Analysing the UMAT

[Michael0007]

So the debate goes on and it'll be interesting to see people's take on the UMAT of how good an indicator it is intellectually

I believe section 1 is the most important as interpreting information and processing it quickly is an important skill to have. This skill has more to do with the intelligence you've gained throughout your life rather than genes

Section 2 is a poor indicator as no test on paper can accurately determine how well you access a situation emotionally.

Section 3 is another important section because essentially, it tests your brain power. And no other test (apart from iqs) can give you a proper Indication of where you stand

UMAT despite it's pros, will still not always be a good indicator of your intelligence as it is an entry test to med and people with high motivation can train their brains to do well in the UMAT

PS. UMAT is still a DECENT way to seperate med  wannabies from med want to bes

What do y'all think?

[anti]

I disagree I guess.  In an ideal world, there would be enough resources to leave the requirements as ENTER and an interview, testing your ability to work and your social skills.  Your ability to pick which shape comes in the middle of a sequence shouldn't factor into it.

For reference,  I got in the 89th percentile in the UMAT last year. I did no study, did well in section 1, badly in section 2 which I thought would be my best and the best in section 3 which I thought would be my worst.

The idea that entry to medicine, a pursuit that requires a lifelong commitment to learning and study, is determined by a test that cannot be studied for seems a bit silly to me.  However, I do understand the need for something like it to prevent the ENTER requirements from soaring even higher, but I don't think the UMAT is the answer.

[matt123]

yeh agreed completely.
i mean ... personally . i got 100th percentile for SECTION 2 only.
and like 10th percentile for section 1/3 ... giving me an overall shit 26th percentile or something.

now .. lets just invent someone called ... PERSON A ..

person A . comes from asia . is CRAZY SMART .. and gets 90-100 percentile on section 1 -3 ... and a crap to average score on section 2 ..

this means . his overall score would be .. lets say .. approx .. 165 ish ...
mine was about .. 130 ish ...

now ... ..keep inmind . PERSON A .. is SMART but has no social skills at all .. and cannot think in tough situations.

in the end of the day .. person A gets an inverview with monash uni ... and hes so fkin antisocial . that he gets rejected majorly

myself on the other hand ... because i stuffed sec 1/3 .. i dont even get a chance to have an interview and show my passion for medicine.

i mean ..
if you bomb out ... are feeling sick ( like myself) . or any other reasons ... + bad luck .... then ur fate as a doctor . becomes .. NILL...

i dont like the umat
personally .. even if i got a good score .. i think it still is very .... over used ..... id prefer an interview + enter + quick thinking test ... not .. fkin pick a shape and tick a box..

sorry

[akira88]

Most universities want you to have a minimum score of 50 for each section, so that scenario wouldn't happen matt123. Refer to one of the other UMAT threads where kingpomba posted up some table with all this information on it. Bear in mind this is for med only

[Russ]

UMAT is still a DECENT way to seperate med  wannabies from med want to bes

I agree with this. At the end of the day, monash fill their places with people that will be good doctors. The fact that some people who didn't get interviews/places would have done well in the MBBS doesn't matter. UMAT isn't an intelligence test. Oh and what you said on section 2; I agree that a multiple choice written test isn't a good indicator but a more open (ie SAQ or essay) format would be.

then ur fate as a doctor . becomes .. NILL...

Not at all. There are hundreds of people graduating every year who became doctors without the UMAT. You can still become a doctor, your UMAT score isn't the be all and end all.

[slothpomba]

Your ability to pick which shape comes in the middle of a sequence shouldn't factor into it.

Section 3 is one of the more controversial sections because of this fact.

I really don't see how much baring section 3 has on becoming a doctor or filtering out people from medicine...

That said, yes i do agree, the UMAT does do a fairly decent job.

It is better than selection on just enter alone but it could do better, i doubt there is much we could do to change that anyway.

So we just have to stick with the system.

