• We need your support!

    We are currently struggling to cover the operational costs of Xtremepapers, as a result we might have to shut this website down. Please donate if we have helped you and help make a difference in other students' lives!
    Click here to Donate Now (View Announcement)

UHS MCAT (all resources compiled here)

ZohaibAsad

ZohaibAsad

Messages
639
Reaction score
842
Points
103
OakMoon! said:
You are not getting my point. I agree that only the relative data should be studied. But if the data you left out could directly effect your conclusion, then not including it makes the whole statistical analysis a futile excercise.
Click to expand...

The pure basis of statistical analysis is to take out data that is not needed. That could be included in a separate statistical analysis but for studying the behaviour of those who got admitted that is irrelevant and should be excluded and the conclusion is about the behaviour of those who got admitted
 
OakMoon!

OakMoon!

Messages
1,532
Reaction score
478
Points
93
"The conclusion is simply that it is not statistically significant to assume that those who score lower on the FSc are always going to score higher on the MCAT but that a high FSc score is not a guarantee to a high MCAT score"

According to this conclusion you separate the whole data into two groups. Ones with the low FSC marks and the ones with high FSC marks. Right? The problem here is that your data doesn't have an equal number of students in both groups. Obviously, the ones with the high FSC marks are more here. And among them are both those with high and low MCAT scores. But you have missed a major portion of those with low FSC marks. This is a huge anomaly here. So your intial conclusion; hence as the FSc Score goes up MCAT scores on a general scale tend to go down, can't be proven by this data.
 
ZohaibAsad

ZohaibAsad

Messages
639
Reaction score
842
Points
103
OakMoon! said:
"The conclusion is simply that it is not statistically significant to assume that those who score lower on the FSc are always going to score higher on the MCAT but that a high FSc score is not a guarantee to a high MCAT score"

According to this conclusion you separate the whole data into two groups. Ones with the low FSC marks and the ones with high FSC marks. Right? The problem here is that your data doesn't have an equal number of students in both groups. Obviously, the ones with the high FSC marks are more here. And among them are both those with high and low MCAT scores. But you have missed a major portion of those with low FSC marks. This is a huge anomaly here. So your intial conclusion; hence as the FSc Score goes up MCAT scores on a general scale tend to go down, can't be proven by this data.
Click to expand...

Ok, first thing from the work I have done so far in the field I know what I'm doing is pretty straight. Secondly, " high FSc score is not a guarantee to a high MCAT score" pertains to the fact that out of those selected in general the high FSc score out of 1100 people could not get more on the MCAT out of 1100 but got less thatn what they score on FSc out of 1100. Anyone who spends more of their energies is likely to have less energy for the mcat and their MCAT score will turn out to be lower while those in the middle range of around 950 have a consistent performance. Those who scored much less on the FSc below 950 spent some of the extra stored energy to access higher MCAT scores. The conclusion stands that to get more than you got in FSc and to be above the regression line you need to be balanced and not let the high FSc score take you down especially as merit keeps getting competitive.

What the rejects did is not a part of the equation and that's the reality. Those who ignore it do it to their own harm, those who witness the underlying message of the numbers will ensure they stay balanced and don't let high FSc scores drown them on the MCAT. And according to that I did not separate the data into two groups as you are assuming, I am straigh forwadly pin pointing how the lower end of those who got into medical colleges did and how those at the higher end did considering the independent variable the FSc score.
 
princesszahra

princesszahra

Messages
2,884
Reaction score
415
Points
93
It is true that those who spend too much of thier energy on Fsc tend to score lower on the mcat.
Even if they get admission on the basis of the aggregate.
this is proved by the data above and my personal experience of 3 mcat sessions(though i appeared only in one)
 
Z

Z.S.M

Messages
1,217
Reaction score
3,841
Points
273
i have just one confusion........

what is the IBCC's policy for O Level Equivalence?
 
Z

Z.S.M

Messages
1,217
Reaction score
3,841
Points
273
i have 8 A*s and my equi is 799/900.....
whereas that girl who topped MCAT has 7 A*s and 1 A and has equi 804/900.......
how?
 
OakMoon!

OakMoon!

Messages
1,532
Reaction score
478
Points
93
ZahraShehzad said:
i have 8 A*s and my equi is 799/900.....
whereas that girl who topped MCAT has 7 A*s and 1 A and has equi 804/900.......
how?
Click to expand...

You must have 8A*s in the required subjects to get the perfect equivalency of 810/900. The compulsory ones are English, Urdu, Maths, Pakistan Studies and Islamiat. And for an equivalency in science you must have Physics, Chemistry and Biology/Computing.
Plus, if you scored A*s in the October/November 2009 session then they were counted as As by IBCC.
 
Z

Z.S.M

Messages
1,217
Reaction score
3,841
Points
273
ZohaibAsad said:
Damn they suck, who on earth would staple CIE certificates they r not uni of gujrat diploma
Click to expand...
they had their fill of my tantrums.......... LOL!

it pains me to see my beautiful certificates, so i've locked them up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top