Registered  members with 100+ posts do not see Ads

UNSW UNSW Medicine: General Entry Questions and Discussion

A1

Rookie Doc
Moderator
Heyyyooo, so from my understanding UAC can obtain university transcripts and convert them to a GPA right? For UNSW, they look at WAM (if I'm not mistaken). I'm just wondering about the logistics around this.
UNSW uses WAM for UNSW general purposes.
For med admissions it's GPA calculated by UAC. UNSW transcripts show WAM but also the courses' individual grades HD/D... which UAC use to calculate GPA. Similarly for other unis, even if their transcripts show a GPA UAC will still do their own calculation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2xq

JeydinNewWon

Regular Member
Since UNSW is repeatedly quoting the line "offered to the highest ranks determined by all measures" they are using the combo method. It so happened that among the good-enough combos, the lowest ATAR is 99.60 and lowest UCAT is 2960 (but note these can belong to two different applicants who have vastly higher scores in the other two components).

So to be fair to UNSW, when sending out interview invites they didn't know what these cutoffs would be. Who knows if the UCAT 2880 that got invited had scored a top interview, their combo would have been sufficient for an offer (and thereby set the UCAT "cutoff" to 2880 instead of 2960).

Unfortunately their interview wasn't top so combo isn't high enough. The fault is in UNSW saying like it was their UCAT that's solely not high enough.
Sorry if this is kinda dead but I'm having trouble understanding this. What I'm getting from this is that after interviews are conducted UNSW plugs in the numbers and with their """magic""" algorithm they determine your place. However, they don't actually know the UCAT cutoff so someone who had say, really high interview and academic scores but with the lowest UCAT (2880) got an offer, they just take the lowest UCAT and call it their 'cutoff'?

Also, I got a feeling UNSW really is just copy-pasting their replies so they can plough through the influx of calls when offers release, am I right? They have been very...inconsistent...to say the least, with someone with lower scores getting unbonded place offer and someone with much higher academic score and UCAT getting a flat out rejection and having their scores said to be 'average'. Like ????

I do wanna try for UNSW, but it feels stressful with these high scorers getting rejections. Granted, we don't know how people did on their interviews, but like...?
 

A1

Rookie Doc
Moderator
However, they don't actually know the UCAT cutoff so someone who had say, really high interview and academic scores but with the lowest UCAT (2880) got an offer, they just take the lowest UCAT and call it their 'cutoff'?
Yes you understood that correctly. I remember reading in an MSO post, another UNSW Admissions officer later clarified it wasn't a cutoff set by UNSW but the lowest that happened to qualify for an offer.

I do wanna try for UNSW, but it feels stressful with these high scorers getting rejections.
My apology first for this lengthy explanation. Previously UNSW stated clearly the final ranking for place offers was equal weight 1/3 1/3 1/3 of ATAR + UMAT + Interview. An MSO maths guru helped run a math model to prove that with such formula, a near-top ATAR + near-top UMAT + near-bottom interview would still be sufficient for an offer.

Apparently UNSW didn't like that so ~3 years ago they changed to "all three components are considered but not averaged". My own interpretation is UNSW still adds the three components together like before but has the rights to reject the poor interviewees regardless of them having top ATAR+UCAT (whereas they'd be successful in the old formula).

Bottomline is don't stress about it. Try do your best in all three components, most of all avoid falling below the poor-interview cut, and let your scores go to work for you. Best of luck.
 

JeydinNewWon

Regular Member
Yes you understood that correctly. I remember reading in an MSO post, another UNSW Admissions officer later clarified it wasn't a cutoff set by UNSW but the lowest that happened to qualify for an offer.


My apology first for this lengthy explanation. Previously UNSW stated clearly the final ranking for place offers was equal weight 1/3 1/3 1/3 of ATAR + UMAT + Interview. An MSO maths guru helped run a math model to prove that with such formula, a near-top ATAR + near-top UMAT + near-bottom interview would still be sufficient for an offer.

Apparently UNSW didn't like that so ~3 years ago they changed to "all three components are considered but not averaged". My own interpretation is UNSW still adds the three components together like before but has the rights to reject the poor interviewees regardless of them having top ATAR+UCAT (whereas they'd be successful in the old formula).

Bottomline is don't stress about it. Try do your best in all three components, most of all avoid falling below the poor-interview cut, and let your scores go to work for you. Best of luck.
So i.e. high ATAR, high UCAT and bad interview could be ranked for an offer after going through their algorithm, but then they check your interview score and just make the autonomous decision to reject candidates with poor interviews in favour of applicants with better interview scores?
 

