I paid a lot of money (which I had to scrape together) for a test that wasn't up to scratch. I am glad that they have got rid of that section though because I've scored in the 99th percentile of every AR section of an aptitude test I have done (something which I had forgotten but my referee mentioned it in my reference) and yet did badly in this one so I feel it wasn't a good indicator of my abilities in that area.PCMD- Year 5/IntercalatingImperial Cardiovascular Sciences 2013-2014
23-12-2007, 11:44 PM #27PCMD- Year 5/IntercalatingImperial Cardiovascular Sciences 2013-2014
24-12-2007, 12:08 AM #28
Actually they have. People have emailed both Pearson Vue and Nottingham Uni. I'm not sure which one said this, but one of them gave back the response that the reason they are dropping it is because a lot of people scored 'too highly'. I was wrong in saying 'easier version', this is speculation. But they have given a reason for dropping it.PCMD- Year 5/IntercalatingImperial Cardiovascular Sciences 2013-2014
24-12-2007, 12:23 AM #29
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
24-12-2007, 01:00 AM #30
Good point. Here's the e-mail someone posted (on this thread: Pearson-VUE response).
This was the response from UKCAT - they blame Pearson-VUE!
Will nobody take some f**king responsibility?
Pearson VUE as the test providers were responsible for setting and
marking the examinations and for assessment of quality. As soon as
UKCAT were informed of the doubts about the abstract reasoning section
at the end of October 2007 universities were informed. The problems
with the Abstract Reasoning section resulted in large numbers of
candidates being marked with too high a score in this section. The
results were not valid and could not be used fairly. Further analysis
has shown that removing the marks for the Abstract Reasoning section has
made very little difference to the ranking of individuals in the total
Individual medical and dental schools are able to use the results of
each of the subtests available to them as they wish. The schools are
aware of the problems with this subtest and if they wish to modify their
admissions processes that is open to them to do.
Any further enquiries regarding the process should be addressed in
writing to Pearson VUE Customer Services or enquiries about specific
applications to medical or dental schools should be addressed to the
UKCAT AdministratorPCMD- Year 5/IntercalatingImperial Cardiovascular Sciences 2013-2014