Research like this should be replicated across medical schools heavy on the UKCAT

[flarestar]

I agree with Krazyfish. The UKCAT should not be the sole indicator for getting an interview for those uni's with cut-offs. An aptitude test cannot be an entry requirement for medicine alone.

Hmmm maybe they should take the C out of UKCAT so it become UKAT since it's not really clinically related.

However how else do you cut down the number of applicants? I also don't think adding a science element to the UKCAT is any better. I took three sciences at A-level I think that's inidcator enough of my science ability. The only thing the science section in the BMAT tests is how quickly can you answer basic science questions whilst checking your understanding of it. It seems to me your A-levels do the science half and the UKCAT tests the quickness half. However I did like the Essay writing section since it tests how well you can organise and consicely write and format an ethical argument which is atleast science realted if not medically related. Atleast it would make some kind of a good indicator on how well of a doctor you may become.

Ah well those are my thoughts.

[Professor Higgins]

The UKCAT attempts to measure certain innate abilities. The fact that testees (as it were) can improve their score significantly by preparation combined with the evidence that it does not predict academic performance is reason enough to say that the UKCAT is bogus. The thing is, so is selection by exam results, personal statement and 'caring experience'. From my rather extensive experience, most doctors are crap. I've met a quite a few good ones, but I bet you couldn't predict this from their exam results or interview scores. Medical school selection and education is still largely voodoo.

[krazyfish]

I agree with Krazyfish. The UKCAT should not be the sole indicator for getting an interview for those uni's with cut-offs. An aptitude test cannot be an entry requirement for medicine alone.

Hmmm maybe they should take the C out of UKCAT so it become UKAT since it's not really clinically related.

However how else do you cut down the number of applicants? I also don't think adding a science element to the UKCAT is any better. I took three sciences at A-level I think that's inidcator enough of my science ability. The only thing the science section in the BMAT tests is how quickly can you answer basic science questions whilst checking your understanding of it. It seems to me your A-levels do the science half and the UKCAT tests the quickness half. However I did like the Essay writing section since it tests how well you can organise and consicely write and format an ethical argument which is atleast science realted if not medically related. Atleast it would make some kind of a good indicator on how well of a doctor you may become.

Ah well those are my thoughts.

Nice one about taking the "c" out of UKCAT, well put.

[Rippy]

Just to point out, UKCAT is testing various skills useful for being a doctor, not necessarily medical student.

Try to correlate interview performance with 1st year exams - you won't find a correlation. Should interviews therefore not be used?

[krazyfish]

Just to point out, UKCAT is testing various skills useful for being a doctor, not necessarily medical student.

Try to correlate interview performance with 1st year exams - you won't find a correlation. Should interviews therefore not be used?

If anything, interview performance and first year performance should be higher correlated than UKCAT. Once again, I'm merely saying that less emphasis should be placed on the UKCAT because of its design flaws. Not that it should be taken out all together, with revision, the examination will be better.

A doctor is a student, in the sense that they have to be continually learning about advances, keeping up with research and refining skills. Wouldn't you agree that being in the field of medicine is a commitment to lifelong learning?

[Rippy]

If anything, interview performance and first year performance should be higher correlated than UKCAT. Once again, I'm merely saying that less emphasis should be placed on the UKCAT because of its design flaws. Not that it should be taken out all together, with revision, the examination will be better.

A doctor is a student, in the sense that they have to be continually learning about advances, keeping up with research and refining skills. Wouldn't you agree that being in the field of medicine is a commitment to lifelong learning?

I'd be surprised if there was any correlation between interview performance and 1st year performance, because interview is about personality etc rather than exam skills. That was what I meant by comparing it with UKCAT - maybe UKCAT doens't predict 1st year success, but it may just be a useful indicator of skills required by a doctor. Why are people complaining about UKCAT when other stuff doesn't correlate with medschool exam success either? I can't imagine having work experience / volunteer work would correlate either.

I was just speculating though. I don't really have any idea.

[krazyfish]

Why are people complaining about UKCAT when other stuff doesn't correlate with medschool exam success either? I can't imagine having work experience / volunteer work would correlate either.