A1

Rookie Doc
Moderator
So i.e. they could be ranked for an offer by the scores or whatever, but then they just make the autonomous decision to reject poor interviewees in favour of ones with better interview scores?

I think UNSW rejects the poor interview scores first, then rank the non-rejects on their ATAR + UCAT + Interview.
 

Registered  members with 100+ posts do not see Ads

ucatboy

final year eek
Valued Member
I think UNSW rejects the poor interview scores first, then rank the non-rejects on their ATAR + UCAT + Interview.
Yeah JeydinNewWon , since ATAR + UCAT come first and determine who gets an interview in the first place, it would make no sense then to go back afterwards and reject people with "low" ATARs and UCATs - why bother inviting them at all? It's the interviews that UNSW is mainly referring to, meaning that even if you have a 99.95 ATAR and 99%ile UCAT, which would theoretically place you in the top third of all applicants (and consequently secure you a place offer) even if you didn't rock up to your interview (an exaggeration of course), you must still meet "minimum requirements" on your interview. My hunch is that they might reject the bottom 15-20% of interviewees, regardless of how good their scores in the other two components are.

I think Adelaide Uni does something similar, every year or so someone makes the news for not receiving a top-up offer even after multiple rounds despite a 99.90+ ATAR and 99%ile UMAT/UCAT, giving the impression that they were "blacklisted", for lack of a better word. I know a few personally, being from Adelaide myself. It pays to give the interview a proper thought regardless of how good your scores are in the other components going into it.
 

JeydinNewWon

Regular Member
It's definitely unlike UNSW to screw over interstate applicants, as they've advocated very strongly for equality between local and interstate applicants in the past (unlike another uni, *cough cough*), making sure that the ATAR and UCAT cutoffs are identical, and if they aren't, inviting either additional local and interstate applicants to make up for such performance disparities.

That said, 99.90 + 3300+ not receiving an offer does raise some eyebrows, Jonalon maybe you could try contacting UNSW for a summary of your performance in each component to see if they're capping i.e. if they say your UCAT was average then something's up.
Sorry if I’m also reviving this but this person literally got 99.95 and 3300+ UCAT and automatically got cut off?!! That’s insane! Seems like the interview is a death sentence for heaps of people then rip
 

ucatboy

final year eek
Valued Member
Sorry if I’m also reviving this but this person literally got 99.95 and 3300+ UCAT and automatically got cut off?!! That’s insane! Seems like the interview is a death sentence for heaps of people then rip
No, not necessarily for "heaps of people", you'll always have a better chance with higher scores in each component (unless of course the uni you're interviewing at uses them as hurdles only e.g. Newcastle). We never heard back from Jonalon but whatever happened, I'm sure that they were an edge case. Looking at their post history, they nonetheless managed to secure multiple place offers at other universities. Unis aren't out to "get you" during your interview if you have high scores.
 

JeydinNewWon

Regular Member
No, not necessarily for "heaps of people", you'll always have a better chance with higher scores in each component (unless of course the uni you're interviewing at uses them as hurdles only e.g. Newcastle). We never heard back from Jonalon but whatever happened, I'm sure that they were an edge case. Looking at their post history, they nonetheless managed to secure multiple place offers at other universities. Unis aren't out to "get you" during your interview if you have high scores.
Thanks. I haven’t even done the UCAT yet and my ATAR definitely isn’t as high as Jonalon’s, but just hearing a lot of these high scores get flat out blacklisted from certain unis is really concerning. Especially UNSW since it’s basically reaching a point that it’s impossibly difficult to get a spot in. (Granted the scores on MSO are only a fraction and skewed to the right of the bell curve of a med cohort I’m sure). Thanks for the help and support!
 

A1

Rookie Doc
Moderator
Sorry if I’m also reviving this but this person literally got 99.95 and 3300+ UCAT and automatically got cut off?!!
That person unfortunately failed to achieve the final ranking high enough for an offer. There wasn't anything to indicate they were automatically cut off.

Seems like the interview is a death sentence for heaps of people
The offer-to-interview ratios are roughly 1 in 3 UNSW, 1 in 4 JMP/JCU, 1 in 5 Adelaide. So yes it's a "death sentence" for 2/3rds to 4/5ths of interviewees. Roughly speaking getting an interview is only a quarter of the way there.

