u/lar_lar__

Are post-interview offer rates actually a useful indicator when picking where to apply?

I achieved a score of over 2500 in my UCAT and have good GCSEs, so I am in a good position to secure interviews at most unis. However, some of the universities I liked when I visited and are considering have a lower post-interview offer rate. I am a bit concerned that applying to them is adding unnecessary risk to getting an offer.

Are these numbers actually indicative of how challenging the interview process is? Is it reasonable to assume that unis with high post-interview offer rates are mainly checking you have a good understanding of what medicine involves and that you are a good fit for the course, whereas in those with lower rates you have to be more sophisticated and show a very deep passion for medicine to distinguish yourself? Or is it more a case of those with lower offer rates, they accept more “less-competitive” candidates who tend to perform worse in interviews?

I am almost certainly going to apply to Imperial and UCL. Previously I wanted to apply to SGUL, because I want to stay in London and I really enjoyed it when I visited it, but they have lower post-int acceptance rates. I was also considering Liverpool because of their more flexible A-level requirements (they allow A*AB as well as AAA) but they have a *very* low rate.

As a result of this I have been looking at Bristol, Manchester, and KCL as alternatives. However I don’t really want to apply to more than two unis with A*AA requirements because I want to maximise my chances that I have an AAA med insurance when it comes to A-levels.

I know this is a bit of a first-world problem but I would appreciate if anyone had any advice about this. Thanks!

reddit.com
u/lar_lar__ — 21 hours ago
▲ 33 r/UCAT

2530 + my score tracker 🥹🥹🥹

I am happy to give any advice :) All of the mocks are Medify + OQB. In the test centre they provide earplugs and there is air con.

u/lar_lar__ — 6 days ago
▲ 7 r/UCAT

Struggling with ‘how far to infer’

I have been doing VR practice and noticed that I often struggle with knowing ’how far to infer’. For example, in the first Q here, I selected true because I thought that saying ‘words that any layperson could understand’ was close enough to the statement making it true. But it was C. And then in this second one, I selected C because I thought just because it says it is ‘now believed’ doesn’t mean it is definitely and truly impossible. But it seems that it was sufficient and made it true.

I do sort of understand the distinction here, but I don’t really know how to articulate it and make sure I don’t make the same mistakes again. Does anyone have any advice for what they think in their heads when approaching these questions? Thanks.

u/lar_lar__ — 1 month ago