Exactly my point! People are complaining about it because there while other factors might or might not be as indicative, the UKCAT is probably the worst of them all yet such a high emphasis has been placed on it (i.e. cutoff scores).

As for work experience and volunteer, yeah I'd be surprised if there was a correlation. But think of it this way. Having related work experience and volunteer may be helpful in promoting and encouraging future success as a doctor. For example, someone would be able to tell if he or she is suitable working in a health care setting. A correlation doesn't have to exist for work/volunteer experience to be an indicator of one's success because if it were, it implies that there has to be a way to evaluate work experience from a general standpoint, assigning it numerical values so it can be compared for the average applicant. Probing how influential a work experience for an individual would be the interviewer's job.

[Dr_Ciggie]

Exactly my point! People are complaining about it because there while other factors might or might not be as indicative, the UKCAT is probably the worst of them all yet such a high emphasis has been placed on it (i.e. cutoff scores).

As for work experience and volunteer, yeah I'd be surprised if there was a correlation. But think of it this way. Having related work experience and volunteer may be helpful in promoting and encouraging future success as a doctor. For example, someone would be able to tell if he or she is suitable working in a health care setting. A correlation doesn't have to exist for work/volunteer experience to be an indicator of one's success because if it were, it implies that there has to be a way to evaluate work experience from a general standpoint, assigning it numerical values so it can be compared for the average applicant. Probing how influential a work experience for an individual would be the interviewer's job.

You have my respect for spawning this thread Krazyfish. I am in complete agreement with your point of view with regards to the questionable validity of the UKCAT in determining one's success as a medical professional. It does not even require a careful scrutiny of the very premise of the UKCAT to establish that more than anything else, the UKCAT is a "speed test". If we accept this to be fact (which it is), then it becomes apparent that the UKCAT makes a flawed assumption, that "one's ability to answer X number of questions correctly within a ridiculous time constraint takes precedence over ones ability to answer > X questions within a "realistic" time constraint.

Lets suppose two students, A and B both take the UKCAT, and student A answers 25/44 questions correctly within the specified time constraint of 21 minutes, whereas student B answers 20/44 correctly. Now consider a scenario where both students were to take a variation of the test where the passages for verbal reasoning for instance, were re-engineered so that allocation of 44 minutes to complete the test (1 minute per question) was considered "realistic"..Who is to say that student A will definitely perform better than student B under these varied circumstances? What is more important to an aspiring doctor? the ability to answer more questions correctly under timed conditions which reflect those that a medical professional is used to being allowed, or the ability to answer less questions correctly under the UKCAT timed conditions?, which I dare say do not reflect realistic time conditions that doctors are used to at all.

Speed testing is not an accurate means to predict one's ability or inability to succeed in medical school because there are too many variables involved. Intelligence, diligence and a commitment to excellence is what IMO makes a suitable candidate, and the UKCAT does not help to ascertain any of the aforementioned.

One of the over-rated arguments on these forums is that "yes but the admissions committee needs to rely on something that can help them separate the better candidates from the worse"...True words of wisdom there. However, are they necessarily correct to use the UKCAT as that "separator"?. This is something that needs to be seriously addressed. At this point, we can merely express our opinions and so for me personally, the UKCAT measures "speed" whilst completely over-looking other more valuable and pertinent attributes required of an excellent physician.

[Medicine Woman:)]

I'm sure you'll agree though Traumatised it's a great thing that international students recognise the quality of education in the UK and the high standards in the NHS. I know it's frustrating when good candidates get rejected ( I'm not having much luck!) but I would hate to think of a medical school system which didn't look worldwide for the best candidates. I always think it's exciting when doctors look to peers across the world to gain knowledge and find the best practice. The way I see it the UKCAT was random and the only thing it showed me is that I need to start reading more books as my VR was alarmingly low.. but I would be lying if I said that I don't see it's use as tool to filter the application numbers. Sometimes things don't seem fair but it's up to us to keep trying.. if O don't get in I might just keep sittng that old UKCAT every year until I'm happy I don't have dyslexia!! lol

[Medicine Woman:)]

I agree, there are many carrots to be peeled in this house and I feel I must get cracking with them I wish you a merry Christmas and a very happy new year x