But as ucatboy said, the unis are not out to "get" the high scorers. Otherwise we wouldn't see 99.80 median at UNSW.
 

JeydinNewWon

Regular Member
That person unfortunately failed to achieve the final ranking high enough for an offer. There wasn't anything to indicate they were automatically cut off.
But if they weren't automatically cut off because (assumedly) their interview wasn't low enough to be rejected by UNSW flat out, wouldn't they still get a spot as per the 33% system? (As the math guru and you calculated?)

That person unfortunately failed to achieve the final ranking high enough for an offer. There wasn't anything to indicate they were automatically cut off.


The offer-to-interview ratios are roughly 1 in 3 UNSW, 1 in 4 JMP/JCU, 1 in 5 Adelaide. So yes it's a "death sentence" for 2/3rds to 4/5ths of interviewees. Roughly speaking getting an interview is only a quarter of the way there.

But as ucatboy said, the unis are not out to get the high scorers. Otherwise we wouldn't see 99.80 median at UNSW.
I think in the latest UNSW Med Info Night recording, the median Selection Rank was 99.82. Granted, it IS after bonus points but that is still saying something. According to UAC, the median ATAR was 99.65, which is again, still quite a ridiculously high academic score. Also, what I meant by "death sentence" is that according to your propositions, a lot of students would be cut off as their interview performance was deemed too low to be considered into the Medicine program.
 

ucatboy

final year eek
Valued Member
That person unfortunately failed to achieve the final ranking high enough for an offer. There wasn't anything to indicate they were automatically cut off.
Yeah not getting a UNSW offer doesn't tell us much because of how high it is on everyone's preference list/how rarely they do top-ups. It's (or was) more telling for a uni like Adelaide though, which everyone in the country interviews at, but ultimately most decline their offer if successful in favour of a local uni within their state. Prior to last year where they introduced an SA subquota I suspect that top-ups went to people ranked as low as 400-500th/800.
 

Registered  members with 100+ posts do not see Ads

ThunderDragon

Regular Member
I know that UNSW now says that despite a 1/3 weighting for each component, it isn't averaged so you can't compensate for one bad section apparently? Would that only apply to the interviews part so despite let's say someone who gets a perfect Atars and 99 ucat can't get in with a 'weaker' interview or does it apply to all sections so for example, if your ucat isn't so strong, it can't be compensated by having a really good Atar?
 

ucatboy

final year eek
Valued Member
I know that UNSW now says that despite a 1/3 weighting for each component, it isn't averaged so you can't compensate for one bad section apparently? Would that only apply to the interviews part so despite let's say someone who gets a perfect Atars and 99 ucat can't get in with a 'weaker' interview or does it apply to all sections so for example, if your ucat isn't so strong, it can't be compensated by having a really good Atar?
Like I said before, if you get an interview invite (which is based on ATAR and UCAT), then you're living proof that one component was able to compensate for the other, otherwise you wouldn't have an interview invite. If you don't get an interview, then I guess you could say that one didn't compensate for the other, but that's common sense.

As long as you've been invited to attend an interview, you're in with a fighting chance of ending up with a place offer. How big that chance is depends on a number of factors, but the fact remains that you've got a chance, otherwise they wouldn't have invited you to attend in the first place.
 
Last edited:

A1

Rookie Doc
Moderator
I know that UNSW now says that despite a 1/3 weighting for each component, it isn't averaged so you can't compensate for one bad section apparently?
I believe the "not averaged" wording is primarily a clause to reject the poor interview scores and UNSW can justify to these applicants their top ATAR+UCAT can't be used to average out.

Apart from that they still work in combination. View the interview invite collated data you'll see ATAR/UCAT does compensate for the other, examples : 99th%ile/98.55, 98th%ile/99.35, 96th%ile/99.45, 94th%ile/99.75 etc. But we wouldn't see a 94th%ile/98.55 getting an invite because this 98.55 doesn't have 99th%ile to compensate.

But if they weren't automatically cut off because (assumedly) their interview wasn't low enough to be rejected by UNSW flat out, wouldn't they still get a spot as per the 33% system?
Basically I didn't agree with the word automatically that's all. This applicant didn't get an offer because (presumably) their interview score alone missed the cut. Similarly, if competitive entrance to engineering was say 92.0 and someone with 91 missed out, I wouldn't call that as getting automatically cut off.
 

Registered  members with 100+ posts do not see Ads

Top