Nope - I received an offer from UQ last year which I declined (chose to study a non-med degree). With many people I know still involved with the admissions process, I just happened to notice a trend which I thought was interesting but lacked any obvious explanation, hence this thread.
Pauline says it all...
I agree with all of the above. But at the point where you have already done poorly in UMAT, JCU has to be one of the easiest schools to get into because it is one of the only schools (1 of 5 I believe) which will still consider you. Take out USyd and UMelb (as literally 99.9% of students won't meet the ATAR cutoffs for guaranteed pathway) and it becomes one of the three remaining options for someone in that situation. All three of which, as I've noted, are located in Queensland.
If this is the case then we'd expect to see similarly low cutoff scores at other provisional pathways (USyd, UMelb, UWA, Flinders, etc.). But it is still significantly easier to get into the two QLD provisional programs than those in other states. This means the lower cutoffs we see at Griffith and UQ have to also be due to some sort of policy decision on the part of the unis as opposed to mere supply and demand. If you put this together with the presence of JCU and Bond, I think it would still be valid to say that it is generally easier to get into med school in Queensland versus any other state.
The question is if there's a coherent reason for this (and if so, what), or if it's just coincidence. Based on what people have said in the thread so far, and the small sample size of unis involved, I'm starting to think it's probably the latter.
Uh, I'm not sure this is valid either. I would argue that the ease of any particular applicant getting into any particular medical school is based on these factors:
1. Relative demand (which is overwhelmingly high at all medical schools but also similar between medical schools as the same people apply all over Australia)
- obviously some variation based on factors like location and relative supply of places as well
2. The methods they use to cull applicants to match the final number of selected applicants to spots
3. How well that applicant's particular performance happens to have matched the culling criteria
Basically, the ease of your particular entry to any particular uni is based on #3 which is based on #2 and the cutoffs for those culling tools in #2 is based on #1.
For JCU, the culling tools are the ATAR, the application and the interview. Using these three the relative combined rank is set such that the number of applicants is able to be culled to fit the number of places. As stated before though the application weighs very heavy and is based on things the applicant often cannot change, like their rurality or ATSI background. However, combined, the relative cull MUST reduce the applicant number to the number of places.
For Griffith, the only culling tool is ATAR. Using this ALONE, the relative combined rank is set such that the number of applicants is able to be culled to fit the number of places. Note that in the absence of an interview or UMAT or portfolio etc. the relative bar for the remaining culling tool is set higher.
For USyd, the bar is set very high because the culling tools of ATAR and interview need to be set to be able to cull the applicant pool down to 30 (which between them they are able to do). Note that if an applicant manages to match their criteria to the culling tools available here then Sydney is a relatively easy uni to get into because the applicant who managed to match their ATAR to the 99.90 culling tool has a massive 66% chance to make it in.
For the JMP, 100% of the admission rank is based on the interview and PQA and the GPA/ATAR requirement culls very few people; the UMAT also relatively less - and thus the interview and PQA must cull relatively more (and so is "harder"). For the hypothetical applicant with perfect interview skills, this is the easiest school to get into because they have matched their strengths with the school's culling tools.
In all these examples and really in any other medical school you can see that the cutoffs for each cull are set so the combined cull will approximate the total places to the remaining applicants.
By suggesting that any particular school is "easy" by any particular cull (e.g. no UMAT) you forget that the remaining culling tools necessarily have higher bars set because their culling effect must be greater to compensate. Thus, a medical school with 300 places which uses 1/3 UMAT/interview/ATAR is just as difficult as a school with 300 places that uses 100% ATAR which is just as difficult as a school with 300 places that uses 100% UMAT to get in overall and the only difference is which specific candidate you are and how well you matched with the culling tools. Thus, what may be easy for one specific candidate is going to be hard for another specific candidate, and you're probably a bit short sighted in suggesting that these medical schools are easier overall because their relative demand is still the same or similar to similarly sized medical schools in other states (except Bond, which obviously has less demand due to cost); its just that the culling tools happen to vary in QLD to favour the UMAT and interview less (and the other criteria more). These other non-Bond unis aren't particularly easy to get into, it's just that you don't appreciate how high the bars are set in other culling tools.