I think something that makes sure candidates aren't only academically capable but socially capable of interacting with patients is very important. (They scrapped the old interview system and replaced it with the multi mini interview system which i think is a good step towards this)

[Caspar]

Most universities want you to have a minimum score of 50 for each section, so that scenario wouldn't happen matt123. Refer to one of the other UMAT threads where kingpomba posted up some table with all this information on it. Bear in mind this is for med only

Why do people make shit up? Only 2 out of Otago, Aukland, Adelade, Flinders, UTAS, UNCLE, UWS, UNSW, UQ, CDU, UWA and Monash use the 50-50-50 rule. That is defiantly not "most" of them. Also, none of the dent only universities use the 50-50-50 rule. You're wrong. Don't post misleading bullshit please.

Personally, I think section 1 tests your scientific reasoning, sec2 analyses your comprehension skills and sec 3 is totally irrelevant. I think UWS;s 1-1-.5 is probably the most fair method currently in use.

[slothpomba]

Why do people make shit up?

Maybe she was just mistaken, i doubt she was trying to intentionally mislead anyone..chill the hell out a bit

[Michael0007]

It amazes me how many people consider section 2 as a better indicator than section 3 in becoming a good doctor.

Patients and their friends and family don't tell you the situation they're in and give you options of what emotions they feel. You have to figure that out yourself. Also, you being able to empathise and say the right thing takes much more than just identifying the emotions, it takes people skills. Although UMAT do their best job to judge emotional intelligence by a MULTIPLE CHOICE TEST, it is a poor indicator of your emotional intelligence.

Many people think picking the next shape is irrelevant. But taking into account the fact that you have learnt nothing about med, what tests your ability to quickly identify the right treatment via the clues and symptoms given to you? That's the part of the brain section 3 and 1 tests.

[iffets12345]

I don't have any issues with the UMAT. We've got to have some kind of test, although I wished everyone got an interview that just isn't feasible. And Yes, although some people who have the potential to be good doctors don't get in the people who do are just as good and capable.  Those other potential doctors, if they really had the passion, will find other ways of getting in.

What I do have a problem with, are those people who take the UMAT lightly, aren't really passionate about medicine or whatever, but do it for the sake of it. Then, these people get 99 percentiles, but don't do a medical course and potential ruin the scaling for other devout med want-to-bes who were like, maybe 89-91 percentile. These people, who go on the whim or at the last minute are swayed by money/status in medicine when they DO get the high percentile, are what pee mee off.
If they don't do med and just waste whatever they did, then that's worse.

[Caspar]

It amazes me how many people consider section 2 as a better indicator than section 3 in becoming a good doctor.

Patients and their friends and family don't tell you the situation they're in and give you options of what emotions they feel. You have to figure that out yourself. Also, you being able to empathise and say the right thing takes much more than just identifying the emotions, it takes people skills. Although UMAT do their best job to judge emotional intelligence by a MULTIPLE CHOICE TEST, it is a poor indicator of your emotional intelligence.

Many people think picking the next shape is irrelevant. But taking into account the fact that you have learnt nothing about med, what tests your ability to quickly identify the right treatment via the clues and symptoms given to you? That's the part of the brain section 3 and 1 tests.

I think as section 3 is more abstract than section 1 in terms of information synthesis ability etc, people (understandably) see it as less relevant to being an apt doctor. Those who are really bad at it (EX: me) tend to think that it's useless, and thus that sec2 is a better indicator.

[iffets12345]

I actually think there might be some indepth psychological wacko reason that explains the relevance of Section 3. That maybe the part of the brain that is used to answers those questions relates to you know clinical skills? meh. We don't know.

[Mr Edwards]

They should make more spots for med. It's disgusting how they make students compete with each other like this for the little places that are available. I think everybody should be able to do med.

[Russ]

Sadly that's not feasible (or even desirable tbh)

[Caspar]

They should make more spots for med. It's disgusting how they make students compete with each other like this for the little places that are available. I think everybody should be able to do med.

3000 1st years p.a is a ridiculously large number of students, if anything, less spots should be offered.