wrxsti said:
people are rude, deal with it.
Yes, they are and having dealt with university pathways into medicine, you're going to get brushed off a lot more times before you get the answers you want.
Out of interest, what did you actually ask the person about pathways into med?
Sometimes you think they're just rude or unconcerned, but actually they a) might not know how to answer your question or b) might not understand what exactly you are asking.
Furthermore, UWS med people are not even chosen in the same way as UNSW med people are, so it makes it rather difficult to compare. Whereas UNSW is 1/3 academic, UMAT and interview - UWS only uses academic as a cutoff. This means that whether people get 99 or 95, they are treated equally in terms of getting an interview (to be honest when it comes to university and in the 'real' world outside of 'school' - there's not too much difference between most who got 99 and those who got 95 - at least in my experience). Thus the UMAT is the primary tool for getting an interview at UWS and the interview is the primary (almost 75% of the weighting - straight from UWS manager) reason for getting into the course. So when you compare the admissions processes between UNSW and UWS, unless you can find evidence from a peer reviewed journal article (which is unlikely since there's only 1 UWS year), it's kinda like comparing apples to oranges, at least I think so.
Furthermore the statement that UAI correlates with UMAT as in "Not many who get 95 can get 220 UMAT" in my experience is false, I've never heard any evidence of this being the case. UAI and UMAT are not measuring the same things and neither of them is a true test of intelligence - and therefore to say that you have to be 'dumber' to get into UWS is simply being misinformed (especially since UWS for the most part considers interviews as more important than either of the aforementioned).
